Finding stuff “offensive” is the ultimate “first-world problem”:

One of the complaints Karl has attempted to use against me in the past is the notion that I am somehow “desensitized” to (purportedly) “negative” imagery and ideas.

Quite simply, I have never had the luxury of being able to being a squeamish little shit.

For example: My “parents” alternated between semi-neglect, and physical violence in their dealings with me.  My “schooling” involved far too much bullying – both the standard “name-calling” and out-right physical attacks against me.  (For example: being tackled from behind, and kneed in the groin until I vomited – and then being punished for defending myself from such antics.

So, no.  I never had the luxury of being a squeamish little shit.

I never had the luxury of believing everything my parents said – because I was confronted with the fact that they were both basically dysfunctional assholes, who allowed my idiot, heroin-addict half-brother to run wild, and become a morbidly-obese, drug-addled, racist piece of subhuman shit.

I am well acquainted with racist idiocy.  I am well acquainted with learning I a half-sister, by being woken up out of a sound sleep (at the age of 11 or 12), herded into the back seat of a vehicle by my parents, and then being driven to Baltimore  – only to find out that the trip was pointless, because the junkie whore had already gotten into some random stranger’s car, because she couldn’t be bothered to wait around for us to arrive.

None of this “offended” me.   It did awaken me to the fact that Leave it to Beaver – and all such “family” shows – are all – without exception – constructed out of a “tissue of lies’.  In the “better” cases, they are merely lies of omission (IE: the shows just don’t talk about “controversial” subjects).  In the worst cases, the shows themselves are designed to (mis)use the pathological state known as “nostalgia” to get the viewers sto lie to themselves.

This is why I cannot help but love the sentiment expressed in the following block-quote:

Users’ determination to offend others is exemplified by one of ED’s most popular sitelinks: a wiki article titled “Offended” reads “Were you offended by what you just saw? Please scroll slowly to the bottom of this page and we will be happy to rectify your situation.” The top of the page shows endearing photos of baby animals, but as users scroll down they are affronted with vulgar images of genitalia, animated displays of suicide, and twisted depictions of human tragedies such as the Holocaust. Exceptionally offensive ED pages feature a hyperlink that redirects users to “Offended” if they have been upset by the wiki article; the notice is accompanied by an animation that flashes between images of a Swastika, the Star of David, and the emblem of the Ku Klux Klan.

Quite frankly, there is something intensely beautiful and honest about a web-page which deliberately rubs an “offended” viewer’s nose levels of the grotesque and horrifying – because approximately 85% of the world’s population don’t have the luxury of becoming “offended”, and looking away.

This is why so many homeless street children in third-world nations resort to glue-sniffing:

Now I ask you: which is more “offensive”: the fact that 4chan (and others) deliberately rub precious Pollyanna assholes’ noses in the muck — or the fact that the aforementioned muck exists at all?

I’m going to paraphrase the SJW assholes here, and put it like this:




One thought on “Finding stuff “offensive” is the ultimate “first-world problem”:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s