Kuro's anti-PC thread (warning: you will probably hate what you read)

[Kuroimaken]

Honestly, I doubt we're really at odds about there BEING an issue. But we are at odds about how said issue should be treated.

Interestingly, even if we're 99,9% similar in genetic makeup, that 0.1% is enough to ensure that no two people have the same fingerprints, exact eye color hue, scent makeup, or heartbeat sounds. We are all "people" insofar as we're the same species, but each and every last one of us is very different from the next. And that's really for the best - variety isn't just the spice of life, it's how nature ensures our goddamned survival. Honestly, the fact we're fixated on hair, eye or skin color really only shows us how shallow we are - we're different in so many other different ways, some of which we cannot possibly even tell without use of a microscope!

Our ability to group up and agree on things is actually based on very shallow aspects of our lives. "I love chocolate!" "Me too!" "Oh wow, our grandparents came from the same piece of geographical landmass!" "We're wearing the same shirt!"

So it should come as no surprise that our excuse for hating people of our own freaking species is just as shallow.

Yes, there are places where people get beaten up for their gender, sexuality or religion. I call it my back street.

Just because something is for the good of a "bigger picture" doesn't mean I have to like it, and I DEFINITELY don't need to endorse it if I find it's a crappy way to do things. Whatever happened to subtlety?

[Dkonen]

Yes, beaten up happens (unfortunately) in my own city. I live a few minutes outside of town so I can't say it's my back street. I did however live next to a murder and a few blocks from where there were regular stabbings-some racially motivated. (Edit: forgot to make note: beaten up is not massacred. It's still bad, but it's no genocide)

Actually I think it was closer to 99.98%, but I don't have my anthro notes right in front of me, and I'm currently between laundry and packing for an event this weekend. It's amazing how little cosmetic effects affect one's genetic code, no? I thought it was rather impressive myself when I learned it (probably why I remembered).

I will endorse what solutions there are until there are better ones. Feel free to come up with and implement it. At that point, I will be more than happy to toss out what we have now.

I'm sure you can at least understand that when you have no other options available, you take the best of what you can get, even if that "best" is still pretty damned bad, which in this case it isn't...it's just clumsy-the growing pains of a fairly young life, for, a few decades is nothing in the lifespan of a culture. Noone expects a toddler to be an athlete, and I don't expect the media to be wizards, but I like what they're trying to do. At least they *are* trying, which is better than the alternative.

Subtlety is nice and it is being used in a few places, but it's harder to see because...well... *subtlety*

[Kuroimaken]

Yeah, I think that fine line is called "being able to draw breath independently". Gotta say I have a hard time imagining what's worse: dying over someone else's bigotry or spending up to several months in a living hell because of the same.

(Fuck, I just had deja vu. I hate it when this happens. July 15, 2011)

My point still stands, whether it's .1 or .02, don't ya think?

[Dkonen]

I'm married. I have a house, and cats and friends. I'll do traction over dead. You should too....that may be something you want to really take a good long look at after this is done. Not to be nosy, but that's not a good place to have your head. At all.

Also beaten up is traction for one or two. Massacre is everyone in your village mutilated, maybe raped, and executed. Of course, being dead, you wouldn't care (depending on your afterlife views), but the scene of a massacre is somewhat (considerably) more horrifying than a guy who's left his teeth on the sidewalk and half his body fluids in the alley. That and don't assume a massacre means guns. It also can mean beating people to death en masse at the hands of a mob. It can mean burning them alive, gassing them. Torturing them and then killing them, a number of atrocities can be committed before their deaths and usually are.

That it's not surprising people hate each other for shallow reasons? Nope. Never contested. Though honestly, a lot of it seemingly stems from insecurities. People make up tales about what makes someone else worse/subhuman so they get disqualified from the "who's better" contest. It makes it real easy to win when you just disqualify anyone better then you on whatever spurious grounds you can come up with (like sexual preferences, religion, region of origin or skin colour)

*shakes head*

people are idiots sometimes.

[Kuroimaken]

No arguments there.

I think envy also plays a part. Basic point: there's always been people who have stuff, and people who don't. Those who don't have stuff could offer to barter with those who do, and that's how basic commerce is born. But sometimes people will want to cheat on that barter, or refuse to trade for whatever reason. And sometimes that avenue is never considered in the first place, which leads to people trying to get things by force. And we all know what happens when people refuse to play nice with each other, right?

[EjoThims]

Hon, you have a good heart, but please understand it's just as much freedom of speech to say you hate what someone's saying and it's hurtful for reasons XYZ as it is to say that hurtful thing in the first place.

My main issue with the whole idea of political correctness is the raging morons who use it as a replacement for developing the basic social skill of actually dealing with any pain you might feel in response to the words of others.

Really. If anything I have ever said has ever hurt you, it is because of what you put into those words.

Either they weren't intended to hurt and you still assumed some kind of malice, or they were intended to hurt and you for some stupid reason actually give any kind of shit what an asshole that would say such things has to say.

In both scenarios, the hurt is a response to the words, not a part of the words themselves.

And I'll be damned if I'm ever held responsible for the actions of another, but that is exactly the core ideal of political correctness.

And it needs to die. A horrible fiery death. Possibly involving sensitive body parts and pressed wood byproduct lacerations.





Now, all that said, any actions intended to be hurtful (even in non physical ways) are a totally different story.

Caveat numero du:

(click to show/hide)

I still stand by that, as a communicator (spoken or written), you are responsible for the ways in which your communication is understood. But there is a big gap between being understood as hurtful (even if you don't actually mean to be) and someone being hurt by your words. Again, the action of the hurt is not in the words, nor even the understanding of them (regardless of the intended harm in them) but is instead in the action of the understanders response.

[Dkonen]

The point I was making is that it's just as much freedom of speech to say: "you're a racist douchebag and you should DIAF!" as it is for you to make the remarks that provoke it.

As one speaking, you know what you are saying and why. People have as much freedom to express their anger at your words as you do to say them. Freedom of speech goes both ways.

And no, as someone who is hearing your words, it is not *my* responsibility to read your mind to figure out what you meant to say. The speaker should take responsibility for their own actions and words. If you hurt someone with them, it's as much your fault as if you had accidentally clocked them (I have done this). It's not *their fault* for getting hit. Your body, your speech, your actions your words.

Be an adult about it and admit when you do something, take responsibility and live with the consequences of your actions and your words.

Political correctness was a mess of new diplomacy and courtesy that wasn't well thought out. That being said, if I called someone Black and they were offended, I'd apologize and ask them if they had another identifier they preferred. It's the mature way to handle it. I said something, it bothered them, I will amend my actions and apologize. My words, my fault.

Noone else controls what I say or how I say it. I do. If I am ignorant or rude, I must face the consequences of such, and those involve either apologizing or being made a pariah. That's how it works. I chose to speak. I chose the words. I spoke them. I am responsible.

I don't fall for the "well if you weren't XX then I wouldn't have had to hit you/assault you/etc" defense.

I've been on one side of that and blaming someone else for getting offended is just a milder version of victim blaming.

[Kuroimaken]

Be an adult about it and admit when you do something, take responsibility and live with the consequences of your actions and your words.

Responsibility to go with a freedom? Surely, it must be madness!

It isn't, but I find that's how a lotta people think.

Fine, everyone has the right to say whatever they want. But not everyone should be allowed to be RELEVANT about what they say. Otherwise we'd find ourselves at the ground zero of a major clusterfuck.

I make it a point to avoid certain words in a non-flattering context. But I otherwise use them fairly freely. Not that anyone appreciates it when I do hold my tongue, mind...

[Dkonen]

Hm...

I think ground zero of a "major clusterfuck" might be putting it mildly....

Then again I have a deep and abiding raging hatred for so called "academics" posting things about "studies" that include miniscule sample sizes and/or are conducted with obvious bias and manage to get somehow into the public's eye.

I swear my eye twitch is probably solely from the fact that we're still trying to convince a fifty-plus year old father that his son was *NOT* made autistic by a vaccine. I get the rages just thinking about it. 

[EjoThims]

The point I was making is that it's just as much freedom of speech to say: "you're a racist douchebag and you should DIAF!" as it is for you to make the remarks that provoke it.

As one speaking, you know what you are saying and why. People have as much freedom to express their anger at your words as you do to say them. Freedom of speech goes both ways.

Well, of course.

I just hate the raging idiots who think that their own inability to not cause themselves pain when hearing certain words means no one has the freedom to say those words.

And no, as someone who is hearing your words, it is not *my* responsibility to read your mind to figure out what you meant to say.

I never claimed it was. I, in fact, I even clarified (in the spoiler) that I believe the exact same thing.

The speaker should take responsibility for their own actions and words.

But of course. But they are not responsible for the actions of those hearing the words they speak, even if those actions are a response to the speaker's words.

If you hurt someone with them, it's as much your fault as if you had accidentally clocked them

And this is where people get stupid.

No one, ever, hurts anyone with words.

Words do not harm people. Words are, in fact, completely incapable of causing physical harm (unless of a high enough decibel level or at an exactly modulated frequency, but those are very much outliers and technically it is the sound, not the words, causing harm).

People hurt themselves in reaction to words. And that is not the responsibility of anyone but themselves. 'Taking offense' over something is a subset of that.

Be an adult about it and admit when you do something, take responsibility and live with the consequences of your actions and your words.

Again, I agree 100%. And if you choose to let yourself be hurt by the words of others, you need to take responsibility instead of blaming others for your self harm.

It's the mature way to handle it. I said something, it bothered them, I will amend my actions and apologize.

Yes, this is the mature and kind way of handling things. But those things are extra and must be given freely. They cannot be expected as a matter of force, coercion, or even censorship. Otherwise they have no meaning at all.

My words, my fault.

Wrong here though. Your words do not control the actions of another. And to assume that they do is massively egotistical and arrogant.

Noone else controls what I say or how I say it.

And the things you say can never control what another feels, thinks, or says; unless they give you that power themselves.

I must face the consequences of such

But of course. Everyone should.

And political correctness is about shifting those consequences to another instead of confronting them.

blaming someone else for getting offended is just a milder version of victim blaming.

 

No.

And claiming this is actually an attempt at taking power away from the 'victims' of the offense. It's an attempt to force on people the erroneous ideal that anyone else has power over their feelings, thoughts, and actions.

And that erroneous ideal is the evil and corrupt heart of political correctness and the reason it is such a damaging trend in our society.

No one else has power over your choices; they are yours and yours alone.

You may feel limited because you do not want to accept the consequences of those choices, but you are making a choice even in letting yourself be limited by those consequences.

To take it to the extreme (because someone will, probably under the misguided notion that it will make me backpedal), I could go around doing X horrible thing (rape, murder, whatever) but I choose not to. As do all other people who do not do such things. For many, the choice is about religion or law - they don't want to go to jail or hell or whatever - they don't want to accept the societal consequences. I have my own reasons for such choices, but they are far more personal than the consequences imposed by outside forces.



Again, everything you ever do, including your thoughts and feelings, are actions you take and choices you make. That does (necessarily) not make them conscious, but they are still your responsibility and no one else's.

[Dkonen]

Actually a number of people *do* get hurt by words. Using dehumanizing language does affect a person. You know this and choose consciously to say or not say it. That is *your* responsibility, not theirs.

Also a subconscious reaction is not a "choice".

Choice involves awareness. Noone is utterly aware of their subconscious. That's why it "sub" conscious.

You have more choice over your words than they do over their reaction, therefore the onus is on you to act like an adult and accept that not everyone is going to react well to your words. You need to realize that you're provoking them.

We even have a clause here that if you verbally provoke a person far enough, that they cannot be charged with assault. It's called "justifiable provocation". It's not used often, but it legally stands that your words are *YOUR* responsibility. You need to know that what you say is going to cause a reaction. You can choose your words easier than someone can sit and figure out every single nuance of their subconscious (impossible).

Since the subconscious is not a choice, but a byproduct of upbringing and circumstance, anyone who refutes responsibility for their own virtiolic spew is being a child and blaming the victim of the offense and metaphysical harm for their own actions. Your words are a choice. If you make a mistake, man up and admit it. If someone gets pissed, explain what you meant, apologize. Be an adult.

I don't *make* you say anything. Noone does. Phrasing and speaking at all is a choice. One cannot control their subconscious reactions. That's why they're reactions and not planned outward actions. Everyone has bits of their subconscious that are deeply ingrained that they don't understand. If you know someone doesn't approve of a certain comment, you can choose not to say it. If someoine gets upset, you can choose to apologize. Unless they're a drama queen playing to the crowd, they can't choose not to be upset.  If they are, it's not a reaction, it *is* a choice and that's a form of manipulation and subterfuge which is a choice, and a very conscious one. They can go honk on my BoBo.

If you make rape culture remarks to me, I'm going to be pissed at you. You *know* that's not acceptable. I get mad at you for it, it's your fault. You went into it with open eyes and chose your words. If you say something that triggers me and I fly off the handle, you can choose to either a-ignore it b-try to find out what it was or c-apologize and open a conversation. I will eventually calm down and figure it out, but not many have the presence of mind to do that and my reacting to a trigger is still a reaction. It's unconscious, I can't control it, I didn't choose to get mad/upset. I don't know many people who would. It's decidedly unpleasant. You can't blame me for having my trigger come up, in a lot of cases, I don't even know what they are. At least I'm lookign to find out what they are. Some people don't have access to what I have (I am very lucky). They don't know what or why they do what they do. And triggers are pretty encompassing. I can't control how I feel in them.

Speaking of..just so we're absolutely clear on this:

You think that people should be more responsible for how they subconsciously react to things than those actions and words they undertake consciously. That's where you're going with this, right?
You think that someone choosing to say something is not their responsibility so much as how the one who hears it subconsciously reacts to it, yes?

Because that's what I'm getting here.

You're saying that you should be able to say what you want whenever you want and it's everyone else's responsibility to automatically know what you mean and how you mean it and to only react to it in a way you find acceptable?

Not that I haven't heard this before (unfortunately).

I believe in word police before feeling police. I believe in responsibility for conscious choices before subconscious instinctual reactions. I believe that you have your awareness to judge your words and choose them wisely, and that is your choice. I believe if you make a mistake, it is your responsibility to apologize. I believe that if you choose to use offensive words than you get what you deserve. You know better. Subconscious is *sub* conscious for a reason. Blaming someone else for their instinctive reaction to your choice, that is victim blaming. Saying that it's someone else's fault that your calling them a slutty worthless bitch made them upset is victim blaming. It's pretty damned obvious they'll be upset. You chose to use the words. Saying that you shouldn't be accountable for using the words is immature and childish and trying to refute accountability.

If you're under eighteen (or whatever your age of majority) I'll give you a pass... because well..accountability is for adults. But as an adult, you have accountability, it's part of what growing up is all about. Just because you refuse the responsibility doesn't make you right. 

[Jackinthegreen]

It is somewhat possible to turn some of one's own subconscious reactions into conscious actions, but choosing how to react to someone does, indeed, require more conscious awareness than simply choosing how to start an action.  Both do take actual thought and awareness though, and it's rather sad that some people simply don't have enough awareness of themselves or others to think before they act much less think before they react.

[Dkonen]

I agree, but there are always things that cause automatic reactions. If you tell someone that you want to kill babies like squashing watermelons while they have an infant in their arms, well I don't think it's sad that they're upset at you. I think they should react and tell you that you're a monster and should be locked away. I find that perfectly reasonable.

There is always also the provision that no matter how well you know someone there may be something in their history that has emotionally crippled/twisted them. Unfortunately there's a lot of that. In many many cases, people don't even know they carry it around. They will react, and no they can't necessarily take control of it.

As stated, I have triggers. I, however, have a great group of people who have finally managed to convince me of this. One of them is waving an object in my periphery. I get really ticked, really really fast. I have the presence to (if I can't move away) tell the person to stop. At one point a smart ass tried to keep it up because he thought it was funny after I told him not to and that it really made me irrationally angry. I grabbed it from him and told him that if he wanted to keep being a little dickhead I would shove it up his ass until it came out his throat.  He had a warning. About ten years ago I would have just grabbed it and hit him with it-repeatedly... and I wouldn't have warned him. I didn't know it was a trigger then, but my self defense mechanism would have kicked in.

There are more people with subconscious triggers due to traumatic events than not. It's sad, but true. Knowing this I can choose to not be an ass and try and provoke people.

That being said if I look at something and say "oh that's beautiful!" and someone goes "How could you say that! Now I feel ugly and *waaaahhhh*" well.. yeah...drama queen looking for attention-it's conscious choice of overblown theatricality. Not buying it.

Again common sense is the sticking point. Somethings are offensive, you know it before you say it. If you don't want someone to be offended, don't say it. If something causes offense, you have a better chance at finding out why it caused offense than the person who was (we're assuming genuinely) offended. They may not even know why, but you, as an outsider, may be able to see it much clearer than they can. If you still don't get it, ask. They're in the throes of a reaction, they may not even know they've reacted. Not all of them are patently obvious to the person within it.

Responsibility lays on the shoulders of those with the most control over the situation.

[EjoThims]

Actually a number of people *do* get hurt by words.

They may be hurt by their actions, feelings, or thoughts which are their responses to those words. But those actions, feelings, and thoughts are their own.

Anyone offended or hurt by anything another says is allowing themselves to be hurt and offended.

My words are not controlling anyone who is not allowing themselves to be controlled. And the words of others do not control me unless I allow them to do so.

That doesn't make my actions right if I am choosing to take advantage of those who would cede that control to me.

I'm just tired of people not owning up to giving others that power over them.

You have more choice over your words than they do over their reaction, therefore the onus is on you to act like an adult and accept that not everyone is going to react well to your words. You need to realize that you're provoking them.

And this is why I am tired of the idiots who hold this stance. The myriad swamp of moronic topics that may possibly offend some random buffoon or another is not my responsibility to wade through.

Personal safety, mental and physical, is the responsibility of the individual. As long as no one else is deliberately taking action to try and circumvent that safety, no one else (aside from your parents or other legal guardian as a child or one society deems to have a similarly developed psyche not capable of judging consequences) is charged with keeping you away from that which may hurt you.

As an adult attempting a civil discourse, I will avoid the most common infractions, as well as generally keep an appropriate tone.

But when one takes it upon themselves to find something in my words or actions to be "hurt" by, it is their responsibility. Just as it is not my responsibility to make sure others are wearing the proper safety gear when coming on to the field to play against me in sports. Nor is it my responsibility to make sure dumbasses aren't jumping off bridges onto the highway in front of my car.

it legally stands that your words are *YOUR* responsibility.

I have never said they are not.

But your responses to those words are *YOUR* responsibility.

You can choose your words easier than someone can sit and figure out every single nuance of their subconscious (impossible).

Not at all impossible to gauge your reactions to events and make a choice on the actions you are going to take.

The assumption that you cannot dictate your own actions is either lazy or ignorant. You are either too lazy to put effort into deciding your own actions and thus choose to allow others to dictate your choices, or you are ignorant that you have a choice to make.

they can't choose not to be upset.

Simply false. You are making this choice (or the opposite one) at this very moment.

I get mad at you for it, it's your fault.

No. It is your fault. That does not mean it is an unreasonable response, but own your actions. You got mad because you do not like those ideas, or words. You slapped me because you wanted me to feel physical pain equal to that which you allow yourself to feel when you explore the consequences of such ideals playing out across our society unchecked.

Just like I choose to be sad when I realized so many were giving power over their choices to those they claimed to hate. I choose to become angry at those who cannot see that the power was theirs in the first place, because I am aware that anger is a more motivating force in my subconcious, thus pushing myself to try and continue pointing out the hypocrisy of such morons.

I also choose to get angry at the morons who drive like morons. Because their blatant disregard for the time and safety of others is something I would like the world to be without. Seriously, how the hell hard is it to understand how right of way or big giant lines on the road work?

I didn't choose to get mad/upset.

But you did.

It's decidedly unpleasant.

It's decidely useful.

You can't blame me for having my trigger come up, in a lot of cases, I don't even know what they are.

Ignorance is no excuse. It never has been, nor will it ever be.

You think that people should be more responsible for how they subconsciously react to things than those actions and words they undertake consciously. That's where you're going with this, right?

Not at all.

I think people should be equally responsible for how they act and react.

You think that someone choosing to say something is not their responsibility so much as how the one who hears it subconsciously reacts to it, yes?

Nope.

I think everything each of us does (including speech) is wholly our own responsibility.

You're saying that you should be able to say what you want whenever you want

Yes. As should everyone else.

and it's everyone else's responsibility to automatically know what you mean and how you mean it and to only react to it in a way you find acceptable?

Completely incorrect. And does not at all follow from what I've stated. I'm almost tempted to point out how it seems to be a deliberate misconstruing of my arguments, possibly by quoting the name of a logical fallacy that covers such items.

But I won't. I'll instead just choose to hint at it in a very blatant manner.

It is everyone else's responsibility to react in a way they find acceptable. I would like them to stop finding a particular set of reactions acceptable, including the idea that anyone else controls the actions they take. It is counter productive to the goals of changing any other ideas about what society finds acceptable.

Additionally, as I stated before (twice now), I 100% feel that being properly understood is the responsibility of the communicator. Though, those being intentionally dense must accept responsibility for that act.

I believe in word police before feeling police.

Perhaps that is where your misunderstanding comes from.

I do not believe in police for anything but physical acts of interaction between people and peoples. Police (and policing) has no place attempting to enter the realms of words, feelings, thoughts, or desires.

But I am particularly confused by your statement here.

If you don't believe in 'feeling police,' why do you believe we should be allowing others to control how we feel? Why do you believe we should only be allowed to say things that allow others to feel happy? These are ideals of policing happiness.

I believe that you have your awareness to judge your words and choose them wisely, and that is your choice. I believe if you make a mistake, it is your responsibility to apologize. I believe that if you choose to use offensive words than you get what you deserve. You know better.

I also believe all of these things.

I just don't believe that these things are anywhere near the full equation of communication or responsibility.

Blaming someone else for their instinctive reaction to your choice, that is victim blaming.

Not at all. Though the assumption that anyone reacting to my choices is automatically a victim is degrading, depowering, and dehumanizing both to myself and to everyone I interact with.

But if you had not considered the ability to choose and control reactions, it's no surprise that you have let yourself be led to such a false conclusion.

Saying that it's someone else's fault that your calling them a slutty worthless bitch made them upset is victim blaming.

It's not my fault if it upset them. It's my fault solely that I am choosing to say it, especially when it is untrue, and I should (and do) accept responsibility for saying such mean and hateful things, whether they be true or not.

It's pretty damned obvious they'll be upset. You chose to use the words.

Hopefully they'll be upset. If I was ever to say such a thing, it would be with the intent of upsetting someone. Either so that, in being upset, they created an association between myself and the loathing implied in those words and correctly surmised I did not enjoy their presence or so that they analyzed that loathing, looking for a cause, and decided that they either agreed with my assessment and should work to make changes in their life or that they disagreed with my assessment and would spend time with others who held the same values they do.

You're talking about being upset like it is a bad thing. It, like anger (and even sadness), is a tool.

(click to show/hide)

And don't even mention depression or other chemical issues. Unfortunately, mental control does not encompass telekinetically fixing legitimate physical and physiological problems with the structure of our own brain.

And yes, this means I believe that I would be responsible for triggering such issues if I was previously aware of them, just as I would be for intentionally adding peanuts to the soup when I knew one of my guests was allergic. It's still the guests responsibility to inform me of those allergies, though.

Saying that you shouldn't be accountable for using the words is immature and childish and trying to refute accountability.

I have never once said I should not be accountable for the words I say.

Just because you refuse the responsibility doesn't make you right.

My point exactly. If only people would understand that they are responsible for their own actions (as well as their words, thoughts, feelings, and desires) as much as I am responsible for mine.

[Raineh Daze]

So... what's it like to be perfectly rational and able to think about everything before taking action? I've heard that such people are highly popular in economic models, but I've never met anyone of the kind.

-Has been following this discussion.-

[EjoThims]

So... what's it like to be perfectly rational

I only wish I knew.

But I choose to work towards that goal the best I can.

And I hold myself responsible when I fall short of it.

[Raineh Daze]

See, this is what I don't get. You're holding people responsible for things that they literally cannot help. Because people are not perfectly rational, emotions are fast, and you are claiming that people have messed up if they don't react to everything like some generic 'normal' person.

Everyone has their weak points, and it isn't their fault if they're prodded. Not really the fault of the person doing it, unless they don't regret it, either. Some things are blameless.

If it happens twice, THEN it's the instigator's fault.

[Kuroimaken]

If it happens twice, THEN it's the instigator's fault.

THAT makes significantly more sense.

You can't blame someone for triggering a given action they do not know the consequences of unless those consequences would be immediately and readily apparent. Since people cannot read minds, nor do they have thought balloons over their heads or anything of the sort that would indicate a given immediate response to a statement, how would anyone know that X pushes somebody's buttons and Y does not?

[Dkonen]

The point I am actually arguing is not that you should read your audience's mind, but that you should use common sense and be aware that there are certain words that will be ill received. If you know someone well, you may even know their triggers, and their psychological weaknesses. My arguement is that, pending that knowledge, you are responsible for what you say, since you know what is wrong and right.

A person cannot always choose how they emotionally receive something, especially if it is upsetting. Having emotional instinctive responses is by no means dehumanizing, as anyone can tell you who has had outbursts, flares of temper, or really *ever* gotten swallowed by their emotions, it's a human state. Without emotion, we are not human.

(as an aside, there are multiple studies going on into the nature of emotional responses, whether they actually serve both social and evolutionary purpose to our continuing survival as a species-so far the response is "yes", as we are a social species and dependant on weeding out undesireables to keep our strata capable of continuing to coexist without destroying eachother)

I also take responsibility if I know, for example, someone is socially inept and an idiot. I know he'll spew things out, and he really doesn't know better. I have a friend, who, if I did not know this, I would probably have very little to do with. But-I know he doesn't mean it, he's just socially handicapped.

You can usually tell those people and I do feel bad for those who immediately offput others. *BUT* I do not pity them enough to think that their social ineptitude should get them a pass for every hurtful unpleasant thing they say. Even the most socially inept recognizes that the words s/he uses have consequences.

Arguing that your words should not have consequences is foolish and self centered.

Within reason, it is my job to understand among my friends, but that's why they're my friends. I know what they mean. That's just a learning curve, and adaptation. I am by no means required to do it, I choose to.

I think you may have been exposed to a number of faux offended drama queens in the past, for truly they are the only ones who *choose* to be offended. Choice implies premeditation. Emotion implies unconcious reactions. If someone has time to think and chooses to be offended...well then they're playing the crowd, not truly offended.

If you say "X is a slob" and X hears you, you're responsible for calling him a slob. He is not responsible for figuring out if you meant to be offensive or if you were pointing out that his sanitary habits needed to be amended.

[Jackinthegreen]

Humans are not Vulcans.  As nice as it might be to be able to always be in control of our emotions, it can be argued that sometimes we actually do need them to be out of our control because action before thought, in certain circumstances, is required or otherwise beneficial.  That doesn't give anyone a free pass to let themselves go of course, but it should let people think on exactly what times might it be better to let our emotions take hold of us.  In my opinion. one of the best examples of that is passion.  Being able to let ourselves go full bore into something without even thinking about it gets stuff done whereas stopping to think can actually screw us over.  Don't think about doing that freethrow, just let yourself do it.