Lmao, “violence is not the answer”. It is. When other people like that fucking asshole kiddo were, then it’s the only acceptable thing to do. “Don’t do unto others what you don’t want done unto yourself”.
They need to understand that their shit has consequences, or else bigotry will never end.
Id disagree with you if we were talking about an adult but as we are talking about a kid I would say you are outting yourself as some sort of predator or abuser with that mentality. There can be consequences that are non-violent, violence just propagates more violence. Interesting that you took a popular phrase, changed it so that it has a different meaning, then tried to use it as evidence for your case. Get support, you don’t have to be so violent.
It will never end. I would bet that you’re bigoted against a variety of people, too. It’s all around us; most people have a “narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them”.
we had an ‘airforce’ player in our team. he usually was only on the field, if the other team played dirty. the most dirty opponent would have a painful clash with our ‘airforce’. the game usually was a bit more civilised after that.
was it the right thing to do? probably not. would we have sent the ‘airforce’ if the referee had stopped dirty plays earlier? definitely not! did it protect other players from going home with injuries? yes!
so no, violence is not the only correct thing to do. but it is a way to achieve certain goals. sometimes fire has to be fought with fire.
the concept may be more established for ice hockey. but it is present in all sports or possibly in life: we hope there is a referee to punish bad behaviour. but if there isn’t, we have to take things into our own hands.
i am not necessarily talking about violence here. if at your job someone constantly tries to sabotage you, violence may not be the best approach. but some dirty play on your side, might just discourage the behaviour enough. obviously that should only be considered, if theere is no sort of referee to stop the behaviour traditionally.
Then that hockey game wasn’t valuable. Fuck toxic enviroments as these that ban the ones who do the only correct thing to do.
Hey, violence isn’t the answer, let alone “the only correct thing to do”.
Edit: you all are real tough guys for advocating that the rude child in this totally true story get beat up. What a bunch of losers.
Lmao, “violence is not the answer”. It is. When other people like that fucking asshole kiddo were, then it’s the only acceptable thing to do. “Don’t do unto others what you don’t want done unto yourself”.
They need to understand that their shit has consequences, or else bigotry will never end.
Id disagree with you if we were talking about an adult but as we are talking about a kid I would say you are outting yourself as some sort of predator or abuser with that mentality. There can be consequences that are non-violent, violence just propagates more violence. Interesting that you took a popular phrase, changed it so that it has a different meaning, then tried to use it as evidence for your case. Get support, you don’t have to be so violent.
Bigotry is as old as humanity.
It will never end. I would bet that you’re bigoted against a variety of people, too. It’s all around us; most people have a “narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them”.
Especially here on Lemmy.
None of that makes it wrong to oppose bigotry.
we had an ‘airforce’ player in our team. he usually was only on the field, if the other team played dirty. the most dirty opponent would have a painful clash with our ‘airforce’. the game usually was a bit more civilised after that.
was it the right thing to do? probably not. would we have sent the ‘airforce’ if the referee had stopped dirty plays earlier? definitely not! did it protect other players from going home with injuries? yes!
so no, violence is not the only correct thing to do. but it is a way to achieve certain goals. sometimes fire has to be fought with fire.
Hockey is weird, its sort of expected that the players use violence to keep each others behavior in check.
the concept may be more established for ice hockey. but it is present in all sports or possibly in life: we hope there is a referee to punish bad behaviour. but if there isn’t, we have to take things into our own hands.
i am not necessarily talking about violence here. if at your job someone constantly tries to sabotage you, violence may not be the best approach. but some dirty play on your side, might just discourage the behaviour enough. obviously that should only be considered, if theere is no sort of referee to stop the behaviour traditionally.
Are you trying to say enforcer? I’m plenty familiar with the concept but your word choice is confusing.
Was bro flying around?
he made sure we controlled who went flying and who not.
guess he could also have been called “Air Traffic Control”…