3 ms·

Nation's plight: The right to offend and get offended

2 points by rustoo 4y ago

ddingus 4y ago
Bear in mind, we are all as offended as we think we are. Secondly, we have agency in our consideration of and response to speech we may not like. Eg: A rando clown calls one of us an ass! Or we are all asses. That is harsh! Strong personal judgement is a solid basis for offense. But, they are a clown and or do not know us. One response would be to be offended and respond with righteous indignation. Another response would be to consider it laughable speech. Yet another could be to take it sincerely and ask why and how we are asses to understand differences. My point here is free speech carries a burden to manage not only our speech, but also how we manage incoming speech. People are very different. Intent is hard to divine too. Not an absolute thing, by any means. Another hard truth related to offense, is that it can be abused or gamed. Like intent, how offended someone is, the harm in play, are all subjective! Free speech, because of these dynamics, has to include "right to offend", but also has to include an effort to take speech seriously and give consideration due others with the expectation of receiving same in like kind. Right now, my take on this conversation is a lot of people are either poorly equipped to do that work, or are unwilling to do it, looking for easier answers. And those easy answers are expensive! What happens is speech ends up being limited and risky and we all lose out on being able to have real expression! The easy answer is to make it all like Disneyland and we simply abandon the First Amendment entirely. Everyone wants an answer when they are offended, and to them it seems easy, objectively solved. The offender is wrong, somehow. ...until it is them with no intent to offend, finding themselves on the other side being accused of offending others... Factor in how saying, "that is offensive" can be abused, and or the hard reality of people needing to hear speech they do not like, calling all that offensive to protect an ego, avoid facing personal failings, and more, and we have a real mistake brewing if you ask me. I will say this too: Even a small amount of that work I describe here pays huge dividends! The number one response today is righteous indignation, and some attempt to control others. My final observation is we are in charge of our speech, and how we take the speech of others. Either we do the work to exercise that agency, manage ourselves and get the benefits, or we will be managed by others and assure you that control will be coarse, limiting and come with regrets.

2 points by rustoo 4y ago

Bear in mind, we are all as offended as we think we are. Secondly, we have agency in our consideration of and response to speech we may not like. Eg: A rando clown calls one of us an ass! Or we are all asses. That is harsh! Strong personal judgement is a solid basis for offense. But, they are a clown and or do not know us. One response would be to be offended and respond with righteous indignation. Another response would be to consider it laughable speech. Yet another could be to take it sincerely and ask why and how we are asses to understand differences. My point here is free speech carries a burden to manage not only our speech, but also how we manage incoming speech. People are very different. Intent is hard to divine too. Not an absolute thing, by any means. Another hard truth related to offense, is that it can be abused or gamed. Like intent, how offended someone is, the harm in play, are all subjective! Free speech, because of these dynamics, has to include "right to offend", but also has to include an effort to take speech seriously and give consideration due others with the expectation of receiving same in like kind. Right now, my take on this conversation is a lot of people are either poorly equipped to do that work, or are unwilling to do it, looking for easier answers. And those easy answers are expensive! What happens is speech ends up being limited and risky and we all lose out on being able to have real expression! The easy answer is to make it all like Disneyland and we simply abandon the First Amendment entirely. Everyone wants an answer when they are offended, and to them it seems easy, objectively solved. The offender is wrong, somehow. ...until it is them with no intent to offend, finding themselves on the other side being accused of offending others... Factor in how saying, "that is offensive" can be abused, and or the hard reality of people needing to hear speech they do not like, calling all that offensive to protect an ego, avoid facing personal failings, and more, and we have a real mistake brewing if you ask me. I will say this too: Even a small amount of that work I describe here pays huge dividends! The number one response today is righteous indignation, and some attempt to control others. My final observation is we are in charge of our speech, and how we take the speech of others. Either we do the work to exercise that agency, manage ourselves and get the benefits, or we will be managed by others and assure you that control will be coarse, limiting and come with regrets.