Why do people justify beating up others for just words or racial insults?

[Anonymous]

I know it must be upsetting when someone is verbally antagonistic or hurls a racial insults but why is getting violent with them justified?

Ideally hitting someone should only be applied in actually self-defense, not because they call you stupid, they insulted your mother or call you a racial term. So far they haven't committed a felony but the one that hit first did. That's still assault and battery charges. No one deserves a beating for just words. How is slapping, punching or beating someone just because they said bad words justified?

I was actually happy this girl got dropped fast. She really thought she could beat up another girl just for being called out a racial word. Luckily the other girl that hurled the insult knew self-defense but she stopped when she was on the ground. How about ignore the insult? Getting verbally insulted isn't the end of the world. You can't just Solve things with violence just because someone insulted you and then get shocked when you lose the fight.

Whoever starts a physical altercation and loses (even if provoked verbally) is at fault right?

Updates

7 mo

Personally I think anyone that hits someone else not in self-defense (regardless of the verbal insults) deserves either jail time or get hit back.

[abc3643]

"Whoever starts a physical altercation and loses (even if provoked verbally) is at fault right?"

No, because that's not realistic about human nature.
Organisms - and not just humans, but it's been shown in dogs too - crave justice and fairness. They need to respond to injustice. And sometimes one's innate sense of justice requires violence or extreme physical action to end the injustice or to get justice.

Let me put it to you a different way. Sometimes words are as meaningless as "thoughts and prayers". One knowingly committing an injustice or attack on you - even if it is just words - needs to stop. Being told to stop may not do anything. Instead, a good old fashioned ass-kicking does the job.

If you don't believe me, understand that this why parents spank toddlers: Words can be worthless to toddlers because their minds aren't sufficiently developed so you can't convince them to stop bad or dangerous behavior that could lead to them hurting themselves or others. But, once you spank the kid, that's instinctive - the most raw form of negative feedback from psychology. At an instinctive level, the child realizes "If I do that, I'm going to get pain so I better not do that." Believe it or not, that may save the child's life one day.

[Asker]

You're comparing toddlers to verbal arguments between older people. Spanking as a method of parenting isn't too common among newer generations and it has worked on some European countries that prohibited it. Certain Latin countries have recently banned it too. If it's not harmful then why was it banned in other countries? Something that's proven beneficial would never be banned.
As much as you're trying to get justice, turning a verbal argument/altercation into a physical aggression can easily put you in a bad spot if the other person (who wasn't physical until you hit first) fights back.

[abc3643]

I am not justifying but I am explaining that this is human nature because one does not want to be dominated. Sometimes responsive violence is the only way to assert that the attacker will not be dominant here.

[NaultD]

In a lot of ways it is self defense. If you see the gun you are already dead. Same logic with politics.

Even in nazi Germany people with money left well before the night of broken glass and anyone who could get money left soon after. That is the safest solution but not viable for everyone.

We do have a right to protect ourselves and loved one's.

[Asker]

How is turning a verbal argument/altercation you were never endangered from (until you got physical first) into a physical fight as a result of your ego/pride thing actually defending yourself?
Had the other girl simply walked away and not gave in to words (regardless of how insulting they are) then she would've have been neutralized.

[Asker]

I could understand if it's a threat, followed by property damage and you really were defending yourself but if it's just out of pure ego and retaliation against bad words then it shouldn't be surprising if the other person defends themselves by then.

[NaultD]

That's the spookest part of self defense. It's only truly justified after certain death. Yet the only time to defend yourself is before you die.

See where it gets complicated?

[MemeSupreme]

respect is important and not letting other people run all over you. sometimes they had a shitty day and thats what pushes them over the edge

not saying you should do it bc fighting is really dangerous and EASILY can go wrong, but i get it lol

[Asker]

How is getting violent worthy of respect? It actually means you care too much about people's words and insults. Let's that story as an example. Obviously the racial remark was exaggerated so that doesn't merits getting physical with others.
The moment you turned someone verbal into something physical, yeah you're putting yourself in a bad position if the person fights back. The girl that tried getting physical was lucky the other girl stopped when she got neutralized. Apparently it seemed like she was trained in martial arts and knew when to stop.
She even admitted that if it was the other way around, the girl that got insulted would've continued hitting her even when she's down.

[MemeSupreme]

well if you dont let someone disrespect you, then others are less likely, altho someone will no matter what if they want to lol

its really just a principle/cultural thing. like you either grew up with it or you didn't

[Anonymous]

Why is this such a problem for you? I mean I'm not advocating violence. But it amuses me when someone thinks they can go running off at the mouth to whoever, whenever. Then one day do it to a person they shouldn't have f***ed with. We call that FAFO. And to a certain extent it's kind of cosmic justice.

[Asker]

What about if the person running their mouth happens to know self-defense and puts a stop to that physical assault like in that link story?
The shorter and thinner girl that hurled the insult still defended herself against the bigger girl. The girl that tried getting physical for words got tossed. Isn't the saying "once you hit someone first, get prepared to get hit back" also applied there?

[Opinion Owner]

Maybe not, but she wasn't a target, she w asn't a victim. Most people with big mouths, that's all they have. But even if they can fight you can still give as good as you get. You can still make them pay for every word.

[Asker]

If you read the story further, the girl that got insulted actually happened to act like the negative stereotype associated with her race and she was also a bully with other girls. She wasn't a poor, sweet girl that did no wrong.
If your race to be associated with the stereotype of being a violent thug, then acting violent and fighting whenever you get insulted would actually keep that stereotype alive. How about not getting violent and maybe that stereotype or racial remark would go away.

[noohair]

We have intellect and are supposed to exercise restraint. Sadly we have normalized violence as a problem solving tool.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Spoken like a white girl

[Asker]

Did you see the replies on the OP's story? The girl that tried to fight her was described as a bully who has been in trouble many times at school and others didn't like her. The girl that got insulted wasn't a victim who did no wrong either.
All I know is once you turned a verbal altercation into a physical one, you shouldn't get surprised if the other people does fights back. Prior that they were only being verbal. It's when you hit first that they got physical too.