#parenting, violent threats
I wish I knew how to get my four year old to stop screaming "I hate you! I'm gonna find a gun and kill you!" every time he's mad at me over anything at all.
I don't know where he got it from, but our world is full of guns, violence and death, especially on #YouTube (which I always block on our electronic devices, but his older brother Link always figures out how to hack back into it. But hey, at least they won't see any female nipples right?! 🙃)
He always apologizes after calming down, but I don't know how to get him to stop saying it in the first place. I've tried ignoring him, yelling at him, depriving him of electronics and toys, crying (somewhat but not entirely hammed up), calmly asking him to stop, putting him on time out (which just makes him more mad) and still... Every time he's angry, out it comes.
His brother used to say "I want to kill you" a lot, but he's dropped it off a lot, thank goodness. Maybe it's just an age thing. It hurts so badly everything, though. And if he says that at school he's going to be in a lot of trouble. I think enough already about the horrors of gun violence, and fearing my kids will be next... I don't want him adding anything to that, even through words.
I gotta get us out of this shithole country.
#parenting, violent threats
@toplesstopics In relation to the rules topic i tooted your way, this toot inspired an idea: should there be a rule against glorifying violence or weapons?
Maybe, that would be too far, as it might be very hard to moderate. Maybe it's the right thing to do.
I added an issue here: https://gitlab.com/ufoi/constitution/-/issues/3
Anyone who does not want to make a gitlab account can tell me to update with new thoughts, i will do so as long as it does not become too much work for one person.
🇳🇱
#parenting, violent threats
My personal stance is to keep the rules limited as is reasonable. Keep in mind instances can make up their own additional rules for their instance still, so there is a lot of freedom for them to customize the rules beyond those enforced by the UFI.
That said I think its good you added an issue, it is worth discussing.
#parenting, violent threats
@freemo I had a hunch it could be too much, thus my defensive stance asking admins how much of a burden it would be. You are amongst those i wanted to invite to critizise, so a comment against it is welcome.
#parenting, violent threats
@admitsWrongIfProven @freemo
If anything, violence would mean flagging as CW instead of banning...
discussion of violence, examples of bad things to say
@lucifargundam @freemo I am specifically talking about glorification of violence. I do not see a case to stop people from discussing it.
Examples would be:
"There is a war going on, the number of civilian deaths by artillery is x" - factual, not glorifying.
"It is so cool how the army totally smashes our enemies, i love gore!" - glorification, problematic.
discussion of violence, examples of bad things to say
I think glorification of violence might basically just be calls to violence, which might be worth making against the rules.
discussion of violence, examples of bad things to say
@freemo @lucifargundam So basically, what we are discussing is where exactly the cutoff should be.
The viable range is from (clearly criminal) calls to specific violence to generic affirmative expressions regarding violence.
What criteria could there be?
- specific: is the positive stance toward generic violence or targeted at a person or group
- time: is about a possible future occurrence of violence or talking about the past?
- adoption: does it adopt the stance of something cited or is it merely stating that another utterance exists
- ... what am i missing?
