Winfrey presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:39 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Ginger wrote:and what does veganism or doctors in the US or UK have to do with Oprah Winfrey?
It has to do with the politics and misuse of science, something which has a lot to do with Oprah as president.

Most public schools, like my rural and quaint little mostly religious ones, don't even care about real science. Or at least they always try to slip their own religious opinions in there when they teach you. Therapists don't care about real science: They care about what makes you the most submissive and controlled. Doctors care more about their religious objections to certain procedures like sex changes and abortions than they care about the real science that says forcing babies/a body you/she hates on a woman will give her mental problems all over the places and may lead to her killing herself? If a president held some wrong views it shouldn't condemn her as president in my opinion. Even if she never changed her mind. No one else cares about doin' proper science so why should I or even Oprah care care one tiny teeny tiny little bit about boring facts about why physics work or whatevs? Hard sciences should NOT be part of the presidents' jobs. That's what we have research facilities, medical establishments, online communities, books, teachers in schools and educational movies for.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

iamspen
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby iamspen » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:08 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:
ucim wrote:
Ginger wrote:and what does veganism or doctors in the US or UK have to do with Oprah Winfrey?
It has to do with the politics and misuse of science, something which has a lot to do with Oprah as president.

Most public schools, like my rural and quaint little mostly religious ones, don't even care about real science. Or at least they always try to slip their own religious opinions in there when they teach you. Therapists don't care about real science: They care about what makes you the most submissive and controlled. Doctors care more about their religious objections to certain procedures like sex changes and abortions than they care about the real science that says forcing babies/a body you/she hates on a woman will give her mental problems all over the places and may lead to her killing herself? If a president held some wrong views it shouldn't condemn her as president in my opinion. Even if she never changed her mind. No one else cares about doin' proper science so why should I or even Oprah care care one tiny teeny tiny little bit about boring facts about why physics work or whatevs? Hard sciences should NOT be part of the presidents' jobs. That's what we have research facilities, medical establishments, online communities, books, teachers in schools and educational movies for.


1.) Point out major institutional problems in America
2.) Proclaim these problems exist, so fuck it, let them
3.) ???
4.) Profit!

There are certain institutions and organizations which are very good at working out step 3, and they will almost universally exploit the populous, especially people espousing views like yours, for their own benefit, regardless of how horrible it may be for you.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6254
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby ucim » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:19 pm UTC

A president that supports pseudo-science is likely to make things worse for you. If the truth of the universe is that you can't fly by flapping your wings, and pseudo science says that you can, jumping out of a tenth story window is still going to be fatal. Politics says jump (or don't jump), not science. Science only gives you hints as to what is likely to happen if you do. Ignore it at your peril.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

cphite
Posts: 1248
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby cphite » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:24 pm UTC

Mutex wrote:A discussion about whether Oprah Winfrey should be president is now about whether or not chickens are fuckers who have it coming.


Oprah Winfrey should not be president; and chickens absolutely have it coming.

In regards to Oprah... She's awesome. She's an incredibly kind and generous person, and she's done an amazing amount of work over the years to advocate for fairness and decency. But that doesn't qualify her to be president. She has no experience in government, or any other type of leadership role. And sure, one counter to that is Trump had no government experience and was arguably shit at leadership in the private sector, and he got to be president... but that isn't a reason to do the same thing again. The presidency needs to be based on more than who is the most famous; and the bar has to be higher than "would be better than Trump".

And as for chickens... vicious little bastards deserve everything they get.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4600
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:25 pm UTC

If Winfrey got the Democratic candidacy in 2020 I would hope that she won over Trump.

I would probably actually hope that someone else won over either of them, and I would probably vote for that person, like I usually do, because my vote will be counted toward whoever the Democrat is anyway because I live in California, so it doesn't matter.

I'd rather someone better than Winfrey get the Democratic candidacy in 2020 though. Not because she's a bad person, but for all the reasons already outlined here.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:00 pm UTC

What Pfhorrest said. All of it.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9873
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:22 pm UTC

So can we all agree that

1) Winfrey better than Trump
2) There exists a large pool of candidates that are better than Winfrey
3) We should probably choose someone from said pool instead
4) but if our choice is Cheeto or Big O, go big or go home

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8072
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Zohar » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:27 pm UTC

Also, Winfrey never said she's running.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2879
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby orthogon » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:43 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:Also, Winfrey never said she's running.

5) We don't believe what any politicians say any more. Although, if she's telling the truth, she's not a politician, and therefore isn't lying.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4600
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:46 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:if she's telling the truth, she's [...] isn't lying.

You don't say?
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6254
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby ucim » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:52 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:Also, Winfrey never said she's running.
Isn't that how candidates announce themselves nowadays - by denying that they are running, and seeing who salutes?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9873
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:13 pm UTC

All politicians lie does not imply non politicians tell the truth.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6175
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:52 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Zohar wrote:Also, Winfrey never said she's running.
Isn't that how candidates announce themselves nowadays - by denying that they are running, and seeing who salutes?

Jose

If they admit that are running, they have to obey campaign finance rules. That's why they insist they aren't running and only suspend campaigning. ( It lets them keep fundraising to pay off debts or finance the next election.

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Yablo » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:01 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So can we all agree that

1) Winfrey better than Trump
2) There exists a large pool of candidates that are better than Winfrey
3) We should probably choose someone from said pool instead
4) but if our choice is Cheeto or Big O, go big or go home


I agree with all but point #1.
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6175
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:32 pm UTC

If you paid any attention instead of randomly posting, you would realize that point 4 also denigrates Trump.

Oprah is overrated as a potential candidate, come back when it's summer or spring, and then we'll talk about her chances.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9873
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:54 pm UTC

Trump was also a joke candidate...

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3281
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:27 pm UTC

And history has not yet woven the tapestry enough to tell whether he truly ended up as a similarly adjectived President.

(Though if he keeps "proclaiming" things that already are (whilst otherwise saying things that obviously aren't), I can see which way that tide is going. I've been awaiting news of The Fakeys with great interest! Can that wait be nearly over?!?)

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Yablo » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:01 am UTC

sardia wrote:If you paid any attention instead of randomly posting, you would realize that point 4 also denigrates Trump.

Oprah is overrated as a potential candidate, come back when it's summer or spring, and then we'll talk about her chances.

I have paid attention, and I specifically didn't disagree with point #4 because it doesn't denigrate Trump unless you read it that way. If our choice is Trump or Oprah, absolutely go big or go home. It just happens that my idea of going big isn't necessarily voting for Oprah.
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:37 am UTC

I'm truly sorry Yablo but: Winfrey is totally better than Trump. Let's list some ways shall we? She has never made inappropriate comments about her daughter being sexy or other women, she has never touched/flirted inappropriately with women, she is charitable, she is a counselor-type personality not interested in foreign entanglements. She is not war hawkish like Trump. She commonly doesn't LIE UP A STORM like Trump. She's from a class of peoples that used to be discriminated against, unlike Trump, so she'd know better how to deal with abused classes of peoples. AND: Unlike Trump she is a... I believe? A liberal so. I like liberals way, way better than war hawkish conservatives. Winfrey is better than Trump in every single respects.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

DavidSh
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 6:09 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby DavidSh » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:29 pm UTC

Objectively speaking, Trump is both taller and heavier than Winfrey today. He weighs about the same as Winfrey at her heaviest, though his BMI is less than hers was. So "Go big" could be taken as "Go with Trump".

In case this helps.

Mutex
Posts: 1310
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Mutex » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:31 pm UTC

That helped a lot, thanks.

User avatar
bantler
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:23 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby bantler » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:22 pm UTC

Winfrey and Trump are essentially the same candidate in many ways.

They are both technically successful billionaire business-people, yet neither actually produce anything. There is no "industry".
Their leadership is essentially being a big-boss figurehead; so wealthy that negotiations and concessions are never required.
Their decisions can be whimsical, personal, outlandish or vindictive, but it never really effects anyone else because there is no Industry.

They don't make anything, fix anything, or service anything that humans need. Just want.
They are both useless.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9873
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:50 pm UTC

Even if Oprah and Trump were both nothing more than tv billionaires, Oprah doesn't swear like a drunken sailor, doesn't have a confirmed history of sexually harassing people, doesn't routinely insinuate that entire demographics of people are sub-human, so even if she had identical policies as Trump she would still be superior.

elasto
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:39 pm UTC

That sums up a divide in Western society that I didn't even know existed until last year - and yet it's every bit as fierce a divide as the traditional left-right: While one grouping places a heavy emphasis on character (do they mean well), the other only really cares about outcomes.

While I thought the battle had been won in this regard - that even though our leaders show poor character time and time again when caught out in financial/sexual scandals or whatever - still, the ideal was there and was one we all agreed upon: Our leaders should be the best of us, and should hold those qualities we aspire to in ourselves.

But, actually, in some people's eyes, with all this emphasis on character the pendulum had swung too far. Hence the backlash against PC'ness - where, for example, someone who had been in a public-facing career for decades would lose their job overnight after a sexist or racist comment spoken privately, and perhaps in jest, went public. Yes, it showed poor character (or poor judgement at least), but some felt that the more important thing was 'Blow their personal views... Were they good at their job?'

And now the pendulum has swung totally in the other direction: Even Trump's most ardent fan would never argue he is a man of good character. They would simply argue that he is a man who knows what he wants and knows how to get it, and that the 'pussy grabbing' or whatever is an irrelevance and a distraction. (The irony is I think Trump has both poor character and lacks the competence to achieve the outcomes he says he wants...)

I think there will be a backlash against the backlash - which is why someone like Oprah even gets a look in: People think 'I'm not exactly sure how competent she'd be as leader of the free world, but she couldn't be any worse than Trump, and her character is a hell of a lot better: She's generous and kind and means well.'

Yes, ideally the options in 2020 will be both competent and of good character, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:12 pm UTC

elasto wrote:But, actually, in some people's eyes, with all this emphasis on character the pendulum had swung too far. Hence the backlash against PC'ness - where, for example, someone who had been in a public-facing career for decades would lose their job overnight after a sexist or racist comment spoken privately, and perhaps in jest, went public. Yes, it showed poor character (or poor judgement at least), but some felt that the more important thing was 'Blow their personal views... Were they good at their job?'

Politicians CREATED the, "PC movement" they are the ones that determine what is Basically Decent or not. And character AND outcomes both matter. If you're not doing your job, sexually harassing women or your daughter... then your character AND your job are not right. Sexist and racist remarks are not appropriate for someone of such highest offices. If he makes racist or sexist remarks he Needs to be called out publicly and not keep it private ditto if he ACTUALLY TOUCHES a woman or women.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9873
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:40 pm UTC

"Character" absolutely matters because it tells everyone else what is acceptable for powerful people to do. If you have a brilliant mayor that every month eats a baby, you lose the value of one baby each month. It's possible that the extra value provided by this mayor is more than the value of all the babies eaten. But let's say it becomes public that mayor baby-muncher eats babies. At this point, you have to add in not just the damage from people living in fear of baby-munchers, but the damage done from other people thinking they can get away with baby munching.

In short, letting a valuable person off the hook for a crime has to include not just "this person did more good than harm" but "letting this person off the hook let's others know they too can commit crimes as long as they do more good than harm".


Of course, this can lead to the scenario where covering up a crime is the best result. Problem is, where there's smoke there's fire...

elasto
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:04 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:Politicians CREATED the, "PC movement" they are the ones that determine what is Basically Decent or not.

No they didn't and no they don't. When there's a twitter storm and someone gets sacked for using an un-PC term, that wasn't politician-led, it was entirely mob-led. Politicians generally jump on such bandwagons rather than initiate them.

And character AND outcomes both matter.

Of course they do, the question is what to do when one option has good character and the other has good outcomes?

Do you turn a blind eye to one with the poor character - hoping he apologises for his personal failings and turns a new leaf - or do you forgive the policy failures of the other and hope he learns quickly on the job?

Now, it's such a cliche that 'the ends don't justify the means' that I thought the matter was settled - here in the West at least - but it turns out we're not so different from everywhere else where people will turn a blind eye to almost any character flaw so long as their lot in life is improving (or they believe it will.)

(eg. see widespread tolerance from Russian citizens towards Putin's ruthless rule, or Chinese citizens towards their one-party state, simply because their respective economies have boomed.)

CU: While I agree with the general thrust of your post, I think your hyperbole detracts from the argument somewhat.

We aren't talking about character flaws that rise to the level of criminality, that's always pretty black and white. Normally it's stuff like cheating on your spouse - stuff that isn't relevant to your job except in that it reveals your poor character.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:11 pm UTC

elasto wrote:When there's a twitter storm and someone gets sacked for using an un-PC term, that wasn't politician-led, it was entirely mob-led. Politicians generally jump on such bandwagons rather than initiate them.

And character AND outcomes both matter.

Of course they do, the question is what to do when one option has good character and the other has good outcomes?

Do you turn a blind eye to one with the poor character - hoping he apologises for his personal failings and turns a new leaf - or do you forgive the policy failures of the other and hope he learns quickly on the job?

Well, I guess you right: twitter storms and public outcries are mob-led... still: Politicians invented, Basically Decent etiquette and rules for good reasons. Namely, to end discrimination and promote fairness and equality for all races and sexes. Still: If I were in Trump's or any politicians' shoes and I be breaking the rules? You GOT TO, "Turn over a new leaf," as fast as you can lest you get prosecuted hella and lose everything, your reputations, your jobs titles and powers... your money. So legal consequences are totes fair when you make bad comments, over, and over, or try to promote wars w/Kim Jong Un's nuclear wars buttons or w/evs.
Last edited by Ginger on Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:23 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

elasto
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:17 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:Well, I guess you right: twitter storms and public outcries are mob-led... still: Politicians invented, Basically Decent etiquette and rules for good reasons. Namely, to end discrimination and promote fairness and equality for all races and sexes.

On occasion politicians lead, but usually they have to be dragged kicking and screaming. Would women have been given the vote without all the public protests with women chaining themselves to railings etc.? Would race-discrimination laws have been passed without the actions of Rosa Parks and all the other civil rights protesters?

It seems to me that politicians do the minimum possible to keep the support of their base while not alienating too many floating voters, and that means not doing anything too radical or out of step with the public mood. It's very rare for a politician to take a leap of faith and, say, propose decriminalising drugs or something. It's actually far easier for a totalitarian regime to take such a radical step and lead the public mood; In most democracies politicians can only follow, not lead, else punishment at the ballot box will swiftly follow.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:26 pm UTC

Aw snap! You got me re: activists and stuff. So, I misspoke when I said politicians invented it, but the "PC Culture" if you will, has been shaped by everyone from politicians to liberals so it's kinda... a political thing and has it right in the name? That is what I was going for. Maybe law makers and cops are really the ones that make all the rules? Ha-ha. Totalitarian police states? I think we might be getting closer beneath Trump's iron fist rules.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:43 pm UTC

bantler wrote:They [Oprah and Trump] don't make anything, fix anything, or service anything that humans need. Just want.
They are both useless.


Acceptance of LGBTQA people's right to be who they are is just one example of something that humans need.

Society as a whole needs the benefit of LGBTQA people being able to contribute their talents to it as fully as heterosexuals can.

Oprah has done more than anyone else to change American society's perception of LGBTQA people over the past four decades.

It may be difficult for people younger than myself to understand just how hostile the cultural climate used to be toward non-heterosexuals. But some of my high school classmates committed suicide because they needed that acceptance, and early-1980s society just wasn't ready to give it to them yet.

Things have changed dramatically since then, and Oprah's talk show had a lot to do with that change, starting in the mid-1980s. Many, many people--both progressive and conservative--agree that the LGBTQA community would not enjoy the degree of acceptance that it does today, if Oprah had not used her influence over the years to promote basic civil rights for people who are not heterosexual.

In 1991, more than two decades before same-sex marriage became legally recognized in the United States, Oprah's show hosted an on-air religious wedding ceremony between two men. Six years later, in 1997, Oprah's show hosted Ellen DeGeneres's coming out. These events were A Really Big Deal, culturally.

And no, they were not just opportunistic attempts to exploit a sensational topic to draw a greater audience to the show. There were boycotts. Advertisers pulled ads. Oprah knew the risks, and did these things anyway, because she felt that they were the right thing to do, and she had the courage to accept the negative effects of doing them. (Granted, part of that courage came from her confidence that she was, by then, powerful enough to survive the impact of those negative effects. But I think it was still courageous.)

Oprah's imperfect, yes, and she lacks the qualifications of many other potential presidential candidates for whom I would prefer to vote. But useless? No. She has not been useless to society, even if you aren't personally interested in buying her magazine or watching her show(s).

elasto
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:47 pm UTC

Ginger: I'm not really sure why it has 'politics' in the name. My best guess is it's more like politics with a small 'p' - like you'd talk about office politics.

ie. PC-ness is more like a set of rules for how to interact with your peers without rubbing anyone up the wrong way unnecessarily. I think it goes way beyond what the law mandates, and by its nature always will. It's basically what used to be known as 'good manners'.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:07 am UTC

OH like... a diplomat talking to different countries or office workers' politics? I gotcha. Anyways, etiquette will always, be abused. Forever and ever. It's the natures of the beasts of our world. And: That doesn't mean Basic Human Decency is a bad idea. It has saved peoples' asses from making bad professional mistakes, respecting their colleagues and patients, treating everyone everywhere fairly under the law? Talking about people whose issues you may be uncomfortable w/you can now have a non-offensive scripts to follow re: PCness... so. It's not a bad idea at all Like I dunno why everyone be saying PC sucks so badly? </3
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
bantler
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:23 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby bantler » Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:59 pm UTC

Ginger wrote: Talking about people whose issues you may be uncomfortable w/you can now have a non-offensive scripts to follow re: PCness... so. It's not a bad idea at all Like I dunno why everyone be saying PC sucks so badly? </3


Using a script in conversations sounds exhausting. Especially when you don't know if your script is current until you inadvertently say something offensive.

Language is rich and slangy and nuanced.
Something can be Lame or Crazy without disparaging limpers and nut-jobs.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:06 pm UTC

Yes, but when like you... tell them screaming to take their meds, or say passive aggressive like, "I HOPE YOU get help for your severe physical and mental traumas." Then, you ARE being disparaging. And I kinda agree about scripts they can be exhausting. Yet if scripts are good enough for Oprah then they are good enough for me, or anyone, who wanna discuss sensitive issues? Because absent a script you only got... your own troubled upbringing to guide you.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
bantler
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:23 pm UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby bantler » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:15 pm UTC

Certainly personal attacks are inexcusable regardless of the language used.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Winfrey presidency

Postby Ginger » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:43 pm UTC

There's when a script or scripts would heavily help because... these people don't actually think they are being wrong or offensive they think they are kindly helping a girl or woman deal with real life and their disabilities? Or people talk dirty about sex to girls because they think being a woman means being a sex object. Or being a white girl is all about Frenches and Englishes. Or being a strong black woman means putting up with harassment... and scrips would heavily help take the venom out of All of These Encounters and more, esp. for professionals working they jobs.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests