It's certainly not the same revulsion. In the world of men who have not lived their entire lives isolated from danger and conflict in a rules-based society, the Hollywood version of war isn't a consideration. It's no different to Marvel or Harry Potter movies.
It's an open secret many people who experience raw conflict in which actions and not regulations decide outcomes like it. It's the reason why they often go back and it's an age old story.
The GP most likely has led a comfortable life safely ensconced in the bubble of order provided by society and when they are a glimse of the reality of the world, they assume that everyone feels like them that it's a horror to be avoided. It's incomprehensible to them that some see that video and I think I could have done better. Some will have seen that video or others like it and set off for Ukraine to see if they can.
The videos that horrify this cohort are the combat videos where the soldier has no influence over their fate: drones, mines, and artillery.
You're making up a bunch of stuff, from the premise about some specific psychologies, to things about the GP, to assumptions about 'Hollywood' and what is the "reality of the world" (it's well-worn sophistry to depict the other person's version as fantasy and your own as reality), to your conclusions.
There's no basis for it. It looks to me, without basis, like the current attempt to spread the fetishization of voilence and war by the same propaganda leaders have used for eternity.
> It's no different to Marvel or Harry Potter movies.
The GP swung that combat clip like a moral sledgehammer, assuming its rawness would jolt everyone alike. Those who’ve lived such scenes in person rarely feel that shock, so the argument’s force evaporates. You don’t get to pick reality — you only choose whether to look away.
> Those who’ve lived such scenes in person rarely feel that shock
What is that based on?
> You don’t get to pick reality
But there is the major question of, 'what is reality'. Again you try the sophistry of assuming your claim is reality and others are fantasy. That's a fantasy in your head.
Personal experience, but desensitisation and psychological callousing are completely uncontroversial.
> But there is the major question of, 'what is reality'. Again you try the sophistry of assuming your claim is reality and others are fantasy. That's a fantasy in your head.
That is certainly not a basis for drawing conclusions about humanity. Also (maybe think to yourself - not really appropriate for HN, and much too personal to ask for a response): have you actually experienced killing someone or nearly being killed, or are you speculating on your response based on your response to online videos?
It's an open secret many people who experience raw conflict in which actions and not regulations decide outcomes like it. It's the reason why they often go back and it's an age old story.
The GP most likely has led a comfortable life safely ensconced in the bubble of order provided by society and when they are a glimse of the reality of the world, they assume that everyone feels like them that it's a horror to be avoided. It's incomprehensible to them that some see that video and I think I could have done better. Some will have seen that video or others like it and set off for Ukraine to see if they can.
The videos that horrify this cohort are the combat videos where the soldier has no influence over their fate: drones, mines, and artillery.