NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/sci/skeptic/19293

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-10 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!paul.rutgers.edu!marlowe
From: [e-mail] (Thomas Marlowe)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: insults
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:17:11 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 27


In the thread 'Gender-Neutral Pronoun', there has been some discussion about
whether someone can insult you without intending to insult you in
particular.

I would maintain, yes, they can, in the same way that a gunman atop a water
tower can shoot into a crowd, not intending to kill any known individual in
particular, and still commit murder.  In fact, if a bomber sets off a bomb,
not knowing for certain whether there will even be people present, but
people die, it can still be murder.

What is needed is a combination of 'malicious intent', 'reckless disregard',
and 'knowledge of consequences'.  Murder can occur when someone, acting with
malice, performs an act which he/she clearly foresees is likely to cause
death.  Similarly (but, thank god, not comparably), someone who uses the
term 'faggot' (or whatever) (1) as a derogatory term, who is (2) aware that
the conversation is likely to be overheard by gays, and (3) without caring
(or even hoping) that they would feel insulted, is arguably insulting the gay
listener.

However, all three elements are needed: the speaker who is (emotionally or
intellectually) unaware certainly insults no one; if the conversation is
supposed to be private, we have bigotry, insensitivity, and so on, but no
insult; if the intent is to go along with the gang, or whatever, we have
moral cowardice and insensitivity, but arguably not insult.

tom