> I appreciate that certain people are sensitive to certain things. I
> also appreciate that no reasonable person can be expected to know what
> word or words will set someone off... and neither can Alec Baldwin
> (OK... there's a little more Baldwin bias). Yes, there is legally
> defined "hate speech," but the mere mention of a less-than-positive
> aspect of an ethnic group falls well outside those parameters.
It's starting to dawn on me as you drag out this insignificant point you're
trying to make (okay, to be fair, you're responding to other people who are
putting just as much work into dragging it out...people like me, now) that
you apparently don't understand the basic concepts of manners in general,
and apologies in specific. You, as the offender, don't get to decide what
does or doesn't offend someone. When you do/say something, and it finally
dawns on you that you've offended someone, you apologize for offending them,
not for doing something wrong (which you'd most likely be too biased to
judge, being the person who committed the offense).
> Now... the apology. I apologize when I do something I know is wrong (I
> apologize a lot, by the way). Alec Baldwin apologized when he knew he
> had done nothing wrong, but wanted to make someone feel better. Anyone
> who feels better because of Alec Baldwin's hollow gesture, and I say
> this unapologetically, needs therapy.
>
> I lost a friend on Facebook a few months ago. I even posted the
> specifics here as the circumstances related to the world of
> television. She and I knew each other from my NBC days. We'd become
> reacquainted on Facebook, and we'd exchanged playful slings back and
> forth about the crappy shows we'd worked on (and, in her case,
> continued to work on). She'd updated her Facebook status and mentioned
> that she'd be in a given city holding auditions for the given reality
> series she was working on. In the same playful tone that we'd been
> exchanging for months, I suggested that she find more talented
> contestants than the ones I'd seen in previous seasons. Well, she
> replied back in a fit of rage that I have only seen in women I've
> actually dated. Apparently, this particular show was, to her, the best
> things since sliced bread, but there was no conceivable way I could
> have known that.
>
> By your standard, despite a record of similar jokes hurled at both
> sides, I was supposed to have apologized for this perceived crossing
> of the line. No thanks. Had I apologized, I'd have felt two-faced
> since I don't think I said anything offensive. And had she accepted my
> apology, I'd have never spoken to her again anyway because I have no
> interest in associating with someone so simpleminded, so the end
> result is the same.
You tell a joke. It offends someone. Whether you, or a "reasonable person"
thinks it's acceptable doesn't even come into the argument. When someone is
offended by you, you apologize for offending them. That's not being a
coward, or two-faced, or whatever other insult you want to attach to it.
That's being polite, and caring about the feelings of those around you.
> I cannot speak for your apology, which you say was sincere. I can tell
> you that, as someone who studied language in college, and delights in
> its use and misuse in everyday life, the specific language used by
> Alec Baldwin ("I do apologize to anyone who took offense") is a
> textbook example of an insincere apology. It pushes the blame back on
> the listener, not the speaker. It says, "You misunderstood me, and I
> am sorry for your stupidity." It just says it in a more sanitized way.
I think you're projecting your own cynicism when you interpret that apology.
It could just as easily say "you took my meaning in a way I didn't intend,
and I'm sorry I didn't use a better turn of a phrase that was less offensive
to you." He's apologizing to the people he offended. Why would he
apologize to people who *weren't* offended? It sounds like he's using your
own logic: he doesn't think he did anything wrong, but he recognizes that
some people took offense to his joke, and he wants to apologize for
upsetting *those* people.
> By nature I am a very blunt person.
You're allowed to say "rude". :)
> I have no inner voice, so I
> externalize darned near everything. My brutal honesty has cost me a
> few friends over the years, but in hindsight those people didn't need
> to be in my life. With me, you always know where you stand. With me,
> when I apologize to you, you always know that I mean it. People cannot
> say the same about Alec Baldwin. And that isn't Baldwin bias. Those
> are the facts as I see them.
Unless they're just plain facts (without the "as I see them" disclaimer)
then that certainly is a bias. It's nice that you're straight up with
people...but unless we're psychic, we take the sincerity of your apologies
at face value, and judge/believe them in the context that they're presented.
Just as we must with celebrity apologies like Alec Baldwin's. You don't
believe him, fine. His insincere apology offends you (but it has nothing to
do with your well-documented disdain for the man), okay. But ranting
against him for this long and this vehemently as if his insincerity is
documented fact is silly, because you can't know that.
Doug Fields
Tampa, FL
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
TV or Not TV .... Smart (TV) People on Ice!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TV or Not TV" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
