5 ms·

People should just be taught (I would consider this is an essential skill which should be put in basic school curriculum to psychologically prepare people for t

People should just be taught (I would consider this is an essential skill which should be put in basic school curriculum to psychologically prepare people for the life, many support/sales professionals learn it quickly but the rest of the people don't) words are just words and they don't have to take them seriously. No word is rude until you consider it rude. No word can actually harm you directly. It's you who is in charge of deciding what to feel whenever you hear/see a particular word. Sadly, most of the people just ignore this job. I personally enjoy being called by the derogatory nickname of my ethnicity because I just like how does it sound. First half of my life I didn't even know it was supposed to be insulting (as I didn't know actual racists exist and can be serious about hating/judging people by just their ethnicity).

raxxorrax 5y ago
I think words can hurt people in certain contexts, but it is very rarely about a single term.
marcus_holmes 5y ago
We used to be taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". I'm not so sure that has ever been true. Emotional bullying was always a thing, and it did hurt. I'm glad that we're now taking that more seriously. But it's also true that my emotions are my responsibility, and my emotional reaction to words is unique to me. I cannot force everyone else to be responsible for how I feel about their words. And I cannot expect everyone else to anticipate how I might feel about what they want to say and modify their speech accordingly. There's a balance in there. I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness".
- 0des 5y ago
  > We used to be taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". Now it is more "sticks and stones will break your bones because your words have hurt me"
- mnsc 5y ago
  >I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness". Or "empathy". And I think on an interpersonal level this is easy. You can't force anyone else to be responsible for how you feel about their words, that is true. But if you say to a colleague or a friend that "when you call me X, that makes me feel bad, could you call me Y instead?". Depending on the friend they might want to understand why this feels bad, but they would call you Y from then on. Easy peasy. But on a collective level we aren't yet (if we'll ever be) as developed a civilization to have empathy on that level. So some people want to, with good intentions, extend their empathy to others and write code like this. But seconds later, the creative and determined individual called cVnt_h_ater have bypassed the code and can proudly wear his misogyny on his sleeve.
  - qwerty456127 5y ago
    > the creative and determined individual called cVnt_h_ater have bypassed the code and can proudly wear his misogyny on his sleeve. Why deny him this right? Isn't it convenient to let kids and mentally unhealthy people to identity themselves this obviously? It's always easier when you know what to expect.
    - wasmitnetzen 5y ago
      Because if you let them do their thing, they group together, drag more people down to their level and then get one of them elected as president. That's not in my interest.
      - qwerty456127 5y ago
        The idea of hating all women this way is nonsensical for normal people (despite the fact limiting their rights used to be a common tradition, I believe most of the people didn't really hate them) and can only exist in some mentally traumatized people. Seeing someone exercising obvious nonsense rarely triggers you to start doing the same on systematic basis. Electing a president requires a majority vote. Even though majority's intelligence is mediocre by definition, it hardly is SO dumb and sick. Even a rude person with sexist jokes, even a women rights limiting proponent rarely is a real serious passionate misogynist, such will mostly see "cVnt_h_aters" ridiculous too.
- wodenokoto 5y ago
  I thought it was something along the lines of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can break hearts" Basically, the pen is stronger than the sword, kind of morale.
  - mkr-hn 5y ago
    I've never heard that one, but it might be a regional variant. I always heard the other one.
    - andytruett 5y ago
      I grew up with 'words can never hurt me', but this variant is my favorite: Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will hurt forever.
    - wodenokoto 5y ago
      I'm not a native speaker, so almost every time I hear that phrase it ends after "sticks and stones", because on TV and movies, that's usually enough for the intended audience. After Googling, I think I might have picked up this version from Tim Minchins song "prejudice" [1] although Google also come up with this clip where a senator also use the "break my heart" version, clearly when it was meant for him to say "never harm" [2] 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw 2: https://youtu.be/QoMheenRUHM?t=92 https://youtu.be/QoMheenRUHM?t=92
- Doxin 5y ago
  I'm not the only kid Who grew up this way Surrounded by people who used to say That rhyme about sticks and stones As if broken bones Hurt more than the names we got called And we got called them all https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltun92DfnPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltun92DfnPY
kypro 5y ago
I'm quite a feminine guy and I was always called various homophobic slurs at school. Even though I wasn't gay I didn't understand why it would matter if I was so I would just say "ok". Even when the insults could be considered objectively offensive I'm still generally okay with it. I've been called names quite a bit in the workplace over the years and I'm okay with it if makes them happy. Being autistic I don't really care and neurotypical people seem to get enjoyment calling people names so it's win-win. High EQ individuals have told me this is wrong and the appropriate reaction would be to take offence and try to make them feel bad, but I've argued this would just result in an objective reduction in happiness in the world so it wouldn't make sense. Plus, most of the time my colleagues have been nice to my face so it's not like it's ever got in the way of me doing my job.
- qwerty456127 5y ago
  I adore you but doubt your judgement about those being high EQ individuals. By the way in the middle school we used a derogatory for gay every day without even having any idea of what did it mean, all we knew was that was the worst word we knew. When others bullied me (always (or I just never cared and don't remember the verbal) physically, way harder to endure) I occasionally went mad and called them this word repeatedly.
  - dmos62 5y ago
    This is neither here nor there, but I learned from watching Louie that "faggot", the derogatory term for homosexuals, has the same origins as the word "fascism" – a bundle of sticks. The idea is that in the dark days of witch trials, one would, apparently, not only burn supposed witches, but also homosexuals. However, since homosexuals were thought of as less than witches, while a witch got the stake, the homosexuals were thrown in with the bundles of firewood. The now archaic word for a bundle of sticks was faggot, or fire-faggot in the case of firewood. The part about different forms of herecy receiving different treatment at the stake might be artistic license, the rest is true though. https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/67623#eid4643623 https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/67623#eid46436...
dynamite-ready 5y ago
I disagree. Language is very often used as a way to include and exclude people in and from various social groups. You're right in that there's never any direct harm in the sound of the words themselves. But you can say the same thing about verbally threatening physical harm (or even psychological harm) to someone, and would be very wrong in your assumption.
- qwerty456127 5y ago
  > But you can say the same thing about verbally threatening physical harm No, verbally threatening physical harm induces reasonable fear and affects your logical reasoning because now you have to consider real risk.
  - wnkrshm 5y ago
    Trying to hurt someone with words also induces a reasonable assumption of that person wishing you ill. You don't know how far they will go in either case.
secondaryacct 5y ago
What s rude is the shared imagery not the words. If I call myself MyDirtyDickInYourDogBringsMeToOrgasm, imagining this scene is disgusting enough to ask me to change it. Words are not just symbols on paper, they are image triggers in your brain.
- Xiol 5y ago
  I have Aphantasia, thankfully I'm invulnerable to this.
- dmos62 5y ago
  If someone attempts to degrade someone's emotional or mental state, that's something that should be stigmatized. But, that doesn't mean that the individual is not completely responsible for his own mental state, in the sense meant by Stoics. It's not about things, but our thoughts about things, which are ultimately under our control. We may play the victim, but we'd only be fooling ourselves.
imglorp 5y ago
> Uhura : But why should I object to that term, sir? You see, in our century, we've learned not to fear words.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  Yeah, that only shows how stupid the original Star Trek often was. Just because they hadn't yet had a Trump or a Hitler in Uhura's century is no reason for her not to know that "words" are exactly what scum like that rises to the top on.
  - imglorp 5y ago
    Agree, the scum is leveraging wetware vulnerabilities in our species around sound bites, tribes, labels, and twisted facts. But I think that was Roddenberry's point: we can only advance after excising that primitive baggage.
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
So "get over it" is your solution? Sounds like you've never been a victim. Place yourself in someone else's shoes please. I mean I don't like the (self) censorship either and don't mind rude or mature words, since we're all mature here and calling a fucking asshole a f*ing a$$h0le is an insult to people's intellect.
- Handytinge 5y ago
  As someone who was incessently bullied for many years, "get over it" is pretty good advice for some people. Like all advice on personal emotional problems, it doesn't sork for everyone, but for a lot of people it does.
Angostura 5y ago
> No word can actually harm you directly. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" is something told to children in the playground who are too young to know better. You might as well argue that there's no such thing as malware, because its entirely harmless until executed on a processor.

raxxorrax 5y ago

I think words can hurt people in certain contexts, but it is very rarely about a single term.

marcus_holmes 5y ago

We used to be taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". I'm not so sure that has ever been true. Emotional bullying was always a thing, and it did hurt. I'm glad that we're now taking that more seriously. But it's also true that my emotions are my responsibility, and my emotional reaction to words is unique to me. I cannot force everyone else to be responsible for how I feel about their words. And I cannot expect everyone else to anticipate how I might feel about what they want to say and modify their speech accordingly. There's a balance in there. I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness".

0des 5y ago
> We used to be taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". Now it is more "sticks and stones will break your bones because your words have hurt me"
mnsc 5y ago
>I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness". Or "empathy". And I think on an interpersonal level this is easy. You can't force anyone else to be responsible for how you feel about their words, that is true. But if you say to a colleague or a friend that "when you call me X, that makes me feel bad, could you call me Y instead?". Depending on the friend they might want to understand why this feels bad, but they would call you Y from then on. Easy peasy. But on a collective level we aren't yet (if we'll ever be) as developed a civilization to have empathy on that level. So some people want to, with good intentions, extend their empathy to others and write code like this. But seconds later, the creative and determined individual called cVnt_h_ater have bypassed the code and can proudly wear his misogyny on his sleeve.
- qwerty456127 5y ago
  > the creative and determined individual called cVnt_h_ater have bypassed the code and can proudly wear his misogyny on his sleeve. Why deny him this right? Isn't it convenient to let kids and mentally unhealthy people to identity themselves this obviously? It's always easier when you know what to expect.
  - wasmitnetzen 5y ago
    Because if you let them do their thing, they group together, drag more people down to their level and then get one of them elected as president. That's not in my interest.
    - qwerty456127 5y ago
      The idea of hating all women this way is nonsensical for normal people (despite the fact limiting their rights used to be a common tradition, I believe most of the people didn't really hate them) and can only exist in some mentally traumatized people. Seeing someone exercising obvious nonsense rarely triggers you to start doing the same on systematic basis. Electing a president requires a majority vote. Even though majority's intelligence is mediocre by definition, it hardly is SO dumb and sick. Even a rude person with sexist jokes, even a women rights limiting proponent rarely is a real serious passionate misogynist, such will mostly see "cVnt_h_aters" ridiculous too.
wodenokoto 5y ago
I thought it was something along the lines of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can break hearts" Basically, the pen is stronger than the sword, kind of morale.
- mkr-hn 5y ago
  I've never heard that one, but it might be a regional variant. I always heard the other one.
  - andytruett 5y ago
    I grew up with 'words can never hurt me', but this variant is my favorite: Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will hurt forever.
  - wodenokoto 5y ago
    I'm not a native speaker, so almost every time I hear that phrase it ends after "sticks and stones", because on TV and movies, that's usually enough for the intended audience. After Googling, I think I might have picked up this version from Tim Minchins song "prejudice" [1] although Google also come up with this clip where a senator also use the "break my heart" version, clearly when it was meant for him to say "never harm" [2] 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw 2: https://youtu.be/QoMheenRUHM?t=92 https://youtu.be/QoMheenRUHM?t=92
Doxin 5y ago
I'm not the only kid Who grew up this way Surrounded by people who used to say That rhyme about sticks and stones As if broken bones Hurt more than the names we got called And we got called them all https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltun92DfnPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltun92DfnPY

kypro 5y ago

I'm quite a feminine guy and I was always called various homophobic slurs at school. Even though I wasn't gay I didn't understand why it would matter if I was so I would just say "ok". Even when the insults could be considered objectively offensive I'm still generally okay with it. I've been called names quite a bit in the workplace over the years and I'm okay with it if makes them happy. Being autistic I don't really care and neurotypical people seem to get enjoyment calling people names so it's win-win. High EQ individuals have told me this is wrong and the appropriate reaction would be to take offence and try to make them feel bad, but I've argued this would just result in an objective reduction in happiness in the world so it wouldn't make sense. Plus, most of the time my colleagues have been nice to my face so it's not like it's ever got in the way of me doing my job.

qwerty456127 5y ago
I adore you but doubt your judgement about those being high EQ individuals. By the way in the middle school we used a derogatory for gay every day without even having any idea of what did it mean, all we knew was that was the worst word we knew. When others bullied me (always (or I just never cared and don't remember the verbal) physically, way harder to endure) I occasionally went mad and called them this word repeatedly.
- dmos62 5y ago
  This is neither here nor there, but I learned from watching Louie that "faggot", the derogatory term for homosexuals, has the same origins as the word "fascism" – a bundle of sticks. The idea is that in the dark days of witch trials, one would, apparently, not only burn supposed witches, but also homosexuals. However, since homosexuals were thought of as less than witches, while a witch got the stake, the homosexuals were thrown in with the bundles of firewood. The now archaic word for a bundle of sticks was faggot, or fire-faggot in the case of firewood. The part about different forms of herecy receiving different treatment at the stake might be artistic license, the rest is true though. https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/67623#eid4643623 https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/67623#eid46436...

dynamite-ready 5y ago

I disagree. Language is very often used as a way to include and exclude people in and from various social groups. You're right in that there's never any direct harm in the sound of the words themselves. But you can say the same thing about verbally threatening physical harm (or even psychological harm) to someone, and would be very wrong in your assumption.

qwerty456127 5y ago
> But you can say the same thing about verbally threatening physical harm No, verbally threatening physical harm induces reasonable fear and affects your logical reasoning because now you have to consider real risk.
- wnkrshm 5y ago
  Trying to hurt someone with words also induces a reasonable assumption of that person wishing you ill. You don't know how far they will go in either case.

secondaryacct 5y ago

What s rude is the shared imagery not the words. If I call myself MyDirtyDickInYourDogBringsMeToOrgasm, imagining this scene is disgusting enough to ask me to change it. Words are not just symbols on paper, they are image triggers in your brain.

Xiol 5y ago
I have Aphantasia, thankfully I'm invulnerable to this.
dmos62 5y ago
If someone attempts to degrade someone's emotional or mental state, that's something that should be stigmatized. But, that doesn't mean that the individual is not completely responsible for his own mental state, in the sense meant by Stoics. It's not about things, but our thoughts about things, which are ultimately under our control. We may play the victim, but we'd only be fooling ourselves.

imglorp 5y ago

> Uhura : But why should I object to that term, sir? You see, in our century, we've learned not to fear words.

CRConrad 5y ago
Yeah, that only shows how stupid the original Star Trek often was. Just because they hadn't yet had a Trump or a Hitler in Uhura's century is no reason for her not to know that "words" are exactly what scum like that rises to the top on.
- imglorp 5y ago
  Agree, the scum is leveraging wetware vulnerabilities in our species around sound bites, tribes, labels, and twisted facts. But I think that was Roddenberry's point: we can only advance after excising that primitive baggage.

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

So "get over it" is your solution? Sounds like you've never been a victim. Place yourself in someone else's shoes please. I mean I don't like the (self) censorship either and don't mind rude or mature words, since we're all mature here and calling a fucking asshole a f*ing a$$h0le is an insult to people's intellect.

Handytinge 5y ago
As someone who was incessently bullied for many years, "get over it" is pretty good advice for some people. Like all advice on personal emotional problems, it doesn't sork for everyone, but for a lot of people it does.

Angostura 5y ago

> No word can actually harm you directly. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" is something told to children in the playground who are too young to know better. You might as well argue that there's no such thing as malware, because its entirely harmless until executed on a processor.