Civil Language By Speakers

[ninetyninepercent]

The politicians and national figures who want to work together in securing the interests of the 99% do not want to share a platform or decision-making with speakers who can only express themselves through profanity.

 

At tonight's G.A., a proposal that any speaker who uses an obscenity be instantly disallowed from speaking for the remainder of that G.A. would do the movement a world of good in public perception if enacted immediately.

 

Remember, the world is now watching our live-streams. And they want to see that we are making level-headed decisions. 

[Billy]

     This is a political process it is not play time in the local kindergarten. There is no reason for anyone not emotional developed enough to deal with our language in all of it's color and complexity to be present.

 

     This feels like control and attempted assertion of will. People should be able to speak using what ever words they feel appropriate to express what they are trying to express. We are not here to tell people how to speak.

 

    That being said we have agreed to be able to have some agreed to policies about what people speak on and procedural stuff to make things fair for all. Making things fair for all and making things palatable to all are not one in the same. Political correctedness is a form of censorship in my opinion.

 

     If someone wants to say I think you guys are fucking awesome I have no issue with that and would oppose anyone that wanted to try and censor that opinion much less everything else that person has to say.

 

     One the other hand if someone wants to get up and spew hateful violence provoking language using acceptable politically correct words I have issue with that.

 

     We are not going to change this corrupt system if we are worrying about or trying to please the people that are still consumed by it. The people that are awake are and the ones that aren't, aren't. Yes members of the sleeping masses are waking up every day but when they do then they are ready. If however we try to cater to their needs instead of bringing them over to our perspective I think we will just turn this movement into a carbon copy of the existing system. That is what political correctedness is and it's self-censorship.

 

     Honestly if someone is not able to set aside a slight uncomfortable feel regarding colorful language to stop genocide and slavery then maybe they aren't ready for this movement. In my opinion one of the main things that brings us together is the feeling that we are fed up with people using pretty words to justify atrocities. Anyone looking for a charismatic person to speak eloquently and say lots of nice pretty inspiring things but turn around and commit murder and genocide and slavery and oppression in your name then I say just vote within the frame work of the current US political system cause that is what it gets you.

 

     A general rule of thumb people speaking truth don't typically go out of their way to pretty up language and make things sound nice and agreeable. Making language pretty and attractive is a product of marketing. I understand that we have been raised to be consumers and marketing is all we understand but we need to look beyond that.

 

     Typically if someone is telling you what you want to hear and their words sound very pretty and well thought out there is a good chance that language was chosen specifically to manipulate you to act in a certain way and typically that action would not be the same had you looked into the truth of the matter and come to your own conclusion. That is precisely why the time was invested in selecting the language.

 

     I have no issue with anyone asking others to try and not use profanity as long as you don't have any issue with them not obeying your will or asking you to use it. I strongly oppose any punitive measure to try and control people or the process. This process is about all inclusiveness and pulling people together and encouraging freedom. The action that is proposed here is exclusive and divisive.

[ninetyninepercent]

All voices should be heard, and neither people nor their ideas should be discriminated against for their particular flavor of language.

 

However, many families will not participate in arenas where profane language erupts in call and response format once every ten minutes.

Whether politically incorrect or not, meetings for deciding and proposing legislation of 300 million Americans shouldn't preclude people who think that profane moderators do a disservice to the discussion.

[blacklite911]

Maybe a mandate that the speaker be silenced is a little too harsh. And we don't even need a proposal for this; maybe just ask when people speak they keep language in mind unless they feel that the particular language is necessary. Speakers are generally adults and, by way of living life, have learned how to adjust their language according to their environment.

[Billy]

just an additional point: The NYC live stream hands out F-bombs like they are candy on Halloween. They do so even during mid day hours. It does not seem to be hurting their ability to gain support.