The essence of politeness is being in offensive. But politeness, by its very nature, is a delicate social construct, varying by time and place. What's politeness in one culture (century, place) might be wildly impolite elsewhere and elsetime. Burping in some cultures is seen as inappropriate and offensive; in others, it's seen as the obligation of guests to demonstrate that they've had a fine meal.
So you'd think that trying to legally mandate politeness — inoffensiveness — would be acknowledged as a mook's game, an impossibility in this global Internet culture. And you would be, of course, wrong, as the attached story shows.
This goes for offensiveness against religion, against politicians, against pretty much everything. It may be offensively projecting my own Western culture, but one of the first things one learns in elementary school is that, while actual sticks and stones may break your bones, names cannot, in fact, hurt you (libel, slander, and defamation aside). Which doesn't mean that being offensive shouldn't incur social costs — as it is an offense against the social construct of polite company — but that legal costs should be few and far between.
And, of course, this is my personal opinion (which some will consider offensive), but if God or Allah or Vishnu or Hastur or whomever might be lurking behind the scenes does actually take offense at something mere mortals says — They are eminently capable of doing something about it (so all the holy books say) directly, or indirectly after death. They don't need busy-body judges looking out for Their delicate sensitivities. Indeed, to think so would seem to me to be rather offensive itself … #ddtb
Embedded Link
India: obscene pics of gods require massive human censorship of Google, Facebook
Government officials demand that Google, Facebook, and other Internet companies hire armies of humans to pre-screen and censor the content that users upload. A judge threatens to block them "like Chin…
I wrote an essay on this topic long ago called "Fuck your manners." I hope from the title you can guess we're on the same page.
Sometimes the truth is rude. Period.
I'm a big believer in good manners and being polite, to be sure — but it's impossible to offend nobody, and in some cases folks take an unreasonable glee in being offended. In other cases, there is a moral imperative to speak the truth that requires breaking some social rules.
But those rules are social, not legal. Which is why I think it's fine for Rush Limbaugh to be socially booed off stage, but I'd be the first one to protest if he were arrested by the police or fined for his buffoonery.
In the case of gods and goddesses of India, some of those obscene depictions are ancient high art, so I find their stance a little suspect.
Say I’m eating with a group of folks, out of a common vessel, and we are eating without utensils. In the Arabic, Indian subcontinent, and many parts of the “far east”/Asia, one eats communally with the right hand only, as the left is for personal hygiene (think a minute). Problem is, with some lefties, that hand designation is swapped. This means I can offend their pre-conceptions by using my left hand, or I can follow their logic and not use my right hand, since…you get the picture: lose/lose.
The one time I was confronted with two very uncomfortable Pakistani Merchant Marines, I stopped eating shortly afterwards, having seen a live beetle wandering through the dish.
In bellydance, I’m learning all sorts of new ways Arabic/Islamic sensibilities can be torqued…
“He is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature.”
— George Bernard Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra, Act II [Caesar] (1899)