Freddie wrote:To play Devil's advocate, that is a bit of an oversimplification. Sure, there are plenty of Daily Mail readers who are likely full of contempt for the "other" just because they are other, but are they not at least somewhat of a (over)reaction to the politically correct Guardian readers and columnists who seem to say (if not necessarily overtly) that you can never criticise immigrants, brown people, women et al for to do so would be, de facto, racist, sexist, bigoted and so on. Many would sooner lynch their first born son, than criticise someone from what they consider a victimised group.
Just look at the recent Sir Tim Hunt situation for an example of relatively timid criticism, now known to be part of a longer joke that didn't go fully reported, which has caused all kinds of trouble for the man because he criticised the wrong group of people and expressed unfashionable opinions (even though only part of an ironic joke). This kind of furious censorial attitude I find no less distasteful than the fury exhibited by the Daily Mail readership. I suppose at least with the Daily Mail lot, you know where you stand; with the politically correct social engineers, the whole point seems to be you never quite know when you have said something verboten, for the goal posts are always moving. One who doesn't purvey forever changing, socially acceptable ideas in the right way is labelled a bigot and summarily torn to shreds, purely through their ignorance of the latest fashions, rather than through any real malice on their part.
People say that, but I've found in my 40 odd years that I don't come a cropper if I follow some fairly simple rules - 1. Don't slag off groups for the actions or perceived attributes of individuals; 2. Don't be a tit; 3. Don't assume everyone ought to be like you; 4. Don't use people's attributes as a basis for humour at their expense.
