Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2017 21:47:57 GMT -5
I think what makes some of these conversations tough is that there's a real divide in how people even perceive "political correctness" in the first place. I could be wrong, but I feel that some believe there's some kind of figurative council out there that determines what is politically correct and what isn't, and people are dragged before it tribunal style should they step out of line. That it's part of some monolithic movement comprised of like-minded people who are dictating what is and isn't acceptable language. I think reality is closer to it being more of a long-standing social exchange, dialog, and sometimes conflict in which we as a society change and develop over time, exchanging ideas of what's acceptable and what isn't over platforms both big (media, celebrities, politics, etc.) and small (street corners, bars, small Twitter accounts, etc.). I don't know of a single person who uses "political correctness" in any way that isn't derisive; people who are in favor of inclusion don't use it un-ironically, either, and even those who are all for inclusion still hate "political correctness" of a different stripe, the kind that focuses less on ethnicity, gender, or religion and instead focuses on opinions (e.g. "all opinions must be treated with equal validity") and stuff like that. That, to me, indicates there's no great monolithic movement; there are simply changes that occur over time, and in today's day of advanced technological communications they happen very quickly, taking many people by surprise. Jerry Lawler is an old man who likely doesn't take part in this societal back and forth very often. Um. I don't know about you, but I got invited to the meeting of the elders underneath the ancient elm tree to discuss whether or not we would be allowing people to say the word "retarded" anymore.
|
|
|
Post by ShaolinHandLock on Dec 6, 2017 4:21:05 GMT -5
I disagree with this line of thinking, because in my experience this simply isn't true. It's not about wanting to go around casually using slurs like an asshole, it's along the lines of 'I think this particular political correctness issue is a load of nonsense'. As I said before, I see these things on a case-by-case basis, rather than being full-on pro/anti political correctness. The original post in this thread is specifically about Jerry Lawler lamenting that you can't call people dehumanizing slurs anymore to get heel heat, which falls pretty squarely into the "asshole" category. What's an instance of a "political correctness" issue along the lines of what you're talking about? See, that's where I disagree. I don't think it necessarily makes Lawler an asshole. It does make him in favour of saying something insensitive for cheap heel heat in the context of a wrestling show. If this were real life and not a wrestling show, and he was going around using slurs like that, then he would be an asshole. This is why I think context is always important in these situations. Besides, I never said that anyone shouldn't find it offensive... As for political correctness issues, I'm not sure I can talk about them without going into political stuff in general, and since that's against the rules I don't think I can. And now that I've said all of that, I know you and everybody else hates me. It doesn't matter anyway, I already know everybody hates me, and I've been seriously thinking again about deleting my account. I'm sorry but..."Everyone is too sensitive" yet you're thinking about rage quitting a message board because you believe (with no evidence) people actively hate you. Let that sink in. It should be almost palpable to you. No one has attacked you personally, you are merely taking blanket statements and wrapping them around yourself, then using that to devalue your own self worth. Which you shouldn't be taking to heart in such a manner, yet felt a need to do... You know, kind of like what slurs do to other people when used casually. Do you see? If you could use this feeling and apply how it is making you feel to how this kind of things makes other people feel, then perhaps you could understand better their position and understand they don't hate you. They hate the overarching attitude that has pervaded so many in society that have decided things are harmless just because it doesn't harm them personally (which is self-centered and shows a severe lack of empathetic reasoning). Our base society in America has just come out of a period of Hedonistic values and is now moving into a period of Socialistic values. Such things come in waves, and they are always met with a fight from those entrenched in the old values, but it's always going to require adaptation in the end to get along if you don't want to be left on the sidelines. Good grief, where do I begin with this... First of all, I never said anyone was "too sensitive". I never said that anyone shouldn't find what Lawler said offensive. I was just saying that there are times when political correctness issues like this do come across as people being too sensitive, and I was speaking purely on a broad case-by-case basis, rather than the Jerry Lawler issue at hand. Secondly, what 'rage quitting'? I've been talking about leaving the forums on and off for a while now, and if I did, it wouldn't be because of this thread, it would be because of a combination of things. Mainly that the forum sometimes stresses me out and sometimes ramps up my anxiety. As for taking things to heart, there's nothing I can do about that, I try not to and most of the time I don't, but when it does happen it's out of my control. Thirdly, I don't exactly get your point at this part of the post "You know, kind of like what slurs do to other people when used casually". It reads as if you think I'm in favour of casually using slurs, when I'm not. I never have been. I've never personally used a slur in my life (that I can think of anyway) and I don't even swear, never mind using slurs. So I have no clue what your point is here. Fourthly, I disagree with the sentiment that not finding something harmful because you don't find it harmful personally somehow means that you're self-centered and 'lack empathy'. I go out of my way to make sure I'm not offending people. For example, there are a few rap songs I wanted to post in the Radio FAN thread, but due to the use of homophobic slurs, I didn't feel comfortable sharing them, as I didn't want to offend anybody. Do you think I want everybody going around being a slur-using asshole who doesn't care about the feelings of others? Of course I don't...but apparently that doesn't matter, just because I'm not personally offended by something that others are. I don't get what it is I've supposedly 'done wrong'. Fifthly, without going into political territory, do you mean 'Socialistic' values as in Socialism? Because if you do, that's opening up a whole other argument. Besides, I don't live in America anyway. I think what makes some of these conversations tough is that there's a real divide in how people even perceive "political correctness" in the first place. This is a good point right here.
|
|
|
Post by Z-A Sandbaggin' Son of a b!%@h on Dec 6, 2017 9:59:30 GMT -5
Everyone needs a flag to wave.
But anymore, it's not about flying the flag. It's about whose flags bigger and who can hold it higher
|
|
Fauxnaki
Unicron
0 Followers Club
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by Fauxnaki on Dec 6, 2017 11:05:11 GMT -5
Obviously shouldnt happen in WWE anymore because its a PG show. But if someone wants to create an Mature rated wrestling show with offensive stuff in it, Im not gonna stop them. It probably wouldnt be that popular or creative but if family guy and south park can do it on TV I dont see why wrestling shouldnt.
|
|
|
Post by benstudd on Dec 6, 2017 15:01:42 GMT -5
I disagree so much with that line of thought. You have to respect people but you can't bash people over the head to respect people. Also I'm looking at my Prime Minister and it's like he is doing daily trips everywhere to apologizes for past mistakes. That's another element I cannot stand, this whole whiney oh my grand-parents were Evil, sorry for their actions. Nevermind that we were not in their skins. And I actually like flaws. For some reason, I respected more his father that I thought was a jerk than all this whiney stuff. Take the Washington Red Skins name stuff. I bet that it's the white people that make more of an issue of it and that are more outraged about it than Native Americans. It's like a form of outraged psycho mob that has taken over since the advent of the internet especially. From 2014Created by the Oneida tribePlease don't make assumptions. But how many Amerindians that were there? You think other Natives care about this? And why did this happen now? Did these guys woke up and day and went "hey dude, I'm a Native American and was watching the Tv the other day and that Red skins name has got to go". More often than not manifestations are agenda-driven and there are people behind the scenes pulling the strings. My point is freedom. I may don't like what someone says but I'll fight to give you the freedom to say it. And I like flaws. "Red Skins" maybe damn outdated and corny but that is what makes us humans and not robots. I may not like that my cousin has a house painted yellow but I accept it.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 6, 2017 16:54:23 GMT -5
But how many Amerindians that were there? You think other Natives care about this? And why did this happen now? Did these guys woke up and day and went "hey dude, I'm a Native American and was watching the Tv the other day and that Red skins name has got to go". More often than not manifestations are agenda-driven and there are people behind the scenes pulling the strings. My point is freedom. I may don't like what someone says but I'll fight to give you the freedom to say it. And I like flaws. "Red Skins" maybe damn outdated and corny but that is what makes us humans and not robots. I may not like that my cousin has a house painted yellow but I accept it. That's literally a picture of Native Americans protesting, it's Native Americans who want to do it, not some shadowy cabal of liberals who want to be the no fun police for... reasons. Obviously it's Wikipedia, so double check sources but en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_name_controversyHere's a link to the 2nd source, coming from the National Congress of American Indians, one of the appendices list many MANY tribes who've officially declared their support. www.ncai.org/resources/ncai-publications/Ending_the_Legacy_of_Racism.pdfThey've been protesting since at least the 60s, it's just no one ever listened, and now in the age of social media, and general attitudes changing people are listening more and it's more of a story and more non native people are getting behind their cause.
|
|
|
Post by sarkerpolseng on Dec 6, 2017 16:55:14 GMT -5
I am watching Raw from 10/06/97 and Bret Hart just called HBK and HHH a "couple of homos."
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Dec 6, 2017 17:09:11 GMT -5
I am watching Raw from 10/06/97 and Bret Hart just called HBO and HHH a "couple of homos." In his defense the channel HBO is pretty gay-friendly.
|
|
|
Post by sarkerpolseng on Dec 6, 2017 17:13:04 GMT -5
I am watching Raw from 10/06/97 and Bret Hart just called HBO and HHH a "couple of homos." In his defense the channel HBO is pretty gay-friendly. Damn it!
|
|
|
Post by CeilingFan on Dec 6, 2017 18:25:07 GMT -5
In all seriousness, this is a great thread.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Dec 6, 2017 21:45:11 GMT -5
People who say xyz about 'he's a heel its fiction it's a heel tactic'
In tv, in a book, in a game, even in a movie this works.
But Jerry Lawler is wrestling under his own name here. The line is blurred way too much. The outcome would need to be stronger in favour of goldust.
Did we forget the 'we the people' anti immigration stance by uncle zeb and Jack swagger started to get support by some fans?
If you had an openly racist character for a heel using flawed arguments that 'sound right', such as 'detroit proves black people can't be in positions of authority ' or 'they're trying to make everyone brown' it doesn't matter how much of a heel or how many times he gets beaten.
He will gain some small vocal support from the crowd, maybe it will get better reception in different states. But the risk of having fans start to see this guy as a spokesperson for their views is significantly higher than playing a fictional bad guy in other forms of media. His quotes would be repeated tp himon social media, people would stand and clap every time he said another derogatory remark....etc
We don't need those fans of hatred flamed. I know i say frequently that anything can be used uf booked right, and maybe if the WWE was going to book a huge storyline where he changes his ways AND -all- his claims are debunked, maybe they could handle it in a mature way, but i really don't think they can to be honest.
My point is no wrestling is not just another form of fiction, the audience participation, the blurring of kayfabe and fiction, and the inability to prevent such things becoming a hotbed for negativity is too strong.
Before you reply, remember Mohammed Hussain. In his interview he talks about how he got real stick from a lot of fans for his character he portrayed on tv. Despite being 'right' on a lot of points as his character and being called 'sand.....people' by Austin, people still hated on him because he played a Muslim heel wrestler.
Perhaps there are similiar stories about effective heels in the territories getting stick from fans, yes but as far as i can tell, it was always for the character, not the issues or political views represented.
Do i think Jerry Lawler could use it today as a heel? Probably, but only if the story was built up right. It could be very interesting if his character kept hurling homophobic abuse and then turned out to be in the closet himself. The breakdown and self realization of his character, as well as acceptance by the homosexual face could be something remarkable in wrestling.
But as a pointless throwaway remark that adds nothing to the feud or doesn't get resolved/addressed in a positive manner? Probably best to avoid such remarks. We have to realise it isn't just another generic insult any more, like calling someone an idiot.
As for the whole PC diatribe....i could easily write an essay on adapting and learning that certain terms just aren't acceptable today. And culture is shifting to find new scapegoats, such as Jewish people seem more and more to be fair game for insults as well as certain nationalities, French, for example.
But it's 2:45 am and im tired of writing on my phone
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 6, 2017 21:48:01 GMT -5
But how many Amerindians that were there? You think other Natives care about this? And why did this happen now? Did these guys woke up and day and went "hey dude, I'm a Native American and was watching the Tv the other day and that Red skins name has got to go". More often than not manifestations are agenda-driven and there are people behind the scenes pulling the strings. My point is freedom. I may don't like what someone says but I'll fight to give you the freedom to say it. And I like flaws. "Red Skins" maybe damn outdated and corny but that is what makes us humans and not robots. I may not like that my cousin has a house painted yellow but I accept it. This may seem ironic given the conversation, but as you just equated a house's paint color with usage of a racial slur I have to ask you to stop and reconsider things before keeping this line of thought going.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Dec 6, 2017 22:00:39 GMT -5
But how many Amerindians that were there? You think other Natives care about this? And why did this happen now? Did these guys woke up and day and went "hey dude, I'm a Native American and was watching the Tv the other day and that Red skins name has got to go". More often than not manifestations are agenda-driven and there are people behind the scenes pulling the strings. My point is freedom. I may don't like what someone says but I'll fight to give you the freedom to say it. And I like flaws. "Red Skins" maybe damn outdated and corny but that is what makes us humans and not robots. I may not like that my cousin has a house painted yellow but I accept it. This may seem ironic given the conversation, but as you just equated a house's paint color with usage of a racial slur I have to ask you to stop and reconsider things before keeping this line of thought going. Hey now! You're restricting personal thought and restricting his free speech! Don't you realise he's grown up using that term his whole life? He is constantly around people who accept it and the team he supports accepts it! Doesn't matter if other people been campaigning since way back when! It's just like if he called a chinaman 'yellow dog' it's just nouns and adverbs man, why you gotta breathe down his neck like big brother and get offended? Why you gotta stress him out by trying to move his chain of thought to include others? He don't have to reconsider nothing! Red skins, yellow house, black bastards, just accept it! He's a human not a robot and he has flaws that you have to accept and never challenge! I mean, dude.....can't you just let go and let him express himself? Those ol' red Indians just need to lighten up, the past is done, there's a conspiracy, people pulling puppet strings jew driven media and i cant be bothered to continue this charade i think you all got the point a while ago in fact i probably have gone too far now im going to sleep
|
|
|
Post by ShaolinHandLock on Dec 7, 2017 6:08:03 GMT -5
In all seriousness, this is a great thread. I disagree, simply on the grounds that it's ramped up my anxiety, I can't stop thinking about it, and I feel like all I did by posting in this thread and sharing my opinions was upset people, which was never my intention.
|
|
|
Post by Aboutreika18 on Dec 7, 2017 6:34:21 GMT -5
In all seriousness, this is a great thread. I disagree, simply on the grounds that it's ramped up my anxiety, I can't stop thinking about it, and I feel like all I did by posting in this thread and sharing my opinions was upset people, which was never my intention. Don't worry, most people will forget who you are and what your views are once this thread runs its course and disappears into the archive pages.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 7:26:43 GMT -5
My point is freedom. I may don't like what someone says but I'll fight to give you the freedom to say it. And I like flaws. "Red Skins" maybe damn outdated and corny but that is what makes us humans and not robots. I may not like that my cousin has a house painted yellow but I accept it. The owner of the Redskins, or the players, or even just people who like the name - they're not being arrested, they're not being censored, they're not being sued. What freedoms, then, are being violated? The freedom to not have their views countered or critiqued in any way? Because that's not actually a thing.
|
|
|
Post by chronocross on Dec 7, 2017 9:46:25 GMT -5
I am watching Raw from 10/06/97 and Bret Hart just called HBK and HHH a "couple of homos." I remember on the 1/26/98 episode of Raw after the pull-apart with Tyson and Austin, that Mike called Austin a f***** as Raw went off the air.
|
|