Clint Eastwood about political correctness and p****y generation

I totally agree: people cry about PC to try to silence requests for respect and to silence protests against people behaving in sexist and racist manners.

Give one example, one example where someone isn't actually being racist.

Absolutely not. Black lives matter is about making sure that black lives matter, too. It is racists like you that want to fight that goal.

Nobody said that. There were clearly people who disagreed and were racist and plenty of people who disagreed and publicized their disagreement in racist ways. You want to talk about PC in order to silence people who point out the racism.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What generation to mock more? The "PC generation" that seeks to not offend, or Clint Eastwood's drama queen generation that seeks victimhood?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who would want to victimize/diminish a shared language.
And, for what purpose?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Actually, I'm still wondering: Why is "pussy" an insult?

 

Yeah, shouldn't it mean "incredibly resilient and flexible"?

 

Seattle, Washington, was the birthplace for political correctness. Eventually, Starbucks, invaded, Canada, with a plethora of bullshit selections, offending every Red-blooded Canadian. We should elect a Prime Minister that would allow us to bear arms against, Starbucks. Allowing us to hold fast to our morning coffee ordering rhetoric: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Double-double

Fuck You America!

 

The Gordian Hump

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Don't bother clicking.​

There is that, but I don't get a vote.

In truth, what stands out to me is the psychoanalytic result describing a basic conflict. And perhaps the (ahem!) lock and key about this stands out to me for particular reasons―e.g., a social revolution in which the overturned traditional order insisted on the point―but it also seems pretty self-evident:

• Basically, pussy is what boys are supposed to want.

→ Okay, boys ... so ... why are we supposed to want a piece of her (cough!) "insult"?

↳ I mean, really, if it's something so loathsome, so awful ... I mean, remind me again, what do I want of it and why? I mean, you know, since it's what I'm supposed to want.​

That is what gets me about using the word "pussy" as an insult. I mean, sure, whether raw jealousy, a symptom of competition, or simply the fact of being male during a certain period of a certain culture, the presence of breathtaking misogyny among gay men as a population should not be remotely surprising. But the heterosexual boys? So ... yeah. Given everything else going on with, say, how American society, for instance, regards women, there is no psychoanalysis of "pussy" as an insult that doesn't make our "traditional" "heterosexual" society look absolutely terrifyingly dangerously awful.

It's the weirdest thing. And I admit, it's one of those words that persists in the lexicon despite its blatant indictment of prevailing heterosexual attitudes in a culture because there is nothing else like it. Part of the reason we see words with this power orbiting the existential fact of woman is because there are few divisions in this Universe like the difference 'twixt men and women, which in turn is only so important because men have gone out of their way to insist that it must be.

It's high comedy:

Q: Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

A: No, but I kiss my wife's insult with it!

Q: Geez, why don't you just kiss her ass, instead? Rimjobs for everyone!​

That is to say, it sounds like comedy if you're high enough.

Oh, right. Sorry. I digress.

 

[edit; nevermind, rhetorical]

 

You just accidentally proved his point by stating that anyone who says something negative about illegal immigration is being racist. That's exactly the point!

 

A breath of fresh air:

https://chicagomaroon.com/2016/08/2...-dont-expect-safe-spaces-or-trigger-warnings/

This is good news, as excessive PC is psychologically harmful. Eastwood's "pussy generation" is an un-PC way of referring to what is actually a real problem: PC has caused younger people in the US to be psychologically fragile.

So what I want to know is why do all of you PC warriors condone and/or practice child abuse?

 

Eastwood's own generation was raised with far greater limitations and more nitpicking censorship on what could be said in public than we have today. Did they suffer from the fragility that is the result of such coddling?

 

You confuse the real with the theoretical, and slid the term from "immigrants" to "immigration".

It is an observation, not a theoretical conclusion, that those who speak ill of illegal immigrants

(not immigration: immigrants)

are invariably racist, in the US today.

There are exceptions. But the difficulty of naming them was the point.

 

Same reason you beat your wife!

 

Why must you promote racism?

I wanted wellwisher to provide an example of where someone was accused of racism where the person accused was not engaging in racist rhetoric. wellwisher is clearly racist.

 

Yeah, this idiot dean is just perpetuating the myth of PC.

This essay says pretty much everything that needs to be said about the dean's message: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng...hicago-dean-declares-war-on-student-autonomy/

Essentially, the people setting up this PC straw man are keeping their own "safe spaces", but since they have power already, they get to keep theirs.

 

Twisted Into Form

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click for what was, once upon a time, an obvious observational truth.​

In truth, I think they probably suffer more from the effects of being whipped and beaten into conformity.

Actually, here's a random bit from a post I started the other day, about other stuff that, for various reasons, never made it to the board:

• Do you remember the old joke about a book called Child Psychology, and when you open the book there are no pages, but, rather, a hollow space for a steel-bristle hairbrush with which one is supposed to beat the child? I think it made it into both WB and Walter Lantz animations, which is where I know the joke from.​

I think I was making some joke about a particular conservative fallacy and the idea of whether or not we enlightened, peaceful liberals would actually have to beat a notion into their skulls―figuratively? I would hope and expect so, compared to the literal prospect, except there's a bunch of them that really, really want an actual war of some sort so it's best to avoid even the figurative―but every time I try the joke, I never properly finish it.

At any rate, yeah, the next point of the setup was what if we tried to beat all the autistic kids into behaving properly; and then the (ahem!) punch line of asking about the bigot kids, and what about their parents.

But, yeah, I think of the generations when the line was, "The boy ain't right," and the solution was to beat him senseless one way or another, and maybe that's been their problem the whole time―maybe they feel betrayed because civilized society progresses, because they can't treat people as poorly as their predecessors treated them.

"Hate, churning your face, consumed by fear: Unreal illusion of a perfect world! Twist into form; the true abyss! Crushed in the palm of fate's hands!"

―Forbidden, "Twisted Into Form"↱​