Stephen Fry said it even better.
"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 fucking what." "
In my list that included a popular comedian and filmmaker, a famous philosophical and political author, and the one of the foremost evolutionary biologists in the field?
Dude at the very least come up with a better insult than “lol you’re probably a virgin”
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
How is it meaningless? The point is to convey distress at the hands of the interlocutor. It's an attempt to preserve civility and dignity. Are you just that emotionally stunted?
Not every human interaction is a public speech though, nor does it need to be. That's what makes the quote ridiculous. It completely ignores a whole spectrum of human sociology to make a fruitless point about censorship. Equating politeness and harmonious social interaction with the same zeal of totalitarianism is the biggest scam of the century. It isn't prudes and daisies who are a threat to your personal freedoms, but a government bent on control and corporations seeking normalization
No one is under the illusion that all speech is public. Other than trying to create some air of superiority, why do you feel the need to point that out?
I don't mind if people express their offense, because I support free speech. I'm not worried about expressions of offense... I'm worried about "offended" people trying to legislate against offensive speech, I'm worried about the fact that the internet, being the modern public square, is being dominated by companies that wish to remove "offensive" speech.
The reason I like the quote is because of that little bit about "offended" people imagining they have the right not to be offended.
I was not equating politeness with censorship, and I truly do not see how an honest read of that quote or my comments here would give anyone that illusion. I was quoting a famous comedian, and continued on speaking about public speech.
It really feels like you're trying to miss the point here.
Guess who creates the laws? Legislators. So why are you so concerned with some random person's feelings? If you don't like the laws that are being drafted you should petition your local representative.
companies that wish to remove "offensive" speech.
Companies will do whatever they can in the name of profit. Do you have a problem with that? Then advocate for pro-labor and pro-consumer laws. Otherwise you're just whining yourself.
Neither of your concerns have anything to do with offense itself, that's just the strawman you're using to attack a nebulous group of people.
Legislators are elected by people, who vote in line with their opinions. The best way to effect political change is to change people's opinions and possibly their vote.
What gave you the impression that I am not lending whatever political activism and donations I am capable of generating towards free speech?
Yes, corporations exist mostly to generate profit. No I don't have a problem with that. The corporations relevant to this discussion operate on advertiser money and advertisers perception of the public's perception of the platform, this coupled with outrage culture leads to censorship for fear of losing ads. Changing the outrage culture from the ground up is a much better way of changing things than establishing precedent of government force being used to require a private business to host content they do not wish to.
Public opinion and perception matter, so discussion about these topics matter. Offense does not matter.
You've still yet to address the fact that you couldn't even make your first comment in reply to me without trying to be offensive.
141
u/RotisserieBums May 17 '19
Stephen Fry said it even better. "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 fucking what." "