Easily Offended

[Nyoibo]

Actually insensitivity, or a lack of morals and understanding of empathy, lead to violence, abuse, and in some cases murder.

Except the insensititve one is usually the one who is on the recieving end of the violence, usually because they say something insensitive to someone who is overlysensitive and they react by lashing out.

[violetyoshi]

Except the insensititve one is usually the one who is on the recieving end of the violence, usually because they say something insensitive to someone who is overlysensitive and they react by lashing out.

Shouldn't that then motivate the insensitive person to be more sensitive, rather than demanding their right to be less. Wouldn't the insensitive person want to learn how to be a better person, and hurt less people?

[the_std]

Shouldn't that then motivate the insensitive person to be more sensitive, rather than demanding their right to be less.

Getting attacked is rarely good motivation to change one's ways or habits. Why would I want to be more sensitive if the people who are more sensitive are the ones who are lashing out?

[Nyoibo]

Shouldn't that then motivate the insensitive person to be more sensitive, rather than demanding their right to be less. Wouldn't the insensitive person want to learn how to be a better person, and hurt less people?

Getting attacked is rarely good motivation to change one's ways or habits. Why would I want to be more sensitive if the people who are more sensitive are the ones who are lashing out?

Exactly, now ask yourself, if I was to use that same arguement for women getting raped, would you accept that, that they should dress more conservatively so they don't tempt men?

[Lace Neil Singer]

Plus, being oversensitive is NOT a good thing. As you go thru life, you have to understand that people are in no way obliged to be nice to you or to censor themselves for you.

[Slytovhand]

Slyt, so called "true life" movies are very rarely entirely true to life, and in any case, you're probably misunderstanding what I'm meaning anyway. I'm used to it by now. In any case, I highly doubt that a person committed a murder solely due to them gaining a thicker skin when the main factors behind murders are sex, money or anger. Or possibly all three.

WHAT???? :shock:

True life movies aren't entirely true to life??? Since when????????





But I think we're probably more debating semantics here. Is the school mass murderer developing a spine? Or just acting out of anger? How closely are the 2 related? (that's all I was pointing out... often times, it takes getting angry to develop said spine, tis all. So, I'd say it's an unhealthy way to toughen up!)

[Lace Neil Singer]

Nope, that's still anger; and probably psychological illness behind it, too. Murder rarely springs out of a vaccum... and school shootings are nowhere near as common as the media would have you believe. If they were, they would no longer be news.

[violetyoshi]

Getting attacked is rarely good motivation to change one's ways or habits. Why would I want to be more sensitive if the people who are more sensitive are the ones who are lashing out?

To defend yourself. It's easier than taking a martial arts class. They're not lashing out, they are trying to explain themselves to you. You see it as lashing out, because you don't like the idea that people in this world have a right to have compassion.

Exactly, now ask yourself, if I was to use that same arguement for women getting raped, would you accept that, that they should dress more conservatively so they don't tempt men?

That's off topic, and besides the point. It's as simple as not using a word, why is that so difficult for people to learn how to do?

Plus, being oversensitive is NOT a good thing. As you go thru life, you have to understand that people are in no way obliged to be nice to you or to censor themselves for you.

Being insensitive also is not a good way to go through life, people will see you as uncaring, and having a lack of morals.

Perhaps I should just report every post using the term retard derogatorily to a mod and let them handle it. It's like dealing with stubborn bratty children, who want their right to say a bad word. Don't most people get past the, bad language is so cool, stage after the teenage years?

[RecoveringKinkoid]

That's off topic, and besides the point. It's as simple as not using a word, why is that so difficult for people to learn how to do?

Actually, I thought it was a brilliant point. To suggest that someone should be careful of what they say lest they tempt someone to lose control and lash out at them is as crazy as saying a rape victim "asked for it" or that a domestic abuse victim "pushed the spouse to it."

While I dislike the word as much as you do, I don't have a right to never see or hear it. I do not have a right to be always shielded from offense. I suppose you could go crying to a mod everytime you see something that offends you, but if the forum is THAT offensive to you, why hang out here? You have every right to find like minded people around you to talk to...but you have no right to insist any exsisting group of people conform to your standards. You kind of have to accept a certain amount of give and take in any group.

People want to say it. You don't want them to. They continue to say it, you continue to fight it. Stubborn runs both ways.

[Lace Neil Singer]

My answer to anyone who constantly whines and cries about being offended on a message board is this; if you want the forum run your own way, then feel free to make one of your own, with your own rules and only have people there who will nod their heads sycophantically to everything you say. Then you won't have to deal with horrible meanypants who keep *gasp!* refusing to bend over backwards so they don't hurt your liddle pwecious feelings.

[guywithashovel]

This reminds me of something people often say in regards to politics. And that is that "the truth is always somewhere in the middle." Regardless of whether or not that is true, I think that principle can be applied to this situation.

On one hand, it is necessary to be courteous and thoughtful and try not to upset other people. However, if it gets to where people are getting upset over words that are actually quite innocuous, and people are constantly having to update their language so that they can use alternative words that don't offend the easily offended people, then the situation has gone overboard. Also, if people are expected to walk on eggshells around certain people because of their various issues and insecurities, then there is a problem.

A couple summers ago in grad school, I took an ethics class. There was a woman in there whose son had Cerebral Palsy. I'm not kidding, she literally expected the world to come to a halt for him. I know this because of the stories she told during class discussions. If she went somewhere in public, and they didn't have the types of accommodations that SHE thought were necessary (and not just the ones that were required), she would start giving people static. Also, she would get snippy with anyone else in the class if they talked about disability issues, because apparently no one else except her could possibly comprehend the issues that disabled (or differently-abled) people face.



Long story short, find a comfortable middle ground.

[Pedersen]

Emphasis added by me:

Except the insensititve one is usually the one who is on the recieving end of the violence, usually because they say something insensitive to someone who is overlysensitive and they react by lashing out.

To defend yourself. It's easier than taking a martial arts class. They're not lashing out, they are trying to explain themselves to you. You see it as lashing out, because you don't like the idea that people in this world have a right to have compassion.

violetyoshi, it's not just lashing out. It's the infliction of physical harm by the oversensitive on the undersensitive/insensitive. As such, this quote:

Exactly, now ask yourself, if I was to use that same arguement for women getting raped, would you accept that, that they should dress more conservatively so they don't tempt men?

is very apropros, and your response:

That's off topic, and besides the point.

is an attempt to change the semantics of the debate. Someone is made the victim of violence due to something about the victim. Words, sexual orientation, gender, religious group, race, and too many other things can all be listed in a similar fashion. Let's make it a nicely generic question:

Since <person> is <X, where X is one of the groups above>, does that then justify violence against <person> when <other person> finds <X> intolerable?

It's as simple as not using a word, why is that so difficult for people to learn how to do?

The problem comes from a simple fact: In all of our lives, we experience moments when the thoughts we have are unkind. Failure to express those thoughts (at least on occasion) results in negative physical affects (stress goes up when we bottle ourselves up too much, and the effects of stress are easily determined from a Google search).

As a result, we sometimes have to express these negative thoughts, lest we wind up harming ourselves. In so doing, it is very likely that someone will be offended. Do we allow the fact that someone will have temporary emotional distress to override the need to express these thoughts, especially when the failure to express these thoughts can result in serious (life shortening) negative impact on the holder of the thoughts?

That also provides the basis for even larger issues: Since any given thought can provide offense for somebody, all thoughts would have to be rigidly controlled, and all expression would likely have to cease entirely.

That is not a good world in which to live. I would rather have somebody speak their mind around me, especially if I would find it offensive. That just tells me who I should ignore from that point on.

Being insensitive also is not a good way to go through life, people will see you as uncaring, and having a lack of morals.

If somebody else has a problem with me, then that is that person's problem, not mine. I will do what I can to make other people's lives better, but not at the level of expense you seem to be demanding. I am myself, and will not sacrifice my own self-identity (as expressed by the words I choose to use) to appease people around me without extremely good reason. So far, such reason has yet to be demonstrated in this thread for this word.

Perhaps I should just report every post using the term retard derogatorily to a mod and let them handle it.

Yes, you should. Definitely. You won't see a single person tell you not to do that, and the mods try to encourage it. Go for it. Have a "report button" party, if you wish.

It's like dealing with stubborn bratty children, who want their right to say a bad word. Don't most people get past the, bad language is so cool, stage after the teenage years?

Of course, with the logic you've demonstrated, I could point that you are doing your own name calling here. After all, people who refuse to stop using a word are just like "stubborn bratty children".

Be careful with that brush you're wielding. Looks like some of the tar is getting onto you.

[Flyndaran]

I sometimes watch a tv program just to get offended. I like to think it as a form of "Relax, everyone's a douche." exercise.