Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Political Correctness Run Amok

By et in MLP
Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 01:23:23 PM EST
Tags: Politics (all tags)
Politics

Opening a June 11 debate at the Boy's State leadership camp in South Carolina, state Democratic leader Dick Harpootlian commented that Democrats are "for beer and girls". State Republican leader Henry McMaster countered that "Republicans are for cold beer and hot girls."

Innocent enough remarks right? Sure. But of course some people just can't take a joke.


Why is it that serious discourse has to take a back seat in this country to the constant din of reactionary voices, to absurd, intellectually sterilized standards of 'political correctness' that no single person can ever live up to, yet we are all expected to pretend to? Will bullshitting it transform us into more truly enlightened creatures in time? Or will it just more deeply entrench irrationality and prejudice as it sweeps it under the rug?

My favorite quote from this article is that detailing a recent Boy's State grad's defense of Harpootlian and McMaster:
Northcutt said the men are "excellent orators" who were trying to pique the interest of their audience. "I am not an advocate of off-color humor in the presence of ladies, but in an audience devoid of those of the fairer sex, such humor is not out of place."
At least someone involved can recognize the inanity of it all, and be young enough to not be called on it, hand-slapped and tongue-lashed by the self-righteous hordes. I suppose such remarks risk inflaming humourless radical feminists, however... Mr. Northcutt had better learn to measure his words more carefully if he wants to get ahead in this world.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o some people
o can't take a joke
o Also by et


Display: Sort:
Political Correctness Run Amok | 59 comments (53 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
some pc nonsense bad, but not this (3.25 / 16) (#1)
by speek on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 06:59:51 PM EST

face it, the politicians said something extremely stupid and fairly offensive. They got called on it. I don't see a problem with the PC crowd, in this instance.

--
al queda is kicking themsleves for not knowing about the levees

offensive? (4.30 / 10) (#2)
by Delirium on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 07:13:28 PM EST

How is a man saying, to a group of young men, that he likes good-looking women in any way offensive? And the other half of the statement - that he likes cold beer - is not even remotely offensive unless you are opposed to alcohol entirely.

[ Parent ]
Re: offensive? (3.09 / 11) (#9)
by S.Prat on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 08:35:09 PM EST

The hot girls comment is considered offensive because of the implication that the only important quality of a girl is her looks. (See Andrea Dworkin, et al.) The cold beer part is offensive as part of the whole joke, calling Democratic women cold.

[ Parent ]
yeah, offensive (3.11 / 9) (#10)
by speek on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 09:17:02 PM EST

Liking cold beer is not offensive. Liking women is not offensive. Being sexually attracted to women is not offensive. Implying the two are approximately equal in importance is offensive. Implying that the value of women is in their ability to satisfy my thirst (as a man), similar to cold beer's ability to do so, is offensive.

And, what does it matter who the audience is? Are you suggesting it could be offensive to women, if they heard it, but it's not offensive since only men did? Is it not offensive to defame someone behind their back? Does that mean we have different standards for men and women? Perhaps it's appropriate to gather just the men together to reinforce attitudes of male dominance over women?

--
al queda is kicking themsleves for not knowing about the levees
[ Parent ]

holy shit (3.80 / 10) (#14)
by et on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 10:01:36 PM EST

You've got to be kidding me. You assault my 'stupidity' for breaking up the comment into cold beer and hot girls - it's called, 'I was having fun with it', ok? - and deem me guilty of rhetorical bullshit. For what I think is a pretty light story, it's got you pretty worked up.

Rather than break things down into two items, you instead totally deconstruct them - looking for psychological undertones to ascribe to them, analyzing the semantics of "cold beer and hot girls" until you arrive at the highly arbitrary conclusion that this one stupid comment reinforces patriarchial oppression and dominance over women in our society. I find it very hard not to bust out laughing. Yea, those young men at the camp are surely spoilt now.

Sure, maybe it does reduce the 'hot girls' in question to a commodity like 'cold beer'. But what's new and shocking about that? What's not commodified these days? I'm sure you've never heard the fairer sex speak in exactly the same debased manner of males right? Oops, sorry, saying "the fairer sex" is in and of itself small-minded and sexist. Come on. I'm pretty fucking far from being a misogynist, people can make up their own minds about the things they hear. Don't waste your energy fighting symptoms, and don't waste your time playing language police.

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
read my original comment (3.20 / 5) (#17)
by speek on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 11:16:40 PM EST

It's not an example of being "worked up". But, people insisted on arguing with me and making me explain why the comments were offensive. So, I did, and I tried to be clear and detailed.

Sure, maybe it does reduce the 'hot girls' in question to a commodity like 'cold beer'

So, is that an "arbitrary conclusion", or is it true? Some people found it offensive, and they spoke out. Not really a good example of out-of-control PC, IMO.

--
al queda is kicking themsleves for not knowing about the levees
[ Parent ]

Well (3.20 / 5) (#23)
by et on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 02:05:30 AM EST

So, is that an "arbitrary conclusion", or is it true?
It remains an arbitrary conclusion. I said "sure maybe it does..." in recognition of the fact that, yeah, that's one way you can look at it. That may be how some people take it upon hearing that. But I don't see how you can definitively claim that the comment is in and of itself offensive and wrong, reinforcing fucked up male attitudes about women etc. That seems no more than one potential interpretation to me. I didn't take it that way, and I don't see the basis for any moral outrage. Because it is possible that some slob with a dim view of women will have that view reinforced by such speech, it is inherently wrong?
Some people found it offensive, and they spoke out. Not really a good example of out-of-control PC, IMO.
I still think it is. Minor and regional, but typical. Actually I'm pleasantly surprised to find that it isn't so cut and dry as I saw it to alot of others. Myself, I find the story amusing as hell, MADD's protestations hollow and incredibly naive. I don't really see the big deal about their audience being teenage males, then again I am not a big on "protect the children!" initiatives, and it hasn't been all that long since I was a teenage male myself. I would have found the article doubly hilarious had I read it at 17. But opinions are like assholes..

Seriously though, I can appreciate the sentiment behind PC attitudes but I do not think it is a good approach, I don't think it works. Teach children to have critical minds instead of consumer minds and maybe they'll be able to see through it all by themselves, without us narrowing the scope of acceptible ideas and sentiments for their convenience.

Btw, my apologies for the "worked up" bit, but you did call me stupid. Fucker.

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
one time... (4.36 / 11) (#18)
by rebelcool on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 11:51:41 PM EST

at a party, i spilled cold beer on a hot girl. But it was okay, because I slept with her later.

Christ, im such a misogynist!

COG. Build your own community. Free, easy, powerful. Demo site
[ Parent ]

you're so romantic (4.00 / 7) (#24)
by et on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 02:09:22 AM EST

Now don't take the Lord's name in vain again my son.

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
you seem to be... (2.57 / 7) (#20)
by poltroon on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 12:24:54 AM EST

wasting a lot of time playing anti-PC police. As annoying as political corectness can be, I'm just as annoyed by people who run around slapping politically correct labels all over other people's words. Some PC statements may very well be trivial, but the label can just as easily be applied to something that isn't trivial, which you want to easily dismiss.

[ Parent ]
it's not literaly what he said, (3.12 / 8) (#12)
by typhatix on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 09:21:45 PM EST

it's that that is the kind of message they are giving to "america's youth". The message was not "yes I like attractive girls, and also I like my beer cold." The undertones of the message that are offensive are the glorifications of sexism and of alcohol to teenage boys. Yes it glorified sexism with the "hot girls" comment and the alcohol was to 17 year olds the same as telling a junior high auditorium of boys "cigarettes make you look cool" (same age difference of 4 years). Many women have the problem that men (instinctually) judge them instantly by their looks. Someone who while probably not the boys role models (who the hell looks up to politicians when they're that age), are still a symbol of success, money, and power. And by acting like a fratboy at a toga party, they are not only degrading their constituents, they are giving the boys potentially damaging ideas of how successful people behave. And before I get lambasted for deciding what is damaging to teach, would you have been offended if the republican had said "we like WHITE SUBMISSIVE women"? Tell me that's not a damaging attitude.



[ Parent ]
Oh please (3.57 / 7) (#19)
by jreilly on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 12:08:20 AM EST

Whenever I'm out with some of my female friends (I'm a guy, BTW), whenever they notice a guy, the first words out of their mouth are "Ooh, he's cute!" Everyone judges everyone else by their looks initially. Its all you have to go on until you get to know them.

Oooh, shiny...
[ Parent ]
theres a difference (2.66 / 6) (#21)
by typhatix on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 12:38:58 AM EST

between "oh hes cute" and an environment where women are judged solely based upon whether they are hot or not. Many women face the problem that they are seen as needing to stay in their "place" where they are submissive and quiet. You are right, that is all you have until you get to know them. But sexism is not about first impressions, its about bigotry based upon gender.



[ Parent ]
hot (4.00 / 1) (#54)
by anonymous cowerd on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 03:54:09 PM EST

...where women are judged solely based upon whether they are hot or not.

No, you've got the idiom completely backwards. You do not say, "I am going to judge this woman; is she hot, whatever that means? I'll base my judgment upon that." It's the other way around; when you call a woman "hot" it means you have already judged her, and you have found her especially admirable in some way or another. For example, she might be superficially physically attractive - that's real common, a guy sees a pretty girl, elbows his buddy and points, "Hey, wow, check out that hot babe over there!" - or you might know her personally and find her particularly charming, or she might have a beautiful singing voice, or whatever. It's a Hell of a world where admitting to admire someone gets read as an insult!

You use the same idiom talking about, say, a writer, male or female: "Hey, read this guy's stuff, he's hot!" or even about a completely inanimate thing like a feature in a computer program: "The new plotting interface in Acad2K is hot!" Obviously that doesn't mean you are sexually objectifying the program in a belittling, demeaning way!

I'm not denying that a lot of guys do objectify women as though they were inanimate objects for their use, we both know that happens, some women treat guys the same for that matter, but merely using the innocent phrase "hot girl" is so far from sufficient ground for an accusation of sexism that it's just ridiculous. When I hear talk like this I have to assume that people are just fishing for a pretense so they can act like they've been affronted.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

stint grits
darts file
gratis ways to fit tins
dapper angle
ill apple
-Barbara Baracks

[ Parent ]

what? (3.62 / 8) (#4)
by et on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 07:53:24 PM EST

A bit boorish and pandering perhaps, but extremely stupid and fairly offensive? Would you care to explain why you think that?

The girls comment is loaded sure, if you want to be pendantic and look at it with your politicalcorrectness meter turned on, instead of just shrugging it off as the offhanded remark it is. But cold beer? You got a problem with cold beer?! In the summer even?

What kind of country can call themselves a civilized people that's so stoic and tightassed in the 21st century that they don't let people under 21 drink? What kind of fool thinks that if a bunch of old men and women draft up a law stating it, that young people will be clean and sober until the day they turn 21? Who on God's green earth actually lived to the age of 21 without being shitfaced more than a few times? And yet we play out these moral fictions and rules with august seriousness, even though common sense tells us how hollow and pointless it is.

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
see my other reply (2.33 / 6) (#11)
by speek on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 09:21:12 PM EST

I don't feel like repeating it. But, consider your own stupidity in trying to break up the comment (cold beer and hot girls), and treat the two as if they weren't spoken together. That's rhetorical bullshit, and you should know better.

--
al queda is kicking themsleves for not knowing about the levees
[ Parent ]

Did you read the artical (2.60 / 5) (#15)
by delmoi on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 10:57:10 PM EST

They made the comment to gathering of teenage guys...
--
"'argumentation' is not a word, idiot." -- thelizman
[ Parent ]
Heh.. (3.50 / 4) (#25)
by BigZaphod on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 02:20:55 AM EST

"Who on God's green earth actually lived to the age of 21 without being shitfaced more than a few times?"

Ummm.... I have, actually. I'm not totaly sure why almost everyone assumes everyone else likes to act the same way they do. Oh well. I agree, though, this whole beer and girls outrage is stupid.

"We're all patients, there are no doctors, our meds ran out a long time ago and nobody loves us." - skyknight
[ Parent ]
"Shit faced" before 21? (2.00 / 1) (#50)
by Scribe on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 07:51:37 AM EST

Who on God's green earth actually lived to the age of 21 without being shitfaced more than a few times?

Actually, I was a (light, occasional) drinker among family (and at the communion rail) from the age of 14.

Before I was 19, I got drunk twice (at college). legal drinking age was 18 at the time. I have not been drunk even once since. I gave up alcohol totally at around age 40.

BTW, I think groups like MADD are a good thing. I think laws against drunk driving are a good thing, and perhaps should be even stricter (mandatory loss of license for life on first comviction? Killing someone while driving while intoxicated automatically Murder I?) I am also opposed to all "drug control" laws, not that I wish to encourage drug use but because the laws do more harm than good. This includes pot, coke, heroin, etc as well as minimum ages for alcohol and tobacco.

This is not a troll or flamebait, but an honest expression of my own experience and well-thought-out opinion.




--
Someday I may have a .sig :)
[ Parent ]
polit. corectness (4.00 / 11) (#3)
by strlen on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 07:25:59 PM EST

sometimes political correctness seems absurd and often makes me laugh (an african-american accented feline animal companion, of unspecified gender..) . but not in most cases: if boy scouts wish to use public resources, they must accept gays for instance. most of the time i see opposition to political correctness being used to as an excuse to voice own intolerance. i am against government mandated speech controls, but to see all these conservatives cry "end the politically correct censorship" and at the same time cry when they see adds for gay/lesbian services and rail against pornography, makes perversion of what freedom of speech is -- "I don't agree with a word you're saying, but i'll defend to my death your right to say it" (Voltaire)." really, if you're for freedom of speech, then defend both politically-incorrect speech as well as pornography and pro-homosexual speech, and don't rail against ACLU (which has defend the KKK few times) as a "politically correct liberal organization" while claiming to be against censorship and thought control.

--
[T]he strongest man in the world is he who stands most alone. - Henrik Ibsen.
those rascals! (3.83 / 12) (#6)
by rebelcool on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 08:05:02 PM EST

Jeebum gypsum those scalliwaggarts!

Who do they think they are cracking wise within the hearing of young lasses?

/me throws hat on floor and proceeds to stop on it in a red faced manner

COG. Build your own community. Free, easy, powerful. Demo site

Damn! (3.16 / 12) (#8)
by Anonymous 6522 on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 08:28:25 PM EST

I wish the politicians in my state were that cool.

And for the record, I get colder beer and hotter girls than both their parties put together.

How Ironic... (3.80 / 25) (#13)
by theboz on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 09:40:48 PM EST

If he had substituted marijuana and homosexual men, the PC crowd would have made him out to be some big hero of equality and freedom.

I really hate the human race sometimes.

Stuff.

Context is everything (3.66 / 9) (#16)
by delmoi on Thu Jun 28, 2001 at 11:04:55 PM EST

First of all read the artical. It isn't an issue of them saying it, it's an issue of them saying it at a gathering of highschool guys.

And, it isn't so much the 'girls/hot girls' comments as the beer ones that really pissed people off. In this country, most highschools loose at least one student every 4 years to drunk driving.

And lets not even get into the fact that the republican party definetly does not stand for cold beer and hot women for teenage guys....
--
"'argumentation' is not a word, idiot." -- thelizman
I think they can handle it (4.25 / 4) (#22)
by et on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 01:15:36 AM EST

First of all read the artical. It isn't an issue of them saying it, it's an issue of them saying it at a gathering of highschool guys.
Yeah I'm well aware that's what the issue is, at least in MADD's view. But is it a really valid issue? Why do we care if two politicians make an offhanded remark as innocuous as that to teenage boys? Do these teenage boys perhaps live in sealed vaults or caves, innocent of the pleasures of 'cold beer and hot girls'? I think not. I suppose they don't watch any TV either. What is the big problem here? People act like these statesmen's words are equivalent to some kind of antisocial toxin that could conceivably poison the minds of these impressionable, naive youngsters. That is bullshit.
And lets not even get into the fact that the republican party definetly does not stand for cold beer and hot women for teenage guys....
True, true...

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
get your story straight (3.25 / 8) (#26)
by streetlawyer on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 04:00:46 AM EST

Why is it that serious discourse has to take a back seat in this country to the constant din of reactionary voices, to absurd, intellectually sterilized standards of 'political correctness' that no single person can ever live up to, yet we are all expected to pretend to?

If this is "serious discourse", then these two men seriously advocated drunken womanising to an audience of seventeen-year-olds, which is an obviously antisocial thing to do. If it's "just a joke, people", then why the fuck do you care? It's not as if the jackboots are at the door; a group of people have suggested that a joke was in poor taste.

And somehow (the ad hominem starts here), I don't think you'd be so quick to say "political correctness run amok" if we were talking about the Reverend Al Sharpton making a joke to an audience of black youths about going down to Bensonhurst to grab some white pussy. Not that Sharpton, who has always struck me as a class act, would say such a thing.

--
Just because things have been nonergodic so far, doesn't mean that they'll be nonergodic forever

flawed, yeah (4.33 / 3) (#42)
by et on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 01:35:46 PM EST

If this is "serious discourse", then these two men seriously advocated drunken womanising to an audience of seventeen-year-olds, which is an obviously antisocial thing to do.
Ah, "cold beer and hot girls" amounts to advocating drunken womanising & antisocial behaviour? Seems much ado over 5 little words. Again I must opine that such an interpretation seems to reflect one's personal political and cultural convictions moreso than it does anything inherent in the words themselves. What is obvious to you is not obvious to me.

Also, your "serious discourse" quote is a serious mischaracterization; obviously I didn't claim that there was any serious discourse going on anywhere within a hundred miles of the Boy's State camp. The beer & girls comments amount to, as you said elsewhere, "competitive ass-kissing", whereas I'm sure the debate that followed consisted of little more than the narrow fluff one would expect of Republicans and Democrats.
If it's "just a joke, people", then why the fuck do you care?
In all honesty? I don't. I went searching for a story to post about to k5, found one, whipped it up and posted it. Obviously the story and my own reactionary commentary on it are not half as good as they could have been, given the lukewarm response and the rather accurate criticisms it's drawn. Perhaps I will have better luck, and make a better effort, next time.
I don't think you'd be so quick to say "political correctness run amok" if we were talking about the Reverend Al Sharpton making a joke to an audience of black youths about going down to Bensonhurst to grab some white pussy.
Hmm, then you've misread me; I highly doubt I would care. I would probably find it humourous, not because such remarks would be comedic genius by any stretch of the imagination, but because the shitstorm to follow would be such a predictable circus of press releases and fiery indignation on all sides.

As for Sharpton being a class act ... ??

--
rOWR!!!!! | I don't fucking dance
[ Parent ]
For Goodness sake (4.30 / 10) (#27)
by tombuck on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 04:41:50 AM EST

What is all the fuss about. Admitedly, here in England the legal drinking age is 18, so drinking underage at 16/17 isn't seen in such a bad light, but...


Young guys will always try to drink beer.

Fact of life. The sooner that we stop attempting to treat teenages like they need to be wrapped up in cotton wool until they move out of home the better.

Young guys will always try to get into girls knickers.

Another fact of life, one of which doesn't seem to provoke as much anger... which I find rather strange, to be honest. I'd rather have teenagers enjoying a beer on the sly, than producing teenage pregnancies.

Wouldn't you ?

--
Give me yer cash!

No, I would not. (4.00 / 5) (#28)
by Tezcatlipoca on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 05:13:10 AM EST

I would rather have teenagers enjoying a healthy (informed, fun, active, free of guilt) sex life than drinking beer.



Might is right
Freedom? Which freedom?
[ Parent ]
That wasn't the question... (4.00 / 4) (#29)
by tombuck on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 05:40:04 AM EST

I refer to the last part of the relevant question :

"...enjoying a beer on the sly, than producing teenage pregnancies."

Yep, safe sex is fine and dandy, but I must admit that after seeing the teenage pregnancy / STD rates rising alarmingly in supposedly 'developed' nations (i.e. USA, UK etc. etc.), I'm all in favour for the teenagers 'holding out' until they're past the hormone-overload stage.

--
Give me yer cash!
[ Parent ]

Worst examples. (4.40 / 5) (#33)
by Tezcatlipoca on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 06:23:34 AM EST

Yuu cite the worst examples (US,UK) of developed nations when it comes to teenage pregnancy.

Countries like Holand or Germany have far less problems because they are more open about sexuality (they don't try to hide that much the fact that teenagers actualy do have sex).



Might is right
Freedom? Which freedom?
[ Parent ]
what an awful prospect (3.00 / 1) (#53)
by anonymous cowerd on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 03:16:16 PM EST

...if for some reason the two were mutually exclusive. Geez, I'd hate to have had to forego beer.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

stint grits
darts file
gratis ways to fit tins
dapper angle
ill apple
-Barbara Baracks

[ Parent ]

for badness sake (2.54 / 11) (#30)
by streetlawyer on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 05:40:09 AM EST

This is true; young men will always do both these things.

But that doesn't mean that young men should also expect to be told what fine and wonderful fellows they are for doing so, and we really ought to expect more of our politicians than to competitively kiss ass to drunks and womanisers.

--
Just because things have been nonergodic so far, doesn't mean that they'll be nonergodic forever
[ Parent ]

I must be *sick* (3.71 / 7) (#31)
by tombuck on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 05:55:02 AM EST

Just because some people enjoy a beer every now and again doesn't make them a drunk... does it ? Is that really how you see the world ?

I'll quite happily admit that there are nasty people out there, some of whom are drunks, some of whom are womanisers, but really...

I like pretty women... to look at at least. However, the women I date *have* to be intelligent, there's no too ways about it... a women reciting latin into one's ear *can* be erotic (what a geek am I ? :-)

However, just because I like looking at pretty women doesn't make me a womaniser.. does it ? I mean, I'm asking the question now, am I truly a nasty person because I like a drink on a Friday night ? Am I *evil* for now and again smiling as a girl passes me by ? Am I the horrific incarnation of the devil, beelzebub himself, for preferring brunettes over blondes ?


... I sincerly hope not, lest the world's society and economy collapses due to people like me !

--
Give me yer cash!
[ Parent ]

jesus, have a beer (1.58 / 12) (#35)
by streetlawyer on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 09:08:13 AM EST

I mean it. You clearly have some fairly serious self-esteem issues if you have such a crying need for approval (from me! of all people, a complete stranger with zero credibility).

I like pretty women... to look at at least. However, the women I date *have* to be intelligent,

So you're an intellectual snob as well as a lech, and we're meant to like you even more for that? Look, speaking for the rest of the world here, we're prepared to give a bit of the unconditional approval you need, but you're gonna have to meet us halfway.

... I sincerly hope not, lest the world's society and economy collapses due to people like me !

Again with the inflated sense of self-importance! Look, if you care what people say about you, act accordingly. If you don't care, then don't care. Don't feel the need to talk about it in either case.

--
Just because things have been nonergodic so far, doesn't mean that they'll be nonergodic forever
[ Parent ]

Congratulations (3.83 / 6) (#37)
by tombuck on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 09:34:34 AM EST

You have *completly* missed the point of my post.

Let me state it in pure a simple terms:

I like a beer on a Friday night. Does this make me a drunk ?

I like *to look at* pretty women. Does this make me a womaniser ?

Personally, I don't need reassurances. I'm trying to say that doing not a lot of one thing (e.g. beer) is not the same as doing a lot of it (e.g. becoming a drunk).

Understand it this time ?


Oh, and by the way, you got me - I am an intellectual snob :-) I may not be the smartest man to walk this planet by quite a distance, but I simply cannot abide fools. (and brains win over beauty every time)

--
Give me yer cash!
[ Parent ]

no, you missed my point (1.33 / 12) (#38)
by streetlawyer on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 09:42:18 AM EST

My point is that I don't care, and nor would anybody else if you didn't feel the need to go on publicly pleading and demanding approval for it.

Personally, I don't need reassurances.

Dr Livingstone, I presume? I believe we have found the source of denial!

--
Just because things have been nonergodic so far, doesn't mean that they'll be nonergodic forever
[ Parent ]

Yet again... (3.50 / 4) (#40)
by tombuck on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 09:51:26 AM EST

"we really ought to expect more of our politicians than to competitively kiss ass to drunks and womanisers."

First things first, are you trolling just to annoy ? I can find no other reason for your total lack of understanding towards my comments.

...but anyway, slow day at work and all, I'll continue...

I am not, and never was looking for reassurances. What I was asking was: Are *all* the people out there who occasionally have a beer drunks ? Your statement at the top of this comment implies so.

What's it to be then ?

--
Give me yer cash!
[ Parent ]

On a related note... (4.82 / 17) (#32)
by Tatarigami on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 06:01:41 AM EST

Today at work I received a letter from a woman insisting that we stop using photo montages to illustrate news items about women on our website. She feels that by cutting and pasting together images of a woman, we are symbolically cutting up the woman herself, thereby reducing her to the status of an object.

I sat there for a good ten minutes wondering how I was going to reply to that before chickening out and sending back a generic 'thanks for your comments' email.


oy (3.20 / 5) (#34)
by gbvb on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 08:19:23 AM EST

I agree with the fact that PC is getting a little
out of hand in US. But, the example sited here is
not exactly about being PC but about being courteous to others. It is like throwing obscenities at a deaf person( i mean hearing challenged person) with a smiling face. Just because s/he can't hear it does not make it right. Just the fact that women/girls were not there does not mean that you have right to say whatever you please. You probably getaway with it in situations when you are with friends but when you have the press there..
It was plain idiocy of those men to talk like that in a public gathering..


Nothing wrong with what they said (4.62 / 8) (#44)
by /dev/niall on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 02:34:22 PM EST

This is not racist, sexist, <whatever>ist. It's a pretty obvious observation that people prefer cold beer (in the USA anyway. warm bittter. ugh) and attractive members of the opposite sex.

I'm assuming no-one has a problem with the cold beer part of the statement. Why then do folks seem to have a problem with the second part?

When are we going to get over ourselves and stop pretending that everyone is the same? We're not. We come in different shapes and sizes, some more pleasing than others.

I would not have married my wife if I did not find her attractive. She would not have married me if she did not find me attractive. I happen to think she's pretty damn hot. This isn't the only reason I married her, but it is one, and damnit it's important. (she's from a rich family - just kidding)

Perhaps there are people out there who can look beyond physical appearance when judging people. Either they have a completely different mentality than normal humans, or they are lying to themselves. Thousands upon thousands of years our race has evolved to consider such matters on a level far below conscious thought. To deny it is to be dishonest with oneself.

I for one enjoy cold beer and hot women. Salut to the guy who one-upped his opponent with a clever remark.

fyi.,.. (4.00 / 3) (#45)
by /dev/niall on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 02:36:50 PM EST

I realize that MADD was speaking to the "beer" comment, I was replying to folks in the discussion who seem to be more upset about being PC regarding the "hot girls" comment.

[ Parent ]
sheesh... (4.00 / 1) (#55)
by Danse on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 04:57:43 PM EST

Which is also pretty silly. He didn't say "Republicans are for cold beer while we drive around looking for hot girls." Jeez. Seems like some people go out of their way to find something to be offended about.




An honest debate between Bush and Kerry
[ Parent ]
"Fairer Sex"? (4.21 / 14) (#46)
by Kasreyn on Fri Jun 29, 2001 at 04:34:28 PM EST

How many times do I have to explain this? If women want male chauvinism to die, they need to quit being such massive, utter, TOTAL hypocrites, and let chivalry die as well.

You just cannot have one without the other.

Women (and especially neo-feminists) seem to think they can have their cake and eat it too - they can have men hold the door open for them, and buy them jewelry, and worship the very ground their oh-so-dainty feet tread upon, but when those very men display a bit of humor or a desire of their own, suddenly it's "sexual harassment".

You know what, men can be real jerks when it comes to women, it's true. But at least most of us are HONEST about it. When people joke about "thinking with the wrong head", most men just give a wry grin and a chuckle. We ADMIT it!! We know we're a bit too lusty for our own good, we don't hide it. But just try casually (and even kindly, with a smile!) joking of a female, in her presence, "Aww, she just thinks with her vagina", and watch her turn all frigid and angry. This is because the average woman likes to pretend to herself that she's more "sensitive" and somehow more emotionally refined than the average man, which she is not. She is only more self-deceptive. Feminists, as well as some minorities who've been oppressed, seem to think the appropriate action is to swing the pendulum the opposite way to "get back at" their former oppressors. It's a pity they're too petty to just let it be and be equals.

Men are animals and mocked for it in the media. Women are hypocritical animals who have really good press. Guess which annoy me more consistently?


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
Tennessee Boys State (3.33 / 3) (#47)
by espo812 on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 12:03:57 AM EST

We were spoken to by two convicted DUI people. Combined they killed a total of three people while driving drunk. They served (also combined) a total of two years in prision for these actions.

I, for one, don't consider encouraging a group of underage boys an appropriate group to lobby interest in alcohol to. Especially a group of underage boys who will soon be attending college (most of them) - with the # of alcohol related accidents among college students.

espo
--
Censorship is un-American.
drinking != driving (4.33 / 3) (#48)
by mpalczew on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 01:01:45 AM EST

drinking is completly diffrent from drinking and driving?

drinking can be fun, yes it's done alot in college, being in college right now I should know.
drinking and driving is just plain stupid.

Neither of those two politicians said anything about driving. You are off topic.
-- Death to all Fanatics!
[ Parent ]
You're right.. (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by espo812 on Sun Jul 01, 2001 at 06:30:13 PM EST

According to the K5 post, they didn't mention driving. So, they advocated drinking under any circumstance (by virtue of not specifying). They didn't say anything about drinking and driving, which most would agree is a pretty big problem, and that's the issue I take with them.

<baited-troll>Does responding to an off topic post make your post off topic as well? I think It does.</baited-troll>

espo
--
Censorship is un-American.
[ Parent ]
Of course not... (none / 0) (#58)
by Kaki Nix Sain on Wed Jul 04, 2001 at 09:55:18 PM EST

Oh, the t word. How scary.

<baited-troll>Does responding to an off topic post make your post off topic as well? I think It does.</baited-troll>

Not any more than two people pissing from the same spot both have to miss a cup.

And now that I've used such a crass example, I hope that my opinion about such considerations about what these polys did or didn't imply when they made a joke that had the chance of offending some hypersesitive nonadolescent homininds can be deduced. later y'l.



[ Parent ]

lame (none / 0) (#59)
by mpalczew on Sun Jul 08, 2001 at 03:14:25 PM EST

We certainly should not expect people to put disclaimers on everything they say. Unless we wan't to raise generations of nothing, but lawyers.

It's like saying "I use a cell phone", and not saying "except for when I drive".

When you assume stuff that wasn't said you just make an ass out of yourself.
-- Death to all Fanatics!
[ Parent ]
the sinister power of rhetoric (5.00 / 1) (#52)
by anonymous cowerd on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 03:12:42 PM EST

underage boys an appropriate group to lobby interest in alcohol to...

This would seem to be saying that somehow these elderly political gentlemen are, by their comments, going to induce those "underage boys" who are listening to drink beer. (By the way, a seventeen year old is not a "boy," Alexander the Great had conquered half the known world at that age!) As though all of those seventeen-year-olds didn't already want to drink beer. As though any of them hadn't already. As though beer, by the delightful and salubrious effect it has on those little grey cells inside your head, doesn't do a perfectly and completely sufficient job of selling itself, without the need of any rhetorical support from the older generation.

Is there no limit to this absurdity? Next thing you know somebody's going to be claiming, oh I don't know, something totally idiotic, like that some stupid TV show or some pop music lyric is responsible for causing healthy teenagers (who would otherwise be indifferent, naturally) to want to engage in sexual intercourse. Well OK, that's completely ridiculous! No one would ever publicly assert anything as nonsensical as that!

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

stint grits
darts file
gratis ways to fit tins
dapper angle
ill apple
-Barbara Baracks

[ Parent ]

No (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by espo812 on Sun Jul 01, 2001 at 06:43:21 PM EST

(By the way, a seventeen year old is not a "boy," Alexander the Great had conquered half the known world at that age!)
I wouldn't consider most 17 year olds (such as myself) men. And certinly legally they are not adult men.
As though all of those seventeen-year-olds didn't already want to drink beer. As though any of them hadn't already.
Maybe every single 17 year old attendee to South Carolina Boys State drinks alcohol, but somehow I doubt that. I don't drink, and I don't desire to drink either.
Next thing you know somebody's going to be claiming [...] something totally idiotic, like that some stupid TV show or some pop music lyric is responsible for causing healthy teenagers [...] to want to engage in sexual intercourse.
I don't believe in holding anyone responsible for the actions of others - except for parents of minors. These politicians wouldn't be responsible for the BS atendees drinking. However that dosn't make it a wise or smart thing to advocate to children.

espo
--
Censorship is un-American.
[ Parent ]
But, sir! (4.00 / 2) (#49)
by driftingwalrus on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 02:47:40 AM EST

Sir, one is not qualified to run mucks.


"I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
By all means treat people as sex objects (3.33 / 3) (#51)
by pavlos on Sat Jun 30, 2001 at 08:22:51 AM EST

But do it fairly!

I am all in favor of treating people as sex objects, at least some of the time. It's good to be reminded in the context of serious politics that we are also sex objects and not just "worker", or "consumer", or "citizen" drones.

However, the thing that I see as a problem is only treating straight women as the toys of straight men. Please treat people of both sexes and all sexual desires as sex objects, including your own group. For example, I think the politicians should have said:

The <insert party here> is for getting pleasantly intoxicated and playing with other sluttish boys and horny girls.
I would vote for the people who said that. Anyone up for the dare?

Pavlos

Political Correctness Run Amok | 59 comments (53 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!