4
187

[–] fightforthehive 4 points 187 points (+191|-4) ago  (edited ago)

I disagree with their statement. I'm sick of political correctness because it's created a climate where people are capable of dismissing a position because the person making it made a distasteful comment about an unrelated topic, rather than honest consideration of said position.

Edit: I was asked by @icantthinkofanewname to share this post of she stepping down from /v/admin's modteam four days ago for visibility.

12
24

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 12 points 24 points (+36|-12) ago 

It's gonna be great when Trump is president

10
47

[–] weezkitty 10 points 47 points (+57|-10) ago 

As much as I hate political correctness, Trump would not make a good president. He is too much of a fool

[–] [deleted] 14 points 4 points (+18|-14) ago 

[Deleted]

15
19

[–] RunsWithScissors 15 points 19 points (+34|-15) ago 

That's not really political correctness though. There are two kinds of political correctness.

The original (and good type) of political correctness is just being, well, correct. For example, if someone has suffered a stroke and can't form syllables as well as most people, instead of referring to them as "stupid" or "retarded," the correct term would be "language apraxia." That's the politically (and medically) correct term. Or if someone is attracted to members of the same sex, we would refer to them not as a "faggot" (politically incorrect), but instead, "homosexual" or "gay" for short. "Faggot" is pejorative, and also, inaccurate (a faggot is technically a bundle of sticks.)

That's one kind of political correctness. Using accurate and non-pejorative terms to refer to people.

The other kind of political correctness is where political correctness is used as a subterfuge for censorship. For example, it's not "politically correct" to refer to people like Donald Trump as racist homophobic pieces of shit. Instead, we have to pretend that Donald Trump is a valuable part of some meaningful debate. Or, we're expected to not refer to bigots as bigots, but instead, "traditionalists."

The difference is that the first kind of correctness, where we refer to people with Down Syndrome as, well, people with Down Syndrome is actually a matter of accuracy. The second kind of political correctness isn't a matter of correctness at all. It isn't correct or accurate to accept hate under the banner of "diversity of opinion," but that's the subterfuge to get it accepted.

18
35

[–] ThizzBoss 18 points 35 points (+53|-18) ago  (edited ago)

Hey look at this faggot cuck pushing a PC narrative, and it somehow managed to sneak in a Trump insults.

DAE SAFE SPACE BERNE SANDERS???? LE XD

Edit: I'd also like to point out that words like retard, imbecile, and moron started out as medical terms but now we aren't allowed to call someone with mental retardation retarded anymore because of faggots like the one I'm replying to. You can't even call a midget a midget anymore without hurting their little feelings.

0
5

[–] Zardoz 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

"Faggot" is pejorative, and also, inaccurate (a faggot is technically a bundle of sticks.)

Slang isn't 'technically inaccurate' ya fag. no more than you calling Trump a piece of shit is 'inaccurate' because that would be an actual segment of feces.

To the OP: There is no reason to delete or censor or give any special moderation to racist, sexist or 'homophobic'. Somewhere along the groupthink line of internet tradition everyone just started accepting that these are unallowed or should be rules and for no reason I can see. a forum for kids? you can make that argument yes. For adults I see no good reason why sexism, racism etc need to be banned, suppressed, deleted.

0
5

[–] MoveThemGoalposts 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The original (and good type) of political correctness is just being, well, correct.

No, the original meaning of the phrase "political correctness" was speech used to toe the (Communist party) line. So if by "correct" you mean "self-censorship in the face of a totalitarian government" then yes, you're absolutely right.

0
3

[–] eg0death 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

No the two kinds of political correctness are the good kind: voluntary. And the bad kind: mandatory aka excuses for censorship

0
0

[–] TEA-EARL-GREY-HOT 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I would argue that bigoted language, slurs, and sexism are not attempts at discussion or descriptions of a position. There is something to be gained by an equal communication verbiage that allows a deep and balanced discourse. I do also notice that columnists, popular speakers, and other media personalities often use the call against PC to mean, "let me be a bigot, fool, or hateful" and seem more inclined to push priorities and power than lay out a position. More inclined, but not exclusive. I haven't really been paying attention to the News, Politics, or World News section of Voat though.

I'm not really replying based on the situation, or the mod, since I have no idea whats going on there.

0
0

[–] Lootaluck 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So you're saying I should take the opinion of /v/niggers regulars on women's issues at face value? Better yet let's seriously consider /v/coontown opinion of optimal tax rates. Bigot, racist and stupid perspectives are a pretty good indicator that an individuals perspective isn't worth considering...but I'm sure you take SJWs opinion of the gaming industry with an open mind

[–] [deleted] 9 points 91 points (+100|-9) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

4
83

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 4 points 83 points (+87|-4) ago 

@she should hang out in her safe space and leave us the fuck alone

[–] [deleted] 3 points 35 points (+38|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

1
87

[–] DivinePrince 1 points 87 points (+88|-1) ago 

Voat is a free speech site. They can have their opinion. I can have mine.

The corruption begins when people start deleting the content they dont agree with.

0
28

[–] Mishima 0 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago 

I agree with DivinePrince but the problem is a lot more insidious than simply deleting content. The whole PC-discourse mindset repeatedly shifts the conversation to how something is said over what is being said, derailing any real debate. It is the perfect sabotage to meaningful discussions u don't want to see take place because instead of stopping it, u replace it with another ultimately meaningless one.

1
6

[–] sneakybells 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

But she has a point. What if I said chinks were sneaky and once everyone got mad at me I said, its this damn pc culture that cant handle the truth? This isnt black and white, we have varying degrees of nuance and youre just washing over it.

5
11

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 5 points 11 points (+16|-5) ago  (edited ago)

yeah @she took over that sub and started that fuck your authoritarian question marks and other markings language is beautiful because we dont need arbitrary marks or even corekt spelin to understand each other

0
8

[–] flimflamedthezimzam 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

The reason authoritarians like tons of ambiguous rules is because it makes it very easy to fuck with whoever you already wanted to fuck with.

20
-17

0
1

[–] helmetbox 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Everyone can have an opinion. However, it's stupid to have any opinion/belief that is not well-informed.

deleting the content they dont agree with.

As far as I know, this hasn't happened. She deleted content that violated a rule. We're in THE SAME FUCKING THREAD right now! This is the very question that was supposedly censored. Do you have any other evidence of censorship? Will you correct your comment and admit you were wrong? If not, then you and your baseless opinion are misleading people.

0
0

[–] DivinePrince 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Um, sure????

0
0

[–] goatboy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Free speech is not the right to destroy the system. She is a subversive provocateur and must go! These parasites always try to infiltrate other people's spaces, take over, change the rules, and destroy the thing that made the place great in the first place. She must go!

[–] [deleted] 4 points 27 points (+31|-4) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

1
19

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago 

[–] [deleted] 11 points 16 points (+27|-11) ago 

[Deleted]

4
28

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 4 points 28 points (+32|-4) ago 

if @she just wanted to give her opinion so be it. That's not what @she wants. @She wants control over spaces where people are likely to disagree with her

1
11

[–] Muraenidae 1 points 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

But what @she does as a moderator will be pretty transparent. If she fails to do her job the way the community wants, why can't we remove her then? Surely such a "fall from grace" would be more devastating than simply not giving her to position. I'm not saying I want her to be in control, but if her personal ideologies don't get in the way of /v/askvoat, then who cares?

[–] [deleted] 5 points 7 points (+12|-5) ago 

[Deleted]

2
4

[–] umpaloompa 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

I totally agree with, this voat drama (yay, our first one) is just shit. She has her own opinion and so what. She never clearly intended to make askvoat a safe space + most of her deletes are just questions without a question mark (rule 1). It's online users making a fuss without seeing the facts for themselves first, seriously go read the rules and check the modlog and tell me where the problem lies.

2
4

[–] Obi_juan 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

The "problem" as it were, IMHO, is an asinine rule requiring a question mark, or your post goes bye-bye. Let's call a spade a spade.

3
14

[–] thijser 3 points 14 points (+17|-3) ago 

She has an unpopular opinion, should this means that she should not be a mod? We like to pressent ourself as a bastion of free speach let us show this in this case. Mods are entilted to their opinions no matter if they are wrong or not.

That said if we can see that she is deleting posts that disagree with her then something is wrong and we should be worried. Perhaps someone could go trough the deleted posts and comments to see such a trend? When I quickly looked there was mostly deleted spam and maybe a bit of overly zealous enforcing (deleting all posts that did not end in a ? for example) , but this has nothing to do with moderating abilities.

Of course part of free speech is the fact that if you have a different opion then you can make your own voat and try to gather people there.

5
3

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars [S] 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago 

easier said than done. @She hijacked a default sub with 47k voaters.

[–] [deleted] 7 points 6 points (+13|-7) ago 

[Deleted]

0
13

[–] Moomoocat 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

I feel like that is a loaded question.

Do not know what's going on exactly, but there are probably (hopefully) better ways to deal with this situation than this.

Out of curiosity, was it that one comment of theirs or were there multiple comments similar to that one?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] weezkitty 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I suspect the moderators might be laying low right now since they are under fire. They probably ordinarily would though.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] Moomoocat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Did not know we had this sub.

3
7

[–] heili 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

I question that person's ability to be objective, their judgment, and whether or not they actually understand the ideal that is free speech.

load more comments ▼ (63 remaining)