I have some questions for those of you whom embrace political correctness.

1) Do you not find it sad that certain movies, sitcoms, comedians would never have existed if the PC culture was present in their time? No Blazing Saddles, No All on The Family, No Don Rickles, just to name a few.

Doesn't this stifle creativity?
Who are you to say what's offensive or not? This is a neutral universe. There is no good: There is no bad.
Who are you to say who is vulnerable? Does this not perpetuate victimhood? Does this not create oversensitivity which ends up in breeding weakness?

2) Do you support PC in journalism? How can we get accurate information if it is filtered in this way?

1. Have you watched Smokey and the Bandit recently? It's totally cringe worthy, try watching it and see if that's really what you want entertainment to be. I don't think you understand what the point of All In The Family was, it was pointing out the racism in society and I believe it is being considered for a reboot, probably well due to continue this conversation. However, there is always going to be "edgy" comedy that pushes at the norms and shows the absurdity of society, that's what art does. Creativity isn't stifled by by constraints.

2. Can you show any good journalist who is unable to tell a story because of PC? How does not calling someone an offensive name prevent you from writing a story about them? You'll really need to give some hypotheticals because I'm not seeing how reporting on BLM is hampered by what you can call the protestors.

Love how the people calling 'PC Culture' Marxism have performed a lot of mental gymnastics to arrive at this conclusion but haven't considered applying this same line of thinking to xyz ideology they subscribe to.

1. Not a quality set of questions to people who understand art, satire, humor, creativity, neutrality, vulnerability, victims, sensitivity, and weakness beyond a range of political narratives.

2. I have never considered censoring the press and I have no basis in my values and principles to ever do so.

Comedians have a love/hate relationship with PC, just like they have with any other BS like politicians and religion. They hate it because it's BS, but they love it because they need to eat.

I ****ing miss Carlin, I'm sure he's cussing in his grave right now.

It's kind of funny that absurdity, exaggeration, and displaying faults dis-honestly is all easily considered correct in genuine humor. Just add politically and we are all set.

This idea that Blazing Saddles wouldn't get made today ignores that art is born within a cultural setting.

PC or not, Blazing Saddles doesn't get made today because the culture, the society that inspired it, is not the same.

The Sistine Chapel "doesn't get made" today because architecture's changed and Michelangelo's dead. That's how it works. You don't have to look far to find controversial, often inflammatory art. South Park's been flying the banner of "anything goes" for the past decade or two, and they're somewhere up with the most successful writing teams of all time, having had success on TV, film, and stage.

In the last couple of week's, a new BBC show called Revolting featured a sketch titled "The Real Housewives of ISIS", admittedly to much controversy and complaints, but it still aired and the show looks set to continue.

I'm not buying this idea that art is ruined because Blazing Saddles is no longer the scathing contemporary social commentary it once was and instead comes across as heavily dated.

UK's public broadcasting is PC gone mad...

You haven't shown why not being an ******* to people is BS.

Oh ****, that looks hilarious!

Whether or not it gets made to today is like an academic question fairly well lost in the wild when it comes to answers. Same goes of whether or not it is still relevant. An old theme can be new again.

Which is all great to opine about, so I am not arguing against your post, but adding the fact is that Blazing Saddles is not banned and still available where I am at in the PC-sphere, however one may find it relevant.

I am skeptical of the argument that Blazing Saddles couldn't be made today, regardless of what Mel Brooks thinks. There's nothing in it that seems problematic by current standards of political correctness. Someone pointed out Django Unchained and that seemed like a pretty good comparison to me.

Now, the M*A*S*H movie probably couldn't get made today.

The BBC is fairly good on being PC. It does ok at journalism and any faults dont seem related to being PC.

It's very rarely even an issue. Only time I can recall was over the Charlie Hebdo story.

Art is not ruined hy PC but it is limited. We will never know what programming we have potentially missed because studios didn't want to risk bring protested or boycotted.

People try too hard to deny this. PC isn't utopian - everything comes with a price.

We can be fairly sure we are missing out on some stuff because of PC. Some of this may have been exellent. Then again much of it may have been like The Jim Davidson Christmas special.

Even Mel Brooks doesn't think it would be made today!

I rewatched Revenge of the Nerds recently and it was pretty amazing how the heroes in the movie were constantly violating women--installing video cameras to spy on them, selling their nude pictures without consent, tricking them into sex under false pretenses.

I doubt that movie would get made as is today. That seems like a good thing.

"regardless of what Mel Brooks thinks"...

13ball: sure, I'm not skeptical of the idea that there are old movies that wouldn't be remade without revisions. I'm just skeptical that blazing saddles is one of them. It's not worth arguing too much about since there's not really any fair way to decide the question. But whatever I has opinions etc.

Porky's, now there was a riveting political commentary!

Revenge of the nerds was a great movie. How could it be a good thing if it wasn't made?

But we do know that you can get a scene titled "The Real Housewives of ISIS" on the UK's public broadcasting channel, so what the **** am I supposed to be scared of? The show also featured some street "pranks" where a guy pretended to be surveying for new ideas for UKIP policies, and had people talking about hanging immigrants.

This is just more of the typical "PC is preventing us from talking about X" where X is never ever defined.

The floppy javelin scene did an amazing job at targeting a couple different groups at once.

Over Christmas I watched a bit of an old British film called Carry On Camping. Similarly, the show featured a large amount of perving on women, men attempting to jovially cheat on their wives, and a generally uncomfortable attitude (like spying on unaware scantily clad women). In a really lame kind of slapstick, puns everywhere, way the Carry On films are still sort of watchable but I'm not really going to pretend it's a bad thing that we don't find the misogyny as hilarious any more.

To be fair, it was always ****

Any artist who quits because their art had an effect may be doing performance art.