5 ms·

The idea of "verbal violence", especially on the internet, is absurd on its face. On every social network that matters, permanently dismissing someone from your

The idea of "verbal violence", especially on the internet, is absurd on its face. On every social network that matters, permanently dismissing someone from your attention who's committing "verbal violence" against you is a mouse click or two away. Call it what it is: People saying mean things on the internet.

DanBC 11y ago
Criado-Perez (and I'm going to say her name every time you repeat your lies) https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-nimmo-and-sorley.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Document... > She describes how the effects of the harassment she has received have been life-changing. Her personality has changed long-term. She describes panic and fear and horror. She feared the abusers would find her and carry out the threats. She felt hunted. She remembers feeling terror every time the doorbell rang. She has had to spend substantial time and money ensuring she is as untrackable as possible. She gives a detailed and personal account of the physical effects of the fear on her. The emails from Sorley and Nimmo (she says) are imprinted on her mind – “I don’t think I will ever be free of them”. It is a moving, detailed, and entirely understandable account of the effect of these crimes on her. > These offences have caused serious and entirely predictable harm to her. > The effect on Stella Creasy has also been substantial. She became concerned for her safety to the extent that she had to alter her behaviour. She had a panic button installed in her home. She describes the effect of the crimes on her public duties, on her staff, and on her family. Again the offences have caused serious and entirely predictable harm to her.
- AndrewKemendo 11y ago
  Who is in charge of the emotions of an individual?
  - pron 11y ago
    The same as who's in charge of their general (physical) well-being: it depends on the circumstances. Of course, it's all a matter of degree. Raping someone is obviously worse than threatening to rape them, but threatening with rape might be worse than, say, stepping on their foot or slapping them.
- Karunamon 11y ago
  Lies? Most people on the receiving reading words on a screen do not react this way. I wonder why? Perhaps Criado-Perez is an exceptionally sensitive individual. Hm, reading further: The messages were posted on a number of different sites, and continued after being blocked and or warned. This goes well beyond "saying mean things on the internet" at that point, and is also well beyond the level of what this conversation is about. The behavior described in your link is nothing short of stalking. Something which is rightly already against the law. (And I think you know that, and I think your accusation of "lying" is especially troublesome in that regard) We're not talking about stalking and actively attempting to make someone else afraid for their life.
- realquick81 11y ago
  DanBC consistently makes these puerile arguments but never gets downvoted. Unbelievable. This white knight seriously wants me to believe that society as a whole are in control of these people's emotions. Dude, wow. Just wow. If I say any more than that the thought police will curb my post.
- tsotha 11y ago
  "she feared... she felt..." What actually happened to her?
  - pron 11y ago
    > What actually happened to her? She was intimidated. It is important to understand that those who have power rarely need to exert it over others physically. Intimidation is enough, and is common in nature, too. Any sort of physical struggle bears a lot of risk for both sides involved (even if it's leopard vs. gazelle), so animals try to avoid violence by communicating their strength both to rivals in their own group as well as to potential prey or predators. It is called signalling[1]. Obviously, being intimidated is not the same as being killed or wounded, but that doesn't mean that this form of signalling is not very real or not a very common form of exerting power over others, in humans as in other species. Intimidation is very common in man and in nature, and its goal is to save the intimidator's the chance of injury and the intimidatee's life -- if they learn their place. If it weren't very real, animals wouldn't have spend so much energy on it[2]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle
    - tsotha 11y ago
      She was... intimidated? Seriously? You think it's reasonable to curtail free speech in other people to prevent intimidation?
      - pron 11y ago
        What constitutes "reasonable" is a hard question. What I know is that all societies on this planet curtail speech to prevent intimidation. They only vary on the degree of intimidation they forbid. As a matter of fact, I am not aware of any single system of ethics where free speech is a higher value than preventing all forms of intimidation. I also, again, must take issue with the use of "free speech" in this context. It is not at all clear that it even applies to every sequence of letters a person types or every utterance a person makes. At its very core -- or consensus -- free speech means the freedom to express all ideas and opinions without fear of arrest. It is not at all clear that "I would like to rape Ellen Pao" is either an idea or an opinion, and therefore I don't mind discussing whether we should allow such things to be said, but I do mind including them under the umbrella of "free speech" (my objection is not on principal grounds but on aesthetic grounds). I do believe that every person should have the right to freely express his or her ideas in public without fear of arrest, and I think that this value is rather high in priority. But I agree with all other free societies (including the US[1]), which think that this freedom does not apply (and I'm not talking about various exceptions to that freedom based on offense) to certain combinations of words that constitute neither ideas nor opinions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...

DanBC 11y ago

Criado-Perez (and I'm going to say her name every time you repeat your lies) https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-nimmo-and-sorley.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Document... > She describes how the effects of the harassment she has received have been life-changing. Her personality has changed long-term. She describes panic and fear and horror. She feared the abusers would find her and carry out the threats. She felt hunted. She remembers feeling terror every time the doorbell rang. She has had to spend substantial time and money ensuring she is as untrackable as possible. She gives a detailed and personal account of the physical effects of the fear on her. The emails from Sorley and Nimmo (she says) are imprinted on her mind – “I don’t think I will ever be free of them”. It is a moving, detailed, and entirely understandable account of the effect of these crimes on her. > These offences have caused serious and entirely predictable harm to her. > The effect on Stella Creasy has also been substantial. She became concerned for her safety to the extent that she had to alter her behaviour. She had a panic button installed in her home. She describes the effect of the crimes on her public duties, on her staff, and on her family. Again the offences have caused serious and entirely predictable harm to her.

AndrewKemendo 11y ago
Who is in charge of the emotions of an individual?
- pron 11y ago
  The same as who's in charge of their general (physical) well-being: it depends on the circumstances. Of course, it's all a matter of degree. Raping someone is obviously worse than threatening to rape them, but threatening with rape might be worse than, say, stepping on their foot or slapping them.
Karunamon 11y ago
Lies? Most people on the receiving reading words on a screen do not react this way. I wonder why? Perhaps Criado-Perez is an exceptionally sensitive individual. Hm, reading further: The messages were posted on a number of different sites, and continued after being blocked and or warned. This goes well beyond "saying mean things on the internet" at that point, and is also well beyond the level of what this conversation is about. The behavior described in your link is nothing short of stalking. Something which is rightly already against the law. (And I think you know that, and I think your accusation of "lying" is especially troublesome in that regard) We're not talking about stalking and actively attempting to make someone else afraid for their life.
realquick81 11y ago
DanBC consistently makes these puerile arguments but never gets downvoted. Unbelievable. This white knight seriously wants me to believe that society as a whole are in control of these people's emotions. Dude, wow. Just wow. If I say any more than that the thought police will curb my post.
tsotha 11y ago
"she feared... she felt..." What actually happened to her?
- pron 11y ago
  > What actually happened to her? She was intimidated. It is important to understand that those who have power rarely need to exert it over others physically. Intimidation is enough, and is common in nature, too. Any sort of physical struggle bears a lot of risk for both sides involved (even if it's leopard vs. gazelle), so animals try to avoid violence by communicating their strength both to rivals in their own group as well as to potential prey or predators. It is called signalling[1]. Obviously, being intimidated is not the same as being killed or wounded, but that doesn't mean that this form of signalling is not very real or not a very common form of exerting power over others, in humans as in other species. Intimidation is very common in man and in nature, and its goal is to save the intimidator's the chance of injury and the intimidatee's life -- if they learn their place. If it weren't very real, animals wouldn't have spend so much energy on it[2]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle
  - tsotha 11y ago
    She was... intimidated? Seriously? You think it's reasonable to curtail free speech in other people to prevent intimidation?
    - pron 11y ago
      What constitutes "reasonable" is a hard question. What I know is that all societies on this planet curtail speech to prevent intimidation. They only vary on the degree of intimidation they forbid. As a matter of fact, I am not aware of any single system of ethics where free speech is a higher value than preventing all forms of intimidation. I also, again, must take issue with the use of "free speech" in this context. It is not at all clear that it even applies to every sequence of letters a person types or every utterance a person makes. At its very core -- or consensus -- free speech means the freedom to express all ideas and opinions without fear of arrest. It is not at all clear that "I would like to rape Ellen Pao" is either an idea or an opinion, and therefore I don't mind discussing whether we should allow such things to be said, but I do mind including them under the umbrella of "free speech" (my objection is not on principal grounds but on aesthetic grounds). I do believe that every person should have the right to freely express his or her ideas in public without fear of arrest, and I think that this value is rather high in priority. But I agree with all other free societies (including the US[1]), which think that this freedom does not apply (and I'm not talking about various exceptions to that freedom based on offense) to certain combinations of words that constitute neither ideas nor opinions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...