nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Two-thirds of people say Ireland is too politically correct

DelaneyIn

Could we be seeing the first straws in the wind of a backlash against a more progressive Ireland? Not everyone in Ireland seems equally welcoming of recent societal and cultural developments, suggests research published today by Behaviour & Attitudes.

Fifty four per cent of 1,000 adults surveyed agreed that they felt pride in the result of the marriage equality referendum; but 46 per cent felt “neutral” or had “no pride” in it. By contrast, 62 per cent of voters voted in favour of the marriage equality referendum in 2015.

Forty seven per cent agreed with the statement that we are “losing Irish identity in face of foreign national influx”. Sixty one per cent of people agreed “everything is changing too quickly”. Forty five per cent of men felt “the #metoo movement had gone too far,” along with 38 per cent of women. And 69 per cent agreed with the statement that “society is too politically correct”.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/two-thirds-of-people-say-ireland-is-too-politically-correct-1.3871647

This is what happens when you try to control thought and language. People will push back. It happens the world over its helped in a small way to the rise of populist right wing politicians.

Even here in the last presidential election yer man Peter casey mentions something about travellers and people love him for it. Because genuine criticism of travellers (or any protected group) is taboo and shamed. People see that and gravitate towards those people.

When everything is racist and sexist those words lose all meaning and people stop giving a damn.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

I would love to see a non discussion thread: Please define political correctness.

A lot of people are up in arms about it, yet can't or won't even explain what it is!

For me, political correctness can be summed up with, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

AKA: Don't be a dick.

Political correctness is about assessing, judging and dealing with someone ( or some group) based on whether they appear on the lefts sacred cow list and what rank they hold on same list ( hierarchy of victimhood)

It's a rotten ideology as it explicitly holds people to different standards based on race, sex, sexuality, cultural background and nationality, it's also a terribly pessimistic creed in that it expects so little of some (bigotry of low expectations)

Baschically its about dividing people up, hence the identity politics activism, it is manifestly nothing to do with promoting equality

dxhound2005

robindch wrote: »

I don't disagree that there are definitions around the place, or that the idea doesn't have some merit - actually, it's really more about people treating and speaking about others with some basic, civil respect. The problems arise when some less-than-honest people define words to suit themselves so that they can shut down other people, and when further people still mischaracterize *that* as a general right for anybody to shut down everybody. That's not what it is, or should be, or was. It's just "respect", but given a longer and sillier name.

However, I'll still put money down that less than 5% of the population could give a coherent definition, or, having been asked, could avoid making some lame gag about it having "gone mad". Maybe the interviewers should have asked the respondents to define it first, then ask whether whatever nonsense they'd defined "had gone too far".

Regardless of that, the term should be woken up at dawn tomorrow, taken out into the back yard and permanently buried in a hole 1,000 feet deep.

I gave a straightforward definition, and you have expanded on it. Why do you think we are part of some 1% elite who could do that, and that 99% of the population would fail to do the same?

Nobelium

kowloon wrote: »

Some see 'The PC Brigade' as anyone who calls them on being a dick. People arguing for freedom of speech are constantly undermined by people who want no repercussions for acting the prick.

What's politically correct depends not on what is right or wrong, true or untrue, but on what particular political opinion is permitted in the hierarchy you are operating in.

coolshannagh28

Political correctness is a powerful force at the moment as it is capable of directing and getting policy enacted by govt , it will remain correct until it is proved wrong and this may happen due to recession , war or a general realisation by the voting public that it is damaging their freedoms or livelihood , however as it is a powerful force among the young it may prove to be a resilient political philosophy.

ogsjw

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

it will remain correct until it is proved wrong

Again,

1. What is your definition of the term?

and

2. If it could be proven 'wrong' it would've been in the last five years. You have a very poor understanding of progress I think.

ogsjw

Mad_maxx wrote: »

It's a rotten ideology

Unlike the other one, which only creates mass shooters :pac:

The 'ideology' of moderate progressivism does not create anything you asserted; only a small amount of people who claim to be about that, but are actually as extreme as the alt-right.

McDave

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Looking at the dictionary definitions "political correctness" first appeared in the language around 1980 (Collins Dictionary). Designed to correct abusive terms which would have been in wider circulation then.

But its usage is declining in recent years, and it has mostly lost its original meaning, now being regarded generally as a bad thing. Unusually the Urban Dictionary has the best write ups on it.

https://www.onelook.com/?w=political+correctness&ls=a&loc=home_ac_political+corr

It started off as a worthwhile idea, coming from a good place. A shield against prejudice, making space for those getting a raw deal from thoughtless majority insensitivities.

But I think in recent times it has become more of a method for ‘new conservative’ social professionals to channel debate onto their own ideological territory, and shut down ‘counter revolutionary’ responses. PC has regrettably become a partisan tool of left-liberal practice. Which is a shame, as I think it was intended to take the heat out off discussing difference.

El_Duderino 09

kneemos wrote: »

Changing too quickly? Catching up with the twentieth century more like.

Yeah things would be changing too quickly for some people no matter how slowly it happened. People who think tradition means not changing are Completely missing the point.

I always think it's funny that the things that were "PC gone mad" in the past are now grand but now those people have something new to complain about. They never recognise that they have actually changed their stance because they were on the wrong side of the issue.

10 years ago the notion of gay marriage was PC gone mad. Now it's fine and has absolutely no deleterious effect on hereto marriage. The people who thought it was PC gone mad then have probably become fine with it and have now found something else to get their knickers in a twist about.

Some people will always want to put the brakes on progress.

dxhound2005

McDave wrote: »

It started off as a worthwhile idea, coming from a good place. A shield against prejudice, making space for those getting a raw deal from thoughtless majority insensitivities.

But I think in recent times it has become more of a method for ‘new conservative’ social professionals to channel debate onto their own ideological territory, and shut down ‘counter revolutionary’ responses. PC has regrettably become a partisan tool of left-liberal practice. Which is a shame, as I think it was intended to take the heat out off discussing difference.

And has been demonstrated by a lot of responses here, it is well recognised as a discredited idea when misused in the way you outlined. Guardianistas, Snowflakes, Avocado Munchers are terms which show the contempt that attracts. And the backlash against so called Safe Spaces in universities There is no need for us to worry about the PC Brigade taking over.

coolshannagh28

ogsjw wrote: »

Again,

1. What is your definition of the term?

and

2. If it could be proven 'wrong' it would've been in the last five years. You have a very poor understanding of progress I think.

You are not capable of comprehending my points.

ogsjw

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

You are not capable of comprehending my points.

Try me.

coolshannagh28

ogsjw wrote: »

Try me.

You perceive yourself to be a progressive and see political correctness as beneficial , I say political correctness will thrive so long as it has govt support and the backing of the intelligentsia and is not knocked off course but something unforeseen . A political philosophy or idea is only correct ie Maoism or any other ism so long as it can be imposed and made stick, peaceably or otherwise.

ogsjw

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

I say political correctness will thrive so long as it has govt support and the backing of the intelligentsia

Define 'intelligentsia' for me.

Nobelium

ogsjw wrote: »

Define 'intelligentsia' for me.

noun. usually the intelligentsia. treated as singular or plural Intellectuals or highly educated people as a group, especially when regarded as possessing culture and political influence. 'a distrust of the intelligentsia and of theoretical learning' 'the belief that the liberal intelligentsia is ruining the country'
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/intelligentsia

coolshannagh28

ogsjw wrote: »

Define 'intelligentsia' for me.

You are asking too many questions ,this is a discussion forum .
I also pointed out that as political correctness also commands widespread support among the young it can last ,as traditionally power rested with the older , wealthier more conservative politically connected , however the internet and the rise of social media has passed power to the young who should have more of it.

Gimme A Pound

Nowhere near as much as Sweden.

I think it seems like a rather simplistic assessment of Ireland. What's their criteria? Ireland seems in the centre, give or take, to me.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

suicide_circus wrote: »

are you happy with the ssm and abortion referenda results?

do you think ireland is too politically correct?

these are 2 completely different and unrelated issues.

you could answer yes to both

Aye, somebody who feels neutral about the marriage equality referendum might just feel like that’s how it always should have been.

Nobelium

suicide_circus wrote: »

are you happy with the ssm and abortion referenda results?

do you think ireland is too politically correct?

these are 2 completely different and unrelated issues.

you could answer yes to both

you could . . . but the second yes would not be deemed a politically correct or permitted opinion and would loose you substantial pc brownie points.

Chris_Heilong

Political correctness is a form of censorship which forces one groups will on others, Created in Soviet Russia in order to control decent. Is is a dangerous tool that erodes expression, somehow it has been adopted by the left wingers as a tool to keep a certain level of control, with Silicon Valley pushing out and promoting their local brand of political correctness on a worldwide stage. It can lead to a very anti science stance, who is now going to pursue differences in the sexes or will cover up their findings if they do not go along with the politically correct narrative. We also see issues when a crime has been committed and all the news papers no longer identify the persons race as a descriptor as they would in the past, If they give any info they might say 'an Asian man in his 20s' oh come on, so are they Indian , middle eastern, Chinese, filipino, thai? This sort of PC is preventing justice in a case like this. Comedy has taken a nose dive especially stand up as children are being brought up with the belief that words equate to violence so to PC minded individuals want to destroy any comedy where sex/gender/religion there might be the punchline, straight/white/male/christian seem to be the only safe targets these days and I think that most of us that fall into any of those categories are fine with that as we know it is a joke.

when political correctness is in opposition to common science then it becomes dangerous to society.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

klaaaz wrote: »

What images could they be? Society is about including everyone for the better of all.

Eh, there is nothing that can be done about being discriminated at the interview stage of a job. No equality under the law stuff applies there. Of course once a person is actually employed, there is protection from discrimination.

Not totally true. If it’s explicitly stated in the interview that you are not being hired for one of the, I think, nine areas you can't discriminate against, you can take legal action and win. Here’s an example:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/solas-employee-awarded-20k-in-discrimination-case-1.3368540?mode=amp

ogsjw

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

You are asking too many questions ,this is a discussion forum .

How can someone have a discussion with you if they have no clue what you're on about? That would make two people talking about things they have no clue about. :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Pythagorean wrote: »

My essential point is this; that political correctness sees things in very black and white terms, e.g the example of the rape victim referred to by George Hook. She is automatically categorized as a victim, regardless of the circumstances, and anyone who dares question this assumption is hounded out. Kevin Myers, by remarking about Vanessa Feltz, fell foul of the same mindset.

Well, I think the guy was acquitted in that case but in what circumstances is somebody who has been raped not a victim? In the other examples people usually bring up here, people are still victims of burglary, car theft, assault etc. even if they were careless.

meeeeh

ogsjw wrote: »

How can someone have a discussion with you if they have no clue what you're on about? That would make two people talking about things they have no clue about. :pac:

Political correctness is when some topics are not talked about in fear of insulting someone. I was in enough spats with morons on boards claiming that Muslims rape our women and similar nonsense. I hate that type of racism or nationalism, however there are valid questions to be asked. For example about where money for new Dublin mosque is coming from (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia). I think Europe in general, including Ireland, has to discuss what type of multi culturalism we want to have. Do we wand communities arriving to Ireland preserve their values or do we expect them to adapt to ours and where do we draw the line.

ogsjw

I wasn't talking to you, which explains why you couldn't define 'intelligencia' for me.

freshpopcorn

If if you are in a situation with friends and you can't make a comment without them jumping down your throat or trying to get your fired/shaming you online. Make new friends. Even in work places that would be very PC. You'd be amazed at stuff you'd hear some of the employees say behind their colleagues back or to the ones they know they can trust.

ogsjw

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Make new friends.

Because they deserve better than you, if they can adhere to the norms of Social Contract Theory but you don't seem to be able to.

I agree, if you can't work succesfully in an office environment without passing homophobic, sexist or racist comments then go re-train for blue collar work/working solo. Whether you work with minorities or not.

freshpopcorn

ogsjw wrote: »

Because they deserve better than you, if they can adhere to the norms Social Contract Theory but you don't seem to be able to.

I agree, if you can't work succesfully in an office environment without passing homophobic, sexist or racist comments then go re-train for blue collar work/working solo. Whether you work with minorities or not.

Also if you can't work successfully without getting offended easily or can't cope with people questioning social issues. Perhaps you should consider looking for another job also!

Pac1Man

I would like to believe that we have reached peak ridiculousness regarding PC culture and I think we have.

The majority of people in this country are fairly centered and the public are obviously sick of hearing these physically and mentally weak fanatics shout the loudest, backed up by RTE and the like which makes them seem a lot bigger than they are.

The far left are cancerous. They are reactionary, lack any sort of self awareness and have no creative thought process which would allow them to have a measured opinion.

[Deleted User]

ogsjw wrote: »

Because they deserve better than you, if they can adhere to the norms of Social Contract Theory but you don't seem to be able to.

I agree, if you can't work succesfully in an office environment without passing homophobic, sexist or racist comments then go re-train for blue collar work/working solo. Whether you work with minorities or not.

People throughout history have adhered to the social contact. That's included slavery and discrimination. It's a weak basis for an argument.

meeeeh

ogsjw wrote: »

Because they deserve better than you, if they can adhere to the norms of Social Contract Theory but you don't seem to be able to.

I agree, if you can't work succesfully in an office environment without passing homophobic, sexist or racist comments then go re-train for blue collar work/working solo. Whether you work with minorities or not.

I always find people who are most afraid to offend anyone will be the least likely to befriend them. They will be proper, respectful and yet you always get the message you are not one of them. They constantly keep guard around you.