Go back

What Grinds Our Gears: Saying “no offence” to soften the blow of an insult

Why adding “no offence” after offending someone is utterly useless

By: Tiffany Chang, Peak Associate

Lately, I’ve been getting better at taking criticism, especially when it’s constructive. I think this kind of honest feedback helps people grow.

However, criticism can often take a nasty or offensive turn. What drives me up the wall is when someone says “no offence” after mentioning something hurtful to their counterpart.

My question is this: why do people think saying “no offence” mitigates the offensiveness of their insults?

I find it astoundingly contradictory. It’s like trying to soak up a diarrhea accident with one toilet paper square. You know for certain it isn’t enough to clean up your disgusting mess, but you somehow think it’ll make a difference if an attempt is made.

“You suck! No offence.” “Your eyebrows look like they were plucked by a four-year-old with cheap tweezers. No offence.” “The colour of your nail polish makes me want to gouge my eyes out. No offence.”

How do people not see the uselessness of this saying? Without a doubt, it has the opposite effect of “not offending.” You already knew that what you were going to say seemed insulting. Adding snide comments makes it that much worse.

Long story short, trying to soften the blow of your insults will not garner any positive results whatsoever, so please stop.

Was this article helpful?
0
0

Leave a Reply

Block title

“Not at all” represented: Unhoused residents respond to Hastings decampment report

Written by Hannah Fraser, News Editor In February, BC’s human rights commissioner Kasari Govender released a report on “the exclusion of media from the April 2023 Hastings decampment.” This two-day decampment was significant in scale, with 94 tents removed and residents forcibly displaced. Despite the City and Vancouver Police Department (VPD) insisting that human rights and press freedom were not violated, the report concludes that “transparency was compromised” by these parties.  According to the report, the media exclusion zone imposed at the decampment was not in accordance with human rights standards, as it lacked legal authority and “requirements of necessity and proportionality.” While framed as a “safe work zone” intended to address safety concerns, the “impact on media was not adequately considered.” As well, Govender deemed the...

Read Next

Block title

“Not at all” represented: Unhoused residents respond to Hastings decampment report

Written by Hannah Fraser, News Editor In February, BC’s human rights commissioner Kasari Govender released a report on “the exclusion of media from the April 2023 Hastings decampment.” This two-day decampment was significant in scale, with 94 tents removed and residents forcibly displaced. Despite the City and Vancouver Police Department (VPD) insisting that human rights and press freedom were not violated, the report concludes that “transparency was compromised” by these parties.  According to the report, the media exclusion zone imposed at the decampment was not in accordance with human rights standards, as it lacked legal authority and “requirements of necessity and proportionality.” While framed as a “safe work zone” intended to address safety concerns, the “impact on media was not adequately considered.” As well, Govender deemed the...

Block title

“Not at all” represented: Unhoused residents respond to Hastings decampment report

Written by Hannah Fraser, News Editor In February, BC’s human rights commissioner Kasari Govender released a report on “the exclusion of media from the April 2023 Hastings decampment.” This two-day decampment was significant in scale, with 94 tents removed and residents forcibly displaced. Despite the City and Vancouver Police Department (VPD) insisting that human rights and press freedom were not violated, the report concludes that “transparency was compromised” by these parties.  According to the report, the media exclusion zone imposed at the decampment was not in accordance with human rights standards, as it lacked legal authority and “requirements of necessity and proportionality.” While framed as a “safe work zone” intended to address safety concerns, the “impact on media was not adequately considered.” As well, Govender deemed the...