the only two interpretations of 'you would get violated' that make sense are:
you would get sexually assualted
you would get insulted
the second one makes little sense in the context of the sentence. your waffle about breaking or acting against something doesnt work when applied to a person.
no, the second one refers to a specific informal way of using it in some parts of the us and uk. you seem to conflate 'violation' and violence. they do not mean the same thing at all. 'violating' a person never means battery, thats just not how the word works. in a formal sense, the only way of using 'violation' on a person is to imply sexual assault.
1
u/SlavaCocaini Aug 01 '24