Daily Archives: November 23, 2019

Political correctness (PC), term used to refer to language that seems intended to give the least amount of offense, especially when describing groups identified by external markers such as race, gender, culture, or sexual orientation. The concept has been discussed, disputed, criticized, and satirized by commentators from across the political spectrum. The term has often been used derisively to ridicule the notion that altering language usage can change the publics perceptions and beliefs as well as influence outcomes.

The term first appeared in Marxist-Leninist vocabulary following the Russian Revolution of 1917. At that time it was used to describe adherence to the policies and principles of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (that is, the party line). During the late 1970s and early 1980s the term began to be used wittily by liberal politicians to refer to the extremism of some left-wing issues, particularly regarding what was perceived as an emphasis on rhetoric over content. In the early 1990s the term was used by conservatives to question and oppose what they perceived as the rise of liberal left-wing curriculum and teaching methods on university and college campuses in the United States. By the late 1990s the usage of the term had again decreased, and it was most frequently employed by comedians and others to lampoon political language. At times it was also used by the left to scoff at conservative political themes.

Linguistically, the practice of what is called political correctness seems to be rooted in a desire to eliminate exclusion of various identity groups based on language usage. According to the Sapir-Whorf, or Whorfian, hypothesis, our perception of reality is determined by our thought processes, which are influenced by the language we use. In this way language shapes our reality and tells us how to think about and respond to that reality. Language also reveals and promotes our biases. Therefore, according to the hypothesis, using sexist language promotes sexism and using racial language promotes racism.

Those who are most strongly opposed to so-called political correctness view it as censorship and a curtailment of freedom of speech that places limits on debates in the public arena. They contend that such language boundaries inevitably lead to self-censorship and restrictions on behaviour. They further believe that political correctness perceives offensive language where none exists. Others believe that political correctness or politically correct has been used as an epithet to stop legitimate attempts to curb hate speech and minimize exclusionary speech practices. Ultimately, the ongoing discussion surrounding political correctness seems to centre on language, naming, and whose definitions are accepted.

Read this article:

political correctness | Definition, Origin, History ...

Political correctness is the process of speaking without offending anyone. Love it or hate it, what was once considered simple good manners, has become far more involved, and frankly, controversial. Exactly what is political correctness, where did it come from, and why do we love to argue about it?

The term political correctness describes written or spoken language that's intentionally phrased to avoid offending or marginalizing groups identified by certain social characteristics, such as race, gender, sexual orientation, or ability. Beyond the obvious avoidance of overt slurs, political correctness also includes the avoidance of terms that reinforce preconceived negative stereotypes. The elimination of verbal discrimination is often considered one of the main goals of political correctness.

Since the 1980s, the increasing demand for political correctness has been alternately praised, criticized, and satirized by commentators from all corners of the political spectrum. The term is sometimes applied derisively in order to ridicule the idea that language is capable of changeor that the publics perceptions and prejudices against certain groups can change through language.

Among the more subtle forms of political correctness is the avoidance of the use of microaggressionsbrief off-hand comments or actions that either intentionally or unintentionally express negative prejudicial slights toward any marginalized or minority group. For example, telling an Asian-American student, You people always get good grades, while possibly meant as a compliment, may be taken as a microaggressive slur.

A relatively new form of being politically correct is to avoid mansplaining. A combination of man and explaining, mansplaining is a form of political incorrectness in which men marginalize women by attempting to explain something to themoften unnecessarilyin a condescending, oversimplified, or childlike manner.

In the United States, the term politically correct first appeared in 1793, when it was used in the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in the case of Chisholm v. Georgia dealing with the rights of state citizens to sue state governments in U.S. federal courts. During the 1920s, the term was used in political discussions between American communists and socialists to refer to a strict, almost dogmatic, adherence to the Soviet Unions Communist Party doctrine, which socialists considered to be the correct position in all political issues.

The term was first used sarcastically during the late 1970s and early 1980s by moderate-to-liberal politicians to refer to the stance of extreme left-wing liberals on some issues considered by the moderates to be frivolous or of little actual importance to their causes. In the early 1990s, conservatives had begun using political correctness in a pejorative manner criticizing the teaching and advocacy of what they considered left-wing liberal ideology gone wild in U.S. colleges, universities, and liberal-leaning media.

In May 1991, then U.S. President George H.W. Bush used the term when he told the graduating class of the University of Michigan that, The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land. And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expression off-limits, and even certain gestures off-limits.

Today, PC culturea theoretical purely politically correct societyis most commonly associated with movements such as gender-based bias, gay rights, and ethnic minority advocacy. For example, the PC culture prefers that the terms spokesman or spokeswoman, be replaced by the gender-neutral term spokesperson. However, the PC culture is not limited to social or political causes. To promote religious tolerance, Merry Christmas becomes Happy Holidays, and a demand for simple empathy asks that mental retardation be replaced with intellectual disability.

In December 1990, Newsweek magazine summarized conservatives concerns by equating the PC culture to a sort of a modern Orwellian thought police in an article asking, Is This the New Enlightenment or the New McCarthyism? However, it was Dinesh D'Souza's 1998 book Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus that first caused the general public to question the benefits, motives, and sociological effects of the political correctness movement.

Advocates of the process of political correctness argue that our perception of other people is greatly influenced by the language we hear used about them. Language, therefore, when used carelessly or maliciously, can reveal and promote our biases against various identity groups. In this manner, the strict use of politically correct language helps to prevent the marginalization and social exclusion of those groups.

Persons opposed to political correctness regard it as a form of censorship that quashes freedom of speech and dangerously restricts public debate on important social issues. They further accuse advocates of an extreme PC culture of creating offensive language where none had existed before. Others argue that the very term political correctness can be used in ways that can actually hinder attempts to stop hate and discriminatory speech.

Opponents point to a 2016 Pew Research Center survey which showed that 59 percent of Americans felt too many people are easily offended these days over the language that others use. According to Pew, while most people naturally try to avoid using language that offends others, extreme examples of politically correct terms tend to devalue the English language and lead to confusion.

Finally, those opposed to political correctness argue that telling people that it is socially wrong for them to express their feelings and beliefs in certain ways will not make those feelings and beliefs go away. Sexism, for example, will not end by simply referring to salesmen and saleswomen as salespersons. Similarly, referring to the homeless as temporarily displaced will not create jobs or wipe out poverty.

While some people might swallow their politically incorrect words, they will not abandon the feelings that motivated them. Instead, they will hold those feelings inside to fester and become even more toxic and harmful.

Read the original post:

What Is Political Correctness? Definition, Pros, and Cons

By Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T.

As you have no doubt seen and heard, two recent arrests of immigrant women vending churros (a long donut like pastry) has resulted in a huge controversy. Ive linked 3 of the many articles on this below my personal comments.

The media and elected officials have feigned outrage over the 2 arrests and they are linking the arrests to 2 new proposed vending laws which, if passed, will forever change NYC vending for the worse. The 2 arrests are being used as proof that all the vending laws need to be radically changed. Need I mention that the Street Vendor Project, a City Council funded front group that has spent years trying to eliminate the rights of street artists, helped write these 2 proposed laws and is using all of its resources to get them passed? The City Council bill was cooked up by by a giant food vending corporation [MOVE SYSTEMS] funded by Wall St billionaires, the Street Vendor Project and a corrupt City Council Speaker with direct ties to the food company. [for details see: https://www.facebook.com/stopintro1303/ ]

Suddenly, both the media and the elected officials are pretending that vendor arrests are either unknown or rarely happen and they are further pretending that this was some kind of racist attack by the NYPD on Hispanic vendors.

The reality is that all vendors experience some degree of harassment. There are thousands of vendors arrested in NYC each year and tens of thousands summonsed. These women had many previous summonses for vending in the subway and simply refused to stop doing it. These were legitimate police actions not harassment.

One can feel sympathy for anyone being arrested or summonsed while at the same time recognize that there are vending laws for a reason. Food vending laws are, to my thinking, the most reasonable vending laws.

These 2 women were unlicensed, had no food vending permit, a completely illegal cart and were vending in the subway, which is illegal for all vendors regardless of what they sell. If there is any type of vending that actually needs to be closely regulated, it is food vending.

A single food vendor with a communicable disease, a dirty cart or who mishandles food, can create an epidemic. Thats why food carts require a vending license, a food cart permit and a certification in proper food handling. They dont want food vending in the subway because NYC subways already have a huge rat problem and food vending will make it much worse. Imagine trying to get into a subway car or out onto a rush hour subway platform that is crammed with food carts.

For most of my life I worked as an illegal vendor. I am not opposed to anyone getting a vending license; but I am opposed to fake vending reform that pretends to be about helping poor vendors but is actually about helping the biggest and wealthiest food vending corporations.

The 2 proposed laws are a scam. They want to completely eliminate any cap on how many food vendors there can be and make getting the license and permit very easy. Sounds good right?

But theres a catch.

A legal food cart has to have hot and cold running water. They cost anywhere from 5 to 50 thousand dollars. The cart and the food has to be stored in an authorized commissary, which would cost many thousands more. And, they still wont be able to vend in the subway, let alone vend from a cardboard box on top of a shopping cart.

Whats more, these proposed laws provide that a vendor getting 4 summonses loses their license; the City Council bill puts all vending decisions into the hands of the BIDs; and the State law gives cities and parks the right to create any new limits on vending they like.

Whats the real agenda behind these 2 proposed laws? Is it about helping poor immigrant vendors?

Apart from scoring points for political correctness, its about helping giant food corporations take over all vending. A food vending company can only own 1 food vending permit. By increasing the number of permits out there (removing the cap) these food vending corporations can temporarily buy up thousands of permits from the vendors who obtain them, exactly as they do now with a huge black market in food vending permits.

Once the streets are completely overrun with thousands of new food vendors, the City will have no choice but to create a concession system, exactly as exists throughout NYC Parks, where 2 or 3 companies own every food cart and stand. Immigrant employees paid less than minimum wage run these stands. Thats the wonderful future the elected officials are setting up for the vendors they are pretending to help.

When you see these hypocrite elected officials posing as champions of the vendors, dont forget that it is these exact same pols who wrote the vending laws and who mercilessly pressure the police to enforce them.

The very same media outlets pretending to be outraged about these arrests, such as the NY Times, have spent decades demanding crackdowns on vending. In fact, the NY Times started the Times Sq BID, one of the most anti-vending organizations in NYC.

One might ask, how is this different from the City arresting artists in the hundreds from 1993-2001? Didnt we protest hundreds of times? didnt we try to change the vending laws?

The difference is that artists were already considered to be First Amendment protected by the NY District Attorney as early as 1993. Every one of those arrests were illegal and unconstitutional. There is no Constitutional right to vend food in the subway. Moreover, we changed the vending laws in such a way as to help all vendors.

In fact, under the rights we won, immigrant vendors can legally sell books, art, cds, dvds and other First Amendment related materials without any license or permit.

These proposed bills are poison to every form of vending.

Please stop exploiting immigrants to make yourselves appear to be enlightened public servants. You are fooling no one.

NY Times: Handcuffed for Selling Churros: Inside the World of Illegal Food Vendors

Daily News: Cries for justice on the subways as NYPDs crackdown on Brooklyn churro vendors brings a second arrest

[NOTE: The writer has vended in NYC since 1962 as both a street artist and a food vendor]

Original post:

Churro vendor controversy: Separating The Facts From The Political Correctness - Pressenza, International Press Agency

Scooter Braun Photo: STEVEN FERDMAN/AFP via Getty Images

Doing a public Q&A right before one of your biggest scandals comes to a head? The audacity that that has! But that didnt stop Scooter Braun from talking with Varietys Shirley Halperin at the 2019 Entertainment Industry Conference on Thursday. I know where youre going to go, he said at one point in the conversation. Im kind of getting ahead to it. Ask the question! Halperin did so, asking what its like to have Swifties turned against him, and Braun acknowledged that its the first time hes talked about the much-publicized Taylor Swift feud in six months. Well, here we are, giving you your attention, sir! I just think we live in a time of toxic division, and of people thinking that social media is the appropriate place to air out on each other and not have conversations, he said. I dont like anybody doing it, and if that means that Ive got to be the bad guy longer, Ill be the bad guy longer, but Im not going to participate. He later added, I think people need to come together and have a conversation, without mentioning Swift by name.

I know this is going to be the most controversial thing I say. I dont know where we got messed up along the way that we decided being politically correct is more important than having conflict resolution, Braun said later at the event. Oooh, controversy! Political correctness! So, Braun is waiting for a conversation with Swift, Swift is waiting for word on the state of her American Music Awards Artist of the Decade performance, and were waiting for whatever happens to the actual show. Dick Clark Productions said it hadnt reached a reported agreement with Brauns Big Machine Records over Swifts performance of old songs. Fix it, Iyanla!

Continue reading here:

Scooter Braun Says Hes Not Going to Participate in Online Feud With Taylor Swift - Vulture

While still marveling at how Durham desires to make Christmas more inclusive for non-Christians by ignoring it altogether, we note that the Timberlane School District is getting some pushback for its own political correctness.

Timberlane High School seniors have traditionally worn gowns of one of two colors: white for the girls, burgundy for the boys.

But district Superintendent Earl Metzler has decided to put an end to that practice in favor of burgundy for all. Why? Why, to be accepting and inclusive, of course.

That would be inclusive of gender non-specific students.

How many of these students there are in the district we dont know and dont know how the superintendent would know. It must be against some law or code of conduct to even think of inquiring about anyones sex, sexual preference, etc. no?

How, exactly, would the one-time wearing of either a burgundy or white robe be so harmful to someone that they should have veto power over what the majority of students might prefer?

Meanwhile, Durham councilors are said to be taking some heat for their further shunning of Christmas (already an unnamed holiday, in their parlance). No matter. Durham will celebrate winter this year.

It better hurry up and do so while it can.

From what we hear from some environmentalists, winter is not long for this world.

Then again, neither may Christianity be.

See the article here:

Of towns and gowns: Timberlane, Durham pushing PC - The Union Leader

Democrats once again pulled off a triumph in off-year elections, this time with a victory in Louisiana. John Bel-Edwards clearly defeated a candidate who tried to make it a referendum on Donald Trump. Edwards, a Democratic Conservative and pro-business governor, proved along with Andy Beshears victory in Kentucky that being pro-commerce is no hindrance.

But, it also presents a challenge to national Democrats, a signal that a hard-left position might not be desirable. Elizabeth Warrens medicine for all proposal may have to be ditched in favor of an improvement on Obamacare. Indeed, Democrats may have to reconsider their views on regulations in order to end the Republican hold on the South and border states. Louisiana, Virginia, Kentucky and North Carolina have moderate Democratic governors. All are sober, well spoken and prudent and represent business progressivism at its best.

Certainly in Kentucky, Republican Matt Bevin tried a bad imitation of an insult comedian and lost even though his party did well. In Louisiana, Republican Sen. John Kennedy, a former Democrat, tried to equal Trump and George Wallace on the stump. He failed, even though he tried to act the role of a populist his elitist roots were exposed. No doubt Trump would be hard to defeat in either Kentucky or Louisiana but his imitators were simply not up to the occasion.

However, Democrats still have an uphill climb in the South. But these steady victories strengthen the hand of center-right elements within the party. It also gives some pointers on how to weaken the GOP. Focus on economic growth and technological progress. Force the hand of conservatives and Tea Partiers on issues of health care, Social Security and the protection of the safety net.

Instead of trying to subtract voters, think about adding more to the party. Blue-collar voters alienated by political correctness, perhaps might be persuaded to drop their social conservatism for opportunity based economic policies.

This is the soft-underbelly of the Tea Party which feeds off resentment not contentment. Trump recognizes this but the bulk of his party refuses to acknowledge this potential vulnerability.

But given the Democratic voter base, it is probably not going to happen. Environmentalism and other social priorities do not take in account the more traditional Democratic agenda. Joe Biden may be boring, but he stands a far better chance in defeating Trump than the rest o the 2020 field. He could ease the social issue divide, make conservatives seem exotic and out of date, instead of creating a controversy-a-minute agenda.

Indeed, Bevin tried to destroy Obamacare in Kentucky, a high enrollment state. He lost quite a few counties in the Eastern part of the state coal country. They may have their prejudices but they could not stomach Bevins efforts to end Obamacare in the bluegrass state. Even Mitch MCconnell did not seem to mourn the loss of the choleric Bevin.

The return to consensus-oriented democracy might create a solid road back to dominance, while aspirational programs may be left for another day.

This week Kump Education Center (KEC) celebrated the opening of the Altice Learning Lab (ALL). We want to thank Bob ...

The upcoming national holiday is all about an attitude of gratitude. At its core, the uniquely American day of ...

So-called excess levies for public schools can serve as small red ribbons tied around the fingers of ...

Hello from Barbour County!There is a youth cheer competition today at Philip Barbour High School, beginning at 7 ...

Elections in 2019 carried bad news for Republicans. In Kentucky, Democrats won the governorship although they ...

This coming Wednesday Kump Education Center (KEC) will celebrate the opening of the Altice Learning Lab (ALL). ...

View post:

Off-year triumph | News, Sports, Jobs - The Inter-Mountain

Why do I need to know beauf?

It's a common expression, filled with French stereotypes.

What does it mean?

Beauf, not to be confused with boeuf (beef)or bof, has two meanings.

The simplest one is when used as a diminutive of beau-frre, brother in law. The other, more complex one, is the French colloquial term used to describe an unsophisticated or vulgar person.

Born at the hands of the famous French cartoonist Jean Cabut (known as Cabu) in the magazine Charlie Hebdo in the 1970s, the originalBeauf wasa typical francais moyen, narrow-minded, conservative, rude and chauvinist.

Cabu's original drawing was the mustachioed owner of a bistro, whoCabu described as someone who doesnt think, yet is convinced of his own truths.

The archetype of todays beauf, le nouveau beauf, is male, provincial, slightly racist and sexist, with poor taste. The English version could be "redneck or chav.

It is, of course, a stereotype, sometimes used to make sweeping generalisations that arent necessarily true. A Parisian might say that:

Les gens du nord, ce sont tous des gros beaufs. - People from the north are all chavs.

READ ALSO:French regional stereotypes: Is half the country really always drunk?

Any other options?

Beauf can also describe someone's behaviour. For example, if you are a bit of a snobbish bourgouise lady, you might say:

Manger avec les mains, mais c'est un comportement de beaufs, ca - Eating with your hands, that's just chavvy behaviour.

Or if you're sick of your uncle's sexist jokes, you might say:

Mon oncle a sorti une blague des beaufs ce week-end encore,trop sexiste!- My uncle told yet another really redneck joke this weekend, really sexist!

Although calling someone abeauf is not a compliment, there is also a form a pride tied to the label. Linguist Alain Rey told the Express that thelangage beauf (provincial language)as "a reaction to political correctness."

Speaking beauf could be a way of countering the "increasing policing of political speech and use of euphemisms," according to Rey.

For more French words and expressions, head to our French word of the Day section.

View post:

French word of the day: Beauf - The Local France