Can words be equivalent to violence?

One punch can kill. It often has. One string of words can feel no less of a stomach punch than an actual punch in the gut. Often it is a truth, a truth that we didn't want to hear. It hurts in a physical way. The upset caused by a stream of words is very real. It can create pain beyond the emotional, beyond temporary mental anguish.

There I am standing at the bar overhearing someone making an insinuation relating to someone and the bar maid. Within microseconds the chap got off his chair, headbutted the man making the insinuation then proceeded to kick him on the ground. No long-term damage, but it was clear that one ought to think carefully about making accusations / insinuations. At least be careful with who you send your words to. Many would have laughed these insinuations off. Many would have ignored them completely. Some would have countered them and put them straight. But this bloke was having none of it.

I look back over the years to see if I could identify a time when things began to change. To see if people have become more sensitive now. More sensitive or what we now call being a snowflake. Well, I can tell you that I know of quite few disputes arising from small things people have said. These little events span many decades. Little events that had not so little tempers fraying. Not much has changed. Not in my opinion. I know of lots of people that refuse to talk to one another, who refuse to make up and bury the hatchet. They refuse to back down because their pride will take a dent. Mothers not talking to sons. Longs standing friendships disbanded. Feuds and neighbourhood disputes stemming from relatively trivial things people have said. Often, miscommunication and the misunderstanding of words spoken. People taking things the wrong way. It can be a poorly chosen word or a poorly constructed sentence. Or it can be how we say something. What we mean can differ substantially from what we said.

I regret, I deeply regret saying something to Megan. For she really took it badly. It hurt a lot for It was read as me being judgemental. And that is something she has encountered all too often. People judging her for the decisions, the choices she has made over the years. It is not that I don't stand by what I said. I do stand by it. It needed to be said, or so I thought. The aim was to make her value herself more. To consider what she is doing in order to stay a little safer. It would not have been a microscopic virus that would have put her out of action, but a person that presumed that consent is a given if she has agreed to meet up. Swipe, meet, sex. But if you want swipe, meet, and decide. No sir. In the minds of too many, swipe and meet, means you want to have sex. Swipe, meet, choke, and perform all kinds that we have watched on the porn channels.

Words read out of context can pack the biggest punch. We don't bother to hear the full story. We don't ask why someone said what they did. We don't get to the bottom of their reasoning. We simply jump to a conclusion and think the worst.

Bias

If I were to tell you that this man is not very nice, then show you a bunch of messages from him, you will read them with confirmation bias. You will see them as what you are told they are. Horrible nasty and unkind things. However, if you take the exact same messages but say beforehand that these are form a really nice friend of yours, the opposite happens. You concur. The messages are read as well meaning and nice. It all depends on how you frame it at the start. The same messages are interpreted according to how you view the person. They are not read objectively. We base it on how we are told to see them. I thanked Megan. I praised her. I sent many genuine compliments. I said she can continue to use my land to let the dog off the lead. Lots of nice things. How were they viewed and discussed? All negative and toxic. All because she wanted to make people believe they were nasty. Nice to nasty by virtue of framing them in a biased fashion. She was of course cajoled into filtering and misrepresenting the messages by callous swine. Swine that feed in the gutter. That revel in dishing out dirt to make them look good. We all feed the master ant. The master ant has the big belly. The big I am. Mr important surrounded by young pretty things. She was too easily influenced by those with an agenda.

Dissuasion

We can persuade and dissuade. We can put people off. We can show our disapproval. The effects are devastating. Relationships ruined or put under strain. Collectively the power of dissuasion is enormous. If you begin to date someone, the group, the family, the 'friends' stick their oar in. They make a splash. Either approval, unsure or abject disapproval. They will dissuade you directly or via subtle suggestive remarks. All of which are most unhelpful. I had, "cut all ties", "You wouldn't do that would you", making Megan squirm. This was followed by "You two make a lovely couple", said in a sardonic, mean-spirited way. Then a dirty look really caused mayhem. This is the fuel that keeps the fire in the extremist's belly alight. Involuntary celibates are not going to go away when society rejects and torments for spiteful amusement.

You can't always pin the blame on any one individual, each dirty look, each rancid comment leaves a mark. Maybe one individual acts as the straw that breaks the camel's back. Who can tell? What I know is that defending against one is a challenge, defending against a barrage of abuse is much harder. It is particularly hard when you are trying to shield a sensitive soul. It would be nice to make an appeal to people asking them to consider their words more carefully, but it is a hopeless cause. It takes an eternity for people to change. It took decades for racist comments to become more frowned upon. Wearisome ageist comments will still be around in the decades to come. To counter it, we can be nice in return, smiling and ignoring it. Or we can strike back with something equally hard hitting and personal. There are pros and cons to each tactic. No right answer in each case.

Words make people act. Why do the dirty work yourself if you can encourage others to help you bash a competitor. Those that act for you can be rewarded by more inclusion in the group. But only whilst they use you to get the job done. Make no mistake about it, the inclusion is only temporary. The patsy is pushed out after the deed is completed.

We feel so much bolder and more inclined to be nasty when others egg us on. We change our opinion very quickly when a few gang up on someone. People aspire to be within a prominent clique. They will throw good friends under the bus to edge their way in. These people never consider any introspection and march onwards in their sordid lives. They don't change. They were born horrible and thankfully die one day, to be gladly forgotten.

Can words be equivalent to violence. As painful, as hurtful, as bad?

Violence