How do you define violence?

[Muttly]

It's tripping me up that threats can be considered violent.

n my state hitting a wall in anger during a fight is considered domestic violence.

I'm not trying to be stupid, but can someone break down why this is violence.

 

[DharmaGirl]

I think because you are so out of control with anger and it is a threatening act. I tried to look up the reason and all I got was lots of people being arrested for it. I think threats are violent. Could be my PTSD, but many times when I was threatened over the years I've been scared poopless.

 

[Freddyt]

It's tripping me up that threats can be considered violent.
I'm not trying to be stupid, but can someone break down why this is violence.

It's intentional use of physical force or power. Usually we think of it as "blowing off steam" but really its usually done to intimidate or to get someone to act in a certain way.
In the World Health Organizations definition if it results in a high likelihood of injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation, it's violence. I really like that definition. You don't have to hit someone to be violent toward them and it sure puts narcissism in a different light.

 

[Friday]

I'm not trying to be stupid, but can someone break down why this is violence.

Intentional damage or destruction of your own, or someone else’s personal property -or pets- in order to threaten, intimidate, or punish.

It’s why the courts gave my DOG a restraining order, against my ex. In the normal course of events? Torturing, killing, or disappearing someone’s pet falls under animal cruelty &/or theft laws. But when it’s being done in order to abuse/terrorize/control your ex or the kids? It becomes felony domestic violence (as well as contempt of court). IF AND ONLY IF there’s a restraining order on the pet, themselves. Killing, injuring, and disappearing an animal? Is, unfortunately, such a common way to abuse PEOPLE that it’s standard practice in domestic violence cases to include pets.

On that theme?

It's tripping me up that threats can be considered violent.

turn it around… imagine someone issuing the same threat to -or directed at- on of your dogs. If someone grabbed your dog by the collar, hurled abusive language at them, and then punched the wall? How would your dog react? How would YOU react? It’s violence.

 

[Muttly]

If I'm taking over this thread, someone please tell me to shut up

If someone grabbed your dog by the collar, hurled abusive language at them, and then punched the wall? How would your dog react? How would YOU react? It’s violence.

I want to argue so badly. It's probably worth thinking about why I do.

I wasn't grabbed. Well mostly not. And instead of punching the wall, it was usually things being thrown. Angry words. And yeah, if that happened around my dog he'd be f*cking terrified. And anyone who did that around my dogs wouldn't get a second chance.

But... if it's a parent towards a child, not a spouse/domestic violence situation, maybe it's different. Maybe it's just really poor teaching. Meh, think I'll take this to my diary so I'm not filling up this post.

 

[somerandomguy]

if it's a parent towards a child, not a spouse/domestic violence situation, maybe it's different.

Why would it be different?

I think it would be worse. There's a much, much greater size difference between a parent and child than between two partners, usually. And a child doesn't have the emotional capability to understand, much less defend themselves.

Violence is violence. Violence is not poor teaching.

 

[Survivor3]

My dad once took a kitchen knife and scored the word "NO" into a wooden bread board. Was that violent? I felt it was just another aspect of his f*cked up threatening and violent behaviour.

I think violence can be anything that consciously or unconsciously causes another living being to feel fear and to feel afraid for their safety be it physical or emotionally/mentally.

 

[scout86]

@Muttly , just my opinion, but I don't think you're taking over the thread, I think you're making a contribution to the conversation.

Some time back, I worked for a construction company. Big highway contractor. The company was big enough that they had a safety officer and a lot of paperwork. At the end of the year, we had to fill out something about "getting hurt at work". I said it was ridiculous and that I HADN'T gotten hurt at work, EVER. Then I read the paperwork. LOL It included stuff like cuts and scrapes and sprained ankles. Well, stuff like that happens all the time and I really didn't think it counted. To me, "hurt at work" means there's a bone protruding from the wound and the bleeding won't stop. Well, I guess it actually means you end up in the ER. Whatever. My point is, I think we look at this stuff the way we learn to look at it and maybe it's useful to consider the many other ways that exist to look at it. I'm not sure there's a "right and wrong" as much as there is a "different".

The whole "hitting a wall" thing is kind of interesting in itself. I've done that. (Not often!) When I have, it's been because I was so frustrated that it felt like I had to do SOMETHING and I knew hitting a wall was better than hitting something that was alive. I couldn't hurt the wall (much), just my hand (some). So, to me, hitting the wall was a "good" thing. Who knew you could go to jail? (Well, I didn't know you could. LOL)

I think this conversation is kind of important. We all grow up knowing what we know. We don't always get the chance to compare that with other ways of thinking. And how would you learn anything different without that?

 

[Tinyflame]

I'm so sorry @Survivor3 . I relate to this, this is so true.