Responding to Disagreement or a Vulgar Personal Attack with Another Personal Attack

[Alien826]

But I don't think that I would ever resort to profane personal attacks. I certainly never do that in real life. In fact, the worst I've ever said to someone who really was being terrible and completely ignorant to me in a bar setting (for month after month, actually) was this, after raising myself to my full height (which is well over 6'2" and over 200 lb.) and saying, in frighteningly even tones, "if you ever so much as speak to me again, I will rip your arms off!" And do you know -- he never spoke to me again!

I often think that people that abuse others online do so because they are safe from a physical response. I'll bet few of them would talk like that in a bar to big aggressive looking people.

 

[JustGeorge]

I often think that people that abuse others online do so because they are safe from a physical response. I'll bet few of them would talk like that in a bar to big aggressive looking people.

I sometimes wonder what boring lives they must lead that they want to willingly create fuss and drama. I have enough fuss and drama, thanks.

 

[Revoltingest]

So, he was opposed to "God's creations being unnaturally altered"? I'll bet he'd change that tune pretty fast if there should come a day when he might need an organ transplant. Even better if his life-saving surgeon should happen to be a transgendered person.

Experiencing new things can be embiggening.

 

[Revoltingest]

I often think that people that abuse others online do so because they are safe from a physical response. I'll bet few of them would talk like that in a bar to big aggressive looking people.

Even small people can pose a risk, eg, wield a knife.
Best to avoid provoking anyone.

 

[Stevicus]

 

[Heyo]

The other week, someone on a Discord server got into an argument with me and responded to my disagreement with a profane series of personal attacks. I told that person that they could benefit from more self-control and maturity before leaving the server, since I was a new member and realized that atmosphere was normalized there. I didn't respond in kind before leaving.

That situation brought to mind a question: if you were in some online venue that had no rules against personal attacks, profanity, or trolling, would you see yourself responding to disagreement with an ad hominem or responding to vulgar personal attacks in kind? Why or why not?

My opinion is that such a response generally reflects on the emotional discipline and maturity of its source, so I believe that responding in kind would be negative for me, not just for others. That's why I didn't do so in the abovementioned situation, in addition to seeing no point to doing so.

Depends on how much I care about the attacker, the topic and the other persons in the debate.
I'm quick at putting people who are too far gone to be saved on ignore but some people benefit from being shown how it feels being attacked. Other people in a debate may benefit when I stand up against a bully. And I have no qualms to show how ridiculous an idea is by ridiculing it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The other week, someone on a Discord server got into an argument with me and responded to my disagreement with a profane series of personal attacks. I told that person that they could benefit from more self-control and maturity before leaving the server, since I was a new member and realized that atmosphere was normalized there. I didn't respond in kind before leaving.

That situation brought to mind a question: if you were in some online venue that had no rules against personal attacks, profanity, or trolling, would you see yourself responding to disagreement with an ad hominem or responding to vulgar personal attacks in kind? Why or why not?

Such responses say more about the person responding that they do about the person being responded to. People who respond is such a fashion struggle to distinguish the difference between attacking their argument and attacking their character, so they respond with a character attack.

I don't respond is such a way because I have no use for anger and can make the distinction noted above.

 

[anna.]

I sometimes wonder what boring lives they must lead that they want to willingly create fuss and drama. I have enough fuss and drama, thanks.

Having encountered a few effective trolls (but not in the way marginalized groups experience when bombarded on social media to the extent we've seen in recent years which is truly mob frenzy which brings out the lowest common denominators in human nature), I've often thought about why online bullies do what they do. There are probably as many answers as human nature allows for, but one of them, I believe, is they do it because they can. It's that simple. Regardless of motive, or where their real life is at - if they can do it online and get away with it they'll do it some more and then some more, and they don't stop until someone stops them via suspension, permaban, deletion, whatever the platform uses. Putting them on ignore helps the person suffering the abuse to not see them, but they will continue to bully because they're not being stopped and they know other people are still seeing them 'dominate' so they still get satisfaction. And then they'll redouble their efforts on the next available victim.

Through a couple decades of being online, I can say that most of the time I don't return abuse for abuse because I don't want to become like them in order to survive. I've learned how to push it off, but that comes at a cost, it takes a certain amount of intentional self-numbing, and it doesn't solve the bully problem for the online environment. The most effective thing that helps people with bullies (that I've seen) is being backed by decent, even-handed and vigilant moderation. The RF moderation is so good in this way and I've appreciated the difference it makes. Another forum I'm on has a community jury system that works very well also.

 

[PureX]

The other week, someone on a Discord server got into an argument with me and responded to my disagreement with a profane series of personal attacks. I told that person that they could benefit from more self-control and maturity before leaving the server, since I was a new member and realized that atmosphere was normalized there. I didn't respond in kind before leaving.

That situation brought to mind a question: if you were in some online venue that had no rules against personal attacks, profanity, or trolling, would you see yourself responding to disagreement with an ad hominem or responding to vulgar personal attacks in kind? Why or why not?

My opinion is that such a response generally reflects on the emotional discipline and maturity of its source, so I believe that responding in kind would be negative for me, not just for others. That's why I didn't do so in the abovementioned situation, in addition to seeing no point to doing so.

I doubt that it matters how we respond to that kind of thing. It's not going to disuade the attacker. So we may as well rèspond however we like.

 

[kadzbiz]

The other week, someone on a Discord server got into an argument with me and responded to my disagreement with a profane series of personal attacks. I told that person that they could benefit from more self-control and maturity before leaving the server, since I was a new member and realized that atmosphere was normalized there. I didn't respond in kind before leaving.

That situation brought to mind a question: if you were in some online venue that had no rules against personal attacks, profanity, or trolling, would you see yourself responding to disagreement with an ad hominem or responding to vulgar personal attacks in kind? Why or why not?

My opinion is that such a response generally reflects on the emotional discipline and maturity of its source, so I believe that responding in kind would be negative for me, not just for others. That's why I didn't do so in the abovementioned situation, in addition to seeing no point to doing so.

Years ago I did on occasion, but it would be rare for me to do it now. I'd have to be in a pretty bad head space to do so now. If I even bothered to dignify such an awful comment with a reply, I would rather respond with a cleverly worded comment that would make other readers think "Yep, that gotchya didn't it ya smug *******." lol It doesn't really stop further rubbish being put forward by the other person anyway, and I don't need the irritation in my life, so I just ignore, block, move on now.

 

[Debater Slayer]

So, he was opposed to "God's creations being unnaturally altered"? I'll bet he'd change that tune pretty fast if there should come a day when he might need an organ transplant. Even better if his life-saving surgeon should happen to be a transgendered person.

I would argue that even using antibiotics and other medications is technically "unnatural," since these are products of human research and manufacturing. I doubt he would have any issues with using those, though.

What also stood out to me as inconsistent and petty was that he had no problem using a slur and making mean-spirited remarks (which I won't detail here) about a group whom he identified as "God's creations." I would have thought that he would at least show more kindness toward people he believed were created in their current form by his god.