verbal aggression is one step away from physical aggression
Post number #586440, ID: de463b
|
some people don't seem to realize this. "i'm not bullying. words can't hurt"
i'm not one to agree or deny the internet tough guys, but i view verbally aggressive behavior as simply a way to identify people who are more likely to perform physical aggression towards others. it's not really culture, just psychology.
what's your take on this? also i'm a faggot
Post number #586444, ID: 87ef3b
|
My take on this is that those things have no direct correlation.
Someone who is always kind and polite is just as likely to eventually be violent as someone who does verbal aggression.
Now, if your theory is correct(which it isn't but let's entertain the idea) banning verbal aggression would have a tremendous negative impact on society as the one way to identify violent people is suddenly suppressed, paranoia would be rampant and rightfully so.
Post number #586446, ID: de463b
|
>>586444 but.. we're already sort of banning verbal aggression anyway, in the label of "hate speech" and such. my point is to try to explain this phenomena, as some people seems to be baffled by the fact that they aren't allowed to use harsh words in various discussion platforms.
and to push the point further, when civil platforms fail people take it to the real life where words can't be banned, and that's how things turn into physical abuse.. "riots".
Post number #586448, ID: 10aacc
|
When people can't talk what they think because "it's aggressive" they WILL find other ways to show discontent and it won't be pretty.
Forced control always backfires and you can bet this whole hate speech stuff will go down the same way.
Post number #586464, ID: de463b
|
>>586448 That's not a reason to remove said forced control though. If people's reaction to being limited for being slightly aggressive is to become even more aggressive that will only prove that aggressive people are inherently bad and requires even stricter control.
Mods this is definitely bait, sorry for falling for it, I'll trust your better judgment...
Post number #586476, ID: de463b
|
>>586467 what? I have done no sin :(
I wanted to stay silent because I also trust the mods' better judgement but I'm compelled to defend my own dignity.
Also please don't argue to this. I only wanted to keep the thread alive, not making myself the main topic of this thread ~.~
Post number #586479, ID: 10aacc
|
>>586476 sorry but if wanting freedom is inherently bad and authoritarian control is good then I'd rather be inherently bad to the bone.
Post number #586480, ID: de463b
|
>>586479 Where did I say that freedom is inherently bad? Neither freedom nor control is inherently bad. Being part of a civilization IS giving up complete freedom.
This is why I hate extremes.. stop putting words into other people's mouth.
Post number #586481, ID: 10aacc
|
>>586480 not putting words in your mouth here's your quote >If people's reaction to being limited for being slightly aggressive is to become even more aggressive that will only prove that aggressive people are inherently bad and requires even stricter control.
You're literally claiming that if people get discontent with authoritarian rules and try to fight it they're inherently bad and need even more authoritarian control.
Post number #586484, ID: de463b
|
>>586481 the word "aggressive" has a broad meaning. besides, the post i'm replying to implied that when limited aggressive people do things that are "not pretty."
i'm assuming this "not pretty" things refer to things they do towards their initial target of aggression. it was always about aggressive behaviors, not anarchism. i never used the word "authoritarian" once, so you're putting words in my mouth.
Post number #586486, ID: 10aacc
|
>>586484 enforcing rules is authoritarian, stop pretending to have any moral high ground and I'm the same person, no one else was foolish enough to reply to your bait, it's just that 4g likes changing my IP address frequently.
Forced peace is never the option.
Post number #586490, ID: de463b
|
>>586486 i feel like you're arguing with the wrong person. what moral high ground? i mentioned bullying in the OP. are you saying that bullying is justifiable? i appreciate your participation in this discussion but i wish you actually talk about the topic i brought up in the first place.
Post number #586494, ID: 10aacc
|
>>586490 you said verbal aggression is bad and rules must be enforced to stop it.
I said enforcing such rules will do more harm than good.
You replied saying that even stricter rules need to be enforced if that's the case... Because "verbal aggression is bad"
Which in turn will make things even worse, make snowflakes like you to enforce even stricter rules and we'll be repeating the same process in a fucking downward spiral.
(1/2)
Post number #586495, ID: 10aacc
|
I suffered bullying as a kid and shit rules only made the bullies angry, by the end of it they couldn't touch me so they decided to put the rules to their favor force situations where I'd look guilty and I was expelled in the end, look how beautiful anti-bullying rules are, they got bullied kid punished in the end, so damn perfect huh?
These shit rules always backfire and bad intentioned people WILL turn them into their favor. (2/2)
Post number #586512, ID: 709920
|
>>586494 calling people snowflake isn't going to solve anything. In the first place I was trying to argue the topic but your response was to call the mods. How's that for forced control? Anyway, I don't think there is any space for common grounds to be made here. I rest my case.
Post number #586513, ID: 0717ad
|
>>586440 >also i'm a faggot okey, I think /d/ cares more abt this. Unless you are trying to prove a point abt ur topic, otherwise I have no pity.
Post number #586514, ID: 0717ad
|
objectively speaking, everyone has their own opinion. Your choice to speak them out to the world or keep them to yourself. Whatever you believe in, you will never have a situation that everyone will agree with you.
Post number #586515, ID: 0717ad
|
>>586512 it's very annoying that everyone is so problematic now. Seems like if you are VULNERABLE and tell your problems TO THE WHOLE ENTIRE WORLD then we can all be chummy and safe together. because apparentlt if the whole world is sad about their life then no one will feel sad about their lives right ? thank you for MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATION, I'M SO PROUD OF US AS AN ENTIRE HECCING RACE. This is a SAFE SPACE. so feel free to share your most inner thoughts and problems :,)
Post number #586555, ID: 0b15c1
|
Physical violence is not the same as verbal one. You have the right to talk, but you don't have the right to hit people. Therefore, all verbal violence is justified. Don't hesitate to harass verbally anyone you can. You have the right to, so you must do it. No one will ever try to physically repress this behavior, because they'd be breaking the law. Hate speech is a way to point at people who merely use their rights. Therefore you must all resort to verbal violence.
Post number #586556, ID: 4cc8bb
|
>>586555 thanks my nigga, you da real MVP I bet OP is a mixed race mutt
Post number #586558, ID: 301632
|
Suuuuure and turning the PC(windows) screen upside down is one step away from hacking
Post number #586588, ID: 5e5eb3
|
there might be some connection, but so fucking what? what are you gonna do?
>>586556 dunno about OP but i am and i love white people
Post number #586596, ID: ac3fce
|
OP, you need to realize that people absolutely know they are doing harm. Don't just say "some people don't seem to realize...". Yes they do realize, they simply play dumb.
Post number #586602, ID: b3c837
|
this is a very gay thread
Post number #586605, ID: 4cc8bb
|
>>586602 shutto uppu kurosetto faggotto
Total number of posts: 26,
last modified on:
Fri Jan 1 00:00:00 1565128208
| some people don't seem to realize this. "i'm not bullying. words can't hurt"
i'm not one to agree or deny the internet tough guys, but i view verbally aggressive behavior as simply a way to identify people who are more likely to perform physical aggression towards others. it's not really culture, just psychology.
what's your take on this? also i'm a faggot