Noboru said: As long as bullying is purely words it can be ignored; the man who gets depressed from insults by another man that be become suicidal has my full approval and encouragement to end his life; I wish not to share this already rotten earth with him any further.Sphinxter said: Statements like the one you did are imho much rather fitting in Railey2's "insanity museum", but they probably won't get includedTo hell with the life of the weak man that lusts so for the approval of his peers — I shall be the first to dance atop his grave take he his own life for being thereof denied. As for the content: 1) people can get bullied for various reasons. Bullied people might not long for approval, but to be left alone by the bullies in the first place 2) I hope, it was just some figure of speech, because actually dancing atop of a grave sounds like a desecration of the death and a grave disrespect for human dignity. It was indeed a figure of speech — having said that, I do not support the idea that the dead should have rights nor do I care about "human dignity". Were it up to me, then organ donation would be compulsory and inheritance would not exist.Actually, even that figure of speech is quite sick imho Be careful now with your insults, for you might actually hurt me with them.Oh wait, no — thankfully I am not such a weak man to so care about the approval of others. |
 It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
Sphinxter said: While I don't agree with weakness being glorified, I do think metaphorically dancing on someone's grave for it is going a bit too far. It sounds more like you have more of a hatred for weakness rather than a proper admiration for strength.To hell with the life of the weak man that lusts so for the approval of his peers — I shall be the first to dance atop his grave take he his own life for being thereof denied. And while I do agree that the approval of those around you should not be the end-all be-all of decision making, there is also nothing wrong with seeking approval of those around you, especially if you are close with them. Neither stoicism nor co-dependency makes for any good way of living a life. |
☕ Truth be told, I'm quite proud of my house blend. To attain my flavor and fragrance, I use five different types of coffee beans. ☕ |
Korrvo said: Indeed — I have no admiration for strength. I'm not impressed by it.Sphinxter said: While I don't agree with weakness being glorified, I do think metaphorically dancing on someone's grave for it is going a bit too far. It sounds more like you have more of a hatred for weakness rather than a proper admiration for strength.To hell with the life of the weak man that lusts so for the approval of his peers — I shall be the first to dance atop his grave take he his own life for being thereof denied. And while I do agree that the approval of those around you should not be the end-all be-all of decision making, there is also nothing wrong with seeking approval of those around you, especially if you are close with them. I disagree — there is much wrong with it; the man that lets himself be so easily influence has worthless opinions; he will always be biased; he concludes not that which makes sense but that which obtains him the approval of his peers and that is exactly how most men operate and why virtually any opinion a man might ever have is clearly just the product of the Zeitgeist and how easily he is influenced by his peers. |
It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
Sphinxter said: Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for the case of the easily influenced. I'm arguing against the idea of someone who won't even consider the opinions and views of those around him.I disagree — there is much wrong with it; the man that lets himself be so easily influence has worthless opinions; he will always be biased; he concludes not that which makes sense but that which obtains him the approval of his peers and that is exactly how most men operate and why virtually any opinion a man might ever have is clearly just the product of the Zeitgeist and how easily he is influenced by his peers. You mention bias, but a man in a vacuum left alone to his thoughts is prone to many of his own bias. Considering what others have to say, yet not taking what other people say as gospel, is an important part of maturity and growth. I am not saying that a person should be easily influenced. Understanding that many operate more emotionally than logically, many operate relying on popular opinion or ingrained beliefs, and identifying who is operating in what way is also a very important part of personal growth. But more importantly, the idea that a man can become so stoic as to live without the justification of those around him is a fallacy and a recipe for unneeded unhappiness. While justification does not stem just from opinionated matters, nevertheless, if you find you're constantly disagreeing with those around you, then it might be a good idea to change up who you are hanging around and who you are talking to. |
☕ Truth be told, I'm quite proud of my house blend. To attain my flavor and fragrance, I use five different types of coffee beans. ☕ |
| NOPE! I dont usually go out of my way to be mean to people. Sometimes I say the wrong thing on accident but I doubt anything I've said to anyone actually caused them to do something to themselves or be part of the reason. I have had people pretend that what I've said to them caused them to hurt themselves tho. there was this one guy that I was friends with. We would only talk every few months but I didnt hear back from him in a long time. I found his account and saw all these comments talking about how much they would miss him. Found out he committed suicide. I wish I had realized sooner, he was a really nice dude. |
| 毎日, 日本語を勉強する |
| Funnily enough, some of the edgy, middle-school tier comments in this thread have made me want to kill myself. |
 What's the difference? |
| @Sphinxter: Ic(h) þink þou hast too little fellow feeling for þy fellow man in bale, teen and woe I'm a bit astonished from where þe hate or strong dislike of þe weak comeþ from There's a difference between donating organs, because that happens before the burial, and outright desecrating the death. I'm glad that it's not up to you to decide about such things and about inheritance, then Sometimes, weak men hide behind strong-looking masks. That aside, even if we seem to disagree strongly about this moral issue, I have nothing against you on a personal level |
NoboruSep 7, 2019 11:57 AM
Sphinxter said: I'm confused. What does inheritance have to do with organ donation or human dignity? Inheritance is merely a way to pass forward the obligations over a property to someone else, usually blood-related, after one's death. It's not the dead that has rights, it's that the living have duties. Actually, no dead person has 'rights', because for one to have rights they have to be a legal person and one is, in most legal systems, a legal person only from their first breath until the absence of brain activity. It was indeed a figure of speech — having said that, I do not support the idea that the dead should have rights nor do I care about "human dignity". Were it up to me, then organ donation would be compulsory and inheritance would not exist. |
KosmonautSep 7, 2019 10:52 AM
 |
| My biggest insult I gave on this site was: "you're a troll!" so yeah, I don't care |
    |
Aastra343 said: Actuallly, the conceived, but not yet born child (nasciturus) gets the right to inherit, according to Federal German Civil Code Section 1932, Sentence 2. Other than that, there are copyright laws that end only after several decades after the death of a person (in many countries: after 70 years after the death) and there are laws against the desecration of the death (cf. Federal German Penalty Law Section 167a, f. and Section 189)Actually, no dead person has 'rights', because for one to have rights they have to be a legal person and one is, in most legal systems, a legal person only from their first breath until the absence of brain activity. |
NoboruSep 7, 2019 11:57 AM
Noboru said: The rights of nasciturus are understood as a right that may or may not come to fruition from the expectation put on the fetus that it will, indeed, become a person. If they are aborted or born dead, then it's understood as if they were never alive, which has its own implications on inheritance. What I'm getting at is: it's not that the nasciturus has rights. On the contrary, it's the future rights of the born legal person that are being protected by the law as long as their birth is a possibility; the right at stake is the one they'll have once they are born, not some 'right' they have as a fetus. Aastra343 said: Actuallly, the conceived, but not yet born child (nasciturus) gets the right to inherit, according to Federal German Civil Code Section 1932, Sentence 2. Other than that, there are copyright laws that end only after several decades after the death of a person (in many countries: after 70 years after the death) and there are laws against the desecration of the death (cf. Section 167a, f. and Section 189)Actually, no dead person has 'rights', because for one to have rights they have to be a legal person and one is, in most legal systems, a legal person only from their first breath until the absence of brain activity. The desecration of death encompasses a whole other thing regarding legal relations, more specifically it's a 'non facere' conduct being demanded of a generalized party: the body is a property belonging to the family of the deceased (this is why in some countries it's the family who chooses if organ donation will happen or not, or why the family must arrange burial, why the family can choose to cremate someone against their wishes, and so on) and they demand from the indeterminate party, society, that it does not do (non facere) anything to their property (the body), being such demand recognized by the state and therefore, enforced by it. It's the same logic as the right to property, in which the owner asks the inderminate party to abstain from doing anything to the property. Again, it's not that the dead has a right to dignity, instead, the family has the right to have others abstain from acting upon their property. |
|
Aastra343 said: Or more like: if they will be born, they will be treated as having been born before and thus having the rights a posteriori.On the contrary, it's the future rights of the born legal person that are being protected by the law as long as their birth is a possibility; the right at stake is the one they'll have once they are born, not some 'right' they have as a fetus. Aastra343 said: While the family may have a say, death people may still have personality rights (post-mortem privacy) even after their death. "human dignity of a person in Germany legally extends to the time after his or her death": https://philarchive.org/archive/EBETCO (see also: https://www.bpb.de/gesellschaft/digitales/persoenlichkeitsrechte/244854/postmortaler-persoenlichkeitsschutz (in German)The desecration of death encompasses a whole other thing regarding legal relations, more specifically it's a 'non facere' conduct being demanded of a generalized party: the body is a property belonging to the family of the deceased https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/590006/06be329f5e98a5f0da17ec858426e7a4/WD-3-384-18-pdf-data.pdf (in German) ) |
| I sure do hope not. I'm mature enough to not look down on people I perceive as "weaker" than me. Sphinxter said: Imagine trying this hard. To hell with the life of the weak man that lusts so for the approval of his peers — I shall be the first to dance atop his grave take he his own life for being thereof denied. |
 Leading biologist Scott Pitnick said: The bigger your 'nads, the smaller your brains |
Daemon said: Funnily enough, some of the edgy, middle-school tier comments in this thread have made me want to kill myself. From loss of faith in humanity perhaps? |
| @Sphinxter It is truly obvious that the bougeois such as yourself, Sir Lancelot, would provide any sort of baseless induction as would any person coming from bourgeoisie roots. For it is only the socialman that may think of himself above all others, has he any inclination towards the respect of his aristocratic superiors, such as yours truly, were I not have been obliged to address you in this way. You see, I am a man of dignified nature, have you not offended the status of the optional notion of organ donation; I may have spared you the dialogue — for I am the magistrate of all mankind; for I consider the obscenity of your proposal therewhile to the current interest of your superiors. |
| On 4chan? Lol, no. Everyone is edgy on there. |
Noboru said: It's more a matter of semantics than anything else. The nasciturus won't be considered a person - what you said by being born - the right to inheritance and succession is merely being 'post-poned', so to speak, until the active party (the baby) is indeed born alive. It's as if the Law makes a bet: I'll protect and grant these rights this future person will have for as long as it takes to that person be the fatic holder of the right to inheritance.Aastra343 said: Or more like: if they will be born, they will be treated as having been born before and thus having the rights a posteriori.On the contrary, it's the future rights of the born legal person that are being protected by the law as long as their birth is a possibility; the right at stake is the one they'll have once they are born, not some 'right' they have as a fetus. Aastra343 said: While the family may have a say, death people may still have personality rights (post-mortem privacy) even after their death. "human dignity of a person in Germany legally extends to the time after his or her death": https://philarchive.org/archive/EBETCO (see also: https://www.bpb.de/gesellschaft/digitales/persoenlichkeitsrechte/244854/postmortaler-persoenlichkeitsschutz (in German)The desecration of death encompasses a whole other thing regarding legal relations, more specifically it's a 'non facere' conduct being demanded of a generalized party: the body is a property belonging to the family of the deceased https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/590006/06be329f5e98a5f0da17ec858426e7a4/WD-3-384-18-pdf-data.pdf (in German) ) I get what you're saying, but there are two types of norms: rules and principles. The former only applies when a specific situation occurs, eg. when someone digs up a dead person's grave, they infringe the rule of law that demands them 'not do' anything to the body. The latter are the ground moral guidelines of a legal system, eg. the freedom of speech, human dignity, freedom of association, so on. Regarding rules, the scheme is that of a subjective legal relation, which means there are the active subject (the holder of the right) and the passive subject (the holder of the duty). Taking the example I gave of grave digging: the active subject, the family, demands the passive subject, the digger, to abstain (not do) from digging up the grave. The dead person could not be the active subject, because the subjective right holder must have a will being acted upon (Savigny) and an interest (Windscheid) being protected. When you put up these parameters to the 'family' theory, they have a will being acted upon (to not do anything to the dead body) and an interest being protected (to not have the body be desecrated). As another example, a child cannot act on their will (they are considered completely incapable of doing so), however they have an interest. which is generally understood as 'being taken good care of'. So, a parent or tutor will hold legal power over the minor, meaning, they will carry out their own will in the best interest of the child until the minor becomes of age and capable of the acts of civil life. As you can see, this is a temporary state until the legal personality (they are alive and are capable of being the holder of rights and duties) can be accountable for their actions. A dead person is dead forever. They don't have an interest to be protected, neither a will to be acted upon, consequently they can't be the holder of a subjective right, nor the active subject of a legal relation. Aside from all of these, all subjective rights in private law are facultas agendi, facultative, this is the logical conclusion of saying that it's a will being acted upon. The corpse cannot wish or wish not to seek charges against the gravedigger, but the family can. Principles, on the other hand, are garanteed independently of there being legal personality or not. For example, everyone has the right to life, no matter where they are in the world or if they constitute a citizen or not; a dog has the right to humane treatment, despite not being a person. Principles do not follow the scheme of subjective legal relations, because they are something one claims from the state, not from another party. The state has to protect your freedom of speech, but it's not yours specifically, but everybody's, that's why it makes laws to punish those that restrict it. The state has to protect human dignity, but it's not yours specifically, but everybody's, that's why it makes laws to punish those that restrict it. |
KosmonautSep 7, 2019 1:19 PM
|
| Honestly if someone was so unstable to the point that they would off themselves over words and meaningless insults from people they don't know then if it wasn't my insults that pushed them over the edge it would just be someone else's anyway. |
BlakexEkalb said: MasterNeutral said: Honestly if someone was so unstable to the point that they would off themselves over words and meaningless insults from people they don't know then if it wasn't my insults that pushed them over the edge it would just be someone else's anyway. So this gives people the right to just be complete a-holes to others just because other people will be a-holes? I guess that's what most people think anyways nowadays. I mean I don't go out of my way to be an asshole to people ever, but if I've been wronged in some way you'll definitely get some insults going your way, and if you can't handle that it's not really my problem. |
149597871 said: People who alter their personality is a issue in itself and they should be seeking help.-InfiniteLoop- said: Did you mean latter? Personality comes from the Greek word "persona", meaning "mask" so it's our personality that's flexible and fabricated. But yes I agree with you on the two sides thing, we have our true self and what we show to others. People often use the phrase "I hate myself", here the I represents their true self and "myself" the part that they show to the world. I've always thought that persona comes from Latin. Yes, apparently it means mask (ironically). I said the former because I always hear people say things like "Don't judge people by their looks, personality is the most important thing", etc. but many of them ignore the fact that this "personality" can be something fabricated and easily altered in order to deceive. |
 |
| nop, because: 1. If I ever insulted anyone, surely there was a great provocation before 2. I'm not the type to waste time in a futile discussion on the internet so I can count on my fingers these people: if they are alive? I don't care, I care who's by my side now |
| I was borderline suicidal back in 2008~2012 (cause financial situations) and I did receive a lot of "Go kill Yourself" messages cause of my love for a certain anime character. It was more draining and annoying than making me want to off myself. So I think one would have to be really far gone to commit suicide from a few online comments from random strangers. I do make fun of certain users on forum posts, but only if they post dumb shit or act fucking stupid that I can't help but mock them. I don't think what I say is bad compared to what others usually post though. I mean some comments I see are more savage than mine. So no I don't really wonder if they killed themselves or not cause if they did kill themselves over something I said then their mental health was really fragile. |
"What has two arms, two legs, and is alive? Not your favorite character lol! xD" |
| You guys never would have survived xbox live in its prime 360 days... It gave you skin of steel. |
 |
| No, because I don't insult someone like that out of the blue. The only times I get involved is when the other party starts the fire with vile remarks, and at that point it's just self defense. |
  |
| I've had such thoughts. It's scary, given how fragile some people are. |
╮ (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.) ╭ |
traed said: I've had worse things said to me than I've said to anyone so it's not as likely someone would kill themselves over something I said though it's always a possability which is why I avoid telling people to kill themselves even if they are pretty aweful since I often try to hold some hope they can change. A lot of people I don't like I don't want dead just disagree with them or want them to become better people and sometimes I even feel sympathy for why they became how they are. Though some are totally a lost cause and I would be glad they can't hurt anyone once they are dead. Yeah I remember there was someone who tried to brand you a pedophile. Was one of the most irritating posts I've read on the site. You handled that really well though. OT: Don't think I've ever insulted someone's character in MAL. Most I said was "That's fucking stupid" and frankly if you're someone who would kill themselves over that, you'd probably have already done it 10 times over due to your previous interactions with harsher MAL users. In a way 1000+ post count proves someone is thick-skinned here lol. |
 |
| If you've had a fight with someone who's on a different spectrum than you online there's no escaping that anxiety. In my experience people write exaggerated threats of self-harm or suicide over the internet, but I still wonder about online friends I've had falling outs with were doing. I've had friends from the internet die, but never over our problems. It still leaves that kind of trauma you mentioned. |
UmuRoiSep 8, 2019 4:59 PM
 |
| I don't mind if snowflakes melt. It's in their nature. |
| Nope can't say I've ever considered it. I look at it like this, if you can talk shit, I'm going to assume you can deal with it being thrown back. Even in this case though I'm pretty tame. I'm not going to tell someone to go die in a fire for example, because that's just not my taste when it comes to talking shit. My preferences lean more towards the humorous rather than a place of anger, but I suppose in some ways this could be worse *shrugs*. Some of my group of friends can say some pretty screwed up shit (myself included) to one another from an outsider's perspective, but we're all use to one another's "toxicity" and it's viewed as the banter it is. If one of them were legitimately upset about it however, then ya I'd feel bad and try and rectify the situation. A stranger though? Nah, my gut reaction would be you reap what you sow. |
momoeiirin said: 1. What if a suicidal person provokes others on purpose in order to make it easier on them to forget them and/or to stop caring about them?nop, because: 1. If I ever insulted anyone, surely there was a great provocation before 2. I'm not the type to waste time in a futile discussion on the internet so I can count on my fingers these people: if they are alive? I don't care, I care who's by my side now 2. That's alright, but your conclusion sounds quite cold imho Roloko said: I'm sorry to hear that and I'm glad your situation got better. Still, that dislike just for liking a specific character seems quite extremeI was borderline suicidal back in 2008~2012 (cause financial situations) and I did receive a lot of "Go kill Yourself" messages cause of my love for a certain anime character. Roloko said: I think it's always best to take the worst case into considerationSo no I don't really wonder if they killed themselves or not cause if they did kill themselves over something I said then their mental health was really fragile. Fuchsia said: Indeed, but what can we do about it? Though what's scarier imho is how little compassion many people here seem to have when it comes to this topicIt's scary, given how fragile some people are. UmuRoi said: Those people might do so, because they wish to have people care for themIn my experience people write exaggerated threats of self-harm or suicide over the internet, but I still wonder about online I've had big falling outs with were doing.´ UmuRoi said: I'm sorry to hear that; yes, like even if I were not responsible, I would still feel responsible and blame myself for not having been able to do anything about it in case something like that happened for meI've had friends from the internet die, but never over our problems. It still leaves that kind of trauma you mentioned. |
| im extremely toxic online so yeah it has probably happened. Im a bit more chill on MAL cause half of the users here are suicidal and depressed |
| well i've insulted a lot of dogs and cats abusers on Instagram, and i really do hope they die |
| Words can do as much damage as you allow them to. So if something I've said in the past hurt a certain person to such an extent that they committed suicide, they can only blame themselves for it. And to answer the question, no I don't wonder if someone killed himself because i said something that they disliked. |
  “The most shameless thing in the world is political power that can be inherited regardless of ability or talent!” |
| As a general rule, I'm not the type of person who goes around insulting people unprovoked. Even if our interests diverge or are diametrically opposed and we're debating over political and religious ideology, philosophy, or more directly personal issues, I'm always pretty polite until someone gives me a reason not to be. Once someone throws direct personal insults to me or the few people I care about, or threatens and attacks me viciously, I'll naturally defend myself fiercely and feel no remorse or compunction in doing so. All that taken into account, logically speaking, why would I care? There are 7 1/2 billion people on Earth (and growing!) and about 10 I actually care about. The planet would be preferable with 1-2 billion. I'm not cruel in that I don't harbor animosity toward people who have done nothing to me, but I'm just apathetic and can't claim that I care either. At least anymore than I do about jellyfish washing up or trees being felled. I don't really have an anthropocentric view of the world and don't think humans are God's gift to Earth just because I am one (nor do I demonize humans - I'm just as neutral as I am to all other organisms). I care about the humans that actually hold meaning and significance in my life and that's where it ends. |
| Words don't have the ability to be offensive; only reference something that is. If someone kills themselves because of words, they needed to die anyway because they're already mentally unstable and weak minded. |
PsychoticDave said: Punches don't have the ability to hurt you, only to create the kinetic energy that hurts you.Words don't have the ability to be offensive; only reference something that is. |
| "my life at this state could be transposed into a pretty massive biography" - Cneq, "the guy who was literally using BTC in 2012 to make deals in the first main instance of a digital itemized economy forming naturally in all human history (also the precursor of NFTs) and who had 20k+ total trades.", 23 years old MAL's most prolific antivaxxer, Noboru. |
Railey2 said: PsychoticDave said: Punches don't have the ability to hurt you, only to create the kinetic energy that hurts you.Words don't have the ability to be offensive; only reference something that is. What's more offensive? Calling you a little bitch or spitting in your face? The word moist or assaulting someone with a water hose for the color of their skin? Anyone offended by words is a pussy. |
PsychoticDave said: Calling someone a braindead idiot is certainly more offensive than someone having a medical condition where their brain doesn't work. Or maybe you're just really offended by disabilities? In that case, perhaps you're the pussy here.Railey2 said: Punches don't have the ability to hurt you, only to create the kinetic energy that hurts you. What's more offensive? Calling you a little bitch or spitting in your face? The word moist or assaulting someone with a water hose for the color of their skin? Anyone offended by words is a pussy. Or maybe you're just incapable of thinking of examples that work against your dumb points, which is why you're making them in the first place. "The real thing is always more offensive than the insult". ok then, hoe. JK, I love hoes. Are you getting the point yet? |
| "my life at this state could be transposed into a pretty massive biography" - Cneq, "the guy who was literally using BTC in 2012 to make deals in the first main instance of a digital itemized economy forming naturally in all human history (also the precursor of NFTs) and who had 20k+ total trades.", 23 years old MAL's most prolific antivaxxer, Noboru. |
Railey2 said: PsychoticDave said: Calling someone a braindead idiot is certainly more offensive than someone having a medical condition where their brain doesn't work. Or maybe you're just really offended by disabilities? In that case, perhaps you're the pussy here.What's more offensive? Calling you a little bitch or spitting in your face? The word moist or assaulting someone with a water hose for the color of their skin? Anyone offended by words is a pussy. Or maybe you're just incapable of thinking of examples that work against your dumb points, which is why you're making them in the first place. "The real thing is always more offensive than the insult". ok then, hoe. JK, I love hoes. Are you getting the point yet? Calling someone a brain dead idiot is just reminding them and their families of the discrimination they've faced in the past and how insensitive to it people can be. But the words themselves are not offensive in the slightest. It's more-so that it's offensive that someone would openly be this hateful in front of you / towards you. |
| Damn, too many badasses here in the forums. I ain't even surprised. |
OptigisaSep 8, 2019 11:25 AM
| a long time ago there was a surge named Wolfy or something who said she-he-it would kill themself over 5 years ago, didn't see the player go in-game since go KYS is "just satire bro" the suicide rate is going up and if someone insults 100000 people over their lifetime one by one on za intanetto, there's probably at least one going off the law of large numbers or something I interpret the question as: do you ever wonder if your words have been swords and caused someone so much damage that they wanted to end their own life? not until now but I've been told I've done the reverse which is making them not want to end their own life; you don't know the impact what you put out there has on others until you get some empiricism on it this is Schrodinger's cat did it suicide or did it not in any case, I can't recall insulting anyone directly that far nor being insulted myself to a degree that would cause long-term PTSD degree mental injuries and you can simply look away or move to another activity on the screen unless you got supa haxxed and they're in your face and you're tied to a chair and your eyes are duct taped wide open and you bite your tongue to escape--which is to say you can also get up and wash your face and go outside and get burned by the sun uh... so ya... I'm not worried... I'd be worried that they are so fragile more than how fragile ningen already are, like I stubbed my toe yesterday and youch intentionally hurting yourself or others doesn't do much unless it's for combat training; I don't know about the beliefs of afterlife and deities but I know that I should continue living and moving forward |
chuunigyoSep 12, 2019 9:28 PM
| Signature |
| no, imagine getting offended online by a stranger. if its a close friend you've insulted that might make more sense. |
 |
| Not at all. Those whom commit suicide and are not under any sort of constant physical duress or complete isolated deprivation are unknowable to me. I mean, there is always going to be just one more game, or just one more fap or just one more exotic thing I can stick my penis into. To think one would take that from themselves in their prime over insults is outrageous and alien. It is like a little baby throwing a tantrum and threatening to kill itself because its parents made it do its homework That will really show them, they will be sorry. |
 |
Railey2 said: PsychoticDave said: So what you're saying is that you're too socially incompetent to understand how insults work. Calling someone a brain dead idiot is just reminding them and their families of the discrimination they've faced in the past and how insensitive to it people can be. But the words themselves are not offensive in the slightest. It's more-so that it's offensive that someone would openly be this hateful in front of you / towards you. That's a new one. I mean I know that autism is rampant on here, but you're taking it to the next level m9. Good for you. Also nice to know that I can call you a braindead idiot without offending you, although I believe that you might wanna take that particular insult to heart. I'm flattered to say the least. Taking autism to a new level must be a scientific achievement. Also: |
PsychoticDaveSep 9, 2019 3:38 AM
Noboru said: I'm appalled about the lack of compassion here. Even more so, when it comes from users who are also strongly against death penalty. Now naturally, there must be some sort of mental self-defense that prevents people from grieving about others with whom they didn't even have anything to do. However, it's a bit awful imho to not give anything about people you've conversed to. Sometimes I wonder whether people are even aware and fully conscious about the fact that the users they're writing to are real people. If you had a harsher life you wouldn't be. What people in advance countries fail to understand is that life is hard and the universe still is all about survivor of the fittest. Actually sitting and feeling sorry for an unknown weakling is pointless and if you try to do it then is more an attempt to play nice and convince yourself you are kind which is nothing but narcissism because in the end you can't care that much. |
More topics from this board
» What do you need cash for in your everyday life?MeanMrMusician - Apr 21 |
33 |
by Oofmastre9000
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » strawberry, chocolate or banana milk? ( 1 2 )bobbysalmon - Apr 17 |
58 |
by rose
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» What if Burger is on a stick?Dragevard - Feb 10, 2022 |
20 |
by Rhaelynne
»»
49 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » school uniform or no school uniform which is better? ( 1 2 )deg - Feb 21 |
96 |
by neol3
»»
50 minutes ago |
|
» Dracula, Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde or Frankenstein(books)?Absurdo_N - 3 hours ago |
5 |
by Kamikaze_404
»»
2 hours ago |