Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I Don’t Care If You Are Offended
I got into an argument on Twitter today. “Wow Jon, what a fascinating lead! Next, can you tell us about your last Candy Crush score on Facebook? And how’s that sinus infection going?” Look, I know my Twitter squabbles are boring, but I was trying to make a larger point before you so rudely interrupted me, Voice In My Head.
Anyway, Twitter peeps were going back and forth on childhood vaccination and I foolishly jumped in the middle of it. I had related the story about my children getting whooping cough from non-vaccinated children in their classroom. My kids had been immunized as babies but were nearing the time for their booster shots. As it turned out, our whole family was quarantined for a week and fed a steady diet of stomach-churning antibiotics. That experience left me less libertarian on the issue than I once had been. “Your rights end at the tip of my nose,” and all that.
One interlocutor noted that vaccinations might cause autism (they don’t). Another wondered if the State can mandate immunization (sure). But shouldn’t parents have the right to say no? (Not if they put the community at risk.) All fair questions and a fine debate to have. And so it went until one person replied with what he felt was a trump card: “That really offends me!”
Ummm… So what?
I felt rude responding this way, but his taking of offense is not my concern; public health is. Harrumphing “that offends me!” has zero bearing on any argument. It’s a non sequitur revealing naught but your delicate constitution.
No need to argue the pros and cons of vaccination in the comments; that specific debate isn’t the point. As our culture has slid to the social justice warriors of the left, activists on all sides seem to think that their being offended carries some sort of moral authority as a victim. It does no such thing.
I don’t understand taking offense in the first place. If someone insults me, I don’t feel badly about myself, I just think they’re an idiot. I certainly don’t grab my pearls and weep into my fainting couch. If you hate me for being conservative/white/Christian/etc. that’s on you, not me.
In a meme traveling about the interwebs, British comedian Stephen Fry said it best:
It’s now very common to hear people say, “I’m rather offended by that,” as if that gives them certain rights. It’s no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase.
“I’m offended by that.”
Well, so [bleeping] what?
The members of Ricochet are the finest debaters in the online world. So tell me, how do you deal with the reply “that offends me?”
Published in General
It really depends on what the offense has been. I have been known to put my foot in my mouth on occasion, and then I am happy to apologize. But in a political argument? I feel rather proud when I offend lefties.
I deal with it the same as you and Stephen Fry. It seems to me there is a good reason we have the term ‘to take offense.’ It is not possible for someone to give offense to another. To be offended is the province of the sensitive jerk with no valid counterargument. ‘That offends me’ tells me you’re out of ammo and I’ve won the debate.
This doesn’t count as debate because I’m not presenting a counterargument. That’s because there is no argument for it. To announce you are offended is to announce you are weak and have no business in the discussion in the first place.
You’re right; it’s usually playing the victim card when confronted with uncomfortable facts. Another version of “I’m losing the argument and I have no reasoned response. So stop already.”
So,
“What offends you? The fact that X? or the fact that Y?”
The perpetually offended are the worst. I bite my tongue and leave the room or change the channel. If I can’t get away, say I am stuck in a meeting with these cry babies, I doodle pictures of them in the margins with knives to the head or some other horribleness. Then, I promptly scribble all over it so it cannot serve as incriminating evidence if something actually happens to the person.
“Well then I guess a quickie is out of the question.”
The best response is just one word: “Why?”
Adam, the best response IS one word, but that word is “So?”
It’s certainly possible to give offense. I don’t think it is usually best to announce being offended, but all of us say or do the wrong thing once in awhile. Still, in political debates we don’t need a lot of precious snowflakes, which is what the left has produced these days.
One problem is that the word “offend” has been perverted to such a degree. It’s yet another example of progressive Newspeak.
The way it should be used: If I commit an offense, I am an offender. If you are the victim of an offense, you are the offended.
Simply disliking something is not the same as being offended by it. You need to demonstrate genuine harm has been done to you in order to be offended.
Yes–that’s exactly right. People use it because social offense is actually a rather powerful thing. None of us want to genuinely offend other people and if we know that we have done it, we should apologize. We have manners and mores so we can avoid offending others. That’s the basis of the old rule to avoid discussing politics and religion at dinner parties–it’s obviously easy to give offense on these hot button issues. Nowadays, though, many on the left want to foist their political ideas on everyone on twitter or facebook and then get offended when people disagree as if they hadn’t stated the whole thing in the first place. They kind of use the dinner party no-nos in an inappropriate context.
The offended: “…that offends me.”
Me: “Interesting.”
It will leave it up to them to either drop it or explain further.
“I’m offended”, or “That offends me”, is really just another form of the ad hominem tactic to shut down debate. I’m offended means ‘You are evil, and have offended me, therefore your arguments are invalid’. It is a method used to avoid your positions and paint you as an evil person.
When arguing with liberals, or progressives, or left wing nuts, it invariably devolves into “You are stupid. You are evil. You are a racist!” The moment the object of your argument perceives that you may have a valid position, is the moment the conversation devolves into “You are evil!”
Listen, if you are Transgender, and we are discussing some topic, and I tell you not to get your panties in a wad, maybe that’s offensive. But it doesn’t refute my impeccable logic!
My first impulse is to respond with the concise version of the suggestion that they take themselves elsewhere and self-fornicate. Circumstances usually don’t allow me to follow the impulse, but the perpetually indignant should be avoided, if at all possible. You can’t argue with them because they don’t listen.
I’m offended by that.
Really? Well then I’ll reiterate it with ardor. And so’s your mom!
The Pharisees and Romans found Jesus offensive and I’ll bet Hitler really hated hearing the Star Spangled Banner. Wahhabi Muslims think your mother is an uncovered whore. Being offended proves nothing. Thinking it proves something makes one a moron, as offensive as that may sound–to morons.
I’m racking my memory, but can’t remember being hit by the “I’m offended.” I may have escaped it because I tend to put my arguments in the form of a question. Or more likely, it’s coming to my town next.
My if-in-doubt, all-purpose, go-to response is “understood.” It says:
1. I grant what you said the bare minimum of acknowledgement.
2. I choose not to spend any more time on it…
3. …even so far as to state whether I agree with it or not.
4. I now pivot to another line of thought.
As in, “Understood. Now, the Spanish smallpox epidemic of 1587 wiped out half the population of Madrid. Some might say, ‘Give me liberty or give me death,’ but that seems a little extreme.”
I never encounter the phrase. Perhaps I should get out more.
Honestly, I live for it. It’s an admission that they got nothing else.
[edit: if it’s about an issue or point of view. If I’ve said something about them personally, intentionally or not, I generally feel bad and apologise. Eventually. Usually.]
The kid version of this is the relentless emphasis on bullying. I have two kids in public high school and they have been so indoctrinated into the whole bullying meme that if someone looks at them wrong they think they are the victims of bullying. Of course, when everything you don’t like is elevated to that level what you’ve actually done is made real bullying harder to identify. If everyone is running around being offended then it’s harder to identify actual offense.
If someone tells me I have said something to offend them, however, I usually apologize first. I think it’s part of Midwest Nice upbringing.
Well, if it’s on Ricochet I deal with it differently than I do in some other contexts. On Ricochet, I’d look to see if someone violated the Code of Conduct, and if he or she did, I’d take the person who’s offended seriously–because he or she is paying to have that Code enforced. If he or she is offended without a CoC violation, I’d say, “well, he or she will have to live with it.”
As far as an ambient culture that thinks “I am offended,” by itself, is a serious argument, I think that’s gone way, way too far, and is verging on being a serious danger to freedom of expression and thought.
As far as the phrase “I am offended” is concerned, sometimes it makes good sense. I am indeed offended, for example, by streets named after Lenin. But I’m willing to explain why I am. If I didn’t have good reasons to be, I would not expect anyone to take my offense seriously.
I find this whole post and its replies to be offensive. Please delete as soon as possible.
If someone tells me that what I said was offensive, I ponder:
1: Is what I said actually offensive to polite civilized company ( do I suffer from potty mouth? is the subject actually inappropriate for the audience? did I express my idea inappropriately?)
2. Do I have some kind of long term relationship with the person that I want to maintain? Is maintaining that relationship more important than expressing my opinion to them in a pithy fashion, right now?
3. Is the person offended some kind of oversensitive blithering idiot whose opinion I should completely disregard?
Depending on how I answer the above three questions, I may apologize, may say nothing, may continue on as before, or I may completely unload.
I once disagreed with a factual assertion at work during a meeting. The asserter was offended and said so. At a later meeting, he took issue with something I said, and after the meeting told me “now you know how I felt.”
“Not at all,” I replied. “When I disagreed with you, you were wrong. When you disagreed with me, you were wrong again.”
This post makes me feel unsafe.
I remember the first time I offended somebody in the workplace. As police officers we had to attend in-service diversity training. The instructor who was a consultant hired to teach the course started talking about ”a hostile work environment”. I thought about some of the incidents and arrests I made such as; taking a pistol from an armed robbery suspect that decided to try and prevent me from taking the pistol, an intoxicated female that tried to bite me several times, domestic disputes, and various other wrestling matches. I asked her if her reference to a hostile work environment referred to roll call or what happens after roll call, and then followed up my question with the remark, my work environment is already hostile.
Before the next class began the Sgt. called me aside and told me I had offended the instructor. To his credit he said; “she doesn’t have a sense of humor.” I told him that; “I’ll be good”, a phrase that I had heard and he had heard from numerous arrestees.
“That offends Me.”
Me: “Well, that was easy. What are You gonna do about it?”
Great story, Doug. If we’ve lost the Police Department, I cannot imagine what is left,
The vast majority of people can behave themselves without adult supervision. Those who cannot behave although they are a small segment of the population are still capable of creating enough mayhem to provide employment for those interested in becoming police officers.
Not related to the subject at hand but Doug’s story reminded me of an incident that occurred when applying for my first job out of the Army. The very nice HR lady asked if I had ever been involved in an incident of workplace violence. I answered, “Of course, it was my job.” She did not quite know how to react.
Tangentially, I’d like to hear more about your job in the “Ask the Expert” series. I’ll bet everyone would.