- Joined
- Dec 12, 2024
I was pondering the merits of a legitimately motivated chimpout compared to a chimpout over stupid reasons. Even IF the provocation is completely understandable, if leaving or removing yourself was an option, you dun goofed. If there was no escalation or no clear communication of intent, you dun goofed. If you started yelling at the top of your lungs, you dun goofed. In matters of extreme provocation and egregious offenses, the battery wouldn't be properly categorized as a chimpout because no reasonable person would be expected to remain calm, but this comes from a single escalation so intolerable that intermediary steps were not an option, such as finding out someone bad touched a child.
A chimpout need not involve fists. Extreme seethe or top of lung yelling might constitute a chimpout, but only if there is an extremely impacted ability to function for a limited time. I parse the difference between speaking loudly and yelling to be purposeful use of the diaphragm to forcefully get as loud as possible, as opposed to merely elevated speaking volume. I do not consider elevated speaking volume while upset to be on the same level as a yell, because one can happen reflexively on automated response, whereas the other requires proactive action that *can* be suppressed if not successfully provoked. I fail to see a single instance where yelling is superior to elevated speaking volume, as yelling communicates a loss of control whereas elevated speaking volume does not.
This is coming across more as a "deeb thought" than a question, but my question is this. We all know a clear cut case of a chimpout when we see one, but what is the defining factor in a grey area case? Or is there no such thing as a grey area case, because even small amounts of self-control disqualify chimpout categorization? Does a chimpout have to be unquestionably a chimpout before it is classified as such?
A chimpout need not involve fists. Extreme seethe or top of lung yelling might constitute a chimpout, but only if there is an extremely impacted ability to function for a limited time. I parse the difference between speaking loudly and yelling to be purposeful use of the diaphragm to forcefully get as loud as possible, as opposed to merely elevated speaking volume. I do not consider elevated speaking volume while upset to be on the same level as a yell, because one can happen reflexively on automated response, whereas the other requires proactive action that *can* be suppressed if not successfully provoked. I fail to see a single instance where yelling is superior to elevated speaking volume, as yelling communicates a loss of control whereas elevated speaking volume does not.
This is coming across more as a "deeb thought" than a question, but my question is this. We all know a clear cut case of a chimpout when we see one, but what is the defining factor in a grey area case? Or is there no such thing as a grey area case, because even small amounts of self-control disqualify chimpout categorization? Does a chimpout have to be unquestionably a chimpout before it is classified as such?
