See, this is exactly what I disagree with. What are we, made out of metal?
We're human. We ALL have weak points.
Where'd I deny that?
I think your position completely ignores the fact that people come from diverse backgrounds, and have varying levels of pain inflicted on them by others and society throughout their lives.
Not at all, indeed, the fact you need to site "diverse backgrounds" and "varying levels of pain" shows you my point.
Lets take the word that started this all off.
Nigger
For the N-word to be universally "offensive" every person ever that hears it would either have to be:
1) offended
or
2) a racist
That's what would be required for it to be "universally" offensive. This would have to mean that every black person that has ever called another black person the n-word would have to be either be offended by their own statement OR be a racist. Every child that ever uttered it not fully understanding the history of it would have to be either offended by it or a racist. This is the issue with "universal" truths of words.
I never discounted to INDIVIDUALS that a word can not be "universally" offensive. Aaron states that the n-word is universally offensive to him in any and every situation it could ever be used. So be it, that's free to him. However even then, its based on the context that the word bothers him SO GREATLY, that the history of it so pains him, and his own views and opinions of people using it is so negative, that it becomes offensive to him. THAT is his context.
However, an ENTIRELY different black person could come upon someone going "Did you hear that South Park Episode where Stan's dad said [the n word] on Wheel of Fortune" and it not bother him at all. That could not be POSSIBLE if the word was UNIVERSALLY and automatically "offensive".
It may well be true that there are few things that hurt your feelings (though I believe very few are truly that bulletproof), but a little sensitivity towards others who may not be as well equipped through no fault of their own (ie, childhood abuse, persecution, etc) shouldn't be such a difficult thing to muster. Instead, you pile on the additional label of "weak" or "oversensitive".
Nope, I've had my feelings hurt by words plenty of times. When I was younger, it was generally teasing that could do it to me. These days its more to do with words of disapproval or disappointment that hurt me more. "You let me down" could do more pain to me than "shorty" or "ragozzi" (popular cheap italian resturant that sounds akin to my last name) would now.
Sorry, I'm not going to play your PC game. I'm not going to cry and get all sad and censor myself or find the nice polite way to say things simply because some people may not like the connotation if saying it plainly explains it better. To be offended is ENTIRELY dependent on ones self. Someone can come up to me and say "You are a mother ****ing honkey that likes to suck ****" and at that point I either get offended or I laugh it and the person off as either joking or insignificant.
The human condition is weakness. No one is a perfect being. No one is a cyborg. Everyone feels pain. To be weak, to feel pain, is to be human. I strive to control my emotions, but I would
NEVER give them away completely simply to never have them control me.
In regards to oversensitive, that's the other extent of it. I fully believe at times people are in no way shape or form ACTUALLY offended by something but are simply seeking attention, drama, or to make a scene and thus purposefully act over sensitive to things in order to meet those aims.
It seems to me that your position is just a rationale for being insensitive and not feeling guilty about it.
Not at all. Indeed, generally in real life I am an extremely sensitive person. I generally am non-confrontational and prefer in general to try and please people when I'm in a general social setting. If things get heated (competition, spirited debate, etc) this can change, but in a general casual setting that's typically my normal attitude.
My position is a rationale that people are FAR to sensitive these days to what people say and many people are simply looking to be offended for no other reason than for attention.
Do the words "Heil Hitler" provoke any reaction in you at all? No context, but the words represent something nonetheless.
You can't really say words without context though. If someone just made a post that said "Heil Hitler" and that was it...no neo-nazi seeming icon or screen name, no past history of it...I'd probably roll my eyes, think the guys a bit of an idiot, and move on. It wouldn't offend me, it wouldn't make me angry, I'd probably laugh it off.
If someone said "And then the guy put his arm up like he was about to go 'Heil Hitler' trying to signal for the basektball and right then it got passed to him, he missed it, and it hit him in the face" it wouldn't even pass through my mind that it was in any way, shape, or form offensive.
if someone said "Black people and Jews are the devil, we must exterminate them all, Heil Hitler!" then I'd probably think they're neo-nazi sons of bitches, a rather worthless human being, and if not for the laws of this land I'd probably like to punch them in the face.
As I said, words are not universally and automatically offensive, it is entirely the context and entirely up to how the person hearing it feels about it.
Note: There are words being thrown around on this thread that would probably earn folks points if used on other threads. However in the context of this discussion the use of the words is important to the discussion. Make sense? But, if one poster calls another poster any of these words -in this discussion - they're immediately thread banned. I think that's a fair compromise for those folks who do find the words inherently offensive and don't think they have any place on the discussion board whatsoever. If seeing the words even in the context of this discussion offends you then I suggest you avoid this thread altogether. 
