Younger cousin #rekt someone.

Because You DONT UNDERSTAND what violance is and what is the difference between violance and force. Thats the cause.

All who dont get this little detail will engage in pointless "discussion" and try to convince me that "they right and im wrong". Lack of understanding makes You and similar ppl to You blind.

One does not now what one does not know. If You think You know but You dont know thinking will block You from learning.

Go edcuate Yourself.

Kids don't understand it either. This is why the more peaceful solutions don't work - they cannot comprehend that whatever they are doing is wrong. They don't have the foresight to realize that they may be causing lasting damage to their victim. Or the understanding that the world does not revolve around them and they should not constantly indulge their desires. The only thing that can be a deterrent is the knowledge that if they hurt someone they will be hurt back in return. Punishments like detention could work but they are prolonged and may result in unfortunate consequences. A clean quick fight is the easiest and most straightforward solution to the whole issue.

"

de99ial wrote:

Because You DONT UNDERSTAND what violance is and what is the difference between violance and force. Thats the cause.

All who dont get this little detail will engage in pointless "discussion" and try to convince me that "they right and im wrong". Lack of understanding makes You and similar ppl to You blind.

One does not now what one does not know. If You think You know but You dont know thinking will block You from learning.

Go edcuate Yourself.

Kind of an ironic statement comming from somebody who appears to have absolutely no experience with people on the autism spectrum.

As long as you cant imagine a nuanced situation where self-defense isn't appropriate or beneficial in the long therm im going to assume your enjoying your mantra reflected in your statement of "thinking is problematic".

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

Kids don't understand it either. This is why the more peaceful solutions don't work - they cannot comprehend that whatever they are doing is wrong. They don't have the foresight to realize that they may be causing lasting damage to their victim. Or the understanding that the world does not revolve around them and they should not constantly indulge their desires. The only thing that can be a deterrent is the knowledge that if they hurt someone they will be hurt back in return. Punishments like detention could work but they are prolonged and may result in unfortunate consequences. A clean quick fight is the easiest and most straightforward solution to the whole issue.

You know what that part is called? Raising. This is PARENTS responsibility to teach them the difference and many other concepts.

"

Boem wrote:

Kind of an ironic statement comming from somebody who appears to have absolutely no experience with people on the autism spectrum.

Yeah because You know me better than i know myself and my surroundings. In fact in my familly i have two nephews with very hard autism.

Just stop making posts based on preassumptions. Self defence is one of the fundamental concepts that NEED to be learned no matter who we talk about.

But i get it. Modern world looks for easy solutions thats why we dont actually heal anyone with mental disorders we just drug them.

It is clear that You and some ppl from here have no idea about what is what and You all move on some theoretical layer of reality. This is exackly the problem - You dont see reality as it is.

Stop pretending that You know something just because You read a book or watched a movie. I assume You did at least that.

Let's look at the very definition of violence:

behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

It has nothing to do with whether it is justified or not. Trying to say that it's not violence just because it's justified is simply wrong.

"

LennyLen wrote:

Let's look at the very definition of violence:

behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

It has nothing to do with whether it is justified or not. Trying to say that it's not violence just because it's justified is simply wrong.

He's probably of the new-age generation that was never though

"sticks and bones may break my bones but words will never break me"

They try to subvert the meaning of "hurt" to "mental harm" so they can justify assault on people they disagree with where something "not-pleasant" is instantly registered as hurtfull.

They don't seem to understand that it takes two to tango and rather then feel pity for people who need to resort to name-calling and look why they are insecure they take them at face value.

Peace,

-Boem-

Wasn't beating up bullies an old school way of thinking same as disciplining your children with a big stick? Interesting you try to call him new-age then bringing his apparent old-school way of thinking.

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

Wasn't beating up bullies an old school way of thinking same as disciplining your children with a big stick? Interesting you try to call him new-age then bringing his apparent old-school way of thinking.

Maybe i shouldn't have used "new-age" but rather woke culture.

And i don't know about beating up bullies or punishing kids with a big stick, im in my thirtees and i have no recollection of that ever beeing the norm during my childhood.

We had fights and stuff, obviously, but it was never the norm or "allowed" as a solution to conflict.

And im using the definition of bullying from psychologie(long therm chronical harrasment or exclusion) which we had very little off.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit :

I was adressing this statement btw which lennylen responded to.

"

de99ial wrote:

Its not violence if You are attacked and forced to defend Yourself.

It's like saying "its not murder when you shoot somebody in self defense" to push it to its extreme.

It's a logical fallacy and a subversion to justify the action.

The court in such a case isn't going to rule you "didn't murder somebody" it's going to rule if the murder was morally justified because of the context.

Yea but those guys who like being offended, they aren't really violent. Do you expect a fattie who preaches fat acceptance or whatever to actually physically assault the guys who make fun them? Unlikely. They have the internet to fall back on and find like minded individuals. Without it they'd be singled out and live in isolation most likely.

So yea, I don't think supporting violence and being woke are the same thing (could be wrong of course, its not like I've made a thorough research).

In regards to bullying, this new concept where psychologists talk to the kids, try to fix them up, it is fairly recent. And it doesn't help, it doesn't reduce it. I am highly doubtful any form of explaining will truly change a bully's mind unless they reach a certain age.

I dont quite understand your first paragraph, you will have to clarify, for example
"those guys who like being offended, they aren't really violent"?
Who exactly likes to be offended, i dont quite understand what your infering here.

As for the second paragraph = look up Antifa, which bassicaly runs on the principle of submersive messaging. The name alone "anti fashist" while utilizing fashist methods like no-platforming/shame and censor culture and classical "good vs evil" dichotomy's that provoke the purity senses of mobs of people.

They utilize a same logical fallacy to justify the agression and damages they cause under a banner of being against agression and damaging entities.

As for the last paragraph, im just utilizing the established definition for bullying i didn't say i agree with the methods currently being utilized.
I think it's entirelly plausible to teach children emotional intelligence without pushing it beyond reasonable and practical applications at a young age.



Peace,

-Boem-