Blue_Phlame
Bluelight Crew
An answer: Anything can potentially be offensive, but what makes it offensive is the person's perspective.
Dialogue: Each person has a perspective. Each perspective is unique to the individual that holds it, but similar perspectives can be shared between two people. Those two people have a shared perspective on certain issues, but cannot have the same perspective on the issues; there will always be slight differences between individuals no matter how close those two people are. Are you following me? Let me use a quick example that might illustrate this a little better. Skip it if you follow me.
Once we agree that other people have a different perspective, we can start to debate what makes something offensive.
Lets start with the Random House Unabridged Dictionary definition of
Offensive terms are a complicated territory, but it doesn't have to be. Other things that I've found to be considered as offensive are contextual phrases (he's a dog vs sup dawg?), or whether a person of a certain out-group uses a term vs someone in the in-group uses the term (sex, race, religion, politics, emotional state, education, affiliation, etc.), or plainly incorrect statements, generalizations, or controversial statements.
I've heard the concerns whether we're doing anyone a favor by labeling more and more words as "offensive" and therefore granting previously inoffensive words the power to offend. A perspective on that statement is whether there's a difference between labeling words as offensive or describing them as being offensive. Whether you're offended by a word or not, makes little difference whether someone else is offended by that word because we each have our own perspectives. Often times its necessary to understand another person's perspective before using certain words if you don't intend to offend. By being informed and educated about another person's viewpoint allows us to respond effectively to each other and communicate without causing offense. However, if there is a divergence between two people who don't share the same perspective of what's offensive, the situation should not default to being considered offensive if one of the persons did not intend for a word or phrase to be offensive. Its the difference between perspectives that makes this division.
If one person is offended by a remark, but the other person did not mean to offend, it would make sense to resolve the issue of offense promptly, because who wants to remain in a state of constant annoyance or irritation? Nobody. Redefining the words we use to communicate, or restrict their use isn't beneficial for everyone either. Sometimes making decisions to outright ban words because it can potentially offend someone is contrary to freedom of expression, which according to the United Nations is a human right for every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers (Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
An example from The Conversation article about insults and careful use of language attest to the aggressive and often unjust policing of the use of words in certain environments.
I'm of the opinion that the context of which a word is used is important, and taking power away from words that cause offense is similar to what we do with a President if they have too much power - take the excessive power away from the Executive branch via checks and balances of the Legislative and Judicial branches and visa versa, so no one branch has too much power, and no one word can cause excessive outrage.
Dialogue: Each person has a perspective. Each perspective is unique to the individual that holds it, but similar perspectives can be shared between two people. Those two people have a shared perspective on certain issues, but cannot have the same perspective on the issues; there will always be slight differences between individuals no matter how close those two people are. Are you following me? Let me use a quick example that might illustrate this a little better. Skip it if you follow me.
Lets say that we have two identical twins. Both raised by the same parents, in the same household, taught by the same teachers, listened to the same music, watched the same TV shows, together at the same time, every time. Everything you can realistically think of has been the same for both twins. These two twins are more alike each other than anyone else, but no matter where they are or what they do, they are still two separate individuals that must sit in two different chairs, and take turns when there is only one of something to go around. When one of the twins is taking the first turn on a coin-operated ride infront of a supermarket, the other twin must wait their turn and watch as the other twin goes first. The first twin has fun on the ride, but for the sake of this example we'll say the ride breaks down. The second twin no longer have a turn on the ride. This example is innocuous that it may seem insignificant to us, but to the second twin, it may affect their perspective on how they view being first or second next time there's situation when to take turns. These two identical twins have a slightly different perspective on one inconsequential situation.
Once we agree that other people have a different perspective, we can start to debate what makes something offensive.
Lets start with the Random House Unabridged Dictionary definition of
Offensive
- causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying:
offensive television commercials. - unpleasant or disagreeable to the sense:
an offensive odor. - repugnant to the moral sense, good taste, or the like; insulting:
an offensive remark; an offensive joke. - pertaining to offense or attack:
the offensive movements of their troops. - characterized by attack; aggressive:
offensive warfare.
Offensive terms are a complicated territory, but it doesn't have to be. Other things that I've found to be considered as offensive are contextual phrases (he's a dog vs sup dawg?), or whether a person of a certain out-group uses a term vs someone in the in-group uses the term (sex, race, religion, politics, emotional state, education, affiliation, etc.), or plainly incorrect statements, generalizations, or controversial statements.
I've heard the concerns whether we're doing anyone a favor by labeling more and more words as "offensive" and therefore granting previously inoffensive words the power to offend. A perspective on that statement is whether there's a difference between labeling words as offensive or describing them as being offensive. Whether you're offended by a word or not, makes little difference whether someone else is offended by that word because we each have our own perspectives. Often times its necessary to understand another person's perspective before using certain words if you don't intend to offend. By being informed and educated about another person's viewpoint allows us to respond effectively to each other and communicate without causing offense. However, if there is a divergence between two people who don't share the same perspective of what's offensive, the situation should not default to being considered offensive if one of the persons did not intend for a word or phrase to be offensive. Its the difference between perspectives that makes this division.
If one person is offended by a remark, but the other person did not mean to offend, it would make sense to resolve the issue of offense promptly, because who wants to remain in a state of constant annoyance or irritation? Nobody. Redefining the words we use to communicate, or restrict their use isn't beneficial for everyone either. Sometimes making decisions to outright ban words because it can potentially offend someone is contrary to freedom of expression, which according to the United Nations is a human right for every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers (Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
An example from The Conversation article about insults and careful use of language attest to the aggressive and often unjust policing of the use of words in certain environments.
I'm of the opinion that the context of which a word is used is important, and taking power away from words that cause offense is similar to what we do with a President if they have too much power - take the excessive power away from the Executive branch via checks and balances of the Legislative and Judicial branches and visa versa, so no one branch has too much power, and no one word can cause excessive outrage.
Last edited:
