Offense Is Created In The Mind Of The Offended

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
This is a posting about “Freedom of Speech”. It will use some current events that are “offensive”. My position on them is NOT the subject of the posting. (In fact, I rarely care at all about emotionally overloaded issues. What usually interests me is the intellectual vacuousness of the arguments over what is, to me, mostly nothing. Welcome to the unemotive Aspe world…) So please don’t go trying to “project” some kind of “position” on me. I’m neither pro, nor anti, whatever it is folks will immagine.

The Point

Right there in the title. When people are “offended” by some symbol or other, that is an emotional state that they create inside their own head and for their own idiosyncratic reasons. It is neither rational, nor reasonable, to make any law, ruling, or policy based on “offense”.

The basic problem is that anyone can be offended by anything. The choice over which offense to elevate to a law, ruling, or policy then becomes a political football. It has no foundation in reason. No foundation in fact.

Yet we in the U.S.A. are busy getting all wrapped around the axle over various “offense” crimes. BTW, this is also why I find “Hate Speech” and “Hate Crimes” of all sorts absurd. How many crimes are committed from a pleasant warm and fuzzy point of view? Tacking “hate” on the front is only for the purpose of political elevation of some injured parties ahead of others. Does it really matter if a person was killed by a party that hated them, or just wanted them dispassionately dead? Does the emotion of someone change the degree of the crime? Frankly, I’d find the dispassionate sociopath killing a dozen folks more of a concern than one guy who hated another.

So with that said, some examples of, IMHO, the stupidity of making policy based on emotional state.


get all your flaggy triggers here boys and girls:


https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2015/...ed-in-the-mind-of-the-offended/#comment-62727
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Yep. Not only that but the "offendee" gives so much power to those they claim offense from. Why? Why would anyone give that much of their personal,power over to someone else? I don't understand that.
 

Ludlow

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 7, 2014
13,588
0
36
wherever i sit down my ars
I think people just talk too damn much. We analyze the flyin fvck out of anything under the sun next we'll ponder the reasons why some check out clerks seem more impatient with rude pricks than others do. And we'll try to sound intelligent doing so
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
People who offend others tend to get offended when they are called out for it.

Simply being offended is not the problem.

It's the context of the offense and whether or not we collectively choose to give it credence.
 
Last edited:

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,609
7,090
113
Washington DC
People who offend others tend to get offended when they are called out for it.

Simply being offended is not the problem.

It's the context of the offense and whether or not we collectively choose to give it credence.
True, but a little too complex for the bumper-sticker philosophy that passes for thought hereabouts.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
People who offend others tend to get offended when they are called out for it.

Simply being offended is not the problem.

It's the context of the offense and whether or not we collectively choose to give it credence.

The PC class tend to get offended and get their panties in a knot over the silliest things. Probably from taking too many touchy feely courses in school instead of learning how to work.
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
as flossy would say:



eh flossy? :lol:
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
People who offend others tend to get offended when they are called out for it.

Simply being offended is not the problem.

It's the context of the offense and whether or not we collectively choose to give it credence.

True, but a little too complex for the bumper-sticker philosophy that passes for thought hereabouts.
If the rest of us are too "Bourgeois" for you yuppies..........................................
You do have a choice..........