What happens when someone feels offended?

[Justmyownself]

Just that really.

I believe that people choose to feel offended, or angry, or sad or whatever emotion they think is relevant to the circumstances.

For example, words are literally just soundwaves. We hear them, consider them, and then attach meaning to them. Consequently we choose an emotion which corresponds to that meaning.

So, if I am overweight but genuienly have no issues with it, and someone makes a remark about my size, I may not choose to attach any meaning to their words because they are of no interest to me. If on the other hand, I am self concious about my weight, if it's an issue for me, then i might choose to attach meaning to that persons words. As acknowledgment of them forces me to confront an issue which makes me uncomfortable.

But what actually happens when someone feels offended? Ok, they might feel bad, but surely that feeling is their own responsibility?

As far as I can see nothing actually happens. The world still turns, the sun still rises. But nothing really happens. You could choose to feel so offended by something that you have to sit in a corner, rocking back and forth while dribbling all over yourself. But nothing actually happens.

Im not talking about obvious criminal offences like public order, as those obviously have legal implications. Im talking about the everyday "offences" which for some reason people seem obsessed about being offended by.

It sometimes feels like being offended by something is just a form of attention seeking. Are grown adults really that weak of character? To me, it sometimes feels like there are no adults in the world anymore. Just a bunch of characterless, over sensitive, narcissistic individuals.

I've got my flame proof knickers on just in case!

@theclacksaredown

I bet the OP is the type of person who considers it a character strength that they call a spade a spade. And everyone who gets offended by their no nonsense straight talking is a snowflake.

THIS ^ I fucking hate this type of person.

Just understand that not everyone is like you, and some people get offended and upset easily.

Doesn't mean you are a better or stronger person because you are not sensitive! (And SUPPOSEDLY don't get upset easily!)

I also find the 'I tell it like it is' brigade are the ones who go batshit if someone says anything they regard as remotely negative about non-whites or gays. Apparently it's OK for THEM to be rude and insulting, but not for others to be! Disingenuous arsehats.

I bet also, that these 'I tell it like it is' twats would be aghast with shock and horror if someone said 'go boil your head you fat cunt,' in response to an insult they had dished out. I find many 'tell it like is is' twats can dish it out, but cannot take it when it's dished out to them...

Feelings are not under conscious control. You can choose how or whether you express them.

Have you ever actually felt something, or do you just choose to say the words you attach to a feeling you think is appropriate at the time?

It does sound like you've never actually had a strong feeling.

The problem is, people want to be offended, and instead of explaining why someone may find something offensive and educating around the issue, people just shout 'I'm offended' from the rooftops and throw their dummy out of their pram. I was called the 'n word' recently and my friend was very surprised when I responded with 'is that the most original thing you can think of to call a black person?' - my point? By being offended you are only hurting yourself. It serves no purpose. I could have responded with anger but I would've given the drunken arsehole exactly what he wanted.

I quote Stephen Fry:

"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."

Interesting thread. I've come to realise that many people who lack empathy, such as narcissists and psychopaths, accuse others of being "over sensitive" or "too sensitive" as a way of exerting control. Anyone else noticed that?

You’ve definitely got a point.

I’m with mrsragnell

There’s being offended where a person is trying to upset you / or give offence. And then there’s someone saying something a bit crass but they haven’t meant to hurt you or anyone else.

If don’t take offence if the intention wasn’t to offend.

I do think it's right to say "I feel offended/am offended". Because it's your own feelings. It isn't right to say someone else has offended you/made you feel offended. People may not always be in control of their reactions. However do "own" them, in the sense that only they are responsible for their feelings (and not others).

Alarms start blaring and we all go and hide in our safe space while we get over being offended. In the meantime, we eat chocolate, listen to therapeutic music and engage in discussion about our feelings.

Wow!

Wasn't expecting so many responses so quickly.

Ok. I'm not a "tell it like it is" type. And I dont go through life oblivious to other peoples feelings. The whole point of my question is the apparent obsession with people being offended by things.

If difficultjet sold tickets for a trip on that particular bandwagon, the queue would stretch for miles. Their shareholders would wet themselves over the dividends!

I just cant help thinking that while people are running around being preoccupied by some percieved slight, that they are blinded to more pressing matters.

I can't remember who posted about people needing conflict and orchestrating situations where it occurred. I think that's a brilliant observation! It makes so much sense.

When I hear people speaking about "cultural appropriation" or demanding that a two hundred year old statue be removed because it offends them for some reason, I can't help thinking how irrelevant it all is.

We live in one of the most affulent countries on earth. We have access to technology previous generations wouldn't even have concieved of. The current generation of students are the most well educated individuals in history

But it just seems wasted, despite all that knowledge, all that potential, the best people can come up with, the most important issue they care about, is feeling offended on behalf of Mexicans because some restaurant gave away a Sombroero with their Friday night special.

'I'm offended' is often a technique used to try and shut down the other party without discussion or argument.

@TheClacksAreDown, it's a spade not a bloody shovel.

When I hear people speaking about "cultural appropriation" or demanding that a two hundred year old statue be removed because it offends them for some reason, I can't help thinking how irrelevant it all is. I knew it. It's always the same type of people who would start threads like this. I knew the angle the op was coming from. She/he tried to avoid it until they couldn't anymore.

Same old, same old. why can't people just take the bullshit?

I think it’s an interesting discussion. Stewart Lee made an interesting documentary about people being offended by his musical about the life of Jesus and a lot of the points there were really thought provoking.

I personally don’t think there’s anything wrong with being honest but it does depend on the situation obviously.

Different cultures are definitely more open/honest than English speaking countries particularly England and the US. The Germans are brutally honest; I live in Korea and people are pretty scathing here too. You can’t just say they’re wrong to be like that.

I don’t like that people use ‘that’s offensive’ to shut down conversation. But at the same time, if something offends someone, I try not to do/say it (eg I’m Scottish so I tone down the swearing in England.)

despite all that knowledge, all that potential, the best people can come up with, the most important issue they care about, is feeling offended on behalf of Mexicans because some restaurant gave away a Sombroero with their Friday night special

Eh? I don't really understand where you're coming from. (Apart from a clearly biased position). So you're saying that despite the affluence and technology at our disposal, the only thing people are worried about today is feeling offended by cultural insensitivity? You don't believe that the boundaries of science, health and technology are being tested and pushed even further every day in the hope of making the world a better place?

I mean, I guess that stuff is happening, but it's not relevant to a "bloody snowflakes" rant, right?

Ricky Gervais (yeah yeah I know, not everyone's cup of tea) has recently been talking about this (in his new standup, and on talk shows etc.)

"Offence is about feelings, and feelings are personal"

Really interesting OP, I guess for me the main thing is that we're all brought up with the idea that there are certain boundaries to be upheld as immutable and that we show respect or disrespect to those around us by either reproducing them or ignoring them. You either stick to what's known, or venture as some sort of lone wolf into these ambiguous regions which haven't been properly classified as polite or impolite yet & so in their ambiguity are offensive by default.
So then I think possibly the state of being offended is very much reacting to transgression as specifically a choice or decision. We trust that you know the rules and every social action you take is observed as a non-neutral decision. Going against what's seen as polite is an overriding of the collective to prioritise the individual. If you, as the offensive party, differentiate yourself from the mass as individual, you not only destabilise the wisdom which the person you oppose takes to be true, but you also reinforce their status as one unit in the whole, because your individuality is constructed only via this differentiation from the mass. To deny a shared universality is to acknowledge inequality on whatever level - you, as someone with an independent opinion, are irreducible to something corporeally distinct and yet identical, whereas your 'opponent' sinks into this undistinguished bog of tired social norms. It's very unflattering for them!

Or maybe it's that we pretend that it is the content of the decision that bothers us, but really it's the fact that you (as the offended) feel excluded - usually everyone respects these boundaries as default, but if you are someone to whom these boundaries are judged to be irrelevant, it becomes an 'us and them' thing. It's a test - who has their inclusion affirmed, and who has the concrete authority to successfully challenge this inclusion, where they can disrespect these social norms by ignoring them and yet retain this authority to the degree that they single-handedly exclude an 'innocent' in doing so?
For some unfathomable reason, even though everyone involved is assumed to have been brought up in the same social environment, you are singled out by a supposed equal as undeserving. We assume there is some sort of logic to the basic social transaction which informs so many of our interpersonal interactions, and think that we can attribute the reasons for social transgression to some sort of false functioning of this transaction. Probably it was us, we didn't hold our end of the deal up, where did we go wrong? We wonder if we've properly understood the social contract we were educated as children to trust, and we get confused and cross and this undigested mix of emotions gets expressed in what we and others can note as the state of 'being offended'. I think maybe 'being offended' is a placeholder, as in it's a mess of thoughts and affect that we haven't really synthesised yet, and because we somehow suspect that our respect of the social rules it has bruised is a little arbitrary and shaky anyway (we don't want to admit it's a means to end and not sort of inherently true), we don't really want to get in there and rationalise it, so it stays a bit murky.

And it's nowt new to say that offence reactions which are coherent across generations constitute reiteration mobilised to serve a corrective societal purpose. In other words, a monitoring which contentwise takes its cue from the zeitgeist, but only so that it makes its coercive structures more insidiously accessible. It's a cultural force which aims to get people used to reacting in the same way to manifold social stimuli, operating within the same channels of thought, so that any other mode of functioning becomes quite unintelligible and suspect.

Fascinating topic but it's getting on!

I quote Stephen Fry:

"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."

How many times has Stephen Fry left Twitter now, because he's been so upset (read: offended) by what people have said to him?

Preach it OP! I 100% agree.

@birdsgottafly yes to what you say. I’ve seen it so many times people use or say racist things and then say the person was over sensitive for them calling them out.

Pp you can be offended and do something, sometimes being offended is the prompt to say something and challenge people.

OP has a point and MN is a case in point with many self-absorbed oversensitive people.

I'm not talking about genuine verbal abuse but the people that have such a toxic view of the world that they can take a completely mundane interaction or event (e.g someone having a shit in your toilet, being invited to just the evening part of a wedding, a friend not seeming that excited about your news or cancelling plans, an offhand comment, a 'thoughtless' gift and on and on) and turn it into a deeply offensive and hurtful encounter and suggest the person doing the 'offending' have thoughts or feelings that they likely don't.

There was a thread on here the other day about someone being 'completely humiliated' by the servers in Costa laughing at the choice of coffee.

MN would die a death if it wasn't for all the 'would you be upset/offended/livid about this?' Or 'would you complain about this?' threads.

This sounds like a convenient way to excuse behaving badly and hurting people.

'Never mind what I did, you're in charge of your emotions so if you feel offended it's your fault not mine.'

I believe that adults have a duty to treat each other with decency and respect, and that it is your responsibility if your behaviour causes hurt or offence. I think it's the mark of a bully to upset someone and then blame the person you have upset for feeling that way.

Diet Coke, everyone is responsible for their own behaviour and for their own feelings.

There's a difference between feeling personally offended - which can be a combination of hurt, humiliation and anger because someone has insulted you as an individual - and feeling 'offended' by something in the public eye, such as an insensitive advert.

The first is usually a spontaneous emotional reaction, which can be controlled in the sense of not showing it, but will still be there. The second can also be this, but is more likely to be an intellectual, considered response ("I find that offensive because ... rather than simply feeling offence) and it's that kind of response that's more likely to be part of a 'snowflake' culture.