I actually wanna touch on the subject Matt and Redneckerz were talking about, IE using ridicule and shame to identify bad behavior. I've got a couple young kids, so my wife and I have been talking about this. My son is 5 and in kindergarten, if he pees himself would I be upset if other kids mocked him for it? I said no, because that shame/ridicule is a useful tool that society uses to identify/correct bad behavior. My wife disagreed with me, she basically just felt bad for his hurt feelings. There's obviously a worthy discussion to be had between the two sides, but I definitely feel the latter school of thought has gone too far in damaging what I would call a real sense of self-worth in the younger generations today. Peeing on yourself is bad, and I could totally see my son being just a-ok with it other than the mild annoyance of wet underwear because that's the kind of personality he has. People need to learn how to behave decently in society and also how to accept constructive criticism without letting it destroy your self-esteem.
That's assuming that your son
chooses to pee his pants. Chances are he does not, but hasn't fully learned to control his peeing yet. Thus, it would be unfair for him to be mocked for it. If it was just bad (intentional) behaviour, I'd be more understanding of your position, but if chances are that his peeing himself is not a choice of his, I think your wife's position is the more reasonable. Similar to the Resetera thing: Mocking someone for being gay / trans / handicaped / ...? Bad form, that's hardly a choice and if negative consequences are associated with it, the people already need to live with that. Mocking someone for demanding safe spaces (for things not associated to mental disorders, where this concepts originally comes from), for extreme language policing or similar? Fair game, this is a choice and you can definitely mock the idea without it being unfair. The border case is religion, where it is of course fine to ridicule beliefs, but when it comes to e.g. stuff like "being a jew", which is an identity and not even necessarily (strictly) bound to a set of beliefs, then it becomes shady.
Nobody did his own defence on this flawlessly, so i don't see why you have stick it up for him.
I do not stick it up for him, I am legitimately puzzled what your issue is with the harassment term that you demand an apology where it might just be applicible. Also you did not only ask about it twice. You asked about it for weeks. Maybe after his final statement that he would answer it, only two more mentions followed, but overall there were more than two postings of the kind "I am still awaiting your reply".
In fact, my repetitive wish for an apology was more spam-like than those two reminders, but oddly enough those messages aren't called as such.
I wouldn't be surprised if
Nobody_Important
perceived it as harassment as well, but if he ever wants to be left alone about this, what choice does he have other than to oblige to your demand?
Unless you feel obliged to return the favor considering Nobody likes your posts so much? Come on.
There is probably next to no one in social media who cares so little about likes as I do. If given the choice, I would have the forum without a like functionality. For the longest time I have even refuse to use that functionality in forums, but since it is a lost fight by now, I may as well use it. Anyway, I do not feel any obligations due to some likes, I try to be as fair as possible in my assessments and due to political closeness (though not full alignment) it is unsurprising that
Nobody_Important
and I often like each other's postings or are in agreement with each other. I enjoy many of his postings and feel he is an essential member of this forum, but if I felt he was in the wrong here, I would have no issues with stating such.
