OK, can you give me the definition of violence that you use? Because the common one is:
behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
You remind me of my Christian parents who redefined “religious” to mean “following the laws of the Bible”, which they claim they don’t because they follow Jesus instead, so my Christian parents now claim not to be religious, even though the common definition is “relating to or believing in a religion.” - simple as that. It feels really silly to do that. Cult-ish, even.
It looks like you asked for a definition of violence instead of searching for types of violence.
Yes, because if you have a word that has a definition, and you put a modifier in front of it to specify something, you can’t have that thing becomes something completely different.
Let’s assume my point for a second, for the sake of argument (yes, yes, I know you don’t agree), and violence is physical only.
That means that if you add a modifier in front of it, it doesn’t make sense to have that specified violence suddenly not be physical.
OK, can we stop randomly redefining “violence” to be whatever we do not like?
We already have a word that perfectly fits here: Exploitation
Knock it off. Thanks.
Violence isn’t always physical.
That’s the common definition. In which case would violence not entail a physical action?
Where is this idea coming from that violence isn’t physical?
Mental or psychological violence isn’t physical. Economic violence isn’t physical, verbal abuse isn’t physical.
That doesn’t answer my question.
It answers your question perfectly. You gave a definition of physical violence. There are many forms of violence that are not all physical.
deleted by creator
This isn’t redefining anything, violence takes many forms, not just broken glass. There’s mental violence, economic, sociological, cultural, verbal.
OK, can you give me the definition of violence that you use? Because the common one is:
You remind me of my Christian parents who redefined “religious” to mean “following the laws of the Bible”, which they claim they don’t because they follow Jesus instead, so my Christian parents now claim not to be religious, even though the common definition is “relating to or believing in a religion.” - simple as that. It feels really silly to do that. Cult-ish, even.
What displayed here is a form of economic violence. It looks like you asked for a definition of violence instead of searching for types of violence.
Yes, because if you have a word that has a definition, and you put a modifier in front of it to specify something, you can’t have that thing becomes something completely different.
Let’s assume my point for a second, for the sake of argument (yes, yes, I know you don’t agree), and violence is physical only.
That means that if you add a modifier in front of it, it doesn’t make sense to have that specified violence suddenly not be physical.
That just doesn’t make any logical sense.