If you know you are going to be misunderstood and offend people with the words you choose, and you use them anyway, that is the exact opposite of empathy.
Failure to see that your words are offensive to some people is a direct result of failing to empathize with the listener.
That is an absolutely ridiculous statement if you look at the context of this conversation.
You are saying that I shouldn't call myself a pussy, because other people might get offended. That I should empathize with the fact that other people might get offended when I call myself names.
> if I had only manned up and broken out sed, but I pussied out and wrote some Python
Are you really suggesting that any given person should watch how they talk to themselves, because other people might get offended by how they talk to themselves?
This is lunacy. Absolute lunacy.
Censorship on how we talk to others is a joke in its own right, but now (when one puts your statements in context with the material being discussed) you are suggesting that failure to censor how we talk to ourselves represents a lack of empathy with the people who are listening in on our thoughts.
Is it so necessary that I defend my right to talk to myself how I please, that I defend the author's right to talk to himself as he pleases, do you honestly fail to see the absolute ridiculousness of getting offended over someone's inner monologue.
I fail to see how the subject of the sentence has any relevance to how offensive it is, if it indeed contains disparaging remarks. If I wrote in a blog post
> I stopped being a stupid ni _ _ er and smartened up
any well adjusted person would be offended by that statement. Even though I was referring to myself.
Failure to see that your words are offensive to some people is a direct result of failing to empathize with the listener.