See, and that's the problem I have with people defending this idiot. Sure, I can understand having the URGE to bash someone in the head if they are calling me names...but as a civilized person who has left high school behind, I DON'T DO IT. It is that ability to control your urges that (allegedly) separates us from the animals...people who can't are really a step down on the evolutionary ladder. And while that may be fine if you're a local enforcer for a street gang or some drunk at the bar, I would imagine we should demand more from our elected representatives.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Ala. lawmaker punches Senate colleague
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
See, and that's the problem I have with people defending this idiot. Sure, I can understand having the URGE to bash someone in the head if they are calling me names...but as a civilized person who has left high school behind, I DON'T DO IT. It is that ability to control your urges that (allegedly) separates us from the animals...people who can't are really a step down on the evolutionary ladder. And while that may be fine if you're a local enforcer for a street gang or some drunk at the bar, I would imagine we should demand more from our elected representatives.
It is not the job of random people to go around dispensing what they feel as justly deserved consequences every time someone pisses them off...at least not if we want even a semblance of civilization. I agree that the Democrat was out of line with his comments, and that reflects poorly on him as a person...the consequence is that his peers would think less of him for sinking to that level of debate. But if vitriol is a level below civilized discussion, physical violence is several levels below that...the Republican escalated the situation and took it to an even worse place, reflecting even more poorly on himself.
Violence is only acceptable in self defense, you can't go around hitting people who piss you off.
Jaskalas
Lifer
Cursing at someone was as good as fighting words less than 200 years ago. Now we protect it, advocating we sit idly by as a bunch of patsies as vitriol is dished out freely. Pardon me if I do not oblige, though I do not need your permission to applaud him and denounce the man who started it.
The real "patsies" are the people who can't deal with simple words without flying into a rage and taking a swing at someone...or the people who think the only way to prove to the world how manly they are is to start throwing punches at the drop of a hat. But trust me on this, it indicates quite the opposite.
You suggested an alternative to the law... i said the law makes sense and has for 100s of years(even if that may only be 101 years in reality, which is close enough). We aren't a bunch of savages that knock each other out for calling someone a "son of a bitch." Are we that sensitive a society that such a minor verbal "attack" be met with fists?
Plus, higher standards should be demanded of our friggin government officials!
It's not about being sensitive, it's about a lack of self confidence and being unsure of yourself. Folks who are quick to throw a punch do so because they feel they have to defend every perceived slight to their honor...having so little to begin with that they can't possibly spare any. Any real man (or woman) who is sure of themselves has no need to punch people in the head when they are insulted, because the insult has so little meaning it's easy to shrug off. It's the frightened, insecure children who feel the need to lash out at people for little slights like this. And in this case, the word children is not figurative...there is a reason kids fight all the time, they are unable to just shrug things off. Most of us grow out of that.
By the way, there is something someone once told me that seems worth mentioning here. People who start fights at the drop of a hat have usually never been in a real fight. If you get in a serious fight with someone who really is trying to hurt you, you know that it's not worth starting one over stupid stuff like name calling. The folks who are always talking about throwing down over their honor and crap that like are like pretend tough guys, nobody who really knows does stuff like that. Like I said before, most people might just take the punch...but you could end up taking a swing at a former UFC welterweight champion or something, and then you're going to get your ass beaten down but good. That might be a risk worth taking to defend your life against a violent attacker, but does it seem worth it because someone called you a name?
Of course we have to consider the fact that this is the Internet, and talk is even cheaper on here than it is otherwise. I wonder how many of the people who like the Senator's approach to verbal disagreements would REALLY take a swing at someone in real life...AT seems to have a pretty dense concentration of e-thugs.
Perhaps what Rainsford was trying to say was that a person should learn to act in an appropriate manner for the position that he holds.
It is obvious that low self-esteem and low self confidence are issues that can exacerbate a bad situation, and should be worked on. One issue does not always equal the other though when male dominance is at play. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares is an argument that comes to mind
A male, being the dominant sex of the species, has been genetically coded to prove dominance. Fight or flight is hard-wired so to speak. A person is not necessarily insecure if they feel lack of restraint to fight. Just that experience has allowed this sort of behavior in the past, and obviously rewarded the person in some way.
As far as serial "sluggers"... the adrenaline high is something that "sluggers" learn to like. Do they always smack a co-worker...? NO! Because most have no interest in losing their job. Some compete in boxing and martial arts tournaments to experience the adrenaline. Others volunteer for duty that will likely get them into bad situations that require a fight, like Iraq for instance. I myself don't actively seek confrontation, but also have never backed down, or talked my way into...or out of a fight.
It is obvious that low self-esteem and low self confidence are issues that can exacerbate a bad situation, and should be worked on. One issue does not always equal the other though when male dominance is at play. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares is an argument that comes to mind
A male, being the dominant sex of the species, has been genetically coded to prove dominance. Fight or flight is hard-wired so to speak. A person is not necessarily insecure if they feel lack of restraint to fight. Just that experience has allowed this sort of behavior in the past, and obviously rewarded the person in some way.
As far as serial "sluggers"... the adrenaline high is something that "sluggers" learn to like. Do they always smack a co-worker...? NO! Because most have no interest in losing their job. Some compete in boxing and martial arts tournaments to experience the adrenaline. Others volunteer for duty that will likely get them into bad situations that require a fight, like Iraq for instance. I myself don't actively seek confrontation, but also have never backed down, or talked my way into...or out of a fight.
Look, you can say that as much as you like...but you're not going to convince me that punching someone in the face is an appropriate reaction to name calling. I KNOW you think that's what's required to preserve accountability, and I'm saying that reflects very poorly on the person who threw the punch. Not that name calling is OK, just that physical violence is not an OK reaction. I realize I'm fighting against years of "this is how real men act" BS, but it's worth saying.
But I'm curious, you keep ignoring my other point, that common sense says starting fights over dumb crap like this is a bad idea. I'm sure you're a real big man who goes around hitting people who say things he doesn't like, but have you ever considered that maybe one of those guys is going to beat the ever living crap out of you for taking a swing at him? It just doesn't seem worth it because someone hurt your feelings...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
