Political correctness on CelticsBlog...

[BballTim]

Well, my definition of PC is being able to speak metaphorically about issues. For example, being able to say after game two that "I felt like the Celtics like chicks in game two" and "they need to take the dresses off and start playing like men if they expect to win game three..." in other words, they need to get tougher and start laying some smack on people, which men are generally better at doing because of their physical make up.

Yes, but you see, your metaphors are based upon stereotypes.

What if you wanted to make a "metaphor" about somebody being cheap, and dropped a Jewish reference (but wrote "no offense")?  What if you started dropping some negative stereotypes about blacks or Hispanics (but again, apologized in advance)?

We don't allow the use of stereotypes on here, especially as related to gender, race, religion, etc.  That's not "politically correct", that's to make sure this is as friendly a place as possible for everybody.  You can insult the sensibilities of people who take offense by comparing them to babies, but in reality, women have the right to not be called "chicks" or to be used as the epitome of softness and weakness.

  I somewhat agree with you and I'm not big on stereotypes but I don't think  a comment about nba players playing like girls is on the same level as referring to someone who's cheap as jewish. I'm starting to wonder, the farther you go down this path, does it ever end? Making fun of Baby because of his weight will offend someone, saying Ray plays like an old man will offend someone else. Seems like a lot of enforcement for you.

[ScoobyDoo]

It's impossible in today's world not to offend "someone" by almost anything you say.

For example, if I compared someone to Sasha Vujajic, wouldn't that be offensive to Sasha and all other men who fall into his category of men. Or is it Ok to bash men like Sasha or men in general.

Again, I have no problem with this board and being politically correct here per the rules.

I'm talking about the larger world and just everyone would be very well served by drop the hyper sensitivity to just about anything anyone says about something. It's damaging to effective communication, IMHO. I think the obvious examples are unacceptable - a misogynistic or race riddled rant, for example. But most other things are incredibly minor and not meant to offend nor are they malicious in intent.

[Celtics18]

I do not think that 'political correctness' (a term introduced by conservaties to marginalize the opinions of those who speak out against the use of derogatory or stereotypical remarks toward groups of people) is ridiculous. 'PC' is just as American as the right to make derogatory stateements.  In other words, living in a 'PC' society doesn't mean you can't use comments that others may find offensive; it simply means that if you do, you need to be prepared for a social consequence (i.e., someone calling you on it).

Scooby-doo has the right in the real world (outside of a blog that controls such commentary) to say anything the heck he wants as long as it doesn't incite violence (I think there is a law against that).  'PC' just means that I have an equal right to say something like "please don't use those words".  That actually IS hashing it out. It means that you and I can argue about the merits of using words that offend people if we want to.  I shouldn't have to be dismissed as 'PC' simply for speaking my mind about language I don't like.

I grew up in a time when the N word, the K word (anti-Jewish term) and other ethnic and gender slurs were used routinely without social repurcussion.  I happen to  like the shift in society where people are now choosing to think about the words they use before saying whatever comment comes to mind.  That makes for a better social world in my opinion. 

Further, have 2 daughters (16 and 20) and I have come to the opinion that our society in many subtle, and not so subtle, ways continuously pounds away at the self-esteem of young women (with words and images).  This occurs to the point where virtues like kindness, intelligence, maturity, or hard work become secondary to physical appearance as a measure of self worth.  When you are watching your own children navigating through the world, it can lead to some different perspective as to power of words.

My daughters and all the daughters of fellow bloggers will deal with it in their own ways -- that's fine. I respect that in America people have the right to say whatever they  want even if they are told that something might feel offensive to others, or be marginalizing, or reinforce stereotypes.  At the same time American values should also support respect for the right of 'PC' folks to call them on it. 

So nicely put.  It's not about suppressing speech, but it's about feeling like you have the right to question speech or action that you deem hateful or hurtful. 

[LooseCannon]

It's impossible in today's world not to offend "someone" by almost anything you say.

For example, if I compared someone to Sasha Vujajic, wouldn't that be offensive to Sasha and all other men who fall into his category of men. Or is it Ok to bash men like Sasha or men in general.

The point isn't to make everything as inoffensive as possible, it's the idea that certain groups have, in the past, been discriminated against and that one remedy is to discourage language that justifies and encourages bias against those groups, whether or not the speaker intends offense or not.  A judgment has been made by those who run this board that women are one of those groups. 

If you think that's a double standard, then I say hurray for double standards.

Sasha Vujacic, men like Sasha Vujacic, Lakers, ex-Lakers, and Laker fans shouldn't be a protected class.  They certainly shouldn't be on this board.  The rules say, "disparaging comments, stereotypes, or generalizations made in relation to another’s race, gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual preference are not permitted."  While you may run afoul of other rules concerning respect for other posters and civil discourse, disparaging comments based on age, fatness, crippledness, and several other categories aren't explicitly banned, so you can have at it on those grounds and claim plausible deniability that you were breaking site rules.

I'm certainly not above unkind language.  I sometimes refer to some of idiotic trade ideas that people post as sub-Chris Wallace armchair GMing.

[JohnBagleyValueMeal]

I wish the game threads were this thoughtful.

[ScoobyDoo]

Great, so we can have at it regarding age, fatness, fitness and square off on Sasha Vujajic and "men like Sasha" but we shouldn't say the Celtics play like Chicks...

That's perfect. I tell you what, to state, once again for the umpteenth time that I comprehend that I should repsect the rules of this board per the creators of it. This is 100% correct and I won't violate the rules again "here on this board".

But as I've also said 15 times, my arguments relate to the world in general. I'd rather not have language police deciding which group of people is "protected" and which group is "fair game", that is a very slippery slope and before you know it the government is so far into you you might as well be cattle, which is pretty much where this country is headed. And that, is a shame...let people be big boys and girls and fend for themselves all by themselves -I don't need Dad to protect me anymore because I am all gorwn up.

Which leads me to my next point - I was wondering how long it would take until someone brought up something "the evil conservatives" did and turn this into somewhat of a politically based debate. I now understand why much if this has made no sense to me based on the way I think. And I'm not saying the way you think is wrong but just very different than the way I think. I just want to make that clear and also make it clear that I am not trying to offend any group of any particular race, gender religious creed or ethnicity by making these comments about the way that I think.

But since the bag has been opened - along those lines, I'll tell you what's really offensive - the political left saying the requirements to show a valid ID in order to vote is an attack against young people, poor people and ethinc groups as if it were some great imposition for them to get an ID. I guess if I need to show and ID in order to rent a hotel room or a car or anything else in this cournty, I pretty much think maybe people should need an ID to exercise the most important right in human history.

To say it's an imposition against those groups is one the most politically incorrect things I've ever heard. It's horrific in it's insinuation that these groups are somehow not "as capable" to achieve an ID, as, I guess, the "other groups" who we've deemed as "more capable?". What an incredible insult to the intelligence, ability and tenacity of poor people, young people and other ethic groups. It's shameful.

Keep the government as far away from me as possible, they couldn't deliver a bottle of milk and I therefore certainly don't want them deciding which "groups" of people are "more protected" than other "groups". If that's the case, let's just start building the Gulags now. This country is in a lot of trouble...and PC is a big part of that trouble/ slope...

God forbid this cournty should suffer some national catastrophe, I'm not sure we're tough enough anymore to handle it. We'll be too worried walking around wondering about which groups to protect and which groups to assault and which person is going to offend us next by saying "BOO!"...     

[Eja117]

Guys, I am not upset in the least, this has been an interesting debate. I also completely respect the rights of the creators of this blog to establish and enforce whatever rules they wish, that is their prerogative. I certainly wouldn't want someone telling me how to run my business.

I don't think that saying a guy is playing like a chick is stereotyping women at all. Bird said it about his teammates, it's a figure of speech used by guys who play ball, most of whom think women are in fact, anything but soft.

I didn't say people who disagree with me wear diapers and are babies. It was a metaphor about the state of PC and how ridiculous I think PC is. It had absolutely nothing to do with any specific person. I would never use a metaphor about race or ethnicity.

You know what, for God's sakes, I've had women say "don't act like a little ****" or "stop playing like a chick" on the basketball court before if I complained about something. It's a completely harmless, irrelevant form of expression as far as basketball goes.

Bottom line, I'm not upset at all - I just think the world would be alot better off without overkill on PC and letting people hash things out for themselves.

However, my point and discussion was/is directed at PC in general in today's world, completely outside of this board. Even if I didn't agree with the PC environment here, I would/will abide by it without complaint moving forward.

It's not that important to me as far as this site is concerned.

Scooby you keep talking about how it' sjust politically correct to not be able to say "They're plaing like chicks"

Has it ever occured to you that it's not as much that you're politically incorrect as that you're just incorrect?

I almost never watch women's sports but when I see highlights of Uconn/Tenn I find myself thinking "I wish the men would play like that"


Also is it ok if from now on we say "They're playing like Scobby Doo"? and if it bothers you we'll just say you're PC and oversensitive?

If memory serves me there was a Scooby Globetrotter episode and Scooby didn't play well. The reason is because although Scooby could talk and solve mysteries he was a Great Dane and Great Danes do not have opposable thumbs. It's not his fault he was born that way. Listen to me Scooby. It's not your fault. No. Listen to me. It's not your fault. It's not your fault son. It's not your fault.

[Celtics18]

Great, so we can have at it regarding age, fatness, fitness and square off on Sasha Vujajic and "men like Sasha" but we shouldn't say the Celtics play like Chicks...

That's perfect. I tell you what, to state, once again for the umpteenth time that I comprehend that I should repsect the rules of this board per the creators of it. This is 100% correct and I won't violate the rules again "here on this board".

But as I've also said 15 times, my arguments relate to the world in general. I'd rather not have language police deciding which group of people is "protected" and which group is "fair game", that is a very slippery slope and before you know it the government is so far into you you might as well be cattle, which is pretty much where this country is headed. And that, is a shame...let people be big boys and girls and fend for themselves all by themselves -I don't need Dad to protect me anymore because I am all gorwn up.

Which leads me to my next point - I was wondering how long it would take until someone brought up something "the evil conservatives" did and turn this into somewhat of a politically based debate. I now understand why much if this has made no sense to me based on the way I think. And I'm not saying the way you think is wrong but just very different than the way I think. I just want to make that clear and also make it clear that I am not trying to offend any group of any particular race, gender religious creed or ethnicity by making these comments about the way that I think.

But since the bag has been opened - along those lines, I'll tell you what's really offensive - the political left saying the requirements to show a valid ID in order to vote is an attack against young people, poor people and ethinc groups as if it were some great imposition for them to get an ID. I guess if I need to show and ID in order to rent a hotel room or a car or anything else in this cournty, I pretty much think maybe people should need an ID to exercise the most important right in human history.

To say it's an imposition against those groups is one the most politically incorrect things I've ever heard. It's horrific in it's insinuation that these groups are somehow not "as capable" to achieve an ID, as, I guess, the "other groups" who we've deemed as "more capable?". What an incredible insult to the intelligence, ability and tenacity of poor people, young people and other ethic groups. It's shameful.

Keep the government as far away from me as possible, they couldn't deliver a bottle of milk and I therefore certainly don't want them deciding which "groups" of people are "more protected" than other "groups". If that's the case, let's just start building the Gulags now. This country is in a lot of trouble...and PC is a big part of that trouble/ slope...

God forbid this cournty should suffer some national catastrophe, I'm not sure we're tough enough anymore to handle it. We'll be too worried walking around wondering about which groups to protect and which groups to assault and which person is going to offend us next by saying "BOO!"...     

Wow.  That took an unexpected turn.  So the whole thing about PC speech and your right to call NBA players "chicks" is really about whether or not voters should show IDs at the poll. 

That's brilliant.

[MBz]

Interesting how we have this long post going and LeBron comes out and calls a question retarded. 

[barefacedmonk]

I'm not upset...I just want to rant on and on because the site rules don't allow stereotyping....and because of that I'll continue to rant and call out the blog rules, the mods, the society...but hey, I assure you that I'm not upset.

[wdleehi]

Keep all political rants on the "Current Events" board. 



Don't kill this thread by making this a political debate.

[indeedproceed]

ftr, if I wasn't on my phone that good will hunting reference gets like 20 tps from me.

[LooseCannon]

Interesting how we have this long post going and LeBron comes out and calls a question retarded.  

I just want the mods to clarify whether or not it is permissible to refer a long-winded rant that is utterly wrong as "retarded".

[Roy H.]

Interesting how we have this long post going and LeBron comes out and calls a question retarded.  

I just want the mods to clarify whether or not it is permissible to refer a long-winded rant that is utterly wrong as "retarded".

On our blog?  No.  A lot of our members have made it clear that it's a sensitive issue for them, so we edit out the word when we see it.

[MBz]

Interesting how we have this long post going and LeBron comes out and calls a question retarded.  

I just want the mods to clarify whether or not it is permissible to refer a long-winded rant that is utterly wrong as "retarded".

Just to be clear, I wasn't calling the thread retarded, not sure if that was implied or not.  I just meant the PC aspect of LeBron's comment.