You must log in or register to comment.
Sure, when your son punches someone on the opposing team during a kid’s hockey game he’s “defending his teammates honor”, but when I do it I’m “assaulting a minor” and “not allowed within 300 feet of a school” by a so-called “judge”.
I thought this was America!
You might need some Sephora to blend in as a kid
I thought this was America!
You’re only allowed to sleep with them and only if you’re rich enough!
Fuck I thought hockey was like, the only sport other than boxing where you’re supposed to punch them.
I think a pro hockey player would get kicked out of a game for sucker punching a player at face off.
They can fight, but there’s a sort of “gentlemen’s agreement” that is usually consensual and happens after face off. Referees will often even give them space to duke it out.
Unless someone on the other team did something really fucked up, then all bets are off (and you take the suspension for sucker punching them lol).
Yeah, there’s a lot of unwritten rules about where the lines are drawn on legitimate play for competitive advantage in the sport itself, to dirty play that veers into being about hurting someone rather than playing good offense/defense, socially acceptable fighting that is part of the broader game, and is penalized within the rules of the game by the refs on the ice, to socially unacceptable fighting that warrants league intervention after the game for suspensions and the like.
It can still be worth it, but we gotta place each act in the appropriate category.
In the NHL it’s fine. Actually if a penalty has already been called against your team then you can do anything you want until the other team gets a penalty.
Absolutely not. You can definitely receive an ejection and a game misconduct which would prevent you from playing in the next game as well.
Professional hockey yes, but they dont let kids fight.
there are still rules to fight him
May I interest you in Australian Rules Football?
In highschool an opponent coach called one of my team mates the n word. I told the coach I was going to kill him. Referee decided the fouls canceled one another. Wish I had drop kicked that fucking cunt instead.
Drop kicking someone while on skates would be fucking impressive.
what does the law say about any of those offences ?
Some states have “fighting words” clauses in their statutes or case law that stipulate when someone’s held less accountable for an otherwise clear-cut Assault/Battery.
If what you say is obviously an attempt to get under someone’s skin to make them throw the first punch it essentially blames you for the fight.
Of course the devil’s in the details, but rumor has it those exceptions exist.
If it were me, I’d hope I’d have the courage to risk my job to use some Discretion in an event like that without clear statute/case law backing up a Fighting Words issue, but I never handled a case like that so we can never be sure.
- Ex-cop
Just mentioned “fighting words” in another comment. But those words weren’t directed to the attacker, so would that still count?
That question exceeds the scope of my training, experience, and rumor I heard on the job from other cops, so your web search would be as good as mine.
I’m 99% sure I was never trained on it, 100% sure I never saw it applied, and such a scenario never came up in the rumor mill.
The insulter didn’t threaten the girl, so he’s clear. The boy is guilty of battery, no defense of others here.
OTOH, “fucking whore” could be considered “fighting words”, but I have no idea how that works if directed at another person. 🤷🏼♂️
Being legal doesn’t mean being right. Some crimes are worth the punishment.
That’s nice. This part of the discussion is about how the law views this event.
And fuck the guy that asked! Typical lemmy, downvoting questions.
Depends on the kids parents wealth.
Idk i was 17 and the coach was old. I’m glad it didnt go much further because it would have not ended at all well.
The correct solution is to wait for the game to start, then wait for that player to get the puck. And that’s when you go in for as solid a body check as you can. Once they get the puck it becomes fair game to check them and you won’t get in trouble for it.
It’s like a boxing match: you wait until you’re in the ring and the bell dings before laying in to them.But then they might not know why they got hit.
Call him a ‘fucking whore’ as he picks himself up off the ice.
Eh. I agree with the sentiment, but it’s weaker behavior than the instant punch. You implicitly agree that “fucking whore” is an insult, if you do that.
People are acting like this doesn’t happen in pro hockey sometimes too.
I haven’t actually watched it in many years but I used to be a big fan, and every now and then someone would do or say something so egregious, that they’d get sucker punched (or something worse like slashed in the face with a hockey stick). And the person who did it would usually get kicked out of the game for it. But his teammates and the fans that knew what was up would support them as they skated off.
If it was said with the intent to insult, it’s an insult.
The intent to insult, is an insult itself, sure.
But the content may be, or not be. The “fucking whore” insult, as content, is a misogynistic insult.
Weaker behavior? I do applaud the kid putting the aspiring frat bro in his place, but equating aggression with strength is bonkers. There are other, better ways for educating fools than a damn sucker punch.
There are other, better ways for educating fools than a damn sucker punch.
No.
Fuck off. By this logic it’s ok for anyone to just walk around punching people that offend their moral views, sensible or not.
By this logic it’s ok for anyone to just walk around punching people that offend their moral views.
No.
It’s not about offending moral views in abstract. It’s about specific assholes that put their “moral views” into violent action. When someone is violent, it’s proof they don’t see their victim as a person.
Therefore it IS ok for anyone to just walk around punching people who instigate oppressive violence.
Also, please don’t fall for the paradox of tolerance, I will lose a lot of respect for you.
Those people should be punched.
Exactly this. The fuckstick needs to know why he got hit.
OP didn’t mention the obligatory “who the whore now fuckwad?”
spits tooth… “Your mum.”
makes you spit another tooth
cough …Worth…it… splutter
Oh, he will. You tell him.
deleted by creator
As sly as this is, I like the other guy’s response.
It’s important to deliver immediacy. Also important to show public courage towards the act. “I assert, in full view of everyone, this is the right action and I deserve no consequences for it.”
You may still be punished, but it’s still important you make the statement.
Nah, this sends a MUCH clearer message.
It also gets him knocked out of the game and prevents him from supporting the girl when this chud inevitably tries to slam her
Nah that doesn’t send a message. The kid did the right thing.
If you’re in highschool. You can’t check until pretty late in learning the game.
We were body checking in middle school. Maybe it’s different now.
I was too. As a peewee. I think that’s like 6th or 7th grade or so. However, I was the last year that was the case for. They had switched to bantams. Which, if I remember correctly, is 8th-9th grade. So, still on the bubble. Not sure if it’s changed since then.
I’m on the fence. On the one side I despise a society that resorts to violence to solve problems. This is primitive. Then again it sure feels like some people don’t learn another way. Doesn’t mean it’s good.
Mhm, a story to remember for sure.
It’s anecdotal, but I was bullied mercilessly when I was a big, fat sixth grader by this pack of fifth graders who would run up behind me during lunchtime in the playground, kick me, and run away. This went on for some time until one day I happened to turn around at just the right second and caught this little shit by the name of Cory Rodgerson.
I took a big, wide swing and smacked him upside the head as hard as I could. One punch. I vividly remember (probably partly falsely given the forty years that have passed) him spinning, falling over, and then bawling his eyes out. I felt horrible about it, but you know what? Him and his group of cronies never bullied me again.
He learned that actions have consequences, and I learned that violence sucks, but sometimes it does solve problems. Was there a better solution? Probably, but telling my teachers and parents had had no effect, so what else was I supposed to do about it? I also did not grow up to be violent, and in fact have never gotten into any kind of physical altercation as an adult, so maybe it was a good lesson for me, too.
Fucking Cory! Classic
Then again it sure feels like some people don’t learn another way.
That’s because they don’t. Because the lesson they need to learn isn’t “people don’t like that behavior” it’s “that behavior will have swift and severe consequences”.
To renounce the use of violence as a method of conflict resolution is to utterly surrender to those who have not and will not.
Disagree, sometimes we have go go back to the fundamental. Looks around, shitty people aren’t get punched enough.
It’s hockey. Punching someone in the face is how you express your feelings.
Consequences are measuring levels of controlled violence. Both human and not.
If one assumes violence is an unnecessary tool, then we would’ve resolved the issue with actual criminal syndicates both high and low by now. Alas, that’s not happening when said syndicates can and will use their own levels of controlled violence against everyone else.
We all had history classes.
Violence is the most effective tool the working class has by a country mile so they don’t get devoured by the wealthys politics and bullshit.
Regulations for business are quite literally often written in blood.
Violence is the last thing some people even understand. Sure it should be a last resort most of the time.
On the other hand Cornell, frats, and the fact that women are sexually assaulted at disturbing rates.
I’d punch an openly misogynistic person too. We’ve spent too many decades not punching shitty people, now we have fascists popping up all over again.
Thrown out? Just give him a 2 min minor
It reminds me when I decked a kid in martial arts class because he made a yo mama joke. There were no consequences for me lol
I did something similar in school. Laid out the kid making fun of me.
We were in pads and helmets. It was middle school chickens establishing the pecking order.
Kid was more abusive than most and picking on me in particular. Put him on the ground, made it clear that this would not be tolerated.
Then I caught up with the running drill.
That’s kinda the attitude that is cultivated for success in athletics.
Good on you for standing up for yourself.
Why did he even get kicked out? It’s hockey. Fighting is only 5 minutes in the box.
I watched a fight once, and suddenly a hockey game broke out.
For the pros, yes. But for all youth hockey (at least in the US) it’s an immediate game misconduct.
Lol, he didn’t get kicked out…UnfilteredMama posted it on twitter. It never happened to begin with.
Not every league allows fighting, some leagues don’t even allow checking
Youth hockey leagues are pretty strict about no fighting. Younger leagues have no checking, for obvious reasons. As you get older, it gets more physical.
Personally, I disagree with the punch. Takes you out of the game when you and the rest of your team can just mark that guy as an asshole and make his day absolutely suck. For everyone saying, but he won’t know why: he’ll know. Plus, you can simply call him a whore every time you hit him. A dirty hit when he has the puck is 2 or 4 in the sin bin, and you get to hit him again later. A single punch is just that, and it’s all over.
Its also absurd because its heavily gendered. If someone called a male teammate a fucking whore we would laugh at them, take note that they are clearly salty, and fuck with them the rest of the game. If it was the girl who punched the guy in the face it would at least make more sense.
Personally, I wouldnt cheer my own kid on for punching someone in the face and getting kicked out of the game. That type of problem solving shows a lack of creativity and compassion.
Agreed. The more I’ve thought about the more I think the comments are mostly a bunch of neck beards proud the kid “defended her honor.” As if she ever asked him to do that. What if it had been a girl on the other team calling his teammate the same thing? Girls can be brutal in their chirping. “Fucking whore” is pretty tame compared to what I’ve heard collegiate female rugby players call one another. Im all for the team ganging up on an asshole player playing like an asshole, but players in just about any team sport constantly shit talk their opponents. Somehow the other guy crossed a line by treating a girl the same as he presumably would any other player on the ice? If he singled her out, fine. Chirp back, or ignore it. And the one comment calling it bullying? Gimme a break. It wasn’t even said to her. Tell the guy to fuck off, score on him and give him a good hip check next time you can get away with it.
Might be field hockey though
Then that hockey game wasn’t valuable. Fuck toxic enviroments as these that ban the ones who do the only correct thing to do.
Hey, violence isn’t the answer, let alone “the only correct thing to do”.
Edit: you all are real tough guys for advocating that the rude child in this totally true story get beat up. What a bunch of losers.
we had an ‘airforce’ player in our team. he usually was only on the field, if the other team played dirty. the most dirty opponent would have a painful clash with our ‘airforce’. the game usually was a bit more civilised after that.
was it the right thing to do? probably not. would we have sent the ‘airforce’ if the referee had stopped dirty plays earlier? definitely not! did it protect other players from going home with injuries? yes!
so no, violence is not the only correct thing to do. but it is a way to achieve certain goals. sometimes fire has to be fought with fire.
Are you trying to say enforcer? I’m plenty familiar with the concept but your word choice is confusing.
i meant to say airforce, as that is what we called it. i put it into quotation, as it was a specific name we used.
Was bro flying around?
he made sure we controlled who went flying and who not.
guess he could also have been called “Air Traffic Control”…
Hockey is weird, its sort of expected that the players use violence to keep each others behavior in check.
the concept may be more established for ice hockey. but it is present in all sports or possibly in life: we hope there is a referee to punish bad behaviour. but if there isn’t, we have to take things into our own hands.
i am not necessarily talking about violence here. if at your job someone constantly tries to sabotage you, violence may not be the best approach. but some dirty play on your side, might just discourage the behaviour enough. obviously that should only be considered, if theere is no sort of referee to stop the behaviour traditionally.
Lmao, “violence is not the answer”. It is. When other people like that fucking asshole kiddo were, then it’s the only acceptable thing to do. “Don’t do unto others what you don’t want done unto yourself”.
They need to understand that their shit has consequences, or else bigotry will never end.
Id disagree with you if we were talking about an adult but as we are talking about a kid I would say you are outting yourself as some sort of predator or abuser with that mentality. There can be consequences that are non-violent, violence just propagates more violence. Interesting that you took a popular phrase, changed it so that it has a different meaning, then tried to use it as evidence for your case. Get support, you don’t have to be so violent.
Bigotry is as old as humanity.
It will never end. I would bet that you’re bigoted against a variety of people, too. It’s all around us; most people have a “narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them”.
Especially here on Lemmy.
None of that makes it wrong to oppose bigotry.
I’m tired of these damn horses causing all these problems
WHY THE LONG FACE?!
Doubt. There’s no way the refs would tolerate that language from kids.
I’m in Western Canada and I can tell you their parents in the stands are usually worse.
If the ref heard it they might care enough. Maybe, maybe not. Hockey kids say all sorts of shit.
The white knight.
Yes violence against people i dont like is acceptable. At least until the violence quotient normalizes.
It’s fun watching people discover the paradox of tolerance in real time.
Women are sexually assaulted at rates that are fucking disturbing.
I’d punch you in the face in a heartbeat if you called my wife a whore. We don’t tolerate intolerance. Get with the program.
The funny thing is that there is no paradox. Tolerance is a social contract. Contracts only protect people who are party to them. If you are bigoted or intolerant, you are not party to the social contract, and thus are not protected by it. There never was a paradox, it is just another thing that bigoted asshats use to try to muddy the waters.
As an aside; safety, tolerance, inclusion, and peace are all social contracts. These fuckers are not part of any of those contracts and thus deserve none of those things.
Yep, and apparently we have to scream it louder.
Because you’re absolutely wrong about the paradox of tolerance?
Your butchered social media interpretation of it is not at all what the philosophers who articulated the idea meant by it or concluded from it.- It’s a paradox, not a conclusion, and not your conclusion.
- They were arguing about the merits of liberal governments over the unchecked power of totalitarian systems.
Particularly, they called out the overlooked merits of intellectual freedom and political institutions structured to limit potential damage of government power through rational debate and deliberative, competitive decision-making. - The meaning of intolerant in philosophy is more technical than merely an opinion that disagrees with other ways: it requires literally prohibiting other ways by unjustified force.
Accordingly, someone who is not imposing their opinion on society with force is tolerant.
Contrary to your position, they would argue that beating a tolerant person over an opinion is a case of intolerance.
Such an appeal to force has no place in open society, and an open society is justified to not tolerate it.To resolve your paradox, a tolerant, open society would be justified to drop Unfiltered Mama’s son into juvie.
The paradox of tolerance is literally just about too much tolerance of the intolerant causing issues in society. That’s it. When intolerant people abandon reason, you can no longer tolerate them in society.
You’re a fart sniffing social media philosopher I see
The paradox of tolerance is literally just about too much tolerance of the intolerant causing issues in society.
It’s literally not.
Repeating reductive shit they say on social media doesn’t make it true.
Your ignorance of the source material is telling.There’s a Wikipedia article quoting part of it
[Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.] But we should claim the right to suppress them [intolerant ideologies] if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
explaining the various takes on it.
It comes from a book called The Open Society and Its Enemies about what I stated.The type of intolerance the quote refers to is the kind that uses force and refuses debate.
They even explicitly reject that we should in general “suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies” as long as rational argument & public opinion still govern public choice.background: book promotes intellectual freedom
The book’s thesis is that an open society (ie, liberalism) has stronger merits than the newer, trendier totalitarian political theories of the day predicated on teleological historicism.
They approached this from their background in philosophy of science (emphasizing enterprises controlled by skepticism and free inquiry) to argue that liberal democracies are not inevitably doomed by totalitarian systems of power, because liberal institutions have an overlooked strengthOnly democracy allows an institutional framework that permits reform without violence, and so the use of reason in political matters
and to keep totalitarian systems like fascism or communism at bay, we need to sustain institutions that allow for open inquiry and grant all citizens extensive rights against their governments.
Even with the best rulers, unchecked power is likely to err and cause unbound damage.
Instead of focusing only on selecting the best rulers, a better system of government might determineHow can we so organize political institutions that bad or incompetent rulers can be prevented from doing too much damage?
They resolved that such a system should include strict limits on the power of the state and a special emphasis on intellectual freedom.
They were absolutely arguing in favor of more open discourse & deliberation, not force, to reform government without violence and restrict its potential damage.
That means tolerating opinions we disagree with from people who don’t try to impose them with force.Unsurprisingly, you shouldn’t expect philosophers who emphasize free, open inquiry and rational argument as crucial to an open society to defend forcible suppression of tolerant disagreements in it.
Colloquial intolerance isn’t the stricter intolerance they refer to.
We can observe intolerance of actual intolerance as posed in that book in action: we do live in a society roughly following the system that book was defending, assault (including that motivated by violent extremism) is a crime, and our society doesn’t tolerate it pretty much as I stated before.Social media dumbasses butchered the idea into bullshit pop philosophy, and you aren’t winning any arguments by regurgitating shit that’s flat out wrong unless that argument is “How dumb is social media? Very.”
Oh you think im joking?
deleted by creator
I’m positive a strongly worded letter would have made all the difference.
No… violence is acceptable…
Conflict is solved only through domination, forgivness, or avoidance.
Forgiveness only resolves conflict if both sides acknowledge the wrongness of the action and the victim accepts it enough to move on.
Do you think this little girl should accept being dominated and be treated as second class person or receive verbal abuse or should she be ostrizied from society in order to avoid that abuse?
Best case, the authority figures caught the abuser and punished him before further escalation happened, they failed to reprimand him for his sick behavior and thus codoned it, forcing the victim or her friends to decided for themselves when on the conflict continuum they were going to be.
No, Im saying violence is the answer
Ahh I read your answer as sarcasm my bad
Boo fucking hoo.
I would not celebrate physical violence in response to words. If it were two adults, there would be charges of assault.
Oh no a assault charge. If it was my son I’d be fucking proud.
These misogynist manosphere boys need to fkn learn . And more dads need to step the messaging to them to respect women
And more dads need to step the messaging to them to respect women
unless it’s trans women apparently.
I fully respect women. Does our law condone punching someone in the face for words?
Oh Mr. Cop here says we should respect the law and let the misogyny continue. Oh, sorry he FULLY RESPECTS the women his support of misogyny hurts.
Bro this is hockey
tell the child to apologize to the family member or relative he stole from.
