4 ms·

"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me". This old cliche is underappreciated in our day and age. Individuals are free to choose the

"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me". This old cliche is underappreciated in our day and age. Individuals are free to choose the way they process the information and commentary they receive. When someone physically assaults you, there is no choice involved, and your life is legitimately and immediately threatened by such activity in the real, physical, and non-abstract sense. It is great that we are all thinking about what we say, but speech is unequivocally not the same as physical assault, and it's farcical to suggest it should be.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
logicchains 9y ago
>Individuals are free to choose the way they process the information and commentary they receive. Some individuals fight tooth and nail to silence this idea because they're threatened by the implication that their own choices have any role to play in their misery. Life requires a lot less effort when everything bad is somebody else's fault.
aninhumer 9y ago
>"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me". This old cliche is underappreciated in our day and age. Because it's false. Words can and do hurt people, and it's not necessarily a result of their choices. You can argue that this harm is less severe, or that preventing it isn't worth limiting speech, but to suggest it doesn't exist is just myopic.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  To clarify, I am not saying that words cannot be hurtful. I am saying that they are not equivalent to physical assault, as someone else in the thread asserted. Physical assault presents a much more immediate personal danger, and deserves to be distinguished from verbal exchange.
Broken_Hippo 9y ago
If only this were in any way true. There is a such thing as mental abuse, after all. Some folks lived through this growing up. Gaslighting is just words too. Folks kill themselves due to harassment. That harassment? Yeah, it can be nothing more than daily messages and/or phone calls and/or letters. Widespread, open racist speech generally signals an environment where racist actions are well-tolerated, I'm assuming (I have no links to back it up at the time). Oh, and this mental distress from words can produce physiological symptoms. But hey, they are nothing more than words, right? The old cliche you speak of only works in a few situations. Someone calling you names or saying mean things on the street don't really hurt you if they are isolated incidents. This is the usual context when this is used. But in a broader sense? It simply doesn't pan out. It isn't the same thing, no, but I'm not sure why that matters. A slap on the rear someone should be able to get over, a punch maybe not. I'm pretty sure both can be prosecuted as physical assult in some situations yet in others, be perfectly acceptable courses of action. Same with words, it depends on how you use them to how much damage it will do.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  >If only this were in any way true. It's true in the ways that are pertinent to this discussion. Another poster equated speech with assault. I would guess most with that worldview haven't spent much time being assaulted in the physical sense. No one is saying that words don't have significance or power. The point is that, in a very literal way, words can never hurt, physically hurt, those who hear them. The listener has time to collect their thoughts, understand the circumstances, and choose an interpretation and a reaction. We hope they will choose healthy interpretations and reactions, even if the original speaker did not. Meanwhile, a victim of a true violent crime like a mugging, carjacking, or politically-motivated beating doesn't have time to think down the road about how badly someone's words hurt their psyche, because they're busy bleeding and dying, in the literal sense that their body may permanently cease to function, if they aren't treated within minutes or hours. They were attacked without choice or option, and their body is reacting to the physical realities thrust upon it, and all the victim can really do is try to remain optimistic about things. Yes, it is sad when someone is bullied or otherwise made to feel bad about themselves. But it isn't anywhere near the same thing as a person who has undergone an actual assault. The saying really is not really hard to grasp, and it's widely applicable. That's why it's a tired old cliche. :)

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

logicchains 9y ago

>Individuals are free to choose the way they process the information and commentary they receive. Some individuals fight tooth and nail to silence this idea because they're threatened by the implication that their own choices have any role to play in their misery. Life requires a lot less effort when everything bad is somebody else's fault.

aninhumer 9y ago

>"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me". This old cliche is underappreciated in our day and age. Because it's false. Words can and do hurt people, and it's not necessarily a result of their choices. You can argue that this harm is less severe, or that preventing it isn't worth limiting speech, but to suggest it doesn't exist is just myopic.

cookiecaper 9y ago
To clarify, I am not saying that words cannot be hurtful. I am saying that they are not equivalent to physical assault, as someone else in the thread asserted. Physical assault presents a much more immediate personal danger, and deserves to be distinguished from verbal exchange.

Broken_Hippo 9y ago

If only this were in any way true. There is a such thing as mental abuse, after all. Some folks lived through this growing up. Gaslighting is just words too. Folks kill themselves due to harassment. That harassment? Yeah, it can be nothing more than daily messages and/or phone calls and/or letters. Widespread, open racist speech generally signals an environment where racist actions are well-tolerated, I'm assuming (I have no links to back it up at the time). Oh, and this mental distress from words can produce physiological symptoms. But hey, they are nothing more than words, right? The old cliche you speak of only works in a few situations. Someone calling you names or saying mean things on the street don't really hurt you if they are isolated incidents. This is the usual context when this is used. But in a broader sense? It simply doesn't pan out. It isn't the same thing, no, but I'm not sure why that matters. A slap on the rear someone should be able to get over, a punch maybe not. I'm pretty sure both can be prosecuted as physical assult in some situations yet in others, be perfectly acceptable courses of action. Same with words, it depends on how you use them to how much damage it will do.

cookiecaper 9y ago
>If only this were in any way true. It's true in the ways that are pertinent to this discussion. Another poster equated speech with assault. I would guess most with that worldview haven't spent much time being assaulted in the physical sense. No one is saying that words don't have significance or power. The point is that, in a very literal way, words can never hurt, physically hurt, those who hear them. The listener has time to collect their thoughts, understand the circumstances, and choose an interpretation and a reaction. We hope they will choose healthy interpretations and reactions, even if the original speaker did not. Meanwhile, a victim of a true violent crime like a mugging, carjacking, or politically-motivated beating doesn't have time to think down the road about how badly someone's words hurt their psyche, because they're busy bleeding and dying, in the literal sense that their body may permanently cease to function, if they aren't treated within minutes or hours. They were attacked without choice or option, and their body is reacting to the physical realities thrust upon it, and all the victim can really do is try to remain optimistic about things. Yes, it is sad when someone is bullied or otherwise made to feel bad about themselves. But it isn't anywhere near the same thing as a person who has undergone an actual assault. The saying really is not really hard to grasp, and it's widely applicable. That's why it's a tired old cliche. :)