“PC – phrases and or specific words substituted for others in order to prevent a group or individual from feeling hurt and or marginalized.”
“PC-whipped – the conscience act of using phrases and or specific words for others in order to try to prevent a group or individual from feeling hurt or marginalized, so as not to appear insensitive or uncaring.”
Example of “PC”:
”An Anglican priest is in hospital after he was beaten up and insulted in what appears to be a “faith hate” assault by Asian youths.”
Source: London Times on-line, March 16, 2008
What would make the above “PC” you ask? Well, that they could be Asian youths, in and of itself, is not a problem. Certainly there are youngsters of Asian origin living around the world.. What would have been more important and germane to the story was the potential driving force behind the actions of said “Asian Youths ™ “ … that being they appeared by their actions and rantings and ravings to be Islamists … or at the very least pro (militant) Islam.
But in England it is considered to be impolite (by the guardians of political correctness) at the very least to show or acknowledge any practitioner of “The Religion of Peace ™ “ doing something decidedly not peaceful. It tends to put a damper on the whole positive PR thing. And would hurt their sensitive feelings.
Oh, did I call “it” the “Religion of Peace ™ “? See how infectious political correctness is? The literal translation of “Islam” is “Submission” or in a broader sense “Submission to Allah”. The word peace is nowhere to be found. But it DOES sound (and read) much better in the press. And so, we come to the real crux of the matter regarding PC.
If you repeat a lie, or a half truth, or a watered down version of something long enough and often enough, people will believe it to be “the truth”. You have only to go as far as the current brew-ha-ha about “global warming”, “climate change”, or whatever it is being called today. There are a few kernels of truth, or half truths floating about in the details, but for the most part it is junk science at it’s finest. Yet the constant pounding by the media (of all flavors) stating “It’s getting warmer, and it may be all our fault!” or “The climate is heading in the wrong direction (warmer or colder, depending on the article in question) and it’s all (or mostly) our fault, and we have to do something about it NOW!!” At the very least, this starts a discussion going on a topic(s) for which there is no real conclusive factual evidence supporting the claims made. At least not based on un-biased, and proper use of the scientific method, factual evidence, or some other “reality based qualifier”.
But, because there is a supposed consensus. Because there is (massive) public acceptance of the ever increasing mountain of incomplete/skewed data produced by those who know nothing (or want to protect their phony baloney jobs) about the scientific method, or chose to ignore it (the facts … any facts) to advance their personal agenda (to cover their ass, cause face it, they are scared!!) … Well, the rest of us had better get on board. Because to ignore all “the evidence”, all the media reports, all the books written by Nobel Peace Prize winners (regardless of the truth/reality), would be Politically Incorrect!!!
You mean we would appear to be “insensitive and uncaring” toward those who have aligned themselves with the above (global warming an such), even though they are buying into what at best would be considered misleading information? And they are scaring themselves needlessly? That we are not PC if we seek to expose them to the reality of it all? You mean PC is bad because it allows for others to manipulate language and actions of those who disagree with them? And those who go outta their way to placate same are “PC-whipped”?
Yeppers, that would be exactly what I am saying.