I guess if all our actions are normal, then the requests from others to change our actions are always going to be unreasonable. So they are kind of in a lose/lose situation. Since we define normal.
Let me also put it this way: the mere fact that something is offensive to another person is, all by itself, a reason not to do that thing. There doesn’t have to be some other reason that it’s bad. Unless there’s some countervailing reason to do it that outweighs hurting somebody’s feelings, you don’t do it. At least, that’s how it is in my ethical system. (Bible scholars can look at what Paul says about eating meat offered to idols for a theological foundation for this idea.)
Generally I agree. Except that there is a difference in moderating your behavior in relation to a specific individual or in a discrete group because of a known specific sensitivity to a particular issue, and modifying behavior in a more general sense. To use an extreme example, wearing a planned parenthood t shirt to a friend’s house who has deep religious conviction may be inappropriate. That doesn’t mean showing your support for planned parenthood in all contexts should be off limits.
We can’t live our lives like that, it’s giving control of yourself to anther person’s sense of right and wrong.
You shouldn’t wear that short skirt because I find it offensive.
You shouldn’t be gay because I find that offensive.
You shouldn’t have ideas that I don’t agree with, because I find it offensive.
You are talking about tolerance of intolerance.
Hunt wrote:
At a certain point a person has to decide to stand up for what is right. I’m not standing up for the right to wear a sombrero to a college party, even though I have that right. These days some may choose not to exercise that right, because they don’t want society to frown at them. However, I don’t want to exercise that right if it hurts feelings. I am not caving to societal pressure.
I will stand up for the rights of women and/or LGBT people. In some circumstances, I will deliberately offend someone by calling them intolerant because I think that sort of rudeness serves a higher good.
Marginalized groups are always expected to be well mannered and inoffensive to majority groups. They are advised that good behavior and asking nicely will change social norms. Historically, I just don’t see that is how change happens. When the majority group knows their way to be the best way, why change?
@Hunt -
I find your posts offensive. Please stop posting on cc. It is the only way for you to live up to your ethical system.
I have a countervailing reason to post, which is to pwn n00bs.
I’m about to think it is just a very good thing there is a place on-line for folks outraged by PC culture to get together and vent. I just don’t know what I think about the youngsters reading it though. Probably they pay us no mind so it doesn’t really matter. I’ll just hope that is the case.
@alh, what you are doing is subscribing importance to your own belief structure, which is precisely the point. People who believe abortion to be morally wrong must tolerate your views in the marketplace of ideas, lest they be intolerant. Fine. So that same relative who shows up for Sunday dinner at your house in an abortion is murder shirt is ok, because that expression of rudeness serves that person’s view of the higher good?
And certainly we see example after example of “marginalized groups” acting in ways that are in no way “well mannered and inoffensive”. How is that working out?
Are we circling around a recognition that wearing a mini-sombrero at a tequila party isn’t standing up for any particular principle?
“I think people should avoid doing things that offend others out of simple good manners and kindness.”
Right, and I think that’s the context in which the college ought to offer some guidance here. I don’t think anybody ought to be forced out of their housing over something so debatable and so minimal. Even if you find the sombreros offensive, I don’t think there’s a reasonable argument that they create an unsafe atmosphere for other students (in contrast to, say, a swastika or Confederate battle flag, which have a history of association with violence). A nice chat with an administrator about erring on the side of showing respect and love to your fellow students is all this situation merits.
I don’t agree with the impeachment of student government figures, either, but that’s within the discretion of their constituents.
Well, we are talking on this thread about the advisability of wearing sombreros to college parties, so I think change is happening.
When I was in college 40 years ago, blackface parties were commonly held by white fraternities, and were not challenged. So I see a whole lot of change.
Gay marriage happened really fast. Even the Boy Scouts have changed policies. I never would have guessed that much change would happen in my lifetime.
I’m incredibly hopeful as to how it is all working out.
You hurt my feelings. Please stop posting on CC. It’s the ethical thing to do.
I need my safe space, safe from Hunt’s posts!
My guess on the next person to be “dis-invited” from colleges…J.K. Rowling
New J.K. Rowling story earns ire of Native Americans
Are a significant number of Native American’s upset over a J.K. Rowling’s story? Or, is this what Ohiodad51 would say is “an expression of power” via PC outrage?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/entertainment/rowling-native-american-controversy-feat/index.html
I wonder what Dr. Adrienne Keene thinks of James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans.
@hunt, of course it isn’t. But I would echo @hanna’s comments above. This is an overreaction to a contrived issue, which as I have said before I believe does more harm than good.
@alh, I went to college thirty some years ago, and never even heard of a black face party until we started hearing about them recently. Maybe they went on all the time, and I just wasn’t invited. Who knows. And what exactly does cultural appropriation have to do with a US Supreme Court decision on gay marriage? You really want to argue equivalency between the actions of the state in limiting the right to a benefit and a group of college kids having a party?
I’m a big Rowling fan, but I think she should move with a lot of caution there. If she wrote about Jewish magic with kabbala mystics or something, I would expect her to do a lot of research and get our myths and legends right. I would not want to read about bagels at a magical Seder table.
I agree with Hanna’s point, and I think I said that before. Can’t we deal with some of these issues by just telling people they should knock off the sombrero-wearing?
I’m only saying these things because I think they’re for your own good. That’s also a countervailing reason.
I agree with this.
Unless the students specifically agreed, ahead of time, that “let’s play Mexican” parties are something they will not do. Which is sort of the case with the two student gov’t reps, at least.
I think the Beastie Boys’ famous 1986 song really speaks to this issue on behalf of the downtrodden tequila drinking college populace.
Which you can invoke at any time. So much for your ethical system.