andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2006-09-10 09:52 pm
andrewducker) wrote2006-09-10 09:52 pm
Offensiveness (request for comments)
I posted an entry earlier today with this LJ Icon.
It's not a nice LJ icon.
It's clearly offensive.
In fact the keyword for this icon is Offensive.
And![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
prynne asked me if I could be convinced to delete it. Her reason being that it contains the word "retarded", and she objects to that word (link now public).
I don't disagree that it's an offensive word. I'd certainly never use it in normal conversation.
But then I'd never say any of the things in the icon. It's there, largely, as a list of things _I_ find offensive.
And I think, myself, that it serves a purpose of saying that "Andrew finds all of these statements offensive, and wouldn't care to hear them from people around him."
In particular, it says "Goths are Retarded", which I _clearly_ can't mean, as I have numerous friends who are, or have been goths, and I've seen the Sisters of Mercy live three times, and have a large collection of black t-shirts. Nobody that knows me could in any way think I mean it as something other than "Here are things that highlight idiots when they say them."
But it's not necessarily obvious from the icon. You could read it as "Here are things Andy believes." if you didn't know me very well. You could more easily read it as "Here are things Andy finds amusing."
Knowing the internet like I do, I know that it's very easy not to recognise irony ("Saying one thing and meaning something quite different"). Many's the time I've made a comment intended to be taking as silliness and had it taken seriously.
So should I take it down? Should I depend on my audience to realise what it means?
It's not a nice LJ icon.
It's clearly offensive.
In fact the keyword for this icon is Offensive.
And
prynne asked me if I could be convinced to delete it. Her reason being that it contains the word "retarded", and she objects to that word (link now public).I don't disagree that it's an offensive word. I'd certainly never use it in normal conversation.
But then I'd never say any of the things in the icon. It's there, largely, as a list of things _I_ find offensive.
And I think, myself, that it serves a purpose of saying that "Andrew finds all of these statements offensive, and wouldn't care to hear them from people around him."
In particular, it says "Goths are Retarded", which I _clearly_ can't mean, as I have numerous friends who are, or have been goths, and I've seen the Sisters of Mercy live three times, and have a large collection of black t-shirts. Nobody that knows me could in any way think I mean it as something other than "Here are things that highlight idiots when they say them."
But it's not necessarily obvious from the icon. You could read it as "Here are things Andy believes." if you didn't know me very well. You could more easily read it as "Here are things Andy finds amusing."
Knowing the internet like I do, I know that it's very easy not to recognise irony ("Saying one thing and meaning something quite different"). Many's the time I've made a comment intended to be taking as silliness and had it taken seriously.
So should I take it down? Should I depend on my audience to realise what it means?
no subject
Would you feel comfortable explaining why you used this icon to my son, who has two sisters who have such severe learning disabilities that they cannot talk and are not toilet trained?
no subject
Depends entirely on the context. I'm surprised it's taken so long for someone to bring that up as an example, to be honest. It was the first thing I thought of.
Would you feel comfortable explaining why you used this icon to my son
Depends on the level of intelligence and maturity your son has. If he's very young, then no, but I wouldn't expect him to be reading my journal. I expect a certain level of intelligence and ability to read between the lines and understand deeper meaning from my readers. I don't feel that it's necessary that I write down to a level where people who don't understand that the literal meaning isn't the actual meaning can easily understand things.
I don't think everything should be banned if it fails the test of "Would it offend a child who was personally connected to it?"
If you'd got here about 16 hours ago I'd have been a lot less certain about all of the above, but the discussion has helped a lot in deciding what I feel about the whole situation. I'm still open to persuasion, of course.