View Single Post
  #2  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:01 AM
Sean
Where in the world...?
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 1,437
Re: Brussels + PC brigade = Daily Mail OUTRAGE!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deckard View Post
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7952261.stm


This is so full of all the requisite ingredients and cliches, I had to first check it wasn't a parody.

I mean I have to ask, what sort of spiteful, backward nation is so stuck in their ways and consumed by selfishness that they aren't willing to make even the tiniest concession in the way they refer to a section of society for the subtle but general/long-term benefit it may have, instead opting to turn an issue of basic courtesy into an issue of political correctness?

Oh that's right - my one. .....



Oh you were brought up to do that were you? Well that's the end of that argument then. Sorted. Thanks for resolving it.

Just pathetic.

Look I know "Mrs/Miss" aren't comparable to terms of actual intended abuse, but that's not the point. What re(eeeeeeeee)ally winds me up is this same old complete LACK of generosity of spirit displayed by those on the right who stubbornly refuse to see any positive attempt to challenge the status quo or hold it up to a mirror as "political correctness gone mad".

They could choose to view this as a positive move, even if they believe it to be just a gesture. They could choose to recognise it as an issue of courtesy, of basic human consideration, of acknowledging the inherent backwardsness of only focusing on the marital status of women and not men.

Or... they could choose to ignore all that and just kick and scream about how they're having to change their ways (never mind that often they're not even being told, they're just being asked) and reinforcing how, again, they're the real victims in all this - of the great "PC brigade".

Invariably they choose the selfish, ungenerous, latter.

I too was brought up to write Miss and Mrs. I then reached an age where I appreciated the benefits of using Ms - not just the sense of encouraging an equal footing, but the obvious logistical benefits too.

The change was hardly a big deal.

And these same quarters - the Tories, the Mail, my own family (I'm ashamed to say) - will also use the same arguments to whinge about how unfair it is that they "can't even buy a gollywog in the shops these days" or "why CAN'T we call them Pakis and chinkies? We don't mean anything by it..." and I have to ask, are these people being deliberately wilfully ignorant?

Had I not batted for this side, I know my family would be making the same case about "queers" (in the pre-reclaimed, non-ironic sense of the word).

But with Ms, I'm just curious: is there this same resistance to adopting the term in the States, Canada, NZ, etc as there is over here? Or is it just us?

As I say, the sky's not going to fall in if we use Miss or Mrs, no-one's claiming that. But the point is, it's such a small thing to ask - isn't it?
First time I've ever heard the argument to be honest. Personally, my first reaction is that I'm always amazed at what people find to be offended by. True, there is no comparable qualifier of marital status for men, and if a woman told me she would prefer to be refered to with "Ms" rather than "Miss" or "Mrs", then fine, that's no skin off my back - but I guess my big question would be, what exactly is inherently offensive about a title that identifies a woman's marital status? I mean, you're comparing it to using words like "Pakis", "chinkies" and "queers", but frankly I don't see how they're comparable. Those three examples are all inherently demeaning, disrespectful, derogatory names. "Miss" and "Mrs" just identifies marital status - nothing more. Honestly, so does a wedding ring, yet surely you don't view a wedding ring as being a derogatory piece of jewelry, do you?

So I guess the short answer is that I'm happy to refer to people however they prefer to be refered to, but I honestly don't understand where the offense is coming from.
__________________
Download all my remixes