The problem with the Goodell standard for offended people

“If one person is offended, we have to listen,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on the name of the nation’s capital’s NFL team.

Slave historian Dr. Ibrahima Seck is, one would assume, a person and based on what this person finds offensive, Commissioner Goodell must seek an audience with Dr. Seck to discussion the logo on the side of the New Orleans Saints helmets, the fleur de lis.

Although Dr. Seck is on record as saying that the fleur de lis has been embraced by the city of New Orleans as a symbol of unity, he also says, “As an African I find it painful, and I think people whose ancestors were enslaved here may feel it even harder than I do as an African.”

This isn’t a mainstream story. It’s likely to die off as the nation comes to terms with what to do about confederate flags (my opinion: government offices, no; private land, not desireable, but certainly legal). And to be honest, I had to go looking for find a source for this story that wasn’t a conservative blog or news site trying to stir up trouble.

But that’s kind of the point. The Goodell standard says that only one person has to be offended to take the offense seriously and start a dialog. PETA is on record as being offended by the name of Green Bay’s NFL team. And now, it’s possible descendants of slaves could be offended by the image being worn by the New Orleans Saints.

Among the things that have also offended at least one person: the Bible, Harry Potter, yoga pants, the word thug, Barbie, the word bitch, the NBC peacock (complete with rainbow colors [since forever] to support gay rights), Game of Thrones, public prayer by athletes, people offended by public prayer by athletes, the war on Christmas, the war on the war on Christmas, the war on the war on the war on Christmas, a picture of a fit person with anything close to the words what’s your excuse, the concept of plus-sized, the concept of obesity, Saving Private Ryan, anything written by EL James (for a plethora of reasons), the TV show Friends, gay wedding cakes, ISIS cakes, and rainbow Oreos.

The list is actually much larger, but I don’t want to do more research.

The point isn’t that no one should be offended by anything ever. It’s that we set the bar too low for taking offense seriously and self-righteous pinheads like Commissioner Goodell (who seems to have more problem with team names than with professional athletes assaulting civilians) don’t help by pretending any offense taken by any person for any reason is worthy of serious discussion.

You cannot have a free society when allow for the possibility that any person can potentially have veto power just by saying they’re offended. Pretending you can isn’t progressive or enlightened, it’s foolish.

If you go back a few years, there was an uproar over a song by Tori Amos that included the lyrics, What if God was one of us? Just a slob like one of us. If you’re a Christian and that offends you, you may have been absent at Sunday school the day they said that Jesus gave up his godhood to come down here and be with us and face all the same crap we face.

But hey, better that you–and everyone else–be made comfortable, than have to consider ideas that might take you outside your comfort zone.

Published by

Chris Hamilton

Chris Hamilton is a writer trying to make the next step, to go from pretty good to freaking outstanding. He's devoting himself to doing the work and immersing himself in writery pursuit. He also hasn't quite mastered this whole Powerball thing, and still has a pesky addiction to food, clothing, and shelter, so he has to work, too. Blech.

One thought on “The problem with the Goodell standard for offended people”

  1. Actually, he was referring to having to consider every point of view, not necessarily giving into everyone. Rule number one of management and leadership is you listen to everyone, no matter how insignificant, and weigh all options before moving forward.

Leave a comment