It’s about teaching people to disregard their own self-preservation, when following orders. That’s why they say “it scares me”.
It doesn’t need to be machine gun firing (part for the whole; “dangers in general”); or literally running towards it (hyperbole; “risking to get harmed”).
You might agree with their point, or disagree with it. However, “le ackshyually to le narwhal bacon’s knee, you’re instructed to take cover lol EDIT WOW THANKS FOR THE GOLD KIND STRANGER!!!” doesn’t address what they said at all. And, like, people get rubbed off the wrong way when others use those “ackshyually”.
It’s about teaching people to disregard their own self-preservation, when following orders. That’s why they say “it scares me”.
Perfectly valid to fear being compelled to move toward danger.
But can we agree that: 1) saying “teaching you to run into machine fire” is negative tonally, and 2) you could make the quoted point illustratively, without phrasing it so reductively?
The most obvious read of the original line is “jarheads being sent to their deaths,” – they told me to, so I’m going to run into machine gun fire – which would obviously receive pushback.
And that’s saying nothing about the actual philosophies of how to deal with danger, vis a vis fleeing it or neutralizing it.
You say it’s “the most obvious read” and yet the other poster still missed it. They weren’t pushing that point back; they were pouring random trivia, as if it was pushing it back.
That’s why I mocked the “ackshyually”. Could I rephrase the quoted point another way? Yes. Will I? No. I think this behaviour should be ridiculed, it adds no relevant content to a discussion. Ackshyuallies, sealions, why do we [social media users] even entertain this sort of thing?
And tone won’t change content in this case. “Teaching you to run into machine fire” has a negative tone but there’s nothing wrong with it. Call it “brave souls laughing at the face of death” (positive tone), or “suicidal butchers going Lemming style, WAH-HOO!” (way more negative), the point still stands: an institution is able to train people to disregard one of their most basic instincts to do its [the institution’s] bidding, that is bloody scary.
EDIT: plus the “what is it that disturbs you”. It shows willingness to make shit up about things one cannot reasonably know; it’s a waste of time to discuss with people like this, because once you brush off their assumption they’ll pour another, and another, and another.
It’s about teaching people to disregard their own self-preservation, when following orders. That’s why they say “it scares me”.
It doesn’t need to be machine gun firing (part for the whole; “dangers in general”); or literally running towards it (hyperbole; “risking to get harmed”).
You might agree with their point, or disagree with it. However, “le ackshyually to le narwhal bacon’s knee, you’re instructed to take cover lol EDIT WOW THANKS FOR THE GOLD KIND STRANGER!!!” doesn’t address what they said at all. And, like, people get rubbed off the wrong way when others use those “ackshyually”.
Perfectly valid to fear being compelled to move toward danger.
But can we agree that: 1) saying “teaching you to run into machine fire” is negative tonally, and 2) you could make the quoted point illustratively, without phrasing it so reductively?
The most obvious read of the original line is “jarheads being sent to their deaths,” – they told me to, so I’m going to run into machine gun fire – which would obviously receive pushback.
And that’s saying nothing about the actual philosophies of how to deal with danger, vis a vis fleeing it or neutralizing it.
You say it’s “the most obvious read” and yet the other poster still missed it. They weren’t pushing that point back; they were pouring random trivia, as if it was pushing it back.
That’s why I mocked the “ackshyually”. Could I rephrase the quoted point another way? Yes. Will I? No. I think this behaviour should be ridiculed, it adds no relevant content to a discussion. Ackshyuallies, sealions, why do we [social media users] even entertain this sort of thing?
And tone won’t change content in this case. “Teaching you to run into machine fire” has a negative tone but there’s nothing wrong with it. Call it “brave souls laughing at the face of death” (positive tone), or “suicidal butchers going Lemming style, WAH-HOO!” (way more negative), the point still stands: an institution is able to train people to disregard one of their most basic instincts to do its [the institution’s] bidding, that is bloody scary.
EDIT: plus the “what is it that disturbs you”. It shows willingness to make shit up about things one cannot reasonably know; it’s a waste of time to discuss with people like this, because once you brush off their assumption they’ll pour another, and another, and another.