You clearly havent got a clue what you are talking about.
You say the altruist is correct and his definition of political correctness is as follows:
"If the government/law whatever suddenly decide that you can't say something then that's the political group "correcting" you so that's political correctness."
ANd then you give a completely different example of political correctness which has nothing to do with his defintion "British rules and regulations are so full of safety at work PC tosh that they make a joke of a sensible society"
Thank you very much for proving my point brilliantly. "Political correctness" is a catch all insult generally used by grouchy, old Victor Meldrew types moaning about this that and the other, when people disagree with them.
And finally "To support corporal or capital punishment these days is to risk
being belittled by PC folk."
No Frank, it's just people disagreeing with you. Come to terms with your abject terror at people disagreeing with your views without labelling them "PC correct" or getting the hump.
You then might be able to manage a discussion.
What is your "Outrage" level?
-
andy at handiwork
- Posts: 4113
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Frank Thring
You of course wouldn't want any compensation if the decorations fell on you.
-
Arginald Valleywater
- Posts: 4288
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Frank Thring
PC is when someone, usually a left wing jobsworth's says "you can't say that". A current hot potato like same sex marriage is untouchable. In a free country, where freedom of expression is sacred, you could happily say you don't agree with the idea. In the UK you would be branded a homophobic fascist simply because your opinion is not PC. I don't like screaming mincer gay people. I find their behaviour offensive and annoying. That is my opinion. If I said that in most modern places of work I could be disciplined or even sacked for being homophobic. PC is censorship, plain and simple. 25 years ago Benny Hill was the biggest star on TV. Any chance in hell of ITV re running some of his shows at their old 8pm slot?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Argie
"A current hot potato like same sex marriage is untouchable."
Wrong.
The Scottish government is talking about introducing same sex marriage ceremonies but only in those places of worship which agree with the concept. There are examples of Scandinavian countries that already have same sex marriages in some churches but not others.
"In a free country, where freedom of expression is sacred, you could happily say you don't agree with the idea."
As have many people in Scotland and elsewhere who have "happily said they don't agree with the idea" and their views have been listened to in terms of the proposed legislation.
In the UK you would be branded a homophobic fascist simply because your opinion is not PC.
Wrong.
Neither the proposed measure in Scotland nor the one south in the Border contains any element of compulsion.
"25 years ago Benny Hill was the biggest star on TV. Any chance in hell of ITV re running some of his shows at their old 8pm slot?"
Well there is loads of output from ITV that people might want to see from way back which they dont show for whatever reason.
Sky television broadcasts Benny Hill stuff quite regularly on the Comedy Channel. So would you regard Carry on films as examples of political correctness? I don't think so and they have been shown regularly every year forever.
"I don't like screaming mincer gay people. I find their behaviour offensive and annoying. That is my opinion. If I said that in most modern places of work I could be disciplined or even sacked for being homophobic"
Wrong.
There is nothing in the Incitement to Hatred law brought in in 2010 which would prevent you from telling jokes about gays or criticising them. The law is in line with those covering racial and religious incitement to hatred so if you said "I hate screaming mincing gays, lets throw this fucker in the canal" that could well cause you problems.
Like a lot of right wing inviduals such as Frank, you merely highlight your ignorance of the topics you hold forth on and fall back on the meaningless, juvenile, all-encompassing "political correctness" insult.
Wrong.
The Scottish government is talking about introducing same sex marriage ceremonies but only in those places of worship which agree with the concept. There are examples of Scandinavian countries that already have same sex marriages in some churches but not others.
"In a free country, where freedom of expression is sacred, you could happily say you don't agree with the idea."
As have many people in Scotland and elsewhere who have "happily said they don't agree with the idea" and their views have been listened to in terms of the proposed legislation.
In the UK you would be branded a homophobic fascist simply because your opinion is not PC.
Wrong.
Neither the proposed measure in Scotland nor the one south in the Border contains any element of compulsion.
"25 years ago Benny Hill was the biggest star on TV. Any chance in hell of ITV re running some of his shows at their old 8pm slot?"
Well there is loads of output from ITV that people might want to see from way back which they dont show for whatever reason.
Sky television broadcasts Benny Hill stuff quite regularly on the Comedy Channel. So would you regard Carry on films as examples of political correctness? I don't think so and they have been shown regularly every year forever.
"I don't like screaming mincer gay people. I find their behaviour offensive and annoying. That is my opinion. If I said that in most modern places of work I could be disciplined or even sacked for being homophobic"
Wrong.
There is nothing in the Incitement to Hatred law brought in in 2010 which would prevent you from telling jokes about gays or criticising them. The law is in line with those covering racial and religious incitement to hatred so if you said "I hate screaming mincing gays, lets throw this fucker in the canal" that could well cause you problems.
Like a lot of right wing inviduals such as Frank, you merely highlight your ignorance of the topics you hold forth on and fall back on the meaningless, juvenile, all-encompassing "political correctness" insult.
-
thealtruist
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: David Johnson
Wrong!
You CAN get disciplined and reprimanded for for saying what Argie said. Anything that has the potential to cause offence is outlawed by the equality in the workplace law. in fact he could be even arrested under the electronic communications bill for writing what he did. That is PC bollocks. He should be allowed to say it without having anybody telling him that he can't.
You CAN get disciplined and reprimanded for for saying what Argie said. Anything that has the potential to cause offence is outlawed by the equality in the workplace law. in fact he could be even arrested under the electronic communications bill for writing what he did. That is PC bollocks. He should be allowed to say it without having anybody telling him that he can't.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
The Altruist
"Anything that has the potential to cause offence is outlawed by the equality in the workplace law."
If you are talking about the Equality in the Workplace legislation which covers the treatment of employees such as racial groups, sexual orientation and disability it is nowhere near as simplistic as you think it is.
It is also worth pointing out for example, that in the sexual orientation case law, heterosexuals are covered.
Basically, this legislation is designed to prevent the following:
1. Direct Discrimination
eg. someone not being employed or sacked because they are gay, heterosexual in a predominately gay environment, disabled, black, white, brown etc etc.
2. Indirect Discrimination
e.g. companies that have policies, benefits and practices that disadvantage certain groups of people
3. Harassment
e.g. A male worker who has a same sex partner is continually
referred to by female nicknames which he finds humiliating and
distressing. This is harassment. Typically there has to be a continual element to this for it to be judged harassment.
For example if I work with Argie and every day I slag him off in front of his workmates for being about as butch as a bunch of limp daffs, then this would constitute harassment. If I just mention it once then it is unlikely that there would be any case for sacking etc.
Now here's to the rub, if any of the following happens to Argie or your good self:
1. He becomes disabled and his mates turn on him at work to say on a regular basis we dont want any cripples here
2. Argie finds his inner gay and starts going out with a butch Liverpool football supporter resulting in an endless onslaught of abuse in the workplace and attempts to stuff his arse with a vibrator.
3. Argie's face turns black after a month in Tenerife but doesnt change colour again resulting in endless jokes about watermelons,
Don't you just think it might be a good idea to have such legislation in place to protect workers rather than throwing them to the dogs?
"PC bollocks" Nah. Argie would be absolutely pissing himself with delight at the legislation.
If you are talking about the Equality in the Workplace legislation which covers the treatment of employees such as racial groups, sexual orientation and disability it is nowhere near as simplistic as you think it is.
It is also worth pointing out for example, that in the sexual orientation case law, heterosexuals are covered.
Basically, this legislation is designed to prevent the following:
1. Direct Discrimination
eg. someone not being employed or sacked because they are gay, heterosexual in a predominately gay environment, disabled, black, white, brown etc etc.
2. Indirect Discrimination
e.g. companies that have policies, benefits and practices that disadvantage certain groups of people
3. Harassment
e.g. A male worker who has a same sex partner is continually
referred to by female nicknames which he finds humiliating and
distressing. This is harassment. Typically there has to be a continual element to this for it to be judged harassment.
For example if I work with Argie and every day I slag him off in front of his workmates for being about as butch as a bunch of limp daffs, then this would constitute harassment. If I just mention it once then it is unlikely that there would be any case for sacking etc.
Now here's to the rub, if any of the following happens to Argie or your good self:
1. He becomes disabled and his mates turn on him at work to say on a regular basis we dont want any cripples here
2. Argie finds his inner gay and starts going out with a butch Liverpool football supporter resulting in an endless onslaught of abuse in the workplace and attempts to stuff his arse with a vibrator.
3. Argie's face turns black after a month in Tenerife but doesnt change colour again resulting in endless jokes about watermelons,
Don't you just think it might be a good idea to have such legislation in place to protect workers rather than throwing them to the dogs?
"PC bollocks" Nah. Argie would be absolutely pissing himself with delight at the legislation.
-
thealtruist
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: The Altruist
DJ wrote:
"For example if I work with Argie and every day I slag him off in front of his workmates for being about as butch as a bunch of limp daffs, then this would constitute harassment. If I just mention it once then it is unlikely that there would be any case for sacking etc."
Unlikely but not unheard of.
It is as simplistic as that. If I start swearing and someone is offended then they have a right to report me which could result in me being sacked even though the swearing wasn't aimed at them.
If I mention on shift that I fucked this right dirty slag last night and a female colleague overhears me and is offended she could report me and I could be sacked.
Or how about I refer to a female colleague as big tits? Still be no case to answer?
What if I tell a racist joke to a white person and another white person is offended by it? Still be no case?
"For example if I work with Argie and every day I slag him off in front of his workmates for being about as butch as a bunch of limp daffs, then this would constitute harassment. If I just mention it once then it is unlikely that there would be any case for sacking etc."
Unlikely but not unheard of.
It is as simplistic as that. If I start swearing and someone is offended then they have a right to report me which could result in me being sacked even though the swearing wasn't aimed at them.
If I mention on shift that I fucked this right dirty slag last night and a female colleague overhears me and is offended she could report me and I could be sacked.
Or how about I refer to a female colleague as big tits? Still be no case to answer?
What if I tell a racist joke to a white person and another white person is offended by it? Still be no case?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: The Altruist
"It is as simplistic as that. If I start swearing and someone is offended then they have a right to report me which could result in me being sacked even though the swearing wasn't aimed at them."
No it isnt as I have already explained. It is down to the nature of what is said, who it is aimed at and the element of continuity i.e. whether this is a very regular event and a particular person can define it as harassment on the grounds that it is an integral part of the working culture.
I hit my thumb with a hammer and shout out "Fucking hell". Someone is "offended" and there is a serious risk that I might be sacked?
Ya having a laff.
No it isnt as I have already explained. It is down to the nature of what is said, who it is aimed at and the element of continuity i.e. whether this is a very regular event and a particular person can define it as harassment on the grounds that it is an integral part of the working culture.
I hit my thumb with a hammer and shout out "Fucking hell". Someone is "offended" and there is a serious risk that I might be sacked?
Ya having a laff.
Re: The Altruist
Maybe, if you were working in a church sunday school at the time !wink!
-
Arginald Valleywater
- Posts: 4288
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Argie
I would like to invite DJ to my place of work and see how far he gets telling a few gay jokes....our E+D officer would have him in front of senior management in a flash. Only this afternoon a colleague was reported twice after joking in a meeting where several letters of the alphabet were used to describe people.....she joked that F stood for foreign! Utter filth indeed er no but she has been hauled over the coals because you guessed "you can't say that"...anyway tits, fanny, bollocks, poofter, jipe and off for some tea and sorry I was going to say crumpet but some twunt could find that offensive!!