Crossing the border next Thursday, a little apprehensive.....

[iris lilies]

Didn't Aristotle, or maybe the Jesuits, say something to the effect of "Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will show you the man."

I'm not where I fall on the speech-as-violence thing. There are probably a number of things we need to protect children from. On the other hand, I have little (perhaps less than I should) patience for adults who value some subjective concept of "abuse" over free speech. College students, for instance, shouldn't be able to shut down speakers whose ideas "make them feel unsafe."

I cant relate to, and frankly do not respect the idea, that anonymous posters in cyberspace are creating "unsafe" places for other anonymous posters. To me, that is disrespectful of the concept of "safety."

I understand and do respect that some people dont like the negativity of certain websites, the negativity inhabits their thoghts and diminishes the happiness of their lives, and they move on. That is ok, not all places are suitable for all people.

Maybe here I am overly focused on the meanng of the word "safety." Maybe we all just have different inyerpretations of the meaning of that word.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Didn't Aristotle, or maybe the Jesuits, say something to the effect of "Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will show you the man."

I think this is self-evidently false, because lots of people may have a great 7 years and end up pretty messed up if say a bunch of trauma happens to them somewhere later in their childhood or adolescence. Noone would would perform the experiment on their own kids even in terms of verbal abuse "ok you are now 8 we can finally verbally abuse you all day long, and it won't do any harm, weeee!!!!". But that's an issue which child development folks would know about, which wasn't information Aristotle had at the time so he didn't or the phrase was just exaggerating for effect. I never said abuse online of a 50 year old was the same or something, in fact I explicitly said otherwise, just if we are engaging in ridiculous arguments I am countering the ridiculous argument of 8 years old being so mature, the brain isn't even kind of mature by then, early socialization isn't complete etc..

On Robs posts I tend to take a middle ground, I can see how his posts (which are rants really sometimes) can be seen as provoking it and I can see how certain people are getting off on targeting Rob. A middle position neither wins respect nor allies I know but oh well. So ignore away

I'm not where I fall on the speech-as-violence thing. There are probably a number of things we need to protect children from. On the other hand, I have little (perhaps less than I should) patience for adults who value some subjective concept of "abuse" over free speech. College students, for instance, shouldn't be able to shut down speakers whose ideas "make them feel unsafe."

you are probably lumping together a lot of things that are really not the same thing at all. Being exposed to ideas one disagrees with say (which I don't oppose although the ideas are often such a joke intellectually that I don't think they should necessarily have a college say forum of that reason, or at least they should be presenting in debate forum where they will be properly refuted for anyone who wishes to think about it), and being personally ganged up on by large numbers of people for verbal abuse that is *personal* (this has happened to some teenagers online and they have killed themselves etc.). Avoiding the latter is simply treating others as you would like to be treated, which I guess is like so controversial ... OMG because it interferes with ... I don't even know people's freedom to treat others like crap?

[gimmethesimplelife]

Didn't Aristotle, or maybe the Jesuits, say something to the effect of "Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will show you the man."

I'm not where I fall on the speech-as-violence thing. There are probably a number of things we need to protect children from. On the other hand, I have little (perhaps less than I should) patience for adults who value some subjective concept of "abuse" over free speech. College students, for instance, shouldn't be able to shut down speakers whose ideas "make them feel unsafe."

I agree with you 100% regarding college students.....I agree they should not be able to shut down campus guest speakers due to not caring for speech content. I've even seen youtube videos of this - it's pretty funky to watch this in action. On the other hand, enough is enough. Obviously I've reached the point where enough is enough - not naming anyone once again - I've reached my personal line.

My question for you and for the board is - where do we draw the line, as individuals and as society? Good question and not an easy one, is it? I rather guess that our mileage is all going to vary on this one. My take is I should have put various persons on ignore long ago - I didn't do so as I was shut down so much in my life when I was younger due to being gay - I know what it's like to be shut down for reasons that have no merit in my mind, and I know what it's like to have this happen often, again and again and again. So I tend to let things drag on for far too long. So - what criteria should we have as individuals and as a society before we shut something down we don't agree with? On the board it became obvious to me that it was time for me address this (and I chose blocking as my method, which could be argued to be passive aggressive, I get that, but gosh darn, it's quick, effective, and it seems to work (!!!)) when a few kindly souls stood up for me and I realized that this was not in my head, that things truly had gone too far.

Now to take a much broader picture - when does society, or when should society, make similar choices? What should the criteria be, what line needs needs to be crossed before society acts in this way? Maybe we can have an interesting discussion on this issue after all and make something positive of the drama that has taken place, who knows? Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

Rob - I visited some of the colonial cities in Mexico many years ago and fell in love with them. I'd like to go back some day. I didn't make it to Queretaro, but I did go to Morelia and I just loved that city. The beautiful pink stone buildings, the aquaducts, the food! And the people were so warm and welcoming. I also liked the small town of Uruapan. Back then it had a lovely plaza and a beautiful nature park with lots of water everywhere.

Maybe you can teach English when you retire? Or lead tours of the colonial cities. I've always thought that would be an awesome job. And with your background in service, maybe do airbnb or a Bed & Breakfast!

Morelia is a place I'd very much like to visit, too, along with Uruapan. There's a lake somewhere in there - by Patzcauro, I think - where there is an annual butterfly migration that is supposed to be incredible to see. Also very scenic if there before or after the annual migration.....I'd love to see this. I like the idea too of leading tours in this area - right now it's a bit dicey as this part of Mexico is one of the more unsafe parts to be honest but I'm hoping for the best here in the future. Such a beautiful country Mexico is beyond the safety issue(s), so much to see and do and so much to learn, and such a fascinating history, too. And I share this with you, Geila, the colonial cities are my favorite part of Mexico. For me personally this area is much more interesting than the beach cities and much less overstimulating than say Mexico City is - Guadalajara is about as big a city as I can handle in Mexico. What is your favorite city in Mexico, if I may ask? Rob

[Alan]

My question for you and for the board is - where do we draw the line, as individuals and as society? Rob

I don't know. If a person brings up the same subject for the thousandth time, a subject that many people disagree with, should those who disagree just remain silent while the ongoing rant continues?

Also, if everyone who disagrees is put on Ignore, do the rant's continue?

[catherine]

Well, if I take my Al-Anon lessons into this, you realize that a) you can't change anyone; b) you are not responsible for their behavior; c) you set own boundaries, not with the intention of changing others, but protecting yourself and d) you take care of your own side of the street. I have also learned that you are best to avoid "toxic" people, behavior and language

If you apply that to society in general, you live and let live. Honor free speech. If you feel you need to address it, address it, but if you're better off walking away, walk away.

I completely disagree with liberal college campuses shutting down speakers based on political platform. I'm all for open, respectful discourse. I'm not supportive of "safe spaces."

What happens if discourse goes from being respectful to disrespectful, or even to abusive? Non-violent resistance would be my answer. Turn my back. Walk away. Disengage.

I would take a more active stance if there are threats made. I guess that's where I draw the line.

As far as "ignore"--I've only blocked one friend on FB who raised my blood pressure with her snide, mean, liberal rants. I haven't really been THAT bothered by anyone else.

[gimmethesimplelife]

Well, if I take my Al-Anon lessons into this, you realize that a) you can't change anyone; b) you are not responsible for their behavior; c) you set own boundaries, not with the intention of changing others, but protecting yourself and d) you take care of your own side of the street. I have also learned that you are best to avoid "toxic" people, behavior and language

If you apply that to society in general, you live and let live. Honor free speech. If you feel you need to address it, address it, but if you're better off walking away, walk away.

I completely disagree with liberal college campuses shutting down speakers based on political platform. I'm all for open, respectful discourse. I'm not supportive of "safe spaces."

What happens if discourse goes from being respectful to disrespectful, or even to abusive? Non-violent resistance would be my answer. Turn my back. Walk away. Disengage.

I would take a more active stance if there are threats made. I guess that's where I draw the line.

As far as "ignore"--I've only blocked one friend on FB who raised my blood pressure with her snide, mean, liberal rants. I haven't really been THAT bothered by anyone else.

I like your take on this Catherine, ESPECIALLY the part about being OK with just walking away when that's the wisest thing to do. What a life lesson for me personally here! I'm not one to walk away easily which begs the question: What exactly do I gain from not doing so? Gotta give myself permission to walk away more often!!! Even if it's something simple as blocking some folks online - it's OK to just calmly walk away......this is not the same as losing or defeat. Live and learn I guess but I am going to look this one over in my personal life. Rob

[iris lilies]

I don't know. If a person brings up the same subject for the thousandth time, a subject that many people disagree with, should those who disagree just remain silent while the ongoing rant continues?

Also, if everyone who disagrees is put on Ignore, do the rant's continue?

For me its not the subject that I disagree with (I may agree with some of it, sometimes) but it is the problem of thousandth thread. At least use the rant thread, or make a thread called "I Hate America and Have Since I Discovered Its Duplicity at the age of 8/10/12" for all of the rants. Some of us may occasionally add to the thread about things in the U.S we dont like. Hey, it's not inconceivable.

Also,the questions Rob poses wont be answered in ways he sees, so why ask them? So strange.

[gimmethesimplelife]

I don't know. If a person brings up the same subject for the thousandth time, a subject that many people disagree with, should those who disagree just remain silent while the ongoing rant continues?

Also, if everyone who disagrees is put on Ignore, do the rant's continue?

Two things come to mind for me here, Alan, being:

A). We have often disagreed in the past, no? Notice that I did not put you on ignore regardless. Why, you ask? Which leads me to B). -

B). It's perfectly acceptable to disagree with me - this is a discussion board, right? If we all agree with one another what would be the point of the board in the first place? The difference: You never belittled me, disparaged me, or took any cheap shots at me. Hence I perceive no need to block you even though we seldom agree. Follow the logic?

Now to move beyond the personal, and the recent history of this thread if possible, what's your take on when the line gets crossed in society, and what if anything should society do when said line is crossed? Rob

[Alan]

Now to move beyond the personal, and the recent history of this thread if possible, what's your take on when the line gets crossed in society, and what if anything should society do when said line is crossed? Rob

Help me out please. Which line?