Political correctness on CelticsBlog...

[Eja117]

3.) I think there has been a tremendous moving of the goalposts in this thread to try to justify a viewpoint. Fact is, saying men are playing like women or the derogatory term "chicks" is against the rules here at Celticsblog and is somewhat insulting to both the Celtics players that were being described that way and women in general as it stereotyped and insulted women as a whole.

What if someone said, "Those girls are playing like guys!" Are you assuming the intent is different? Is that against the rules?

What about, "Those guys are playing like chicks!" referring to the UConn or Tenn. women teams?

Do you know of any woman that would get offended by either of those?

I think if someone added "they're playing like they got a bunch of football concusions" and "they have no fundamentals at all. All they care about is the big play" or "they're losing control every other second like a dumb Ron Artest"  "they need to take off some skirts and put on pants" yeah I could see some women getting ticked.

Title 9 happened for a reason and it's not because women in sports were being treated so great

[boom]

3.) I think there has been a tremendous moving of the goalposts in this thread to try to justify a viewpoint. Fact is, saying men are playing like women or the derogatory term "chicks" is against the rules here at Celticsblog and is somewhat insulting to both the Celtics players that were being described that way and women in general as it stereotyped and insulted women as a whole.

What if someone said, "Those girls are playing like guys!" Are you assuming the intent is different? Is that against the rules?

What about, "Those guys are playing like chicks!" referring to the UConn or Tenn. women teams?

Do you know of any woman that would get offended by either of those?

I think if someone added "they're playing like they got a bunch of football concusions" and "they have no fundamentals at all. All they care about is the big play" or "they're losing control every other second like a dumb Ron Artest"  "they need to take off some skirts and put on pants" yeah I could see some women getting ticked.

Title 9 happened for a reason and it's not because women in sports were being treated so great

What does women in education or receiving government aid have to do with anything I wrote?

Are you saying referring to women to play as men? Or equality? I guess I'm a little confused on what point you're trying to make in your post. Do you mind clarifying?

[Rondo2287]

Seriously, at this point I feel like we are just arguing to argue. 

[Kwhit10]

For example, the last thing I would gather form LeBron saying "the questions are retarded" is that he was attacking people with mental disabilities. I don't even know how anyone could get there.

 

I am not sure what is hard to understand about it.  Even taking context into account, it is incredibly offensive, because he was using the word that is generally used to describe mentally challenged people as an insult.  

I am a big fan of looking at context with these things.  And the context is [dang]ing here.  

I even will go with the argument that you can use the N word in a positive context, and it shouldn't be offensive.  However, if it is used as an insult, I don't think there is any grey area there.

So, when Lebron used the word "retarded" as an insult, it was absolutely offensive, not because of the word, but because of the context.  Just like when you used the words "women" or "chicks" to insult people, then that became offensive.

I personally don't think the word "chick" is necessarily an offensive word, and certainly "women" isn't, but when you use it to attack other people, then it is absolutely offensive.  

Words evolve in meaning, some people may take retarded to be offensive, and some may not.

I'm sure most people here don't take the word "dumb" in the same sense as they do retarded when it's almost the same thing.  A remark that stemmed from a term for a handicap.

[Kwhit10]

Seriously, at this point I feel like we are just arguing to argue. 

Isn't that what the internet is for? 

[EJPLAYA]

I think that about 90% of our problem in society is based on this “political correctness” trend. Instead of acting like grownups and ignoring comments like this (and using those type of comments to form our opinions of that individual), we make a big ordeal out of things to try and advance our own agenda. Most people can’t even explain to you what THEY meant by a comment let alone anyone else being able to read their minds and interpret it. My dad had a saying “File it where it fits”. (usually that round wastebasket) If you are looking for ways to be offended you’ll usually find them. There have definitely been individuals on here who look for any possible way to interpret comments that weren’t personal as being personal attacks. There are also people on here who go out of their way to make personal attacks on others ideas. Neither should be happening. When it all boils down to it though, this is Jeff’s website and his rules go. If you don’t like it, move along.

[nickagneta]

3.) I think there has been a tremendous moving of the goalposts in this thread to try to justify a viewpoint. Fact is, saying men are playing like women or the derogatory term "chicks" is against the rules here at Celticsblog and is somewhat insulting to both the Celtics players that were being described that way and women in general as it stereotyped and insulted women as a whole.

What if someone said, "Those girls are playing like guys!" Are you assuming the intent is different? Is that against the rules?

What about, "Those guys are playing like chicks!" referring to the UConn or Tenn. women teams?

Do you know of any woman that would get offended by either of those?

So because you want to take the exception of the exception of the exception to what is meant by the stereotype that 99.9999% of the people would take it for, we should dismiss it and allow the stereotyping?

I am sure I could find an African American out there that wouldn't care if a Caucasian called them the "n" would but it still wouldn't mean that it was right to do so or that the Caucasian person wasn't using a racial slur.

[Donoghus]

I think that about 90% of our problem in society is based on this “political correctness” trend. Instead of acting like grownups and ignoring comments like this (and using those type of comments to form our opinions of that individual), we make a big ordeal out of things to try and advance our own agenda. Most people can’t even explain to you what THEY meant by a comment let alone anyone else being able to read their minds and interpret it. My dad had a saying “File it where it fits”. (usually that round wastebasket) If you are looking for ways to be offended you’ll usually find them. There have definitely been individuals on here who look for any possible way to interpret comments that weren’t personal as being personal attacks. There are also people on here who go out of their way to make personal attacks on others ideas. Neither should be happening. When it all boils down to it though, this is Jeff’s website and his rules go. If you don’t like it, move along.

Pretty much all that needs to be said in my book.

If you want the flame wars, go check out the ESPN or CBS Sports forums.  

[Rondo2287]

The Bottom line is that some people want to be able to say whatever they want whenever they want and don't care who they hurt in the process. I am convinced that no ammount of discussion will change that.  But as long as we have the rules in place that we do here I am happy.

[nickagneta]

I think that about 90% of our problem in society is based on this “political correctness” trend. Instead of acting like grownups and ignoring comments like this (and using those type of comments to form our opinions of that individual), we make a big ordeal out of things to try and advance our own agenda. Most people can’t even explain to you what THEY meant by a comment let alone anyone else being able to read their minds and interpret it. My dad had a saying “File it where it fits”. (usually that round wastebasket) If you are looking for ways to be offended you’ll usually find them. There have definitely been individuals on here who look for any possible way to interpret comments that weren’t personal as being personal attacks. There are also people on here who go out of their way to make personal attacks on others ideas. Neither should be happening. When it all boils down to it though, this is Jeff’s website and his rules go. If you don’t like it, move along.

Pretty much all that needs to be said in my book.

If you want the flame wars, go check out the ESPN or CBS Sports forums.  

TP, I agree with that final line 100% as well.

[Roy H.]

For example, the last thing I would gather form LeBron saying "the questions are retarded" is that he was attacking people with mental disabilities. I don't even know how anyone could get there.

 

I am not sure what is hard to understand about it.  Even taking context into account, it is incredibly offensive, because he was using the word that is generally used to describe mentally challenged people as an insult.  

I am a big fan of looking at context with these things.  And the context is [dang]ing here.  

I even will go with the argument that you can use the N word in a positive context, and it shouldn't be offensive.  However, if it is used as an insult, I don't think there is any grey area there.

So, when Lebron used the word "retarded" as an insult, it was absolutely offensive, not because of the word, but because of the context.  Just like when you used the words "women" or "chicks" to insult people, then that became offensive.

I personally don't think the word "chick" is necessarily an offensive word, and certainly "women" isn't, but when you use it to attack other people, then it is absolutely offensive.  

Words evolve in meaning, some people may take retarded to be offensive, and some may not.

I'm sure most people here don't take the word "dumb" in the same sense as they do retarded when it's almost the same thing.  A remark that stemmed from a term for a handicap.

It really is interesting, the way language evolves.  At one point, "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" were the three levels of mental retardation, based upon one's IQ.  Strangely, the three terms are now used as analogous with "stupid", while "retarded" has a more specialized meaning attached.

Linguistics aside, though, I do think you have to look at the present day meaning of words when you use them.  For instance, if a word wasn't offensive 30 years ago but is today, it behooves one to try to pick new language.

[angryguy77]

For example, the last thing I would gather form LeBron saying "the questions are retarded" is that he was attacking people with mental disabilities. I don't even know how anyone could get there.

 

I am not sure what is hard to understand about it.  Even taking context into account, it is incredibly offensive, because he was using the word that is generally used to describe mentally challenged people as an insult.  

I am a big fan of looking at context with these things.  And the context is [dang]ing here.  

I even will go with the argument that you can use the N word in a positive context, and it shouldn't be offensive.  However, if it is used as an insult, I don't think there is any grey area there.

So, when Lebron used the word "retarded" as an insult, it was absolutely offensive, not because of the word, but because of the context.  Just like when you used the words "women" or "chicks" to insult people, then that became offensive.

I personally don't think the word "chick" is necessarily an offensive word, and certainly "women" isn't, but when you use it to attack other people, then it is absolutely offensive.  

Words evolve in meaning, some people may take retarded to be offensive, and some may not.

I'm sure most people here don't take the word "dumb" in the same sense as they do retarded when it's almost the same thing.  A remark that stemmed from a term for a handicap.

It really is interesting, the way language evolves.  At one point, "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" were the three levels of mental retardation, based upon one's IQ.  Strangely, the three terms are now used as analogous with "stupid", while "retarded" has a more specialized meaning attached.

Linguistics aside, though, I do think you have to look at the present day meaning of words when you use them.  For instance, if a word wasn't offensive 30 years ago but is today, it behooves one to try to pick new language.

you rang?

[angryguy77]

For example, the last thing I would gather form LeBron saying "the questions are retarded" is that he was attacking people with mental disabilities. I don't even know how anyone could get there.

 

I am not sure what is hard to understand about it.  Even taking context into account, it is incredibly offensive, because he was using the word that is generally used to describe mentally challenged people as an insult.  

I am a big fan of looking at context with these things.  And the context is [dang]ing here.  

I even will go with the argument that you can use the N word in a positive context, and it shouldn't be offensive.  However, if it is used as an insult, I don't think there is any grey area there.

So, when Lebron used the word "retarded" as an insult, it was absolutely offensive, not because of the word, but because of the context.  Just like when you used the words "women" or "chicks" to insult people, then that became offensive.

I personally don't think the word "chick" is necessarily an offensive word, and certainly "women" isn't, but when you use it to attack other people, then it is absolutely offensive.  

Words evolve in meaning, some people may take retarded to be offensive, and some may not.

I'm sure most people here don't take the word "dumb" in the same sense as they do retarded when it's almost the same thing.  A remark that stemmed from a term for a handicap.

"idiot", "moron", and "imbecile"

you rang?

[EJPLAYA]

The Bottom line is that some people want to be able to say whatever they want whenever they want and don't care who they hurt in the process. I am convinced that no ammount of discussion will change that.  But as long as we have the rules in place that we do here I am happy.

I agree, however people also can’t be so sensitive that they have to “interpret” an insult. We all know when we see a personal attack on here. It shouldn’t happen. Some people however think that you disagreeing with their logic on something is a personal attack. Their have definitely been warnings on here to many people, including myself, over comments that were in no way personal, but that the individuals complained and said that was the way they took it. A gentle red bolded warning done to “everyone” in the thread by a mod is usually all that’s needed to steer the conversation. Whether it is right or fair or not, once again it is their rules.

[Chris]

It really is interesting, the way language evolves.  At one point, "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" were the three levels of mental retardation, based upon one's IQ.  Strangely, the three terms are now used as analogous with "stupid", while "retarded" has a more specialized meaning attached.

Linguistics aside, though, I do think you have to look at the present day meaning of words when you use them.  For instance, if a word wasn't offensive 30 years ago but is today, it behooves one to try to pick new language.

Exactly.  In 2050, when "retarded" is considered the same as "idiot" and "moron", then I promise, Chris III won't edit it out of a post.  However, it has not evolved to that point yet, therefore it is innappropriate to use.