Are Insults Legal?

[BigApplePi]

What is wrong with insults or personal attacks*? After all they just express something about how one feels or thinks about another party or they can even be insincere jokes. Why is it recommended they be prohibited and if the offending party wishes to keep it up, they be punished?

Definition: Any action which demeans the other party.

There are strong reasons for banning these things. Yet they smack of censorship! Anyone disagree? Are they necessarily hurtful? Whether you agree or not, why do you think this is an issue? How do you handle receiving personal attacks? Do you ever dish them out? Why? Can a personal attack be objectively defined or is that subjective? Since it is quite possible you will be a recipient sometime in the future, have you thought about how you would handle them? How have you handled them in the past?

Speaking for myself, I don't care to either make personal attacks or to receive them. But aren't they a part of real life? Shouldn't one be prepared for how to deal with them or can they be? To INTPs and their relatives: Can the answers to this be subject to logic and reason?

*Please note this thread is categorized under psychology, not morality or politics.

 

[Cognisant]

I think they're fair game on some boards and if it's blatently true then it's not an insult so you can say it anywhere.

 

[Jennywocky]

Okay, Experiment #1:

If I responded to this thread with, "Fuck off, you repetitive dimwit," how would that make you feel, and what would your response likely be? What would the response of other forum members be? How will the system spiral towards chaos?

 

[Cherry Cola]

I think they are alright under some circumstances.

Online for instance. The problem with insults there is that its hard (especially for moderators) to tell apart when two people are just irritated at each other and throw in some ad-homs while they discuss with one another from a situation where someone is getting hurt and shit is hitting the fan.

The thing with insults is that it's a case to case things, it depends on the recipient and the sender, and there can be a very subtle line between an insult that is merely an expression of irritation or a trivial part of discourse between two parties which spices things up, and something that leaves someone feeling badly hurt.

It is not enough to consider the intention of the insulting party, nor is it enough to consider the reaction of the insulted. People can be tactless and be people can be far too easily hurt.

So while in theory there is room for clear cut definition of boundaries, it requires phenomenological insights which we do not have access to. Hence you basically need a feel for whats okay and whats not, an intuitive consideration of all that is in play in a given context.

 

[Hawkeye]

Some people get offended.

I say it sucks to be them. ^^

 

[Brontosaurie]

Okay, Experiment #1:

If I responded to this thread with, "Fuck off, you repetitive dimwit," how would that make you feel, and what would your response likely be? What would the response of other forum members be? How will the system spiral towards chaos?

i love you

in a strictly Fuck Yeah Damn Right sense

 

[Fukyo]

I'm suing you for this BAP!!!

 

[Cognisant]

 

[BigApplePi]

I think they are alright under some circumstances.

Agreed but can those circumstances be defined?

Online for instance. The problem with insults there is that its hard (especially for moderators) to tell apart when two people are just irritated at each other and throw in some ad-homs while they discuss with one another from a situation where someone is getting hurt and shit is hitting the fan.

When two people know each other and under other situations are friendly, it could be that their style of expressing irritation is just that: style. Yet as you say, in a recent thread moderators are concerned a fire might be lit that would get out of control.

The thing with insults is that it's a case to case things, it depends on the recipient and the sender, and there can be a very subtle line between an insult that is merely an expression of irritation or a trivial part of discourse between two parties which spices things up, and something that leaves someone feeling badly hurt.

It is not enough to consider the intention of the insulting party, nor is it enough to consider the reaction of the insulted. People can be tactless and be people can be far too easily hurt.

Is that what is going on? ... that someone is badly hurt? Certainly receiving a dart hurts, but BADLY? People experience a measure of pain to themselves in something everyday. Usually that doesn't cause self-immolation. So why not expect pain in a dialog? Some amount of conflict in dialog is expected, no?

So while in theory there is room for clear cut definition of boundaries, it requires phenomenological insights which we do not have access to. Hence you basically need a feel for whats okay and whats not, an intuitive consideration of all that is in play in a given context.

There is something about insults and personal attacks and boundaries. I'm looking for that.

 

[BigApplePi]

Okay, Experiment #1:

If I responded to this thread with, "Fuck off, you repetitive dimwit," how would that make you feel, and what would your response likely be? What would the response of other forum members be? How will the system spiral towards chaos?

I could respond in two ways. One is solely thought; the other feeling.

 

[BigApplePi]

I'm suing you for this BAP!!!

Can you lend me your -shyster?- lawyer?

 

[Grayman]

Constructive crisism will always a lot further than an insult. Insults are never necessary.

 

[Latte]

Belph = Fukyo

Constructive crisism will always a lot further than an insult. Insults are never necessary.

This is not universal. Sometimes destructive criticism is the only constructive criticism one has available as a viable tool to change things for the better.

The cases where this applies are rare, though.


Of course, reforming a person is not always worth the effort, so constructive criticism might be more laborious and less fruitious for one's own wellbeing and by extension the state of a community than alternatives, including silence.

 

[Fukyo]

I play the accordion to silence Latte's screams in my mind.

 

[BigApplePi]

Constructive crisism will always a lot further than an insult. Insults are never necessary.

That might be ideal for this forum if only because this is an INTP forum. I call "insults" always emotional. They aren't technically reason although there are causes/reasons behind them. An insult can be extremely effective out there in the real world. It can lay the recipient low.

This is not universal. Sometimes destructive criticism is the only constructive criticism one has available as a viable tool to change things for the better.

The cases where this applies are rare, though.

Agreed, but when?

Of course, reforming a person is not always worth the effort, so constructive criticism might be more laborious and less fruitious for one's own wellbeing and by extension the state of a community than alternatives, including silence.

Agreed again. But why wouldn't that work or be okay for this forum?

 

[BigApplePi]

I play the accordion to silence Latte's screams in my mind.

You mean

Spoiler

 

[Grayman]

That might be ideal for this forum if only because this is an INTP forum. I call "insults" always emotional. They aren't technically reason although there are causes/reasons behind them. An insult can be extremely effective out there in the real world. It can lay the recipient low.

It can hurt or it can anger. Neither of these are beneficial and certainly not necessary. There are better ways than NEGITVE emotional manipulation to achieve ones goals.

What exactly do you think is happening when they are layed low?

 

[Cognisant]

That's the most adorable thing I've ever seen.

 

[Latte]

That might be ideal for this forum if only because this is an INTP forum. I call "insults" always emotional. They aren't technically reason although there are causes/reasons behind them. An insult can be extremely effective out there in the real world. It can lay the recipient low.


Agreed, but when?


Agreed again. But why wouldn't that work or be okay for this forum?

Figuring out more specific parameters for when insults are "good" would be very difficult. If you intend to attempt to do so, I wish you good duck D:

That's the most adorable thing I've ever seen.

 

[r4ch3l]

I try not to be personally offended by things and love a good roast. When I am at the point where I am able to throw shade at someone and know they'll laugh and throw it right back I know I am really friends with that person. Good insults are an artform.

I will be not so much offended as irritated by lazy, stupid, or repetitive attacks intended to upset me or mess with my head...but I usually ask myself why the person is insulting me and try to ask myself in the most objective way I can while still existing within a self if there is any truth to it first.

Within a community (e.g. forums, living with roommates) I believe that respect is important to keep things stable and aligned with the intention behind creating the community in the first place.

 

[BigApplePi]

It can hurt or it can anger. Neither of these are beneficial and certainly not necessary. There are better ways than NEGITVE emotional manipulation to achieve ones goals.

What exactly do you think is happening when they are layed low?

I would say beneficial is relative. I say insults and personal attacks are definitely not for this forum because it's an INTP forum. The base community here is one of thinkers and thinking. The only reason (unless I have ulterior unconscious motives) for running this thread is to examine insults and personal attacks themselves.

However the outside world is different. We have the media, advertising, political dirty tricks, one nation inflaming another, drama, "the medium is the message", sporting events etc. IOW all sorts of stuff that appeal to emotions where the public is not willing to apply reason. The strongest wielder of these tactics aim to lay low the other side. It's win/lose or in the case of war, lose/lose or in the case of good sportmanship games, win/win.

 

[Grayman]

However the outside world is different. We have the media, advertising, political dirty tricks, one nation inflaming another, drama, "the medium is the message", sporting events etc. IOW all sorts of stuff that appeal to emotions where the public is not willing to apply reason. The strongest wielder of these tactics aim to lay low the other side. It's win/lose or in the case of war, lose/lose or in the case of good sportmanship games, win/win.

Critsism creates the mob. Insults only satsify the mob, they do not create it. Insults in the political arena often lead to self destruction. Critisism in the arena is a powerful tool.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Generally those who insult are also those who are insulted. Also, usually someone insults another first (usually several times) before being mobbed. So is it a bad thing? I'd argue no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO1gpitixCo

 

[Jennywocky]

I try not to be personally offended by things and love a good roast.

I think roasts are the exception that proves the rule: They are specific events with very very defined boundaries and context, not freeform random insults. Everyone's expecting it, the insults are meant to show affection, and everyone who is there appreciates good insults.

When I am at the point where I am able to throw shade at someone and know they'll laugh and throw it right back I know I am really friends with that person. Good insults are an artform.

I think so too. I love a lot of the Curmudgeon books released some years back, with H L Mencken and Dorothy Parker and the like -- it takes a sharp mind on the fly to come up with the best pointed quips possible. I laugh and laugh and aspire to their greatness.

It's funny that it's usually my INTP friends IRL who trade the insults most with me (although not always). We get a kick out of it. The really hilarious part is when outside observers think we're actually mad at each or don't like each other... it's the furthest from the truth.

But again, it's in the context of a close relationship and we know how we "really" feel.

I will be not so much offended as irritated by lazy, stupid, or repetitive attacks intended to upset me or mess with my head...

Right... and I'll agree that, even when I'm the target, I can appreciate an artful witty jab as opposed to some slovenly squinty-eyed dull-witted hack job.

but I usually ask myself why the person is insulting me and try to ask myself in the most objective way I can while still existing within a self if there is any truth to it first.

Agree, and like you said, community needs some basic rules and level of respect or the day-to-day relationships become untenable.

Generally those who are insulted are also those who insult. Also, usually someone insults another first (usually several times) before being mobbed. So is it a bad thing? I'd argue no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

Well, I know you're da tit, but who's da tat?

I play the accordion to silence Latte's screams in my mind.

Tagline.

I approve.

 

[Hawkeye]

Well, I know you're da tit, but who's da tat?

How about the tit that speaks tat?

To be honest, a tit for tat sounds like a great deal! ^^

 

[Jennywocky]

How about the tit that speaks tat?

To be honest, a tit for tat sounds like a great deal! ^^

I could use a good tat, but if I trade you, my bra won't fit right.

 

[redbaron]

You're all dickheads.

 

[BigApplePi]

Critsism creates the mob. Insults only satsify the mob

That's for sure. I've seen it on internet forums. This forum not so much but we are vulnerable so best to be prepared.

It could happen when we don't like a poster's POV, but not always. On this forum a different POV I tend to like because it invites discussion. (I recently had long discussions with just george on his "I hate government" thread and I thought it a great and productive experience.)

But what happens when we don't like a posters style? If we don't like the poster's style, that is emotional. It's highly tempting to first express irritation and then if the poster also has a strong opinion, to post something irritating to the other guy in response. Sometimes we don't even know we are doing it. The only thing I can say here is to try to recognize it ... to recognize our feelings and be cautious.

Notice that when more than one poster does not like the person they will support each other. This can give a false illusion their side is the more objective one and to behave righteously ... the beginning of a mob reaction.

Another action is when we disapprove of something about a poster, to deliberately try to provoke them. This might be okay if it's intellectual debate, but if there's a tinge of insult or disrespect, what to do is going to be a tough call. I say ALL POV's have merit. INTPs tend to know this. But we aren't always INTP and at our best on this forum. I say ALL people deserve respect and if we can't tolerate them to look inward at ourselves.

 

[BigApplePi]

Figuring out more specific parameters for when insults are "good" would be very difficult. If you intend to attempt to do so, I wish you good duck D:

I will try to say something eventually but my intuition says it will be abstract. If I forget and get distracted, will you remind me?

 

[Latte]

I will try to say something eventually but my intuition says it will be abstract. If I forget and get distracted, will you remind me?

Quite possibly!





Good thread idea, this.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

You're mother is a donkey and your father is a french hen.

 

[Hawkeye]

Insults are intentional attacks on a person or persons. They aim to injure a person mentally.

The thing with insults is that they only affect the weak-minded.

You can attempt to insult a person with high self-esteem, but you'll probably end up looking like an ass in the process. Trolls are good are finding the chinks in people's psychological force-fields.

Ultimately, if a person feels insulted they only have themselves to blame.

 

[Seed-Wad]

Because society is the subjugation of the aggressive to the meek. If aggression is tolerated then it would allow the most aggressive to dominate those meeker and/or ruin the fun for everybody without anybody being able to say anything against it, as being aggressive is apparently allowed.

 

[Hawkeye]

Because society is the subjugation of the aggressive to the meek. If aggression is tolerated then it would allow the most aggressive to dominate those meeker and/or ruin the fun for everybody without anybody being able to say anything against it, as being aggressive is apparently allowed.

*cough* Survival of the fittest. It may sound harsh, but that's the way evolution works. Try to work against the grain of Mother Nature and you're in for a rough ride.

 

[BigApplePi]

Insults are intentional attacks on a person or persons. They aim to injure a person mentally.

The thing with insults is that they only affect the weak-minded.

You can attempt to insult a person with high self-esteem, but you'll probably end up looking like an ass in the process.


If a person feels insulted they only have themselves to blame.you

This reminds me of the book, film and play, "Of Mice and Men." The main guy was a big guy and gentle. He was unfairly attacked by a small guy who took advantage of his gentleness. It's a tragic story cuz the big guy was eventually brought down.

Everyone is vulnerable because everyone has flaws and there are those who are skilled in finding them. I think what happens ... you know the saying, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me"? This is false because words can lead to action and action can destroy you.

Think witch trials, McCarthy era. Today there are laws against slander and libel, but try and prove it.

 

[BigApplePi]

*cough* Survival of the fittest. It may sound harsh, but that's the way evolution works. Try to work against the grain of Mother Nature and you're in for a rough ride.

I believe there are some social philosophers who claim people band together in groups. The meek have value and loved ones wish to protect them. It turns into "survival of the fittest society."

 

[redbaron]

Taking this to the literal sense, at least according to laws in Australia.

Swearing is illegal. Defamation is illegal, however is subject to interpretation - if someone says something defamatory, it's illegal only if someone decides to sue. If something is true (not defamatory) then it's not illegal regardless of who takes offence and wants to sue.

So the question of whether insults are legal is open to the legislative interpretation of the justice system you apply the question to.

So in Australia, if an insult is true and is not delivered with profanity, it's legal.

Did I take this question too literally?

 

[Hawkeye]

Taking this to the literal sense, at least according to laws in Australia.

Swearing is illegal. Defamation is illegal, however is subject to interpretation - if someone says something defamatory, it's illegal only if someone decides to sue. If something is true (not defamatory) then it's not illegal regardless of who takes offence and wants to sue.

So the question of whether insults are legal is open to the legislative interpretation of the justice system you apply the question to.

So in Australia, if an insult is true and is not delivered with profanity, it's legal.

Did I take this question too literally?

You brought in politics. You moron... hang on, I can go better... you imbecile... no wait... you IDIOT!

 

[Jennywocky]

So in Australia, if an insult is true and is not delivered with profanity, it's legal. Did I take this question too literally?

So you can call someone a m0thrfvck3r as long as they've done the nasty with their maternal lineage?

Hmm... hey wait, weren't you guys populated with criminals or something?

 

[redbaron]

So you can call someone a m0thrfvck3r as long as they've done the nasty with their maternal lineage?

Pretty much, if it's not defamatory (untrue) then it's allowed.

I'd sue you for defamation Hawkeye, if only what you said wasn't true D=<

 

[Seed-Wad]

*cough* Survival of the fittest. It may sound harsh, but that's the way evolution works. Try to work against the grain of Mother Nature and you're in for a rough ride.

I believe there are some social philosophers who claim people band together in groups. The meek have value and loved ones wish to protect them. It turns into "survival of the fittest society."

This. Group selection has effectively overtaken individual selection in modern society. Only when society breaks down into a postmodern society (as we are headed to) roles reverse once more. Many people were afraid the theory of evolution would be misused to deconstruct society, and they were right. To give up on society is to give up on ever improving the human condition, as the human condition is imposed by society, without it we would be reduced to our animal impulses WHICH IS BAD

Taking this to the literal sense, at least according to laws in Australia.

Swearing is illegal. Defamation is illegal, however is subject to interpretation - if someone says something defamatory, it's illegal only if someone decides to sue. If something is true (not defamatory) then it's not illegal regardless of who takes offence and wants to sue.

So the question of whether insults are legal is open to the legislative interpretation of the justice system you apply the question to.

So in Australia, if an insult is true and is not delivered with profanity, it's legal.

Did I take this question too literally?

I like this approach!

 

[Grayman]

...
But what happens when we don't like a posters style? ...

I really agree with all that you said.

What this forum is lacking is a proper way to give a thumbs up without me having to fill the thread with thumby posts...unless I am just not aware of one.

 

[Grayman]

You're all dickheads.

If 90% of us are dickheads does that mean...

A) You are 90% right and 10% wrong
B) Just wrong
C) Wow, that's a lot of mushroom tops!

 

[Jennywocky]

If 90% of us are dickheads does that mean...

A) You are 90% right and 10% wrong
B) Just wrong
C) Wow, that's a lot of mushroom tops!

Considering how dicks can't seem to see where they're going half the time, that's a lot of people bumping their heads on stuff.

 

[Hadoblado]

Considering how dicks can't seem to see where they're going half the time, that's a lot of people bumping their heads on stuff.

The eye of the penis is aligned perfectly with its trajectory, it may not seem this way, but it knows its destination and leads with great abandon.

@OP
I respond to insults with obsession. I need to know why someone said the thing that they did. Insults are semaphore flags. You just need to learn how to read them. Once you know the cause of an insult you either know something about yourself, or something about the person insulting you (or both).

I used to be err... I guess an 'insult nihilist'? Giving and taking insult as if they were only in good fun. This is one possibility, but the scope is so much larger than that. Legitimate criticism, dominance play, projection, misattribution, blame, entertainment, peacockery, retaliation, conformity... Insults are a vastly complex behavioural representation of psychological phenomenon. Being thick-skinned is blissful ignorance to the detriment of social comprehension.

 

[Jennywocky]

The eye of the penis is aligned perfectly with its trajectory, it may not seem this way, but it knows its destination and leads with great abandon.

Abandon, yes (as it plunges ahead); aim... not quite so good. *ouch* It always seems to need a helping hand.

I guess an 'insult nihilist'? Giving and taking insult as if they were only in good fun. This is one possibility, but the scope is so much larger than that. Legitimate criticism, dominance play, projection, misattribution, blame, entertainment, peacockery, retaliation, conformity... Insults are a vastly complex behavioural representation of psychological phenomenon. Being thick-skinned is blissful ignorance to the detriment of social comprehension.

fascinating term - "insult nihilism." And a thoughtful explanation.

(As opposed to the "insult symphony" that can move us to anger, love, embarrassment, shame, amusement....plucking at our heartstrings or driving us into a mad frenzy.)

There's a lot to unpack in one simple line.

 

[Brontosaurie]

The eye of the penis is aligned perfectly with its trajectory

yes

What this forum is lacking is a proper way to give a thumbs up without me having to fill the thread with thumby posts...unless I am just not aware of one.

 

[Goddess]

Speaking for myself, I don't care to either make personal attacks or to receive them. But aren't they a part of real life? Shouldn't one be prepared for how to deal with them or can they be? To INTPs and their relatives: Can the answers to this be subject to logic and reason?

*Please note this thread is categorized under psychology, not morality or politics.

Insults is part of emotion, feelings, while INPTs are emotionless.
INPTs will not easily react to personal attacks and not easily insult others only because they don't like them or their style.

 

[Goddess]

The eye of the penis is aligned perfectly with its trajectory, it may not seem this way, but it knows its destination and leads with great abandon.

Abandon, yes (as it plunges ahead); aim... not quite so good. *ouch* It always seems to need a helping hand.

So now we're talking about penis.

 

[BigApplePi]

Considering how dicks can't seem to see where they're going half the time, that's a lot of people bumping their heads on stuff.

That is correct. One would think they are deliberately trying to muff it.