Words are not violence, But do Words Matter?

[Love Child]

I did read a book on Non-Violent Communication and thought it to be a very effective read and something to think about for sure. What are your thoughts about the importance or non-importance of words? Do they only matter when they are sent over a non-secure server using your personal phone if you are a high ranking official?
Does it matter who says these words? Can certain people get away with saying certain words that others cannot say? Do you feel the freedom to say all of the words that you want to say?

[Fry Guy]

I think the short answer is "No". For those wanting a nice neat answer, the answer is No.

Those needing a little more nuance need to start looking at things like context and situation and appropriateness.

What you are prepared to talk to your mates, grandmother, a judge, your kids or boss be the same. Your choice of words, tone, subjects and such will all change. So they should.

But that does not mean that something that is hurtful is not inappropriate or something offensive or insulting is not reasonable or that meaness ought to be criminalised.

Freedom of expression and freedom of speech allows us to see and experience different opinions and idea. It fosters our values because we know what else is on offer. It allows us to be grown ups in the world not coddled by those wishing to infantilise and keep us safe from other thoughts and beliefs.

Of course I have heard an alternative to this is blocking any opinions you don't like and staying in your bubble. Ask Rootilda.

[Duchess]

I did read a book on Non-Violent Communication and thought it to be a very effective read and something to think about for sure. What are your thoughts about the importance or non-importance of words? Do they only matter when they are sent over a non-secure server using your personal phone if you are a high ranking official?
Does it matter who says these words? Can certain people get away with saying certain words that others cannot say? Do you feel the freedom to say all of the words that you want to say?

Of course words matter and it matters who says them, particularly when they are said by the goddamn leader of the free world who appears to be supported by every flake in the country. Words matter when you say them to your spouse, your kids, your boss, your friends, the people you employ or those you work with. Communication matters.

Yes, some people can get away with saying things others can't and no, no, I don't always feel like I have the freedom to say all that I want to say because, words matter. You can't unring a bell.

[Fry Guy]

But words are not violence and feeling bad or insulted or offended is not a crime and it is in these times and these things said that ought to be protected. No point protecting the things you agree with but controversial and confronting language should be protected.

[Duchess]

No one is telling people what they can or cannot say. Free speech is a protected right here and one I support. I don't have to like or agree with the speech of others but I'll defend their right to bleat their crap.

[Fry Guy]

No one is telling people what they can or cannot say. Free speech is a protected right here and one I support. I don't have to like or agree with the speech of others but I'll defend their right to bleat their crap.

I know
That is one of the reasons I like you. That is one of the reasons you run this site.
Can you imagine how thin it would be trapped around people exactly like you ²⁴⁄₇

[Duchess]

Can you imagine how thin it would be trapped around people exactly like you 24/7

I would be bored to tears and doing a disservice to myself. I'm interested in other opinions and I encourage others to share them. I'm not someone who thinks my way is the only way or that my opinion is the only one that matters. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

[Donovan]

But words are not violence and feeling bad or insulted or offended is not a crime and it is in these times and these things said that ought to be protected. No point protecting the things you agree with but controversial and confronting language should be protected.

I disagree with this premise. Words absolutely have power, in fact they are more powerful than any weapon mankind can create. Because words convince. Words coerce. And words spur action. Fryguy is speaking like words have no power because, like most of us, his words have little influence over the world.
But the words of the powerful, as we are currently witnessing, can create peace or chaos at will. The Rwandan genocide in the 90's was created purely from radio broadcasts. The German Holocaust was the result of years of propaganda. Our own current situation is the direct result of talking idiots like Alex Jones and Bill O Rielly.

Words have power in the right circumstances. Never doubt.

[HairOfTheDog]

Words themselves are not violent, in my view. But, words most definitely can/do incite or deter violence, and people should own the words they put out there.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I generally like to read/hear/engage them. But, not always.

I typically don't expend much energy on people who regularly express opinions based on made-up or imagined truths presented as facts, especially people who go off the rails when challenged...........unless the opinion or person has the power to impact my life or the lives of many (in which case, I'll keep challenging).

Freedom of choice isn't a constitutional right, but it's an intrinsic one and exercising it to avoid irrational and wasteful time-sucks is often a wise one, in my opinion.

Anyway, while I respect everyone's right to express their opinions, I don't respect all opinions expressed. And, I think restrictions on some types of hate speech are appropriate and necessary for society.

[HairOfTheDog]

I disagree with this premise. Words absolutely have power, in fact they are more powerful than any weapon mankind can create. Because words convince. Words coerce. And words spur action. Fryguy is speaking like words have no power because, like most of us, his words have little influence over the world.
But the words of the powerful, as we are currently witnessing, can create peace or chaos at will. The Rwandan genocide in the 90's was created purely from radio broadcasts. The German Holocaust was the result of years of propaganda. Our own current situation is the direct result of talking idiots like Alex Jones and Bill O Rielly.

Words have power in the right circumstances. Never doubt.

Absolutely.  Sometimes, the pen (or voice)  is much mightier than the sword.

The words of the powerful, especially with broad reach and constant repetition, can and do incite atrocious action.  As you noted, the evidence of such is abundant throughout history.

When I hear our President -- along with members of the Republican Party and propagandists like Rush Limbaugh and Jeannine Pirro --  whipping up fear/resentment/hate towards "the radical Democratic mob’s Soros-funded criminal migrant caravan en-route to invade America!", the words of one of my favorite thinkers come to mind.

The same prescient words come to mind when I hear/read the reflexive defensiveness and idolizing praise of those who worship President Trump and their political party, without question or reason.

'Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities', Voltaire wrote back in 1765.

[HairOfTheDog]

Lots of absurdities in that fear/hate-mongering rhetoric. And, she's just one of many voices peddling it to millions, purely for potential political gain.

[sally]

Words most defintely have power, how else do you control the masses? If words don't have power then how do you explain the bible or any other religous texts? You give a bunch of assholes the power to talk a bunch of shit and it gives all the rest of the common folk meaning to their pathetic lives and something to fight over with the other common folk.

[Fry Guy]

Words themselves are not violent, in my view. But, words most definitely can/do incite or deter violence, and people should own the words they put out there.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I generally like to read/hear/engage them. But, not always.

I typically don't expend much energy on people who regularly express opinions based on made-up or imagined truths presented as facts, especially people who go off the rails when challenged...........unless the opinion or person has the power to impact my life or the lives of many (in which case, I'll keep challenging).

Freedom of choice isn't a constitutional right, but it's an intrinsic one and exercising it to avoid irrational and wasteful time-sucks is often a wise one, in my opinion.

Anyway, while I respect everyone's right to express their opinions, I don't respect all opinions expressed. And, I think restrictions on some types of hate speech are appropriate and necessary for society.

You describe your own actions beautifully.

"regularly express opinions based on made-up or imagined truths presented as facts, especially people who go off the rails when challenged"

That is you. I mean remember when you implied Maggot was a possible child molester support and rape apologist because he viewed a situation as different. Work this behaviour and result into the quote above. You are projecting your own bullshit and pretending to virtue signal a morally/intellectual superior position that you do not hold.

[Fry Guy]

But words are not violence and feeling bad or insulted or offended is not a crime and it is in these times and these things said that ought to be protected. No point protecting the things you agree with but controversial and confronting language should be protected.

I disagree with this premise. Words absolutely have power, in fact they are more powerful than any weapon mankind can create. Because words convince. Words coerce. And words spur action. Fryguy is speaking like words have no power because, like most of us, his words have little influence over the world.
But the words of the powerful, as we are currently witnessing, can create peace or chaos at will. The Rwandan genocide in the 90's was created purely from radio broadcasts. The German Holocaust was the result of years of propaganda. Our own current situation is the direct result of talking idiots like Alex Jones and Bill O Rielly.

Words have power in the right circumstances. Never doubt.

Of course I never said words do not have power and only an idiot would imply that I said that words have no power.

You are not implying that I am sure.

Words are not violence. There is really not much of a argument here it also makes NO position about the power of words.

Free Speech and free expression is worth protecting and not just for nice things but for bad things and bad ideas. Let the marketplace of ideas be vast and people exposed to all of them. Let the better ideas rise and the bad ideas fall.

If you think THAT is confronting, look at what would be happening if you try to limit it and whatever rationale you decide on speech and whatever arbitrary rule you put on it, someone else "ups the ante" and THEIR interpretation or understanding of what should be limited is more severe, because it is all subjective right? Slowly you march lockstep to censoring different ideas, thoughts BUT it is not YOUR fault you only suggested you limit it a bit but the next person was not responsible he just limited it a bit more, and so on.

Bad idea.

None of this suggests a thing about words having no power either.

In fact nothing I said suggests that. Only an idiot would say so or even imply it.

[HairOfTheDog]

This time I'm going to address your obsessive bullshit because you've drawn another member into it FryGuy.

For the record:  I don't believe that anyone here is a child molester, and I never suggested or stated that Maggot or anyone else was a 'possible child molester'.  

However,  I have in fact had several debates with many posters here over the years, Maggot especially, in response to comments:

-- immediately deriding alleged victims of rape and molestation because they didn't come forward soon enough,
--insisting that the alleged victims were really just 'groupies' or 'gold diggers' if the accused is famous or rich/powerful,
--claiming that minors from a certain locale  or of a presumed sexual orientation must have invited it or accepted it for personal gain,
--suggesting that 'all men did that shit back in the day or would if they could get away with it', etc.  

I don't consider such claims and arguments as 'apologizing for rapists' so much as I consider them reflective of a lack of understanding about how many women and children have been sexually assaulted/molested and how perpetrators operate.

When a poster acknowledges that minors or adults were sexually abused by someone with power over them, but claims the victims 'allowed' it for any reason, I'm gonna question whether that poster thinks it's okay.  

In the exchange to which you're referring with Maggot in the Supreme Court thread, he said he meant the parents allowed the sexual assault and molestation because they wanted gold medals.  And, I apologized if I misinterpreted his comment as suggesting the young girls allowed it for gold medals, though I believe the parents' claims and anguish about being fooled by the molester (Nassar) and that they too are victims.  

That's how free speech and debating differences of opinion works.  It is not an example of stating conspiracy theory, opinion, Trump rhetoric, and made-up facts as indisputable truths, then going off the rails when challenged.   That's your territory.  And, when people choose to tune it out, it doesn't mean they're uninterested in differing opinions or living in a 'bubble'.  It just means they're not interested in being sucked into your bubble.

[Fry Guy]

Nice try Snowflake. But then that is more Bullshit, and stating bullshit assertively does not make it fact and nor does repeating bullshit over and over.
What is more, I do not have to accept said bullshit as fact, by virtue that you said this. I hope this is understood.

Here is an example of what I mean. I have never thought words don't contain power. I think ideas and words behind them are some of the most powerful things our species have and have elevated us intellectually from all other species on Earth. It is part of the reason I am an advocate of the free marketplace of idea and the need to legally protect speech and freedom of expression.

Now Donovan has suggested that I am saying that words have no power. It is an idiotic assertion as I have neither said, implied, inferred or suggested this and as above, disbelieve it. If words have no power they would be of no consequence and don't need protection.

So Donovan says something stupid about myself and what i supposedly believe, based on fuck all, I pull him up on that and what happens next?

You, Snowflake, charge in making bullshit claim I drew Donovan into this. Donovan dragged himself into this making a stupid statement about assertions I was neither making or believe.

Kind of bullshit......again.

Just like your bullshit above about Kavanaugh was bullshit. You lost your shit in that thread because you are a Snowflake.
By any reasonable narrative reading as I pointed out you COULD NOT have reasonably read it the way you did.
With no clarification you made a series of tenuous illogical leaps of logic to pretend Maggot was trying to make children responsible for rape and molestation.
It was disgusting and no misinterpretation. You were just losing your shit because you are a Snowflake and did not like him not towing your views around this subject. You were prepared to flippantly insinuate a fellow mod was a supporter of child molestation or rape.

You have no moral or intellectual capital after that to try to browbeat me. You are immoral and disgusting. Hope this clears this up for you.

[BigMark]

This time I'm going to address your obsessive bullshit because you've drawn another member into it FryGuy.


You have the right to remain silent.

























Unfortunately you don't have the ability. 

[HairOfTheDog]

I was  addressing your statement that I suggested another member, Maggot, was a possible child molester FryGuy. 

Donovan had nothing to do with your claim involving Maggot nor my response to it. 

It's not a problem for me that you think I lost my shit with Maggot in the Kavanaugh thread.  Shit happens.  

I did however have a problem with you claiming that I suggested Maggot was a possible child molester, which never happened. So, I addressed it.

You're certainly not a victim here, despite your claim that I'm trying to browbeat you. Disagreeing/debating the content of your posts and mocking the style/tone once wasn't browbeating you, though it sure set you off.  

A good deal of your comments since then include you fathoming me a "dishonest, slimy, snowflake, pseudo-intellectual, hypocrite, retard" and whatever else.  I find that weird and boring......so I typically just don't respond.  Not responding is also not browbeating.

We all obviously just do as we see fit here.  No one's asking or attempting to browbeat you into doing anything different.

[Fry Guy]

You attempt something doesn't mean you were successfully nor that the effect you hoped for was realised.

Have I insinuated I was a victim? Anywhere?

I like pointing out your failure and your bullshit and hypocrisy. Doesn't mean I feel victimized nor does it mean I am "set off".

For instance if you held your breath until you turned blue and videotaped it to make me feel bad for you, but that act of trying to make me feel bad, would it equate that I did feel bad?

I would love you to test that theory.

Of course you do not believe trying something means that people have to be personally affected by your efforts.

Attempts at browbeating me or holding your breath are no more likely to victimise me or upset me or change my life than anything else and none of it would set me off.

Only a liar would claim it did. Incidentally why did you?

[BigMark]

HOTD is an extraordinary being you fruitloop.