To be exasperated with posters who refer to ‘the terminally offended’?

[BernardBlacksBreakfastWine]

Been lurking on a couple of threads recently and I just get so frustrated by posters who use these phrases:

”People are offended by EVERYTHING these days.”

”Snowflake”

”The terminally/permanently offended”

etc

It’s just so empty and pointless; you could equally have used these phrases against, say, people objecting to page three photos a few years ago (and, to be fair, some of these posters probably did).

People get so angry when prejudice is pointed out to them. You just know they’re aching to say “This is political correctness gone mad!” but they at least know that’s been discredited, so they pull out one of those other meaningless catchphrases.

AIBU to wish that people could actually articulate a reason that people shouldn’t be offended by insidious prejudice rather than just slinging pointless insults?

Terminally bored ?

I think it’s the assumption that everyone is operating in bad faith. Some people are just putting their foot in it. Some people are using out dated language. Some people are bigoted twats, but not everyone. Once you start lumping people together you get a kick back

There are swathes of people wildly posting ‘educate yourself’ at every opportunity. Again, that causes good faith individuals to roll their eyes. It’s divisive. It’s a need to be the victim and claim the attention points associated with it. I think it’s primarily internet driven and older generations find it tedious.

To clarify: when I said about the insidious impact of seemingly small things on people's thinking and behaviour I don't mean on how I feel in that moment. I'm talking about the build up of things like women being referred to as girls in the workplace reinforcing people's unconscious bias that they're not as capable as men and as a consequence being less likely to get a promotion than a man.

Whether I choose to go about my day or be offended (not quite sure why I can't do both of those things at the same time?) doesn't make that not happen. When I said about being bothered by something, there will obviously be a spectrum of bothered-ness, ranging from noting to myself that I think something is wrong to actually addressing it in some way. I get not the headspace to get upset about the smaller end of the scale, but why would it bother you if other people do have the headspace for that?

Because on occasion they will have sufficient headspace to report the postie and give him months of grief and anxiety and disciplinary procedures. I don't find being called a girl or love demeaning or disabling in any way, but as I said, it does depend on context and I absolutely have been irked when guy tried to get ahead of me in a supermarket queue with a patronising "you don't mind do you love?" smirk.

‘I agree OP: the thing I dislike is the shutting down of people’s right to challenge poor behaviour or opinions.’

Who are you to decide what behaviour and opinions a person holds?

The thing I don’t like is shutting down the right to hold differing opinions. You don’t have the right to police people’s opinions or behaviour.

@Petrine

Who are you to decide what behaviour and opinions a person holds?

The thing I don’t like is shutting down the right to hold differing opinions. You don’t have the right to police people’s opinions or behaviour.

I'd draw a distinction between shutting down people's opinions, which is more nuanced, and challenging their behaviour. You're partially right that people will have whatever opinions they have and there's a limit to what influence another person can have on that. (Will come on to that later).

But if someone's behaviour towards me causes me offence or upset or diminishes me based on their own prejudice of me then yes I do have a right to challenge it, thanks very much. And I'm not going to be told that their right to cause offence to me outweighs my right to take issue with that and I just have to suck it up with a sweet smile.

To choose a slightly random personal example: I used to routinely be told by my bosses that my wanting flexible office hours made me unreliable compared to child free peers because I usually got to the office later and left earlier. I challenged this again and again on the grounds that a) it was discriminatory towards working mothers and b) I was actually working a lot more hours than most of my single, child free peers because I was logging on at home while they were working exactly their contracted hours and then leaving me to do a lot of extracurricular work. It used to really piss me off that people who worked fewer hours felt they could tell me they were better workers than I was when I was catching all their work after hours. I would kick off about it and they would say I was oversensitive and a "drama queen". It turned into a bit of flashpoint, I stood my ground and now am quite senior, and nowadays no one dares say anything to me about it.

Their opinions were their opinions. But I'm not going to cringe away from pointing out that they are incorrect when it's factually wrong and upsetting. And it took me being "offended" to get them to change their perspective.

Which brings me to the "opinion" point of the discussion. If people never called one another out on perceived offence, misogyny and racism would still be being openly tolerated at work: women would be subject to open discrimination in the workforce etc. People's views won't change overnight but they won't change at all if they aren't challenged.

Yes some people take this too far and become oversensitive.

But if people don't ever communicate the fact that something makes them uncomfortable, attitudes will never change.

You often get it where they’re trying to gaslight the OP into thinking she’s in a shit relationship and her DH is a misogynistic wanker when the thread is totally unrelated.

OP: ‘So DH was watching the kids the other day as I popped out to the shop and as I was crossing the road a car zoomed past and nearly knocked me over, the lights were on orange so AIBU?’
Poster: ‘Watching his kids? It’s interesting you put it like that, isn’t it? Very telling. He clearly seems himself as a part time babysitter, doing you a favour by watching his own children. Massive red flags right there.’

@BernardBlacksBreakfastWine , you infer in your post that those who get irritated by the constantly offended are older people and you should know that I know very many extremely well educated young people who hold that view and here, since you asked is why:-
Free speech is precious, I’ve just come back from Vietnam and one tour guid told us “We don’t have free speech here. “ Poor man, poor people; I think we often take for granted that we do have free speech and how important that is.
There is a great fuss at the moment about the potential sale of The Telegraph not to a foreign individual but to a foreign state and the concern is all to do with free speech and journalism,so concerning is the prospect our government has felt moved to intervene.
Of course there are some things that when said are illegal and that is quite a different matter but aside from that no one has the right not to be offended.
I suspect most posters here will agree with you, this forum is largely populated by people who appear to share a sort of group think in my opinion.
Being offended has allowed a certain type of person to quite effectively shut down free speech. In their world there are things you cannot think and certainly mustn’t question. It’s quite lazy really but crucially it’s dangerous.
We have the right to our opinions, we have the right to offend so long as we remain within the law. Tell us why you think we’re wrong, debate with us but try and do it with an open mind because you may be surprised that sometimes we have a point.

The ones who get me are the ones who leap to take offence on behalf of other people, who didn't actually feel offended anyway.

I think the difference between the terminally offended and those justifiably calling out inappropriate attitudes is always going to be in the eye of the beholder. We all lie somewhere on a continuum that runs from 'I say what I like, me' through to compelled speech, and will react to what we see accordingly. So calling people terminally offended is both an attempt to belittle and shut down argument AND a label justifiably applied to the thought and language police (who I personally feel are an emerging problem and equally culpable of trying to close down discussion) depending on how far we agree with their objection. Personally I'm not too worried about insults aimed at shutting down discussion anyway. I've never once stopped discussing something or changed my view because of them.

Personally, I have much more of an issue with the "terminally unoffended."

But that’s exactly what the “you’re permanently offended” people are doing - trying to police views and shut them down.

@Zodfa "The ones who get me are the ones who leap to take offence on behalf of other people, who didn't actually feel offended anyway."

How do you feel about people who "leap to the defence" of people who are not in a position to defend themselves? As many more vulnerable people aren't? Happy to discuss if you've got a few examples to share.

I didn’t imply (not infer!!) anything about age at all.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about free speech. I agree wholeheartedly about debate.

People who shout ‘snowflake’ are not debating. They are not engaging.

That’s what this thread is about. If someone has a point, I’ll happily hear it and engage with it.

The example you have used is such an abstract idea.
Of which you will be challenged on, some quite rightly will deem these kinds of statements with mirth.
Hence the snowflake.
Basically, the recent trend of over analysing and implying power structures to micro events is undermining the broader concept behind feminism for example.
They have no basis in actual empirical reality-senseless.
Moreover you also have to remember people are actually earning a living from promoting offence.

I do find the use of the word "offended" quite offensive. I am not offended by things. I think- and am happy to say, that things are offensive to minority groups, or to women, or to people on a lower rung of the ladder and I am happy to speak out on their behalf. But I am not personally offended.

With respect, it’s not abstract at all! It’s a very specific example based on discussions that have actually happened on here.

Basically, the recent trend of over analysing and implying power structures to micro events is undermining the broader concept behind feminism for example.

I disagree vehemently with this. There is rarely such a thing as over-analysis. It would be helpful if you gave a specific example though as your point is rather abstract, ironically!

@BernardBlacksBreakfastWine Nobody can ever give examples of professional offence, overthinking, being offended on behalf of other people, any of these things. Because they generally mean "somebody called me out on sexism, racism, ageism, disablism or homophobia and I didn't like it. And all of my black friends agree with me."

@BernardBlacksBreakfastWine , this is the part which I took to be referring to the age of those making the comments you speak of:-

“It’s just so empty and pointless; you could equally have used these phrases against, say, people objecting to page three photos a few years ago (and, to be fair, some of these posters probably did).”

I’d have to see quotes in context to establish if people were failing to debate or simply expressing frustration that others had failed to debate and instead effectively shut down any chance of doing so.

In my view it just makes them sound stupid and /or privlidged. If they are too thick to see that prejudice and discrimination show up in complex ways then I'm embarrassed for them. I suppose it is annoying because there's no critical thought and ultimately it's people like that who refuse to see prejudice and inequality who perpetuate it.

I used your example!!!😂
Claiming your abstract example of sexist behaviour is discussed on Mumsnet doesn't give the idea any credence at all.

There is a very classed/raced/gendered sentiment expressed on mumsnet that good English people should not show a lot of emotion or reveal that they are offended or hurt or ask for help.

For the poster upthread who complained that “we” used to get along without all this talk of micro aggressions and that “we” used to be more tolerant of mistakes the racial/class/sexist component is utterly missing. Its invisible. But the “we” who didn’t have to care about micro aggressions and racism is either a white person who didn’t experience them or a non white person from a model minority who escaped insult by aligning with the power structure.

One person’s mere “offence” is another person’s life or death experience of insult and exclusion. Its a luxury of place, time, and status if you can dismiss something as unimportant when other people think it is.

And, of course, there are a lot of permanently offended white Britons:offended by republican sentiment/dissing the old Queen, offended by Harry and Meghan, offended by transfolk, offended by strikers, offended by immigrants, offended by Europe, offended by the phrase “Little Britain” —when they are offended their offense feels righteous. Its only the pain of others that doesn’t register.

I prefer the term "professionally offended".

Feel free to take offence at that.

@GasPanic "I prefer the term "professionally offended".

Me too. I am also fond of "do-badders"