Saying you are offended by something because of “it’s history” is basically saying you don’t actually have a reason to be offended but you decided to make one up.

Think about it; if someone calls me a piece of shit, I’m not offended because of the history of the word shit, I’m offended because of what the person *explicitly means* by their statement in this current interaction.

However if someone beside me said, “can you believe this shit?” in a friendly, joking manner about a ridiculous event, but then I get horribly offended because of some distant history where speaking about shit during casual conversation with someone was an insult that they were of lower status and didn’t deserve to be treated with dignity… well then I’m just being a moron. I actively hunted for some reason to be offended by something, by dragging the context of hypothetical conversations of which I played no part, with people I have never interacted with and don’t know, from hundreds of years in the past, and then arbitrarily placed that meaning into my current conversation, and then got pissed at my friend who in no way was using it to indicate I was of lower class then he. To the contrary, he has absolutely no clue what I’m talking about and now has no interest in telling me about the funny event that took place, and possibly not being my friend either.

Just saying 🤷🏻‍♂️

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Can’t believe he did that to them. 🤣

It’s virtue signaling. It’s just like spam. It tries to hijacks the protocol of communication.

This type of discourse is harmful to civilization

I think what you’re missing is that people actually *enjoy* being offended, or rather feigning offense. It gives the “offendee” a woke card to play. We live in a world where the one with highest ranking victim card wins the argument, gets the handout, etc.

So if you use the word “shit” with me, and I can convince you and those around you that I’m offended, because my grandfather’s cousin had a roommate who died a violent death due to a malfunctioning shit-cleaning device, I’ve played my victim card. But let’s say you, who used the term “shit” when speaking to me, are black or perhaps homosexual, for example. Your race or pervert victim card beats my shit-offense victim card. You win the debate. It would therefore be unwise for me to play my shit-offense victim card against your race or pervert card.

But what if you’re a white, straight, Christian male and you use the word “shit” when speaking to me? Now my shit-offense victim card might be enough to beat you, depending on which of us has the darker skin complexion. So yeah, it’s not really about the offense conveyed per se, but about the value of the victim card it allows the hearer to play. Clown world has its own strange rules that we all need to master and exploit in order to thrive. It’s just a convoluted game theory thing.

It's wrapped up in playing the role of judge or victim.

These are 2 of the roles we play in which we surrender our experience over to others.

Beware of playing the judge or victim.

Take nothing personally.

Clearly there is a story behind this and I want to hear it

George Carlin would be so proud 😃

🤫 without those points there's no ground for their argument.