I found political correctness to be a horrible ideology. I did not have the intellectual arguments to confront it at the time; but I do now. I will write now about how wrong political correctness is.

Their central claim is that they are building tolerance. Whether or not that actually is their goal, they are going about it in a completely wrong way. Tolerance is not something that you force through a party line. Tolerance is something that people
develop for one another when they find out where one another is coming from. That requires them to understand their actual opinions, however offensive these may be. And if people are not allowed to express their actual opinions, they never understand one
another's perspective, and then they cannot have for one another real tolerance or real respect.


Instead people have been taught to be insincere. And insincerity is a horrible thing to inflict upon a population. It makes Americans look to everyone else like scammers. Even I could not escape that stereotype when I went to Australia. Imagine how much
worse it is for born Americans

I wrote a refutation of the central claims of political correctness.

Claim: The Western civilization is the root of oppression of women.
Answer: In the non-Western Muslim civilization, the situation is far worse than it has ever been in the West.

Claim: Western literary and cultural legacy is patriarchial / racist.
Answer: You obviously haven't read Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Mary Shelley, Marina Tsvetayeva, Dorothy Parker, Walt Whitman or Mark Twain.

Claim: Men see women as sex objects.
Answer: Some men do. As someone said on the Internet, women see men as success objects. I see no reason to see either one as better than the other.

Claim: Sexual industry is the root of exploitation and disrespectful treatment of women.
Answer: Afghanistan, Congo and Bosnia during the war did not have sex industry, but they've had mass rapes. Women have it much better in Netherlands or San Francisco than they do in these places.

Claim: Social or personal problems are rooted in low self-esteem.
Answer: If that had been true, then for the bulk of recorded history, in which self-esteem was not encouraged, nothing good could have happened. Many good things happened in all societies, whether or not they believed in self-esteem. As was once told me
by a woman from World War II generation, self-esteem used to be called conceit, and her generation was in no way a failure.

Claim: Abuse of women is committed by men with personality disorders.
Answer: In most of the world - and in much of America - abuse of women is the social norm. It is not committed by "sociopaths" or "borderlines" or "narcissists"; it is committed by your average Joe, Igor, Abdul, Praveem or Jamaal who believes that real
men beat women, or that love is for sissies, or that he owes it to God or to other men to keep women down.

Claim: Beauty is only relative or culturally dependent.
Answer: In a study that was conducted by an American woman - Judith Langlois - it was found that a face with a particular set of proportions was regarded as beautiful by everyone. Actual beauty - such as the Sistine Chapel or the Burmese stupas or the
works of Anna Akhmatova - takes talent and effort to produce and deserves respect.

Claim: Physical beauty and inner beauty are incompatible with each other. Answer: I see no reason at all why attractiveness and being a good person would correlate one way or another. There will be people possessing of both, either or neither. This idea allows the women who have neither to attack and abuse women who have
either or both.

Claim: Beauty is a patriarchial institution that destroys women's self-esteem. Answer: That some people are stupid does not mean that people can't be intelligent, and that some people are poor does not mean that people can't be wealthy. We are all endowed with different gifts, and we do different things by way of developing or not
developing them.

Claim: Love is a patriarchial racket.
Answer: Many of the people who championed love in the West - and in any number of other places - were women, and not stupid or weak ones either. A man who champions love is far less likely to be ugly to his woman than either a traditional man who
believes that real men beat women, or the "rational" man who believes that anything with emotions is an inferior form of life.

Claim: Love is narcissism.
Answer: Love worked out for many people in World War II generation. The World War II generation - unlike the baby boomers - have not been accused of generational narcissism. It has been practiced successfully by people who were in no way narcissistic, so
it is not narcissism.

Claim: Relationships should be about equality.
Answer: I see no reason why they should be. Most relationships are not about equality nor will they be about equality, however much you seek to put human nature under a Marxist mold.

Claim: Anyone who takes objection to political correctness is a misogynist. Answer: Crying wolf discredits you when the real wolf appears. The Ayatollah is a misogynist. I am not.

Claim: Anyone who takes objection to political correctness is a sociopath. Answer: This is a Soviet trick. They too diagnosed with untreatable disorders people who disagreed with their party line.

Claim: "Sociopaths" and "perverts" are evil and can only be evil whatever they do.
Answer: This contradicts most basic reason. If people are responsible for their actions then anyone, including a "sociopath,"can act rightfully; and if some people cannot act rightfully then people are not responsible for their actions.

Claim: Male perspective is by nature destructive.
Answer: Tell that to Mohandas Gandhi.

Claim: Women who are pretty or nice are sellouts to men.
Answer: Gender war is not the solution, gender war is the problem. The solution is for men to be good to women and for women to be good to men. I am not a sellout to women because I refuse to let Michael Murphy speak for me.

I did a major in psychology and economics and a minor in mathematics. I also wrote a column for the university publication called The University Journal. Some of my work was incendiary – deliberately so – and I got both friends and enemies. I also
got involved with Amway. Then I started a political organization and got involved with a number of politically minded students.

Then I went on the Internet. At first I was fighting with everyone, and everyone hated me. Then I made a joke of the whole thing and started making fun of the ads. At that point people started liking me. I finished the place with a measure of good will.

I made friends with a policeman named Sergeant Michaels. During the summer there were people streaking the Lawn, and I enjoyed the view of them. There was another police officer who tried to crack down on that, and I said that he was running “Operation
Asshole.”

During my last few months there, I made friends with a graduate student named Doug Chambers. He was gay but very macho and was riding a motorcycle wearing a black jacket. We put together a newsletter named “4 AM Free Press” to expose some corruption
that was taking place at the university

I decided to finish the place in two years, and I did. It was my alternative to dropping out. I ended up finishing University of Virginia at age 18 and going straight into the computer industry.

https://sites.google.com/site/ilyashambatbiography

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)