Nobody has the right to not be offended.

[sir pball]

“Nobody has the right to not be offended. That right doesn't exist in any declaration I have ever read.

If you are offended it is your problem, and frankly lots of things offend lots of people.

I can walk into a bookshop and point out a number of books that I find very unattractive in what they say. But it doesn't occur to me to burn the bookshop down. If you don't like a book, read another book. If you start reading a book and you decide you don't like it, nobody is telling you to finish it.

To read a 600-page novel and then say that it has deeply offended you: well, you have done a lot of work to be offended.”

- Salman Rushdie

You want to claim a right to be so offended there should be legal sanctions? You literally agree with Khomeini, the only distinction is muzzling versus murder.

This is a total drive-by, I have work in the morning.

[Binkie The Clown]

1. +1000

[Ghost in the Machine]

2. I have been saying that for years, and so have a lot of others here.. n/t

[sir pball]

4. I know, but I thought..

..that the guy who's got a literal death sentence hanging over his head for being "offensive" could probably say it best.

So, not entirely a driveby..

[Warpy]

3. Then there are the people who are presumptious enough to be offended

on someone else's behalf. Those are the people I could throttle with a big old grin on my face.

Thanks for telling me I'm not alone and I love that meme.

[leftynyc]

6. Well said

and you most certainly aren't alone in that.

[kcr]

9. Right. Empathy for other people who aren't like us are for suckers.

Who do they think they are?

[seaglass]

20. Seriously. I am white but was offended that POC were referred to as race naggers by another DUer.

So I am to shut up about it, we don't stand up for each other anymore? I am insincere because I care? Do I want the DUer who made the statement to be arrested? To make it illegal to use that term? Makes zero sense to me.

I have no idea if this post was made based on some internecine DU battle that I am unaware of but it seems really stupid to me.

[kcr]

21. Yep. All it means is they don't think anyone should be offended by things they aren't offended by.

I'm sure there are people who are truly never offended by anything, but then those people wouldn't care if other people are offended. Either way, it doesn't say much about the person, in my opinion. Being curious about the world around you and caring about what goes on in it isn't a bad thing.

[Warpy]

38. Empathy is one thing, dear

Getting nasty to someone else and trying to use it as an excuse is quite another.

[Oneironaut]

10. I hate that.

There's a difference between genuinely wanting to help others and injecting yourself as a group's 'savior.' Despite being offended on a group's behalf, they always tend to make it about themselves.

[kcr]

11. Aren't you interjecting yourself as these groups' savior against other saviors?

Seems that way to me.

[Oneironaut]

13. Not really.

I don't get all offended and angry when someone does it, nor do I feel the need to jump on the cross. It's just annoying and doesn't come across as genuine. The type I'm talking about wants it to be all about them and how offended they are - they don't bother to get the opinion of the actual group they claim to be supporting.

[kcr]

14. But how is your being annoyed any different than those who are offended?

The answer is, it's not. They don't bother to get the opinion of the actual group? Have you? Or do you just feel free to speak on their behalf that your way is better.

[Oneironaut]

15. I am not offended nor am I speaking on anyone's behalf.

I just value sincerity.

[kcr]

16. But your opinion on what is sincere is just that.

No different than than the opinion of those who are "offended on other people's behalf". Or do people have a right to never be annoyed? They should just take your word on whether another person is sincere or not.

[rjj621]

35. I'm with you on that

Seems to me there are many times that a bunch of people want to take it upon themselves to decide what's offensive to other people and even entire groups of people. If you're offended fine and I don't give a shit, but don't decide what someone else should find offensive. That's for them to decide.

[backscatter712]

7. Look here on DU.

I won't name names, but let's say there are frequent abuses of the alert button and the jury system here.

Someone gets sand in an orifice over an off-color joke, or a remark that's selectively interpreted to be "racist" or "misogynistic", and too many times, the alert button is clicked, a few jurors think it's OK to punish people for speech.

Or I like how Stephen Fry puts it.

[philosslayer]

34. The first amendment does not apply at DU

This is a private website, and the jury system means the participants get to decide what is appropriate, and what is not. This is a site that supports Democratic candidates and progressive viewpoints. If a post gets hidden by a jury, then that in theory reflects the view of the DU community. This is reflective of the fact that DU members should be able to visit this site without being exposed to views, opinions, attitudes and speech that they find repellent or offensive. That is how the site is set up, and there is nothing wrong with that.

[kcr]

8. Okay.

But neither do the offenders have the right to be shielded from the consequences of their odious opinions. Goes both ways. Don't want to hear people telling you you're a shit-head? Keep your mouth shut.

[prayin4rain]

22. Agreed. Also, it's OK to be offended by people who voice that they're offended,

but not OK to be the initially offended?

Being offended by an offended person. ... OK.
Being offended by a remark you find offensive. ... not OK.

I hear more whining about offended people than anything else lately.

[lapislzi]

23. Depends on what the offended party considers to be an appropriate consequence.

Calling me an asshole? Fine.

Throwing me in jail? Cutting out my tongue? Killing me in the name of an imaginary being who needs to be "defended" by mortals? Not so much. To paraphrase Heinlein (bless his misogynistic libertarian heart), of all the imaginary crimes humans have invented, "blasphemy" is probably the stupidest.

[hobbit709]

12. To me the 1st Amendment gives everyone the right to open mouth and insert foot.

I have the right to ignore it if I don't care to listen.

[Blue_Adept]

17. Cool! Back to our regularly scheduled Texas and southern bashing!

[rug]

18. I'm glad you will not be upset when I say that post is a steaming pile of shit.

[Glassunion]

40. Bravo sir!

[alarimer]

19. Maybe. But saying things to deliberately offend people makes you an asshole.

Of course you are perfectly free to be that, if you wish. Just don't get upset when people call you on it.

Sometimes it's better just not to be a jerk. Maybe that's really the only standard we need. It is a fine line between mocking beliefs and mocking people for holding those beliefs.

Offensive material in, say, movies or books is easy to avoid. But we do need to examine a culture that constantly subjugates women as mere sex objects (in porn, say, or almost any advertisement). To say that if one is offended by, for example, the SI Swimsuit issue just to avoid it is missing the entire point of whatever discussion we are having about it. It is yet another example (among many such) that our culture still has a very long way to go with regard to sexism and objectification. It is not offensive so much as symptomatic of larger issues, which many here and elsewhere completely fail to grasp.

[lapislzi]

24. Love the trope, hate the troposphere

I can objectively read a book or watch a film that depicts certain tropes and enjoy it, while still knowing they're tropes. Case in point: any Disney feature film. They're all tropes. One can easily be offended by Disney's habitual depiction of women as beings who need "rescue" by the price. Or Lord of the Rings. I remember reading it as a teenager and wondering, "where are the girls?" I still loved it. If you dig into it, it's annoying and stupefyingly simplistic. But it is well-produced stupefaction.

But one can also suspend some of that awareness and enjoy a book or film (or whatever) for pleasure. I don't feel morally compromised when I consume entertainment of this sort. On the other hand, I try to balance that with a healthy diet of more honest intellectual fare.

"Troposphere" in post title refers to the stew in which these tropes simmer or fester. Usually subReddits, etc. I know it's a weather term IRL. I was just coining a phrase to make a point.

[mythology]

31. Here's a response about the lack of women in LOTR

Young girl: Riley said only boy hobbits can travel to Mount Doom. Is that true?

Lorelai: In the movie, only boy hobbits travel to Mount Doom, but that's only because the girls went to do something even more dangerous!

Young girl: What?!

Lorelai: Have you ever heard of a Brazilian bikini wax? ...

Young Girl: So girls go on adventures too?

Lorelai: And they go in heels.

Because quoting Gilmore Girls is never wrong in my opinion.

[lapislzi]

39. You are so right, and that is perfect.

Gilmore Girls rock.

[Quantess]

41. Gilmore Girls was a good show! Melissa Mc Carthy was also great on the show.

Daughter's name was Rory, I believe.

The only detail that bugged me was that Lorelei's handsome, semi-love-interest always wore his baseball cap backwards.

[Glassunion]

42. There were several Females in the Lord of the Rings.

One of my two favorite characters from the trilogy was: Éowyn.

She is a rather prominent character in the 2nd and 3rd books in the trilogy, and for some damn reason either someone starts cutting onions, or it starts getting really damn dusty when I get her part in the battle of the Pelennor Fields.

[closeupready]

25. +1.

[pintobean]

26. 'Freedom from religion'

always amuses me.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Sure.

But that shouldn't be an excuse to be an ass because you can.

Just proclaiming that you have a right to be an ass doesn't make you any better than any 4chan troll.

[PoliticAverse]

28. "Being offended is the natural consequence of leaving one’s home." - Fran Lebowitz

[Agnosticsherbet]

29. "Freedom of expression is the right of every individual to hold opinions without interference"

"and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

Bing offended falls under that.

That is from the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." Look it up.

I think people have the right to be offended. They do not have the right to change anyone's actions because they are fucking offended.

[whatthehey]

30. Not relevant though

Neither the OP, nor Rushdie, nor Fry nor 1A advocates here have even implied that people have no right to be offended. Just that if you ARE offended, it doesn't give you any rights to punish or silence the person offending you so that you avoid any future offense.

Lacking the right to be free and protected from offending speech does not mean you lack the right to find it offensive.

[Agnosticsherbet]

32. Totally fucking relevant. You conflate being offended and forcing other people to kowtow to your

offense. Those are two different things.

We have the freedom of speech, but we don't have the freedom to force our speech on others.

We have freedom of religion, but no right to dictate religion to others.

Freedom to be offended falls under both the Universal freedom of expression, and also under freedom of speech. Neither of those grants a right to limit other people.

[whatthehey]

33. You're still arguing the wrong fucking thing

NOBODY HAS YET CLAIMED PEOPLE CANNOT LEGITIMATELY BE OFFENDED.

The only claim made is that you have NO right to NOT be offended. Why is that huge glaring difference so hard to understand?

Be offended? No problem! Tell me I can't offend you? Big problem.

[rjj621]

36. Yes! +1 n/t

[Yo_Mama]

37. Yes - and anybody has a right to explain why something is offensive.

The remedy for rude/harmful/crass/stupid/awful/hateful speech is MORE SPEECH.

We shouldn't stop talking to each other and we shouldn't be afraid of controversy. Most of the great advances in our society have been controversial.

[JanMichael]

43. i was going to post somethinb so gross that i was told to stop. it was that offensive.

think of the worst necrophilia and orifice use plus family and you may get my drift.