[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: kicking Rodger's assans Tucker and Gehrke

Rob: well put.

yeah, i went through 3 sets of delete that sentence, include that
sentence, etc.  before putting it in.

my concern was exactly yours.  and i also thought about what it could be
that distinguishes between what real and imagined "hurt" is and didn't
get very far.  and i did think about what "hurt" was in other instances
of being "offended" and some i can see as very serious.

ultimately, though, i do think folks (myself included) could use a bit
of "skin thickening" about being offended:  it is easy to do, it seems
common for any trivial thing, and it is easy to feign, simple to call up
righteous indignation, and make a gaping gushing wound out of a
paper-cut.  

as silly as it is, my thinking was ultimately "has any trial lawyer ever
been able to win a court judgement because of the 'hurt' they suffered
from being 'offended'"?  and though folks have been compensated for hot
coffee spilled on their hands, mental anguish generally, pain and
suffering of a dizzying variety, loss of reputation, and so on, to my
knowledge, no one in the US has ever been able get compensated for the
"hurt" occasioned by being "offended".

so, finally, i guess i return to a simple question i can't answer all
that well: "what trivializes what?"

respectfully,
michael korcok
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page