Political Correctness
- Thread starter lbsf1
- 2,890 comments
- 151,663 views
- 24,608
- Anoka, MN
What I don't get is what is the desired outcome here (besides clickbait income)? Non-POC's essentially pretending black people don't exist?
I'm sure there is a discussion to be had about stuff like this, but going about it this way seems to just guarantee that will never happen. It kind of reminds me of the whole "Fathers Day is sexist" thing people were trying a few years ago, a topic with legitimate aspects approached from all the wrong angles.
I'm sure there is a discussion to be had about stuff like this, but going about it this way seems to just guarantee that will never happen. It kind of reminds me of the whole "Fathers Day is sexist" thing people were trying a few years ago, a topic with legitimate aspects approached from all the wrong angles.
Yes, Reported!
That's all it takes for me to be considered racist?
Last edited:
- 23,444
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
No offence intended, i'm somewhat of a neurodivergent myself as someone diagnosed with dyslexia.How to wind up someone whos autistic in two easy steps.
1. Suggest everyone/the majority are 'on the spectrum'. It's not accurate or true, and the 20% is pretty much the hard cap for diagnosis, and that's for all ND diagnosis, not just ASD.
Autism spectrum disorder
One in 100 children in the UK have a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. We have raised concerns about the time it takes for diagnosis, as well as the support offered in England.www.bma.org.uk
2. Describe it as something we 'have'. I don't 'have' autism, I am autistic, in the same way, people don't 'have' blindness, they are blind.
Perhaps it's something i no longer really give much thought to, as i was diagnosed probably getting on for 40 years ago now. I'm equally 'happy' to say 'i'm dyslexic' or 'i have dyslexia'. It may well be considered not PC to say 'i have dyslexia' any more, but it was fine back then so its never bothered me either way.
My point about ND being typical or not wasn't about any figures for diagnosed cases, it was for all those people who have some form of ND but have never been diagnosed. It's better picked up on now, but there must be so many more especially adults of 40+ who have some form to some degree who've flown under the radar all their lives.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,003
- Mile High City
Sabine gets it pretty straight on the discussion of Autism Spectrum Disorder as a different normal.
I suspect, and this is pure conjecture, that if we investigated a lot of mental disorders that we'd find that many of them present as a spectrum. Certainly not all of them. A condition like narcissitic personality disorder for example tends to present with just about every symptom being expressed. It's a disorder where the various symptoms complete the loop and feed and reinforce each other, so it doesn't work well if you're missing some of them. Missing some of them might just be the way out of that particular disorder. But there are other disorders, such as depression, which almost certainly exist in both degrees and expressions like Autism. I imagine we could call depression a Depression Spectrum Disorder with particular Types corresponding to the degree of independence a particular individual can achieve. I wouldn't be shocked to learn of Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder or even Bi-Polar Spectrum Disorder. Though that last one might be ridiculous, I'm not an expert on the subject.
The point is that there are many mental conditions which can have different kinds of expression and require different levels of care ranging from independent to debilitating, just like Autism. Being able to function independently may still require active management of the condition.
As a personal example, one of my kids has hearing loss. It's easy to forget, she has bone conduction hearing aids, and she functions independently and largely successfully (except when she removes her aids and forgets to put them on). It would be easy to think of her situation as perfectly "normal". If everyone could interact with her with an understanding that without her aids they need to speak up, and aware of the basic physical requirements for managing her aids (like taking them off to put on a helmet or something), then her life would be hard to distinguish (especially without doing a comparative assessment) from any other living condition. But she does have a real impediment. And even if she is successful at managing it, she is managing it - and that is a key distinction. Taken in the extreme, her condition could be quite severe in terms of the management it requires. Luckily she has a more mild expression of hearing loss, but she is still managing her hearing loss.
I suspect, and this is pure conjecture, that if we investigated a lot of mental disorders that we'd find that many of them present as a spectrum. Certainly not all of them. A condition like narcissitic personality disorder for example tends to present with just about every symptom being expressed. It's a disorder where the various symptoms complete the loop and feed and reinforce each other, so it doesn't work well if you're missing some of them. Missing some of them might just be the way out of that particular disorder. But there are other disorders, such as depression, which almost certainly exist in both degrees and expressions like Autism. I imagine we could call depression a Depression Spectrum Disorder with particular Types corresponding to the degree of independence a particular individual can achieve. I wouldn't be shocked to learn of Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder or even Bi-Polar Spectrum Disorder. Though that last one might be ridiculous, I'm not an expert on the subject.
The point is that there are many mental conditions which can have different kinds of expression and require different levels of care ranging from independent to debilitating, just like Autism. Being able to function independently may still require active management of the condition.
As a personal example, one of my kids has hearing loss. It's easy to forget, she has bone conduction hearing aids, and she functions independently and largely successfully (except when she removes her aids and forgets to put them on). It would be easy to think of her situation as perfectly "normal". If everyone could interact with her with an understanding that without her aids they need to speak up, and aware of the basic physical requirements for managing her aids (like taking them off to put on a helmet or something), then her life would be hard to distinguish (especially without doing a comparative assessment) from any other living condition. But she does have a real impediment. And even if she is successful at managing it, she is managing it - and that is a key distinction. Taken in the extreme, her condition could be quite severe in terms of the management it requires. Luckily she has a more mild expression of hearing loss, but she is still managing her hearing loss.
Last edited:
- 2,156
- United Kingdom
The DSM-5 has a category for Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders.
It doesn't list bipolar in the same way (yet), and there is disagreement on whether it would be helpful (but it is definitely a thing).
As for classing other conditions as spectrum disorders, it would be interesting to find out what the current thinking is in the psychiatric community. I don't know if the nomenclature is used solely because it covers the various subtypes of a disorder or if it reflects the broad way in which patients can present with symptoms.
Last edited:
- 16,488
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Another year, another Home Secretary promoting racist assumptions about groomers despite her own government's report offering substantial evidence to the contrary. This one is losing support on her own side because of it, though:
Steve Baker withdraws support for Braverman over grooming gangs rhetoric, says ally
Influential Brexiter backed home secretary’s leadership bid but is said to object to her singling out British-Pakistani men
Last edited:
- 2,156
- United Kingdom
Can relate to the fluid intelligence dropping more than the crystallised.
I'm not sure there'll ever be a test that measures the other forms of intelligence in any meaningful way, which is a shame.
Thinking more about those types of intelligence reminds me of on of my friends who barely scraped by in his GCSEs but now owns a Bentley and has a very successful security company.
I'm not sure there'll ever be a test that measures the other forms of intelligence in any meaningful way, which is a shame.
Thinking more about those types of intelligence reminds me of on of my friends who barely scraped by in his GCSEs but now owns a Bentley and has a very successful security company.
Last edited:
- 28,798
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I like how a discussion about IQ in this thread began with a bitchfit over James Watson being stripped of honorary titles for spewing unsubstantiated tripe about black people's supposed genetic inferiority with regard to intelligence and how there can't be any substantiation because studies of the topic will result in academics getting canceled. That discussion also seems to predate the "cancel culture" bitchfit, which is kind of wild to me as it wasn't really that long ago.
Anyway, I observed discussion about supposed double standards and it got me thinking about this post again and this thread seems most appropriate for discussing the topic even as "political correctness" (Boo!) is a bogeyman.
I think this notion of a double standard is rooted in misattributed collectivism, a sort of guilt by association absent any logical association. Because those who hold discordant views are inappropriately lumped together by viewpoint, those discordant views are perceived as a double standard. The reality is that they're just different standards applied by different people.
Anyway, I observed discussion about supposed double standards and it got me thinking about this post again and this thread seems most appropriate for discussing the topic even as "political correctness" (Boo!) is a bogeyman.
Offense is subjective. Due to that subjectivity, there's unlikely to be a consensus when it comes to use of a particular word. Some people are offended by it such that, as seems to be the case above, they would see its use prohibited broadly. Others assert that any negative reaction to use of the word is wholly inappropriate. These are obviously extremes and the discord certainly isn't limited to these poles. I'm somewhere between the two poles in that, as I replied to that post, I'm not personally offended by use of the word but I recognize that others may be and that offense isn't necessarily inappropriate, even as it surely can be. Because offense is subjective and views on offense are so discordant, it stands to reason that which is deemed to be acceptable is also going to vary wildly.
I think this notion of a double standard is rooted in misattributed collectivism, a sort of guilt by association absent any logical association. Because those who hold discordant views are inappropriately lumped together by viewpoint, those discordant views are perceived as a double standard. The reality is that they're just different standards applied by different people.
Last edited:
- 16,488
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
A Statement on the Changes to the New Editions of Ian Fleming’s Bond Stories - Ian Fleming
A statement from Ian Fleming Publications on the changes to the new editions of the Bond stories.
www.ianfleming.com
