Comments on: Did PC arise to fill the missing manners gap?

By: Oldflyer

Oldflyer — Thu, 06 May 2010 22:37:23 +0000

Excellent point Suek.
I blame women for the coarsening of society. Women were supposed to set the standards of behavior, not get in the gutter with the pigs. Women have abrogated their responsibility. I am teasing, of course. But, the underlying point is serious. When civil society lost a significant portion of its female population, it was doomed.
I felt the same way about the progression of women into combat roles. It wasn’t that women could not become ruthless and vicious warriors; it was a question of the impact on society if they did in significant numbers.. I was clearly out of step with the times, but I have become accustomed to that status.

By: Danny Lemieux

Danny Lemieux — Thu, 06 May 2010 18:44:05 +0000

I dunno. More often than not, pople using foul language fall in the category of weenies trying to sound tough.

By: suek

suek — Thu, 06 May 2010 16:09:14 +0000

A couple of observations. First, there used to be two sets of standards – one was what was acceptable among males, and one that was applied to the male/female interaction. I think David has it right about the male/male interaction – either you were friends and everything was ok, or you were not, and violence ensued. Violence today is grounds for arrest or a lawsuit (did you see the article the other day where a 70 yr old grandmother slapped her 18 year old granddaughter across the fact for language, the granddaughter called the police, and the police arrested the grandmother?) so people will say whatever they want.

On the male/female thing, though…when I was much younger and considerably more alluring, I noticed that a certain amount of language and sexually oriented comments were the “pick-up” lines that some men used to test women’s receptiveness. If you ignored the slightly off-color joke, or obviously disapproved of the language the man used, he took that as meaning you weren’t interested. If you laughed at the joke, or came back with equally crude language, you were fair game, and he’d push to see if he could get something going. That of course assumed that you might not be interested in some sort of sexual activity – nowadays, it seems as if the expectation of willingness is just assumed.

One of the most difficult lessons to get across to young women today seems to be that they can control a social situation (unless there’s actual violence). They seem to think that they’re just will-o-the wisps at the mercy of males’ inclinations. I don’t understand it. I’m the one who grew up in a “male dominated society”, and they’re the ones who supposedly have all the female equality. What went wrong?

By: Oldflyer

Oldflyer — Thu, 06 May 2010 15:43:26 +0000

David Foster’s point is well taken. Again, putting on my “Analyst’s” dunce cap, I would say that the societal and legal restraints on physical response to insult has encouraged the foul mouthed wimp. Is that you Rahm?

By: David Foster

David Foster — Thu, 06 May 2010 13:57:55 +0000

Of course there has always been a certain level of vulgarity and nastiness that just didn’t get reported outside of closed circles. If there was similar offensive language in FDRs or JFKs administration, few would have ever known about it.
But also, I think that for most of history verbal aggression among men was held in check because if it went too far it might lead to (a)a fistfight or (b)among certain classes and at certain time periods, a potentially-fatal duel. As these risks have declined, more males have adopted verbal aggression on the “mean girls” pattern but adding a primarily-male flavor of vulgarity to the mix.

By: Oldflyer

Oldflyer — Thu, 06 May 2010 13:41:54 +0000

I am not an Analyst, nor do I play one on TV; but, based on 75 years of observation I conclude that much of the rude and abusive behavior we see is a ruse to cover weakness and self-doubt. Nothing new about that. During my working years, in particular the Navy ones, it was apparent that the most effective leaders were by and large Gentlemen. These men were secure in their selves, and at ease with their responsibilities. They could be ruthless when necessary, but seldom abusive. There were some who achieved higher rank and led through fear and bullying. But over time people tired of the bullying and tuned it out.
On the larger issue, the coarsening of society does not serve us well, at all. We were often told as we rode the down escalator of societal standards that it was liberating. It was not.

By: Al

Al — Thu, 06 May 2010 09:33:17 +0000

I do not believe that the concept of Political Correctness arose to fill some perceived gap in civil discourse. To me, both the PC concept and the use of foul language have the same purpose. They are linguistic attempts to control the discussion and the person exposed to the language. The PC behavior is more subtle. Explatives are crude. That’s the only difference. And there is nothing subtle about the current Administration.
Al

By: » Links to Visit – 05/05/10 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter

» Links to Visit – 05/05/10 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter — Wed, 05 May 2010 19:21:18 +0000

[...] Bookworm Room – Did PC arise to fill the missing manners gap? [...]