9 ms·
> I've been watching this shift in acceptable standards in America move from intent to perception with considerable consternation. I think that both intent and
by simiones 5y ago
> I've been watching this shift in acceptable standards in America move from intent to perception with considerable consternation.
I think that both intent and perception are important, and they are both judged in the more modern understanding of "toxicity". Malintent is a direct "strike". But, lack of malintent doesn't mean that perceived offense should be entirely ignored.
Let's imagine a scenario: as in the example above, an English person says "can I burn a fag" and an American person believes they are casually thinking about hurting a gay man. The English person meant no harm; but, the American person is not at fault for not understanding this. They can complain, and the English person should explain their intent. The American person should learn and remember the meaning of this expression in British English, and the English person will need to remember that this expression may sound offensive to American listeners, and avoid it in such scenarios.
Basically, the important aspect is that a misunderstanding is not always the fault of the listener (which the intent-only model suggests: you took offense, but I didn't mean that, so you're silly for feeling offended). It is of course also not only the fault of the speaker (which the perception-only model would suggest: I felt offended by what you said, so it doesn't matter what you meant, you owe me an apology or more). Both parties are involved in a miscommunication, if indeed there was one.
- shrikant 5y ago> [...] an English person says "can I burn a fag" and an American person believes they are casually thinking about hurting a gay man. FYI, it's combination of difficult-to-discern keming with the default font on HN, and your unfamiliarity with the phrase, but it's actually "BUM A FAG" and not "BURN A FAG".
- simiones 5y agoYes, you're right, thanks for correcting that! Incidentally, did you intentionally write keming instead of kerning?
- shrikant 5y agoYes :) https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/keming https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/keming
- userbinator 5y agoIt's interesting to see so many people thought it was "burn" --- perhaps the reference to cigarettes primed the "mental autocorrect" in the wrong direction.
- slibhb 5y ago> Let's imagine a scenario: as in the example above, an English person says "can I burn a fag" and an American person believes they are casually thinking about hurting a gay man. The English person meant no harm; but, the American person is not at fault for not understanding this. If you call someone out for "offensive speech" and your offense rests on your own misunderstanding, it is absolutely your fault.
- mauvehaus 5y agoThe major issue with this model is that the offended person has options that are a bit less hostile and assuming of bad intent than "calling somebody out". Unfortunately, we seem to be in a place where bad intent is taken for granted and merits an aggressive reaction rather than placing any responsibility on the offended party to be civil and open-minded in their response to be perceiving offense. In the case of "burning a fag", our hypothetical American has the option of inquiring about the meaning of an unfamiliar idiom rather than jumping straight to calling out the speaker.
- madaxe_again 5y agoYes, but not necessarily your problem. I’m British. I once asked for a glass of water in a restaurant in Virginia, and while I thought the waitress’s response was a little peculiar (no reply, just turned around and walked away), I was astounded when the police showed up five minutes later. Apparently she’d misheard me, and thought “just a glass of water, please” was a threat. It was never revealed to me what the threat I had apparently made was, but it cost me several extremely stressful hours convincing the local PD that there had been a misunderstanding - so while it was her fault, it was my problem. I’ve puzzled for years over what she heard. As a white guy wearing a suit, I got out of there without being charged. If I weren’t… I can imagine it could have gone very differently.
- throwaway22032 5y ago> the American person is not at fault for not understanding this. Part of being an adult is understanding that generally, people are not 4chan trolls. If someone who's not a crackpot says to you "can I burn a gay", even though that seems unambiguous, they've probably just misspoken or are joking. In real life almost everyone seems to get this, online it's like everything is a strawman.
- simiones 5y ago> If someone who's not a crackpot says to you "can I burn a gay", even though that seems unambiguous, they've probably just misspoken or are joking. Well, for one, this only applies if you already know that person is not a crackpot. Secondly, burning someone would indeed be an extreme example, but not all (accidental) offenses are so obviously monstrous. If someone said "I hate fags" (intending to say they don't like cigarettes), this would be more likely to be someone's actual homophobic opinion, depending on culture.
- throwaway22032 5y agoBut, again, most people aren't running about spouting horrible stuff, and neither are people trying to catch them out either. It's all just a bit weird to me. If someone said to me "I hate fags", I'd either ask them to clarify, or change the topic. If they were persistent, then yeah, get rid. It's not a problem that requires instantaneous resolution.