There is, to a limited degree, control over one's responses. However, much is predetermined by nature, culture, and habit, so that our choices are at best narrowed, for example, we can refuse to get into a flame war, although we cannot help being angry. Certainly people, including you, who engage in insults do so with the intention of being hurtful, as a result of resentment, and therefore expect (at least as a probability) the result sought.
When I say that one is responsible for the result, unless one cannot avoid the action, I do not mean that one is necessarily guilty. Martin Luther King was responsible for getting his followers hosed down, by persuading them to march in places like Selma, but that does not mean that he was guilty, insofar as the action was justified. But it does mean that King had to behave responsibly in encouraging confrontation.
I do not mean that there is no culpability on the other side, even if, as a matter of established character, the individual did not have a choice at the moment of action, but rather broader responsibility for the formation of his character. But my focus is different: if I wrestle a bear, I am likely to be mauled, and it will do no good to say "bad bear". One must either be constrained to wrestle the bear (there is no good alternative), or one must have an awfully good reason for doing it, or one is a fool behaving irresponsibly.
Muddying the water with the culpability of others, instead of analyzing one's own responsibility, is just evasive....... |
