3 ms·
> if they haven't started the violence first You mean physical violence. Physical violence is not the only kind of violence. It seems common for people in the
by ebg13 6y ago
> if they haven't started the violence first
You mean physical violence. Physical violence is not the only kind of violence. It seems common for people in the "nazis get to talk too" camp to forget or ignore that.
- mancerayder 6y agoWhat other types of violence are there?
- ebg13 6y ago> What other types of violence are there? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_abuse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_abuse for starters. https://www.who.int/violenceprevention/approach/definition/en/ https://www.who.int/violenceprevention/approach/definition/e... - "This typology distinguishes four modes in which violence may be inflicted: physical; sexual; and psychological attack; and deprivation."
- baggy_trough 6y agoThat is a nonstandard and confusing use of the term.
- ebg13 6y agoIf you think it's confusing, then the best I can say is that you have a _lot_ of reading to catch up on. But here is at least a very abbreviated primer on terminology to help alleviate your confusion https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2652990/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2652990/
- baggy_trough 6y agoNo thanks, I'll just stick with the normal definitions of words rather than do "a _lot_ of reading" to learn what the latest ideological contortions are.
- mancerayder 6y agoIt's because it's an ideological cudgel. It's non-standard, strange to the vast majority, and feels extremely dangerous to those who are versed in history. If words are violence... the sky is the limit in terms of restrictions to speech. It's nonstandard and confusing and shall always remain as such.
- caconym_ 6y agoNot that I think it matters at this point in the discussion, but I did not intend for the scope of my language to be restricted to physical violence.
- ebg13 6y agoSorry, that first sentence should have been a question.