Ruthlessly kicking in the heads of kids (and adults too)

Perhaps the most disturbing thing I've seen in quite some time.

I added in the text omitted from the original paragraphs as struck out, and made the text that was included in the original quotes bold... just to avoid any pretense of quote mining.

piegasm wrote:
So let me see if I've got this straight...

This:

simpleflower wrote:I'd personally love it if the WBC couldn't protest at peoples' funerals. Free speech is always going to be restricted in some manner or another and always has. Usually when someone like Hitchens (who was a neo-conservative, along with Harris and Dawkins) makes an argument about free speech, what they are really saying is that they want the political status quo to continue. The reality is that free speech of the sort that allows the WBC to picket peoples' funderals is free speech of a sort that allows assholes to inflict trauma on other human beings during their weakest moments. I'm actually all for the State fining, taxing, and hauling off to labor camps even, assholes who think their free speech entitles them to use their mouths to inflict trauma on other human beings. It was pretty traumatic getting called the f-word hundreds of times before I ever got into the 5th grade, and, fyi, physical harassment accompanied this verbal harassment-and it usually does but it doesn't have to). In fact it was a constant hostile environment. Also, it was pretty traumatic to have to constantly endure being called the t-word in online spaces ruthlessly, in addition to the f-word, while being stalked, harassed, rape threated, and even death threated. I'm all for a society where kids (and adults too) who do that sort of thing get confronted by the state and have their heads kicked in ruthlessly and thrown in juvvie or jail if need be where they can whine about free speech in the dungeon with all the other assholes. I would love an America where the WBC yelled out their right to free speech and were told that, if they wanted to make a website and express their views there, they where free to do so, or that, if they wanted to make a bulletin board in their church hall, and express their free speech there, they where free to do so, but nowhere else.... That's my idea of free speech for these assholes, and it has very little to do with Hitchens' thinking as it was phrased and represented by you. Censoring someone completely such that the state tries to make their existence, much less what they are saying, totally invisible, is not the argument you are giving here and it's not the argument Hitchens was making. The argument hitchens was making was a more general argument afaik, and you correctly latched onto it. I actually have no problem with THAT form of censorship if the State has to do this to prevent genocidal groups like the Neo-Nazis from intimidating people. Would I support totalitarian censorship of neo-nazi groups to the point people weren't even aware they existed? Yes, yes, I actually would support that kind of censorship as well.

is morally reprehensible...

but this:

r33v3 wrote:
I think there is a misunderstanding here. You posted that you want to see kids have their heads kicked in ruthlessly. Surely you can see why someone like me would be horrified and disgusted to read that another person wants that to happen. I don't know if you personally know any children, but I do - I have younger brothers and sisters and let me be the first to tell you that in the real world if someone suggested to me that there could be a situation where they would need to have their heads kicked in I would be inclined to "re-educate" that person myself - preferably in some physical manner.

...is totes reasonable.

Mod hat: Take a day off and see if you can find a way to argue a position without being so disingenuous.

Clearly, the systemic state sponsored kicking in of children's heads as punishment for various crimes and harassment is considered more reasonable than someone saying they would like to personally and physically 'reeducate' anyone who wanted to kick in their younger siblings heads.

Wow.

Here is a link to the whole thread about censorship. SimpleFlower advocates the state beating the shit out of anyone who bullies.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2349&start=75

Ah, thanks scott1238, I should have put in the link myself.

In any case, does anyone here think advocationg for the kicking in the heads of kids (and adults too) for committing harassment or certain crimes a reasonable social justice position?

I despise bullying, harassment, and terroristic threatening. Even so, I don't think kicking in the heads of anyone, especially children, would be a just punishment for such acts. I would love to see more aggressive laws and enforcement against such things. Kicking in heads as a punishment goes too far.

Dar wrote:Ah, thanks scott1238, I should have put in the link myself.

In any case, does anyone here think advocationg for the kicking in the heads of kids (and adults too) for committing harassment or certain crimes a reasonable social justice position?

I despise bullying, harassment, and terroristic threatening. Even so, I don't think kicking in the heads of anyone, especially children, would be a just punishment for such acts. I would love to see more aggressive laws and enforcement against such things. Kicking in heads as a punishment goes too far.

[mansplaining]SimpleFlower is using hyperbole for effect, advocating the brutal beating of children in response to bullying is allowed because Simpleflower is a marginalized person. R33V3's response saying xe would defend xir siblings from such assault is clearly a threat to SimpleFlower, because R33V3 is privileged. We know R33V3 is privileged because xe spoke out against the views of a marginalized person.[/mansplaining]

I was initially going to say that they weren't using it in a literal sense, and it was more like an emotional outburst. But, to use the 'new speak' of the A+ crowd, simplethingo "doubled down" and made it clear that they did mean it literally. In my mind that makes that person a fascist. Fuck fascists!

I found this comment by simpleflower interesting:

I do have brothers and sisters, six of them, and if one of them physically harassed other people or even psychologically in the school system (they're homeschooled), in groups, I would expect them to be fined, given community service, or, on the level of physical harassment, getting their own asses kicked and thrown in jail so they could experience what that felt like. Apparently you never have.

Does simplflower believe police have the legal power to "kick the ass" of someone who is accused or guilty of physical harassment (especially children!? I must have the most confused looks on my face when I read that forum.. Wow.

OFFS

R33V3 has made a (qualified) apology for being unjustly censured by the moderators.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2555

The responders to the apology note illustrate a selective amnesia not seen since the Ministry Of Information described by Orwell in 1984.

such lickspittle attitudes to injustice does not bode well for a social justice site.

scott1328 wrote:OFFS

R33V3 has made a (qualified) apology for being unjustly censured by the moderators.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2555

The responders to the apology note illustrate a selective amnesia not seen since the Ministry Of Information described by Orwell in 1984.

such lickspittle attitudes to injustice does not bode well for a social justice site.

Amazing. R33v3 is an absolute saint for putting up with that crap and still having the grace to apologise and try to make amends...... and for all that, they still don't think he/she's done enough:

Post by Ginny (a mod no less)
You evidently misremembered simpleflower's original post, although it was re-quoted with context near the end of the locked thread. What she said was

simpleflower wrote:Also, it was pretty traumatic to have to constantly endure being called the t-word in online spaces ruthlessly, in addition to the f-word, while being stalked, harassed, rape threated, and even death threated. I'm all for a society where kids (and adults too) who do that sort of thing get confronted by the state and have their heads kicked in ruthlessly and thrown in juvvie or jail if need be where they can whine about free speech in the dungeon with all the other assholes.

So, a far cry from "just verbal abuse." You can still disagree about ethical measures of punishment, but be more careful to represent your opponent accurately please.

You have to wonder if these people understand the concept of emotional detachment.

I thought that Ginny was the only sensible mod they had. I was wrong, if you can read that threat and decide that r33v3 is the problem, then you've no idea what is right or wrong. And if that's the case, then how can Ginny realistically talk about social justice.

Seems to me that they believe social justice equates to revenge for hurt "feefees" as they would dismissively call them.

Again, I despise bullying, harassment, stalking, and terroristic threatening. I've had to put up with these things myself. I would love for society to learn how to eliminate or at least minimize such behaviors and crimes. I suspect education will likely do more than punishment can, but I won't discount the role of punishment either.

Simpleflower advocated ruthless physical violence against children (and adults too) for bullying, harassment , stalking, and terroristic threatening. r33v3 correctly challenged that hyperbolic position. The regulars and the moderators seem to have decided r33ve was wrong for doing so, even punishing him with a ban. That just astounds me. Seriously, WTF!

Dar wrote:Seems to me that they believe social justice equates to revenge for hurt "feefees" as they would dismissively call them.

Again, I despise bullying, harassment, stalking, and terroristic threatening. I've had to put up with these things myself. I would love for society to learn how to eliminate or at least minimize such behaviors and crimes. I suspect education will likely do more than punishment can, but I won't discount the role of punishment either.

Simpleflower advocated ruthless physical violence against children (and adults too) for bullying, harassment , stalking, and terroristic threatening. r33v3 correctly challenged that hyperbolic position. The regulars and the moderators seem to have decided r33ve was wrong for doing so, even punishing him with a ban. That just astounds me. Seriously, WTF!

It's like there's an alternate reality over there. I'm expecting to hear the twilight zone music when I enter that site.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2555

They are still beating up on poor r33v3 for standing up against ruthless violence against children as punishment for bullying, harassment, or commiting certain crimes.

Unbelievable.

Dar wrote:http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2555

They are still beating up on poor r33v3 for standing up against ruthless violence against children as punishment for bullying, harassment, or commiting certain crimes.

Unbelievable.

Simpleflower has deep problems.

Isn't it ironic how some of the victims there can be so repugnant and insulting to people who post intellectual disagreements with them. Even more so as it is done on a supposed safe space.

If I was r33v3 I'd tell them all to fuck themselves (that would resonate with them) or at least simpleflower for the kind of malignant abuse shoveled at him. The moderators there should not be idly sitting by and silently approving and nodding such anti-social and contemptible behaviour from members like that.

A new take on A+ justice

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=2300

So, I think it's only fair to ask, is A+ in favour of kicking children's (or adults) heads in? State sponsored kicking's of, of course.

The Patrician wrote:A new take on A+ justice

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=2300

Simpleflower certainly seems to have inconsistent positions. Kicking the heads in of adults and children guilty of homophobic bullying, and rehabilitation of children guilty of premeditated murder.

But other than, that the discussion seems worthwhile. Although Samsa's blatant Skinnerian reductionism is off-putting and incorrect.

That thread is the one that made me realize that A+ forum is composed of profoundly damaged and disturbed individuals. Nothing good can possibly come from it.

Dar wrote:Perhaps the most disturbing thing I've seen in quite some time.

Clearly, the systemic state sponsored kicking in of children's heads as punishment for various crimes and harassment is considered more reasonable than someone saying they would like to personally and physically 'reeducate' anyone who wanted to kick in their younger siblings heads.

Wow.

This is why the A+ movement is doomed. It's been taken over by the Bolsheviks.

Simple Flower, everyone's favorite advocate for state-sponsored head-smashing of children has now been thrown to the wolves. And for the stupidest of reasons.

[url=http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3159]http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3159[/url]

Each post in that thread was more ridiculous than the one before it. "I like internet hugs" "you're hogging internet hugs" "you're mean for trying to deny me internet hugs". Okay.. Granted, I'm being dismissive.

I will say this is a general sense though.. Simpleflower strikes me as a very fragile person. If I were interacting with hir I'd be much more gentle than everyone in the thread has been.