We get it, you only care about your internal code. Your virtue signaling is very strong. And kudos to you, I just don’t understand why you need to whine constantly.
This is a misunderstanding of different meanings of the word “racist”
And this is just wrong. Every single person* who ever called members of the Tea Party “Tea Baggers” knew they were being offensive (and making a sexual reference). And if you called them on it, they would have admitted they were intending to offend. Republicans dropped the “ic” from Democratic because they didn’t want to admit that their opponents support Democracy, but deny that the goal is to be offensive.
.* as with most used of the phrase “every single…” there were no doubt a few clueless people mixed in there, especially at first. But it didn’t take long before most of them were clued in, and either stopped using the term, or did so with malice aforethought.
Sam Stone is triggered easily.
Yeah, he’s a real snowflake 
A real cupcake. A pansy.
I disagree. He just has this overwhelming urge to make himself a powerless victim despite his posturing as some Heinlein hero. This conflict leads to his whining.
No, actually I just don’t like bad manners, hypocrisy, and assholes.
You see it ultimately comes down to throwing a tantrum because others don’t immediately genuflect to the superiority of his internal code. Only he gets to be autonomous.
A tantrum? I’m not the one pitting people constantly so I can go off on them. You might want to check a mirror.
The pit should be renamed, “The Tantrum Zone.”
Is this the height of Canadian sarcasm or what?
Let him be. If he needs this I’m not not going to take it away from him.
There, there, Sam Stone. This is your safe space. We’ll give you some chamomile tea to calm you down. Just relax.
No it doesn’t. The claims in my post refer to declaring something offensive or inoffensive objectively and for everyone.
The person in region A taking offence would be arrogant to tell the person in region B that their usage is objectively offensive and vice versa.
You misspelled empiricism.
Right? What with all the reactionary radicalism, some conservatism would be downright refreshing.
No he didn’t. Neither side gives a shit about evidence when it happens to contradict their preferred ideological beliefs. Worse, one side is overwhelmingly over-represented in academia, most especially in social science departments, and has now started to apply an ideological filter in academic journal publishing.
If it is, it’s a misunderstanding that’s extremely prevalent among people on the left.
Okay, so you’re purposely being horribly offensive to a group of people, and meanwhile calling that same group out for accidentally being offensive to other groups of people? Doesn’t that seem just the teeniest, tiniest bit hypocritical to you? Whatever happened to treating others the way you want them to treat you?
Sure, and that’s the third factor to consider.
In discussing whether we should recommend against an action due to offending people, we should consider 1) How many people it offends 2) to what degree but also, yes, 3) How much it curtails the freedom of the person being asked not to do it.
In this discussion, we were talking about safe terms to use to suggest someone is of low intelligence. Switching terms is not a big deal; It’s not a huge inconvenience and we all have to do it anyway as language evolves. It was not a great hardship to overnight switch from using the term “oriental”.
That’s why I didn’t include factor (3) in my earlier breakdown; it’s not relevant to what we’re talking about here.
You’ve quoted the part of my post where I stated my position, but not the part where I explained my position and then gave an example to illustrate.
Instead of just parroting your claim again, you might want to have a run at actually addressing the points.
Why does it matter what word one uses when insulting someone (or in the actual example an idea) by saying it is stupid? If using a certain word is offensive, it can only be because the comparison itself is offensive, so why do we consider it acceptable to make the comparison with one word but not another?
A: They called themselves ‘tea baggers’ 'cause they’re not smart enough to look it up on Google with safesearch off.
B: It not the Democrat Party and Republicans have had decades to learn that, they use it out of spite.