Appropriateness of posts

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>]

On Tuesday, 18 March 2014 at 13:05:31 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I think the issue there probably isn't so much "offense", but 
> the fact that american discussion of politics is notoriously 
> volatile, and in a mixed-group is pretty much guaranteed to 
> erupt in a flame war.

Well, it was right after his re-election and the person who told 
me not to talk about it agreed with my sentiments, and nobody 
complained about it either. This was on closed guild chat. It was 
a case of "somebody might be upset" where nobody actually was 
upset.

> That mildness of "shit" is true of probably around half of 
> americans, too.

Yes, again nobody was upset, it was a case of "somebody might get 
upset".  I actually don't consider "shit" to be cussing at all. 
:-)

I keep reading comments from people on the net claiming that 
Linus Thorvalds is acting like a jerk, but I've never seen a 
comment from anyone from northern Europe suggesting it.

> Disney-ish way to say "ouch", "oops" or "stuff". But then, the 
> US was also home to Puritanism way back when, so there's still 
> a lot of those intolerance-disguised-as-ethics attitudes too.

Yes, but it goes deeper I think. Because we are getting more of 
it in my country after we got  immigrants (a fairly recent 
phenomon). E.g. the neutral term for a black person in Africa was 
"neger" (no negative connotations, but a bit exotic and 
interesting), while the insulting version was "svarting" 
(blackish). Then the immigrants took offence at the neutral term 
because they associated it with "nigger" and didn't want to be 
associated with tribal Africa, so now the neutral version is 
taboo and many children books have to be scrapped (books that are 
describing tribal Africa in terms that aren't racist).

So, with more "sensitive issues" beneath the surface you get more 
of the superficial politeness. In the US that has been going on 
since the early days when various religious groups fled from 
Europe. BUT, some people in the US that has not really been much 
outside the US thinks that this level of surface-level politeness 
is meant to be universal and global.

However, I am upset about the widespread US term "caucasian", not 
because it is a bad word, but because of the Aryan connotations 
that has some seriously bad vibes to it after 2WW and the nazi 
worship of "scandinavian genes".

The term "caucasian" is incredibly bad taste, and I find it 
offensive. I cringe when I cross off "caucasian" on US papers. It 
is if I am forced to declare myself Aryan.

> the world: "Uhh, what's the big deal?" Personally, I think it's 
> positively bonkers to worry about kids being scarred by seeing 
> something they themselves used to suck on, but whatever.

Actually kids are more scarred by being told that such things are 
taboo. Being relaxed about the human body of others is a good 
path to feeling good about your own body.

What is worse: higher rape rate is tied to cultures that make sex 
and nudity taboo than cultures that are more relaxed... (rape 
becomes a more potent source of power and control if sex and 
nudity is a big deal).

(Again, just about all american I've met has expressed that they 
have no problems with nudity themselves, and I believe them. But 
I've been told that I cannot go swimming in my boxer shorts that 
look like swimming trunks because they are underwear and I could 
get into trouble over that… i.e. someone MIGHT be offended. Which 
is kinds of odd, cause in my own country I can go swimming naked 
and basically nobody would be offended, if spotted they might be 
amused, but not offended.)

Ola.