AIBU to think Political Correctness never actually went too far?

[Lessthanaballpark]

AIBU to think that as soon as Political correctness actually started to gain any traction there was a backlash against it that dampened its effect from the outset?

That as soon as the idea that people should check themselves before expressing any racist, sexist or disablist opinion an equally powerful feeling of resentment emerged to counter it and frame those do-gooders as hysterical feminazi killjoys (if female)/manginas(if male)?

That from the moment that women's rights started to have any effect on society, cries of "pussification" and "political correctness gone too far" erupted before anything actually had a chance to "go too far"? That from the privileged viewpoint of someone who is used to seeing themselves reflected in the media, sport and politics, any step towards including other groups feels like a step too far.

That it is far far far more common to hear people saying "well I know this is politically incorrect but I'm going to say it anyway" than it is for people to actually chide others for being politically incorrect.

And that this nostalgia for a time before political correctness existed incorrectly assumes that we have already reached racial/sexual equality and have gone beyond it when really we are only half way there?

"Jehovas witnesses can't"

Errrm yes they could if they chose to, their parents would probably choose not to allow them. They also probably choose not to allow them into assembly either, does that mean those shouldn't happen? I suggest the majority of children would take part in the Nativity therefore it is perfectly reasonable to have one. If some choose not to take part then so be it.

Of course it's perfectly reasonable to have a Nativity. It's also perfectly reasonable for a Head to choose not to!

And of course Jehova's Witnesses could choose to allow their children to take part in a Nativity- if they decided they didn't want to be Witnesses any more.
(sorry I didn't say that it was muslims who couldn't take part in a Nativity, by the way. I know you were hoping I would! )

What a goady thread.

No jehovas witnesses at the school, but if there were that would be totally irrelevant. You can't change things to suit everyone, or you end up pleasing no-one. And in answer to your question about incidences where places are penalised; what about schools being marked down by Ofsted for being too 'white' or too 'English'? Despite the school being in a predominantly white catchment area. This is only one example, but if you want more, let me know. I have loads.

Livelove Can you link to schools being "marked down" by ofsted for their ethnic mix please?

"And in answer to your question about incidences where places are penalised; what about schools being marked down by Ofsted for being too 'white' or too 'English'?"

Could you link to one, please?

Sorry, no idea how to attach links. Not very internet savvy I'm afraid, but if you google it you will see some incidences come up.

Political correctness has certainly been used, what for depends your standing in the world.
On the surface a postive, altruistic notion.
Turn and see the underbelly, and yes, it could be abused for nefarious reasons.

Just name a school, then.

Not goady at all Missmargie. I like threads like this as they can be quite educational! Sometimes I have a mindset, and reading about issues from a different angle does sometimes make you stop for a minute and think about things from a different perspective. As long as it keeps civil and personal insults don't get introduced, I think it's good to debate.

Middle Rasen school Lincolnshire.

I don't know. I think it is pretty worrying that criticism of certain beliefs/religions is now classed as "hate" speech. I think it is pretty bad that people can be arrested and jailed for things they say on, for example, twitter or facebook. Obviously if they are making personal threats of violence that is a different thing, but people should be allowed to criticise religion or ideas that they find ridiculous without being shouted down as a bigot or racist.

Thank you, live. I've got some important telly watching to do- I'll be back later!

Did Ofsted censure a school because it was too white?

It wasn't "censured" for being "too white" . Th school was described, quite neutrally, as having a lower than average number of non white children.

And, at another point in the report, was told that one of the things it should do if it wanted to move from good to outstanding was to broaden the children's outlook on the world.

A touch of the wintervals, I think.

From the OFSTED report-
"What does the school need to do to improve further? [ie- to move from good to outstanding]

 Extend pupils’ understanding of the cultural diversity of modern British society by creating opportunities for them to have first-hand interaction with their counterparts from different backgrounds beyond the immediate locality.
 Improve teaching and pupils’ achievement so they are consistently outstanding by: checking that no pupils are ever given work which is too easy or too hard for them
extending opportunities for teachers to develop their skills by learning from each other, or from teachers in other schools, about what works best to ensure pupils’ more rapid progress."

YANBU

That was the title of the article, Bertrand.

Bert thanks for reading that. I was going to but I'm a Celebrity is on.

Sorry, Totally- I know. I was responding to the previous poster. I thought it would be helpful to put something on for the benefit of anyone who doesn't want to read links.......,

Good call

Sorry for coming in late and going back, but people tend to use as examples of too much PC to compare individual cases (a rapist) with group cases (several rapists of the same group).
I think it is natural that some caution is applied when actual identifications have not been made and when there's the risk of entire groups of innocent people can be branded the same as the accused and put at risk.

Consider a country where whites are a minority and a group of white men are accused of rapes. Would you want all white men classified as rapists and a risk for the wider population?
Or would you appreciate that the media took some time to make sure they reported accurately that they were indeed all white, and that the individuals had been named, rather than blame the whole group they belonged to?
Would anyone like to be looked at with suspicion because of what other white males had done?

That is the problem when accusing groups and groups from minorities.

In western Europe, if a group of white men go on a sexual assault rampage, they tend to be talked about as "men", less so as "white men".
And people will continue to feel comfortable around the majority white men.

here's a good example

The fact that an allegedly respected newspaper can, without any apparent rebuttal, report a man as female is so Alice-in-Wonderland-Orwellian that I can barely get my head around it.

Oh, and recently the Rollerderby association in Australia ratified the whole 'transwomen are women' thing meaning that mixed sex (sorry, mixed gender teams can be stacked in favour of women with men's bodies. But, you know, still be fair.

Now, I don't play roller derby, so at least I'm not in danger of having a woman with a man's body slam into me at speed, but I can guess it would be unpleasant.