Are we allowed to change our minds ?

Whilst I agree that there were things seen as acceptable when we were younger that have no place in a civilised society. However, meanings of words themselves change over years. Some which were perfectly fine to use years ago, now would be seen as extremely offensive. We have to be a little careful when condemning our younger selves for having used words which, at the time, were not meant to offend and, indeed, did not offend.

Barmeyoldbat your parents sound great, I love their practice of reversing roles at dinner. Sadly in my time working overseas I never say anything comparable.

Thanks Paddyanne that comment made me laugh out loud. ??

I go red in the face thinking about some of the things I said or did in the past. I am glad not to be quite that silly now. Is it not true that if we change our minds or opinions because we now know better, we are wiser today than we were yesterday? That must be a good thing - change should be embraced if it is for the good .

Whilst my parents and grandparents were liberal and were A typical in terms of their outlook towards race. As a child growing up in the 70s my views about sexuality have certainly mellowed. Understanding now the dreadful bias people have experienced I am very glad of that.

Paddyanne - that woman in the next room, changing her mind mid-labour: I think it was probably me!

When you say ‘ should we be held to account’ do you mean that we should be punished or held to account for them or do you mean just admitting to the past behaviour.?

I'm sure that many of us expressed opinions when we were young and hadn't experienced much of life and would say things differently now. If we could revisit our younger selves we'd be probably be embarrassed.
You're bound to change. A closed, rigid mind shows a lack of intelligence and empathy, surely? Not to mention tunnel vision.

Oh, come on, Doodledog. I really cannot let you get away unchallenged with perpetuating that urban myth/socialist smear about the PM "burning £50 notes in front of homeless people". And when you say that "context is all, I suppose", it's a bit remiss of you to omit to mention that the PM's comment about "letterbox women" was in the context of his impassioned defence of women's right to wear the full veil if they chose to do so.

I changed my mind many years ago and cancelled my own wedding the day before. I have never regretted it and my mother was very relieved.
Some guests grumbled and asked for their gifts back. The priest visited to check it it was last minute nerves. I have now been married to a good man for over 40 years, I am glad I changed my mind

I suppose we are all guilty of youthful indiscretion, of speech and action which we would not use now. Whether or not we should be held accountable for such depends I think upon where we are now. I am not in the public eye, do not tell people how they should live their lives or make the legislation to punish those who stray, but I think that those who do, need to take a good look at their younger selves before they criticise others. I am thinking here of M Gove; as a young journalist he took recreational drugs, so did many others and I care not a jot. What I do care about is that this same man was responsible for the legislation that meant that any teacher indulging in their spare time, the same as he did, would be struck off for life. Before we get into discussions about the responsibilities of journalists versus teachers, it is the hypocrisy, the 'do what I say, not what I do' that I have a problem with.

The difference between 'giving offence' and taking offence' are very different. Some people take offence when none was intended. I suppose that shows lack of perception.

Most people don't mean to 'give offence' but some people always take it, just the same.

yeahbutnobut...it is extremely offensive to repeat the rhyme you chanted at school ,I am hurt & upset by you writing the word out today ,why did you feel it necessary ? You could have put the N word as people do.

I take your point Welbeck. I should have written “old tweet OR student rant “. I wasn’t thinking of the trouser dropping MP . I was thinking of the awful rants by Andrew Sabisky who resigned recently.
I can see a difference between those 2 things.
If s.o. had too much to drink and dropped his pants that’s one thing but if someone’s rant reflects his true beliefs about women etc that’s more serious. I think anyway.
I suppose some might argue that even those sorts of beliefs could change with age. Some people like to shock only and might not really believe what they are saying. I don’t know. I’m no expert. That’s why I asked the question.
Thanks everyone for your posts.

By “held to account “ , Bridgeit , I was wondering if he should have lost his job because of saying those things ? I think he should have resigned as some of those comments were pretty disgusting.

FFS!

Why the F,sakings?

Presumably because the post was deleted.
I went back to check and it had gone. In my opinion it was used as an illustration of what is now unacceptable . It wasn’t meant to be offensive at all.

WHY are you FFs ing Yeahbutnobut? You chose to write the offensive N word out in full & others including Welbeck have been sensible & kind & explained why it really isn't necessary.

@Bodash
Is that a a ‘socialist meme’? I don’t know, as the Bullingdon Club is private, male and members only but Cameron was asked and never denied it.

Any and all criticism of individual Tories is not necessarily an act of socialism, you know. In fact, I was, broadly, speaking in defence of the bloke who dropped his pants, and he is/was a Tory.

As for the letterbox and ‘watermelon smile’ comments, whatever the context they are pretty offensive, don’t you think? He could have made his point without using such derogatory terms.

Well in terms of change in language, some might find this amusing and some horrifying:

www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/i-had-to-tell-my-mum-not-to-say-that-as-it-means-something-else-1.4186898

A few of the 'mistakes' are probably more suitable to Irish culture but I thought the link was educational!

Is this thread initiated as a general question or about the Tory Party?

I think there are plenty of MP's from ' ALL ' political parties that could be held up for scrutiny and the balance could be addressed by posting the homophobic, sexist, antisemitic tweets etc. that has hounded many from various parties. It would quickly be condemned to the ' Whataboutery' tag but the balance needs to be understood when apportioning blame to just Tory/Labour etc.

Is this thread is another thread about an individual already being discussed on GN?

' If ' it is a general question then yes of course we are 'allowed ' to change our minds, it is a human trait and using the word ' allowed ' is rather odd .

What an individual says at any one given time may not be where they end up years later and there is no one reason as to why that happens, maturity, personal circumstances, gained knowledge of, reacting to change in society etc. etc.

What is annoying is when there is a determination to twist or purposely refuse to look at ' the context ' of some accusations, feel it appropriate to condemn one individual but not another because they may like one but hate the other. E. G an MP or and individual from one political party may be called to resign for his/her actions but if the same happened within the party someone sides with they ' HAVE BEEN ON A JOURNEY'

"Are we allowed to change our minds ?"
I hope so, because I regularly change mine.
With the exception of a few things.
Otherwise I try to keep an open mind.

I also think that overtime our thinking on various subjects evolve.

I can think of a number of subjects where my opinions, formed by the attitudes and knowledge of the period - and I mean 1960s - 80s - hves then changed as more information became available or where a subject I had never really thought about, became of active current concern , so that I did think about it.

For all but a few, our attitudes are not cast in stone. For under 30s I would ignore anything said more than five years ago, unless it was an attitude repeated many times and continued way past a time when they should know better. For people over 30, I would ignore anything said more than 10 years ago..

Bear in mind that St Paul had been a persecutor of Christians before the incident on the road to Damascus, which led to his conversion to Christianity and his later willingness to die for that religion. Nowadays, he would be hounded to the end of his life by those refusing to believe he could really be a christian, because he had once thought otherwise, indeed the leaders of the christian church may well have rejected him because of his previous allegiance.

If you were one of 5he decent people who were fooled by the leavers, yes it is good to change your mind.

hltttps://audioboom.com/channels/4976477