Words can hurt, but that does not mean the formulation of the words is the transgression. Words only hurt when they speak to truth and what underlies a truth that hurts is where you find the transgression. It is your choice whether or not you choose to help work towards ending the transgression. Going about your day pretending something doesn't exist doesn't accomplish anything.
If you need to subscribe to that model to hide from yourself from the fact that you don't actually care, it is your life to live, but it is not a model that works beyond one's self. The disingenuity is out there for everyone else.
I disagree. Words can certainly be transgressive given certain company or context. Being sensitive to the feelings of others doesn't have to be mutually exclusive to fighting against hatred and injustice.
The fact that trigger warnings exist and are in use in many places is evidence of the existence of this model.
There is only so much time in the day. Every minute spent in idle chit-chat where one might blurt out the wrong thing is time not spent dealing with the actual problem. Indeed, it is a mutually exclusive situation. It is not possible to do both at the same time.
There is no denying the existence of the model, but it is used to try and hide from oneself that one doesn't actually care and would rather take the fun road of talking about it instead. Which is fine. It is your life to live and if that is what it takes to get through the day, so be it. It is not the altruistic behaviour you are trying to make it out to be, however.
I'm not arguing for or against any model of behaviour. Like I said above these are choices that people are free to weigh up and do as they see best.
I'm simply responding to "There is no model where reminding someone of the existence of something is a transgression" but we seem to have reached an agreement that there is.
We have always acknowledged that people will set up walls to hide from themselves. It is not clear how you think that equates to a transgression. It is likely a fundamental aspect of the human experience.
It can be seen as a transgression because you're knowingly choosing words that will cause someone distress.
In my experience people are normally careful about what kind of jokes they make around someone who has suffered a traumatic experience, an "there's a time and a place" kind of thing.
I believe many people would find it transgressive to make jokes about public transport around someone whose child had recently been killed by a bus.
You can see this even in popular culture. I'd give the famous "Don't mention the war" episode of Fawlty Towers as an example.
I think it's part of the human experience to exhibit sensitivity towards others and to reflect that in your language.
> It can be seen as a transgression because you're knowingly choosing words that will cause someone distress.
Who? On internet forums, there is only you. Any words you write are done so to stroke your own thought processes. There is no expectation of anyone else being on the line. In fact, most comments you write will never be read by anyone. And even when something does reply, there is no belief that it must be human. It could just as easily be a GPT model, and that's fine. It wouldn't change the experience.
Again, forum usage is solitary activity. If there are other humans involved behind the scenes to make the software work, that is merely an implementation detail that is not of concern to the user. Any care for the words you choose is only for your own benefit, and as it pertains to the discussion, most likely because you don't want to accept some truth about yourself.
If you need to subscribe to that model to hide from yourself from the fact that you don't actually care, it is your life to live, but it is not a model that works beyond one's self. The disingenuity is out there for everyone else.