Originally Posted by Icky
Congrats. A lot of victims are though.
Some of possible reasons why are;
You dodged a bullet, you lucked out.
Or your memories of the discipline and your rantionalisation of them make you see they werent that bad but the imprint they made was severe.
Your parents weren't abusive.
~~~
Justt cause the survivors survived, doesn't mean its a viable way to go about things.
To me this ended up the more interesting discussion in this thread. Maya handily makes herself look stupid, I no longer find it entertaining to pile-on.
I've seen the abused become abusers. It's not always how things go, but it is certainly a common route for the abused.
They normalise the abuse they received, and through that lens they rationalise the abuse they inflict.
I've had discussions with a person who had a tremendous level of cognitive dissonance on the subject, so I largely think Icky is spot-on with the rationalisation stuff. I mean, I've witnessed it. "I've seen some things, man, and some stuff... wouldn't recommend it!"
I was a difficult kid, and I'm sure many parents would have done worse to me than what I received. I'm grateful for my mum's 'compromise.' I grew up in an extremely violent environment, so I'm very aware of the effects of violence, but none of that came from my family or carers, the people a child trusts implicitly.
My mother, a stern Scottish woman who saw corporal punishment doled out on the boys in her school system, her brothers included, came up with what she felt was a compromise: on the few occasions where she really felt need to get through to me, she lightly smacked the back of my hand. It was done sparingly.
Any British kid who was forced to (somehow unironically) read A Kestrel For A Knave in school will know why the back of the hand works so well... and I guess anyone reading this who got the cane as a child.
It was light, but it was enough of a shock to really get my attention. In that regard it worked very well.
Now, the things she told me once she held my attention... well, I might not have understood the lesson, but that's different - she sure as shit had my full attention. My grandparents were pinchers, which hurt, while I certainly wouldn't call that abuse - the pain made me more temper-tantrumy. The hand smacks worked better because it didn't actually hurt.
If I ever adopt, I won't do what she did. But I think I'm able to make that decision because I wasn't really physically disciplined growing up.
-----
Also I should note: the hand smack was *NEVER* a "punishment", it was a way to stop me from acting like a maniac in that moment.
Defaulting to corporal punishment is just bad parenting.
Last edited by DrGonz; Feb 13, 2020 at 01:20 AM.
Reason: <24 hour edit/bump
Originally Posted by Thorn
I'll take the hardship of having peaceful nonconformists over fighting and war any day, the idea that we need our life threatened because people are annoying on Twitter is pathetic
Yeah cool Thorn. Good thing that idea isn't the one I'm circulating here.
Originally Posted by fudgiebalz
is this saying that life needs to be violent to be normal?
Originally Posted by Ele
No.
It's saying that our identification of 'violent'/'problematic' acts becomes broader and more encompassing over time, for a variety of reasons. That's concept creep (the first article).
The other part of this is that as things become rarer, if we're looking for them, we can still find them even when they're not there, solely because we are trying so hard to look for them. That's prevalence-induced concept change (the second article).
If you take these two articles together, it explains something that's happening in our culture. We look for shit to complain about in the absence of really big smelly shits (we complain about farting perhaps, which isn't even shitting).
We whinge and cry about stuff that people who've dealt with actual existential threats would brush off. We get mad at Smaiva for making a 'did u assume my gender' joke.
"Although conceptual change is inevitable and often well motivated, concept creep runs the risk of pathologizing everyday experience and encouraging a sense of virtuous but impotent victimhood."
Modern living absolutely has its problems. I'm not denying that. I am asserting, however, that some 'modern problems' are only problems because people are looking to make mountains out of mole-hills (pathologizing everyday experience).
My recommendation for everybody to go get punched in the face is aimed at getting people to put their threats into perspective. Life doesn't need to be violent to be normal, but having some violence in your life can put things into perspective.
I'll also throw in this exchange with sirkill, for good measure, since he pretty much said the same thing as you,
Originally Posted by sirkill1
Lol you say all this like it's a bad thing that life becomes easier for future generations, I'd love to see your attempt at surviving a cold winter in 1785 Russia, starvation style.
Originally Posted by Ele
Certainly not. Just that we become softer as true threats become scarcer, and in this scarcity of true threats, we start to broaden the idea of what a true threat actually is.
I wouldn't want to live 100 years ago, and you wouldn't either (as you said), because we both recognise the difference between true threats and soft threats.
So yeah, read past the OP bro. Cetainly not saying war is more desirable than peace...
Last edited by Ele; Feb 13, 2020 at 04:28 AM.
Idk man.
Your "It's saying that our identification of 'violent'/'problematic' acts becomes broader and more encompassing over time, for a variety of reasons. " post just reads like "none of the things you're upset about are actually relevant to me or my immediate friend/family circles and i am comfortable in the belief that my outlook on it is perfectly fine."
Which is weird, cause you keep trying to justify how someone else is making a big deal out of nothing. Which implies your belief of their situation amounts to little more than "you're making it up". That seems like an extreme level of denial really.
Why are you so intent on erasing/quashing other peoples opinions/readings of a situation? You just keep coming off a bit like the generation before ours dealt with the uproar about racism.
A perfectly valid thing to be upset about that they viewed with scorn just because "its how i grew up and it was fine" and "you're over-reacting i have black friends" kind of stuff was their response, and the generations after thought that was an awful thing.
You're sounding like that first generation over this gender argument, and honestly i thought you had more brains than that.
Your "It's saying that our identification of 'violent'/'problematic' acts becomes broader and more encompassing over time, for a variety of reasons. " post just reads like "none of the things you're upset about are actually relevant to me or my immediate friend/family circles and i am comfortable in the belief that my outlook on it is perfectly fine."
Which is weird, cause you keep trying to justify how someone else is making a big deal out of nothing. Which implies your belief of their situation amounts to little more than "you're making it up". That seems like an extreme level of denial really.
Why are you so intent on erasing/quashing other peoples opinions/readings of a situation? You just keep coming off a bit like the generation before ours dealt with the uproar about racism.
A perfectly valid thing to be upset about that they viewed with scorn just because "its how i grew up and it was fine" and "you're over-reacting i have black friends" kind of stuff was their response, and the generations after thought that was an awful thing.
You're sounding like that first generation over this gender argument, and honestly i thought you had more brains than that.
Addicted-re 07-16
24/07/2019. I'll find you again my friend.
My point is about trying to explain why people complain about frivolous things. Yes, there are real issues to discuss regarding trans people and gender (real problems that have come to light with the expansion of what we identify as problematic). But also yes, along with those real issues, there are some silly things that have been raised as problems too.
Do you reckon microaggressions are a legit problem Icky? Is calling a trans woman bud transphobic?
Do you reckon microaggressions are a legit problem Icky? Is calling a trans woman bud transphobic?
Last edited by Ele; Feb 13, 2020 at 12:46 PM.
