MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Political correctness...

Political correctness...


What does it mean to you personally? I've seen a few posts today that used the term in a fashion that didn't make sense to me...help me out. Starwars and ferris buellers day off...evidently Star Wars sucks now because (among other tired reasons)it has become too PC...ferris Bueller could never be done today because...that's right...PC.

What was so politically incorrect about Star Wars or FBDO that I'm missing? If the argument was made for all in the family or blazing saddles...sure...I get it.
But Star Wars???what was so offensive that I'm forgetting? As for ferris...skipping school?charlie sheen???

Has too PC become code for I don't like women or brown people in my movie?
All opinions welcome...

reply

The phrase appeals to several types. One are bigots who want to judge others without being judged in return. Another are people who want to feel persecuted. But mostly it's bigots.

reply

I think "too PC" means bending over backwards to not offend ANYONE, which is impossible. Too many people look for reasons to be offended, and I think it's gone too far. Offense occurs, but quite often it's not intentional. Reactions to an incident are influenced by a person's life experiences, culture, level of education, age, intelligence, etc. These days, no matter what you say and how nicely you say it, SOMEONE wants their fifteen minutes of outrage.

reply

GlenEllyn,
You said it beautifully!

reply

yes Glen, very well put, I wish I could express myself like that but I can't,
as far as the blacks, the browns, the yellows, the pinks (the French) go, If I say anything that offends them, screw em

reply

It also covers casting and story decision that are not based on say making a good film but seem to exist to push a certain agenda or check off a diversity card.

One example of this was Sulu being gay. It was a token gesture that added nothing to the story, didn't really make sense but was there seemingly just to say look we added a gay character.

reply

Good point, it does seem to be used as some sort of soulless check in the box. Like the top execs go, 'there is no black guy or gay guy' we need one of those'. So the director throws one in to satisfy the audience. If this is the case I would think that it is inspired by racism.

reply

I don't know about Sulu. He seemed fairly uncomfortable with the two show girls from Rigel near the end of "Shore Leave."

reply

I never involve in politics...never.

reply

Smart man!

reply

I think there's difference between PC and "too PC." Political Correctness itseld is okay. Of course movies will always be politically correct if they want to sell. It's just common sense.

However, "too PC" is politically correctness taken to the extreme. A "too PC" movie makes sure at all times it's characters to be overly diverse, with antagonists that always be white and no black can ever be a bad guy. Even when there are black thugs they will always be good guys somehow, while the real bad guys thugs will always be white (russians, french, irish, etc.)

This is actually not politically correct at all.

reply

[deleted]

Amen.

reply

Sorry...trying not to comment directly...but French thug??? FUNNIEST POST YET!

reply

SWAT (2003) had one. He wasn't very good.

https://moviechat.org/tt0257076/SWAT

reply

You call that political correctness but we have a senile president that panders to white trash and half wits; and a whole political machine that picks up his poop. So are those things politically correct?

reply

Who cares about your president? I'm not even an American. This is about movies.

reply

Movies are a reflection of culture. If the political climate changes radically, does not the definition of political correctness change with it? And if not, then is what you are defining really political correctness or something else entirely?

reply

The movies' political correctness came from Hollywood, which are mostly left (and Jews, but that's another matter), regardless of who the president is. Is it affected? Sure, but isn't entirely dependent to.

reply

And there it is, a Jew comment. It never fails that PC complainers turn out to be bigots.

reply

Okay.

reply

Agree that some people take it too far and use it like a weapon, but only 50 years ago it was unthinkable for a woman or a person of color to become President, you were considered a freak of nature if you wore long hair, homosexuals were in danger of imprisonment, tattoos were barriers to any decent employment.

Many people ridicule tree huggers for example, but if California didn't take drastic action against smog in the seventies, our air would be worse than Shanghai or Mexico City.

The key is taking each event case by case, and not trying to ruin people or politicize everything because it goes against your personal interests. But it is also important to recognize what good certain movements have done for people, as it's no longer acceptable to beat children and animals, to date rape women, to treat certain minorities as subhumans.

reply

Nice comment. Case by case ... I think that is a valid and interesting point. I think it also explains why Republicans are so ill-informed. That is, they do not have the time, patience or constitution to consider everything as its own individual situation. Republicans, Conservatives seem to always want a way to short-circuit having to think, and would rather be told what to think and say.

reply

I think you are misrepresenting Republicans. Which as I see it ask for case by case examples of wrongs, racism or inequality. Often to be meet with no specifics. You can't just say black people suffer from "institutional racism" and provide no details or specific examples and then try to say Republicans are "ill-informed".

Also it is a horrible idea to make general public policy based on "individual situation" that might not apply to the general public. that is a recipe for disaster.

The difference as I see it between Reps and Dems is Dems are so focused in fixing a problem now they pay no attention whatsoever to the possible cost later where as Reps are so terrified of any and all possible future costs they are paralyzed for even attempting to fix any problems now. But because I think the government sucks at everything I prefer Republicans not getting anything done than Democrats getting stuff done but without caring about what damage it will cause in the future.

reply

"I think you are misrepresenting Republicans."

That caught my eye. I don't care since Republicans constantly insult and misrepresent Liberals. Republicans are always complaining about stuff, and then when they can get enough steam up to actually state their idea, it is invariably wrong, but they don't give a damn.

You also cannot just whip up some example that I never mentioned and use it as an argument, like "You can't just say black people suffer from "institutional racism"".

You infer you think about the difference between the general and specific, and yet that is what most Republican arguments are. At the base in the last 20 years all I hear is how detestable Democrats are. They will do anything to stop them, and then most of the big Republican talking head actually have taken to talking about Liberalism like a mental disorder. That BS started around 2000 and shows no sign of abating.

You then try to play the fiscal conservative card, and that is another pile of BS ... it is the Republicans, specifically Reagan and Bush II that exploded the debt, Bush pushed it into a spiraling mess - and Republicans are still trying to float the fantasy that cutting taxes will raise more revenue. Well, it won't.

The government does not suck, but it does make mistakes, just like the private sector, but the government does it in full view of everyone and we all get a vote - something no one gets in the private sector. This country is run by the private sector elite, and that is why no one has a vote or gets any say, and middle class incomes have been falling for 40 years since the 80's.

reply

" I don't care since Republicans constantly insult and misrepresent Liberals"

Well nice to see the level you are playing at. 'when they go low, we go lower.'

" Republicans are always complaining about stuff, and then when they can get enough steam up to actually state their idea, it is invariably wrong, but they don't give a damn."

Again one can just easily interchange the republicans with democrat and it would not change the meaning at all.

"You also cannot just whip up some example that I never mentioned and use it as an argument, like "You can't just say black people suffer from "institutional racism""."

Examples are helpful in defining what we are talking about. The idea of political correctness can cover a large broad meaning; examples help specify and clarify the definition.

"
The government does not suck, but it does make mistakes, just like the private sector, but the government does it in full view of everyone and we all get a vote - something no one gets in the private sector."

This is just an insane comment. of course you get to vote in the private sector. You vote with your wallet. if the private business is doing something wrong then enough people stop giving them money they die. Government does something wrong they create bureaucracy and use the media to cover it up. Than hope the voters forget about it by the next election cycle and they can keep doing the wrong things. and you do not even have the option of not giving them money because they hold a gun to your head and demand taxes. the private sector is a lot more free than government and is held to a higher standard than government.

" This country is run by the private sector elite, and that is why no one has a vote or gets any say, and middle class incomes have been falling for 40 years since the 80's."

And yet, tell me, how many in the lower class in the US do not have multiple flat screen TV's in their homes and at least 2 cars that are less than 15 years old?

reply

You just play with your programmed responses. Don't waste my time. I don't have to prove that Liberals are more socially and collectively oriented compared the greedy and controlling Republicans. I don't have to prove that debts shoot up under Republicans. Both self evident.

You use fake stats that you do not even know to try to deny that in terms of real purchasing power the average American's income has dropped. That's just fact. It doesn't matter how many flat screens people have or cars. What matters is if they can afford health insurance, and most cannot. Most cannot afford to send their kids to college.

reply

"You just play with your programmed responses."

I don't know, your responses sound pretty programmed too.

"Don't waste my time"

Don't say stupid factually incorrect things and I won't have to correct you.

"I don't have to prove that Liberals are more socially and collectively oriented compared the greedy and controlling Republicans."

Yes one group are angels and the others are monsters. does the phrase cognitive dissonance mean anything to you?

"I don't have to prove that debts shoot up under Republicans. Both self evident."

This is patently false. Debt almost always goes higher under Democrates; Bush jr. was one of the first examples of it being vice versa and that is because he pushed a lot of more social policies. I think you need to recheck you 'facts'.

"You use fake stats that you do not even know to try to deny that in terms of real purchasing power the average American's income has dropped."

purchasing power has decreased because the products prices increased due to a result of production costs, the highest cost being employee wages. purchasing power went down because of the increase in minimum wage set an arbitrary number for business to base pay around.

"hat's just fact. It doesn't matter how many flat screens people have or cars. What matters is if they can afford health insurance, and most cannot. Most cannot afford to send their kids to college."

of course it matters, maybe if they bought less flat screen tv's they could afford health insurance. Also the cost of health insurance is skyrocketing due to a number of factors; including government subsidies and general healthcare costs. It is the same case with college. In almost all cases the more the government is involved the worse the outcome for the people is.

Out of curiosity were are you getting your information? I am curious of your sources to see if you are even worth wasting time on.

reply

I'm not arguing but would like to interject a thought, Republican is a political party while Conservatism is an aptitude, a certain bent toward the world; they are not the same. There was a time when the Republican party was fairly liberal and Democrats were more conservative but at least in theory you can still be a liberal Republican or conservative Democrat. Up until the late 80's - early 90's, there were actually quite a few liberal Republicans but the party was taken over by conservatives who forced out liberals. Conservatism and Liberalism are natural enemies who have battled many times over the centuries under the guise of various party names. It really boils down to liberalism is inclusive while conservatism is exclusive though those ideas can manifest differently in different places and times.

reply

Your point is valid, but this is what gets people arguing so much ... the meanings and connotations of words these days are bleeding out so that nothing means anything anymore. Democracy ... we all talk about democracy, yet our country is not democratic, and neither is any other, but in the context of how democratic the US was, it is must less democratic now. Is that confusing? Also, socialism. Mention socialism and 99% of Americans see Stalin or Mao instead of Norway, Finland or Sweden. Why? Because we have been programmed to get at each other's throats and fight all the time.

To me it all boils down to our government being taken over by the corporate military industrial congressional complex. We cannot even imagine how much money they have, and they will use it to kill the whole country if they have to rather than relinquish control.

reply

"Mention socialism and 99% of Americans see Stalin or Mao instead of Norway, Finland or Sweden. "

You do realize that those countries have mostly free market economies and are only socialist in public policy right? Also do you realize they spend next to nothing on national defense and security? Must be nice to have America as a ally and not have to worry hardly at all about military spending.

" corporate military industrial congressional complex."

Ever take any history of engineering classes or read any books on the topic. The reason we have smart phones, tv's, the internet, computers, and basically every bit of technology we have is directly because of the military university industrial complex.

"We cannot even imagine how much money they have, and they will use it to kill the whole country if they have to rather than relinquish control."

Now you sound conspiratorial and paranoid.

reply

Politically correct to me is about being considerate of other
people's sensitivities. Republicans seem to think that goes
180 degrees against what they stand for in life ... that is,
attacking, insulting and trying to humiliate anyone they
disagree with or who is Liberal or who identifies as
Liberal.

Sure, people sometimes push it too far, but that does not
wipe out the whole idea of taking people's feelings and
respect into account. The whole attack on PC by Trump
and the Republicans is twisted and fake, like everything
they do.

reply

You called croft_alice "a B"...

reply

"Politically correct to me is about being considerate of other
people's sensitivities"

people are too entitled and too sensitive. They should become adults and deal with sensitiviity like adults.

"Republicans seem to think that goes
180 degrees against what they stand for in life ... that is,
attacking, insulting and trying to humiliate anyone they
disagree with or who is Liberal or who identifies as
Liberal."

Well since you seem to be the only one doing attacking, insulting, and trying to humilate republicans I am going to go ahead and say you are hypocrite and incredibly biased.

reply

"people are too entitled and too sensitive"

Screw you, you cannot decide what feelings people have a right
to what feeling are too sensitive. You use terms you do not and
can not define. You call some people ??? surely these are the
main minorities, blacks, hispanics, gays, transgenders too
sensitive, and yet Republicans go off like whiny little babies
if they cannot dominate a conversation with insults when they
get their facts totally wrong.

I am not attacking Republicans, I am describing and accurate
image of what I see and hear after years of paying attention to
history and politics.

Who else, what other group would elect someone who is basically
a criminal as President, and then for almost a year, support him
still when the majority of what he has said and done has been
misinformed, stupid and just bad. There comes a point where
some groups are so problematic just to mention and describe
them honestly gets one labelled as biased. I am not biased,
Republicans do not play fair, and feel entitled to cheat and lie
because they tell themselves it is in the best interests of the
country, but it is funny how it always fills the pockets of the top
Conservatives at the same time. And you call me a hypocrite?

reply

"Screw you"

well nice to see a rational response. This is why I have a hard time taking supporters of political correctness seriously. So anger and bitter.

"you cannot decide what feelings people have a right
to what feeling are too sensitive."

I cannot decide what people feel but I can recommend not to be too emotional. People do not make the best choices based in emotion. It was a recommendation not a decision.

"You use terms you do not and can not define."

What terms are those?

"I am not attacking Republicans, I am describing and accurate
image of what I see and hear after years of paying attention to
history and politics."

and republicans are not attacking liberals; they are just describing an accurate image of they see and hear after years of paying attention to history and politics.

"Who else, what other group would elect someone who is basically
a criminal as President, and then for almost a year, support him
still when the majority of what he has said and done has been
misinformed, stupid and just bad."

Democrats.

"There comes a point where
some groups are so problematic just to mention and describe
them honestly gets one labelled as biased."

That sounds racist.

" I am not biased,"

lol sure you're not.

"Republicans do not play fair, and feel entitled to cheat and lie
because they tell themselves it is in the best interests of the
country, but it is funny how it always fills the pockets of the top
Conservatives at the same time."

That can literally be said about Democrats as well. this is all non-specific hyperbole.

"And you call me a hypocrite?"

Yup I do, and you seem to be a pretty good job of confirming that claim.

reply

You're just name calling and being a dork, that is why I said screw you, and I'll repeat it again, screw you.

reply

This is funny considering he just accused me of the very same thing in another thread.

reply

Did you even read the threat? You don't know the difference between name calling and suggestion either? Also why bring up discussion from another thread and take things out of context completely. Not all discussions are equal, dumb20dumb.

reply

I was not name calling anyone. Saying people are too entitled and too sensitive is not name calling. saying 'you're being a dork' is name calling. Suggesting people act like adults Is a SUGGESTION not a ridiculing taunt. But since you seemingly can't tell the difference I will suggest you to grew up as well.

reply

As I see it political correctness is an extension of or approach to social interaction routed in the ideology of social justice. Honestly it is too broad to define in any single post but if you are really interested in it I would recommend the book "the Quest for Cosmic Justice" by Thomas Sowell. I am just about finished with it and I can't recommend it enough. Basically the idea of it is political correctness (social justice) is about finding equality or social equity but without consideration to cost or potential cost.

Now in regards to Star Wars becoming PC, the viewpoint comes from perceived pandering that the film TFA seems to have done towards a culture that is heavily influenced by social justice; at least in the main stream.

It is not really about "women or brown people in" the movies but about the manner they are presented in the movies. One could take the manner in which Rey was presented as being a hyper-feminist ideal The way this gets perceived is they did this on purpose to push a PC narrative towards the social justice feminist that they were marketing to. It also does not help when the head of Lucas studios goes on regard and says she "doesn't owe" the male audiences anything.

Now that is not to say that some 'fringe' elements out there take those terms like 'social justice' and "PC" and use them in a racist or bigoted manner. Just look at those that identify as alt-right. They are not actually part of the conservative right they are nationalist populist and usually very racist or bigoted in their beliefs. But Richard Spencer realized his pathetic organization had no power calling themselves white nationalist so they coined a new name (alt-right) and focused on the few viewpoints they shared with conservatives, like preserving Historical monuments. It was a very clever tactic because now what he did is make people believe they are alt-right if they are against PC. It makes the nationalist populist group appear larger than it is.

reply

Political correctness simply means fairness in the way that people are represented. This way, minorities are not subject to being represented in terms that only suit the person providing them, which may or may not be suitable. It is therefore correct to expect and demand, wherever it's appropriate to employ language etc which is not prejudicial to a minority being treated fairly.

People take umbrage at being reminded of political correctness because they think it tars them with a certain brush and doesn't define their real intentions. Well intentioned or not, the people whom political correctness benefits in the end are tarred with the same brush far more regularly through complacency and ignorance than those that feel impugned because their language doesn't do them or their argument any favours except to people who are genuinely prejudiced.

Most criticism that invokes PC usually comes from those that don't understand.

More often that not, criticism of PC comes from people who are aggrieved that society might want to try and be less prejudicial, which will leave them behind.

reply