this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
1012 points (93.7% liked)

tumblr

3446 readers
1005 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not what self defense is. For instance in most civilized spaces you can't respond out of proportion, you are usually required to retreat if its safe to do so from public spaces, you can't continue attacking while your opponent flees, you can't instigate or cause the conflict and then claim the protection of self defense.

[–] glitches_brew@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Responding in proportion by harming someone in self defense would be crossing the standard of not harming others, but is acceptable.

And if you go further than is needed you would void your own social contract status.

He's talking about apples and you're talking about apple pie. You kind of asserted a lot of extra to what entails self defense.

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He and about everyone in this thread including the originator are talking shit about things they don't even slightly understand and then trying to scramble to justify.

That’s what “self-defense” is. Someone breaks the social contract and tries to harm you so you are allowed to also break the social contract and harm them.

This just isn't correct your social contract didn't magically change. You aren't excused from it by someone's actions. It is rooted in who you are not who they are. It can be described in this case by a sentence. Just because a clause doesn't apply to a particular situation doesn't mean the fuckin rule changed.

Don't cause people to come to harm by action or inaction wherein your actions are themselves justifiable to reasonable people while protecting yourself by doing the least harm possible while preserving your justifiable interests. We end up needing a lot more words to describe what reasonable is because people are stupid assholes but it is what it is.

You apply the same rule to someone trying to attack you as someone making change at the fucking grocery store. The attacker is part of the same social contract even if you end up bloodying the one person and thanking the other.