Doubt. There's no way the refs would tolerate that language from kids.

If the ref heard it they might care enough. Maybe, maybe not. Hockey kids say all sorts of shit.

I do.

You’re doing the far-right bullshit thing of treating the fact that a position requires (gasp) human judgment as an argument against the position itself. “Who gets to decide what’s fair?” “Who gets to decide what constitutes harm?” “Who gets to decide what’s reasonable?” They act like these are impossible questions that somehow invalidate the whole idea. If you’re an adult and have any confidence in your own morality, you should be able to make judgment calls. I promise it really isn’t an impossible dilemma unless you’re a moral relativist coward.

Anyone with a brain. It’s not a complicated thing to understand.

Oof, a proud shitty parent here.

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.

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.

I'm in Western Canada and I can tell you their parents in the stands are usually worse.

tell the child to apologize to the family member or relative he stole from.

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.

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.

Drop kicking someone while on skates would be fucking impressive.

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.

he made sure we controlled who went flying and who not.

guess he could also have been called "Air Traffic Control"...

Pacifism is surrender to every bully you'll ever encounter. Teaching kids horseshit like this is how you make a generation of slaves who'll never revolt. Which explains why every kid is repeatedly told that violence is bad and only bad people are violent (except the cops and soldiers, because state-sanctioned violence is different).

May you and every other person who disapproves of this kid's actions never again know any peace you haven't had to fight for and don't constantly have to fight to defend.

Its a bit different when its an opponent in a competitive game. They could shout any random mean thing at anyone just because they are frustrated.

Things only said by people who use racial slurs in online games.

Escalation to violence is never acceptable

Bullys and abusers love this mentality. It's the only reason they can keep being bullies and abusers.

that's a separate serious problem that needs to be addressed, but it can be done without violence.

Name a time in history that I never has.

No, I don't like to speak or act for others without permission first. I won't assume my team mate is offended unless they say so, and won't jump to their defense unless they ask. I consider that to be a minimum level of respect and I would expect others treat me the same way.

I would not celebrate physical violence in response to words. If it were two adults, there would be charges of assault.

Fucking Cory! Classic

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

Good on you for standing up for yourself.

cough ....Worth...it... splutter

Shitty comment

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.

I fully respect women. Does our law condone punching someone in the face for words?

Thrown out? Just give him a 2 min minor

Bro this is hockey

Why does everyone seem to assume no violence means no consequences. I don't think a player who calls someone a whore should be allowed back on the rink. Just remove the bully. It's a natural consequence ("we don't want abuse so if you do that you cant be here") that I assure you will be more effective than punching them in the face. And it doesn't require a vigilante justice that risks escalating the situation. That slope is too slippery.

I fully agree with you, but I think we are picturing kids at the opposite ends of childhood. In my head we are talking about little kids that are very young and just learning things like impulse control and what is fair. The smear of the very few pixels left in the OP's image gave me the impression that we were dealing with someone pretty young. But if we're dealing with older kids, then the dynamic does change dramatically. If your teenager is physically lashing out at other kids then we are dealing with someone with behavioral problems (both child and parents) and that does need a much stronger correction.

Nah that doesn't send a message. The kid did the right thing.

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.

Just remove the bully

You were obviously never a target of bullies growing up. All that does is teach the bully not to get caught. And generally will invite retaliation against whoever the bully decides is at fault for it, usually whoever "snitched".

But damn few bullies come back and try again after being popped in the nose by the target of their bullying or a bystander. Because they were taught the lesson on the one language they're able to hear it in.

People who've never been in a fight have as much business weighing in on the use of violence as celibate priests have weighing in on sex.

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.

This user has definitely dropped N bombs in voice chat while playing a FPS.

Okay troll.

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.

Yes violence against people i dont like is acceptable. At least until the violence quotient normalizes.

I thought this was America!

You're only allowed to sleep with them and only if you're rich enough!

I'm positive a strongly worded letter would have made all the difference.

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.

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.

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.

Oh you think im joking?

No... violence is acceptable..

Yep, and apparently we have to scream it louder.

Boo fucking hoo.