Offending Someone

[rambot]

In case you haven't read yet, I am living in South Korea.

This past weekend, myself and some friends put on a little sketch comedy night that was meant to, as the Brittish say, "take the p*** outta living in Korea".

The comedy sketches themselves were quite good; a couple were really clever. When I watched these things during rehersals, I usually would wince here and there, and then get on with it thinking "Oh, it isn't that bad".
Reherse, Reherse, Reherse.
And the time comes to perform.
We do our show. We have a lot of private institute, young Korean women who come to the show. Many (though not all of them) find almost all of the show HILARIOUS!...at times, I saw a couple wiping away tears. A few of the older Koreans either did not understand, or did not get it.
There was probably 1 Korean to every 4 or 5 expatriots (Americans, Canadians, aussies, brits etc...)

However, on discussions forums around Korea, there has been QUITE the backlash against our show. Quite a few people have levelled rather serious complaints against the show...all foreigners (often quoting koreans who said "_____": Charges of racism are fairly common.

That is not to say nobody liked hte show. It was self written, produced and performed. People laughed. The first show was a standing o.

But these some of these foreigners were completely offended and even leveled a VERY serious charge of drug trafficking against one of hte performers...
BAh...more later.

 

[JesusWalks78]

In case you haven't read yet, I am living in South Korea.

This past weekend, myself and some friends put on a little sketch comedy night that was meant to, as the Brittish say, "take the p*** outta living in Korea".

The comedy sketches themselves were quite good; a couple were really clever. When I watched these things during rehersals, I usually would wince here and there, and then get on with it thinking "Oh, it isn't that bad".
Reherse, Reherse, Reherse.
And the time comes to perform.
We do our show. We have a lot of private institute, young Korean women who come to the show. Many (though not all of them) find almost all of the show HILARIOUS!...at times, I saw a couple wiping away tears. A few of the older Koreans either did not understand, or did not get it.
There was probably 1 Korean to every 4 or 5 expatriots (Americans, Canadians, aussies, brits etc...)

However, on discussions forums around Korea, there has been QUITE the backlash against our show. Quite a few people have levelled rather serious complaints against the show...all foreigners (often quoting koreans who said "_____": Charges of racism are fairly common.

That is not to say nobody liked hte show. It was self written, produced and performed. People laughed. The first show was a standing o.

But these some of these foreigners were completely offended and even leveled a VERY serious charge of drug trafficking against one of hte performers...
BAh...more later.

Its like the use of words...for example the word Homo is acceptable to the homosexuals in my country and yet you have to be nice and not use it.

Words are merely tools to name things....people call Fijians Coconuts, I dont find it insulting...but try and say Homo and people get all upset....if you are gay yopu are a homo period...whats the difference, i use the word with no malice, the malice is only imagined on the other persons part.

People are strange.

 

[RavenPoe]

If you mean no malace, you would have no problem to cease using it. To say something and accidentally offend is one thing. When people approach you and say they are offended and you persist in the offense, then I find fault.

I happen to be part of a group of people who perform a weekly show which has very much offensive content. We used to have problems now and then with people not realizing that some of our jokes may not be appropriate for them. We learned from our mistakes and now have posted notices at the ticket counter stating that the show has offensive content, and even find audience that look out of place to make sure they are not going to take offense and offer a refund if they think they may have a problem. The people who do attend enjoy the show very much and know what to expect. My conscience is clean.

 

[Adriac]

Its like the use of words...for example the word Homo is acceptable to the homosexuals in my country and yet you have to be nice and not use it.

Words are merely tools to name things....people call Fijians Coconuts, I dont find it insulting...but try and say Homo and people get all upset....if you are gay yopu are a homo period...whats the difference, i use the word with no malice, the malice is only imagined on the other persons part.

People are strange.

That was relevant.

On topic... I think there are layers to offense. People being people have a tendency to overreact to things, and you shouldn't become afraid to say anything for fear that someone will be angered. At the same time, you can cause genuine pain with your words, and that's something that you need to be mindful of.

In my opinion, as long as it is all in fun, and you are sympathetic to those who are truly hurt, you can tell the haters to take a flying leap.

 

[JesusWalks78]

If you mean no malace, you would have no problem to cease using it.

Why should I stop using...the problem lies with the offended party.

To say something and accidentally offend is one thing. When people approach you and say they are offended and you persist in the offense, then I find fault.

So we must modify what we do to suit others? Where does it end, if i find it offensive that someone is breathing should I tell them and insist that they stop breathing?

People need to grow a thicker skin and stop crying like babies.

 

[Adriac]

People need to grow a thicker skin and stop crying like babies.

Aah yes... Luke 23, or I miss my guess. Right before Jesus punched that kid in the arm.

 

[Oonna]

Why should I stop using...the problem lies with the offended party.



So we must modify what we do to suit others? Where does it end, if i find it offensive that someone is breathing should I tell them and insist that they stop breathing?

People need to grow a thicker skin and stop crying like babies.

Ok SatanWalks78...I mean no offence, i just find it funny and like the name better...hahahahaha

 

[JesusWalks78]

Ok SatanWalks78...I mean no offence, i just find it funny and like the name better...hahahahaha

thats cool, i dont care at all......thats my point, it is only offensive if I choose it to be offensive and i dont, if thats what you want to call me please feel free to do so.

By the same token...a homo is just a homo....which is a shortened form of homosexual, so I dont see the problem with saying something wioth no malice like homo.

 

[SallyNow]

Why should I stop using...the problem lies with the offended party.

So if someone comes up, berates you, your business, your parents, they are not being offensive... you are just being oversensitive?

The meaning of words change over time. It isn't new; it's been going on for thousands of years. That's one of the reasons why Latin is used as language tool... the meaning doesn't change. But in English and most other languages, meanings do change, and a word that was endearing could now be insulting; an insult can become a term of endearment; and so many other variations.

So we must modify what we do to suit others? Where does it end, if i find it offensive that someone is breathing should I tell them and insist that they stop breathing?

If the language as a whole has changed, if society has changed the meaning behind the word, then yes, unless a person wants to be seen as offensive or have their words misunderstood, they must change with the times.

People need to grow a thicker skin and stop crying like babies.

People need to learn that language isn't static and gain a wider vocabulary.

 

[JesusWalks78]

So if someone comes up, berates you, your business, your parents, they are not being offensive... you are just being oversensitive?

See post 8

 

[quatona]

To a certain degree I agree with JW78, but for me it depends whether I am the speaker or the addressed person.
Offense doesn´t occur if it´s not taken. Taking offense always requires a good portion of assuming the intention to offend for the person opposite. I don´t gain anything from taking offense, and I can easily avoid taking offense. So that´s what I will do.

People need to grow a thicker skin and stop crying like babies.

Then again, I am not the person to tell others what they need to do. When communicating, I am interested in the person opposite to concentrate on the points I am making and not to be distracted by negative feelings like taking offense. Acting or speaking in a way that causes the other person to take offense is counterproductive to what I regard the purpose of communication. Thus, if there is one way of wording a message in a way that is likely or predictably causing the other person to take offense, and another way that doesn´t, it is most reasonable to use the latter.
There are situations in which causing another person to take offense can not be avoided. In the case of "homo" it can easily be avoided without any loss to the message.

Why should I stop using...the problem lies with the offended party.

In a communication situation, if the partner has a problem with you, you have a problem yourself. Unless you are not even interested in communication but are more like talking to yourself.

So we must modify what we do to suit others? Where does it end, if i find it offensive that someone is breathing should I tell them and insist that they stop breathing?

I think the essential differences between this slippery slope example and picking a word that will predictably cause someone to take offense are obvious. I needn´t explain them, need I?
In view of the above said I´m sure you can think of reasons why not to respond to this request, but to respond to the request for not calling someone a name that he takes offense from.

 

[rambot]

Thanks for your opinions everyone. I was only my way to class (now 8 hours later) and I completely lost my train of thought: Just a couple of good ideas that i got in my head.

Putting up the warning sign would have COMPLETELY absolved me from guilt.
Frankly, I have a feeling that the expat community in my city was not, shall we say "expecting" what came at them. It was a very fast paced night and if someone's thin skin is scarred early on, the cut only goes deeper. Warning them may have been a good idea.

My biggest problem with all the slaggers is that they are remaining annonymous on forums and not willing to confront anyone involved. I joined a NEW forum in the hope htat someone will have something to say to me, but I don't expect that to happen.

We DID have one Liverpuddlian leave, proclaiming, "This is sh--e" as I burst into my bluegrass song about shady school directors (a song that was otherwise, ROUNDLY appreciated). Apparently, this little man has issues with smiling as cast member after cast member told me afterwards "He's a negative nelly".

I can understand critics...even folks who are offended. What I don't appreciate or understand is that someone takes retribution to the next level by saying one of the cast members was dealing drugs; a VERY serious offense in Korea where 5000$ fines, prison time and deportation are all on the list merely for having MJ in your system (EVEN if you did it outside the country).

And so NOW I have the question I was going to ask in the first place:
When you are offended how do you react? What do you do?

 

[quatona]

Thanks for your opinions everyone. I was only my way to class (now 8 hours later) and I completely lost my train of thought: Just a couple of good ideas that i got in my head.

Putting up the warning sign would have COMPLETELY absolved me from guilt.
Frankly, I have a feeling that the expat community in my city was not, shall we say "expecting" what came at them. It was a very fast paced night and if someone's thin skin is scarred early on, the cut only goes deeper. Warning them may have been a good idea.

My biggest problem with all the slaggers is that they are remaining annonymous on forums and not willing to confront anyone involved. I joined a NEW forum in the hope htat someone will have something to say to me, but I don't expect that to happen.

We DID have one Liverpuddlian leave, proclaiming, "This is sh--e" as I burst into my bluegrass song about shady school directors (a song that was otherwise, ROUNDLY appreciated). Apparently, this little man has issues with smiling as cast member after cast member told me afterwards "He's a negative nelly".

I can understand critics...even folks who are offended. What I don't appreciate or understand is that someone takes retribution to the next level by saying one of the cast members was dealing drugs; a VERY serious offense in Korea where 5000$ fines, prison time and deportation are all on the list merely for having MJ in your system (EVEN if you did it outside the country).

And so NOW I have the question I was going to ask in the first place:
When you are offended how do you react? What do you do?

rambot, I have already given my answer: I remind myself that I do not know the intentions of the other person, and I refuse to take offense.

But let me ask you a question: Being a performing artist myself, that if a person enters a stage the conclusion is reasonable that she/he is intending to affect the persons in the audience. You engaged in a form of entertainment that causes amusement on the expense of weaknesses of some individuals or groups.
Consider the situation of those persons for a moment: They find themselves not openly and objectively criticized (which often is hard enough to deal with already), but adressed in a way that has these characteristics:
- It happened coram publico, and from a stage.
- The persons had no opportunity to directly respond to the veiled criticism.
- They haven´t been asked whether they want to be the subject of this public performance, therefore they are justified in feeling used for entertainment purposes.

Thus, I wonder why - if using unobjective methods yourself - you are surprised that the persons in question react unobjectively.

This is not so much a moral/ethical approach, but more the question:
If you stir the pot (and the nature of your performance allows the conclusion that this was one of your intentions), how can you be surprised if it stirs?

 

[JesusWalks78]

Then again, I am not the person to tell others what they need to do. When communicating, I am interested in the person opposite to concentrate on the points I am making and not to be distracted by negative feelings like taking offense. Acting or speaking in a way that causes the other person to take offense is counterproductive to what I regard the purpose of communication. Thus, if there is one way of wording a message in a way that is likely or predictably causing the other person to take offense, and another way that doesn´t, it is most reasonable to use the latter.

When people see the fat they cut it away and get to the meat.

Who is the one that eats the fat and ignores the meat?

There are situations in which causing another person to take offense can not be avoided. In the case of "homo" it can easily be avoided without any loss to the message.

You said that dropping the word homo doesnt change the message...leaving the word homo doesnt change it either.

In a communication situation, if the partner has a problem with you, you have a problem yourself.

Not in this situation, I am not the one jumping up and down calling outthat the other person is offensive.

Unless you are not even interested in communication but are more like talking to yourself.

I do not force people to interact with me on this forum, they do so of their own freewill. If they dont like it, then simply ignore it.

I think the essential differences between this slippery slope example and picking a word that will predictably cause someone to take offense are obvious. I needn´t explain them, need I?

How so that persons breathing caused me offense...should they be required to stop breathing simply to be PC?

In view of the above said I´m sure you can think of reasons why not to respond to this request, but to respond to the request for not calling someone a name that he takes offense from.

I have responded....I said no, I say it with no malice, my intent is notto offend...what they do with that information is up to them.

 

[quatona]

When people see the fat they cut it away and get to the meat.

Who is the one that eats the fat and ignores the meat?

Who would add fat that needs to be cut away?

You said that dropping the word homo doesnt change the message...leaving the word homo doesnt change it either.

Quite obviously for the person you are talking to it does. What is reasonable to do with this knowledge depends on your intentions.

Not in this situation, I am not the one jumping up and down calling outthat the other person is offensive.

You are the one who tries to communicate someone and is misunderstood. I would call that having a problem. Ymmv.

I do not force people to interact with me on this forum, they do so of their own freewill. If they dont like it, then simply ignore it.

You are sending a strangely mixed message. On the one hand you publicly offer your opinion on a forum without anyone explicitly having asked you (which in itself indicates that you have a desire to be heard and understood), on the other hand you encourage the same audience to ignore you.

How so that persons breathing caused me offense...should they be required to stop breathing simply to be PC?

Did you read my post? Did anything in it resemble of a PC argument? This has got to be a strawman.
I am not telling you what you "should" or "should not", I am wondering whether your behaviour matches your purposes and intentions.
Furthermore you keep confusing the two situations of being the speaker and being the person adressed, which I clearly distinguished between. I see no problem with not taking offense from a certain term, and at the same time avoiding terms that are likely to be taken for an offense.
On another note, my breathing or non-breathing is not transmitted on a virtual message board. So it´s impossible for you to take offense from it.

I have responded....I said no, I say it with no malice, my intent is notto offend...what they do with that information is up to them.

Your interest in your audience seems very limited. On the other hand you assume that it has an interest in your message.

 

[rambot]

Thus, I wonder why - if using unobjective methods yourself - you are surprised that the persons in question react unobjectively.

Well, had Koreans been offended, I would most CERTAINLY not be surprised. Though that was not the intent of the performers, I would have still expected someone to gleen the wrong message.

What is the surprise to me is that Koreans (for the most part) LOVED it! What surprised me that much more is that, the few people who ARE complaining are all foreign (with the odd Korean expatriot [or kyopo]).

These jibes (and I'm not going to call them insults) were not directed at them in any way.

You engaged in a form of entertainment that causes amusement on the expense of weaknesses of some individuals or groups

This works on the assumption that only weakness can be used as a target for humour. I personally feel it's a matter of chicken before egg.
Of course, you are unaware of the content of the sketches so I can't expect you to know that.
Frankly, the two sketches that most people seem offended by were sketches that dealt with ABSOLUTE absurd topic matters.
The Koreans who attend these performances (we've only done this one and a performance of a Dario Fo work...that's it) tend to be a special breed of Koreans:
1) They TEND to be students, friends or coworkers of the foreigners in the production (or friends by association).
2) They can speak and understand HIGH level English
3) They usually have travelled overseas and experienced other cultures which allows them to have a little more context for their xenophobia (a fairly common trait amongst Koreans who don't have the aforementioned traits).
The simple fact is that a lot of the Koreans who fit into this mold (and I will say that the number is VERY few) have a very, VERY good sense of humour and a good grasp of irony. They KNOW that what we are saying is a joke. They KNOW that Koreans aren't REALLY like that and that foreigners don't actually think those things. In some ways, those Koreans are the ABSOLUTE best audience members because they get to see what outsiders find a bit strange about their culture (and then blown WAY outta proportion).

This sketch night ("Babopalooza"...ie: Idiot-palooza) was TARGETED at foreigners with foreigners being the main audience. I can give you my solemn vow that, had this performance been targeted at Koreans (in ANY way) the comedy would have been more tasteful.

Again, I would not have been surprised if Koreans would have been "wee-ed" off. I AM surprised that a (VERY) select number of FOREIGNERS are.

Lastly, if you are referring to me personally, I should note that the two (of 6) sketches that I were in were considered (even by the complainers) to be the least offensive and (thereby) the funniest.

 

[quatona]

Well, had Koreans been offended, I would most CERTAINLY not be surprised. Though that was not the intent of the performers, I would have still expected someone to gleen the wrong message.

What is the surprise to me is that Koreans (for the most part) LOVED it! What surprised me that much more is that, the few people who ARE complaining are all foreign (with the odd Korean expatriot [or kyopo]).

These jibes (and I'm not going to call them insults) were not directed at them in any way.

This works on the assumption that only weakness can be used as a target for humour. I personally feel it's a matter of chicken before egg.
Of course, you are unaware of the content of the sketches so I can't expect you to know that.
Frankly, the two sketches that most people seem offended by were sketches that dealt with ABSOLUTE absurd topic matters.
The Koreans who attend these performances (we've only done this one and a performance of a Dario Fo work...that's it) tend to be a special breed of Koreans:
1) They TEND to be students, friends or coworkers of the foreigners in the production (or friends by association).
2) They can speak and understand HIGH level English
3) They usually have travelled overseas and experienced other cultures which allows them to have a little more context for their xenophobia (a fairly common trait amongst Koreans who don't have the aforementioned traits).
The simple fact is that a lot of the Koreans who fit into this mold (and I will say that the number is VERY few) have a very, VERY good sense of humour and a good grasp of irony. They KNOW that what we are saying is a joke. They KNOW that Koreans aren't REALLY like that and that foreigners don't actually think those things. In some ways, those Koreans are the ABSOLUTE best audience members because they get to see what outsiders find a bit strange about their culture (and then blown WAY outta proportion).

This sketch night ("Babopalooza"...ie: Idiot-palooza) was TARGETED at foreigners with foreigners being the main audience. I can give you my solemn vow that, had this performance been targeted at Koreans (in ANY way) the comedy would have been more tasteful.

Again, I would not have been surprised if Koreans would have been "wee-ed" off. I AM surprised that a (VERY) select number of FOREIGNERS are.

Lastly, if you are referring to me personally, I should note that the two (of 6) sketches that I were in were considered (even by the complainers) to be the least offensive and (thereby) the funniest.

No, I am not referring to you personally, and I am not trying to accuse you or anyone or to make a moral statement. These genres (cabaret, parody, travesty,...) of entertainment have a long history, and there are reasons why they are there. What I am saying is that they have an effect, and what I am saying is that this effect is - at least partly - based on the fact that people (individuals or groups) are - more or less open or subtly and in a more or less friendly manner - ridiculed. Even though they are pictured in an exaggerated manner and in gross stereotypes (and everyone involved knows about it), there must be some truth about it (else it wouldn´t be funny at all, and it wouldn´t serve the purpose).

You are, of course, right: I haven´t attended the performance, and therefore everything I say here is necessarily very general, and it is entirely up to you to decide whether some of it is relevant.

Just another observation:
In the beginning of your post you point out that you were surprised that it was not the Koreans who felt offended, but rather some of the foreigners.
Later you emphasize that it was not the Koreans that were "targeted" but the foreigners.
So the foreigners feeling offended rather than the Koreans makes perfect sense, no?

 

[trunks2k]

Its like the use of words...for example the word Homo is acceptable to the homosexuals in my country and yet you have to be nice and not use it.

Because it's about context. If I call somebody a "homo" they probably know I'm joking around and don't intend it to be a homophobic insult. When other people say it, then it's a different story, because often it is meant to be used in a derogatory, homophobic fashion. If somebody I am not familiar with were to call me that, then yeah, I'd be really angry, because past experience has taught me that it is most likely not meant to be something other than a slur.

Likewise, gay men can often get away with calling each other "[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]." Because they know what is meant behind the usage of the word. But if a stranger says it, it is taken as a slur because, quite frankly, it probably is.

 

[Moonlight Lady]

This is an excellent discussion - very good thread.




JesusWalks78, it concerns me that you neither wish to know, or care that you may be offending (or may have offended) another person.... and this makes me wonder if you really understand what Jesus was all about.


God said to Love your neighbor as yourself.... and in case you were wondering what that meant, see 1 Corinthians 13, then explain to me how not caring that you have offended someone (even if you don't understand how) is being in any way Christ-like?


Just an observation.

 

[RavenPoe]

I couldn't say it any better.

I am sorry that the sketch night was met with "hidden opposition". If I were offended by something, I would approach it directly, not spreading my discontent like gossip.