This person is dead serious.

[novapsyche]

Over in liberal, nbda1997 uses Gran Torino, Clint Eastwood's deft flick, as a parable. Specifically, this person focuses on the main character's flaw of bigotry and expands:

I really believe that political correctness, especially when taken to the extreme that it has in our country today, does very little to ease racial tension. When people are constantly required to edit and censor themselves, they are forced to leave feelings bottled up and frustration grows.

[...] What I am saying is that treating someone who uses a racial slur almost like a criminal is not only unfair, but ultimately gives that racial slur more power. Rather than ostracizing the person, why not just give it right back to them and get the tension out of the way?

I would love to hear what Mr. Eastwood would say to such an argument. The thread takes a twist, though.

I think there needs to be a Bigots Anonymous. Right now, the only outlets for feelings of racial (or sexual, or religious, or gender, or class) superiority funnel toward emphasizing that stance. There needs to be a counterpoint, some venue where persons can meet and, by acknowledging their shame, can come to a point of catharsis and repentance. The shared aspect would be the primary feature, as the nature of bigotry is something that is very personal and private; the remedy, commonsensically, would need to involve renouncement in front of a group.

Comments

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

When people are constantly required to edit and censor themselves, they are forced to leave feelings bottled up and frustration grows.

This is an utterance that can only come from the perspective of a person with privilege. The privileged perspective views the "normal state of affairs" as one where a person of privilege does not have to worry at all about the feelings of the oppressed. Asking the privileged to concern themselves even just a little with the feelings of the oppressed in order to watch what they say is a minuscule imposition when compared to oppression itself. But even this minuscule burden, which does make a difference in moving society past oppression, is apparently too much to ask.


When people are constantly required to edit and censor themselves, they are forced to leave feelings bottled up and frustration grows.

What feelings are being required to be bottled up? The only feelings that must be expressed in terms of racial slurs are feelings of hatred by the privileged against the oppressed.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

This is all besides the fact that adults must edit and censor themselves all the time. If we all said the first things that came to mind, civilization probably would not propagate, as such seems predicated on civility.

[novapsyche]

I never said "white" anything. That is your guilty conscience trying to project onto me.

Why you decided to post to my Dreamwidth account when this was originally posted to LiveJournal (and almost a year ago), I don't know.

[novapsyche]

You know, the best thing for you to do might be answer this on your own journal. The only way I'm even seeing your responses is through my email--otherwise, this would be just you talking to yourself.

There is a way for a person making an argument to go from something specific (e.g., your excerpts) to a generalized remark (e.g., what I said). This is a standard rhetorical technique.

Your problem is that you've taken everything I said here personally. This is a flaw.

This topic is pretty much closed. Sod off, will you?