>> where we are censoring completely benign words

Are you saying in any context? That's not the proposal as i read it.

>> >> Could you just say

>> censoring

For censoring to be the case, it must be that you can't use particular words.

I read the case as

  1. the GP's post expressing a desire to show heightened care to a reader
  2. your parent posting a possible solution

Taking this to an extreme, if both behaviours above were to become a social norm then some words in some contexts would become extremely frowned upon to the point that you would personally choose not to use them.

They'd still not be censored though. Documents would continue to be written with the offensive terms by those who seek to offend. The words would be used in the socially unacceptable way in service of making a stronger point.

I was using "we" to mean "we" would be self-censoring.

self-censor? Your original post makes no sense then, how can you self-censor a word that you self deem to be benign?

You’d have to recognise that the word wasn’t benign in that context first?

Go back to the original parent of this thread. The concept was he self censored due to the fear of someone being offended.

Thats not true - where does he self censor?

> So what should I do? Just shut my mouth and don't say anything? Then the slave trade will continue to operate freely... All speech besides threats of violence needs to be free, or we can't progress as a society.

Okay, you got me, he didn't self censor but he was talking about considering self censoring and chose not to. QED no one has ever self censored out of fear of reprisal.