Society/Culture Being 'offended' - Australia's favourite pastime?
- Thread starter fairdinkum
- Start date
- Tagged users None
http://www.slsa.sa.gov.au/manning/adelaide/beaches/beaches.htm
Do you think that being offended by things is something that only stupid people do?
I'm yet to meet the person that finds absolutely nothing offensive. People may not necessarily be outspoken about the things that offend them, much less want them banned, but everybody believes in some standard of what constitutes 'the done thing' and what doesn't.
- Banned
- #28
- Thread starter
- #29
Master troll.
By the way, can't believe you outlasted me on the North board. Boy are they easy to offend.
- Thread starter
- #30
Surely you can see that the thrust of this thread has to do with what this heightened offendedness inevitably leads to - things being banned/sacked/censored.
See Chasers, Catherine Deveny, blackface on Hey Hey, poster referred to in OP etc.
More broadly, 'offense' seems to me to be a generally negative emotion/reaction. The examples I cite in the OP demonstrate this well. Without getting into an ontological debate about whether or not negative emotions are unavoidable/necessary/etc, it seems to me that a society full of offended people is likely to be more negative (or angry/tempered/whatever you like) as well.
Of course people are going to be offended by this or by that. A technologically advanced, globalised world ensures we see stuff that will offend some people sometimes. But when we start carrying on like porkchops over a photo posted in a thread which was clearly meant to be some black humour, I think it would take a talented sophist to argue that that is a good thing.
Blasphemy laws are the hallmark of civilized society
freer flow of information has surely had some effect. solipsism, and greed in its various forms as well perhaps. the apparent surge in road rage is probably something of a parallel for the same selfish human reasons. tabloid television and news.
So? That's just the commercial dynamic. Businesses tailor their services to what the consumer wants.
Catherine Deveny has every right to offend whoever she wants. She doesn't have a right to draw a cheque from an employer whilst pissing off their customers.
Really, I think it's a good thing. Water finds its own level. Most people, businesses, organisations want to operate harmoniously with the people around them. If something is completely out of step with social mores then it by and large self-regulates itself away. As things become more acceptable, they organically make their way into accepted practice - see casual swearing, sex in movies, bathing suits, whatever.
But what's offence? It's just an expression of what people do or do not like about other people's actions. Personally I don't think knowing that information is, in and of itself, a bad thing.
The fact that many people believe that it is appropriate to (say) queue in an orderly manner for services, or give up one's seat on the bus for the frail and infirm are (I think) very positive things for our society. I am glad that I live in a society where (by and large) people do this through a shared awareness of etiquette, without needing the threat of legal consequences for failing to acquiesce.
Sounds like your real problem is with how third parties react to people taking offence when it's something you're not personally offended by.
It's not a good thing or a bad thing. It is what it is. If you like it, great. If 100 people don't, great. If the situation is reversed, great.
Gauging social attitudes and calibrating etiquette and our own behaviour accordingly allows optimisation of the environment for the most harmonious operation of human interaction - all without the need for a single law. That's all that really matters, IMO.
By the way guys, this is not a thread to bash moderating decisions elsewhere on BigFooty. I've already deleted a couple of posts in that vein.
Father Jack
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 23, 2006
- 22,937
- 25,127
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur FC
Not at all, I think what the psalmist was getting at is that there is no point getting all upset at the drop of a hat, but instead consider carefully the situation and endeavour to ascertain whether a) there is actually anything to be offended at, and b) what profit there is in getting all riled up. Sometimes the most innocent remark can be hugely confronting if misinterpreted.
- Thread starter
- #36
This is a classic Caesar post. Sophistry if ever I've seen it.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Let's go through this slowly. Why is it the 'commercial dynamic' that led to those people getting the chop? Because there's a sizeable proportion of people offended by stuff those people did. What is my OP about? That very proportion of people who get offended and whether or not it is growing.
Perhaps, for the benefit of people like yourself, I could have made my OP more narrow and harder to squirm around.
I am not talking about social mores or etiquette. I am talking about people getting 'offended' by other peoples words and ideas (which, of course, we express through actions of one variety or another). Although these are not mutually exclusive, they are still, obviously, seperate.
More importantly, if somebody cuts in line in a queue, then somebody else has been directly inconvenienced in an unavoidable way. If somebody posts a picture of the WTC on an internet forum, other people can quite easily ignore that photo (and even that poster if they like). See the difference? The offense I was making reference to in the OP (and I thought this was clear) is the type you see reflected in posts at the bottom of heraldsun articles about a childrens beauty pageant - not the type one may feel when somebody cuts in line at Woolies.
A mighty fine Caesarism.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Let's go through this slowly. Why is it the 'commercial dynamic' that led to those people getting the chop? Because there's a sizeable proportion of people offended by stuff those people did. What is my OP about? That very proportion of people who get offended and whether or not it is growing.
Perhaps, for the benefit of people like yourself, I could have made my OP more narrow and harder to squirm around.
I am not talking about social mores or etiquette. I am talking about people getting 'offended' by other peoples words and ideas (which, of course, we express through actions of one variety or another). Although these are not mutually exclusive, they are still, obviously, seperate.
More importantly, if somebody cuts in line in a queue, then somebody else has been directly inconvenienced in an unavoidable way. If somebody posts a picture of the WTC on an internet forum, other people can quite easily ignore that photo (and even that poster if they like). See the difference? The offense I was making reference to in the OP (and I thought this was clear) is the type you see reflected in posts at the bottom of heraldsun articles about a childrens beauty pageant - not the type one may feel when somebody cuts in line at Woolies.
A mighty fine Caesarism.
- Banned
- #37
Why is this subject never open to public debate?
Well, it's not open for debate here because this isn't the Customer Service forum.
I'm not sure what's open for debate there. You'd have to ask that moderator. Preferably in their forum.
So what's your point exactly? That people shouldn't have opinions on what they do and don't like? Or merely that they shouldn't express them?
Yes you are.
You draw an arbitrary line between stuff like people cutting in line and people being offended by the expression of ideas, and pretend it's black and white. It isn't.
All offence is based on a personal determination of acceptable social behaviour, and the reason that acceptable social behaviour is defined as such is ultimately rooted in a tangible reason. There are plenty of people who believe that the expression of certain ideas, or the ridicule of certain events, causes real social harm. No less social harm than the person who does not respect rules of queuing.
You may disagree. You may think they are ridiculous. But that is an entirely subjective point of view. That is the point I am making, and it is one you seem hell-bent on avoiding.
And you accuse me of sophistry.
- Thread starter
- #40
My point was made in the OP, if you'd care to read it in full without trying to conceive of a clever way to frame the discussion to allow you to post something which makes you seem more insightful than everybody else.
Sigh. Not this rubbish from you again.
If you want to discuss whether or not people should be 'offended' by other people cutting in line at woolies, or whether or not those line-cutters are of ethical/moral/whatever equivalence to people who post black humour on the internet, then go and start a thread about it. I won't bother opening the thread, but I'm sure you'll have fun.
My thread, this thread, clearly, once again, was intended to be about whether or not there has been a general increase in our society in people's propensity to 'get offended' by the words/thoughts(actions) of others, and express this 'offense' as they see fit. So far, the poll suggests that a few people do feel this propensity has risen, and replies other than yours show that many people cottoned on to the general idea my OP was talking about without any problems.
I don't know why you feel the need to enter threads like this and carry on the way you do.
- Banned
- #41
Ahhhh yes, that tiny little board full of padlocks at the bottom of the page.
Don't you think that if you're going to complain about something it's worth stopping and considering whether it is in fact a bad thing? That's all I was positing in my initial reply.
That aspect of the topic interested me more than a whole bunch of people sitting around saying "yeah, everyone is too PC and uptight about everything these days". YMMV.
But if you wish to construe the topic so narrowly as to generate a predetermined line of discussion, I will stop treading on your toes.
- Thread starter
- #44
^ Now you are just being petulant. That said, I'm happy for you to come good on your promise if it means you'll make like a Daytripper and leave the discussion to those who actually want to discuss the basic topic at hand.
EDIT: As I said to Trippy, I'm happy to let you get the last word in if it means you will leave the thread to those of us who want to discuss the actual topic at hand.
EDIT: As I said to Trippy, I'm happy to let you get the last word in if it means you will leave the thread to those of us who want to discuss the actual topic at hand.
How is challenging the preconceived assumptions inherent in the OP not 'discussing the topic at hand'?
If you can't be bothered defending your intellectual position that's cool, but at least be honest about it.
If you can't be bothered defending your intellectual position that's cool, but at least be honest about it.
Are you *ed? Greatest tragedy in world history? Only 3000 dead, it's bloody insignificant on the grand scale of things. Calling it the greatest tragedy in world history is the most offensive thing I've ever heard. Mods...
Most of the time these days I don't think people are even really offended. They have just been conditioned to think they should be offended and act accordingly.
EDIT: And whether you spell it with a 'c' or an 's' depends on whether you are using it as a verb or a noun. So you might commit an offence. Or perhaps you might take offense.
EDIT: And whether you spell it with a 'c' or an 's' depends on whether you are using it as a verb or a noun. So you might commit an offence. Or perhaps you might take offense.
On behalf of all *s, I am offended by your use of the word *ed.
In my opinion; Australians can really dish it out but can't take it.
To be honest I'm just really sick of being surrounded by close-minded dimwits, every second word is a vulgarity, at least 10 times a day there are racist, sexist and homophobic remarks, then people get offended so quickly if you so much as criticize them in the smallest way.
People are stupid in general and I am afraid that may never change.
To be honest I'm just really sick of being surrounded by close-minded dimwits, every second word is a vulgarity, at least 10 times a day there are racist, sexist and homophobic remarks, then people get offended so quickly if you so much as criticize them in the smallest way.
People are stupid in general and I am afraid that may never change.
might also consider a language angle. 'offended' is conceivably a catch-all for any grade of dislike. a lack of more appropriate words or phrases (however that is) could quite possibly lead a person's feelings, or, lead to the proliferation of statements of 'being offended' where it could be better described as something less harsh. much like illinois nazi stated, fall into the practice of stating offense.
Similar threads
