Bullying: Are We Too Quick To Play The Victim Card?

[the_great_she_elephant]

Last week Peter Dutton, the minister for immigration declared that he would not be bullied by the UN on border protection ; a few days ago Labor M.P. Gary Gray said he would not cave in to bullying by Union thugs over preselection;  and not a day goes by on FB and other social media without someone, somewhere  being accused of bullying. Has the word 'bully' become so overused as to be virtually meaningless?

I am not referring here to the concerted online abuse and innuendo that can drive vulnerable teenagers to suicide, or to cases where the online abuse spills over into real life (letters to employers, phone calls to government agencies etc.) I'm talking about the everyday  cut and thrust of online interaction where childish insults and even genuine but vigorous debate is sometimes labelled bullying by those on the receiving end.

  Are we all becoming just a tad too  precious about our perceived dignity? If, for example, you have a bird as your username or avatar and someone who has taken a dislike to you addresses you as “You great lump of avian excrement,” would you accuse that poster of  bullying , or would you simply shrug your shoulders  and conclude they were not very articulate and a few penny bangers short of a fireworks display.

As Bob would say: discuss.

[Anonymous]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

The question is, where do we draw the line in the sand?

when the behaviour is ongoing.

its not hard to tell the difference between

ongoing, deliberate actions and an 

argument. 

---

So if two people have diametrically opposing opinions on politics, say, and each time either of them voices their opinion the other criticises it, which one is the bully?

---

are you talking about an argument between

two people or someone who is deliberately,

repeatedly singling you out?  

[ecar3483 · Accepted solution]

The victims and the bullies, like the men and the pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm have become indistinguishable.

You don't know who you can trust, anymore. Say that you like something and you're just as likely to invoke the righteous wrath of bullies and victims, alike.

This great mode of communication that we use has become a conduit for silencing people.

So much for free speech...

(Cynical, wry smile smiley).

[the_great_she_elephant]

are you talking about an argument between

two people or someone who is deliberately,

repeatedly singling you out?

I'm talking hypothetically.

[cmcoins2000]

Before it is too late She.

[Anonymous]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

are you talking about an argument between

two people or someone who is deliberately,

repeatedly singling you out?

I'm talking hypothetically.

---

which hypothetical scenario

are you talking about?

one could easily be considered as

bullying, the other, not really.

[the_great_she_elephant]

which hypothetical scenario

are you talking about?

This one:  if two people have diametrically opposing opinions on politics, say, and each time either of them voices their opinion the other criticises it, which one is the bully?

It doesn't necessarily have to be just two people though. How about this:  if two or more  people  have diametrically opposing opinions on politics, say, and each time either any one of them voices their opinion some of the others criticise it, which of them is the bully?

[Anonymous]

So if two people have diametrically opposing opinions on politics, say, and each time either of them voices their opinion the other criticises it, which one is the bully?

i assume this is hypothetically

something that would happen on

a chat board/social media/amongst

a large group of people?

the bully would be the person who

continually criticises the other person.

BUT it would have to be intentional -

meaning the bully singles out one person

while not criticising others' political views.

does that make sense? 

the 'victim' needs to feel they are being

targeted.  its like being harassed, stalked.

know what i mean?

OR

if amongst a chat board etc there are 2 ppl

who criticise each other every time either

voices an opinion then it depends who 

started it 

you'll find usually one would have to be

more persistent and deliberate than the other,

so i guess that is how you would tell

the difference.

[Anonymous]

that's a really cute pic  

is She chasing her hat?  

[ecar3483]

Hypothetically speaking, I think the problem lies in unconscious passive aggressive bullying.

The phenomenon of unconscious passive aggressive bullying is easily observed - a person doesn't contribute to another person's threads, or a person doesn't award Kudos to a person.

The impression that the person feels that they are, somehow, "above" the the other person, or "too good to respond" is created, and the other person can quickly develop feelings of inadequacy, a "victim" mentality - Why aren't they good enough?

The simple solution to the problem of unconscious passive aggressive bullying is called positive contribution encouragement, or stalking. That's where one person follows another person and contributes to their threads, or gives them Kudos for their contributions. They may also choose to send the person Personal Messages of encouragement. There is no limit to the number of Personal Messages of encouragement that a person might send in a day, because making people feel that their contribution matters, matters.

The solution lies in making people aware that their contribution matters, and is valued by their peers, to the point where all they want to do is be left alone. But we can't have that because people who are alone are lonely people and lonely people are especially vulnerable to predations of bullies, and not just unconscious passive aggressive bullies.

If the problem is going to be solved, once and for all, it's going to take effort, and just a smidgen of parody.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Oops! I think I may just have stalked you, Ecar.