Avoiding offending people

steddyeddy

The Germaine Greer thread got me thinking about pronouns (it's not a bank holiday in the UK so I'm not out tonight). The subject was on transsexuals and how they like to be called. One poster said he thinks of them as the original gender like Germaine said. Personally I would go out of my way not to offend anyone and respect the wishes of people I'm referring to. Saying that one of my colleagues thinks that a man is someone with one X and one Y chromosome. He's entitled to his belief too but I don't think there's anything stopping him addressing people how they want to be addressed.

The thing is this seems a relatively sacred cow. Should people address me how I want to be addressed? For instance I stated recently I despise the terms middle, upper and working class. I find the terms working class offensive as I don't believe they're well defined and they're a method of derision sometimes. The thing is I don't expect people to stop using them because I find them offensive.

I'm trying think of another example but the other one that springs to mind is people on the dole. A mate of mine of the dole says he is a customer of the welfare office. Not everyone would refer to him that way to be fair :pac:.

How far should we go to avoid offending people? Should we not just teach people to respect their own beliefs and not give a crap what other people think?

Stheno

I think tbh that we go far to far to avoid offending people as it is.

I'm working class in that my father was working class which is the traditional definition. By profession I'd be middle class.

Anyway who gives a ****? We're all people!

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

I think tbh that we go far to far to avoid offending people as it is.

I'm working class in that my father was working class which is the traditional definition. By profession I'd be middle class.

Anyway who gives a ****? We're all people!

How f-ing dare you!!!!! Well I don't buy the labels myself but I respect your right to think that.

One eyed Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

How far should we go to avoid offending people? Should we not just teach people to respect their own beliefs and not give a crap what other people think?

Isn't that the problem though?

It appears that some people genuinely have been taught to respect their own beliefs and expect their own beliefs to be respected even though they don't give a crap for what other people think of their beliefs and just how disrespectful they are?

I prefer to condense that down into "don't be a dick!", but nobody gives a flying fcuk for what I think, nor do I expect them to. That way everyone's happy.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

How f-ing dare you!!!!! Well I don't buy the labels myself but I respect your right to think that.

I'm not sure I get your problem here?

Traditionally class has been determined by the profession of one's father?

steddyeddy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Isn't that the problem though?

It appears that some people genuinely have been taught to respect their own beliefs and expect their own beliefs to be respected even though they don't give a crap for what other people think of their beliefs and just how disrespectful they are?

I prefer to condense that down into "don't be a dick!", but nobody gives a flying fcuk for what I think, nor do I expect them to. That way everyone's happy.

But what constitutes being a d1ck? Is calling someone on the dole a dole user instead of customer offensive?

Plryty

The two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be courteous but still hold a different belief to another person, it's how actual educational debates take place between parties with complete opposing views. Clearly how somebody socialises can cross into bullying, but in most popular cases, people getting offended is due to their own insecurity as opposed to somebody trying to elicit a negative response.

George Carlin said it best. "They're only words, it's the context that counts, its the user, its the intention behind the words that make them good or bad. The words are completely neutral."

OhDearyMe

It can be a minefield sometimes. How is one person to know the other would be offended by a certain term or label? I do try my best not to offend and try to deal with people with as much tact as possible but I think people need to take others and the comments they make with a pinch of salt unless the person is very obviously trying to be a prick.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

I'm not sure I get your problem here?

Traditionally class has been determined by the profession of one's father?

Well I'm not really outraged you said that I was joking. It's not a problem it's just not something I subscribe to. I compare it to star signs or some other grouping of people. We inherited it from monkeys (the class system) and I think it's time some people evolved. You gave your definition of class but there's a million definitions out there.

sonny.knowles

Another one of these ****ing class threads.

OhDearyMe

steddyeddy wrote: »

But what constitutes being a d1ck?

I don't think it's difficult pick up on that?

IsMiseMyself

A dear friend of mine is trans, so I'm rather attuned to trans issues. It's a complicated thing and so much more than someone waking up and deciding "I'm a [opposite gender]" now. Having seen my friend struggle for years to becoming who he is now, it's a really, really awful thing.

He self-harmed and was depressed for years, and only since coming out has he found any happiness. I can't understand what it's like to feel inherently wrong in my body or to look in a mirror and wish I wasn't myself (and not even in a "omg I have such a bad outbreak" overly dramatic manner). However, before my friend came out, I was pretty uneducated on trans issues, and I'm pretty sure I would have said some (non-intentionally) offensive stuff at some point or other.

A lot of the time it comes down to the terminology and the word usage: like the difference between sex and gender. Gender identity is a very complex thing, and if someone is trans and wants to be called by their correct pronouns then I'll absolutely use them. I dunno. I think people should be better educated - in school, for starters, and that would help enormously.

But back to the point: I think people are allowed to be offended by whatever. Usually they have a reason. Let them have their offense, relative to the issue. It's when offense becomes a weapon or like causes ridiculous levels of drama over something minute - that's when people need to take a step back and consider their outlook.

But again: it's complicated!

steddyeddy

But should we suspend our beliefs about biology ect to avoid offending someone? I personally would as I wouldn't have a clue how to define man or woman in a philosophical way but I would attack those who don't.

steddyeddy

IsMiseMyself wrote: »

A dear friend of mine is trans, so I'm rather attuned to trans issues. It's a complicated thing and so much more than someone waking up and deciding "I'm a [opposite gender]" now. Having seen my friend struggle for years to becoming who he is now, it's a really, really awful thing.

He self-harmed and was depressed for years, and only since coming out has he found any happiness. I can't understand what it's like to feel inherently wrong in my body or to look in a mirror and wish I wasn't myself (and not even in a "omg I have such a bad outbreak" overly dramatic manner). However, before my friend came out, I was pretty uneducated on trans issues, and I'm pretty sure I would have said some (non-intentionally) offensive stuff at some point or other.

A lot of the time it comes down to the terminology and the word usage: like the difference between sex and gender. Gender identity is a very complex thing, and if someone is trans and wants to be called by their correct pronouns then I'll absolutely use them. I dunno. I think people should be better educated - in school, for starters, and that would help enormously.

I don't know a lot about trans people but I know they go through a very hard time. I personally wouldn't want to add to that.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well I'm not really outraged you said that I was joking. It's not a problem it's just not something I subscribe to. I compare it to star signs or some other grouping of people. We inherited it from monkeys (the class system) and I think it's time some people evolved. You gave your definition of class but there's a million definitions out there.

I gave the traditional method of calculating class, no idea why you took such offense.

Maybe because you are from a lower class background but consider yourself above that with your PHD? Who honestly gives a ****?

OhDearyMe

steddyeddy wrote: »

But should we suspend our beliefs about biology ect to avoid offending someone? I personally would as I wouldn't have a clue how to define man or woman in a philosophical way but I would attack those who don't.

I think it's best to learn when to keep your mouth shut - choose your battles and all that. Obviously you can believe whatever you like but you don't always have to verbalise every single thought that enters your head.

steddyeddy

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Another one of these ****ing class threads.

Well it's about the use of PC terms in order to avoid offending someone. So no not really about class. It was just an example.

sonny.knowles

Stheno wrote: »

I gave the traditional method of calculating class, no idea why you took such offense.

Maybe because you are from a lower class background but consider yourself above that with your PHD? Who honestly gives a ****?

I think the OP does, he seems to bring education and class up in every thread he starts. Major chip on shoulder.

zeffabelli

Excuse me one eyed jack but using the term dick is gender divisive, a micro aggression and highly offensive. It is andriphobic first in that it assumes there is something wrong with a dick. There is nothing wrong with dicks and you should not cave to this phallophobic terminology because someone might cry.

Don't be a dick surely should come with trigger warnings for those who are a little sensitive about their dicks or who may have been offended by dicks.

Additionally no one can assume there is consensus on what constitutes a dick anymore without making gross gendered discriminatory post structuralist assumptions.

sonny.knowles

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well it's about the use of PC terms in order to avoid offending someone. So no not really about class. It was just an example.

But you couldn't resist mentioning class.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

I gave the traditional method of calculating class, no idea why you took such offense.

Maybe because you are from a lower class background but consider yourself above that with your PHD? Who honestly gives a ****?

Jesus dude I didn't take offence. It was actually a joke. I don't think if I was actually offended I would get away with saying how f-ing dare you unless I went to drama school or something.

Also no I'm extremely proud of my roots.

steddyeddy

sonny.knowles wrote: »

But you couldn't resist mentioning class.

And you couldn't resist posting in a thread about it. Care to use this opportunity to discuss the use of PC terms?

Crooked Jack

In before someone posts the Stephen Fry quote

Oafley Jones

People seem to seek out offence as a past time these days. I won't be the first to quote Stephen Fry... ( HA Crooked Jack) But it's a fairly astute observation.

“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 ****ing what."

sonny.knowles

steddyeddy wrote: »

And you couldn't resist posting in a thread about it. Care to use this opportunity to discuss the use of PC terms?

Not really, I leave that to the PC brigade. I call a spade a spade.

Azalea

zeffabelli wrote: »

Excuse me one eyed jack but using the term dick is gender divisive, a micro aggression and highly offensive. It is andriphobic first in that it assumes there is something wrong with a dick. There is nothing wrong with dicks and you should not cave to this phallophobic terminology because someone might cry.

Don't be a dick surely should come with trigger warnings for those who are a little sensitive about their dicks or who may have been offended by dicks.

Additionally no one can assume there is consensus on what constitutes a dick anymore without making gross gendered discriminatory post structuralist assumptions.

Why do you keep saying this kinda thing as if you're talking to a bunch of people who buy into the extreme PC stuff?

steddyeddy

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Not really, I leave that to the PC brigade. I call a spade a spade.

"Anyone who calls a spade a spade is fit to use one" Oscar Wilde.

steddyeddy

Crooked Jack wrote: »

In before someone posts the Stephen Fry quote

You just got in there dude!

sonny.knowles

steddyeddy wrote: »

"Anyone who calls a spade a spade is fit to use one" Oscar Wilde.

Thanks, coming for you that is a compliment. I may not have a PHD, but that's by choice, I don't need a PHD to know my worth or show off, I was happy to join be real world not waste years for a piece of paper that is meaningless.

Crooked Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

You just got in there dude!

I like to do things in style

steddyeddy

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Thanks, coming for you that is a compliment. I may not have a PHD, but that's by choice, I don't need a PHD to know my worth or show off, I was happy to join be real world not waste years for a piece of paper that is meaningless.

If it makes you feel better a PhD is pretty worthless. Real experience counts for so much more.

sonny.knowles

steddyeddy wrote: »

If it makes you feel better a PhD is pretty worthless. Real experience counts for so much more.

Not sure you'd know much about real experience, you have all the hallmarks of the academic or lifelong student. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

osarusan

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

Those who really can't, re-register.

Azalea

Oafley Jones wrote: »

People seem to seek out offence as a past time these days. I won't be the first to quote Stephen Fry... ( HA Crooked Jack) But it's a fairly astute observation.

“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 ****ing what."

I've seen him get offended himself.

People seem to seek out people being offended too.

Theres a difference between pandering to the offence bandwagon and being well mannered.

If a married woman prefers to be called Mrs rather than Ms, then that's how I'll address her. I prefer to use a shortened version of my first name, and people generally call me by that because I prefer it. If someone is transgender then I'll use the appropriate pronouns, because it's their preferred form of address - understandably. Anyone who goes out of their way to refer to someone a way they know isn't their preference is just a bad mannered oaf, not a profile in courage standing up for their dearly held principles.

I'm genuinely starting to despise the word offence, it's become a dirty word in itself. It's like outrage - admitting to even the most minor irritation at something online usually results in being accused of being outraged.

Very little offends or outrages me, lots of things irk me. And then I move on.

steddyeddy

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Not sure you'd know much about real experience, you have all the hallmarks of the academic or lifelong student. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

You got me there xxxxxx

One eyed Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

But what constitutes being a d1ck?

This -


“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 ****ing what."


Someone who goes out of their way to be as offensive as possible to as many people as possible, because they get their jollies out of upsetting people and they're that arrogant and so self-interested in themselves, that they don't care for, nor empathise with those people whom they hurt with their stinking attitude towards other people who aren't them.

sonny.knowles

osarusan wrote: »

Those who really can't, re-register.

Not such a good guess, I may have only signed up in the last few weeks but have been aware of the OP long before then.

Robsweezie

Do nothing. Be nothing. Say nothing.

Stheno

sonny.knowles wrote: »

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

THose who can excel, do, then move on to teaching, to provide those who will excel in the future?

Azalea

Azalea wrote: »

Why do you keep saying this kinda thing as if you're talking to a bunch of people who buy into the extreme PC stuff?

It's repetitious and tedious in the extreme, like most one-trick ponies.

Azalea wrote: »

People seem to seek out people being offended too.

And then, ironically, they offended and outraged at the people who are offended because they're not outraged at the same things.

Did I say offended and outraged enough there? :pac:

justchecked

Its quite simple really, you follow the one example which has been dictated to society, never speak up and so avoid being a fascist.

steddyeddy

Usually if someone makes a point to refer to someone as a term they know they'd be uncomfortable with then it's them with the problem.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Usually if someone makes a point to refer to someone as a term they know they'd be uncomfortable with then it's them with the problem.

Although you can be sure that in their own heads they're some kind of heroic anti-pc warrior, standing up for their right to be obnoxious!

Plryty

steddyeddy wrote: »

But should we suspend our beliefs about biology ect to avoid offending someone? I personally would as I wouldn't have a clue how to define man or woman in a philosophical way but I would attack those who don't.

As in participate in delusion?

It depends on what you're talking about. The social sciences do tend to be rift with poor grounded arguments at times & suffers a lot with bias by experts in the field. Its theories & studies just don't carry the same punch of evidence as the traditional sciences. This then enters a positive loop whereby a whole lot of crazy gets taught, if it's challenged the student is graded poorly because of bias.

When the social science view meets skepticism by traditional sciences which don't use social tact, it's easier to frame that skepticism as being simply bigoted. A common example being the controversial geneticist Watson, who if I understand his comment correctly, skeptically said back a decade ago that we shouldn't assume intellectual capacity evolved identically in seperate geographic regions over thousands of years. Whether that is a delusional comment to make is beyond my understanding of genetics & its influence on intelligence. Ask a geneticist, not a social scientist.

zeffabelli

Azalea wrote: »

Why do you keep saying this kinda thing as if you're talking to a bunch of people who buy into the extreme PC stuff?

I was joking with one eyed jack making fun of this PCs stuff.

zeffabelli

Candie wrote: »

Theres a difference between pandering to the offence bandwagon and being well mannered.

If a married woman prefers to be called Mrs rather than Ms, then that's how I'll address her. I prefer to use a shortened version of my first name, and people generally call me by that because I prefer it. If someone is transgender then I'll use the appropriate pronouns, because it's their preferred form of address - understandably. Anyone who goes out of their way to refer to someone a way they know isn't their preference is just a bad mannered oaf, not a profile in courage standing up for their dearly held principles.

I'm genuinely starting to despise the word offence, it's become a dirty word in itself. It's like outrage - admitting to even the most minor irritation at something online usually results in being accused of being outraged.

Very little offends or outrages me, lots of things irk me. And then I move on.

If a married woman wants to be addressed as Mrs. Then that's fine. If a single woman wants to be addressed as Mrs. Then no I won't ... because it is incorrect in English to do that.

If your single and gave convinced yourself you are married, that is commonly known as delusional.

Frito

Candie wrote: »

Theres a difference between pandering to the offence bandwagon and being well mannered.

If a married woman prefers to be called Mrs rather than Ms, then that's how I'll address her. I prefer to use a shortened version of my first name, and people generally call me by that because I prefer it. If someone is transgender then I'll use the appropriate pronouns, because it's their preferred form of address - understandably. Anyone who goes out of their way to refer to someone a way they know isn't their preference is just a bad mannered oaf, not a profile in courage standing up for their dearly held principles.

I'm genuinely starting to despise the word offence, it's become a dirty word in itself. It's like outrage - admitting to even the most minor irritation at something online usually results in being accused of being outraged.

Very little offends or outrages me, lots of things irk me. And then I move on.

I would be of a similar opinion.
In response to the op then go as far as your manners compel you, there is no great honour in offending people just for the sake of it, even though we may all agree that you can if you want to.
I get irked by insults like window licker when referring to disabled people. I dont particularly consider it anti-choice, or a harbinger of a post-Orwellian dystopia to express my opinion on it. It would be quite the overreaction. But I dont get outraged or offended, I'll state my opinion, listen to hysterical witterings about Newspeak, and then get on with things.

Sheep Lover

Stheno wrote: »

THose who can excel, do, then move on to teaching, to provide those who will excel in the future?

There's more to the Microsoft package than Excel though, what about Powerpoint?

Clive Bisquette

Azalea wrote: »

Why do you keep saying this kinda thing as if you're talking to a bunch of people who buy into the extreme PC stuff?

A "bunch of people" ?

This poster calls that you work for an American Multi-National which some will contend is a great breeding place for Dicks of all sorts.?

Galwayguy35

If I think something I might say would cause a person real offence then I won't say it, it's never happened though and I can't think of any discussion I would be in that it would.