Wait..."392 new answers, 386 total"!?! We've killed math!

being shouted at by strangers is a situation that contains within it the potential for harm (the perceived likelihood of that potential coming to violent fruition, well that depends on the individual! how *likely* you think it is doesn't enter into it). having your life filled with horrible violent events doesn't = finding strange shirtless yobs yelling at you a BREEZE! fear when you are yelled at/fear when you have a knife in your face - they're both about not wanting to experience pain/death/discomfort of some sort, and there's no way you can set up some reliable hierarchy of fear. people have said this in this thread already, more succinctly than i have!

- Having things yelled at you from a car can be threatening.
- Having things yelled at you from a car can be funny.

I think these are both true.

Why? Because it suggests that the question might not be a matter of opinion? The mental health consensus on verbal abuse is that whether it's "serious" or not, it has repercussions. What's wrong with pointing that out?

The funny thing is that I totally agree with your point about yelling being abusive, I just think that you express it in a completely "nyah nyah" kind of way.

I'd include That's why the correct answer to the thread's question is "Dud." in that, as well. You don't always have to talk down to people to get your point across.

Bizarre thread. In length, in depth. The title is so specific and still vague, and everyone fills in the blanks as they will. The car is the crucial detail; the safety of being in one rather than on foot, the speed, the power (social, physical). But so much isn't there, and what isn't there is where this argument keeps circling and diving. Class, gender, race; and basic dramatic context details like whether the shouter or -ee is alone or not, the time of day, the mood of the space (postgame party? demonstration? ghetto? country road?) and the nature of the shout itself (mainly "wierd" vs aggressive [and the wierd end justified by imo lazy connections to other "irruptions" like dada or protest]). Of course, this open area has its center of gravity at its most extreme ends (rape, stabbing, victimhood) guaranteed to bring blood up and thought down.

So forget about the car. Restated, this is really "What right does anyone have to impose themselves on another in public?" The shout is an irruption, an imposition into the reciever's life, momentarily. Even at its most benign or funny, it's an intrusion, an encroachment. At root, I would have to say DUD, but of course all of the gap-filling and attendant line-drawing is where the question gets answered (by feel) as these things happen in life.

(yes I know thank you captain fucking obvious, but really if there's one thing I could see change in the mood here it would be the inclination to find some kind of end BEHIND an argument rather than just "winning" it, which is usually pyrrhic or an excuse for performance or both.)

this is something i'd like to see across ilx and one of the main reasons i don't contribute to "in depth" threads (as i am prone to shut down other peoples responses in my head after a while...but i think i'm not the only one.)

As I said privately, I'm sorry for being condescending. That said, come on, now. We ignore science just because it wasn't that long ago that Established Science made all kinds of wacky claims, and we don't have the extreme ends of the profession stand in for the consensus. Most reputable research on the question suggests that "words can never hurt me" is total nonsense: that was my point. "Mental health professional" is just a bit of jargon from my day job which wasn't meant to sound all high-n-mi-tee or anything.

nickalicious, yes that's why I posted so much about the original intention of the thread - but as jess sez (and he's right) we can't always have it our way on ilx.

ilx != Burger King

(and thank god for that)

If only I had paid attention to The Rolling Stones.

I'd also like to point out that I've actually stopped myself from yelling things when I realized they might seem offensive/evil/frightening. Only so as to not seem like such a bad bad mang, which I promise I'm not. Just ask my son!

I still have the nagging feeling that you sound like Mick Jagger! hahahaha

Actually, lots of people have said my stage-presence is very Jaggeriffic, due in equal parts to the hand-on-hip thing and the skinny-guy-that-dances-like-somebody-rubbed-tiger-balm-on-his-nuttsack thing.

*car passes by, someone shouts "GET A ROOM!"...I poop on them*

I think there are two competing points here:
- Having things yelled at you from a car can be threatening.
- Having things yelled at you from a car can be funny.

And yes, both of these are true, which leads us to a question: is it acceptable to threaten or potentially-threaten someone because it's funny?

Maybe phrasing it like that will make it clearer why some people have just really put their feet down about this being unacceptable: there's a level on which it really is just harming others for your own amusement.

So workers playing pranks on their boss seems funnier to me than hazing rituals. And Alan's cotton ball example (other thread) seems horrible because it's kids picking on a weaker kid. But at my school we had a teacher who couldn't stand the smell of matches, and every now and then someone would light a match in his lessons and he'd go green and run out. It was cruel to him but he was the teacher and could (and did) get retribution for doing it.

Does humor derived from scaring people (sneaking up behind people and shouting "BOO!", jumping out at people while wearing a fright mask) fall into this category?

As for these questions:

Is threat harm? Yes. It really is, both legally and logically: people are "harmed" -- i.e., the quality of their lives are diminished -- by feeling threatened.

Is your fear my problem? Always? This one I don't get: of course it is, if you're intentionally creating it for your own amusement! If people are scared by you minding your own business, then sure, that's their problem, not yours. But if you're doing something to them specifically to get a reaction -- a reaction you know in lots of cases can be fear, resentment, or just plain annoyance -- then yeah, it's your problem: you started it! This is why I hope the cars thread has maybe accomplished something: I hope some people have noticed that the people they might yell at -- whether they intend it or not -- might honestly not appreciate the yelling, and that in such cases maybe it's not worth putting them through that just for a laugh. It doesn't really matter if you think they're justified in feeling how they feel; it's up to them.

Tom, you're absolutely right about power relations -- it's still a childish and mean thing to do to someone like a teacher, but this isn't something I'd get too bothered by, since someone like a teacher theoretically has the authority to make you stop it. (It becomes less random-bothering and more a test of precisely that authority, and testing authority is a pretty normal thing for people to do.)

Granted, in real life I tend to err too far on the other side of the line, due to maybe overdeveloped fear of bothering other people.

See for instance Dan, I didn't really mind your putting my name on the nacho cheese thread! That's an example of a liberty someone might not appreciate, but because I know you I don't hold it against you. And, per example, I hold it against Ethan a little cause he kept doing it after I asked him not to.

But I think the comparison, while over-the-top and probably not worth arguing about, is a valid and non-ridiculous one: those are phrases people use to tell others "I am going to do X to you and if you don't want me to you're just being a crybaby or a prude." (Both of those were invoked in the other thread; both of those are invoked by bullies, date-rapists, and lots of other people who want to do things to others that others would prefer they don't.)

Do we really need two threads for this? I find the date-rape comparison suspect at best, offensive and upsetting at worst: are you now bullying me?

You can't be held personally responsible if something you say offends someone else unless you are specifically trying to offend them. i.e. shouting "Faggot" out a window clearly is something meant to be offensive, shouting "Don't mess with Texas!" isn't. If someone gets upset by "Don't mess with Texas", it's their right to - but you can't say that that fear is the statement-maker's problem, because then it precludes anyone from saying anything, ever.

nice udders

Ally, I think the distinction that's being drawn is between normal speech and, say, shouting out of cars, which is an "act" outside the confines of normal speech. (Normal speech would involve stopping the car and saying "Excuse me.") It's not just randomly saying something that happens to offend someone: it's actively bringing them into a relationship with you in which you dictate all of the terms and they're powerless to participate, and it's doing this for your own amusement. This is the level on which I think the date-rape comparison was made: would you agree to "I can't be held personally responsible if something I did to you hurts you unless I was specifically trying to hurt you?"

I guess that's the crux of it, whether we think of this as a form of "speech" or an actual "act" to which someone is being subjected. I think of it as an "act." I think that because "speaking" to someone usually involves standing on their level, outside of a potentially-dangerous vehicle, and saying something to which they might have some opportunity to respond.

BLURILLLLLAZ!!!

I'd also note that the same problem that always happens in these threads is reemerging: it needs to be said one again that your freedom to say or behave in certain ways does not include the freedom not to be criticized for them.

When Person A is introduced to Person B, Person A punches Person B on the arm. Person B goes down in a splintery mass.

Is Person A a bad person for punching Person B in the arm?

I still don't understand how "DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!" or "PARDON ME DO YOU HAVE ANY GREY POUPON!" shouted by frat boys is really some sort of diabolical plot to harm people or even something that people should be offended by, but then again I'm probably considered a total jerk by half of ILX so it's not a surprise that I'm insensitive.

That's why I even got involved in the other thread, watching someone go relatively bitchcakes over a thread that originated in fairly innocuous shout outs. Obviously no one in their right mind would defend someone driving down the street screaming out racial obscenities, but people who are defending very harmless, nonsequitorial "humor" are being treated the same as the person who'd run down the street shouting "Chink!" after an Asian or summit. (disclaimer: obv. this is not directed at a majority but a very small minority and obv. the "other side" of the argument went well far up their own asses as well)

also, I find jess yelling blurillaz very upsetting :( :( :(

Ally, it really does make me sad when the funny-joke turnaround becomes more important than arguing with what people actually say. I'm sure I do it to other people, yeah. But part of why people get sucked into extended unproductive arguments is the sense that they're trying very hard to make particular distinctions, and other people are ignoring what they're actually saying because the truth makes their comeback quips less funny. I mean, I say all this stuff about entering into social agreements about stuff, and the difference between speech and acts, and the differences between beyond able to avoid or participate in speech and just having it imposed on you ... but responding to that would, I guess, be less funny than saying I'm bullying Ned, as if such a thing were possible.

It's not your fault and I'm not complaining -- this sort of thing just bums me out.

I suppose you could try, but my response would be, "Huh. Anyway."

Should this have me rolling on the floor with laughter?

Anyway quite frankly I think it's best this discussion ends with bad jokes because what could've been a reasonable discussion just can't be at this point. I'm not going to go into WHY at this point because A) it's rude and bullying to those I'm talking about B) it has nothing to do with the people still posting on this thread.

I still stand by what I said: I don't see why obvious absurdist humor (I was pretty specific with my examples) would be considered threatening or harmful, even if shouted out a car window.

BLURILLLLLAZ!!!

I still don't understand how "DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!" or "PARDON ME DO YOU HAVE ANY GREY POUPON!" shouted by frat boys is really some sort of diabolical plot to harm people

ok this shit is hilarrus

i can't believe the "yelling from cars" thread is four years old. i really can't.

Where did the time go?

the other day, i yelled at some douchebag riding his motorbike on the sidewalk. felt damn good.

^^^ IJ, not BL