This is a magnificent piece of writing.

In Scotland an official of the Scottish Government wanted to make e.g. conversations at the domestic breakfast table subject to State censorship. Coming to an election near you very soon.
HIs name is Humza Yousaf, and he’s on Wikipedia (see esp. section on ‘Hate Crime Bill’ – last sentence).

The first time I encountered the ‘where are you from offence’ was way back in the late 80s/early 90s while at university in Canada. I’d become heavily involved in the International Students Association and found the mix of nationalities and cultures of fellow members fascinating. I developed some good friendships, some of which last to this day. One night, while I was tending bar at one of our events, a guy of East Asian descent came up and ordered a beer. I couldn’t make out an accent because of the music and presume he didn’t hear my Scottish one. I asked ‘where are you from?’ in a friendly manner anticipating a brief exchange about our respective points of origin, what made us both come to Canada, maybe segueing into my time previously living in SE Asia. Point was it was an attempt at dialogue based on expectation of mutual shared experience, so when he stopped smiling and coldly replied, ‘I’m from here in Canada’, I was embarrassed in the way that only students in their early 20s can be. I stumbled inexpertly over an explanation that I’m not from Canada, that I realised that Canadian born people come from a range of ethnic backgrounds but that, given that this was an international students’ event, I assumed most people attending were, like me, from elsewhere. He seemed to accept that and started smiling again.

I get that things can be misconstrued but back in the day, we had no social media to tell us what to be offended by and to amplify that, often confected, offence. The point is that awkward mutual misunderstanding between that guy and me was resolved because an understanding of context and intent still existed. We’ve created a social dystopia, particularly for young people.

This way of judging people on mere (supposed) intent (“proces d’intention” in French) reminds me of the Spanish inquisition : the conclusion is precluded, and all following discourse is a ineluctable process to demonstrate the awfulness of the character of the offender, and of course exercise a “just” vengeance upon them.
The intolerence of the “perpetually offended” is shilling.

It’s the Washington Post, what else should one expect?

…that in a moment where social media gives us unprecedented access to other people’s thoughts, we have become consumed by fear of all the things they might be thinking but not expressing.

I wonder. Is it that social media actually gives access? Or is it that social media is, itself, inherently untrustworthy because that is the fundamental assumption people approach it with. Perhaps there is distrust because of social media, not in spite of it. Perhaps social media is just that: media. It is something that can be manipulated by the user to present whatever facade is desirable at the moment and everyone knows (or at least suspects) that.
I am not afraid people using social media are thinking things they are not expressing. I KNOW the things they are expressing for the vast majority are not. The purpose of social media to the masses is not the expression of inner thoughts, but the gathering of “likes” and “up votes” and (in this case) “retweets”. To be a successful social media “influencer”, I’m not going to say what I want to say…I’m going to say what my audience wants to hear. Or at least I’m only going to broadcast those of my thoughts that I think will drive the most positive outcome from my “followers.”
Kat is right. There is no forgiveness for the mistaken tweet. But that is not because we have lost the ability to recognize that all of us are complex animals that house a multitude of contradictions. It is because we must punish anyone that breaks the fundamental “tweet-verse” rule: only publish what your followers want to see. How dare anyone actually be real?

A must needed “step in the right direction” for Somnez and her kind.
People are growing tired of this narcissistic virtue signaling behavior that has swept our societies. Corporate workplaces have become unwitting victims of the media, academia and government power elites who praise the likes of Somnez, who call out those that do not step in line. Her actions and those of her ilk, continue to perpetuate and promote the thought police environment that’s so prevalent today.
Great article! The comments that follow show there’s hope we will find our way out of this “5hit show” that has befallen us. Maybe this recession or depression that’s about to take hold be the impetus needed to wake up the WOKE!

It is hard to say where it would end. “You retweeted an offensive joke” becomes, “You were overheard telling an offensive joke to your friends at a bar,” becomes, perhaps, “You were captured by one of our corporate surveillance drones exiting a Ricky Gervais show, and our facial expression-analysing algorithm confirms the presence of mirth.”

This has consumed my thoughts for a number of years now, ever since I noticed how willing governments were to monitor their people in every capacity.

Did anyone watch the cheerleader video on YouTube? It was a tad perplexing. My take on the ‘scalp ‘em’ chant was that it must be the US equivalent of burly lads on latter day footie terraces shouting ‘you’re gonna get your furkinedskickedin’, only by young girls in mildly inappropriate uniforms. Looks a bit like a comedy zeig-heil straight from Fawlty Towers at the start of their routine too. Honestly thought that was the reason for the opprobrium.

The effect of the social media on this generation is the blurring of the border between private and public. No, your workmates are not your friends until they become such. At work you are supposed to focus on work and if you want to banter there are plenty of neutral subjects: traffic jams, the weather,etc. Never expose your hobbies, your vision of the world, your comedic genius. Apply this rule and you’ll be ok 99% of the time. If you have fallen victim to the 1% bucket it is probably not your fault so no need to apologize.

Isn’t one participating in this comment section actually taking part in social media?

This article summarizes the snowflake issue perfectly. Please continuing writing such well done works!

My comment which took issue with the manner that this article is written, and not with the content, has been unceremoniously deleted. My review was not popular, but why censor disagreeable commentary?

The colleague who retweet of the off-colour joke doesn’t deserve any sympathy. He was a naive fool for engaging in social media and mentoring women. Two major errors of judgement. Any man with sense knows to never get involved in either.