---
"We have a choice of whether we are hurt by words."

I heard someone say this about an hour ago. 

I see their point... but the idea makes me uneasy.

There are certainly times when it's pretty clear that the speaker did not intend to hurt.   Forgetting that a name or status has changed.  Misreading someone's social flagging. Customary word usage that means something different in another culture.*  Those are cases where there is certainly a choice of whether or not to take offense. 

But, some words are meant to hurt.  They aren't just a slip or an error, they are a deliberate poke.  Surely the choice is different in those cases.  If someone calls me a "***", should I just blow it off?

 I don't think so. The choice would be what to do about the insult,  not whether to be hurt.

This is what bothers me about the idea.   I tell the toxic person not to call me a "***".  They then fall back on, "well, it was your choice to be hurt about it." or "I didn't mean that as an insult, it was supposed to be a joke."  They can then feel righteous, while I have been insulted a second time by being accused of being over-sensitive.

It's the difference between someone making punching motions with their fists into the air, and someone actually punching you.   One, you can laugh at, but the other really does hurt, and you really need to do something about.  At the very least, put that person on your "do not call" list.
 ---

* There was an interesting kerfuffle when a British friend offered to "come 'round and knock you up"