What offends you?

[Limehouse]

How about "racist scum"..."bigoted bastards"...."war mongering right wingers"....."feminists"......"murdering abortionists"...."tory bastards"
The list is long.......

Like I said before - I haven't seen them scrawled on walls near my home. I don't see what's wrong with the term 'feminist' anyway.

[Derrick]

I live in an area where average income is low and where unemployment is relatively high.

The newly re-energized NF tried to march here a few years ago and were confronted by a very large crowd. After an hour and before they could address their small support the old bill advised them to use their return tickets earlier than expected.

During the last council elections here the BNP leafleted during the middle of the night. I was up late one night when their sad drivel dropped through the letterbox at 2:30am. I went outside and shouted and the scumbag ran off.

A few days later on, the Tory looking BNP candidate knocked at my door and was being escorted by 2 meatheads. After being told to "piss off, Nazi scum" he walked away caling me all sorts of names. He came last thankfully.

At that time the SWP were selling their propaganda outside W H Smith at lunchtime on a Saturday on a regular basis.

At least the SWP have the guts to stand there rather than doing a covert moonlit drop like the self knowing cowardly and unpopular Nazi's.

For me the best part of Furher Griffin appearing on Question Time was when it was taken up by HIGNFY. His picture appeared and not one of the panel could actually identify who the sad twat was. Deathly silence. Classic.

Derrick

[babybird67]

I remember that episode of HIGNFY

classic it certainly was!

[Stephen Thomas]

but why precisely should we refrain from ridiculing or offending others?

There's ridicule and ridicule, Ally, as you must well know. Somebody earlier linked Political Correctness with human decency and that's my position ie that someone should not be insulted for stuff they have no control over.

Jewboys and n*ggers anybody?

[Ally]

But those are exclusions you apply. What about ridiculing people who use n*gger or jewboy as insults? Would you have a problem ridiculing them? Everyone applies their own standards to their exemption list, so who gets to create the master list?

But of course, my main thrust deals more with the matter of offending than ridicule. And I would like to know:

Why should we be concerned with offending others?

[lynn cates]

paradigm

Hello Ally.

"Why should we be concerned with offending others?"

Now THAT'S an excellent question. And the answer, I think, depends upon one's ethical paradigm.

At one pole, an ethical egoist (like professor Rand) shouldn't care a feather or a fig about offending someone (unless it should lead to personal disutility).

At the opposite end of the spectrum (oops, mixed metaphor?), the Kantians and Natural Law camps see something of the Divine or transcendental in humankind. Therefore, etc.

Many of the camps in between deal with the topic on an ad hoc basis.

Cheers.
LC

[Limehouse]

But those are exclusions you apply. What about ridiculing people who use n*gger or jewboy as insults? Would you have a problem ridiculing them? Everyone applies their own standards to their exemption list, so who gets to create the master list?

But of course, my main thrust deals more with the matter of offending than ridicule. And I would like to know:

Why should we be concerned with offending others?

It's kind of hard to answer your question Ally - but that's because not many people would think about asking it and when you're put on the spot it makes you think hard about why you would not want to offend others.

I suppose I want people to feel good - to feel valued and respected. Now historically - say when I was a child - a lot of people were not valued and respected because of things like their colour or their religion or their disabilities or their sexuality. Not only were they not respected - but they were often subject to abuse. I think it's a good thing that abuse of that type is no longer acceptable. I think it's better to see the good in people than look for difference.

[Ally]

It's kind of hard to answer your question Ally - but that's because not many people would think about asking it and when you're put on the spot it makes you think hard about why you would not want to offend others.

I'm good at that aren't I? But actually, I kind of believe that's the point of life, to ask the questions everyone else takes for granted and really examine what motivates us and why we believe what we believe in regards to the questions that most people wouldn't think to ask.

I suppose I want people to feel good - to feel valued and respected.

But that doesn't really deal with the subject of offense. What I mean is, and as said previously, you cannot control what someone will take offense to.

Using an example previously of a discussion, what if I told you that I found it deeply insulting and highly offensive that you would condemn me to a horrible death of drowning in my own blood vomit, or paralyzed and incapable of moving out of my own waste and filth, slowly going mad trapped inside my body...what if I find it offensive that you would prefer this for me, and based solely on your own fears, would choose to deny me a choice on how to live my own life?

What now? You have offended me. Are you going to change your mind? Are you never going to speak on the subject again for fear that you might offend?

I think it's a good thing that abuse of that type is no longer acceptable. I think it's better to see the good in people than look for difference.

Your are juxtaposing two different concepts. The opposite of "good" is not "different". The opposite of "bad" is not "conformity" One can both look for the good and the differences in people, and celebrate and appreciate the differences and grow and broaden ones perspective.

But regardless, once again, this is your opinion on what should be valued in people. To the deeply religious who view homosexuality as a sin against god (hypocrisy aside in their singling out this one vice), they may well view homosexuals as akin to murderers and rapists. They find gay people as deeply offensive as I find bible-thumpers. I am not going to change their mind and I refuse to allow someone to tell me I can' t call them bigoted, idiotic, narrow-minded, hypocritical dumbasses if I want to, for fear of causing offense.

That's the thing: they are just as convinced of their rightness as I am. I can't remove their right to speech without removing my own. Therefore, they have to be allowed to be as hateful as they want to be.

[Limehouse]

I'm good at that aren't I? But actually, I kind of believe that's the point of life, to ask the questions everyone else takes for granted and really examine what motivates us and why we believe what we believe in regards to the questions that most people wouldn't think to ask.



But that doesn't really deal with the subject of offense. What I mean is, and as said previously, you cannot control what someone will take offense to.

Using an example previously of a discussion, what if I told you that I found it deeply insulting and highly offensive that you would condemn me to a horrible death of drowning in my own blood vomit, or paralyzed and incapable of moving out of my own waste and filth, slowly going mad trapped inside my body...what if I find it offensive that you would prefer this for me, and based solely on your own fears, deny me a choice on how to live my own life?

What now? You have offended me. Are you going to change your mind? Are you never going to speak on the subject again for fear that you might offend?






Your are juxtaposing two different concepts. The opposite of "good" is not "different". The opposite of "bad" is not "conformity" One can both look for the good and the differences in people, and celebrate and appreciate the differences and grow and broaden ones perspective.

But regardless, once again, this is your opinion on what should be valued in people. To the deeply religious who view homosexuality as a sin against god (hypocrisy aside in their singling out this one vice), they may well view homosexuals as akin to murderers and rapists. They find gay people as deeply offensive as I find bible-thumpers. I am not going to change their mind and I refuse to allow someone to tell me I can' t call them bigoted, idiotic, narrow-minded, hypocritical dumbasses if I want to, for fear of causing offense.

That's the thing: they are just as convinced of their rightness as I am. I can't remove their right to speech without removing my own. Therefore, they have to be allowed to be as hateful as they want to be.

OK - you are making some really good points. I do completely accept your take on the euthanasia debate and you have introduced an aspect that I hadn't completely thought through.

However - I am struggling with people being given the right to be hateful. I see the argument you are making - but I can't embrace it personally. However - I appreciate your approach and I'll have to think about it a bit more over a good night's sleep!

[Ally]

Have a good sleep!

I just wanted to clarify that I was not in fact offended by the previous discussion regarding euthanasia, in case I was not clear. I was just using it as an example of how two people could both have differing beliefs on a sensitive subject, both coming by them honestly and how one could take offense beyond the others ability to control.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi everybody,
Those of us who live in communities and are not hermits are social animals and depend on each other ,to a greater or lesser extent, to survive.Courtesy or polite behaviour, avoids the hurting of other people's feelings in these communities and enables people to live more harmoniously together.Most people seem to live happier,healthier lives that way.
Norma

[Limehouse]

Have a good sleep!

I just wanted to clarify that I was not in fact offended by the previous discussion regarding euthanasia, in case I was not clear. I was just using it as an example of how two people could both have differing beliefs on a sensitive subject, both coming by them honestly and how one could take offense beyond the others ability to control.

Morning Ally

Ok - I've slept on it (well I thought about it in bed) and first I thought about a word 'intention' and this morning I read your post above and it amounts to the same thing. You can offend osmeon without intending to offend them - just by giving your view. However - if you intend to offend someone - and you do so using language and behaviour that oppresses them and degrades them - in order to do them harm - then that is surely wrong.

I'll give you an example. A few posts back - someone was saying that a person 'chooses to be offended' and that 'names can't hurt people'.
Here is a sad story to show that people can be very greatly harmed.

Fiona Pilkinton was a lone mother with two teenage children living on an estate in Leicestershire. Her daughter had physical and mental disabilities and caring for her was extremely challenging.

Fiona and her family were plagued with abuse from local youths. They were called names and spat at in the street. Their home was bombarded with rocks and stones and dog mess was pushed through their letter box. Fiona complained to the council and to the police numerous times but the abuse continued. Parents of the youths concerned did not stop their offspring from attacking this family. Fiona's daughter was terrified byu the attacks and Fiona herself was heatbroken that they were being targeted just because her daughter had disabilities.

Finally - Fiona could take no more. She drove her daughter to a quiet lay-by and set light to the car with them both inside. They died a horrible death.

Did Fiona and her family really have to endure such treatment in the name of freedom?

[Limehouse]

Hi everybody,
Those of us who live in communities and are not hermits are social animals and depend on each other ,to a greater or lesser extent, to survive.Courtesy or polite behaviour, avoids the hurting of other people's feelings in these communities and enables people to live more harmoniously together.Most people seem to live happier,healthier lives that way.
Norma

Absolutly Norma. And I would say most people do live together harmoniously even when they come from vastly different cultures. There are 24 homes in my cul-de-sac and in them live English -Poles - Lithuanians - Slavs -Pakistanis - Christians - Muslims - homosexuals - heterosexuals and possibly Pagans - and we all get along and exchange Christmas cards and live our private lives privately and unmolested.

[Ally]

Fiona Pilkinton was a lone mother with two teenage children living on an estate in Leicestershire. Her daughter had physical and mental disabilities and caring for her was extremely challenging.

Fiona and her family were plagued with abuse from local youths. They were called names and spat at in the street.

Life is hard. A good teaching example that some people are idiots. Want me to give you the story of the women being raped, actually physically assaulted in Africa as a political object lesson? Or the women in the Middle East beaten and stoned to death for failure to be properly moral...and happening to flash their ankles? So no, I can't really get worked up over name calling.

Their home was bombarded with rocks and stones and dog mess was pushed through their letter box. Fiona complained to the council and to the police numerous times but the abuse continued. Parents of the youths concerned did not stop their offspring from attacking this family. Fiona's daughter was terrified byu the attacks and Fiona herself was heatbroken that they were being targeted just because her daughter had disabilities.

At this point she should have gone higher than the local police. I assume you have a next up the chain just like we do here. Or sued the parents for the damage to her home. Or caught one of them in the act and beat them with a bat til the rest got the idea not to trespass on her property or bother her. If your judicial system is so ineffective, what would happen to her, nothing, self defense. Or here's a thought, she could have moved.

Finally - Fiona could take no more. She drove her daughter to a quiet lay-by and set light to the car with them both inside. They died a horrible death.

And? So what. Do you expect me to feel sympathy for her now? She is a murderer. She chose to kill her daughter, because she'd rather be dead than move?

Did Fiona and her family really have to endure such treatment in the name of freedom?

Yes. She had a lot of options available to her and her choice was to knuckle under passively and then murder her daughter.

I don't have sympathy for her death. And she had other choices in her life.

[jason_c]

Absolutly Norma. And I would say most people do live together harmoniously even when they come from vastly different cultures. There are 24 homes in my cul-de-sac and in them live English -Poles - Lithuanians - Slavs -Pakistanis - Christians - Muslims - homosexuals - heterosexuals and possibly Pagans - and we all get along and exchange Christmas cards and live our private lives privately and unmolested.

The race riots in Northern England suggest this is an idealised community. Middle class communities are rather different than ghetto or inner city communities. I have a friend who worked in Holland for many years. I had always believed Holland to be a liberal part of the world. Some of the stories he told of race problems in that country(Rotterdam particularly) were a real shock to me.

Wether this is best dealt with by being PC or instead having brutally honest politics(sometimes racially charged) I do not know. My guess would be the latter.