sapphi_snake said:
Harassment doesn't need to include 'threat to physical harm'. All it needs to do is be a repetitive behaviour meant to distub or upset. The repeating insult of this girl definately is harassment. And as a psychologist, I'd expect you would be more aware of the negative impact this type of harassment can have on the victim. And there's a huge difference between criticising a politician for his/her political actions or decisions (which is what free spech laws are really meant to protect - the right to criticise public authority, and prevent things like tyrannies from emerging), and throwing around senseless insults, which are nothing more than cheap ad hominem attacks, used by modern-day politicians and partisan media outlets to manipulate the masses (one of the biggest issues with contemporary media). |
So in otherwords. It's your opinion that the vast majority of people in the media, most people who post on message boards and the like, all should be thrown in jail for harrassment.
Including people like say... John Stewart from the Daily Show... or really even yourself. What with as eaisly as you throw the word bigot around.
As for the view of a "psychologist". Different things effect people in different ways. Someone may be as hurt and stresse because you didn't like their dress, or disagreed with them.
I know people who were violently ill and upset just because somebody else didn't want to be their friend. To the level of where you think he was worried about a cancer test result or something.
Because i'm a psychologist i know more then anybody how basing things off a subjective measure is a problem.
