pull down to refresh

102 sats \ 3 replies \ @sox 1 Oct \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
I don’t agree, words can be violence. If you damage mental health you’re left with good physical health that cannot be use.
Recovering from a physical wound can be relatively fast (excluding mutilation). Recovering from even a light mental wound can take years, decades, maybe also never.
I think the fact that people can’t value mental health as much as physical health, is partly because you can see someone bleed and you cannot easily avoid feeling empathy from your eyes. Stuff that you cannot see, and you don’t have the intelligence to imagine and empathize, can be really easily ignored.
write
preview
69 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 1 Oct
Then:
  • Is it acceptable for the state to make hurtful words illegal?
  • Is it acceptable to use physical violence to defend oneself against hurtful words?
reply
102 sats \ 1 reply \ @sox 1 Oct
I’d have to say no and no.
But to make no and no work in real life, we have to invest on mental health awareness and wellbeing. Both to make people generally better than what they are, and also to make people resist better against mental violence.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 1 Oct
But how would you justify the "no", and "no", when we currently accept the state making physical violence illegal, and even endorsing physical violence as a proper response to defend one's self against physical violence?
And further, if there are people who oppose government spending on mental health awareness, or people who do not acknowledge the importance of mental health, such that mental healthcare in the country never gets better, when does physical violence become justified, if ever?
reply