Offended? - I Don't Believe It
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
Believe me Steve R, nothing you have said so far is common sense in the slightest. You just seem pissed off and bewildered that people dare to be offended by the use of racist language. For some reason you've chosen this forum to vent this.
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
I've chosen this forum because I've been a member here for a few years and have made over nine hundred posts.
Bearing that in mind, why would I not choose this forum?
Bearing that in mind, why would I not choose this forum?
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
I am, of course, aware of that.
It pleases me too, as I am also a non-racist.
It pleases me too, as I am also a non-racist.
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
Well I suppose you can choose this forum if you want. I'm new here and have noticed your last few posts have had racist connotations, seems you have a chip on your shoulder about this whole subject. By the way don't mistake me for some PC nut who gets all offended by the term black board instead of chalk board or anything, I just believe there are certain things that are simply designed to spread racial hatred and I won't let things like that just pass by without me getting my 2 cents in.
-
Sam Slater
- Posts: 11624
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
!laugh! Always liked the word 'divvy'.
I'm not debating the words used to offend, just the tendency to be offended. Again, I think we differ in our views and there are no definite guidelines.
Thinking about it another way:
If I call 2 different people the same obscenity, with only one being offended and the other indifferent, what's caused the offence? The person that was offended, or the obscenity used?
The offended could blame the word, but the indifferent and the offender would point to the offended. While the offender could blame the offended, but the offended pointing out it was the indifferent person was not offended enough, and that being offended to that particular obscenity is the correct emotive response.
There is the dilemma where there is no black and white. An offender is only an offender depending on the offenders response. Harping back to my previous assumption that it takes two people for an offensive remark to offend somebody.
The fault lies with all parties in some circumstances. Where this breaks down is the purposed intent to offend, or the intent to seem offended.
Intent to offend is wrong, as is the intent to act offended. The first is to depict superiority over the other, while the second is to deflect genuine criticism by becoming offended (Religion fall into this particular category). They gain a social advantage through deceit. Both instances are prevalent in society still because there still is a small advantage to be gained. Both must have been strong ploys for social or financial benefit in our past, and it still exists.
The ability to express/hide your real intent is the ultimate precursor to what follows at the social, interactive level between the two parties.
Whatever, apologies & politeness is usually the key to getting along happily!
I'm not debating the words used to offend, just the tendency to be offended. Again, I think we differ in our views and there are no definite guidelines.
Thinking about it another way:
If I call 2 different people the same obscenity, with only one being offended and the other indifferent, what's caused the offence? The person that was offended, or the obscenity used?
The offended could blame the word, but the indifferent and the offender would point to the offended. While the offender could blame the offended, but the offended pointing out it was the indifferent person was not offended enough, and that being offended to that particular obscenity is the correct emotive response.
There is the dilemma where there is no black and white. An offender is only an offender depending on the offenders response. Harping back to my previous assumption that it takes two people for an offensive remark to offend somebody.
The fault lies with all parties in some circumstances. Where this breaks down is the purposed intent to offend, or the intent to seem offended.
Intent to offend is wrong, as is the intent to act offended. The first is to depict superiority over the other, while the second is to deflect genuine criticism by becoming offended (Religion fall into this particular category). They gain a social advantage through deceit. Both instances are prevalent in society still because there still is a small advantage to be gained. Both must have been strong ploys for social or financial benefit in our past, and it still exists.
The ability to express/hide your real intent is the ultimate precursor to what follows at the social, interactive level between the two parties.
Whatever, apologies & politeness is usually the key to getting along happily!
[i]I used to spend a lot of time criticizing Islam on here in the noughties - but things are much better now.[/i]
Re: Offended? - I Don't Believe It
Reserve it for as long as you like; it is not required.