Group items tagged

Robert Bowers, the alleged Pittsburgh synagogue killer, had an online life like many thousands of anti-Semitic Americans. He had Twitter and Facebook accounts and was an active user of Gab, a right-wing Twitter knockoff with a hands-off approach to policing speech. The Times of Israel reported that among anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and slurs, Bowers had recently posted a picture of "a fiery oven like those used in Nazi concentration camps used to cremate Jews, writing the caption 'Make Ovens 1488F Again,'" a white-supremacist reference. Then he made one last post, saying, "I'm going in," and allegedly went to kill 11 people at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. Only then did his accounts come down, just like Cesar Sayoc's, the mail-bomb suspect. This is how it goes now. Both of these guys made nasty, violent, prejudiced posts. Yet, as reporter after reporter has noted, their online lives were-to the human eye at least-indistinguishable from the legions of other trolls who say despicable things. There is just no telling who will stay in the comments section and who will try to kill people in the real world. It was not long ago that free-speech absolutism was the order of the day in Silicon Valley. But that was before anti-Semitic attacks spiked; before the Charlottesville, Virginia, killing; before the kind of open racism that had lost purchase in American culture made its ugly resurgence. Each new incident ratchets up the pressure on technology companies to rid themselves of their trolls. But the culture they've created will not prove easy to stamp out.

Free speech, properly understood, is not violence. It is a cure for violence. Freedom of speech is the eternally radical idea that individuals will try to settle their differences through debate and discussion, through evidence and attempts at persuasion, rather than through the coercive power of administrative authorities-or violence. The authors of this article assert that while it may feel unpleasant grappling with ideas and perspectives that run counter to one's own, it creates positive stress that strengthens one's resilience and allows one to reap the longer-term benefits of learning.

Lukianoff, a First Amendment lawyer, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (fire), and author of _The Coddling of the American Mind_, speaks about free speech controversies at American universities and the dangers of protecting students from ideas and words that they dislike. Such moves, although well-intentioned, arguably diminish tolerance for diversity and dialogue, and ironically, may exacerbate both depression and anxiety.

The U.S. Supreme Court is tackling a question of increasing importance in the age of social media and the Internet: What constitutes a threat on Facebook? Anthony Elonis was convicted of threatening both his estranged wife and an FBI agent. After his wife left him, taking the couple's two children with her, Elonis began posting about her on his Facebook page. Elonis was indicted on five counts of interstate communication of illegal threats. At his trial, he acknowledged the violence voiced in his posts, but argued he was exercising his First Amendment free speech rights. Longtime federal prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, however, notes that most of the posts occurred after Elonis' wife had gotten a protective court order, and that Elonis posted his messages on his Facebook page without restriction. Thus, Fitzgerald contends that the husband reasonably foresaw what the reaction would be. "The wife would read this and think, this is not an artistic statement, this is not a political statement about a larger cause," says Fitzgerald. "This is trying to get inside her head and make her think there could be someone doing violence to her."

In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like. Two terms have risen quickly from obscurity into common campus parlance. Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless. For example, by some campus guidelines, it is a microaggression to ask an Asian American or Latino American "Where were you born?," because this implies that he or she is not a real American. Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response. For example, some students have called for warnings that Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart describes racial violence and that F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby portrays misogyny and physical abuse, so that students who have been previously victimized by racism or domestic violence can choose to avoid these works, which they believe might "trigger" a recurrence of past trauma. The current movement is largely about emotional well-being. More than the last, it presumes an extraordinary fragility of the collegiate psyche, and therefore elevates the goal of protecting students from psychological harm. The ultimate aim, it seems, is to turn campuses into "safe spaces" where young adults are shielded from words and ideas that make some uncomfortable.

Swearing expresses many different types of emotions. Kinda like when people use their car horns.

This article explores into depth the reason why and when we swear. One reason we swear is to insert a direct emotional component into the discussion to express frustration, anger or surprise. Swearing frees us of the feelings of anger or frustration we hold inside of us and provides an alternative from physical violence. The second use of swearing is in the form of jokes and humor, sex talk, story telling and social commentary. Our word choice is dependent on the people we are surrounded by, the relationship we have with that group of people and the setting of the situation. For example, people are less likely to use swear words in mixed company or in the work place. We are more likely to swear with people of the same gender or with our sexual partners. This article also describes the amount of swearing in our lives.

Why do people swear? Why does using a swear word make us feel better? How do we choose which word we use? Luckily for you, the Association of Psychological Science's Perspectives on Psychological Science just published an article that answers these important scientific questions in an article by Timothy Jay (2009).