I could tailor this to be a #vaguequestionsbypablo, but I'm a bit more sincere about the question at the moment and I kind of just want your actual thoughts on it.
Disclaimer: I'm not going to screen myself now because it limits my articulation, if I come across as an asshole it's not my intention.
My Facebook feed is nauseating.
Militant feminazis post their hideous blogs to incite anger from both genders on their friends list. Then, they tag my school's Gender "Equality" (HA!) Club to cry misogyny, sexism, homophobia and "fuck you, ugly bastard cyber-bully!" at anyone who tries to tell them to calm down, or at least have some respect.
Israelis share the Israeli Defense Force's facebook page that counts how many rockets are fired on Tel Aviv, and how "Arab cunt sand-niggers should suicide bomb themselves." When my two Syrian and Egyptian friends interject-- both the most incredible people to me who have helped me through the worst of times-- every Israeli on the East Coast shows up to yell anti-Semite and so on.
Somehow, and this is perhaps the worst bit, those...discussions?... exhibit novel-length, single-sentence caps-locked bullshit salads that are reacted to via further bullshit salad-making until I have to pick through the leafy greens of ignorance to find a discernible word to even be angry at anymore.
I used to get involved, somehow I cared and put the effort in and was just as much a part of it.. I knew I was right. Then again, they knew they were right too. That's a tough situation. I happened to be good at it by avoiding personal attack and so on and actually discussing evidence, a concept which they hadn't even considered to be relevant to their bullshittery.. But it didn't make me feel healthy, there was never a compromise or conclusion of any sort, and it only inflated our egos on both sides and made us want to murder each other more.
Now, when my Syrian brother messages me to like a comment or "fuck 'em up" as I apparently grew a reputation of doing, I say no thanks it's not worth it. So far, it's been working. I know I have a bad habit of commenting on absolutely everything on Hubski with little to no valuable input, I swear I'm toning that down, but on Facebook and in person I'm not that kind of guy at all.
Because I've detached myself so effectively, mainly by sticking to specific closed and safe areas for ventilating- Hubski, my school's philosophy club which I lead, and music-- I am no longer damaging myself and whatever sort of "relationship" I have with my classmates. The problem is, as it becomes more evident with people asking me to step in as though I'm expected to represent the cause, as though I'm a traitor for keeping my mouth shut.. I may now be perceived to be weak. No backbone. A guy who won't step up for what matters to him, or defend his friends. A good public speaker or sharp-witted debater when face to face with someone, who "backs out" of arguments now.. what a bitch.
Such is the conflict in my mind. So I ask you Hubski, white knighting and moral halos aside, consolations and feel-betters aside please:
when you keep your mouth shut, or you see someone keeping their mouth shut.. is that a sign of weakness?
"Speak only when it improves upon the silence." - Mahatma Gandhi You're asking the wrong question. You're asking "am I a pussy when my friends tell me to mix it up over Palestine and I don't want to?" This is a simple answer. No. The question you want to ask is "How can I get my friends to leave me alone on 'issue X' without offending them?" Different question. Your best move is to come up with a concise answer for yourself as to why you don't want to get involved. If you can write it on a matchbook it's short enough. I might start with "these are my friends on Facebook and I don't want to publicly pick sides in a dispute that is unfortunate, complex, and utterly without winners." You might go with "nothing anyone says is going to accomplish anything other than making everyone angrier, and there's more than enough anger already." You might say "I think the last thing my Feed needs is gasoline for the fire." Did you know that you can "ignore" someone on Facebook without unfriending them? That is how my sister-in-law and I can avoid fisticuffs. Don't tell her I said so.
Yes, the Restricted list? That is how I manage family friends and adults so that I can avoid showing them who I really am. Glorious. Writing that in first thing when my new journal ships. Lost my old one, god damn it.
Now, Let me put it this way before I render completely incapable of articulation: My question is whether or not the aforementioned stance on confrontation makes me a pussy. It is not wondering whether or not my friends think I'm a pussy and how I should talk to them about it. ja feel?Did you know that you can "ignore" someone on Facebook without unfriending them? That is how my sister-in-law and I can avoid fisticuffs.
"Speak only when it improves upon the silence."
- Mahatma Gandhi
"How can I get my friends to leave me alone on 'issue X' without offending them?"
isn't actually my concern. Facebook is an example here, I'm not having a teenage cyber-social crisis where my friends are pressuring me and I wear a bag over my head to school, I'm having a teenage character crisis where I'm pressuring myself to make my life as happy as possible while damaging as little as possible around me. It is very much an in-person situation as well to be clear, and managing my friends isn't the crux of the problem so much as managing myself is. That said, the last thing my Feed needs certainly is "more gasoline," luckily I have very understanding and relatively intelligent friends who I don't have a problem dealing with.
Got it. So the real question is "what makes a pussy?" The answer is "you do." If you are keeping your mouth shut because you think your friends want you to keep your mouth shut but you really want to say something - you are a pussy. If you are snarking and picking fights because you think your friends want you to pick fights but you'd really rather sit it out - you are a pussy. Most kids don't realize this until they're 30 or so. The reality of the situation is that you know a thousand times as much about yourself as your friends do. You care a thousand times as much about yourself as your friends do. Their only way to really know where you stand is to test your limits. Push your buttons. See if they can spin you up. If they can? You are less than them. If they can't? Well, they'll try harder. Until they hit the point where they determine that your stones are bigger than theirs. That's the nature of pecking order. That's the nature of "being a pussy." Know how The Fonz could make anything cool? Could show up in a bathrobe and suddenly bathrobes were the thing to wear? Obviously The Fonz is a fictional character, but the nature of "cool" is following your own path for your own reasons and being invulnerable to the doubts and assaults of those around you. To be a pussy is to knuckle under in the face of adversity. To be a pussy is to not fight battles you can win. But to be a pussy is to fight battles because it is expected of you, because it's the easy way out, because it gives your friends and peers a way to shunt you down the pecking order. Your friends will think you're a pussy if you think you're a pussy. If you have the belief in your convictions to say "I'm not getting into it because I don't want to" and make it stick, your friends will know you as the badass you truly are.
point taken -- ref - by the way, originally nwpabs did not use the word "pussy" - only the word "weak." I think this is worth noting -- because while "pussy" is a more powerful word in a male world, it makes no sense in my world. You tell me not to be a pussy, and I'll say "meow." I'm sure noway's on-line friends cover all genders. Nonetheless, I loved the "thrust" of kb's arguments.
When a guy calls his bro a "pussy" he is not calling him a slang term for a fucking 16th century word no one knows. Nor is he calling him a cat because apparently cats have some notoriety for being cowardly? In the context of modern society it is incredibly self-evident what someone means when they call someone a "pussy" and it is so obviously a gendered insult I cannot believe people still bring this up. Also as if you really needed more evidence against it: pusillanimous is an adjective and pussy is used as a noun in every case I've ever heard it. That seems a little odd if it were shorthand, doesn't it? It's always said, "that guy is a pussy" not, "that guy is pussy". I realize this is coming off a little sharply, but you would not believe how much I see this used as a dismissal of a bigger problem.
That definitely could be one of the origins of the word's current use. . . along with several others. While pusillanimous is an excellent word meaning timid, it originates in the Latin word pussilus meaning very small. When a guy is called a pussy, he is being called very small. Given the word has so many meanings including kittenish, nowaypablo's original use of the word "weak" unambiguously expressed his meaning.
Well then, color me uterus. Case closed everybody, see you next week.
Jeff: Listen. It doesn’t matter. You lose the jacket to please them, you keep it to piss them off. Either way, it’s for them. That’s what’s weak. Troy: People have been clowning me about this jacket since I got here, but if I take it off to make them happy, that just makes me weak, right?
Man I tried community like twice and never really clicked. I never started from season 1/pilot though. I may just give it another try! thanks:)
No way pablo!!!! if you don't watch all of Community, we can't be friends. (That's not true but it's brilliant and clever, at least most of it is, and you would probably enjoy it, and so would the rest of Hubski, and also I answered the question of "What makes a pussy" flippantly down below but you'll chuckle at it so peruse the damn thread.)
I laughed at work, fuck you/thank you, that was on point.
Hm, If you are snarking and picking fights because you think your friends want you to pick fights but you'd really rather sit it out - you are a pussy man I still don't think these are it. Also I don't agree that not fighting battles you can win is pussy-esque, I think you prove the mass of your cojones when you fight battles that you may not win, or aren't expected to win... and win. But I wouldn't always feel comfortable engaging a situation where "pick on someone your own size" may apply. The knuckling under adversity bit is absolutely true, and although I really don't want to and less still do I care about keeping rank in the pecking order, you're most likely on point in what would put me on top or below. Okay so I think we've narrowed it down to the question of "what makes a pussy" as you said, but now that I think about I think lil said it best at the mention of choosing your battles. By keeping my mouth shut, I'm effectively engaging in choosing my battles, i.e. not choosing these ones in particular. My concern therefore is whether or not choosing my battles wherein I virtually choose to not partake in battles, makes me [weak] or not. The reason I would choose to not partake in any of them is because of the examples I gave in the OP, where nobody is actually listening to each other for some sort of conclusion to be made, whether its a win or loss for either party-- thus, both sides end up losing and so does their relationship.If you are keeping your mouth shut because you think your friends want you to keep your mouth shut but you really want to say something - you are a pussy.
galen has the right of it. We're circling around the same subject, I think I just see it more universally than you do. For example, I said: You reduced that down to You're looking at actions. I'm looking at intent. Galen boiled it down to two snappy lines of dialog; it's not what you're fighting, it's why you're fighting. And no matter the reason, if it aligns with your internal compass you're showing inner strength. Might be wrong, might be evil, might be misguided... but ain't nobody gonna call you weak. "Choosing your battles" is a much more Machiavellian concern. Absolutely: some fights aren't worth fighting. But that's a different consideration than "why you must fight them." It's like this: Right. But when you say it like "nobody's listening to each other, thus both sides end up losing" you're making your reasoning external. People are calling your judgement into question because you are making judgements about external factors. If instead you say it like "I'm not going to add my voice to an already-pointless conversation" you've taken a stand. Same statement? Yep. Absolutely. Same justification? Got it in one. Different context? Just different enough. That's the thing - sometimes it's about nuance. And the nuance here is "I have made a judgement for myself and you're not swaying me."To be a pussy is to knuckle under in the face of adversity. To be a pussy is to not fight battles you can win. But to be a pussy is to fight battles because it is expected of you, because it's the easy way out, because it gives your friends and peers a way to shunt you down the pecking order.
I don't agree that not fighting battles you can win is pussy-esque, I think you prove the mass of your cojones when you fight battles that you may not win, or aren't expected to win... and win.
The reason I would choose to not partake in any of them is because of the examples I gave in the OP, where nobody is actually listening to each other for some sort of conclusion to be made, whether its a win or loss for either party-- thus, both sides end up losing and so does their relationship.
Modern Family was great to watch with my mom for like two seasons stretching it. With Donald Glover and the rest in community I think I'm going to give it a proper chance too.
I somehow made the same connection between the two shows and never watched either. Community has received so much praise on Hubski that I think it warrants a shot. Imagunna check it out.
We should unite the community noobs somehow, it seems like there's a good bunch of us about to start. Tv sit-com club?
I'm on episode 2 season 1. It's already hilarious. kleinbl00 the pilot is an ode to John Hughes that I think you'd appreciate
I just watched one of the latest episodes on Hulu. It's D&D themed, I was laughing to the point of a maniacal cackle. Where are you watching early episodes?
Ok, breakthrough. and I get what you and galen mean in regards to the why, though I was obviously thinking of the actual actions themselves primarily, as the conflict lies in communication between these people and myself.. anyway, I think I got you. This helps, thanks.Right. But when you say it like "nobody's listening to each other, thus both sides end up losing" you're making your reasoning external. People are calling your judgement into question because you are making judgements about external factors. If instead you say it like "I'm not going to add my voice to an already-pointless conversation" you've taken a stand.
Choose your battles. Choose where and how you want to spend your intellectual and emotional energy. You are well on your way to figuring out what is worth doing, saying, or writing. You realized that engaging in arguments about polarizing topics based on insufficient information and selective statistics is not the best use of your time. When you do speak up on a topic, your frenemies will know that it is something you feel strongly about. . . . and everything kb said.My question is whether or not the aforementioned stance on confrontation makes me [weak].
Choose your battles. point taken, thank you, and pardon my vulgarity. It's a Jersey thing.When you do speak up on a topic, your frenemies will know that it is something you feel strongly about.
Pabst, there are some things that are simply not worth saying. You may completely and totally disagree with what the person is saying, but you know what? They're just not worth the energy. To me this happens when I'm facing someone and I realize that no matter what I'm going to say, that person isn't going to change their mind. Then in addition, I do not have the energy, fire, or willingness to stoop to their level in order to agree with them. (Pick one of the three or more.) Sometimes my mental dismissal is "I don't have the time for this." or "I don't care about this enough to argue with you." Sometimes it is "I so completely disagree with you on this subject that I cannot look on you with any respect for having this viewpoint, and in fact arguing this viewpoint with you gives it any sort of creedence and so therefore I refuse to do so." Keeping your mouth shut can be as much as sign of tiredness or unworthiness as anything else. I think it is a stronger person who knows when not to bother with an argument, than someone who is going to plunge into every single fight just to fight, just to show their bravado and "intelligence" and "my way is above all." Discussing a viewpoint suggests that that viewpoint has merit. Not all do. As I said in a different thread with 8bit, I was dating a guy who turned out to be batshit. When he told me that equal rights for both sexes would lead to more male sociopathy because men had an innate desire for sex that would cause them to become killers if they didn't get laid, that was an argument I didn't even bother to have. His statement was so wrong on so many levels that in fact I wasn't sure where I would start with it. Context helps too. If you have had multiple discussions with a person before and you can't get to a point where you either see eye-to-eye or agree to disagree, are you going to keep having arguments/discussions with them about future topics? Why? You know where they are going to go. (That helped me decide to leave that boy's assertion alone too; we had already tried to talk about a few other subjects and been unable to agree.) Usually I get into Facebook arguments when I am so tired of a given person's blatant stupidity that I must point it out; frequently, too, I am tired of that person in my feed and want them to unfriend me. I know this question isn't about Facebook, but I think that should be a consideration of what it takes to get involved in a verbal brawl. For the most part, other people's opinions aren't going to hurt you. Racism, sexism, etc - yes, those opinions will hurt you and you will find me stepping up for them pretty much anywhere and yes, especially here (but also in real life; I definitely accused someone of being, and I quote, "a sexist pig" at a 4th of July barbecue this year) - but there are also experiences on which I do not have any input because I recognize I don't know enough, and that's a great time to stay quiet too. Like, I'd (personally) stay out of any discussions about Israel and Palestine. I really don't know enough. That doesn't make me (or you) weak. That means you are capable of acknowledging and differentiating between times you should speak, and times you shouldn't.
yup.
Otherwise I'm on the same page as you with pretty much everything, though imma have to call you out about making them unfriend you, ms. passive agressive ;) Maybe I'm late or maybe I should just be grateful I came around to it, but I think I'm learning to choose my battles and generally chill out. I appreciate your input ref, thank you. Glad we're on the same page about that too. and boy oh boy I read that convo with 8bit I wanted to buy you a hug or something. Sometimes crazy is really good at hiding. P.S. I kinda want to question why you call me Pabst but I kinda just wanna let it flow.Usually I get into Facebook arguments when I am so tired of a given person's blatant stupidity that I must point it out.
It comes from the pablo, that's all. As for passive aggressive, I don't know. Stupidity enrages me. Let me rephrase that. What I perceive to be stupidity enrages me. It enrages me because I feel like it is a waste of my time. I like to get into people's faces about their stupidity on Facebook because I believe, in a way, that quietly unfriending them because of their opinions is almost like tacit compliance. "I don't like what you're saying but I'm not going to confront you about it." I guess that is where I draw my line about being a pussy. If you waste my time by being an idiot, yes, I am going to tell you about it. I am going to call you out on it. I want to become that person that you don't want to be friends with because I no longer want to be friends with you. And because said person has already wasted so much of my time by publicly being an idiot, I want them to know it, and I want them to do the work of removing me because I have already spent so much time sifting through their idiocy that I'm not going to just passively go to their page and let them "off the hook" as it were. I am going to flame them the fuck out. I think it is more accurate to call my behavior actively aggressive. When I make them unfriend me on Facebook I am very blatant about it. And, just so everyone doesn't go around thinking I'm a giant douche to my facebook friends all the time, this has happened about 3 times in my life, mmkay? Now I am going to pause and consider all of the pejorative words used in this thread - i.e., "pussy" and "douche" ("douche" was nearly "prick" or "dick" but i rethought it) quietly, alone, and to myself, without judgement. P.S. to buying me a hug, ah, well, somehow I keep finding these winners, you know what I mean? Some quiet non-judgmental reflection would be well-served there except I can't ever seem to get to the end of that particular problem. And no, I'm not going to ask hubski or kleinbl00, because the answer is very likely, "It's something about you you need to change," and other people might be able to very accurately say that and cut me with it (but not in a bad way, necessarily) but I don't think I'm going to be able to change it until I suss it out and conclude it myself. And accept said conclusion.
Note: Italics mine not ref's. You make a lot of good points here. The phrase "you waste my time" jumps out at me because it just seems that reading or engaging in idiocy is a personal choice to waste our own time. It doesn't take too long into a thread to be able to decide if you want to choose to read on. It doesn't take too long to decide whether to waste time or to invest that time elsewhere. We have agency. We can decide how to waste our own time. On line, no one wastes it for us. In person, it's similar, but more personal and more difficult to withdraw. nowaypablo 24 hours after instigating this discussion - where do you stand?If you waste my time by being an idiot, yes, I am going to tell you about it. . . . . And because said person has already wasted so much of my time by publicly being an idiot, I want them to know it
I watched Trainspotting last night, it's on Netflix. Theme was nothing about the subject but it had me thinking about what role, place, and rights we have withinin the lives of others. It is not healthy or possible to live on your own, and it is not possible to make decisions on your own, that won't impact everything around you. With respect (and understanding) to ref, this is partly the confrontation that made me sick to my stomach over time. July 4th guy deserves the worst, so does bad date guy. Their Facebook variants, just the same. However in my current case, I'm not personally being challenged, threatened, or insulted by what's on my Feed. I'm offended, confused, baffled, but to me that's just a reminder that I've got a grip on what I think is right. I balance that by reminding myself how much of my mind is constructed of opinions that I must make vulnerable to influence and perspective, but there are core ideas that define my sense of right and wrong, and bingo lil, if those are challenged directly to me then those are the battles I will choose to fight, as you said. I won't feel weak for not defending or instructing everyone what I think is right, even if it's "truly" right whatever that means, cause that's stupid and a waste of time. Let me stop ranting and replace it with this:
This is really what I want. If you ask me where I stand, it'd be whichever side or party is advocating this, francopoli's side.If you waste my time by being an idiot, yes, I am going to tell you about it. . . . . And because said person has already wasted so much of my time by publicly being an idiot, I want them to know it.
"Speak only when it improves upon the silence." - Mahatma Gandhi
. Replace silence in this case with Angry Yelling Screaming, there are few times when speaking will improve on it, I won't bother when it does not. I was raised to believe that men should have a stoic, silent character. That listening is more important that speaking. That when you talk, have something to say that adds to the conversation, moves a talk forward or opens a mind to a new way of looking at things. I'm not saying I'm good at these ideals although I try. Still, I love this outlook at life and it works well for my personality.
I did this exact same thing with "A Clockwork Orange", but I think it may have been serendipitous in that case.Also don't make the mistake I did and not notice the Glaswegian-English dictionary in the back until you'd finished.
Woah! didn't know there was a book, only the film was suggested to me. I'll check it out!
Yeah that makes sense, i got you. I like to get into people's faces about their stupidity on Facebook because I believe, in a way, that quietly unfriending them because of their opinions is almost like tacit compliance. "I don't like what you're saying but I'm not going to confront you about it."
I'm going to take a tangential tactic and recommend you view these kinds of arguments through the kind of lens displayed by the Overview Effect. Staying quiet doesn't make you weak, it means you're not willing to engage in the petty. It seems you have already distanced yourself somewhat from arguments like these, but in the broader "pale blue dot" perspective hatemongering and stirring up "debate" is really counterproductive. After explaining to your friends your reasoning for stopping your debate habits, invite them to do the same. Hopefully they just don't understand why you stopped, and they'll accept an honest reason. Remember, whether in argumentation or elsewhere, just because you can destroy someone doesn't mean you should.
Oh man, I'm sorry! I wrote a thorough reply to this and I guess I didn't send it or it didn't go through? Aw man. Okay well I sorta gotta hurry my time on Hubski now so I'll make this brief but I'm not taking your advice for granted: 1) I kinda-sorta heard of the Overview Effect a long time ago and now that you remind me it's got me thinking a lot, I will be sure to tag you when I make a separate post about it probably in #philosophy. I've got some ideas I want to put in writing and I'll put that on the list. I don't want to rant about it now anyway.
2) Anyway I think we're on the same page for sure about what you're saying.Remember, whether in argumentation or elsewhere, just because you can destroy someone doesn't mean you should.
This idea helped me break down my place in other discussions on this thread. I have a feeling that there's a sad reality wherein the more someone loses battles and hurts, the more they'll be tempted to destroy someone even though they shouldn't, for example if it's unfair. They're damaged from people who did the same to them. When everyone runs out of things to be angry at, it's like a coping mechanism to instigate Hatred to return to that familiar feeling. Heroine.
That's sort of the position I'm taking on the matter. I guess this post is questioning whether or not its the "right" position, whatever that means.
I was raised to believe that men should have a stoic, silent character. That listening is more important that speaking. That when you talk, have something to say that adds to the conversation, moves a talk forward or opens a mind to a new way of looking at things. I'm not saying I'm good at these ideals although I try. Still, I love this outlook at life and it works well for my personality. I was on Facebook a week, then poisoned my metadata and deleted it. I only do social media that improves my outlook on how the world works. As I got out of my teens I came to the realization that life is far, far too short to deal with useless bullshit. People who come off as militant turn me off nearly instantly. Persons full of hate and anger have no place in my life. And if someone thinks that I am a pussy for not being loud and angry, that is on them. Their opinion of how I choose to carry myself is not my problem.
I wasn't "raised" to believe this so to speak, but I know exactly the character you are talking about. I've seen it rarely in people in real life (plenty in movies) but you're right that it adds power to a man's air and presence. Hm, I gotta say I like your way of thinking, it reminds me a lot of Armenia (where I'm from) where the teen drama doesn't even exist, there's no such thing as these kind of superficialities. It's not like they live in huts and don't access Facebook, but their lives and their places in society are much more.. calm. I truly want to be the kind of man you describe.I was raised to believe that men should have a stoic, silent character. That listening is more important that speaking. That when you talk, have something to say that adds to the conversation, moves a talk forward or opens a mind to a new way of looking at things. I'm not saying I'm good at these ideals although I try. Still, I love this outlook at life and it works well for my personality.
It took me a while, and I still get way overly excited about new things that really dig into me, but for the most part I'm living up to my idea. It is amazing what you learn about people when you allow yourself to be quiet and let others talk.
- Mahatma Gandhi To be a pussy is to knuckle under in the face of adversity. To be a pussy is to not fight battles you can win. But to be a pussy is to fight battles because it is expected of you, because it's the easy way out, because it gives your friends and peers a way to shunt you down the pecking order. You realized that engaging in arguments about polarizing topics based on insufficient information and selective statistics is not the best use of your time. When you do speak up on a topic, your frenemies will know that it is something you feel strongly about. After explaining to your friends your reasoning for stopping your debate habits, invite them to do the same. Hopefully they just don't understand why you stopped, and they'll accept an honest reason. Remember, whether in argumentation or elsewhere, just because you can destroy someone doesn't mean you should. Restraint requires strength of character. Strength of character requires ... well ... strength.
All of these above. You just gotta watch shit go down until actions begin to form that infringe upon your understanding and knowledge of self. It's always awkward to say it because it comes across as cocky, but a lot of people don't really have a sense of self beyond what's placed upon them by the environment. "Speak only when it improves upon the silence."
but the nature of "cool" is following your own path for your own reasons and being invulnerable to the doubts and assaults of those around you.
Choose where and how you want to spend your intellectual and emotional energy.
I'm going to take a tangential tactic and recommend you view these kinds of arguments through the kind of lens displayed by the Overview Effect. Staying quiet doesn't make you weak, it means you're not willing to engage in the petty. It seems you have already distanced yourself somewhat from arguments like these, but in the broader "pale blue dot" perspective hatemongering and stirring up "debate" is really counterproductive.
Silence is a position of restraint.
This is an excellent way of stating it. I am going to borrow this in the future. It's always awkward to say it because it comes across as cocky, but a lot of people don't really have a sense of self beyond what's placed upon them by the environment.
Haha, all the interesting people in my school are overly tolerant. As a result, we have spent the last 2 days lambasting Israel, less because we care, and more because it's definitely more interesting than the World Cup conversation (which has devolved to a few of the interesting people messaging everyone indiscriminately to tell them that Germany will win). So far, no one has dared to call us anti-semites. Is it good? No. I brought out, forthright in that very conversation, that we had a bad habit of using world atrocities to entertain ourselves, and we accepted that statement without any kind of defense or moral concern. If, one day, someone was sick and tired of it, we would definitely not consider him/her a coward.
Thought defriend them and block 'em. Effectively silencing them from spewing their ignorant bullshit all over your Facebook, like some ignorant jizz torrent that cakes everything in it's sticky goop. Militant feminazis post their hideous blogs to incite anger from both genders on their friends list. Then, they tag my school's Gender "Equality" (HA!) Club to cry misogyny, sexism, homophobia and "fuck you, ugly bastard cyber-bully!" at anyone who tries to tell them to calm down, or at least have some respect.
Israelis share the Israeli Defense Force's facebook page that counts how many rockets are fired on Tel Aviv, and how "Arab cunt sand-niggers should suicide bomb themselves." When my two Syrian and Egyptian friends interject-- both the most incredible people to me who have helped me through the worst of times-- every Israeli on the East Coast shows up to yell anti-Semite and so on.
Yeah I guess I could, except I can't block them from my reality :D
There are ways... Duct tape and zip ties plus a closet or basement... I don't mean to say anything illegal... Well not THAT illegal... Just leave them down there with enough food to survive and they're well off... Oh wait something like this (I think) happened with those two girls... Nevermind that's bad. BAD HAVIRES BAD!