On Sunday 04 Oct 2009 11:12:11 am Kiran K Karthikeyan wrote:
>  if your audience is composed entirely of rednecks, you wouldn't
> go around calling them rednecks.

Ah - I see the logic. If your audience is composed of breasts you wouldn't go 
around referring to them as breasts?

If you were a redneck yourself among fellow  rednecks you would not have such 
thoughts. The idea that you are different from them is what provokes the 
thought  "Ah - a group of rednecks. Therefore I must not tell them that on 
their faces"

If I am addressing a group of women I would not want to say "Good evening to 
this lovely gathering of pairs of breasts"

The reason of course has nothing to do with political correctness. It is more 
about what my mind has been taught to consider as "political correctness" 
rightly or wrongly. It is the fact that I am not seeing this group of people 
as fellow humans but as women - more specifically pairs of breasts/boobs and 
I don't want to let that become obvious in a prudish and insincere denial of 
sexuality. I then pretend that I am not thinking what I am thinking by 
avoiding even an edgewise reference to my real thoughts.

The unconscious mind is being shown up in a statement. The pink elephant 
appears. If one sees women subconsciously as pairs of luscious breasts, one 
is more likely to balk at talking breasts lest one's mind be revealed 
assuming that it has been drilled into you that one must not talks breasts 
with women. 

That latter drilling/indoctrination is the problem that I am talking about. 
The Victorian prudery that I grew up with is alive and healthy.

shiv



Reply via email to