Pot calls kettle what, now?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

First off, Im'ma just toss two pieces here that I recently found interesting...

“That’s not racist, you idiot”: Jay Leno slams college kids for being too “politically correct”
...Leno also took umbrage at a former intern's suggestion that not liking Mexican food made him racist.

Student Blasts Her College’s ‘Thought Police’ and Political Correctness That’s ‘Reached the Level of Crazy’
...Weiss described the campus-wide initiative in which students are told to avoid using words “that are not inclusive”; the mandatory session that discouraged extending the wish of “Merry Christmas”; and a freshman seminar in which her friend was lambasted by the lecturer for being a white heterosexual man from Georgia.

That said, now let's put the shoe on the other foot just for the sake of a thought experiment, and see where this goes. So here's a suggestion.

"Pot calls the kettle black" - we've often heard that phrase. But, given the present-day perception of subtle racial overtones as detrimental to constructive discourse, inclusiveness, social harmony and equality, I have to ask, why black? If we're to remain true to the extant social mores and tendencies of the day, is it really OK that black should constantly be associated with something bad? I mean: economic black hole, herd's black ram, black pit of Hell, etc.

Shouldn't we now rephrase this to "Coffee cup calls salad plate greasy" or something? I say we wage a war on all well-known and long-established proverbs and sayings that are no longer OK and have become offensive to the modern sensitivities of our civilized society! What say you? Are you with me? And why not?

Comments

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Our local equivalent here literally says, "Look, a notch mocks the nick". See? No racial overtones! And they call us Balkanites backward.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

The pot calls the kettle a container used for heating things?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Sounds politically correct enough to me.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I say go with the Biblical "Take the log out of your eye before criticizing the speck in your neighbor's." Or alternately "Woe to blind guides who strain out a gnat but swallow a camel."

[garote]

Where I grew up (reference: Santa Cruz) the local zeitgeist appeared to be that "black" and "white" were stupid terms to apply to people, and those applications should change. At some point I realized that it wan't even skin color people were keying into in determining race - it was facial structure, especially the nose and hair. For example, John Boehner's skin is darker than Colin Powell's, but Boehner is clearly a "white guy" to anyone who uses the term.

Sanitizing the entire rest of the language of references to colors seems like a fool's errand.

[balalajkin.livejournal.com]

Just outlaw all the negativity. Not a smiling face? Hang 'em high. Someone said "I don't like..." - that's enough for a jail term. Everyone must be positive and inclusive.

[musicpsych.livejournal.com]

Can that positivity and inclusion come with a trigger warning? Otherwise, someone might feel bad.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

It's fascinating how for some, offensive language isn't really about principle (i.e. is something really potentially offensive in principle), but more like a matter of expedience (i.e. if no one happens to complain that they're offended, then it isn't truly offensive).

Not to mention that we can't know for sure if no one is being offended by something, even if we haven't personally heard anyone explicitly complaining about it.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

What's more fascinating to me is how the whole premise is being dismissed outright based on the character of the particular source.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

That sort of approach reminds me of a bullet-proof vest. Whatever you toss at it, is bounced back with remarkable ease.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Eh, the 2nd citation is from The Blaze, a Glenn Beck production; and we know how worried he is about "who will think of the white males!?" And given how the Op-Ed is written (an extract is quoted in the citation), I'm highly dubious of the things it reported, especially the bit about "lambasting a white heterosexual male from Georgia" (the word heterosexual is a red flag for me, why would that even come up except it's part of a laundry list of supposed lefty things and "values") I'm also betting the word "lambasting" didn't match what really happened. The original Op-Ed reads like any number of complaints raised on a Fox News victim-hood piece that John Stewart pokes fun of; and the writer of the Op-Ed seems to have a lot of issues with "Social Justice Warrior" types too.

A great example of a word that was normally part of everyday language and used routinely, having its use changed by raising some awareness about how hurtful words can be would be "retarded". Stephen Colbert had Timothy Shriver (John Kennedy's nephew) on his program to talk about the "R-word campaign." Mr. Shriver is a huge advocate for people with Down syndrome, and he also is chairman of the Special Olympics; Mr. Shriver asks that people consider not using the word "retarded" in regard to people with Down's. This prompted Colbert, playing his obnoxious pundit character [incidentally, doing a fine job of taking the voice of the author of the Op-Ed in the second citation] to wonder why Shriver is trying to take away his right to say the word "retarded."

Short video clip:
http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/wug1p5/tim-shriver

But if the Pot wants to call the Kettle 'black', I'm fine with with it.