Barnes and Noble "Diverse Editions"

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I don't use codes, dog whistle or any of the other silliness that it's become popular to accuse people of.

Of course you don't. Because you're the perfect human being surrounded by a sea of "silliness." The one in complete control who just KNOWS that everyone else is going crazy, and that he is the last bastion of sanity in a world gone mad.

It's just not possible that your views might ever need to evolve from the ones instilled in you at a young age by people who lived in a different world than you do now. You keep on rockin' those anachronistic platitudes. I'm sure they'll serve you and your progeny well.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

I'm not a librarian, Mr Reading Skills.

And I'm not talking about people being "mean to you in the office" (where the hell did you get that??)

I said that if you are teaching self-defence to women and children, focusing on stranger attacks in public is very much the wrong approach. And I am talking about physical violence, of which sexual assault is one of the primary forms for these classes of victims. I've never been punched deliberately (apart from in training). I have been sexually and indecently assaulted a number of times. Almost never by strangers in public - only once in that situation, on a bus as a child. Broad daylight. Crowded bus. Wearing jeans and a Tshirt. "Normal" looking attacker who assaulted me without warning. And this personal experience is borne out in all reputable stats. This is, overwhelmingly, the violence we experience.

Go on, ask me why I didn't report that bus assault.

The vast majority of attackers are known to the victim, and frequently either related or in positions of power over them. Your approach to "avoid the situation" would involve women and children avoiding family members, intimate partners, teachers, coaches, tutors, scout leaders, priests, etc etc etc. It makes no sense in this context at all.

Women's self-defence is a thing, but it's not primarily "stay out of dark alleys" and "avoid sketchy-looking strangers".

Once again, you confuse different types of self defense and seem to assume that one size fits all. There are many different approaches and each requires a different approach. You want to lump everything together and say well, what you talk about doesn't handle some specific situation that I was in once, so you are totally wrong. That's just BS.

We teach kids to tell responsible adults when something that makes them uncomfortable happens. We teach things like no one has a right to put their hands on you. We teach them how to get out of a grab and run away. If someone had taught you to scream "leave me alone, you are not my father" when someone accosted you on the crowded bus, maybe it would have turned out better. I don't know, but it's what we teach the kids to do in such a situation.

Family situations is not about self defense. If we suspect there is a problem at home, we talk to the parent(s) and suggest seeking help. It's fairly rare but it happens.

We do have classes that teaches women's self defense. Those are normally taught by women instructors. They talk about how to handle dates who won't take no for an answer and the like as well as being accosted in public. Being in an abusive relationship is not self defense. We have professional councilors that we refer those people to.

Self defense isn't being in a bad relationship. It being in a situation where you are willing to physically hurt, maybe kill the other person. Bad family situations, bad relationships, non supportive parents are all things best handled by people who train for years to handle those issues, not karate instructors.

Sometimes bad things happen. It's called being in the wrong place at the wrong time. My sister was once accosted by a flasher while walking our dog. She told my parents and my parents called the police. The police came and took her story. At no time did she feel like it was her fault, my parents made sure of that. That's how we teach kids to handle such things.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

No, I'm not. That's just your spin on it. Guess what, just because I haven't said something very much means that I did not say it. I don't use codes, dog whistle or any of the other silliness that it's become popular to accuse people of. You can win any argument if people allow you to put words in their mouths. It's just a rhetorical device to use when you don't have a good argument.

It's great that you're already using statements about codes and dog whistles etc. Clearly it means you've had to have this conversation with other people about your views and practices before.

Lets review

1) you have stated flat out that those being picked on should not let words hurt them.

This is utter garbage, and has been dismantled here, and in countless studies. Words are capable of doing great damage, regardless of ones self confidence they are capable of getting in. Unless of course you're self confident on the edge of arrogance but at that point you've got other issues.

2) You have stated victims of certain types should learn to avoid places and situations if they don't want to be victims.

This is literal victim blaming. It's a black and white example with nothing extra put in.

3) You have tried to contort any disagreement with you as not wanting to hear differing opinions, or people putting words in your mouth.

Yet it seems you're the only one who doesn't want to listen, and no one has put words in your mouth. The only thing people have said is that there are implications to certain statements.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

If someone had taught you to scream "leave me alone, you are not my father" when someone accosted you on the crowded bus,

Indecently assaulted, not "accosted". Again, I am talking about violence, not people being mean. Not threats. Violence. And that was not something my father had ever done to me, so why would I yell "you're not my father"? I was about 12. I was frozen. I was hideously embarrassed. I assumed it must have been my fault somehow.

Family situations is not about self defense. If we suspect there is a problem at home, we talk to the parent(s) and suggest seeking help. It's fairly rare but it happens.

Again, I'm talking about violence, not euphemistic "family situations". The parents are usually the perpetrators. What "help" would you suggest to the parents?

We do have classes that teaches women's self defense. Those are normally taught by women instructors. They talk about how to handle dates who won't take no for an answer

Dates who violently attack them, you mean? Rapists?

and the like as well as being accosted in public. Being in an abusive relationship is not self defense. We have professional councilors that we refer those people to. Self defense isn't being in a bad relationship.

I.AM.TALKING.ABOUT.VIOLENCE. Battering. Beating. Rape. Not "bad relationships". This is overwhelmingly the sort of violence women and children are targeted for.

It being in a situation where you are willing to physically hurt, maybe kill the other person. Bad family situations, bad relationships, non supportive parents are all things best handled by people who train for years to handle those issues, not karate instructors.

Every single word you have said here has downplayed and minimised the violence I am talking about. You ooze minimisation, dismissal, and victim blaming. I know this is not what you want to hear, and I realise you are unlikely to listen. But this is what is happening. Jesus H Christ, dude, I'm disclosing child molestation and rape and you're wittering about "bad relationships".

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by meeera

Jesus H Christ, dude, I'm disclosing child molestation and rape and you're wittering about "bad relationships".

Given that this started with criticizing the 'words will never hurt you' part of '"Sticks and Stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you"' you seem to have taken it quite a long way away from that.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

1) you have stated flat out that those being picked on should not let words hurt them.

This is utter garbage, and has been dismantled here, and in countless studies. Words are capable of doing great damage, regardless of ones self confidence they are capable of getting in. Unless of course you're self confident on the edge of arrogance but at that point you've got other issues.

Words are capable of great damage. If we help people early on not to place too much importance on what other people say, that damage can be minimized.

2) You have stated victims of certain types should learn to avoid places and situations if they don't want to be victims.

This is literal victim blaming. It's a black and white example with nothing extra put in.

It is also, in some situations, just plain common sense.
Not that it is your fault you were a victim, but that you can take actions to minimize your chance of becoming a victim.
If you walk into the worst part of town flashing a wad of money around you are probably going to get mugged.
Is it right that you get mugged? No it isn't.
Should you be able to walk anywhere without that risk? Yes you should.
But in the real world, some situations are more dangerous than others, and should be avoided.
There is a difference between: "It is your fault you were a victim" and: "There are things you can do to avoid becoming a victim"

In other situations, it doesn't apply at all. Sometimes you can't avoid it, and life just sucks.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Not that it is your fault you were a victim, but...

Everyone, everywhere needs to stop one word shorter with phrases like this. There is no "but." Every "but" is an attempt to shift some portion of blame onto victims. Whether you intended to do so or not.

"It is not your fault you were a victim."

Full. Stop.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Paperbackstash

This discussion has strayed far, far beyond the original topic.

It's still an interesting new subject, though. *eyes it from the sideline*

With binoculars and a parabolic mike.
Wouldn't want to be caught in tbe crossfire.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Words are capable of great damage. If we help people early on not to place too much importance on what other people say, that damage can be minimized.

It is also, in some situations, just plain common sense.
Not that it is your fault you were a victim, but that you can take actions to minimize your chance of becoming a victim.
If you walk into the worst part of town flashing a wad of money around you are probably going to get mugged.
Is it right that you get mugged? No it isn't.

Both of these are examples of fighting the symptom rather than the cause.

Instead of focusing on reducing the power of words we should focus on the people inflicting damage with those words.

Instead of saying ‘well you did this what did you expect was going to happen’ we should focus on the people who actually made whatever happen.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Everyone, everywhere needs to stop one word shorter with phrases like this. There is no "but." Every "but" is an attempt to shift some portion of blame onto victims. Whether you intended to do so or not.

"It is not your fault you were a victim."

Full. Stop.

I’m with you in not wanting to blame victims. We do desire to empower everyone to reduce the chances of being victimized...and reduce the power we GIVE others to hurt us.

Words do hurt. There are attitudes and mindsets that can be adopted to give people tools to mitigate that hurt. Which would you rather do...wait for all the bullies in the world to become kind people...or fortify yourself such that words can indeed be “just words”.

There isn’t just one scenario nor one quick and easy solution. There are lots of scenarios and how to handle or avoid them differs.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Both of these are examples of fighting the symptom rather than the cause.

Yes. Like the common cold, there is currently no perfect cure for other people sometimes being assholes.

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Instead of focusing on reducing the power of words we should focus on the people inflicting damage with those words.

Instead of saying ‘well you did this what did you expect was going to happen’ we should focus on the people who actually made whatever happen.

(Firstly, that isn't what I said, or anything like it, so please don't put fake quotes around it)

No, we should do both.
It is good to try to make neighbourhoods safer.
In the meantime, it is good not to walk through bad neighbourhoods at night.
Both of these things are true, and ignoring that is nonsensical.

It is good to try to raise the standards of all drivers.
In the meantime, I'll practice what I was taught on defensive driving courses to reduce the chances that I have an accident caused by a bad driver. The accident wouldn't be my fault, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try to avoid it in the first place.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Everyone, everywhere needs to stop one word shorter with phrases like this. There is no "but." Every "but" is an attempt to shift some portion of blame onto victims. Whether you intended to do so or not.

"It is not your fault you were a victim."

Full. Stop.

Ok.
It is not your fault you were a victim. Full stop. End sentence.
Next sentence. Here are some actions you can take to minimize your chances of becoming a victim.
There is nothing wrong with saying both of those sentences.

For example, here is the advice from the Met Police about how to reduce your chances of being pickpocketed: https://www.met.police.uk/cp/crime-p...pickpocketing/

Does that mean they are blaming victims of pickpocketing? Should they not give this advice?

Similarly for their advice on avoiding mugging: https://www.met.police.uk/cp/crime-p...treet-robbery/, which includes

Plan your route and think about what to take with you, especially if you’re going somewhere you haven’t been before. Keep to busy, well-lit streets, walkways and paths which are more likely to be covered by CCTV. Only take licensed taxis or minicabs booked by phone or a mobile phone app.

Isn't that just good advice?

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

Indecently assaulted, not "accosted". Again, I am talking about violence, not people being mean. Not threats. Violence. And that was not something my father had ever done to me, so why would I yell "you're not my father"? I was about 12. I was frozen. I was hideously embarrassed. I assumed it must have been my fault somehow.



Again, I'm talking about violence, not euphemistic "family situations". The parents are usually the perpetrators. What "help" would you suggest to the parents?



Dates who violently attack them, you mean? Rapists?



I.AM.TALKING.ABOUT.VIOLENCE. Battering. Beating. Rape. Not "bad relationships". This is overwhelmingly the sort of violence women and children are targeted for.



Every single word you have said here has downplayed and minimised the violence I am talking about. You ooze minimisation, dismissal, and victim blaming. I know this is not what you want to hear, and I realise you are unlikely to listen. But this is what is happening. Jesus H Christ, dude, I'm disclosing child molestation and rape and you're wittering about "bad relationships".

I'm sorry you were harmed, but it's not always about your personal situation. If you are having trouble dealing with your personal situation, then I would suggest you seek appropriate help.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Everyone, everywhere needs to stop one word shorter with phrases like this. There is no "but." Every "but" is an attempt to shift some portion of blame onto victims. Whether you intended to do so or not.

"It is not your fault you were a victim."

Full. Stop.

We are told not to use the word "but" since it can be interpreted as a negation.

If you are the victim of a crime, you are not to blame. There are things you can to to lessen your chances of being a victim.

This is true for self defense, computer virus, and con games. Heck, it's even true of driving and avoiding accidents.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Both of these are examples of fighting the symptom rather than the cause.

Instead of focusing on reducing the power of words we should focus on the people inflicting damage with those words.

Instead of saying ‘well you did this what did you expect was going to happen’ we should focus on the people who actually made whatever happen.

You can only control your actions. You can't control other people's actions. Most people are better off focusing on what they can positively do rather than wish other people didn't do bad things. I lock my front door when I leave my home. I don't leave it open and join hashtag campaigns on twitter telling people to stop robbing homes.

Nobody is saying, you did this, what did you expect? That is purely your personal spin on it.