Why are people incapable of logic?

First of all, you are wrong about suicide. Second, you initially said that people who committ suicide are cowards. That includes the guy's brother. After he got pissed, you took it down a bit and said that people who committ suicide are GENERALLY cowards. You little bitch, trying to de-escalate. I am asking you you little autist. Have you ever had a loved one kill themselves? Do you know how much that fucking hurts? The guy was rightfully pissed. Can't you read a situation? Couldn't you just shove your ego up your ass and apologize? But no, you had to feel like the "redpill" distributor of the day, in front of a guy who lost his brother. You piece of shit. The knife should have gone all the way in.

He didn't once back down, he merely asserted both points: that suicidals we're cowards, excepting the subject's brother because OP didn't want his dumbfuck mouth to get him stabbed. In my post I suggested that next time he revs someone up that hard, he backpedal onto a generalization, but given he got stabbed I'm guessing OP made no such submission of his pride.

What I love here is that if this story is indeed true and not just bait (all of Jow Forums is bait though, we're chummed waters), OP got stabbed and that STILL wasn't enough to make him see his autism objectively. To call him 'beyond hope' would be too kind and too temperate.

Maybe OP is suicidal by trying to get himself stabbed. But yeah, he just HAD to assert himself as the server of "cold hard truth". Even to a guy who lost his brother. I am sick of these people who think being logical means being a prick.
He wanna pretend to be Sherlock or some shit? Well guess what, Sherlock knows how to read a fucking room first. Fucking waste of space.

Well
>A equals B doesn't mean that B equals A
this doesn't sound like being book smart, also this #20946478

I should have said """booksmart"""

If someone is severely depressed and hopeless, then kills themselves, it's not really that they were cowardly, but hopeless that life would get any better (like suffocating underwater).

That was easy to refute, wow.

University philosophy professor here. You think are are some sort of supreme philosopher, a king of logic---but you're nothing but a cliche of the freshman in a philosophy 101 class trying too hard to be intelligent in class discussions. Please, become a little bit self aware and just stop making everyone cringe by fiercing declaring your diagnosis of autism to the entire class.

You're a piece of shit.

Given OP hasn't issued a single reply it's fair to say this was bait or he learned what a turbosperg he is a few replies in.

I mean there's nothing for Jow Forums but to reply to bait, I just figured you'd wanna know you were doing it.

Notice how in OP's post that nowhere does he ever admit even the slightest possibility that it could have been him that was in the wrong.

no, there's some schools of logic where that's true. i.e.: just because a = b, doesn't inherently mean b = a, depending on certain conditions (correlation/causation comes to mind).

op's case was not this, though.

My sister was kidnapped, gang-raped and sex trafficked for a month, comitted to a mental ward due to the permanent brain damage the repeated drugging induced, then came back to the US, stayed with friends, and tried to get her life back together.

She found that men would not stop sexually harassing her, and unable to ever feel safe and escape that, she walked into a donut shop near a police station and blew her chest out in the bathroom with a 12-gauge. She was a 10\10 with a ~150IQ, and had a bad childhood like I did.

You are a victim of your own Naivety; You have no concept of being in a situation that is genuinely hopeless, and coming from a background that had to deal with that for years, I certainly hope you are able to stay that way. You do not realize all you are doing is saying something that makes you feel good, but is really damaging to other people.

Obviously, you are looking for an explination that will allow you to be safe and not have someone kill you.

Start here, this is what is wrong with them:
youtube.com/watch?v=otxAuHG9hKo

if you said that people who commit suicide are cowards, and that guy's brother killed himself, then you did call his brother a coward.

Do not let bait bring up stories of the dead.

This user gets it

Some sperg being unaware of his own limitations nor being able to read the situation sounds like your average 4chainer.

>admit even the slightest possibility that it could have been him that was in the wrong
Nobody does.

Why did you back out and say his brother wasn't a coward too? You probably would have minimized the anger a little that way. Should have been like:

>Yes, your brother was a coward. No, I'm not saying he had it easy. But he did take the easy way out. He didn't have enough courage in him, and you shouldn't ignore that.

Stick to your guns no matter what ignorant people think. They want you to change your opinion to theirs, always, and love a hypocrite so they can feel right while also getting their revenge.

LOL I hope op gets his reputation ruined. Fucking idiot.

Life is a test and we are each given our own. All tests require some amount of courage to pass. We don't all need the same amount of courage because no two people are given the same test, but suicide is one such way to fail the test, meaning that person didn't have enough courage to pass their test.

this approach would likely escalate the situation further. if you can believe it.

If you aren't insecure, then you won't pick at the other's insecurity. If it still escalates then they are immature and you just walk away from the conversation.

or, as it happened in op's case, they stab you.

>says something offends people enough to want to hurt you
>call them immature for being offended

Attached: concerned-babby-contrast-vignette.jpg (1638x2048, 403K)

How the fuck do Jow Forums and /b/ get the rep for being containment boards when this cesspool still exists?

If they're offended to that degree, they're obviously immature and deranged.

I agree with though, ultimately, OP should have been able to read what type of person it was, and just apologized when he realized they weren't wrapped very tight.

>If they're offended to that degree, they're obviously immature and deranged.
"Immature" is really underselling something so severe. And a complete misuse of the word.

Well since OP said it was in class I was assuming everyone involved is under 25. That could still be part immaturity then, even if the person got violent. I'm not talking about the person who threatened to kill him.

because people like to circlejerk

>Why are people incapable of logic?
>I was having this subjective dialogue where I made absolute statements
>someone disagreed and I proceeded to learn nothing from the experience and dismissed him with internal epithets

Gee boss, ur 2 logikal 4 me

Yikes, are you the guy that pulled the pocket knife?

Suicide is the easy way out. It IS for cowards because they no longer want to put up with life. Your brother killed himself? That is unfortunate and I'm sorry it happned, BUT suicide is a coward's way out.

Being offended doesn't make it any less truthful.

Yeah, yeah, but was he wrong?

I don't believe that's why most people become suicidal, it's usually because they can find no way out of a situation or a mental condition, feeling hopeless and trapped. But nice vidya game logic and muh courage test.

Okay, so they feel hopeless and trapped, then what? Why suicide? Maybe because... it's the easy way out of the hopelessness and trapped feeling? The final end-all solution to to fix their problems?

To use your "vidya game logic" if you play games on easy mode because you don't want to try (and you CAN try, you just don't want to), you're a coward - a person who lacks courage when confronted with difficulty. Plain truth.

your "logic" on suicide is wrong though. most people who kill themselves legitimately think the world will be better without them and that they're doing the right thing. especially with really depressed people it's more delusion than fear

dude probably shouldn't have freaked out but you taking this stance like you're just so logical and smart and everyone else is just so incapable of it just comes off like you think you're a lot smarter than you are

it has nothing to do with maturity. if someone interprets commentary as an attack on their ethnic background, cultural background, personal tragedies, people they care about, &c, whether explicitly or implicitly, it's reasonable for them to want to smack you.

Absolutely.

Somehow, people will still fall for this extremely obvious bait.

Based on the OP's story though, the person misinterpreted what OP was saying. He wasn't personally attacking them and he wasn't saying it just to be a cold-hearted snobby prick. In that case, the person misinterpreted it as a personal attack, which means the person is insecure and probably immature as well. Besides, what's so mature about getting physically violent with someone in a classroom just because they said something you don't agree with? Your personal investment in the matter doesn't warrant that behavior. It's called freedom of speech.

Everytime I've thought people just don't understand my logic it's been this

>people that commit suicide are cowards
>that guy's brother committed suicide
>therefore his brother is a coward
Seems pretty logically to me retard

you are trying to assert two contradictory thoughts
then you looked like a pussy because you tried to backpedal with "in general"

>She sees me in the street sometimes and the guilt is in her eyes not mine.
that's not guilt, that's disdain

The funniest part is that his logic is just inconsistent. So not only is he a sperg, he's a retarded sperg.

>Based on the OP's story though, the person misinterpreted what OP was saying.
Which was "people who commit suicide" are cowards. Ergo, "this person called my brother a coward" is a valid interpretation.

>He wasn't personally attacking them and he wasn't saying it just to be a cold-hearted snobby prick.
It was a personal attack on that person, whether or not it was intentional.

>In that case, the person misinterpreted it as a personal attack
>This person said people who do X are Y.
>My brother did X.
>Therefore, this person said my brother is Y.
That's not a misinterpretation.

>which means the person is insecure and probably immature as well
By this logic, grief over the death of a loved one (sibling, parent, child, etc) is immature and an insecurity.

>Besides, what's so mature about getting physically violent with someone in a classroom just because they said something you don't agree with?
It's perfectly reasonable, and understandable, to have a dramatic reaction to someone inadvertently insulting a loved one; especially a dead loved one. Even if the insult wasn't intentional.

>Your personal investment in the matter doesn't warrant that behavior.
Behaviours are always the warrant and results of personal investments.

>It's called freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech also means that when you say something, others have the freedom to react to it however they will or want.

>It was a personal attack on that person, whether or not it was intentional.
This was not necessarily a valid interpretation, depending on OP's tone. I also believe that suicide outside of warzones is cowardly (in warzones, if you believe you can jeopardize your country by being captured and you take a cyanide pill to prevent that, that's honorable; avoiding becoming a POW and having to endure severe torture by suicide is also cowardly, but far more reasonable to the extent that I see no need to call such a person a coward). A person who is depressed / traumatized / in a very bad situation in civilian life and commits suicide, however, is a coward, and it should be understood that courage is a REMEDY for depression. The statement was not necessarily meant to be condescending, but alleviating or inspiring, like a proverb. If OP was calm and cool when he said it and the person went off, then the person misinterpreted and took it personally because they are insecure and/or immature.

>By this logic, grief over the death of a loved one (sibling, parent, child, etc) is immature and an insecurity.
Grief is different from taking what someone says as a personal attack when it was clearly not said with any specific person in mind.

>It's perfectly reasonable, and understandable, to have a dramatic reaction to someone inadvertently insulting a loved one; especially a dead loved one. Even if the insult wasn't intentional.
I'm not saying it isn't. However, getting violent from it is not reasonable or understandable.

>Freedom of speech also means that when you say something, others have the freedom to react to it however they will or want.
Uh, no? Are you fucking kidding? You can say whatever you want to someone in response, maybe, but you can't physically attack them because of something they said.

>This was not necessarily a valid interpretation, depending on OP's tone.
It is. He said people who do X is Y. The guy's brother did X, therefore Y under OP's axiom.

>I also believe that suicide outside of warzones is cowardly
Then you are also deficient in logic.

>A person who is depressed / traumatized / in a very bad situation in civilian life and commits suicide, however, is a coward, and it should be understood that courage is a REMEDY for depression.
People who have been researching and studying depression and suicide have found the opposite. The pressure to remain steadfast and courageous only increases the risk of suicide (especially in men).

>The statement was not necessarily meant to be condescending, but alleviating or inspiring, like a proverb.
It was an insult, dismissal, and prejudice towards a personal tragedy. It has the same problems you do when victim blaming a rape victim or veteran.

>taking what someone says as a personal attack when it was clearly not said with any specific person in mind.
That is grief, and a common functionality of it.

>I'm not saying it isn't.
You were, whether intentionally or not. It was still inferred.

>However, getting violent from it is not reasonable or understandable.
Dramatic responses to personal tragedies are always reasonable and understandable, even if it includes violence. The impact may differ, but the need and response is still understandable and within reason.

>Uh, no? Are you fucking kidding? You can say whatever you want to someone in response
Freedom of speech and expression means you are free to react however you want to anything. Even if that includes drama or damage. Freedom of speech/expression does not mean freedom of consequences from what you say and do.

>but you can't physically attack them because of something they said.
Having someone say to your face that they're going to rape and murder your children warrants getting physical with them. Same with insulting a dead loved one.

Different user, I've got to jump into this

>Dramatic responses to personal tragedies are always reasonable and understandable, even if it includes violence
Emotional and violent reactions are never reasonable, even if you think they're understandable. By definition they're not reasonable

>Freedom of speech and expression means you are free to react however you want to anything. Even if that includes drama or damage. Freedom of speech/expression does not mean freedom of consequences from what you say and do.
While freedom of speech does mean freedom to offend and to be offended, it's still not and will never be an excuse for violence.

>He said people who do X is Y. The guy's brother did X, therefore Y under OP's axiom.
I'm not saying that that part is what's invalid. What's invalid is in thinking that OP meant offense by it.

If I were in OP's shoes, I would have likely just apologized and then kept quiet. I've been there and done exactly that. I've even taken verbal abuse without responding or making an attempt to save face; sometimes you just have to depending on how the situation unfolds. What's most important is that you remain polite and considerate of others. That said, it takes a lot of integrity to be able to say you're wrong when you aren't, and grieving / having a personal connection to it doesn't mean you're an authority on the matter.

>The pressure to remain steadfast and courageous only increases the risk of suicide (especially in men).
That isn't courage that's motivating them. Courage is heading into uncertain danger when the odds are stacked against you. I don't see suicidal civilians exhibiting that trait when they decide to take their own lives. Acting out a perceived duty, the whole "it's better this way" thing, is NOT courage.

>Freedom of speech and expression means you are free to react however you want to anything. Even if that includes drama or damage. Freedom of speech/expression does not mean freedom of consequences from what you say and do.
Please point me to where it is stated that freedom of speech means it is legally acceptable for someone to physically hurt you in response.

>Having someone say to your face that they're going to rape and murder your children warrants getting physical with them. Same with insulting a dead loved one.
A threat isn't the same as a perceived insult. I'd also like to see where it is stated that you are legally allowed to physically attack someone who threatens you. I've always been taught and have understood the law to be that you are supposed to bring that information to the police rather than take physical action yourself.

1/2
>I'm not saying that that part is what's invalid.
Your argument, however, does.

>What's invalid is in thinking that OP meant offense by it.
He didn't mean it intentionally, obviously. But it doesn't count here. It was still a personal attack, whether or not he meant to, or foresaw it coming. Not to mention that offending/insulting people without meaning to is often worse than intentionally doing it. He was in the wrong for his comments, regardless of what he originally meant. And he deserved people giving him shit for it.

>If I were in OP's shoes, I would have likely just apologized and then kept quiet.
It's better if you didn't spew it in the first place. Not to mention apologising, or any attempts to, is only a further insult.

>What's most important is that you remain polite and considerate of others.
That doesn't always work, since politeness and consideration isn't universal. Not to mention if it were me, the more polite and considerate you try to be about it, the more offencive you're becoming.

>and grieving / having a personal connection to it doesn't mean you're an authority on the matter.
It means they're entitled to give you shit for attacking someone they hold dear.

>Courage is heading into uncertain danger when the odds are stacked against you.
Which most suicidals do for years and years until it becomes too cumbersome. Suicide is a process that takes years-to-decades to reach -- which is often spent trying to fend off all the crap you're going through, until inevitable exhaustion. There's a reason why most male suicides tend to be middle-aged-to-elder.

2/2
>Acting out a perceived duty, the whole "it's better this way" thing, is NOT courage.
It's courage in the same sense that an army fighting until they're last breath, even though it was very obvious the battle was a no-win.

>Please point me to where it is stated that freedom of speech means it is legally acceptable for someone to physically hurt you in response.
It means that while being free to say what you want, also grants others the freedom to give you shit for what you say. The only thing freedom of speech disallows is that you can't be prosecute for something you say. Not how people react to it.

>A threat isn't the same as a perceived insult. I'd also like to see where it is stated that you are legally allowed to physically attack someone who threatens you. I've always been taught and have understood the law to be that you are supposed to bring that information to the police rather than take physical action yourself.
That's an ethics and discourse matter. Not a legal one. Freedom of speech, legally, just means you can't be officially tried and prosecuted for speech. It says nothing for how people will respond to your speech, and how they'll enact it.

>Emotional and violent reactions are never reasonable, even if you think they're understandable.
They are understandable/reasonable. That's not to say where it's good or bad reason. It's just reason.

>While freedom of speech does mean freedom to offend and to be offended, it's still not and will never be an excuse for violence.
Freedom of speech means you're free to express said offence. Turning to physical actions just makes it a different matter.

1/2

>Your argument, however, does.
Bullshit it does. I even called OP out for backpedaling. If the conditions that OP laid out matched the brother's, then the brother was indeed a coward per OP and he just looked like a hypocrite for backpedaling, which was a bad move. He had to admit to being wrong (even if he wasn't) in addition to apologizing.

>He was in the wrong for his comments, regardless of what he originally meant. And he deserved people giving him shit for it.
Sure. But he was only wrong in how and where and to who he delivered his comments to, and this does not mean that the person who attacked him wasn't insecure / immature or that his comments are wrong.

>That doesn't always work, since politeness and consideration isn't universal.
It's probably the safer bet than getting even more aggressive about it, wouldn't you say? And by polite and considerate I mean, at that point, once OP realized the person was emotionally taken back by his statements, should have apologized and admitted to being wrong, and also let the person speak their piece in front of the class and thank them for it. What else do you recommend someone do in that situation then, assuming they've already said it within earshot of someone who takes it personally and reacts?

>It means they're entitled to give you shit for attacking someone they hold dear.
Sure, but they're not entitled to force me to change my opinion or do physical harm to me for holding opinions they don't agree with. I'm also entitled to smack a bitch fucking silly if they try to stab me or take a swing at me, regardless of their motivation; self-defense and all that.

2/2

>Which most suicidals do for years and years until it becomes too cumbersome.
Okay, first, my comment was about the decision to commit and the act of committing suicide itself, not the pretext that leads up to suicidal thoughts. Secondly, in that situation, it's not courage they lack but luck, possibly intelligence, possibly good opportunities / people in their lives. There is still nothing necessarily courageous about killing yourself in that situation.

>It's courage in the same sense that an army fighting until they're last breath, even though it was very obvious the battle was a no-win.
How is suicide a fight at all? A fight against what, at that point? Are you killing yourself to save face or something, and do you believe suicide can save face? If so, sure, I guess; I don't agree with that, but if you see it that way, like some old world Japanese do, then okay. But you're likely doing it out of some duty still, and I question how courageous you really are. Want to know what's more courageous than suicide to me? Giving up on yourself and living for someone else instead, as hard as that is. If they don't respect what you give, you have no reason to give them your respect any further.

>It means that while being free to say what you want, also grants others the freedom to give you shit for what you say.
Except when "giving shit" involves doing physical harm. Freedom of speech does not give people the right to do physical harm to another, in the United States at least, and there are no grounds for which physical harm will not get you prosecuted in court. Just because someone says something you don't like does not mean, under any circumstances, that you are now allowed to stab the person in the neck in a classroom, and if you think otherwise, you either aren't talking about the United States, aren't from here, or are deeply ignorant of the law and culture here.

>They are understandable/reasonable. That's not to say where it's good or bad reason. It's just reason.
Having a reason doesn't make it reasonable you fucking cretin

OP you were correct, but you fucked up.
you should not have backed down to the guy who's brother had become an hero.
You should have called him a coward for not being able to continue to fight to survive. ALL an heroes are cowards.
If you didn't back down, he would have left and cried. Fuck that guy, I hope you are pursuing attempted murder charges. He should be in lockup for the better part of his life.
He seems as much as a bitch as his brother who offed himself.

>be me
>brother commits suicide for whatever reason
>whole family grieves for him and I'm not even close to getting over it
>one day some dude starts talking about how people who commit suicide are cowards
>I call him out on not knowing what the fuck he is talking about
>"B-BRO, JUST THINK LOGICALLY YOU KNOW"

Attached: 1557531249240.png (569x450, 266K)

Statements like that just hand suicidal people another stick to beat themselves with. All it does is add confirmation to the negative voices in their head telling them that they're selfish, cowardly burdens and nobody would miss them. Grow up and learn some empathy.

>Because A equals B, doesn't mean that B equals A.

Dude wtf

Attached: 1466627679984.jpg (495x497, 78K)

1/2
>Bullshit it does.
It does.

>I even called OP out for backpedaling.
a). for backpadeling, instead for the shit he spewed. And b). you're still insisting not only that the guy's brother is a coward for offing himself, but that they are criteria to differentiate whether or not he qualifies as such, Putting you in the same ill-got and logically-deficient position as OP.

>If the conditions that OP laid out matched the brother's, then the brother was indeed a coward per OP
Which would make you as bad as OP. Perhaps worse.

>and he just looked like a hypocrite for backpedaling, which was a bad move.
Which apparently is worse than what OP did, and the grief his assailant has presumably gone through. In before you claim that wasn't what you were saying, despite it being plainly untrue.

>He had to admit to being wrong
He shouldn't have said it in the first place, regardless of his intent and expectations. There are some actions/mistakes you don't make, nor get to escape the consequences from.

>in addition to apologizing.
Which likely would've add salt to the wound and escalated the matter. Sometimes, the worst insult you can give to in these situation is an apology, or attempts to make amends.

>But he was only wrong in how and where and to who he delivered his comments to
He was wrong for making these insinuations about both the dead and suicidals in the first place.

>and this does not mean that the person who attacked him wasn't insecure / immature or that his comments are wrong.
This is not an security/maturity for the same reasons PTSD and other traumatic experiences aren't. Actively disparaging people who commit/suffered these tragedies is immature, especially with the expectations that no one would try to get back at them for it. Actively believing that succumbing to lifelong issues enough to end it is immature, especially when cobbled with the stereotype that it's done for little-to-no reason.

2/2
>It's probably the safer bet than getting even more aggressive about it, wouldn't you say?
It's probably worse.

>And by polite and considerate I mean, at that point, once OP realized the person was emotionally taken back by his statements, should have apologized and admitted to being wrong, and also let the person speak their piece in front of the class and thank them for it.
Which is still polite/consideration by your standards, not the standards of others, and treating it an absolutist matter. Not to mention, in this case, apologizing is only making it worse.

>What else do you recommend someone do in that situation then, assuming they've already said it within earshot of someone who takes it personally and reacts?
Not spout that bullshit in the first place, especially if you're going to act suprised that people are coming after you for it.

>Sure, but they're not entitled to force me to change my opinion or do physical harm to me for holding opinions they don't agree with.
They're not doing that. They're just giving you shit for something you did.

>I'm also entitled to smack a bitch fucking silly if they try to stab me or take a swing at me, regardless of their motivation; self-defense and all that.
And you would still be the one in the wrong, considering your commentary was what sparked the whole debacle.

>Okay, first, my comment was about the decision to commit and the act of committing suicide itself
>not the pretext that leads up to suicidal thoughts.
Those two are the same thing with suicidalism, and cannot exist without each other.

>Secondly, in that situation, it's not courage they lack but luck, possibly intelligence, possibly good opportunities / people in their lives. There is still nothing necessarily courageous about killing yourself in that situation.
Which is still wrong and victim blaming.

>But you're likely doing it out of some duty still, and I question how courageous you really are.
Because you're not capable of empathy or basic humanity.

>Want to know what's more courageous than suicide to me?
It's likely going to be something you'd find on Jow Forums.

>Giving up on yourself and living for someone else instead, as hard as that is.
Which not everyone has the privilege of enjoying.

>Except when "giving shit" involves doing physical harm.
Which would be splitting at hairs to justify one's prejudice. And pushing the matter into a different issue altogether.

>Freedom of speech does not give people the right to do physical harm to another
Freedom of speech only means you can't be legally prosecute for something you say. It does not dictate how people can respond to someone's commentary. You're legally free to call someone a nigger. People are also free to use that against you in retaliation.

>Just because someone says something you don't like
Means they can respond in turn. It just means they can't have you arrested for it.

>and if you think otherwise, you either aren't talking about the United States, aren't from here, or are deeply ignorant of the law and culture here
And you're a bigot who's not capable of empathy of (especially) those outside your demographic.

No, it's still reasonability. It's just not to say if it's good or bad reasonability.

this is a made up story

lawfag here, it depends on a number of circumstances. in my state, even if we're talking homicide laws, if the perpetrator was proven to be too emotionally unstable to be rational in his actions, then he can get a reduced sentence. going into a flying rage because someone insulted a dead family member has qualified under that before. we also have provocation laws here where, if it's proven that you did something to provoke a person in attacking you, it can also reduce whatever legal accountability they're given. op's comments and lack of de-escalation would apply to this. there's also nothing about relating to the first amendment. you would have to attempt to have someone arrested for their comments for that to happen. this was just a conflict that escalated into violence. which are among the most common criminal reports.

however, I don't empathize with op on this. and probably would volunteer to be his attacker's lawyer, to get him as reduced sentence as possible.

Oh, come on, you were bitching about suicide and the guy has a brother that actually fit in that group you just said. Then, you felt fear because he would gonna split your fuckin' face.

Animals got amidala on their brain and when in fear, cold, happiness, they aren't thinking.

Stop thinking youself too smart, look like a dumb shit.

>Which likely would've add salt to the wound and escalated the matter.
>It's probably worse.
So, are you vouching for the violence then? You don't provide an alternative to OP's situation, you just state that it shouldn't have happened at all. I agree with you, but since it did happen, what would you suggest OP do next?

>He was wrong for *publicly* making these insinuations about both the dead and suicidals in the first place.
Fixed that for you, Mr. Thought Police.

>This is not an security/maturity for the same reasons PTSD and other traumatic experiences aren't.
But being traumatized literally means you have a deep insecurity regarding a certain context. I understand the person experiencing it can't heal if they consider it an insecurity, maybe, but I'm not in the business of healing.

>Actively disparaging people who commit/suffered these tragedies is immature
If it was in response to a classroom topic then OP wasn't actively disparaging anyone. Simply having a viewpoint about a general subject and stating it isn't the same as the deliberate defamation of one's character. Of course, we don't have enough information from OP to say whether it was in response to a topic or not.

>They're not doing that. They're just giving you shit for something you did.
The person stabbed OP in the neck with a blade. Regardless of ANYTHING, that action isn't justifiable.

>Those two are the same thing with suicidalism, and cannot exist without each other.
Judgment can still be passed separately on one and the other.

>Which is still wrong and victim blaming.
Victim blaming? Dude, it's just an observation. A person who commits suicide lacks something that ensures survivability, clearly.

>People are also free to use that against you in retaliation.
Sure, and if the other person admits to being wrong, apologizes, and lends an empathetic ear, and you still get abrasive and physically violent with them, you are immature... or mentally ill, and should seek help.

I think people who kill themselves have guts, honestly. Cowards? Never. They are admirable.

this

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, are numbers

1 isn't a number however because I am only saying that when we discuss all of the characters collectively they or numbers, but individually they are just characters.

Your logic is that of a prepubescent teenager. just do your class a favor and stfu if you're not going to make any fucking sense

People who commit suicide are cowards though, stand by what you say and stop being a massive bitch

Attached: 1547832022676.jpg (682x900, 68K)