You delightful little troublemaker.
[INFJ] Easily offended
- Thread starter zsedftghj830
- Start date
The reason that I said, "I think the standards are becoming vague on what is indeed offensive beyond absolution in society as a whole." stems from what Wyote already mentioned:
We have so much access to these problems that we make them our own in a sense. One's offense informs our own in a bilateral way, especially when it is expounded across people groups, generations, friendships, families, etc; thus creating murky waters of subjectivity. It's difficult to delineate objectively in those cases, despite them only being tangentially related. So, the offense may be made out to be more than it is in many cases as this 'cause' or 'movement' against the whole, instead of an isolated occurrence. We want to lump things together, it's our brain's way of simplifying problems, but it isn't necessarily the correct way or what is true. A lot of these things are not so easily categorized as 'right' or 'wrong', 'offensive' or 'admissible'.
I've been sitting here trying to think of specific examples, where this could be the case. I think a big one is in the comedy industry, where comedians are being threatened to being censored right and left due to the nature of their jokes. Should one lose their reputation for an ill-timed joke that offends people? Where is the line? This is what I meant by the standards becoming vague. We are starting to see a shift where what was once permissible isn't. Not to say that some of the things that are coming into question weren't absolutely offensive, but should they be censored now due to crossing that line, and why? Where is the end? Who gets to decide?
Last edited:
Indeed. The absence of something is nothing. For something to exist, then nothing must also exist. <3
Edit: Though, come to think of it, we don't have access to nothing in the scope of our existence because our entire world is only full of somethings. Perhaps, the nothing is found out there beyond the periphery, somewhere we cannot reach.
Last edited:
- Aug 21, 2015
- 9,599
- 90,223
- 2,590
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 5w4
The offended are all-encompassing. Both the liberals and conservatives are equally offended, one side by things that won't change and the other by things that are changing.
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."
[Stephen Fry, The Guardian, 5 June 2005]”
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."
[Stephen Fry, The Guardian, 5 June 2005]”
Ruji, please tell me where. Where? Where? Where?
Sometimes the intent of the other is malicious or not; it's primarily their problem. It's not my problem if there's something wrong with them. Paradoxically, being offended is the problem of the offended too. I am of the opinion that whatever the intent of the other may be, if I let the weight of it into my psyche, I'm the loser. My advised reaction to whatever it would be would be is to rise, whether by humor and/or by didactic correction: thou shall not do this again. Either way, the point is to rise from it thereafter. Living in it is fungus. Laughing about it is fungicide. But of course laugh about it after the roar. Perhaps the approach is not absolutely stoic but it does echo resilience.
Also, nobody bears the same levels of tolerance. So, if standing on the other side of the scale where you've overstepped the other's boundaries, apologize. Learn about the person. Accept said person too. Forgive. Kiss-kiss. Mwah-mwah. Win-win-win.
Also, nobody bears the same levels of tolerance. So, if standing on the other side of the scale where you've overstepped the other's boundaries, apologize. Learn about the person. Accept said person too. Forgive. Kiss-kiss. Mwah-mwah. Win-win-win.
Perhaps the real issue is consequences. Those who offend want a free pass..and they shift responsibility to the victim of their acts..
In your heart @mintoots. The fight is in your heart.
I think you hit the nail on the head here. The increasing exposition and intermingling of cultures combined with the political movement to make all values protected under the veil of diversity creates a highly volatile society that's just as highly confused about what diversity means - the clear separation of individuals, of course. The ensuing psychological hostility between the cultural 'units' can then only be allayed by delimiting what is permissible to express in an attempt to promote uniformity of people; but certainly not their unity.
From one perspective, this is indicative of the nihilistic influences present in the West, where ideas and philosophical stances are now relegated to something supplemental and firmly detached from 'reality' - which is considered from a strictly material viewpoint - that is, something you adopt as a sort of character enhancement, but never something that you genuinely believe constitutes reality enough to embody it too zealously.
- Aug 21, 2015
- 9,599
- 90,223
- 2,590
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 5w4
I like your approach & description of it @mintoots aptly said.
Min-min-min.
Further derailing here, but what you said reminds me of Western culture's incessant individualism & 'push for the top' - not bad things in themselves, but can be taken too far (like anything).
D
Deleted member 16771
I'm not sure that there has ever been an age of greater or lesser 'offense' - it seems rather to be something anthropological, only that the norms and values about which we offend and are offended are constantly in flux.
And the responses to that 'offense' is in flux, too. In one time and place, honour demands a duel, in another, passive-aggressive correction at the dinner table.
Whatever the cultural matrix, and however it manifests, 'offense' seems to service a social ordering principle. Individuals use it to enact their status and autonomy, or make plays to appropriate external validation through censure.
There's been an attempt to entrap the OP into saying something incriminating in this thread, even, and it serves the same function. The cultural matrices we erect are just playing fields and rules of sport which reward lucrative social capital to those most able to navigate them, and those driven to do so (everyone).
The levels of 'offense' in general seem pretty constant over time - the only thing that changes are the values to be offended 'about' and the enormous power now wielded by internet mobs, but 'cancel culture' doesn't seem too different to the 'scandal culture' of yesteryear. Civil society and its mores always somehow retains the power to destroy people.
And the responses to that 'offense' is in flux, too. In one time and place, honour demands a duel, in another, passive-aggressive correction at the dinner table.
Whatever the cultural matrix, and however it manifests, 'offense' seems to service a social ordering principle. Individuals use it to enact their status and autonomy, or make plays to appropriate external validation through censure.
There's been an attempt to entrap the OP into saying something incriminating in this thread, even, and it serves the same function. The cultural matrices we erect are just playing fields and rules of sport which reward lucrative social capital to those most able to navigate them, and those driven to do so (everyone).
The levels of 'offense' in general seem pretty constant over time - the only thing that changes are the values to be offended 'about' and the enormous power now wielded by internet mobs, but 'cancel culture' doesn't seem too different to the 'scandal culture' of yesteryear. Civil society and its mores always somehow retains the power to destroy people.
One thing that sucks about the internet is that it's given everyone a means to broadcast every mundane thing in their lives like it's breaking news and every shitty opinion like it matters. Not every thought in one's head or opinion needs to be shared. I had high hopes that Facebook and etc. being down today would have been permanent or at least lasted awhile longer. The world would probably be better off if everyone didn't feel entitled to broadcast every opinion and joke at someone else's expense like they're offering a public service.
There's a house with a "F*ck Your Feelings And F*ck [elected member of office]" flag that we drive by everyday on the way to taking our son to school. Our son can't read yet but that will be an interesting conversation to have once he learns lol.
I was thinking back maybe 15 years ago you'd never see something like that displayed in someone's yard. I see them all the time out here though. Call me a fuddy duddy but back then it seemed like regardless of how you felt about a certain politician, you had enough respect for your neighbors and any kids around not to display something like that. It's not the worst thing someone could do but it does make me wonder what the next step is. Because while it's just a yard flag, it's a pretty hostile statement to anyone disagreeing with you. It's almost like testing the waters to see what can get by. People mostly seem to ignore it if they don't already agree. Though in one local town the neighbors wanted it taken down. There is a vulgarity code in that town which was enforceable with fines. But it became a first amendment issue. No one is arresting you for using profanity against the government but there are people who live there who don't want to be subjected to it day in and day out. Who find it offensive. Are the people who complained about that flag being too easily offended? And why is their neighbor being so easily offensive?
I was thinking back maybe 15 years ago you'd never see something like that displayed in someone's yard. I see them all the time out here though. Call me a fuddy duddy but back then it seemed like regardless of how you felt about a certain politician, you had enough respect for your neighbors and any kids around not to display something like that. It's not the worst thing someone could do but it does make me wonder what the next step is. Because while it's just a yard flag, it's a pretty hostile statement to anyone disagreeing with you. It's almost like testing the waters to see what can get by. People mostly seem to ignore it if they don't already agree. Though in one local town the neighbors wanted it taken down. There is a vulgarity code in that town which was enforceable with fines. But it became a first amendment issue. No one is arresting you for using profanity against the government but there are people who live there who don't want to be subjected to it day in and day out. Who find it offensive. Are the people who complained about that flag being too easily offended? And why is their neighbor being so easily offensive?
Last edited:
