Is this offensive?

I agree! Thank you for your support!

 

Ohhh, pseudo-rebellious nonsense is what I do best though!

Offensive material is the canary in the coal mine. Them disappearing means one of two things, either we've become such an outstanding body of people that we no longer offend each other, or we're so self censored we're unable to.

I bet one has a much higher chance of happening than the other.

 

But once we start talking about "the professionally offended" we're essentially shutting out ideas before we've considered them.

I mean, if someone criticizes something you wrote because they found it offensive, I think it's fine for you to read their criticism, think about it a bit, and then make an independent decision about whether you want to take their opinion on board. I don't think it's fine for you to dismiss them without thought. This is especially true if the person who's offended is a member of a traditionally disadvantaged group who's offended because of something you've said or implied about that group.

 

Do you mean if a white person made a generalisation about black people he never knew?

Definitely, one might never read that hell in his absolute righteousness, or prig.

 

People can be greedy/desperate and being 'offended' is a low-requirement skill for a potentially highpaying job.

Say a newstation needs a new story? They can pay a single person of a certain race/religion/whathaveyou to create a story about how they're 'offended' at their treatment; this in turn offends the viewership of that newstation which is then primed for more stories like this.

That's what I mean by the professionally offended, and these people do exist, on both the selling their offense, and creating of it.

Reminds me about how over half the guys planting bombs in Iraq/Afghan are being paid to do it, they don't belive in the cause, but they're willing to keep a terrible system going for money.

Also, not trying to glaze over your posts on here @matwoolf , You're one of my favorite people on here (top three at the moment)

I'm just that combination of tired enough to say what I really think, but too tired to be able to focus on anything or find the words.

 

So how do you filter out those who are "professionally offended" without losing the input of those who are legitimately offended?

(And does that really have much bearing on the case at bar? I mean... making up negative crap about BLM seems like something a significant number of people find offensive--unless someone's paying posters around here and I'm missing out!!!)

The Americans in Iraq/Afghanistan, you mean? But I think they're ALL being paid, aren't they?

 

cleva

 

The whole point and back and forth of this thread would be non-existent if the OP just did what a TON of other authors have done and satirized it/made a fictional group of people.

The story he wants to tell is legitimate. Using the namesake of Black Lives Matter is ill-advised, at best.

ETA: Not just fictionalizing, but getting the theme across without pointing fingers at real life events. A great amount of creativity is required to pull it off. I certainly wouldn't be able to do it.

 

That depends - it seems entirely possible that the story he wants to tell is "BLM sucks and lemme show ya why!"

 

@Chained is 100% right. This is how I make my living. In an average month I appear in 6 print and 3 broadcast stories. According to my diary, tomorrow C4News has booked me to be a person with small ears offended by the failure of headphone manufacturers to cater to my community. That one's national, but niche - £300. Last week I had a clash: The Cheltenham Observer wanted me to be offended about the milkybar kid and SkyNews wanted me to be offended about the limited variety of fish you can get in Tesco. Sky's where the big bucks are so I went with them. I can't disclose the sum they paid but let's just say: Mama's got a brand new Vespa! Next week I'm at the EAPO expo in Brussels (that's the European Association for the Professionally Offended, for the uninitiated). It's kind of a bore but I get 8 CPD point for going so... I'm due for reaccreditation at the end of the year. The assessment process can be a nightmare. Wish me luck!

 

I really hope that was sarcasm. If not, ignore the laughing smilies and sign me up for some of that! I can play offended at anything!

 

Yeah, his post didn't exactly scream “IN NO WAY DO I SUPPORT MY LEAD'S VIEWS.” Writing about bigots is one thing, but writing about bigots and tarring an entire movement? Shotgun, meet foot. Ka-blam!

 

No filtering process is perfect, but what I've always done is search for what's being sold. Is the information being presented in a way that its speaking for its self, or is it being worded for maximum manipulation. If its the second, they're selling offense, and its a pretty good indicator.

Both sides really, and neither are being paid very much. I'm starting to get depressed, i'm out of this thread.

 

Surely that can be done without using BLM as a name for the group. Like I said, it requires tremendous creativity and an open mind.

 

Oh, it can be done, and it can be done well. As many people have already said, give the problem to the MC and make up a totally fictional group.

 

I hate to use Vonnegut so many times as an example, but his short story Harrison Bergeron is a perfect example. The theme of the story is "Communism sucks and lemme tell ya why!" but he never mentions real communist countries, leaders, groups, etc. (in this particular story).

 

I believe it is our duty to tell the truth. If one person' truth differs from another, that is okay.

When Orwell wrote Animal Farm, did he give a damn about offending Marxists? I doubt it.

Good writing prompts one to think about one's life. If we end up questioning our values, that is good. Perhaps the novel will simply reinforce the reader's opinion, or maybe it will change it. What is wrong with that?

But I think the advice about naming names, so to speak, is sound. I would not refer to the group as BLM. I would give it a thin disguise, which allows for plausible deniability.

Even better, put it on an alien world, call the group XLM (Xeno Lives Matter) and create a sci-fi parody. That is,

A) Safe ground
B) A tried and tested approach to questioning societal values without raising ire (since it is on an alien world, it is not real) and
C) cool.

My tuppence worth....

 

Using BLM but calling it something else seems like the worst idea of all to me. People will still know what you're doing but instead of looking like an ignorant bigot, you'll look like a cowardly ignorant bigot.

As for satirising BLM? Words fail me.

 

Especially since Orwell and Vonnegut were discussing groups that were actually kind of evil if not completely evil. Black Lives Matter, while it does have a few members who shout questionable things (as all groups have), the general goal of this movement seems to be making the voice of black folks heard.

Also, is it just me or has the OP not responded to us? You'd think four pages in he'd come and clarify/answer our posts.

 

Yep. Those voices are highlighting the fact that racism against blacks is still rampant in the United States. I shouldn't be surprised at the viciousness of the backlash from those determined to deny that fact, but I am anyway.

 

What if you made it clear that it wasn't all bad? If you show a dark side, because the movement definitely has one, but acknowledge it's a rather lose group since anyone can start using the BLM hashtag regardless of what kind of black civil rights they're going for, good or bad, all it says is they're interested in the issue of police and potential discrimination that is being discussed currently. So I think you should name them, as long as it's not about criticizing so much as enforcing the message they are not perfect. I think that's an important message because people hold civil rights activism in very high regard, up to an including scoffing at the very notion of bad individuals in it.
I agree with the point that was briefly raised this site doesn't seem very good. It is very politicized. It seems to have decent info, but I'd read other sites to be careful. Especially considering this site seems to be not immune to simply attacking the whole American left. The comments are also a bit of a cesspool, not much restraint of consideration given but a whole lot of enmity for the left from every individual. "Mental disorder of liberalism". That's not a community you want to be part of. Not if you want to have a rational argument.

 

Yeah, we'd be surprised by the stuff people want to read.

 

I don't think "offensive" is the issue, here. I haven't read through the entire thread - having only just noticed it - but my only comment is practical, based on the assumption that you are hoping your work will be read by others (otherwise, why worry if it's offensive?). Generally, we'd like our readers to empathize with our protags. It's one of the factors that holds them. That doesn't mean that protags can't be seriously flawed, just that there should be something about them that the reader can root for. Archie Bunker was a racist, but we laughed at his racism and came to appreciate other aspects of his character.

By choosing a hot-button, real-life group like BLM as your mc's yardstick, you shift the reader's attention toward the group (where public opinion battle lines are already drawn) rather than your mc. Besides, I would argue that your mc's judgment of BLM is inaccurate, as, like any group, it is not monolithic.

Even if your story arc is that your mc overcomes his attitude towards BLM (no hint of that in your OP, just spitballing), I still wouldn't use them, for the reason cited above.

 

Yeah, all those people wanting to not be worked to death and be given a decent wage. They were basically Satan.

To be fair, he said back on page 1 he'd decided not to write the idea. Don't really see that any further response is needed.

I feel left out