Well, we’re addressing the feelings of offense, not the actions taken because of them. I don’t believe I ever implied that the Jewish Terror League would show up and behead her for the affront.
Is that not the case with all offense based on (mis)use of symbols? To my mind, that is no reason to go around giving the offense in question.
Myself, I’m not offended in the slightest by this tattoo. But not giving offense to those who have not merited any by taking an action I know will give offense (however “irrational” I happen to judge it) seems a pretty straightforward application of the Golden Rule.
Then what is the relevance of the example you gave? The reason the “furor” over the drawing Mohammed issue became (in)famous is exactly because of the violent reaction triggered by the “offense”.
If Muslims worldwide had simply said “please don’t do it, we don’t like it”, I’d have no criticism of them for that.
I would, and did. And still do. It was a caricature. Nobody should care.
Yes. I don’t see any reason to care about any of them. I don’t get why there should be a special exception for this one.
Wear One first, see how she likes it. 1) Living in the world, you do not have a right NOT to be offended, nor does she have the right NOT to be confronted should her display offend 2) It is her body. Even the seemingly stupid choices are freedom in its’ purest form. 3) Symbology is subjective to history. The odds are fair that few people, even Jews would recognize that one right away and immediately launch to offense.
Bottom line, she’s not talking about inking herself up and wandering naked through a Sader, she’s putting a symbol she likes where she likes it. It’s her business and that’s that. It’s a perfectly fine idea for her.
Do you see anyone asking for a “special exception”? Please point out where.
If you, or anyone, want to offend someone, go right ahead; free country and all that. No-one is claiming she should be prevented by force or law from doing it.
It is the flipside of freedom of speech - you can say what you like, and others are equally free to think you are an ass for saying it.
Well, yeah. But irrational doesn’t mean imaginary.
The OP’s explanation of why this person wants this tattoo raises a separate issue that doesn’t seem to have been addressed yet. It sounds like this person is into spiritualisticizational kinda stuff, and may consider this tattoo to in fact have some sort of power. If so, then they might want to consider whether doing this might actually bring some negative karma down on them.
The difference between us is I am not out to say what people should or should not care about.
Lots of people care about stuff I don’t.
I’m all for co opting, rebranding, and reowning.
I don’t think anyone is saying that anyone would be “injured” by it. I find it mildly offensive, but the person who would be most injured by it is the tattoo-bearer, in that I strongly suspect that most Jews she met would not think highly of someone who would get that symbol as a tattoo. If I, hypothetically, saw that tattoo on someone I actually knew, and wasn’t just walking past them on the street, I would probably ask about it. If they gave the explanation provided in this thread, I wouldn’t say anything, or tell her I’m offended, but I would mentally tag her with a “dipshit” label.
Like I said earlier in this thread, if that is a non-issue for her, then she should go for it. No one is being injured.
Jews aren’t special. Everyone is free to think everyone’s tattoos are stupid, or be offended that their cultural symbols are being misappropriated.
Actually, that seems to be exactly what people are saying.
Prohibited by who?
No, they are saying the opposite. Repeatedly.
No. Jews may be offened by this particular usage, but people of other religions are entiltled to feel offened if their sacred images were misused.
Prohibited by Jewish law to be written in a nonsacred way in general. No secular law prohibits her from doing what she wants.
This is deeply offensive to reality.
It really is starting to piss me off that I keep having to explain this.
If you offend someone, they will feel the need to offend you back. And since you are not offended by symbols, they’ll find something to use that’s offensive to you. Not everyone will respond as such, but, with something like a tattoo, you’ll be showing it off to enough people that you will run into someone who will respond.
And if you think you somehow cannot be offended, I’d be willing to offer you some in a place where it wouldn’t get me in trouble with the mods. Just be forewarned: it would involve your daughters.
I’m fine with all this, but she used the word, “hurt,” which seemed odd to me.
If I see somebody even with a patently hostile or offensive tattoo (like a swastika), I mentally file the person as an asswipe, and possibly dangerous, but I don’t feel personally “hurt.”
The tattoo she’s suggesting is unlikely to be helpful in life, and is quite likely to cause some problems for her down the road.
A tattoo of a rose/dolphin/etc. does not have the same sh!tstorm-inducing potential.
Imagine she walks into a job interview and the HR director is devoutly Jewish. (Wave bye-bye to the nice job, sweetie!)
Don’t be a jerk, BigT; this is threatening and totally inappropriate.