NicoleG wrote:
Why is it that if I say something that offends someone else, yet I had no intentions of offending, I am the one held accountable for the other person being offended instead of the other person being held accountable for wearing their emotions on their sleeve and taking offense when I meant none?
It's both your fault and theirs, if it really has to be seen as a fault. If it's a thing that would offend most people, they might feel that you should be the one to apologise, on a "should have known better" basis. "Doing wrong" is a relative concept, if most people say it's wrong, then that's as near as you can get to it being wrong, though in absolute terms it isn't, because it could always be argued that their rules were wrong.
Apologising isn't always an admission of guilt.....many people say sorry a lot to make the other person better, they don't really mean to convey any great remorse.
I agree that if you don't know a thing will hurt somebody, you can't logically be expected to admit blame. Though once you do know, if you did it again then you would be more culpable.
But I think it's better if people focussed less on blame and more on responsibility.