View Full Version : The culture of offense
Ultralight
1-8-16, 10:23am
I was wondering what folks thought about The Culture of Offense in this country and how it may have effected this forum as well.
Here are a couple articles if you are not privy to what the Culture of Offense is:
http://spectator.org/blog/59269/never-ending-culture-offense
http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/11/25/from-megaphones-to-muzzles-free-speech-safe-spaces-and-college-campuses
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/apr/29/writers-join-protest-charlie-hebdo-pen-award
So what's your point, Bud? :devil:
I am startled when it happens but usually give the other the benefit of the doubt, sometimes taking some time to reflect before doing so.
As long as you have differences of opinion, you will have the possibility of taking offense especially if the skill of conversation is not developed.
I don't find that this site has that much of a problem these days.
I think there's a fine line between an attitude that seemingly extends self-entitlement to being treated with kid gloves, and having a valid point about insensitivity and rudeness. In other words, people are entitled to differing opinions, even if their opinion is in and of itself offensive ("I think group x is usually not as smart as group y"), but it's not appropriate to say "group x is a bunch of ****ing idiots."
Somewhere along the line our society seems to have developed the idea that any opinion that is "not nice to me" should be shut down, and while I'd like to live in a utopia where everyone agreed with my POV and thought I was just perfect too, I don't think that's appropriate, or even fair.
I didn't read all of the articles, just a brief one. It seems that it is a push back towards PC type language. My is that PC language has been given a bad rap. Watching the impact of our language skillfully is very important. Many of the PC issues were voices trying to be heard in a culture that shut them down. So it was never some name-less face-less person being offended, but for me it was based on real and very common stories of me as a woman, my friends who are Native American and of color in other ways. I agree with open dialogue and a dialogue that has safe space to say that you disagree, to say that words and actions from the last 100's of years are painful, to feel like you will be heard. More importantly that you can have a voice that leads to job and social opportunities.
I may be off topic here but I feel we are getting some voices into the larger cultural dialogue that have been missing and that is uncomfortable. So let's talk about that. Let's talk about how it is hard to hear from a person of color and struggle with what that means for us. How it is hard to hear about some of the things women deal with and manage that even if as a man we did not support what happened to them. Really deep and difficult things to address.
rodeosweetheart
1-8-16, 12:05pm
I didn't read all of the articles, just a brief one. It seems that it is a push back towards PC type language. My is that PC language has been given a bad rap. Watching the impact of our language skillfully is very important. Many of the PC issues were voices trying to be heard in a culture that shut them down. So it was never some name-less face-less person being offended, but for me it was based on real and very common stories of me as a woman, my friends who are Native American and of color in other ways. I agree with open dialogue and a dialogue that has safe space to say that you disagree, to say that words and actions from the last 100's of years are painful, to feel like you will be heard. More importantly that you can have a voice that leads to job and social opportunities.
I may be off topic here but I feel we are getting some voices into the larger cultural dialogue that have been missing and that is uncomfortable. So let's talk about that. Let's talk about how it is hard to hear from a person of color and struggle with what that means for us. How it is hard to hear about some of the things women deal with and manage that even if as a man we did not support what happened to them. Really deep and difficult things to address.
+100. Well said, Zoe Girl!
Again, I think it's a fine line between unhelpful dialog, "you're not allowed to say that about me", and helpful dialog, "I don't think what you're saying is correct, this is my experience."
"Women don't like to work as hard as men."
"How misogynistic, how dare you say that. I'm offended."
"Women don't like to work as hard as men."
"I put in 12 hour days and do 90% of the housework, does that sound like a lazy person?"
(and believe me, when the dialog seems like it' s just repeating and repeating some tired old stereotype that serves the proclaimer very well it's very tempting to just shut it down with an angry offended accusation, but it doesn't do any good IMO.)
Thank you Rodeo,
I love non-violent communication work, and find it extremely challenging. Maybe that is something we can add to college courses so that people have some skills to participate in these conversations.
Ultralight
1-8-16, 12:27pm
What happens when someone gets offended?
rodeosweetheart
1-8-16, 1:32pm
Thank you Rodeo,
I love non-violent communication work, and find it extremely challenging. Maybe that is something we can add to college courses so that people have some skills to participate in these conversations.
That's a good idea, and I really like your characterization of what you are going for as "non-violent communication work." What a great goal, and something for me to keep as my own goal! Thanks; you have give me a lot to think about here, and I appreciate that.
Williamsmith
1-8-16, 2:03pm
I think we forgot how to laugh at each other.
http://youtu.be/lZysRZ6k0ag
iris lilies
1-8-16, 3:04pm
What happens when someone gets offended?
Given my recent interaction with The Garden Diva of my neighborhood who told me to remove my own hands from my own hips because she felt threatened as I was talking to her, I have firsthand knowledge of this, and I say that being offended is a tactic.
It a tactic of oneupmanship, it's a play of power.
It's a power play via the current popular vehicle of victimology. If Garden Diva is offended or threatened or violated (pick your victim term) that gives her status in the communication. It acts as a way to throw off the offense. And if the offense doesn't recognize the rules of engagement of victimology, it allows the victim to cast aspersions on the moral make up of the offending person. That may even get them terminated from their job.
There ya go Zoe, analyze that.
Gardenarian
1-8-16, 3:05pm
The problem of students objecting to speakers is becoming ridiculous. Why do people become personally offended or even hurt by what some pundit says?
Many feminist speakers find themselves being banned from colleges because they have at one time or another commented that the whole transgender phenomena has worked to reinforce gender stereotypes. I happen to agree with this conclusion, but even if you disagree, is that a reason to prevent someone from speaking?
This also happens when someone is coming to speak on a particular topic - say, Oregon history - and in the past they have made a remark on a totally unrelated topic that bothered people. Bam, they decide they want the person banned.
Universities are supposed to be about the free exchange of ideas. What a crock.
ApatheticNoMore
1-8-16, 3:26pm
It seems mostly something privileged beyond words upper class college students worry about, I guess. While the rest of us try to survive.
I think for some people, aggressive communication produces a feeling of power over their environment. They seek to "best" others.
I think other people are motivated by a desire to seek peace and to model peacefulness.
Maybe the two camps will always have trouble talking to each other.
some have a desire to best. But I think some people approach debate from a very detached intellectual perspective, of making an intellectual point (which isn't necessarily about besting), which mystifies those who approach it from a more emotional perspective.
But definitely some have argued we should approach it from trying to see what common ground there is if any (reminds me of Edward de Bono's writing, about how people who try to only win the argument are lousy conversationalists :laff: ). Though I don't think there is always such ground to be found.
The people that say Charlie Hebdo doesn't deserve an award give a good argument (nor of course did they deserve death, but that goes without saying)
Gardenarian
1-8-16, 3:27pm
What happens when someone gets offended?
At my college, they have "safe rooms" so that people who had their tender feelings hurt can get support. These students are supposed to be adults. Do they fall apart every time they read a newspaper?
I disagree with a lot of stuff in the paper but I don't have an emotional meltdown about it. I agree that the "personal is the political" but that doesn't mean you get to have a tantrum every time someone promotes something you're opposed to.
Given my recent interaction with The Garden Diva of my neighborhood who told me to remove my own hands from my own hips because she felt threatened as I was talking to her, I have firsthand knowledge of this, and I say that being offended is a tactic.
It a tactic of oneupmanship, it's a play of power.
It's a power play via the current popular vehicle of victimology. If Garden Diva is offended or threatened or violated (pick your victim term) that gives her status in the communication. It acts as a way to throw off the offense. And if the offense doesn't recognize the rules of engagement of victimology, it allows the victim to cast aspersions on the moral make up of the offending person. That may even get them terminated from their job.
There ya go Zoe, analyze that.
Well, I can say that as a left-of-the-left liberal I agree with much of your assessment!
I get offended daily. It annoys me. But that is all.
If someone offends me, I challenge their idea if I can.
But I really think people need to toughen up and act like adults who have at least a shred of self-confidence.
Being offended sometimes is the price you pay to live in a society with free speech.
The real scary stuff I see is when people who are offended conflate offense with abuse. Like: "Billy offended me, I feel like he abused me."
http://dailyatheistquote.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/atheist-quotes41.jpg
https://i1.wp.com/theshake.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/offended.jpg
Gardenarian
1-8-16, 4:46pm
+1
The problem of students objecting to speakers is becoming ridiculous. Why do people become personally offended or even hurt by what some pundit says?
Many feminist speakers find themselves being banned from colleges because they have at one time or another commented that the whole transgender phenomena has worked to reinforce gender stereotypes. I happen to agree with this conclusion, but even if you disagree, is that a reason to prevent someone from speaking?
This also happens when someone is coming to speak on a particular topic - say, Oregon history - and in the past they have made a remark on a totally unrelated topic that bothered people. Bam, they decide they want the person banned.
Universities are supposed to be about the free exchange of ideas. What a crock.
It is odd. You would expect universities to be a bastion of free expression, but instead you see students behaving like Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. I can't imagine the level of craven spinelessness it must take for university administrators to cave to their demands. Speech codes, safe zones and Orwellian reporting systems to punish thoughtcrime. I have to wonder how some of these kids will survive in the post-college world.
I'm coming to believe that much of Donald Trump's popularity stems from disgust with the more ridiculous extremes of PC rhetoric.
It is odd. You would expect universities to be a bastion of free expression, but instead you see students behaving like Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. I can't imagine the level of craven spinelessness it must take for university administrators to cave to their demands. Speech codes, safe zones and Orwellian reporting systems to punish thoughtcrime. I have to wonder how some of these kids will survive in the post-college world.
I'm coming to believe that much of Donald Trump's popularity stems from disgust with the more ridiculous extremes of PC rhetoric.
I just don't see what the heck people think is going to happen if they are offended?
Can they not draw the distinction between harassment and offense or between abuse and offense?
I remember when I was in college we lefties brought in Bobby Seale to talk about his experiences with The Black Panthers in the 60s and 70s. The right-wingers brought some right-wing ass-clown later on to talk about whatever they were into. The Feminists brought some Sex Worker Activist. And so on it went.
If you have something to say, then college campuses should be the place to say them (uh...or most anywhere in a country with free speech). But when the right-wingers brought their guy to campus we did not pitch a bitch. We protested -- not because of or about him speaking there -- but because and about his ideas we disagreed with. There is a difference!
I just don't see what the heck people think is going to happen if they are offended?
Because you are a privileged straight white male and are not subjected to the constant barrage of microaggressions that people in other situations have to deal with.
I would say there is a difference between being micro-aggressed and being offended.
I would say there is a difference between being micro-aggressed and being offended.
I would expect a privileged straight cis white male to say that.
I would expect a privileged straight cis white male to say that.
Okay. Expect that if you like.
iris lilies
1-8-16, 7:38pm
... I have to wonder how some of these kids will survive in the post-college world...
They will take their tiny minded, butt hurt selves to the HR departments every week. Since the HR departments will soon be filled with like minded victims in a few year, commerce will be affected because the company focus will be less and less on the work, and more and more on the people who produce the work. Only they won't be producing, they will be whining.
Now all of that said, I watched the drama unfold here a couple of counties away from me in the Univ of Mo issue, and it does seem to me that the President of the campus erred in failing to take seriously enough continued acts of random racism, some blatant. The guy, obviously, can't do anything to stop those who are acting like idiots, but when the idiocy is discovered, some soothing talk and appointing task forces to review the situation would have been a good thing. He needed to be more open, meet with student leaders, and put on a big public face of regret. Probably putting into place a well paid position or two for dealing with racial issue (more than what already exists, because I'm sure they do exist there) would have been a good idea.
I'm not saying that he didn't do anything appropriate, I'm saying that he, apparently, didn't do ENOUGH to show he was hearing the protesting students.
Chicken lady
1-8-16, 8:03pm
My father is offensive. Interestingly, he is one of the most open minded, supportive people I know. He will actually say stuff like "the new minister is a skirt. That's going to shake some people up." And then he will fight a pitched battle because the session is asking the skirt to do things they would never expect from a male minister. But he won't stop using the term "skirt"
1. LOL!
2. I am going to start using the term "skirt."
Williamsmith
1-8-16, 8:15pm
Maybe they should just get over it.
http://youtu.be/1H-Y7MAASkg
1. LOL!
2. I am going to start using the term "skirt."
By those terms, my DH is offensive. I have to constantly tell him NOT to greet women with the term "babe" and NOT to refer to them in private by the word "b**ch."
He is also offensive in his opinion of migrants and Muslims.
In spite of my supreme frustration with this, I tire of people who are easily offended. I just saw a news piece about a young woman in my state who tweeted her opinion of the right of Palestinians to their own state (she is Jewish) and she got such a backlash she couldn't return to school because she was being charged with bullying. I couldn't believe it. Lighten up, people!
By those terms, my DH is offensive. I have to constantly tell him NOT to greet women with the term "babe" and NOT to refer to them in private by the word "b**ch."
He is also offensive in his opinion of migrants and Muslims.
In spite of my supreme frustration with this, I tire of people who are easily offended. I just saw a news piece about a young woman in my state who tweeted her opinion of the right of Palestinians to their own state (she is Jewish) and she got such a backlash she couldn't return to school because she was being charged with bullying. I couldn't believe it. Lighten up, people!
If people disagreed with her then the topic needs to be discussed, not squelched.
Chicken lady
1-8-16, 9:13pm
So, I have to share a few more "my dad" stories. When he was work he had a good friend at work who belonged to "the black businessmen's association" and my dad refered to it as "your racist group." And the guy got upset and said "we aren't racist!" And dad said "would they let me join?" And the guy had to admit that they would not let my dad join. And then dad said "why not?" And there was silence. And my dad continued to call it "your racist group."
once they made my dad go to sensitivity training. When he came home I said "did you learn anything?" And he said "yeah. I learned not to call Claudia (the receptionist) 'sugar lips'." I was appalled. I asked "do you call Claudia "sugar lips?" And he said "no. But I learned not to."
So, I have to share a few more "my dad" stories. When he was work he had a good friend at work who belonged to "the black businessmen's association" and my dad refered to it as "your racist group." And the guy got upset and said "we aren't racist!" And dad said "would they let me join?" And the guy had to admit that they would not let my dad join. And then dad said "why not?" And there was silence. And my dad continued to call it "your racist group."
once they made my dad go to sensitivity training. When he came home I said "did you learn anything?" And he said "yeah. I learned not to call Claudia (the receptionist) 'sugar lips'." I was appalled. I asked "do you call Claudia "sugar lips?" And he said "no. But I learned not to."
All In The Family reboot -- you're on the writing staff!
W
I didn't read all of the articles, just a brief one. It seems that it is a push back towards PC type language. My is that PC language has been given a bad rap. Watching the impact of our language skillfully is very important. Many of the PC issues were voices trying to be heard in a culture that shut them down. So it was never some name-less face-less person being offended, but for me it was based on real and very common stories of me as a woman, my friends who are Native American and of color in other ways. I agree with open dialogue and a dialogue that has safe space to say that you disagree, to say that words and actions from the last 100's of years are painful, to feel like you will be heard. More importantly that you can have a voice that leads to job and social opportunities.
I may be off topic here but I feel we are getting some voices into the larger cultural dialogue that have been missing and that is uncomfortable. So let's talk about that. Let's talk about how it is hard to hear from a person of color and struggle with what that means for us. How it is hard to hear about some of the things women deal with and manage that even if as a man we did not support what happened to them. Really deep and difficult things to address.
Excellent reminder. Thank you.
I just saw a news piece about a young woman in my state who tweeted her opinion of the right of Palestinians to their own state (she is Jewish) and she got such a backlash she couldn't return to school because she was being charged with bullying. I couldn't believe it. Lighten up, people!
The irony is remarkable...
iris lilies
1-8-16, 11:17pm
It seems mostly something privileged beyond words upper class college students worry about, I guess. While the rest of us try to survive.
some have a desire to best. But I think some people approach debate from a very detached intellectual perspective, of making an intellectual point (which isn't necessarily about besting), which mystifies those who approach it from a more emotional perspective.
But definitely some have argued we should approach it from trying to see what common ground there is if any (reminds me of Edward de Bono's writing, about how people who try to only win the argument are lousy conversationalists :laff: ). Though I don't think there is always such ground to be found.
The people that say Charlie Hebdo doesn't deserve an award give a good argument (nor of course did they deserve death, but that goes without saying)
You are right that in a real discussion where real work has to be accomplished, the best way to start is to identify and summarize common ground.
Thats not Internet chat though, because we don't have "real work" that must be done. Its all mostly blather.
A grounding thought about work that I've always liked is this: in work there is conflict.
Honestly too many people don't seem to get that. I have little respect for those who are shocked or hurt at the idea that working with other humans provokes conflict.
You are right that in a real discussion where real work has to be accomplished, the best way to start is to identify and summarize common ground.
Thats not Internet chat though, because we don't have "real work" that must be done. Its all mostly blather.
A grounding thought about work that I've always liked is this: in work there is conflict.
Honestly too many people don't seem to get that. I have little respect for those who are shocked or hurt at the idea that working with other humans provokes conflict.
The idea doesn't shock me or hurt my feelings; it just annoys me and wears me down--which is why I chose to work oddball shifts, often alone, for most of my career.
You are right that in a real discussion where real work has to be accomplished, the best way to start is to identify and summarize common ground.
Thats not Internet chat though, because we don't have "real work" that must be done. Its all mostly blather.
A grounding thought about work that I've always liked is this: in work there is conflict.
Honestly too many people don't seem to get that. I have little respect for those who are shocked or hurt at the idea that working with other humans provokes conflict.
My boss used to say that he would love being a manager if it weren't for the people. I always thought that was funny. I agree that in order to get anything done you have to get through a lot of messiness. The best managers are those who can most effectively work through the discord and come out on the other end having accomplished something.
What happens when someone gets offended?
Many things, One is like IL's situation and it is used as a ploy. But that does not cover all of it.
There are a lot of ways we talk to each other to shut down conversations and get power back. Offending someone can effectively remove them from a decision or an opportunity. It can be used by a supervisor or the dominant person in education or work so that they get their way. Saying that you are offended may be expressing a lot that we don't know how to talk about easily.
In all things we could do a lot with more skillful ways of talking to each other. I have options when I am offended about how to express that, I have options when someone tells me when they are offended by me. However as we move towards more of these conversations we all need to work very hard to listen to others. It is still very important to pay attention to when we stop listening because of our own issues. Sometimes those issues are not wanting to face that a person is offended and it is reasonable (even if we did not intend this). I have plenty of stories of difficult conversations, some I totally bombed, some I was the offended person and when I did it skillfully the relationship got much better and I felt much better than sitting in having my feelings hurt.
rodeosweetheart
1-9-16, 2:39pm
Zoe, thanks for stating your viewpoint in such an eloquent and kind way. Your communications here are a model for me of how communication should be--respectful to all, and extremely compelling. You have made my day.
iris lilies
1-9-16, 5:15pm
The idea doesn't shock me or hurt my feelings; it just annoys me and wears me down--which is why I chose to work oddball shifts, often alone, for most of my career.
That is eminently sensible to me. You recognized it exists, you don't like it, you avoid it.
TVRodriguez
1-9-16, 7:57pm
Many things, One is like IL's situation and it is used as a ploy. But that does not cover all of it.
There are a lot of ways we talk to each other to shut down conversations and get power back. Offending someone can effectively remove them from a decision or an opportunity. It can be used by a supervisor or the dominant person in education or work so that they get their way. Saying that you are offended may be expressing a lot that we don't know how to talk about easily.
In all things we could do a lot with more skillful ways of talking to each other. I have options when I am offended about how to express that, I have options when someone tells me when they are offended by me. However as we move towards more of these conversations we all need to work very hard to listen to others. It is still very important to pay attention to when we stop listening because of our own issues. Sometimes those issues are not wanting to face that a person is offended and it is reasonable (even if we did not intend this). I have plenty of stories of difficult conversations, some I totally bombed, some I was the offended person and when I did it skillfully the relationship got much better and I felt much better than sitting in having my feelings hurt.
I am in wholehearted agreement with you on this, Zoe Girl. I really learned a lot from the work of Marshall Rosenberg on non-violent communication(NVC). The actions of listening, observing, and thinking before speaking are things we often think we are doing but actually neglect to do far too often. When I find myself regretting saying something, it's when I have forgotten the principles of NVC.
Is talking without violent threats a form of non-violent communication?
Yes, I can't recommend the book highly enough, and there are training programs I have seen as well. A conversation with violent threats can be brought into a NVC model with a very skilled facilitator. I have a few experiences with that, reasonably successful (no one ended up being violent however we did not solve all the problems). It was not all between kids, adults who were on the verge of getting violent twice and I am just an afterschool supervisor. So when I say that these things are possible I am not saying that lightly, or without an understanding that pretty much anybody can use something to try and manipulate others.
I know that Marshall Rosenberg has done some huge work in the middle east, and then had his own teenagers. I am not sure which is a bigger challenge! One of the stories I like the best from the book was a cab driver who was saying racist things and the conversation was able to transform into something else.
You are right that in a real discussion where real work has to be accomplished, the best way to start is to identify and summarize common ground.
Thats not Internet chat though, because we don't have "real work" that must be done. Its all mostly blather.
A grounding thought about work that I've always liked is this: in work there is conflict.
Honestly too many people don't seem to get that. I have little respect for those who are shocked or hurt at the idea that working with other humans provokes conflict.
I have worked in academic, military, corporate and local government settings, and have always found this to be true.
There is a substantial subset of the population that is unshakably convinced that they are smarter, better qualified and more honest than their management and peers, and are only held back because of their personal forthrightness and disdain for politics. While this may sometimes be true, I find it more often to be a sort of psychological defense mechanism. I consider it to be one of the greater causes of friction in trying to get things done in a group setting. It will only get worse as more sectors of society fall prey to the everyone-gets-a-trophy mentality.
iris lilies
1-11-16, 1:00pm
My father is offensive. Interestingly, he is one of the most open minded, supportive people I know. He will actually say stuff like "the new minister is a skirt. That's going to shake some people up." And then he will fight a pitched battle because the session is asking the skirt to do things they would never expect from a male minister. But he won't stop using the term "skirt"
This is hilarious. I have been trying not to laugh at your dad's choice of words, but "skirt" is such a funny archaic word I can't help it. Is that from the 1940's?
Chicken lady
1-11-16, 1:11pm
I have no idea where the word ever from. My dad was born in the 40's, but the town i grew up in was at least half a generation behind.
i just had an interesting conversation with my daughter. She got in a heated arguement about health care with my dad, during which he was shocked to discover that a woman needs a prescription for birth control. Dd said "what did you think?" And he said "I don't know. My mother (a registered nurse) just gave it to people." (Knowing my grandmother, probably from the back door of her kitchen without telling their husband/father.)
This is hilarious. I have been trying not to laugh at your dad's choice of words, but "skirt" is such a funny archaic word I can't help it. Is that from the 1940's?
Here's an interesting list of the many slang terms for females of that era. Sometimes I get the feeling our language has lost some of its richness since then.
http://www.lostartofbeingadame.com/2013/01/26/words-for-women-get-the-hang-of-30s-slang/
Chicken lady
1-11-16, 2:03pm
Hunh. Are they all supposed to be archaic? Because I recognized a lot if them.
dh used to call me jailbait (fondly) way back when.....
i was was thinking about the clothing thing again this morning. I ordered two dresses from a place that sells retro (not vintage) clothing. I have a 50's figure and I like 50's dresses. I will wear them. But looking at the stuff in the 70's and 20's my brain categorized them as "costumes". yet, I'm sure people buy them and wear them just as I do my 50's style dresses.
it makes me wonder what creates this categories in our minds.
Here's an interesting list of the many slang terms for females of that era. Sometimes I get the feeling our language has lost some of its richness since then.
http://www.lostartofbeingadame.com/2013/01/26/words-for-women-get-the-hang-of-30s-slang/
I assume that the younger generation of straight men still have plenty of slang terms for women. But just as I wouldn't use the gay slang term otter to describe my coworker two offices down to other coworkers that's exactly how I described him to my friends shortly after he started working in our office. It's all about picking the appropriate setting to use a slang term or phrase. I'm not sure calling the new minister a skirt at a session meeting qualifies. On the other hand, if chicken lady's dad was only calling her a skirt at home after the session meeting and not at the meeting itself I personally would be totally fine with that.
Ultralight
7-21-16, 11:44am
Hey all:
A local atheist organization has asked me to lead a discussion on -- you guessed it -- The Culture of Offense.
(Perhaps I am indeed an expert at offending people!)
Anyway, if you have links, anecdotes, ideas, etc. about things I might want to include in the discussion, let me know! Thanks!
Hey all:
A local atheist organization has asked me to lead a discussion on -- you guessed it -- The Culture of Offense.
(Perhaps I am indeed an expert at offending people!)
Anyway, if you have links, anecdotes, ideas, etc. about things I might want to include in the discussion, let me know! Thanks!
http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-from/
I would suggest this theory that we are transitioning from a "culture of dignity" to a "culture of victimhood" is helpful in explaining the rush to take offense we see so much of now.
Ultralight
7-21-16, 12:16pm
http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-from/
I would suggest this theory that we are transitioning from a "culture of dignity" to a "culture of victimhood" is helpful in explaining the rush to take offense we see so much of now.
Reading it now... Very interesting! Thanks for the link!
Hey all:
A local atheist organization has asked me to lead a discussion on -- you guessed it -- The Culture of Offense.
(Perhaps I am indeed an expert at offending people!)
Anyway, if you have links, anecdotes, ideas, etc. about things I might want to include in the discussion, let me know! Thanks!
funny story. I am from small town here in the south. When new folks move into town, everyone makes it a point to invite them to church.
I discovered that some people are offended by this and we thought we were being polite. LOL
iris lilies
7-21-16, 12:39pm
Hey all:
A local atheist organization has asked me to lead a discussion on -- you guessed it -- The Culture of Offense.
(Perhaps I am indeed an expert at offending people!)
Anyway, if you have links, anecdotes, ideas, etc. about things I might want to include in the discussion, let me know! Thanks!
Are they pro or con?
Ultralight
7-21-16, 12:43pm
Are they pro or con?
I am guessing there will be pros and cons in the group. Though I attended one of these last year in a different city. Everyone in attendance disagreed with the culture of offense. We eventually realized that those would support the culture of offense would not want to attend because they would be offended and asked to state their case.
I wish I were joking, but this is what happened.
I am speculating that here in my city, we'll get a more diverse group with varying opinions.
Ultralight
7-21-16, 12:45pm
funny story. I am from small town here in the south. When new folks move into town, everyone makes it a point to invite them to church.
I discovered that some people are offended by this and we thought we were being polite. LOL
When I moved to Alabama I was promptly invited to a church by some well-meaning lady.
And I was indeed offended! Outraged even...
Then I said: "No thanks, ma'am. I am an atheist."
She was offended as well, outraged even.
But you know what?
Neither of us are worse for the wear. We were offended, which is something that happens in life.
iris lilies
7-21-16, 1:13pm
I am guessing there will be pros and cons in the group. Though I attended one of these last year in a different city. Everyone in attendance disagreed with the culture of offense. We eventually realized that those would support the culture of offense would not want to attend because they would be offended and asked to state their case.
I wish I were joking, but this is what happened.
I am speculating that here in my city, we'll get a more diverse group with varying opinions.
That is interesting!
I assumed that atheists would be sympathetic to offense since I see a fair amount of victim thought and victim speech from them. I am extraordinarily sensitive to victimology, it annoys me very much. Ugh. But I also realize that my reaction is not entirely right, it is semi-right. I could afford a bit more sympathy to those who wish to present themselves as victims IF they have somewhat of a case. Usually I just want to shout "grow a pair, you weenies!"
As an atheist I would be annoyed to be constantly invited to church, but if it were only a couple of invitations I would think it was nice just not my cup of tea.
Ultralight
7-21-16, 1:25pm
That is interesting!
I assumed that atheist would be sympathetic to offense since I see a fair amount of victim thought and victim speech from them. I am extraordinarily sensitive to victimology, it annoys me very much. Ugh. But I also realize that my reaction is not entirely right, it is semi-right. I could afford a bit more sympathy to those who wish to present themselves as victims IF they have somewhat of a case. Usually I just want to shout "grow a pair, you weenies!"
As an atheist I would be annoyed to be constantly invited to church, but if it were only a couple of invitations I would think it was nice just not my cup of tea.
I think the vast, vast majority of atheists have a much, more more sophisticated philosophy of offense.
Check this out:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/12/04/activist-maryam-namazie-heckled-at-talk-by-muslim-students-who-say-she-invaded-their-safe-space/
Also: Do you remember the exchange between Sam Harris and Ben Affleck?
Atheists want -- need! -- the freedom to discuss, debate, and crest bad ideas.
ToomuchStuff
7-21-16, 1:54pm
Were you asked to lead as in participate in, or just bring an article, slap it down, say what do you think, and walk away?
(Perhaps I am indeed an expert at offending people!)
Well, perhaps with some practice, but right now you're pretty much a rank amateur.
iris lilies
7-21-16, 2:05pm
Were you asked to lead as in participate in, or just bring an article, slap it down, say what do you think, and walk away?
Hey, he wouldn't even say what he thinks! He would just come into the room, write a provocative talking point on the white board, and then sit down, clamping his mouth shut.
Ultralight
7-21-16, 3:59pm
Well, perhaps with some practice, but right now you're pretty much a rank amateur.
This offends me! ;)
Ultralight
7-21-16, 4:02pm
Were you asked to lead as in participate in, or just bring an article, slap it down, say what do you think, and walk away?
It is not especially formal. It is held at a nearby Mexican restaurant once a month. They pick someone and a topic and ask them to "present." This means:
Do some research, put together a quick couple paragraphs about the issue, then ask a series of questions pertaining to the issue. I am essentially supposed to keep people on topic, prevent excessive cross-talk, and chime in as needed. I have attended a few of these for other topics. It is laid back.
Generally when I do this sort of thing I try to foster participation from others and allow them to explore an idea.
Gardenarian
7-27-16, 12:29am
There has been a lot of research lately on the ways that people, on social media and in real life, limit themselves to hearing only stuff they already know they are going to agree with. That might be an interesting sub-topic.
I certainly wouldn't subscribe to "The National Review" or "like" Monsanto. There seems to be fewer and fewer neutral news and information sources.
There has been a lot of research lately on the ways that people, on social media and in real life, limit themselves to hearing only stuff they already know they are going to agree with. That might be an interesting sub-topic.
I certainly wouldn't subscribe to "The National Review" or "like" Monsanto. There seems to be fewer and fewer neutral news and information sources.
I subscribe to NR, and as long as Monsanto maintains a 2% dividend yield I like them just fine, but that doesn't mean I can't read the New York Times, Slate or any other source that may be less than congenial to my views.
I think there may be a certain false nostalgia for some past where news sources were completely objective. I don't believe that was really ever the case. I do think too many people sort themselves into various camps because it makes them more comfortable. The problem with that cloistered thinking is that when they do come across a contrary opinion they panic.
iris lilies
7-27-16, 10:14am
I both subscribe to NR and love Roundup. When a group of yong Monsanto chemists showed up at a party I was attending years ago, I opened my arms and shouted "I love you guys, I looooove Roundup!"
Newspapers back in the "olden" days were well known to be Republican or Democrat.
Gardenarian
7-27-16, 4:06pm
I both subscribe to NR and love Roundup. When a group of yong Monsanto chemists showed up at a party I was attending years ago, I opened my arms and shouted "I love you guys, I looooove Roundup!"
It's a shame that someone with your love of plants cares so little for the life of the soil. Maybe you should trade in your NR for a subscription to Permaculture Magazine (https://www.permaculture.co.uk/). Broaden those horizons a little.
I have no nostalgia of any kind about news sources. The majority of people now get their news from Facebook, and Buzzfeed is the most popular of "news" sources. It can be easily tailored to meet anyone's particular political/lifestyle/class affiliations. My point was that it is easy to live in a mirror bubble that only reflects back to you the opinions you have already formed.
"A recent study by Indiana University researchers suggests... They mined a massive set of data about online behavior to show that access to information via social media exposes people to a narrower range of information sources than the not-quite-as-old-as-grandpa habit of using search engines to find stories of interest." (Treehugger.com)
There are some decent sources of news, such as the NYT, BBC, CNN, WSJ, etc. but again, only those stories that are likely to appeal to a particular FB user will show up on their feed.
And folks who tailor their news to fit their predilections, those who adapt the world to themselves, seem to be much more likely to be offended by things outside their bubble (to get back to the topic of this thread.)
I both subscribe to NR and love Roundup. When a group of yong Monsanto chemists showed up at a party I was attending years ago, I opened my arms and shouted "I love you guys, I looooove Roundup!"
:0! Say it ain't so!!
Ultralight
8-25-16, 2:38pm
So check this out!
U. of C. tells incoming freshmen it does not support 'trigger warnings' or 'safe spaces'
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-university-of-chicago-safe-spaces-letter-met-20160825-story.html
There's an article about that in Slate They consider the following to be "weird":
"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called “trigger warnings,” we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual “safe spaces” where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/08/25/the_university_of_chicago_sent_incoming_freshmen_a _letter_decrying_safe.html
ToomuchStuff
8-26-16, 10:57am
Sounds as sad to me, as the woman that argued with me that her calling us, was Google's fault. She shouldn't have to know what her area code is, or be responsible to a small business, because it has the same name as a small business in her location, and placing orders for things she won't pick up. (items that expire)
iris lilies
8-26-16, 10:59am
So check this out!
U. of C. tells incoming freshmen it does not support 'trigger warnings' or 'safe spaces'
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-university-of-chicago-safe-spaces-letter-met-20160825-story.html
This is gratifyng.
So check this out!
U. of C. tells incoming freshmen it does not support 'trigger warnings' or 'safe spaces'
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-university-of-chicago-safe-spaces-letter-met-20160825-story.html
Good for them. Where else will you be exposed to differing ideas and philosophies than at university! That's kind of one of their main purposes in my opinion. There are certainly better ways to register your displeasure with a certain speaker than banning outright. In fact, your protest is more effective if others can actually hear/see the offensive one next to your argument. Banning them outright says more about your opinion of the general ability of your fellow students to decide for themselves than about the offensive speaker. I'm glad this university has a little faith in their student population.
This is gratifyng.
What it may be is brilliant marketing. If you're in a position to pay more for your kid's undergraduate education than I paid for my house, you have options. Compared to most of it's designer-label U competition, UC has some drawbacks. It's in flyover country, and not even a very good neighborhood in flyover country. There are high schools in rural Texas that have better football teams. Do you really want to sit in the bleachers shouting "Go Maroons"? Bernie Sanders got his BA there, and Barack Obama taught there, and neither of them has much sympathy for a guy who's got $300k handy for tuition. Snob-appeal wise, it probably lacks the drawing power of Stanford or Yale.
So how can UC compete in it's price range? How can it distinguish itself? By selling a bit of toughness. They may not be Parris Island, but at least they can promise your kid won't come out wimpier and whinier than he went in. That he can suck up his Sophocles without a fainting couch and trained counselors standing by.
That's something, isn't it?
What it may be is brilliant marketing. If you're in a position to pay more for your kid's undergraduate education than I paid for my house, you have options. Compared to most of it's designer-label U competition, UC has some drawbacks. It's in flyover country, and not even a very good neighborhood in flyover country. There are high schools in rural Texas that have better football teams. Do you really want to sit in the bleachers shouting "Go Maroons"? Bernie Sanders got his BA there, and Barack Obama taught there, and neither of them has much sympathy for a guy who's got $300k handy for tuition. Snob-appeal wise, it probably lacks the drawing power of Stanford or Yale.
So how can UC compete in it's price range? How can it distinguish itself? By selling a bit of toughness. They may not be Parris Island, but at least they can promise your kid won't come out wimpier and whinier than he went in. That he can suck up his Sophocles without a fainting couch and trained counselors standing by.
That's something, isn't it?
I think you're onto something. And that last paragraph made me laugh out loud. Thanks, I needed that.
I think you're onto something. And that last paragraph made me laugh out loud. Thanks, I needed that.
+1
ToomuchStuff
8-27-16, 10:53am
A joke of the day site I visit:
1300's: I am dying from the black plague
1800's: I am nine and I work in a factory
1900's: I am off to fight in a war
2000's: I am offended
A big "culture of offense" day is coming up tomorrow - "topless" day will be happening across the US. Between the folks offended enough to participate in this day, and the people offended that they would participate, there will likely be a big turnout of "offense" tomorrow.
A big "culture of offense" day is coming up tomorrow - "topless" day
I'm going to have to do some pretty thorough research before I determine whether or not I should be offended.
I'm going to have to do some pretty thorough research before I determine whether or not I should be offended.
Am I to be offended by nudity, or by peoples' reaction to nudity, or by my resentment at people trying to force a reaction from me? It's all so much effort.
I'm put in mind of that scene from Casablanca, when Peter Lorre asks Bogey if he despises him, and Bogey says he probably would if he gave it any thought.
If we accepted all the invitations to outrage we get from people claiming to be victims or claiming to speak for victims there'd be no time for anything else. Especially if all and sundry can claim victim status on the basis of feeling unsafe or excluded by anything they may see or hear, or may possibly see or hear.
In the face of such constant mewling, perhaps a certain level of cultivated insensitivity is the best defense. It may be best not to give any thought to any but the worst of it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.