It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
If i am expected to act within a society, i should be able to comment on how that society functions.
So, when people claim that they are no longer free to be complete asshats - because then people complain about it - I have no sympathy
Have you ever heard of the term passive aggressive?
When the law gives people the power to manipulate what I can or cannot say or do in ways where I cannot be reasonably expected to know from one person to the next what language I should be expected to use to avoid upsetting them ... then the bully is not me, it's the person who creates the intent inside themselves.
originally posted by: EveStreet
a reply to: Winstonian
Pretty soon all words will be offensive in some way. We will only be allowed to communicate in small sighs, nods and interpretive dance.
originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: EveStreet
Pretty soon we are going to be forced to talk like troglodytes. Uga, uga, humm, humm?. Hummm..... Huuuh...
That would be the only way to not "offend" anyone. Heck the word "offend" can be offensive for some people... Heck, the word "people" can be offensive for some, since "some" want to be identified as "it" and not as a person...
When you write straight words on the internet, you are missing all the unconscious cues of nonverbal language we usually read when we speak face to face. Intent is then in the eye of the beholder so to speak.
This is the problem with the internet. You call what I wrote a "tanny tantrum" and you label everything else I write in that manner, but as this IS the internet, you have even less of the cues we would have with ordinary language. You cannot get my verbal tone, body language, facial expressions, or anything in order to understand the full speaking context of what I write.
...I call it a black hole, referring to the interstellar phenomena, then if I have a colleague of color at the table, he or she may choose to find that offensive.
My intent should be obvious there to anyone with half a brain, but to that person, it was a hurtful, racial comment creating a negative environment and that's all HR will care about.
However, at the same meeting, if this same project were the pet project of my colleague of color and I were to unleash a diatribe in which I called him a "stupid effing n-word" for defending it constantly. I think my intent at that point would be crystal clear and I would deserve whatever I got for it.
So you add what you imagine them to be. To you I am "angry" because to you only someone who is angry would possible write the things I write. You are creating the intent in my words. The problem, your "tanny tantrum," is thus being created by YOU and not me. You have no possible clue at all beyond the bare words what my intent and my emotional state actually is.
originally posted by: ketsuko
originally posted by: Gryphon66
"We're all snowflakes."
Very good! We're making progress. We are all individuals, just like snowflakes. Now if we could stop people from grouping up into activism groups we might get somewhere.