11–20 of 111 posts
Are people actually deeply offended by things they read on the interest? Or are people looking for reasons to be "offended"? Because the latter seems far more often the case.
Didn't read, but this offends me.
>People who have so desensitized themselves to everything offensive that they’re offended by mere attempts to be considerate.
The author seems to be suggesting that because everyone thinks their behavior is universal and objective, one cannot justifiably make this claim, and that every objective thrust must necessarily have emotional underpinnings. Maybe; but Fry never tries to invalidate others' feelings. Those offended tend to.
Are people actually deeply offended by things they read on the interest? Or are people looking for reasons to be "offended"? Because the latter seems far more often the case.
You can judge actions, moderate actions, reward actions... But feelings are harder to identify.
Which was sorta the point of this article, I guess. There's a good chance that everyone is offended... So, what are we gonna do about that? If everyone is offended - and if we stop trying to sort out who has a "right" to be and who doesn't - then these notions that some bad behavior is justified kinda start looking silly: if we're gonna welcome everyone into the proverbial pool, then we can't let anyone get away with abuse, including the system itself.
Anyhow, it's a shame that it looks like only half the comments here are from people who read the article instead of just jumping to conclusions.
Are people actually deeply offended by things they read on the interest? Or are people looking for reasons to be "offended"? Because the latter seems far more often the case.
Did you actually read the article? Or did you just look at the title and see a "witty quip" opportunity? Because the latter seems far more likely given your comment seems unrelated to the article's content.
Are people actually deeply offended by things they read on the interest? Or are people looking for reasons to be "offended"? Because the latter seems far more often the case.
How would you ever know? You can judge actions, moderate actions, reward actions... But feelings are harder to identify. Which was sorta the point of this article, I guess. There's a good chance that everyone is offended... So, what are we gonna do about that? If everyone is offended - and if we stop trying to sort out who has a "right" to be and who doesn't - then these notions that some bad behavior is justified ki…
Are people actually deeply offended by things they read on the interest? Or are people looking for reasons to be "offended"? Because the latter seems far more often the case.
How would you ever know? You can judge actions, moderate actions, reward actions... But feelings are harder to identify. Which was sorta the point of this article, I guess. There's a good chance that everyone is offended... So, what are we gonna do about that? If everyone is offended - and if we stop trying to sort out who has a "right" to be and who doesn't - then these notions that some bad behavior is justified ki…
The tsunami analogy was quite eye-opening for me. It puts things into perspective. It's easy to look at an individual drop and say: "this is nothing!" Anyhow, it's a shame that it looks like only half the comments here are from people who read the article instead of just jumping to conclusions.