Fandom Gruff ┬─┬ノ( º _ ºノ) UNFLIPPED THREAD

[Kreekakon]

This is a difficult topic to talk about because someone IS going to get offended, but that's inevitable. Too many people are afraid of offending these groups, which is what's limiting our discussion about these issues and instead pulling in feelings into our objective breakdown. That's bad.

This actually brings to my mind another very important issue, and arguably an even harder one to solve because it is not clear cut at all.

That's the topic of "people being offended".

On one hand I do think it is VERY important what the feelings of other people are. Knowing how to be politically correct is something that I believe holds merit. Saying something while altering the way it is said to not lose the original meaning of the statement but also avoid offense is something that I think more people should strive for.

On the other hand though, where do we draw the line for people being "reasonably offended"? It's one thing to "reasonably" be upset because something is truly a touchy subject to you, but it's also another thing to be "unreasonably" offended because a person got upset due to someone criticizing them for something completely worth criticizing.

I think the distinction is sometimes very hard to make out and it's why the topic of "offending" people is so prevalent and hard to solve right now.

[Mudbill]

There's also that line between where people should get offended and where people should just "get a thicker skin" and deal with it. Just saying "deal with it" may not sound like a very good argument to being possibly offensive, but a lot of people are triggered by normal conversation, which turns into a big deal. A single word without an illmeant nature should not be censored for the sake of "those who may be offended by it" in my opinion. Actually, I don't think anything should be censored unless explicitly wanted.

[Kreekakon]

The tricky thing is that I believe that there are people out there who are good reasonable people. These people know how to differentiate between what is worth getting offended over and what isn't. They have extremely good self control over moderating these feelings.

But even for these people there are certain things that if you bring up with them it will make them upset out of their own control. They know it's unreasonable and they wish they could treat it just like everything else they are able to endure, but this one thing is just that thing that gives them majorly negative emotions.

It's mainly the issues like these I think we have to be careful of because these people are the best of us and still have some fears they are afraid to tread in.

I don't think we have to be overly careful though since that would be too counter-productive for any sort of conversation taking place, but if such a situation does turn up I think it would be well within reason to adjust.

So yeah that's basically me saying this exact sentence really drawn out haha:

There's also that line between where people should get offended and where people should just "get a thicker skin" and deal with it

[i3670]

I'd say it also depends on the situation and where you are. Imagine you and a friend playing co-op video games, you do something wrong which kills both of you and your friend says "I'm gonna kill you." You don't take that seriously because of the context. If you were to take that as a serious threat to your life, the police would be drowning in death-threat cases. On the other hand, if a total stranger comes up to you on the street and says the same thing you treat it with more gravity.

Now we get to the internet. I don't take anything directed towards me on the internet as personal. You can call me an idiotic, whore-mongering, racist deltiolog and I won't be affected by it. Why? Because it's a faceless stranger that I know absolutely zilch about, that might just be venting their opinions. Not to mention that it takes very little effort to send a message or an e-mail compared to writing a letter with the blood of a full-moon slaughtered beast at the north west corner of your house. You might want to contact the police of that happens.

So basically get the context, assess the situation and act accordingly.

[Red]

Those who judge merely by looks are the first ones to land on an Island of Sirenuse.

[Mudbill]

We all judge by looks, but we may not all conclude by them. Only people who don't judge by looks are physically blind.

[Red]

We all judge by looks, but we may not all conclude by them. Only people who don't judge by looks are physically blind.

Put it like that and following the saying 'Don't judge a book by its cover' would be impossible.
You know yourself you're going too deep into this. 'Judge' here obviously corresponds to 'conclude', although the terminology might point other way - don't take it word by word.

[Mudbill]

Put it like that and following the saying 'Don't judge a book by its cover' would be impossible.
You know yourself you're going too deep into this. 'Judge' here obviously corresponds to 'conclude', although the terminology might point other way - don't take it word by word.

People say don't judge a book by its cover, but that's exactly what people do, and you should expect it. First impressions are incredibly important when it comes to people, and your appearance plays a big part in that.

What I mean is not that bad looks instantly get you turned down (well, in most cases), but that it may affect others' first impression of you. If you're applying for a job, walking in with trashy and dirty clothes could alone be the deciding factor as to why you don't get it.

"Don't judge a book by its cover" is a wishful expression. Like I said, not realistic. A more realistic version of it would be "Don't judge a book PURELY by its cover."

[Red]

Put it like that and following the saying 'Don't judge a book by its cover' would be impossible.
You know yourself you're going too deep into this. 'Judge' here obviously corresponds to 'conclude', although the terminology might point other way - don't take it word by word.

People say don't judge a book by its cover, but that's exactly what people do, and you should expect it. First impressions are incredibly important when it comes to people, and your appearance plays a big part in that.

What I mean is not that bad looks instantly get you turned down (well, in most cases), but that it may affect others' first impression of you. If you're applying for a job, walking in with trashy and dirty clothes could alone be the deciding factor as to why you don't get it.

"Don't judge a book by its cover" is a wishful expression. Like I said, not realistic. A more realistic version of it would be "Don't judge a book PURELY by its cover."

That's why I put "merely" to the earlier one. I do get your point, but I don't know why you assume I didn't know it already. Wishful thing it might be, but I think it has a good lesson. It doesn't apply to every case so well, but when it does, it's good to remember. A less attractive person might have potential somewhere else,
a diamond might look like a real one, but it's actually a fine counterfeit and a rock might look like a rock, but it's actually a raw diamond. Somethings simply shouldn't be judged merely by their looks; you have to go deeper than the surface - turn the pages.

EDIT: it might be you equate this to the conversation earlier, but I am not directly referring to that. The theme here envoked something inside me that decided to try be a philosopher.

[A.M Team]

I hope you all have a happy Halloween! I'm heading away from the city because I can't stand the sound of fireworks (particularly Blackcats which are borderline IEDs).