You are reading a single comment by @ffm and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • That seems to suggest that the intent of the writer plays absolutely no part in this.

    You can cause harm without meaning to. If I step backwards onto your foot with my massive, sweaty, haven't-cycled-for-5-years bulk, then it doesn't really matter that I didn't intend to crush your dainty little toes into useless floppy pancakes. If you say "fuck me, you've just crushed my toes!" the appropriate response is for me to say "oh shit, sorry, I didn't mean to step on your toes" and then get off your toes.

    The wrong thing to do would be for me to continue standing on your toes while explaining to you that I am not, in fact, a toe-crusher, and that toe-crushing never even entered into my head, and people need to be less sensitive about accidental toe-crushing these days because I am definitely not a toe-crusher and you haven't even had your toes crushed anyway.

    That would make me look like a dick, and your toes would still hurt.

  • All true, but it does leave us with the no-less thorny problems of identifying whether harm has actually been caused, since this is clearly a less direct (for the lack of a better word) interaction than standing on someone's foot. It's obviously bollocks to assume that you cannot cause offence even when you intend none, but it's also bollocks to assume that nobody will ever take offence where none has been intended. I totally don't have a problem with someone saying "careful now, that could come over in a way that you don't intend" allowing room for clarification. I do have a problem with the default assumption being that something like that quote has any malicious intent or any real consequence.

About

Avatar for ffm @ffm started