• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

over-sensi-sensitivity

Status
Not open for further replies.
buldog5151bass

buldog5151bass

Kibble, milkbones, and P Basses. And redheads.
Oct 22, 2003
26,728
70,221
Connecticut
bulldogbatsonline.com
#1
I know this is on the borders, but I don't see it as against the rules here. I read them, and I don't think this is either political, racially/culturally insensitive, or disrespectful in any manner. I am not asking why (because I don't want to venture into politics/religion/etc.), but I think as a society, we have gotten too sensitive. There are some things in the recent past in culture that today would not even see the light of day, and it's a shame:

1. Blazing Saddles would never have been made. The entire point of the movie was to point out double standards. Richard Pryor approved the move. But Mel Brooks and others have said that the movie would not be approved today. Not only was it %!#$^!-n funny, but made a point.

2. Lou Reed's "Walk on the Wild Side" - the lyric alone "and the colored girls go ..." would have prevented the song from getting released.

Any other examples?

Mods, if this does cross the line, my apologies.
 
#2
The folks complaining about others' oversensitivity are the ones being the most oversensistive, in my humble opinion. :p (And I predict an early death for this thread. Not that you went over the line, but close enough that someone surely will.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: murphy, GregC, P-oddz and 6 others
#3
This very subject was brought up recently on a media outlet in reference to the movie Animal House (one of my favorites).

I think political correctness and sensitivity are interchangeable.

My answer to the question is YES absolutely. It's very hard if not impossible to reverse. Lighten the hell up people and stop worrying about everyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Munjibunga
#5
There is a rise in sensitivity, but it's paired with the rise of equality and fairness too. It's all really somewhat new, the inclusion of different sexes, races, sexual orientation, etc. So I think some of it is growing pains.


The outrageous over-sensitivity over other's perceived over-sensitivity is the most annoying. It's perfectly fine to disagree over how much is too sensitive (the thread about women being referred to as girls), but some go way over the top. But of course some are just looking to be offended as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GregC, yodedude2 and FilterFunk
#7
blue4 said:
There is a rise in sensitivity, but it's paired with the rise of equality and fairness too. It's all really somewhat new, the inclusion of different sexes, races, sexual orientation, etc. So I think some of it is growing pains.


The outrageous over-sensitivity over other's perceived over-sensitivity is the most annoying. It's perfectly fine to disagree over how much is too sensitive (the thread about women being referred to as girls), but some go way over the top. But of course some are just looking to be offended as well.
Click to expand...
^I agree 100%.
 
#11
buldog5151bass said:
I know this is on the borders, but I don't see it as against the rules here. I read them, and I don't think this is either political, racially/culturally insensitive, or disrespectful in any manner. I am not asking why (because I don't want to venture into politics/religion/etc.), but I think as a society, we have gotten too sensitive. There are some things in the recent past in culture that today would not even see the light of day, and it's a shame:

1. Blazing Saddles would never have been made. The entire point of the movie was to point out double standards. Richard Pryor approved the move. But Mel Brooks and others have said that the movie would not be approved today. Not only was it %!#$^!-n funny, but made a point.

2. Lou Reed's "Walk on the Wild Side" - the lyric alone "and the colored girls go ..." would have prevented the song from getting released.

Any other examples?

Mods, if this does cross the line, my apologies.
Click to expand...
Oh boy (man?), I don't think this will last long. Your post isn't breaking any rules, but I do predict early heat death for this thread.

My contribution to the thread:
Plenty of Looney Tunes episodes. I mean the early ones of the 40s. They used to rip on African-American folks hard. I'd post links, but that could get me in trouble. So just google "all this and rabbit stew", at your own risk. No way that stuff would fly today. Funny as all can get, but the underlying tones of the cartoon would get shot down fast today. Looney Tunes as it were back then no longer exists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yodedude2, buldog5151bass and slobake
#12
twinjet said:
Oh boy (man?), I don't think this will last long. Your post isn't breaking any rules, but I do predict early heat death for this thread.

My contribution to the thread:
Plenty of Looney Tunes episodes. I mean the early ones of the 40s. They used to rip on African-American folks hard. I'd post links, but that could get me in trouble. So just google "all this and rabbit stew", at your own risk. No way that stuff would fly today. Funny as all can get, but the underlying tones of the cartoon would get shot down fast today. Looney Tunes as it were back then no longer exists.
Click to expand...
My parents had a book that was a collection of New Yorker cartoons from the pre-war era. I would say 90% or more of it wouldn't fly today, and it wasn't just African-Americans catching flack. I distinctly remember feeling uncomfortable (being 1/4 Irish) with one that showed a snow-shoveling crew with a big Irish guy that was already down into the dirt - the foreman yells out "Just the fluffy white stuff on top, McNamara!" Ouch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yodedude2
#13
As for your overriding question, the simple answer is a resounding yes. We have become too sensitive.

Where I think I would probably cross the line is the examples that first come to mind. So I won't....because people are too sensitive. It's the circle of life. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: tfer
#14
I'm not so sure I would use the term overly sensitive, but I think it is appropriate.
What I see are people more concerned about their own personal rights than the big picture.
Instead of finding common ground for the whole, people are insisting what is good for them be acknowledged/accepted.
It's tough for me to express this in a few sentences. Right about now would be a good time for a big 'ole GTG to discuss.

-Mike
 
#15
Rudyard Kipling had some archaic turns of phrase. No surprise, since he was writing from the perspective of a British colonial master in about 1895. Mark Twain also used language we don't use these days. Huckleberry Finn made some pretty clear points, even with all the language we wouldn't like so much now. Historic perspective and understanding the message is more important than the specific words in some instances.

In other instances, words are what they are and if you use the wrong ones at the wrong time, you just suck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: murphy, yodedude2 and hrodbert696
#20
I don't know, is Blazing Saddles that much different from, say, South Park? That's still being made (I think).

The Lou Reed example is an interesting one as it kind of has a foot in both old and new worlds.

The world is changing and people seem to feel various different ways about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hrodbert696 and fretter
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back