Is there a word or idiom to describe being offended for some one else?
For example, Person A makes an off-the-cuff remark that person B is 'trailer trash'. Person B knows that person A means it as a joke and isn't offended. Person C then gets offended at the remark and jumps to person B's defence even though the remark had nothing to do with them. Person A and B often make these remarks to each other.
I would suggest vicariously offended.
performed, exercised, received, or suffered in place of another
I've found a few published uses of the phrase:
... making their living by being vicariously offended ...
There's a tendency in this country for people to be vicariously offended
A term I have seen used more recently is Professionally Offended or Professionally Outraged.
This is used to describe someone who takes offense at something on behalf of the supposedly offended party, usually on Twitter.
Phillip Schofield has described Twitter as "the land of the professionally outraged".
The idiom, take something personally, may fit in this scenario. Definition:
to interpret a remark or action as directed against oneself and be upset or offended by it, even if that was not the speaker's intention.
Example:
"I took it personally when he yelled at the class."
I think took umbrage would be a nice fit.
Example:
Person C took umbrage at person B's remark about person A.
Beside the question of real understanding from B (was it a joke or not from A...), we have to answer your first request : Empathy which means a comprehension & imaginatively entering or projecting into another person's feelingsh.
"on behalf of" is a good fit here.
"in the interest of" - Merriam-Webster
Example:
I’ve noticed the phenomenon of someone getting personally offended on behalf of someone else, who, in fact, has not been personally offended. Use in an article
Though not commonly used, this type of offense can be said to be a secondhand offense as explained in this article.
acting as the PC (political correctness) Police
of course this is meant as a slight to the third party - sort of a "mind your own business" response
I would say that Person C is being overprotective.
having a tendency to protect someone, especially a child, excessively.
The idiom “more loyal than the king” was used by an author as a subtitle in a 2010 opinion piece criticizing a fellow Pakistani columnist for expressing misplaced concern on behalf of the United States over the possibility that leaks from within ISI (Pakistan’s powerful spy service) had revealed the name and identity of the then CIA station chief in Pakistan, in spite of the fact that the United States itself had not voiced such concerns through official channels.
In the first paragraph, the author of the piece states the idiom’s meaning as follows:
The idiom ‘More loyal than the king’ means someone who unnecessarily behaves more concerned about matters that concern someone else and ought not to have been of such concern to him. Generally it is spoken about sycophants or those subservient to the concerned, for their undue zeal and interest in matters owed directly to someone else.
(from ‘Pakistan’s Liberal Extremists: :More Loyal Than The King’ on ‘siasat[dot]pk)
Although the second sentence about how the idiom is generally targeted at unduly zealous sycophants would probably not apply in your context as presented, the idiom as defined in the first sentence would describe “Person C” in your scenario, with the United States representing your “Person B” and “sections of the US media” playing the role of your “Person A.”
Please note that variations of this idiom include “more royal/ist than the king” and “more papal/Catholic than the Pope,”
the latter being defined by Wikipedia (as an extension of its literal meanings) as:
Adhering more stringently to any norm (the norm of what is considered offensive, in your case) more strictly than is required by the arbiters of the norm (Person B, in your case);
with the former (as paraphrased from its use in ‘When the King Took Flight’ by Timothy TACKETT, via ‘Google Books’) meaning:
someone who “abides no compromise [when it comes to offensive language, in your case]” even when/if the king himself [Person B, in your case] does/would abide such compromises.
