The Problem of Offense

Campus Report ^ | November 28, 2007 | Bethany Stotts

[bs9021]

The Problem of Offense

by: Bethany Stotts, November 28, 2007

Offense is a “psychological construct,” argued University of Nevada-Reno Adjunct Psychology Professor William O’Donohue at an American Enterprise Institute (AEI) conference on the politically-correct university. He noted that proponents of political correctness often do so in order to reduce offense, yet define political correctness so broadly and inconsistently as to encompass Aleutian Islanders while excluding the oft-persecuted Jews.

These inconsistencies inherent to politically-correct ideology require proponents to simultaneously uphold contradictory doctrines, argued George Mason University Professor Jeremy Mayer at the conference. “To be liberal on a college campus today and to be politically-correct, you have to believe two contradictory or silly things. One, that gender has no role in behavior except that which we construct...but second, you have to believe that homosexuality is entirely genetic, and there is no choice and no nurture...,” he said. Mayer, an expert in racial politics, added, “there’s also this belief that got Jim Watson in trouble, which is that all races are equal in IQ regardless of what the data shows. And if you question that on a college campus, you can lose your job as he did.”

.....

O’Donohue asserts that the two core assumptions of political correctness are that “certain activities, particularly language, give psychological offense to members of certain groups” and that “the psychological offense is such a magnitude or kind that it is impermissible and it’s justified to prohibit it and even punish those that give rise to this offense.” In other words, he believes that the current system encourages the punishment of offenders regardless of the degree of psychological damage caused by “offensive” comments.

[bert]

Offense is taking the initiative and destroying the enemy.

[sean327]

Here is a better definition of Offense.

To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy, by fire and maneuver.

[Secret Agent Man]

The liberals want to punish others who aren’t liberal. This isn’t a big surprise. They’re just getting mechanisms in place to do it officially/legally.

It’s not conservatives who push for ‘hate (ie thought) crimes. Guess who bans free speech when conservatives are invited to speak at a campus, but says we must have free speech for liberal speakers? MY body, My choice, but I want public money to fund my private choice. Choice above all, but for Edwards and Hillary-care, you can’t opt out. Forcing your kid to hear how homosexuality is normal, you can’t opt out - but don’t wear a shirt opposed to homosexuality or we’ll kick you out.

These people are such hypocrites it is painfully obvious.

[bert]

......To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy, by fire and maneuver....

I can accept that

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Johns Hopkins is featured in this article.

Maryland "Freak State" PING!