Skip to main content

Offender's Compunction

 


“Death is a certainty for all of us, both you and me.” Does this offend you???
how about this “you b***** mo***, I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE YOU DEAD.” This does hurt.
So, Is right to offend an indispensable part of the freedom of expression and speech? I would gladly say NO.

Let’s start with the major stakeholders, the offender and the offended. It’s not natural for us to step out of our comfort zone and hurt someone else. Then why do we do so? The answer is psychological…
Its the repressed emotions of anger, jealousy and pride that seek expression inform of hate-speech, misinformation and condescending remarks. Thus every example of offence is a sign of spreading emotional malice in the society.

If you have ever been on the side of the offended,(given the rates of cyber-bullying, you are under threat), our body initiates a defence mechanism every time we are offended. That could be resistance or denial. Resistance is when we reciprocate offence with another offence and needless to say this is what begets violence. But the dangers of denial are no less. Every time we laugh off at a relatable meme or joke, we do realise the unhappiness and incompleteness. This way we keep destroying a part of our self-image. And this scenario is troublesome.

Also, we do live in a society, where minorities exist, and given the right to offend, the majority by the sheer power of their number marginalise them. And this has been the starting point of all homicides.

Coming to the subjectivity of offence, and our inability to draw a line between what is offending and what is not. We are at a crossroad with two options ahead. One to do away with drawing lines forever, unleashing a beast in the social structures. The other is to continually improve from our experience and keep drawing better lines. Creating room for unintended offences and allowing the society to evolve.

Here the concept of the social contract becomes pivotal. We need to give up individual rights when they trample into the rights of others. We must not force a person to bear the brunt of someone’s actions, that he did not approve of at the first place.

Finally, I would like to point out that this stand transfers the burden of morality from the community to the individual which I say is both unrealistic and unfair. Unrealistic because we are expecting people to be rational and thoughtful before every action when we know people are emotional and guided by circumstances. Unfair because if a community can not stand to its morals, expecting individuals to do so…..

“If you have to offend someone to prove a logical/rational view; then either it is not a nice point, or you need to work on your communication.”

Popular posts from this blog

Politics of Perpetuity

There are obvious downsides to democracy. When we look at the distribution of opinion on a particular issue, it generally follows a normal distribution. This implies that to achieve the majority, it's theoretically advised to stick to the centre. And this love for mediocrity makes democracy allergic to politically solid decisions.  Along with it, democracies tend to be the rooster for sweet talkers. And that is an outcome rather than a voluntary trait. Primarily because most voters need to be equipped to deal with the complexities of the field. For example, it could be more practical for an electrical engineer to comprehend medical patterns and the pandemic's effect on production. Thus, democratic institutions need people managers who have two keywords to watch out for - sweet talking and status quo. However, democracies have been hugely popular. And people have reported being happier. Whether this is induced, indoctrinated or influenced is another question. But history has cho...
dive in...

Turning back from pull to push

Two recent campaigns deserve attention from marketing enthusiasts, one of Campa Cola (reenergised by the Reliance Group) and of Tata Sampann's species. The challenges these two brands face are too distinct from one another. Campa, on the one hand, aims to fight the global brands like Pepsi and Coca-Cola, whereas Sampann looks to create a market in indian spices that has been dominated by local players like MDH and Everest. However, their strategies have something in common: getting the distributors to stock more of their products on the shelves. Campa is offering the distributors twice the margins, while Sampann is leveraging its vast portfolio to make stocking only Tata products a win for the distributors. Image credit: Economic Times To understand why this is happening, and what makes this interesting, one has to look back on the history of marketing, more specifically the shift from a push to a pull-based marketing, where the focus of the brands shifted from pushing their produc...
dive in...

The Theatre Era

As tough times await us, it's frivolous to talk about theatres. But doesn't it look like theatres would go out of fashion before the pandemic ends( But would it ?? ) With the footfall on OTT platforms rising daily. Looking at a screen stuck to the chair, with no ability to pause or even play subtitles, sounds so technologically inferior. The blockbuster release has increasingly been  generously funded , mega-multi-starrer films, which keep running sequels until they go unprofitable . In fact, content is sometimes the second priority; the fan base and the festive season come first. Over the years, movie houses have mastered this art. Roping in top actors into characters that have gone synonymous with their name. The OTT platforms, however, are earmarked for the content. Their promise to give a shot to the aspiring director who doesn't have funds to compete against the mult-million movie releases. Thus i n its cast and crew shines the raw, untamed art which any critic would b...
dive in...