TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Post your random thoughts.

Go To

Just post whatever comes to mind.

Please refrain from excess venting in this thread. Talking about negative emotions is fine but it's best not to dwell on them for too long. TV Tropes is not suited to deal with mental health situations.

    Original post 
Just post whatever comes to mind.

If Oscar Wilde had lived in our time, he would be a /b/tard.

Actually, scratch that. He does, and goes by Jethro Q Walrustitty.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Nov 11th 2022 at 8:59:26 AM

Tzetze DUMB from a converted church in Venice, Italy Since: Jan, 2001
DUMB
#108201: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:47:01 PM

I will never understand the people who think they're more moral because they're aware that yes, people die.

It's seen as at least closer to trying to do something about it?

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.
MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108202: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:48:04 PM

@Blixty: I was thinking of that as a general, overaching sentiment among most of the population, which appeared to be so from what I've seen, though I may have been wrong. Point taken - my apologies.

edited 19th Oct '11 5:49:06 PM by MilosStefanovic

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108203: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:49:45 PM

It's seen as at least closer to trying to do something about it?

Maybe.

It's still very annoying, though.

Point taken - my apologies.

No problem. I see a lot of "lol America sucks" on the internet, it kind of makes me raeg. Sorry for snapping at you.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108205: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:50:59 PM

I took the OP to be about specific tragedies, which rubbed me the wrong way. Yay, alternate post interpretation.

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...
MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108206: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:52:57 PM

@Blixty: Nah, I don't have anything about America as a nation, but am extremely bitter about its foreign policy and think that you guys should fucking leave the rest of the world alone. Apart from that, I'm cool with you.

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108207: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:54:54 PM

What about US vs. Lord's Resistance Army, eh? (I'm neutral on this, just wanted to hear opinions)

edited 19th Oct '11 5:55:01 PM by Merlo

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108208: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:55:23 PM

Our current foreign policy is the result of a long line of politicians who simply don't know any better. Personally, I agree with you, but it's a bit more complicated than simply telling everyone to come home. Military-Industrial Complex, and all that.

Also, I have only a very vague notion of what our operations in your country are, so I can't speak on those.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
#108209: Oct 19th 2011 at 5:59:33 PM

[up][up] From all I can tell, they're a scourge on humanity, and guilty of all kinds of terrible crimes, but I don't really understand what our purpose is in sending "advisors". What do we know about this issue that the local militaries don't?

I'm also slightly annoyed with them because yesterday my professor quizzed us on them and my not knowing about them cost me 5 points.

edited 19th Oct '11 5:59:44 PM by EdwardsGrizzly

<><
MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108210: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:00:08 PM

[up][up][up]I don't know much aout the issue, but if the governments of the countries where the LRA is in operation have called for US aid, I'm fine with that. Otherwise, no.

[up][up]Yes, I understand that pulling out all forces at once and taking a more pasisve diplomatic stance would annihalte the economy. The world is fucked up, basically.

edited 19th Oct '11 6:00:27 PM by MilosStefanovic

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108211: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:03:37 PM

That's also not just us. The UK and Australia have the same problems as I recall.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
Tzetze DUMB from a converted church in Venice, Italy Since: Jan, 2001
DUMB
#108212: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:03:49 PM

but I don't really understand what our purpose is in sending "advisors"

Well, they could be "CIA in Vietnam" sort of "advisers".

edited 19th Oct '11 6:03:58 PM by Tzetze

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.
Inhopelessguy Since: Apr, 2011
#108213: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:05:07 PM

Blizzy has got it right, for the most part.

The US's current stance on foreign affairs comes from the period between the two wars.

The isolationist practice of the US meant that the League of Nations was weak, blah, blah, blah.

Eventually, the weak strength of the League was one of the key factors in allowing Hitler's expansionist policies, leading to WW 2. The Americans, learning from their mistake post-WW 1, decided to play a less isolationist role in world affairs.

So, the intention of the US's current foreign policy is well-meaning, but not very well executed.

MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108214: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:07:57 PM

I'm not really sure if the United States' international involvement is out of good intentions (with an idiotic, Leeroy Jenkins approach), self-interest masked as the former, or a combination of both.

edited 19th Oct '11 6:08:23 PM by MilosStefanovic

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108215: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:09:40 PM

I don't know if you could talk about the United States having intentions like a monolithic entity. The government is run by a lot of people, and out of those people who are responsible for [foreign policy action], they're all going to have differing motives.

edited 19th Oct '11 6:10:30 PM by Merlo

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...
Inhopelessguy Since: Apr, 2011
#108216: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:10:58 PM

Well, their original focus, IIRC, post-WW 2, was Europe, but considering the formation of the European Economic Community shortly afterwards, and NATO, - meaning Europe would be pretty okay - they shifted that kinda thinking towards the world at large.

Sadly, those nations who were communists. So, at the very start, it was a noble and dignified effort, that got rerouted into what you've suggested Milos.

MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108217: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:14:59 PM

[up][up]Well, yes, but those people have to ultimately come to a compromise on what will America's exact involvement in the issue be like, and America's exact goals and actions turn, more-or-less, monolithic by then. What's important is the end result and its consequences. Otherwise, point taken.

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108218: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:15:22 PM

I'm not really sure if the United States' international involvement is out of good intentions (with an idiotic, Leeroy Jenkins approach), self-interest masked as the former, or a combination of both.

That depends on who's making policy at the time. Anything done under Bush is usually the former.

Well, yes, but those people have to ultimately come to a compromise on what will America's exact involvement in the issue be like, and America's exact goals and actions turn, more-or-less, monolithic by then. What's important is the end result and its consequences

That's true at any given static moment, but it changes over time.

edited 19th Oct '11 6:15:57 PM by BlixtySlycat

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108219: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:24:33 PM

What's important is the end result and its consequences.
That was more or less what I was trying to say. Who cares what the motives were, what actually happened is the important part. But then I thought, I guess it is important to know what the motives are, because those are indicators of future actions.

Oh look, something on Tumblr that's actually interesting.

Tw: abusive relationships, violence, rape culture.

So, let me tell you a story. There’s a man and a woman who get married. Let’s say their names are Tom and Lauren. There’s a clear power dynamic in the relationship. Tom often orders Lauren around. He tells her what to do, and yells at her if she doesn’t follow his instructions. Normally, eventually Lauren agrees to do what he says and the issue subsides. But occasionally, things go different.

For example, suppose Lauren wants to go out with her friend from work, but Tom is jealous and wants her to stay home. Lauren insists on going out, because it’s important to her, and Tom, in a fit of anger, slaps her, pours tabasco sauce on her tongue, pinches her, washes her mouth out with soap, etc etc.

Horrible, right? Your first reaction, I’m guessing, is that he is an abusive awful husband, and Lauren needs to divorce his ass and get away from him ASAP.

Okay, now let’s look at the same situation, but with a child and a parent. Why is it suddenly acceptable?

It doesn’t matter what you call it. Discipline, consequences, punishments. It’s all the same thing. If you are touching your child in a way that causes them pain or discomfort, if you are non consensually taking control of their body and hurting them - YOU ARE ABUSIVE.

That is child abuse. Spanking is child abuse. And it is no more acceptable than violence between peers. It doesn’t matter if you’re not beating them but it’s just a ‘few swats on the butt.’ It doesn’t matter. I am tired of hearing excuses.

There is nothing loving or beneficial about physical discipline. By hitting your child, you are teaching them that violence is an appropriate way to respond to situations that you don’t like. You are teaching them that they deserve to be hurt. You are teaching them that it’s okay for the bigger person in the situation to misuse that power.

We need a generation of people who respect their bodies and boundaries, and other people’s. We need a generation of people who resolve issues with gentle communication. We need a generation of people who will not tolerate violence.

I strongly believe that children being hit disciplinarily makes a strong contribution to abuse culture.

If someone is hit as a child, because their parents are angry, what’s to stop them from hitting their partner when they are angry? If someone is hit as a child, they learn that boundaries don’t matter, that saying ‘no’ isn’t important, that if you are bigger and stronger you are allowed to touch other people without their consent.

And on the other hand, if someone is hit as a child, they learn that they are powerless. They learn that the people they trust in their lives will hurt them. They learn to associate love and pain, and will often recycle that experience by getting involved in abusive relationships. They learn that they do not deserve physical safety.

It’s not okay. It’s hurting everybody. So, for fucks sake, for the sake of children and adults and future generations and everyone - stop hitting your children.

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108220: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:26:30 PM

I'm against corporal punishment too, but I kind of question the link there.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108221: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:27:19 PM

Why?

<— still in process of forming opinions

edited 19th Oct '11 6:27:47 PM by Merlo

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108222: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:31:10 PM

Well it just seems like they're taking two sort of similar things and assuming they're connected.

Now don't get me wrong, it's very possible and perhaps even likely that corporal punishment contributes to the current culture of violence in the western world, but I'm not sure that there's such a direct and specific link between it and spousal abuse.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
MilosStefanovic Decemberist from White City, Ruritania Since: Oct, 2010
Decemberist
#108223: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:35:09 PM

That depends on the child's age and its reaction. Under the exactly same circumstances as the ones mentioned in the husband-wife example, it would be unacceptable. But if the child was throwing around a temper tantrum, it needs to be shown that it's not the way it can react, and should be spanked a few times until it calms down. You can't reason with someone in a fit of rage, and just letting it go will eventually lead to having a spoiled brat in the house. Of course, age is an important factor - if a child older than six or seven is throwing such a tantrum for something as small, you're a horrible parent for not teaching it how to behave when you should have, and any corporal punishment for the sake of teaching them discipline probably wouldn't work by then.

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
BlixtySlycat |like a boss| from Driving the Rad Hazard Since: Aug, 2011
|like a boss|
#108224: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:37:36 PM

*shrug*

I disagree. Of course, tantrums are not common in my family for some reason. I never really had them all that often. When I did, I was sent to my room, not hit. Likewise the three of my younger siblings that I live with.

I don't know about my other two.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
Merlo *hrrrrrk* from the masochist chamber Since: Oct, 2009
*hrrrrrk*
#108225: Oct 19th 2011 at 6:40:30 PM

Surely there must be other ways to deal with a tantrum? Like... like... locking in a dark closet! :D

Incidentally I've never found being spanked calming, it just made me hate whoever did it.

edited 19th Oct '11 6:41:44 PM by Merlo

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am...

Total posts: 291,497
Top