What NOT to Say in a PC World

So you have the major items that draw debate: You can no longer say "retard" because it offends the mentally challenged individuals who process information at a slower than average rate. Fine. I'll agree to take offense.

My mom is no longer "Deaf." No, she hasn't miraculously regained her hearing, but sometime around 2001 she became "hearing impaired." Maybe because she was born with the disability, she deserves this PC title, but I don't hear any old-timers getting their panties in a bunch over losing their hearing and you know, going deaf, then being offended by it. Of course, are they demanding we call them age-impaired? But you get better with age, as many folks North of 40 spout religiously, so I guess age is not a PC hot topic.

Let's discuss race, then. Pick your race then tag -American at the end. I understand "Nigger" is a derogatory term for black people. But not when you're black and you're talking to someone black and you say the word as LAZILY AS POSSIBLE (i.e. niga, nicka, ne-ya). However, I can be labeled a food (cracker, for those of you not in the know) and have to accept that nickname? I can't even "retaliate" to your white reference by calling you black. Something you clearly ARE. I have to say you are African-American. Take a look around and count the number of black people that actually came from Africa or have parents that hailed from Africa. In most cases, you will find America born-and-bred for several generations. My great grandparents were from Germany. Does that make me German-American? Maybe. Do I say that? NO. I live in America and have never visited Germany-nor have my parents. Funny thing is, coming from the Southwest we are overrun with imports from Mexico. Kids, parents, grandparents, HUGE families come to the U.S.-legally and otherwise- for this so-called "better life" (pre-recession, of course). They actually have Mexican culture and heritage. They speak Spanish. They make authentic tamales and guac! They are most deserved of the title Mexican-American as a nice PC blend of their past and present culture. But, in my experience, Mexican's are so proud of their Mexican culture that they balk at any reference to being Americans. Mexicans have the audacity to drop the -American we so graciously grant them! What a slap in the PC face?!

How about religion? There's a nice non-PC topic. America was founded by folks searching for freedom from religious persecution (among other ideals). They included the clause that there should be a separation of Church and State (meaning, religion doesn't rule the Nation). However, we Pledge our Allegiance to "One Nation, Under God." I feel like there should be some sort of Venn Diagram or Flow Chart to help map this historical mindfuck.

My faith in Humanity only goes so far.

Now, we can't just opt out of saying the Pledge of Allegiance in our classrooms like reasonable, tolerant, mature and independent-thinking citizens. We have to FIGHT to get that nasty religious reference out. Forget time-honored tradition and harmless oaths. Then again, maybe Mexico has no such country oath and that's why so many beaners invade America? Now, I grew up saying the Pledge of Allegiance every morning in class for several years. Sometime around 4th grade, I was able to rationally question what I was saying and pledging to. Because I wasn't raised in a church-going family (single mother and all-GASP!), I knew of God and religion, but not much. I asked my mom. She believes in God and took me to a few different churches of varying Christian beliefs. I realized-FOR MYSELF- that God is a mythical being created by Man to rationalize life and death; the AfterLife is the belief that there is something more powerful than what we currently perceive thus creating a reason to live morally and ethically; and the Bible is a book of Old Wives Tales and fantastical stories created to inspire, teach, and mold how we shape our morals. I went back to school and continued to say the Pledge of Allegiance-as I loved my country and was proud to swear fealty- but I intentionally left out "Under God." Agree to disagree. And I was in 4th grade.

Why do we need to fight about this? If you are religious, then there is no problem saying "Under God" or having God printed on our currency. If you are not religious, then simply omit the words, do not say the Pledge at all, and don't use the money-pay for everything on your handy-dandy credit/debit card! Same for Creation vs Evolution. Let science teach, you know, SCIENCE-that which is based on FACT with evidentiary support- and teach Creation at home. Problem solved, now let's all get along.

Now, don't go thinking I'm the Anti-Christ and all because of my non-traditional views. I respect religion of all shapes, colors and sizes for how it teaches us to interact as decent human beings, and the strength and faith belief in a Higher Power can bring. There's peace and acceptance and love in religion that is very important on a fundamental level. 

religious extremist past (i.e. Branch Davidians near Waco, TX and Warren Jeffs FLDS Chruch in UT). Not everyone can be judge by the actions of everyone else in a similar group. That is called stereotyping. THAT is what is Politically Incorrect. 

In fact, comedy is the only time we should make light of stereotypes and ignorance because it brings to surface real issues. It allows people to laugh at one another-and at themselves-which allows a sense of unity that we ALL possess something that makes us difference, and that is okay. You have a funny accent, my skin is a different color, people of a certain age typically behave this way. Stereotypes are OKAY when everyone understand that they ARE IN FACT STEREOTYPES and not indicative of an entire race, age, culture, religion, lifestyle, gender, etc. We only have ourselves to blame when a stereotype is created and perpetuated.   It isn't laughing at a group of people who traditionally say, behave, eat, drink, or look a certain way that keeps the stereotype going. It's when a group of kids from New Jersey get a reality TV show that shows them with big hair, fake tans, hard bodies and wild accents boozing it up that creates and perpetuates the image of "Italian-Americans." It's the rap music video with drug and alcohol references, scantily-clad women dancing provocatively to lyrics making light violence, promiscuity, and illegal activities that perpetuates the stereotypical image of black teenagers who dress as if they were in that music video. It's Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie and Kim Kardashian who give bored rich girls a bad name. Stereotypes are funny because they are based on some kernal of truth. They are not PC at all, but they can give us great comedy:

And not so great comedy:

Oh, but it still isn't okay to do Black Face?

So when does a stereotype or comedic reference go too far? At what point do the civil liberties group and Advocates and varying I-Disagree-With-Everything-ers decide enough is enough and this is too offensive? 

When Christian Siriano, an openly gay male has to apologize to GLAAD for for his fierce catchphrase a "hot tranny mess" and likening trannies in the gay community to white trash in the heterosexual community? Was the transgendered  community really in that much of an uproar? More importantly, where were the Christian, redneck, white-trash, and heterosexual advocates outraged by being compared to trannies? The whole thing is absurd! (see: http://www.tvguide.com/news/Christian-Siriano-Offers-12020.aspx) 

Short people (vertically-challenged?) should not be called midgets. It's offensive. But Willy-Wonka can have Oompa Loompas-a bunch of short, orange people, running his chocolate factory. But if you call a short person an Oompa Loompa on the street, it's offensive. 

Actor Verne Troyer gained fame and notoriety by portraying "Mini-Me," the pint-sized version of Mike Meyers' character Dr. Evil. It's acceptable to call children "Mini-Me" as they are mini versions of their parents. But it's ignorant to refer to a short person as a miniature version of a full person. Even though that's EXACTLY what the movie did. And that garnered relatively low criticism from the short community. 

Also, I've yet to see Christmas boycotted for the overabundant use of short elves. 

Here's the latest issue to cause outrage: Stop Animation Film The Pirates! Band of Misfits offending leprosy campaigning groups. Please read this, because I cannot possibly go into more details without my head exploding from the absolute inanity of it. 

My honest question is why the Pirate community isn't more offended by their portrayal in this and other movies. 

Pictured: Pirate

Why stop at this family-friendly animation when there's more hard-hitting offenses out there in new cinema?Let's take a look at these new releases and why it upsets me that no one is picketing:

One For The Money starring Katherine Heigl has in it's very premise that working for a bail-bondsman is a last resort for the heroine. Member of PBUS (Professional Bail Agents of the United States) should be PISSED that this movie perpetuates the myth that bail agents are sleazy, uncouth, and unconventional jobs. If nothing else, Dog the Bounty Hunter should stand up for his chosen profession! 

Bail Enforcement Agents play a vital role in the economy and should be respected as the vigilante justice keepers they are!

The Grey stars Liam Neeson as a plane crash survivor in Alaska trying to stay alive in the wild as wolves hunt his intruding group. Goodness! Where do I even begin to be offended? First of all, PETA should be involved because this portrays wild animals behaving naturally in a natural, wild setting-which is detrimental to humans and will likely cause chaos and animosity toward these wild animals in their natural setting (re: Jaws). 

I'm surprised Sarah Palin hasn't spoke up to defend her great State. Travel Alaska, the State's official travel information and vacation source should be picketing against the movie's negative simulation of the Alaskan countryside. Surely, they take offense that this movie promotes Alaska as a wild and dangerous place that no one should dare travel to? 

Finally, there's the multi-billion dollar plane industry that should boycotting this movie and forcing a cease and desist of release because it clearly discriminates against air travel. Why couldn't it have been a cruise ship that left the oil miners stranded in Alaska instead of a plane crash? And let's not forget, according to USA Today, "Statistically speaking, flying is far safer than driving" (Don't believe me? CLICK HERE). 

This last one is a doozy. The poster and premise utilize perceived suicide as a possible option, although, it's not actually about a suicide, it's about the distraction of suicide to cover a much bigger, covert operation. Survivors of Suicide, a support group, should take offense to Man on a Ledge's chosen "distraction." Suicide is a serious problem plaguing the United States today with many youths and young adults seeing it as their only option rather than live with their everyday emotions and situation. Yet, this movie utilizes the possibility of a person killing themselves as a spectacle. I can't fathom how Leprosy Advocates can speak louder than Suicide Survivors and families affected by suicide. 

Also, I'm waiting for the Business Architects Association to speak up against the unfair portrayal of ledges as being unsafe. Because, let's face it, gravity kills people more often than ledge's do.