In that case the proper response is, “I stand by my previous remarks.” There’s no use offending people in the first place unless you’re willing to stand up and make your point stick.
If you are going to lie about it, you might as well just go with a simple, “My apologies.” Anything more than that just leads to awkward conversation. They’ll want to talk themselves out. Just smile politely and let them get on with it. The sooner they shut up, the sooner they go away.
Well I’m sorry you feel this way.
That’s why I don’t like forced apologies. I’d rather someone not apologize than for them to offer up a bogus one.
Hey, I’m just being real.
which is to say
I know this may offend some, but hey, I’m just being honest here.
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:19, topic:651383”]
Just say, “I am truly and deeply sorry” without elaborating. They’ll read what they wish into it even if the only thing you’re sorry about is that empty bottle of Scotch.
[/QUOTE]
Hmm, this could work. No backpedaling, no what fors, just “sorry” and nothing else.
On my planet, sometimes people are forced into apologizing.
“I couldn’t be sorrier about what happened.”
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:19, topic:651383”]
Just say, “I am truly and deeply sorry” without elaborating. They’ll read what they wish into it even if the only thing you’re sorry about is that empty bottle of Scotch.
[/QUOTE]
After which the offenderati - and perhaps more importantly most bystanders - will consider that I have admitted what I said was incorrect. In certain circumstances it would not be at all acceptable to me for this to be the outcome.
Meh. If you’re going to engage with or respond to people who are demanding an apology from you, then what you need to do is apologize, sorry or not.
As the OP notes, “non-apology apologies” just look boorish. If you don’t think you should apologize for something you said, then simply ignore any and all demands for an apology.
If you are being confronted with demands for an apology that you can’t ignore, well then, too bad, that’s your tit in the wringer, and what you need to do is apologize.
Trying to find an “insincerity loophole” so that you can successfully placate people you can’t afford to offend, while still sending the message “I’m not sorry” to others, just looks cowardly as well as boorish.
Kimstu your post seems confused. You suggest that if you don’t think you should apologise you shouldn’t - except if you pragmatically must at least give a qualified apology, in which case you should give a full apology even though you won’t mean it.
Because, I assume, lying outright is better than saying what you really think, and having sensible smart people know what you really think is less important than looking boorish. Or something.
Is that a fair summary?
Well, I apologize and will try to clear that up. 
Yup. The only principled position to take when you think you should not apologize for something is not to apologize for it. And in that case, you should not respond to any demands for an apology or argue with people demanding apologies, because that just amounts to poking people with a stick when they’re already upset, and is not nice.
If your balls* are in hock to anybody to the extent that you cannot avoid making some sort of apology even though you sincerely think that in principle you shouldn’t apologize, well, that’s too bad: in that case, I’m afraid the good ship HMS Principle has already sailed without you.
And in that case, ISTM that the least unprincipled thing you can do is to put on your big-girl panties* and generously make the apology that you can’t avoid. Squirming around trying to find some kind of face-saving non-apology, as I said, just looks cowardly and boorish, and it doesn’t do jack shit to disguise the fact that your balls* are in hock.
The only principled and responsible way to “say what you really think” is to say it, frankly and freely. (Or equivalently, in this case, to not say what you don’t really think.)
If you can’t do that, then genuinely sensible and smart people will probably have already figured out that your balls* are in hock, and you will probably not impress them by trying to fake the appearance of being more brave and honest than you are.
*In the gender-egalitarian sense of the term, speaking as a woman myself.
On my planet, I don’t talk to other people much, anyway, so usually I only insult people if I really mean it. If I do accidentally insult someone I don’t mind apologizing for my accident. It works out pretty well.
Eh, the only apology worth anything has dollar signs in front of it (however I WILL do currency conversions for a small additional fee).
The point I’m not getting is why it is less principled to lie outright when you don’t have to than to make a qualified apology when that will get your balls out of hock.
I get that your opinion is that this is boorish, but frankly I’m more interested in rationality than what you think.
I think it’s boorish to put someone’s balls in hock and demand an apology and at that point, there is not much that is going to make me think that the victim of the ball hocking is the boor.
Sorry, that should be “The point I’m not getting is why it is more principled to lie outright when you don’t have to than to make a qualified apology when that will get your balls out of hock.”
Mostly because if you apologize when you don’t think in principle that you ought to, you’re already lying. Wriggling your way out with as minimal an apology as you can manage just comes across as adding pettiness and cowardice to dishonesty, rather than significantly reducing the dishonesty factor.
Fine with me. By all means, don’t feel you have to keep on asking me what I think about this subject if you’re not interested in it. You won’t hurt my feelings (and even if you did, I would refrain from asking you to apologize ;)).
You put your own balls in hock if you tolerate a situation where you will do something that you sincerely consider unprincipled just because you’re afraid of the consequences if you don’t.
While many demands for apologies are certainly unfair and unreasonable, that doesn’t absolve the unwilling apologizer for being too chickenshit to stand up for their principles.
$$$$$ I’m sorry that you r 2 dumb dumb to understand my apologises.
Don’t be so hasty. I think dum dums are negotiable currency in some neighborhoods. Let me check with my umm, “accountant” and get back to you. 
I feel like you have some point that you’re dying to make, so you’re just going to shoehorn it in, regardless of how irrelevant it is to what’s actually been said. Nobody cares about how antisocial you are, and how rarely you find yourself interacting with human beings. It’s still true that on Planet Earth people are sometimes forced to give apologies. What part of being forced into an apology makes you think any part of the insult was an “accident”?
I can’t speak for Merneith, but I read his post as meaning that he doesn’t get “forced” into apologies: either he insults somebody deliberately upon due consideration and doesn’t apologize for it, or he insults somebody without meaning to and has no qualms about apologizing for it.
I took the “rarely talk to people” bit as intended to explain that he doesn’t run much risk of getting into less clear-cut situations, where he ill-advisedly said something without duly considering the consequences and is now in trouble for it but doesn’t really feel that an apology is owed.
At least, that seems to me to be the sort of scenario in which people generally find themselves “forced into an apology”.
Eh, if someone has the power to force you to appologize, then I imagine your just going to get in more trouble with a non-apology apology then you would if you just refused. Most people are capable of parsing a sentence and figuring out that “I’m sorry you were offended…” isn’t actually apologizing for the thing you putatively did wrong.
