Donate SIGN UP

Are We Becoming A Nation Of Neurotics?

Avatar Image
naomi24 | 12:56 Sat 05th Sep 2020 | Society & Culture
41 Answers
John Cleese has said, “PC stuff started out as a good idea, which is, ‘Let’s not be mean to people’, and I’m in favour of that despite my age,” “The main thing is to try to be kind. But that then becomes a sort of indulgence of the most over-sensitive people in your culture, the people who are most easily upset.”

He continued: “I don’t think we should organise a society around the sensibilities of the most easily upset people because then you have a very neurotic society.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-cleese-political-correctness-comedy-woke-bbc-fawlty-towers-a9702986.html

Should we be treading on eggshells in order to indulge those who are most easily upset - or who claim to be?

Your thoughts?
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 41rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
To judge from many of these posts, it would seem so
11:05 Tue 08th Sep 2020
Question Author
//I think the vast majority of people have neither the time or the inclination to get involved in such attention-seeking flummery,//

Really? Inclination or not, the majority of them think about whether it's right to call a black man 'black' or 'coloured' - or whether it's right to call a man dressed up as a woman 'he' or 'she' - even though we know he is a he. That's what's happening - it has become endemic - we all do it - and that is the point John Cleese is making.
I agree with him to a point, but he seems a little neurotic about it himself. It's all subjective, if something upsets you (to nobody specific), then you are rationally annoyed, have morals and have a genuine point. If it upsets someone else, they are a neurotic snowflake. It's like irregular verbs... just depends on your own view. Most people get annoyed or upset about something or other.
naomi - // //I think the vast majority of people have neither the time or the inclination to get involved in such attention-seeking flummery,//

Really? Inclination or not, the majority of them think about whether it's right to call a black man 'black' or 'coloured' - or whether it's right to call a man dressed up as a woman 'he' or 'she' - even though we know he is a he. That's what's happening - it has become endemic - we all do it - and that is the point John Cleese is making. //

I don;t agree - i think the media merely make it appear that way, which is easy enough to do.

If you tell people often enough that something is so, they will believe it, but repetition does not make a minority into a majority.
pixie - // It's all subjective, if something upsets you (to nobody specific), then you are rationally annoyed, have morals and have a genuine point. If it upsets someone else, they are a neurotic snowflake. It's like irregular verbs... just depends on your own view. Most people get annoyed or upset about something or other. //

That's true, but i think the point Mr Cleese is addressing is the increasingly naval-gazing approach to actively looking for things to be upset about - often on behalf of others with whom we have no connection whatsoever - and then getting disproportionaly wound up about it.

The nonsense of Adele's recent 'cutural appropration' - which surprisngly did not crop up on here - is absolutely a case in point.

I believe that if you are using the term 'cultural appropriation' in any sentence other than one along the lines of "Cultural approprition is a manufactured nonsense designed to give people with too much time on their hands something to get in a tizzy about ...", then you need to have a look at how you are spending your valuable time making a fool of yourself to other people.

That's not because 'cultural appropreiation' is something I disagree with - it's because it is entirely manufactured out of thin air in order to find things to be upset about, on behalf of people who, if they care, are perfecly capable of being upset under rtheir own steam, and saying so.
Question Author
AH, //i think the media merely make it appear that way//

The media certainly encourage it - but they're not making it up. I don't believe you wouldn't consider appropriate wording when referring to black people, for example, and even on here we were asked not to refer to men dressed as women as 'he'. That is what's happening.
Question Author
AH at 17:18 Sun, people finding things to get upset about isn't the issue. We know that happens. The issue is how the rest of us respond to it - and how willingly we concede to it.
naomi - // AH, //i think the media merely make it appear that way//

The media certainly encourage it - but they're not making it up. I don't believe you wouldn't consider appropriate wording when referring to black people, for example, and even on here we were asked not to refer to men dressed as women as 'he'. That is what's happening. //

I think human nature is to get vexed about some things, not many, and not much, and I think the media do, as you say, encourage it, but i think there is a difference between accurately assessing something, and amplifying it because it sells papers.
The survival of the fittest with politeness and empathy.
The punishment should fit the crime for those that veer from decent behaviour.
naomi - // AH at 17:18 Sun, people finding things to get upset about isn't the issue. We know that happens. The issue is how the rest of us respond to it - and how willingly we concede to it. //

I still believe that the majority see this for what it is - an aspect of society, but by no means a major shift if thinking and attitudes.

I think that common sense is a great leveller, and because a load of London-centric twitfaces make noises about nothing does not mean that the rest of us will take charge if something important comes along.

The restoration of Rule Britania to the Proms is an excellent example of a load of navel-gazing ninnies being overuled by people who actually matter - the British public.
Question Author
AH, This isn't about newspapers. It's about society's reaction to the delicate sensitivities of the so-called 'Woke'.
david small - // The punishment should fit the crime for those that veer from decent behaviour. //

The most apt punishment for the twitfaces would be to simply remove the attention they so desperately crave every minute of the day.
naomi - // AH, This isn't about newspapers. It's about society's reaction to the delicate sensitivities of the so-called 'Woke'. //

Speaking personally, I only know what the term means, and have only ever seen it disuccsed, in the newspapers I am referring to.

Over in real life, very few people actually care.

The concept has figureheads in Harry and Megan, but otherwise, it would be seen as what it is, minority attention-seeking pap.
Question Author
AH, //Over in real life, very few people actually care. //

And you know that how? Perhaps you missed all the policemen, and public figures, and all sorts of people - including many on here - who 'took the knee' (stupid expression) in the wake of the George Floyd killing and in support of the BLM movement.
Naomi - // AH, //Over in real life, very few people actually care. //

And you know that how? Perhaps you missed all the policemen, and public figures, and all sorts of people - including many on here - who 'took the knee' (stupid expression) in the wake of the George Floyd killing and in support of the BLM movement. //

For every person who 'took the knee' and yes it is a stupid expression, and an even more stupid attention-seeking gesture - there are a thousand more who didn't; and wouldn't.

The only reason why you and I know about anyone 'taking the knee' is because they do it in front of a tv or newspaper camera, which makes it appear more important, and this is the point - more prevalent, than it actually is.

It was, and is, a short-term attention-seeking piece of self-righteousness, and as shown by the Premier League, taking the log off players' shirts almost as fast as they put it on - it has not real lasting impact.

Novelty doesn't last, never has and never will.
Question Author
AH, Whatever any of it was or is society in general concedes to political correctness because it it expected and demanded. You clearly disagree but thanks for your input.
‘society in general concedes to political correctness because it it expected and demanded’

Is it? Really? Expected and demanded by whom?
Question Author
Read the link.
Last night I watched a Midsomer Murders that I hadn't seen before, from 2018 I think, In it a rugby team in the Home Counties perform a haka as they have a NZ owner. Is this not 'cultural appropriation' as none of them were Maori, in fact as few of the NZ team are Maori isn't it the same for them?
In my youth I wore what were called gypsy blouses, I cook curry, pasta, chilli etc., how many rules have I broken?
As usual taking something to the extreme, think manhole covers, blackboards, BLM and so on, diminishes any genuine problems they're supposed to be highlighting.
To judge from many of these posts, it would seem so
zebo - // In my youth I wore what were called gypsy blouses, I cook curry, pasta, chilli etc., how many rules have I broken? //

That would be none.

Unfortunately, social media has given everyone a voice, including those whose voices would be far better unheard.

The false sense of entitlement that the concept offers, soon expands into the notion that anyone can say what is right or wrong for everyone else, which of course is patent nonsense.

What I, you, and I am sure the majority of people do, is simply take lots of no notice of twitfaces aggrandising themselves to each other - it passes the time for them, and had no real and lasting effect on anyone else.

21 to 40 of 41rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Are We Becoming A Nation Of Neurotics?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.