Easily Offended

(Photo: Underwood Archives, Getty Images)

On April 8th, 2019, I posted a poll on Facebook posing the question, "Do you believe that people are more sensitive and more easily offended now (the 2010s) than ever before?" 66 people voted with 71% (47) people saying yes and 29% (19) people saying no. Comments discussed social media being a factor as well as age. The question presented if people were offended but did not specify a group of people. Now some people asked if this was to start a fire on Facebook especially how "divided" we are as a country. Throughout the last nine years, I can see in person and social media the belief that people are becoming "soft" with participation trophies and being rewarded for their failure...or that is what I am being told. My social media is riddled with people expressing frustration that millennials are sensitive and lazy due to being babied more than the other generations. This isn't only with older generations. People my age will post something, followed by someone being offended and expressing concerns, followed by the original poster responding that the person will need to get over it, and thus begins a thrash of insults of intelligence and bigotry followed by someone blocking the other. The point of my post though isn't only being offended through social media but overall in our community. I want to take a historical perspective of people that have been offended in the past and to see if in the last nine years has been the peak of people becoming overly offended. I do want to note that I do not have a specific way to measure how offended someone has been but I am going to ask the question has someone been so offended to lead to violence, destruction, or other aggressive crimes. I also want to point out some theories on why people are the way they are in today's world and possibly why we may feel that people are more offended today than ever before. To begin we need to understand what exactly does it mean to be "offended". Google defines being offended as, "resentful or annoyed, typically as a result of a perceived insult". I know we all can think of a time whenever we were resentful or annoyed by the everyday interactions of others. I know I can become annoyed at the smallest things in everyday life. Slow driver, technology not working, social media post can all be annoying in our everyday life. Which brings us to the next questions, do people get easily offended every day? This leads to us throwing out the question of people getting easily offended but perhaps the new theory should be, are people amplifying their responses when being offended. Can someone insulting you and your beliefs lead to an eye roll or anger fueled Facebook post? What would you do if someone offended you? Would you want them to suffer? Lose their job? Lose their life? For many of us, I hope, the answer is no.

Historical Consideration

The picture you see is one of the Freedom Riders, a group of people, both black and white who traveled through the southern states in protest of the segregated public buses in 1961. On May, 14th 1961, Police Commissioner Bull Connor and Police Sergeant Tom Cook wanted to sabotage the bus by slashing the tires and firebomb the bus while barricading the doors from the outside so they would burn alive in the bus. Once the riders got off the bus many of them were assaulted. Some reports state that a state patrolman fired a gun clearing the mob who he believed would lynch the riders. When going to the hospital, the riders were secretly taken to another hospital due to the fear of mobs in the hospital. They were then attacked again by a mob in Birmingham Alabama. Let's think of this in the most objective way possible. Police officials and townspeople of two prominent cities in Alabama wanted to literally burn people alive because they wanted to share seats on public buses. People were so offended by something so small that they wanted to brutally murder people. I suggest you read more on the deeds of Bull Connor and how his disagreements with civil rights led to police dogs and fire hoses being used on people who wanted the use the same restroom, water fountain, and restaurants. You also have to understand that the Ku Klux Klan had such hatred with the equality of African Americans that they would lynch all the way to 1981. This proves that people were more offended back in the day if they were willing to burn someone alive. This wasn't only in Alabama or in the deep south. Martin Luther King Jr. once said that he saw more hatred towards race in Chicago than in the deep south. Overall, I lean towards this time in history due to rebuttal the belief that we are easily offended today than in the past. This clearly contradicts that belief. If you want to more about how being offended led to the vicious murders of people, I suggest reading the story of Emmet Till, a 14-year-old African American who was tortured and murdered due to whistling at a white woman. Now I know someone will respond to this post, "but people still kill today due to being offended, what about them?" excellent question. When thinking of people being so offended that they are willing to kill I cannot think of such a state scale as people did in the past. If someone today was offended with members of LGBTQ wanting equal rights by riding a bus around the south and a police commissioner attempted to rally people to burn them alive the majority of the public would see this in discuss. Majority of states would see this cruel and would not support these actions. With that being said we do have people that are still offended by people that are different race and sexuality to the point where they become violent to anyone who is different. I do not want to send the message that people cannot fall victim today as they did during the civil rights movement, I just believe it is not as frequent or seen as acceptable behavior as it was back in the day. In no way am I belittling the magnitude of hate crimes that still happen today.

Vilified

I believe the main issue we have today with the internet is to vilify someone who we disagree with on specific subjects. Rather it is politics, culture, religion, and other controversial topics come with a title of people that disagree with our opinion. Trump supporter? Must be a racist/sexist. Liberal? Must be a lazy millennial. Feminist? Must be overly aggressive. Like Chick-Fil-A? Homophobic. We always label people to either being bigots or cry-baby. IS someone's character determined by their view on a specific topic? I know good and bad conservatives and liberals. I know good and bad feminists. I know good and bad people who believe in gun rights, drug rights, pro-choice, pro-life, straight, gay, bi, trans, white, black, Christian, Atheist, Muslim, Jewish, literally human beings. I think we need to understand that disagreement on controversial topics does not determine someone's character. The complexity of what makes you cannot be should be defined through an opinion. I remember getting flak for working at Hobby Lobby during the supreme court case that the company would not pay for plan-b pill through insurance. People would call our store expressing that they could not believe that I could work at a place that would not provide a plan-b pill for their workers. Am I a bad person because of this one very specific issue? All the good deeds do not matter because of this issue that I had no part in. Yes, a part-time cashier in Georgia trying to get through college is a "bad person" working for a company that doesn't provide the plan-b pill under insurance. Rather you agree or not, this should not decide who you are as a person. I do believe that when people are being vilified due to their belief, this could lead to people feeding into the role of the "bad person" online.

Self-fulfilling Prophecy

I have noticed recently this unapologetic movement through social media. I will scroll through Facebook and see someone amplifying a controversial topic to provoke a response. If vegans are giving issues about the consumption of meat, then someone will post them grilling meat. Someone has a gun issue, then someone will post guns. The purpose of these posts is to provoke anger towards someone who disagrees. This could lead to people fighting in the comments sections with both parties challenging the other's egos. Seriously two friends were arguing over racism in America which ended with who had the bigger "manhood" in the comments. This type of social media forms a hook and bait type of interaction on social media. People know their posts will cause stirring the pot. The post usually goes against the majority opinion with not only disagreeing with the topic but also looking down on people who agree with the majority opinion. This is considered trolling. People are not trying to change other people's mind but to only to go into an argument that will promote self-esteem and self-worth if they believe they are in the right. I have never seen people debate through social media with one ending with, "wow you are right I now have a different opinion". We need to consider if people are now easily offended that people are actively trying to offend through social media. The double-edged sword of social media is that you can post whatever you want so no one can stop you from posting something that will cause debate but people can also understand that this is the bait and not bite and keep scrolling. Finally, I believe people hide behind "jokes" that can be highly offensive and just say it was a joke. I love true crime podcasts and I listen to a popular one known as Sword and Scale. The host, Mike Boudet, posted on social media on international woman's day, "I don't understand dumb c*nts, maybe I should take one apart to figure it out". This led to him being fired. Boudet argued that this was a joke and an attack on free speech. Do you believe that anyone would actually find this as funny? This is a prime example that this post was to cause shock and anger towards a group of people Boudet wanted to provoke. Even if people are or are not easily offended we can admit that people are trying to offend people to gain power over others. Honestly, I for one enjoy stirring the pot at family events and social media, but never to the point like Boudet that could seriously upset anyone.

Different Problems for Different Times

Another debate that people argue today is that people should not be upset about their problems due to them not being as bad as the problems of the past. The classic, "back in my day", argues the seriousness of people's problems of today. I think this is the clash between empathy and sympathy. It's so easy to tell someone that is upset that at least they are not a starving child in another country. Should an eighteen-year-old not be upset because eighteen-year-olds in the past went to war? Now I will be realistic and say people do get upset over little things but I feel that this has always been a thing throughout time. Showing empathy is difficult because we have to go to a place that the other person may be feeling. Sentences starting with "at least" don't provide much help for people who are upset. Telling someone to suck it up and deal with it doesn't resolve the issue even if it is an issue you do not see as a big deal. Perhaps we need to show empathy for people even if we don't know that pain. Even if it's losing a game, spilled ice cream, or failing a test, we should look out for each other not try to one-up them with something that is worse happening to us. To the theory that the millennials are doomed and too sensitive, I think Socrates in 369 BC said it best "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers".

To the Offended and the Offender

Are people more offended today as they were in the past? I really don't think so. I believe we are now more aware of people being offended through the internet but I believe it has always been there. So where do we go from here? For the offended. We need to ask the question of who and why were you offended? Did the person that upset you truly try to upset you and if that is the case isn't getting upset only giving them what they want? If you think about it, if someone is trying to offend you the best way to get back would be to not give them the power at all. Just scrolling past could be the best way to move forward through these issues. If you disagree with someone's opinion doesn't make them a bad person. Focus more on the topic at hand not the character of the person. Always remember that you are not meant to find a revelation through social media, you suppose the see recipes and baby pictures. To my offenders, I get it. People freak out all the time over the smallest things and getting people to think of you and your post feels good. Everyone wants attention and people will get the attention even if it angers others and we take pride in having "haters" which we affiliate with success. We all want to prove that we are successful through social media throughout pictures, opinions, and statuses. I believe that people have been offended in the past, present, and future and nothing will change that. I just hope that being offended will not lead to any more violence. I know we are a long ways away from that.