How do we solve the modern Western hypersensitivity problem?

Post Reply New Topic

Hi all.

Last December, I made a thread entitled "Why I Hate Political Correctness". In summary, I said that modern political discourse has been ruined because people (on both the left and the right) care more about hurt feelings than actual human deaths. Think of this thread as follow-up. Emotional hypersensitivity is ruining Western intellectual discourse like AIDS. How do we fix this problem?

In my opinion, we need to stop teaching kids about human emotional sensitivity and instead tech kids how to mentally escape. I never learned how to mentally escape from the feeling of offense until I was an adult. Now, I wish I had known this skill when I was a kid.

Whenever I feel offended, I just think about the natural world. The natural world is full of creatures that are far weirder than I am ... but they still manage to win fights and get laid. For me, nature is like a fountain of soma.

We need to stop teaching kids how to respect the sensitivity of other people. We need to teach kids how to think of nature's beauty whenever they feel offended. Who's with me?

People need to firmly reject weaponising and politicising offence no matter who's side it's on. Politeness is the perfect way of teaching people how to interact with each other. It allows people to be considerate of each other and avoids all the issues with outrage culture. Empathy is fine too. Real empathy. When SJWs talk about empathy it's the furthest thing in the World from real empathy. Politeness and empathy don't care about politics or race or sex.

I don't know how you can teach people to handle taking offence better, but that would be good too. On that subject, teaching people thoroughly why they should reject the concept of revenge would be great too. I used to believe in revenge until I saw the concept broken down and picked apart so well that I no longer do, and it's so immensely helpful at combatting resentfulness. Rejecting revenge doesn't mean letting people walk all over you or not allowing you to take violent action if necessary or not still feeling resentment, but you want justice instead of payback, and it really does save you a lot of mental and emotional energy. If you can solve a problem without harming that person, you're fine with that and able to carry on, while with revenge you would still be burning with the need to get that payback in, so you would either be stuck with that emotional baggage, or if you did get that revenge it would probably then ruin your solution and bring more grief to you.

And reject slapping the word HATE on everything that doesn't match up with your view of how things should be. Even when hate is a possibility. Easy example, abortion. Most people who want abortion criminalised don't hate women. They're coming from a position of wanting to save lives. The presence of hate in their motivation needs to be proven. Don't impugn people's motives.

Misogyny is probably my most hated word since even when you're dealing with actual sexists and chauvinists, hatred of women is often not present.

There isn't a problem of hypersensitivity. There is a problem of hyposensitivity. People simply aren't sensitive enough.

Taking offence at every “microoffense” and trying to erase every microagression from history is causing people who complain about actually offensive things to be thought of as SJW’s.

I agree.

Bollocks.

If people were even more sensitive, the world would stink. There would be no discussions because every argument is bound to offend someone. There would be no jokes aside from kindergarten-tier jokes. There would be no sexiness on TV anymore because ugly people would be offended. There would be no more history because Australian Aboriginals would be offended by the fact that they never built a civilisation without help from foreign invaders. There would be no manly TV shows because some people on the left think that manliness is inherently evil ... even though most women are attracted to masculinity ... secretly or openly.

In the modern West, people are offended by everything. Creationists are offended by evolution. White supremacists are offended by the fact that chocolate is made by hard-working black Africans who barely make enough money to buy food. Black supremacists are offended by the fact that sub-Saharans were a minority in Ancient Egypt. To be honest, it's hard to even talk about race in today's PC culture because every word for "black people" offends someone. There are also a lot of people who are offended by the scientific method. Modern hypersensitive outrage culture is a trainwreck.

It's gotten to the point where I can't even use the word "cracker" to describe white supremacists ... even though I am white ... and they deserve it anyway.

Human civilisation is full of things that are bound to offend you. You just need to be aloof and transcendent.


^^^
Human civilisation is just a small sliver at the end of the geologic timescale. Everything that offends you is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

I have to work even though work is hard for me. I don't let that offend me ... because I know that nobody will care. Everyone will just tell me "Get back to work you lazy piece of s**t!"

... so why should I care when other people are offended?

What is an "actually offensive thing" to you?

I guess I feel pretty offended when the Israeli military murders people. I am offended by murder ... but not much else.

Sometimes I talk about human stupidity ... but not because I am offended. It's mostly just funny to me. I live a depressing life. Sometimes you just have to laugh.

We don't exist for the grand scheme of things. We exist in the time we exist in in the lives we exist in and all that is relevant to us is immensely and significantly relevant to us in the moment in which we exist, no matter how small in the grand scheme of things.

I remember once reading a question and answer. "What's the point in existing if we are just going to die at the end?" to which someone replied "What's the point in eating a taco if it's just going to be gone afterwards?"

The end isn't relevant in these instances. The significance is contained in the journey and the experiences it holds.

This doesn't change the fact that we can think about something else. Being offended is a choice. Obsessing over some bad stuff that happened to you years ago is a choice.

Since we are an Autism board I would say a lot ABA therapies. Advocating autistics be seperated from society because we might be mass shooters and we have no empathy. I would say The Onion’s Autistic Reporter is at worst a microagression.
https://youtu.be/tInDH2FeXaM

I disagree because I believe that people actually feel offended, and feelings are acknowledged, not chosen. It's only after one experiences a feeling that one reacts to it and this reaction may be an action or it may be an assessment to determine if the feeling is actually substantiated by the facts of the situation and how to manage it.

For example, my mother lost $100. I don't think she could have chosen to be ecstatic over that. She was upset and then she decided to try to change her perspective on it "I guess it was meant to happen" or perhaps "Well I've found money before and if someone finds money, someone else needs to lose money, so maybe someone will find my money and be happy" but these techniques merely worked to help her mitigate her feelings of upset. For her to be happy over losing this money, something would have had to have arisen to make losing the money beneficial to her.

For example, someone misses their flight and is upset and must take a different flight. They can sit there and think "Well at least I could get another flight" or "At least I won't get stuck in traffic because I am getting in later," or try to find some positive in it, but they probably won't be able to make themselves overjoyed that they missed their flight unless the the flight they were initially scheduled to be on crashes. Then they might be overjoyed they missed the flight.

Even trans people are sick of modern hypersensitivity.

brilliant

Evolution is proof that we can never take language too seriously.

We're all just a bunch of apes ... and apes are a bunch of primates.

Which races of people are just apes? All of them. The people who abused you in the past were just apes. The people who you find sexually attractive are just apes. Words and sentences are just ape noises.

Religion is irrational. Patriotism is irrational. Our attachment to material objects is irrational. It's all just the delusions of bloated ape brains.

What we should be concerned about is our survival. In the modern world, we hold the natural world at arm's length, and so it's harder for us to directly observe our connection with nature ... but we are still connected to untamed wilds. We ignore this fact at our own peril.

It's hard to take the concept of "human dignity" seriously when our ancestors crawled through the mud and relied on external fertilisation instead of what we call sexual intercourse.


^^^
This is Tikaalik, and he doesn't care what you call him.

Now, we have reached an evolutionary level in which we can be harmed by mere vocal grunts. I guess this busts the myth that evolution always makes us better than we were before.

The evolution of intelligence is proof that there is no God. No loving God would create something as horrible as intelligence. Thanks to intelligence, our survival instincts have been destroyed and clouded by verbal illusions. This lends weight to the idea that the human brain is not a superior piece of machinery, but merely a tumor created by random mutation.

Our reptilian hindbrain is more reliable. It never tells us to be offended. It only tells us to survive.