Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »
Top | New | Old
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
I don't condone violence.

Yet when someone is convicted of a violent act it's not rhetorical violence. There's proof given to make a conviction.
FoxyQueen · 51-55, F
@DeWayfarer It's not, mostly because of platitudes. But they definitely should be.
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@FoxyQueen You have to draw a line somewhere. A legal reason is the best we can do.

I'm not sure I'd call violent rhetoric rhetorical violence.
FoxyQueen · 51-55, F
@MistyCee yet, it is.
@FoxyQueen I agree with both being dangerous, but I do think the different nouns and adjectives convey slighty different meanings.

Rhetoric violence is not actual violence, while violent rhetoric is actual rhetoric.

My apologies for being so picky.
FoxyQueen · 51-55, F
@MistyCee No worries. Violence is something that is still rather disputed. There are 9 forms of violence and most think if it isn't physical, it isn't violence, but that simply isn't true. Violence is a force that is used in a myriad of ways to gain control and power over anyone who cannot withstand the violence. This means systems and institutions can be inherently violent while not creating a physical danger or direct danger. It is also not a concept commonly discussed. It took me a while to understand the various types of violence.
FoxyQueen · 51-55, F
@GerOttman And she paid a huge price for that rhetoic, like she should have.

 
Post Comment