Do Words Hurt?

reply to post by halfoldman

Hi there,halfoldman-ja hulle was,en heeltemal genadeloos.

Aside from the trauma of my home situation,in general a lot of what went on in those days went wayyy past "Spare the rod and spoil the child"-as an older child it became clear to me that most people seemed to have an agenda of instilling control and subjugation through humiliation+fear,instead of through Genuine respect for authority figures-because of their decency,and the reasonable,sound logic approach to whatever concept they wished the child to understand,as would have been the wisest+true way to achieve respect.That was the way in schools,and in most normal households too-very draconian.
Bless you,i wish you a very good day:-)

Whoops. Wrong thread.

I've always found the studies on the way language influences us when very young fascinating. Some claim to have evidence that words and phrases heard while one is still in the maternal womb can have a profound effect.
-Not that the fetus understands them or applies any meaning at the time, but that their subconscious records them- especially if they are delivered with force of emotion happening at the same time by the mother. Hormonal secretions in her body (when in a argument with someone, for example) strengthen the imprinting process in the new mind.

This is apparently just part of our wonderful automatic survival system in our body, which enables us to develop defense mechanisms to dangers in the environment.

What I've read is that because these sounds become associated with emotion, and are recorded in the mind, the child learns the meaning of the word later, and then can understand the words that play within them, and that served as the principle structure and base for their personality.

Like- a pregnant woman, (or one with a toddler in arms) says to her husband, 'you are always late everywhere!' in anger. This child will have those words played and replayed inside for years, and as their conscious mind associates them with specific behaviors, they become someone who is habitually tardy.
The effects could be said to be damaging when the words are more insulting (stupid, worthless, a monster, etc.). Apparently it doesn't even matter much if the words are accompanied with a 'you' or "I", since the subconscious makes no distinction- only the conscious awareness will project things onto others or retain as self image, later.
But once the concept is embedded, it still a part of that persons psyche forever.


I mentioned L. Ron Hubbards "Dianetics' the other day- I am NOT into scientology, and did not et to the end of that book, as it began to get into his ideas that people should undergo lengthy de-programming of these base ideas, in order to become some sort of Uberman of his own design..... but he had some observations on this that I think had merit, and that spurred me to look for others findings on the idea from others.

Working with animals, I have been fascinated by the bodies ability to record and make associations with words, not only for animals but humans. It doesn't seem to stop at infancy; our subconscious minds continue to make these associations. I have to pay attention, for example, to the effect certain words have on an person hile they are handling a horse. If a word causes a physiological reaction in them, the horse reacts immediately. The person may be unaware, or barely aware, of an internal reaction, but the animal can be moved into the hands of another, or the person moved to work with another animal, and the experiment is repeated with the same results.
Certain animals are like bio-feedbck machines that way, which is why even psychotherapy is done with horses now.



So I think the effects of language upon us go beyond the conscious judgement- we don't totally control what they do to us. But I have noticed that some people identify with the internal movements of emotion more than others- some people will not acknowledge consciously anything they are feeling inside emotionally, others will be highly sensitive to it, but with each, the horse will get dangerous anyway. Meaning that, even if you cut yourself off from your physiological reactions in uyour body stirred by subconscious associations, it will still effect your environment and others. Empathic bodies around will feel it, and it will effect how others feel in your presence.

Sorry this is so long. It is one of my personal interests! (this is Bluesma, by the way, unable to log in with my more current account- no intent to deceive anyone!)

well, they say the pen is mightier than the sword, but given the choice i'd take a withering insult over a blow from a claymore, anyday.

reply to post by coquine

So I think the effects of language upon us go beyond the conscious judgement- we don't totally control what they do to us.

I think initially yes, words will lead our thinking down a certain path to certain thoughts. But I think it's when we believe the words to be true or false, or accept them by manner of authority, they take power over us. I think at that time, as heralds and Gods of our own thought, we can disassociate the words from the thoughts, deprogram ourselves from the indoctrination, and see the words for what they are: symbols representing the thoughts of another, not anything that can inflict any harm.

I don't think words can harm a fetus. I think tone and audibility may harm a fetus, but not the articulation of tones into words. In your example, I don't with think the child who, with a mother who complained about lateness, will be growing up consistently tardy, because in the womb he has no clue what "being late" means. It seems inconceivable that the subconscious will recognize and remember the word, and after eventually understanding the semantics, apply that meaning to life. (I am trying to remove the idea of a subconscious from my thinking. I of course could be very wrong.)

It can only be how we think about words that brings us harm. I have noticed in this thread that those who are "thick-skinned" as they like to call themselves, already have a general understanding that words do not hurt. They've realized that they are just words, and thoughts are just thoughts, and with this simple shift in perspective, are able to become more powerful than the words they hear—this seems to be accomplished by reason. And then there are others who carry an idealistic superstition towards words, who are maybe more intuitively inclined, and rather than think about how they can alter the effects of words on themselves, seek to associate the words to whatever idealistic notions they carry.

I'm just thinking out loud here.

I'm glad I read your post Bluesma, I wouldn't have known it was you. The way you think is refreshing.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

...an idealistic superstition towards words...

care to elaborate?

:-)

Depends who it is. If it's someone who doesn't know me...I'll just laugh and move on. I'll save my energy for someone who is actually a threat to me, not someone flapping his gums. Now if someone close to me like a family member or a spouse insulted me yeah those would most likely hurt my feelings.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by intrptr

 

If words had no effect they wouldn't yell at you in boot camp. DI's job is to break your spirit, destroy your will and replace it with their own.

A will to kill.

I have argued that the only affect is the affect one has on oneself. It is because we have a superstition regarding words that we believe them to have power over us.

That would be something if the opposite would exist; the contents and meaning of words from my brain directly inserted in the others' brain without the chance for that person to refute it 'inside'.

Great post, but there is something I'm missing, people want words to be able to hurt so that the opposite can be true; words can invoke positive feelings and in an ideal situation we would all live in a society where everyone would just want to invoke positivity in eachother or wouldn't know any better. No one would have to cheer themselves up or have something because of which others would want to, we would all cheer up one another just because there would be no other option.

Instead of wanting to use words to have someone bring themselves down inflicting self harm to get rid of competition which is why people would want to do that I believe. For example when two guys are after the same girl, one would make the other doubt himself so he wouldn't approach her. Or at work when an employee gets put down so he will never ask for a raise. Or simply in those relationships where both use those words to create some effect in the other, it's a contact even if it is negative and people would hurt themselves over it, in all cases when the meaning of words is lost it's worse than either negative or positive, there's just nothing left.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Words hurt, and words can build. You can choose what words you listen to but they can still have an effect on you.

Considering this forum is all about words..and seeing how people react to words everyday.. i am not sure why youfelt you needed to touch on this topic

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Because there are no such things as words in themselves, they don't exist without a speaker/voice, you think me "thin skinned' as I disagree and believe words can wound and we should take care not to wound with our words.
Coaching disassociation( thick skin edness) to speakers or hearers of hurtful words (all at every level of development) may not be the best? You then say its the hearers problem and its not. Bully's should take full responsibility for their words and the wounds it causes others. People hearing bullys should understand that the insulter is full of problems that he/she probably is ignorant of.

I would like to add to all those people who are not "thick skinned" and can feel the negative energy behind the words that it is an insulters self exposure, and as we are not disassociated we can feel each others pain (even when directed outwords).
I am not thick or thin skinned and do not like being labeled because my idea on words ability to wound is at odds with yours.
I accept that with your disassociation words cannot wound you, but I still believe words can wound.

P.S All thoughts and words are creative.
OM
Peace and love.

Words are only words. Of course you will get your teeth knocked out if you start insulting people but what if you are a 300 pound athlete saying those words? Yeah those people would probably think twice and maybe not even care about those words and walk away.

Words may cause you to think about something, but what you put back out is completely up to you. You can throw a fit as a reaction and try to knock someone's teeth out, or you can smile and tell yourself "this joke isn't worth my time" and walk away. I don't think words matter, it's how you react to them.

**edit: example, short person will find the word "short" a lot more sensitive and hurtful than a person who is say..6'3

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

care to elaborate?

:-)

I wonder if a superstition of words, a faith in semantics, and a religion of language is at fault when people claim words hurt. It seems as if people are giving unnecessary power to words by irrationally making them out to be good or evil, thereby allowing them to be used as weapons. This leads to a fear of, and a scorn towards, words themselves.

reply to post by BDBinc

I would like to add to all those people who are not "thick skinned" and can feel the negative energy behind the words that it is an insulters self exposure, and as we are not disassociated we can feel each others pain (even when directed outwords).
I am not thick or thin skinned and do not like being labeled because my idea on words ability to wound is at odds with yours.

I never labelled you anything. You labelled yourself. This is a prime example of what I mean. You feel insulted where no insult was given. Who fault is that?

Also, we don't feel each other's pain, we think about and imagine it.

There is no negative energy behind words. There is nothing behind words. They are, in every case, as negative as you make them out to be.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Nope you are wrong, I did not say that people who get wounded by words are not thick skinned, that was you( read your own post).
I don’t feel insulted by you and didn’t say I was.
Who fault is that?


We do feel each other's pain.
OK fine you cannot, but I can.

There is negative or positive creative energy behind words, oh yes there is if it is placed behind them.

reply to post by BDBinc

you think me "thin skinned' as I disagree and believe words can wound and we should take care not to wound with our words.

I am not thick or thin skinned and do not like being labeled because my idea on words ability to wound is at odds with yours.

Sorry. I don't know you enough to call you thin-skinned or label you in any way. These are your conclusions.

Yes, your fault.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

There is nothing behind words

Then - what is language for?

Might as well reply to your other post here:

I wonder if a superstition of words, a faith in semantics, and a religion of language is at fault when people claim words hurt.

Thank you for that - interesting ideas. I'm not sure exactly what you're shooting for though - is it that you have a problem with emotional responses? If we do away with our emotions will it make us stronger? Better? Invulnerable?

I'm interested in your word choices and what those words mean to you personally. Do you think, when you use the word superstition, that some people are actually assigning some kind of supernatural power to words? Do they believe those words can affect them - magically? I think it's interesting when you say faith in semantics and religion of language...

You asked us - do words hurt? You've decided they can't. Rational people are unaffected by words - irrational people are hurt by them

So, language has no effect on some people - the rational people?

I don't actually believe that - they can claim whatever they want. I've seen some of those same rational people being seriously affected by words right here - in River City :-)

But let's pretend it's true...how sad is that - really?

We humans are emotional creatures. We're human because of language - not in spite of it. We evolved with our languages. Words do affect us - they're meant to affect us

It's not easy being vulnerable - it's true. It's exhausting trying to protect ourselves from harm - real or imaginary

I wonder which is easier - losing our emotions or teaching ourselves not to express them?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


What's my fault?

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words.....Nah.

Here's how words hurt. I shout some &%%^&**(^-explicative at a cop, he gets offended and tackles me to the ground, banging my head against the stone pavement, and throwing me in the lock up.

All the hurt was done by the guy that heard the words, not the one that spoke them.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


You did say"I have noticed in this thread that those who are "thick-skinned" as they like to call themselves," (do they?)"already have a general understanding that words do not hurt."

I disagreed with you. Members who are disassociated from their or from others words surely are not to be labeled by you? You know them to call them thick skinned, surely you don't know them either and you cannot make that statement about them labeling them thick skinned in good faith.

It is clearly not me that was labeling members " thick skinned" if they agree with you about words.
.