Bully ing and your ideas

What is your take on the subject ?

This was moved per request to an appropriate forum from the link below:
https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/jedi-in-the-news/119828-the-bully

Amyntas wrote:

Manu wrote:

JLSpinner wrote:

Manu wrote: How does the student tell the difference between one who bullies and one who offers a different perspective.

Sometimes antagonism is a better service than being agreeable.

You can have a different opinion and still be respectful.

Respectful is a point of view.

Wrong , Respectful is an adjective ,

adjective
1.
full of, characterized by, or showing politeness or deference:
a respectful reply.

Language can get tricky. For example, it is entirely possible that I might get offended with the "Wrong" part of your reply, given how it is worded it might be less respectful than "that's an interesting point of view, however".

Also, politeness, the word you use to define the ambiguos "respectful" is itself ambiguos, as it is culturally defined and we have quite a bit of variety in here. Americans (and Dutch?) might be used to cheeky, straight-forward replies, but start a reply with "wrong" in Ecuador and people will assume you are being very insulting.

Like always you have intention vs perception here. As a moderator I say don't be abusive or insulting but that can also be ambiguous. What it boils down to is trying to understand whom you are taking to. If it is someone who is more sensitive we should try to tread a little lighter. If you are talking to someone who is blunt and straight forward, try to see the meaning behind the rough words. The key here is empathy and understanding. Try to do more than read and interpret with our emotions. Try to read and interpret with theirs. It's not easy and it involves checking your ego at the door and lowering your defenses.

An opinion has contexts, the contexts define the meaning AFAIK. A bully is probably someone who asserts their own as correct in the face of correction. What dictates 'correct' depends on the circumstance. If its entirely subjective then it remains one persons opinion, but if it references other things then those objective elements have attributes which are true and so represent 'correct'. But, the concept of being bullied is something which occurs to others, and the bully is just being pig headed. If one see's the bully for what it is, then they can avoid feeling bullied and the bully can remain as simply pig headed. The problem is, some people are vulnerable for various reasons and are susceptible to the pig headed persons behaviour to the extent they are bullied by the persistence.

When does a offense become an offense become and offense ? When does teasing or fun become an an offense ? When does swearing become offensive ? Isn't it when is become identified as Offence ? When some one says it is ?

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: When does a offense become an offense become and offense ? When does teasing or fun become an an offense ? When does swearing become offensive ? Isn't it when is become identified as Offence ? When some one says it is ?

Hehe yep, that is what civilization is I think, that 'context' of circumstance. At the base level civility, and then on top of that any other rules which are agreed upon to allow that particular society to function.

For instance, in a recent thread I mentioned how swearing might be considered appropriate, within the rules here, as defined by the context its sentence as amplifying information.

Adder wrote: So if the question is about whether that sort of language is acceptable, its already in the rules, the first one in the abridged list in the FAQ says;

1. Please use respectful language, do not be abusive and swear only where appropriate.

I'd argue that what is appropriate from that sentence is defined by being respectful and not abusive. Name calling is not respectful, is abusive, and therefore not appropriate.

Which just so happens to serve as an explanation of civility to make it clear for those wondering

Edit: Sorry I keep getting dragged away... so what constitutes 'abusive', is the right question. Its the question which constitutes the concept of concern and compassion which maximize the potential for connection.

And for strangers, we cannot know. So I'd say the closer a relationship between two people means the more they know about each other which then allows more poetic license to be employed for effect. Such that between a Master and Apprentice, it would be closer and so enable a greater amount of traction to be employed in using communication to transfer energy for growth.

But to assert that same level upon strangers would be avoiding asking that question, of what constitutes abuse 'to this person' and instead just taking advantage of the liberty provided by others who do follow the rules within that particular environment. Being the rule breaker and getting away with it for effect is usually for some reason, such as in this thread to 'bully' and enforce a particular opinion over others but often if someone feels like they don't have a place or are not getting enough attention or perhaps if a system has broken rules to try and penetrate restrictions to communicate the details.... as breaking rules is abusive to the system as a whole, while not caring if one is being abusive to members is abuse to its constituent parts - for the system should exist to serve the members. Which is why at some point, rule breakers can cease being part of the system by losing membership of it. The members though should be more important then the rules but a balance must exist as each member is unique. Lines of communication must remain open. And indeed I don't mean to be sound preachy, but after long enough as a moderator one inevitably forms an opinion about these things, too long perhaps :S

I think that at some point youre going to have to choose between providing a day care center for the helpless and lame, and creating a place of learning and growth for people who are ready to find out how to become powerful, and discover the ability to live their lives with courage and clarity. Im more than happy to protect a five year old from a ten year old. But i would never call a five year old a Jedi. Maybe i would think of them as being in training to eventually become a Jedi. I think a JEDI needs to know how to stand up for his or her self.

Yes, defending the mentally debilitated or the under age members is very important. But the more important service to provide to adults or young people entering into adulthood, is to help them learn how to defend themselves.

As for how you define bullying, i dont care, except that i will not agree that its just any and every time any person feels offended or challenged. That definition will only enable people to be helpless and weak because we'll focus on padding all the walls so people can come here to hide. Life is hard and unfair, and if you cant fight for what you need then youre as good as dead. We're all assholes sometimes, and need to learn how to respect others "the hard way" meaning that when we cross the line, the people we cross put us in our place themselves.
And we all have to learn to set and enforce our own boundaries when others cross us. Learn how to voice what you think is important even if you know people wont like it. Learn how to bite back when someone bites you, and learn how to take a bit of a beating to your ego from time to time and get over it. To forgive what doesnt really matter. I believe that interacting with each other on those terms (within the context of fairly clearly defined rules of behavior and punishments for infractions) will naturally result in the appropriate balance between courtesy and honesty.

I wouldn't necessarily say that being bullied has much to do with different perspectives as, say, in a standard argument. The lone bully often has personality issues (created by problems in the family or because the person was bullied him- / herself) and it's very rarely about conveying a certain set of ideas. Bullying in groups often has to do with establishing group identity by deliberately creating a sense of "us" and "the other" - a recurring theme in life that used to serve to strengthen the group and secure the group's survival but is now largely useless and harmful to society, yet still present in human instinct. It's also a theme that often pops up in our studies here - for example by Watts.

As these actions ostracise people, the latter are denied the feeling of belonging to a certain group. In nature, this would mean certain death, so instinctively, the reaction to being bullied is psychologically so severe that the victims sometimes end their lives as they don't see how they can have a meaningful existence outside the group. As such, bullying issues should always be tackled by caregivers and / or teachers immediately and with all seriousness.

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Please create a difrent forum subject for this . Nothing wrong with discussion but take discussion to another part pls . This is for an outreach NOT a discussion . If you like, link the discussion here but make the attempt to keep this lane clear . Please and thank you.
This is not an attempt to define anything but to reach out and give service to those who feel they need it . All my heart and I hope I see good links to good discussions , I'll even join in .
Assistant pastor for outreach , Carlos

Hi,

I don't see how this is an outreach issue - the discussion isn't about a request for help by a member, it's a merely theoretical discussion about a clear topic.


best wishes,

Peter

Cyan Sarden wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Please create a difrent forum subject for this . Nothing wrong with discussion but take discussion to another part pls . This is for an outreach NOT a discussion . If you like, link the discussion here but make the attempt to keep this lane clear . Please and thank you.
This is not an attempt to define anything but to reach out and give service to those who feel they need it . All my heart and I hope I see good links to good discussions , I'll even join in .
Assistant pastor for outreach , Carlos

Hi,

I don't see how this is an outreach issue - the discussion isn't about a request for help by a member, it's a merely theoretical discussion about a clear topic.


best wishes,

Peter

lol that doesn't apply here it was moved here so we could discuss it here . Smiley face

On the subject ... when we act without consideration to others ideas and thoughts and feelings,wouldn't that obviously create conflict?
It is said ...
Jedi believe In the Force, and in the inherent worth of all life within it.
In the sanctity of the human person. We oppose the use of torture and cruel or unusual punishment, including the death penalty.
In a society governed by laws grounded in reason and compassion, not in fear or prejudice.
In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin.
In the ethic of reciprocity, and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and self-determination within religious, political and other structures.
In the separation of religion and government and the freedoms of speech, association and expression.
Wouldn't that type of not caring Kinna oppose many of the basic beliefs many hold as guides?
Jedi ism and its faith is open in many ways to interpitations but that one seems pretty clear , jedi by their focus , Kinna care . Thoughts ?

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: On the subject ... when we act without consideration to others ideas and thoughts and feelings,wouldn't that obviously create conflict?
It is said ...
Jedi believe In the Force, and in the inherent worth of all life within it.
In the sanctity of the human person. We oppose the use of torture and cruel or unusual punishment, including the death penalty.
In a society governed by laws grounded in reason and compassion, not in fear or prejudice.
In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin.
In the ethic of reciprocity, and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and self-determination within religious, political and other structures.
In the separation of religion and government and the freedoms of speech, association and expression.
Wouldn't that type of not caring Kinna oppose many of the basic beliefs many hold as guides?
Jedi ism and its faith is open in many ways to interpitations but that one seems pretty clear , jedi by their focus , Kinna care . Thoughts ?

I think it goes without saying that a Jedi should not be a bully. Unfortunately, bullying is mainly seen in kids and youth - an age group that is in the process of defining their role in life and position in society but has not much experience or social skills. So this is always something that requires outside intervention.

Of course, we also have a related phenomenon in adult life: mobbing. Usually has different reasons but the victim might feel the same. Again something that a Jedi should have moved past - mobbing is worse than bullying in my opinion as it's done deliberately and by people who are (or are supposed to be) fully developed socially.

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: On the subject ... when we act without consideration to others ideas and thoughts and feelings,wouldn't that obviously create conflict?

Well, I must admit, I thought the original post on bullying was related to Kyrin's input on a different thread, where her wording possibly could have been misread as bullying. As Cyan said, it goes without saying that a Jedi should not be a bully (and in his previous post, he addresses how bullying for the sake of bullying is usually an internal conflict acting out). I was trying to touch upon the fact that not all speech or actions that might seem like bullying, actually are bullying. It is entirely possible for someone to feel offended even when the original intent of the "offender" is not to hurt, but to provide a different view.

I remember several years ago I was at a job interview, and it came down to myself and one other person competing for the position. I obviously did not wish this other person any harm, but I did want to get the position. Was that inconsiderate of me? Would we all have been better off if I had dropped out of the process in order to make sure he got the job, did not have his feelings hurt, and thus we avoided conflict?

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Wouldn't that type of not caring Kinna oppose many of the basic beliefs many hold as guides?
Jedi ism and its faith is open in many ways to interpitations but that one seems pretty clear , jedi by their focus , Kinna care . Thoughts ?

The best friends are those who will call you on bullshit when they spot it. Bad friends make up excuses for you.

A best friend knows your worth and holds you to high standards. That is why he points out something as soon as he sees it. He has no interest in being "harmonious". His interest is your success.

A bad friend either secretly wants to see you fail, or is deluded into thinking that he is helping anyone but himself by showing sympathy when you need a good kick in the ass. The bad friend is trying to get you to calm down and not "rock the boat", but keep things as they are. He either does not care about your success, or does not see how his excuses are enabling your bad behavior in the name of empathy.

Anyone who sticks around here (an online place anyone could quickly escape by closing a browser window) long enough to call people on bullshit as they see it, is someone who does care. Those are the friends worth sticking with.

True but then when is action considered harassment ? When does they "line" that wall that what ever you wanna call it get passed? The idea is to be mindful of our words n actions and intentions because at any given time we won't know or we choose to not care or we just don't take into effect that the OTHER person is feeling . That's the idea . Can we use our "sword" our Jedi saber our words difrently? Not takin friends and close ones here . That's a tolerated or accepted behavior then it's accepted but when it becomes not ...
I took MANY classes courses and lessons on harassment in the US Army . The. Lunt of it is wether sexual friendly jokingly it doesn't matter once one person says it's harassment , it has become harassment . To me bullying is harassment . Some don't see it that way some won't ( usually the offender ) but if we can provide auppprt for the both sides just MAYBe ... maybe we can change a bit of something worth passing to the next generation of Jedi and ... human beings .

I took MANY classes courses and lessons on harassment in the US Army . The. Lunt of it is wether sexual friendly jokingly it doesn't matter once one person says it's harassment , it has become harassment . To me bullying is harassment .

That could just as easily be said as "While I was employed by a government organisation I had to sit through endless seminars and presentations designed to assist that organisation is reducing its reputation as a hyper masculine boys club that treats women, pretty boys, and any minority it can get its hands on as sex toys or the butt of jokes and hazing- regardless of whether that reputation is earned or relevant - the training designed mostly as a public display of "Look at the training we are giving our people!" with any side effect of actually making the recipients think and consider their behaviour as a happy accident"

(That's a jab at...bureaucrats more than it is at you, whatever branch of the government you were with, or anything else)

This morning I cheekily chatted to the staff at a cafe I frequent on their use of the term "wifi", how they serve coffee, horse racing, and bacon.

I have no doubts whatsoever they were uncomfortable and wanted to conversation to end as quickly as possible - They just wanted to take my order and hide out the back, and to be fair, I'm about as pretty as Stuntman Mike, so I can understand their plight.

But where they Harassed? or what it just one of those things that happen?

Maybe they work in customer service and dealing with eccentric customers is part of their lot in life.

Had they been other customers, and I just wanted to share my views, would that be harassment?

What if they were stuck next to me on a plane?

When does "Dealing with people who arn't your besties" become "harassment"?


This is one of those positions it is hard to defend without someone comparing you to pol pot, but I generally believe a little "bullying" is good for you.

Kicking someone when they are down is cruel and unnecessary, but keeping people, uh "grounded" is important.

No one is too good to have their legs kicked out from under them, and the worst thing you can as the recipient of ribbing is be offended.


Again, I'm not...promoting Bullying....as such....but declaring yourself (for any reason) as being exempt from the views and input of the world, lest it bruise your ego or gentle spirit...

Well, it's up there with Salad for great ways to make friends*.




Whether Gordon Ramsay is a Bully or just a tough Mentor is probably open for debate....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=756RRIbp0Xo

Intention as bullying is often the definition of the one who receives it never the ones around. To many times as human beings we often forget that. Many good organizations have some one to go to not only for support but for verification as well. No one is ever alone especially here . Not any more.
I fight for the users.
But I digress , when does a joke step over the line ? When it's taken as hurtful to the one it's intended for or even when some one hears it and takes it offensively . That's the hardes thing to do some times ... watch where we sling our Sabers, our words. Some care not to chop or slice . Others still get hurt. Some do, some are on the hurt end. Just because we have a iron constitution doesn't mean the rest of us do. Not thinking of others feelings is often bullying or a way into that path . U think ?

I think bullying is a word used too liberally these days. Particularly as it pertains to internet communication which is frequently lacking established relationships between parties and oft misinterpreted due to the lack of verbal/non-verbal cues which would otherwise temper the choice of words or reduce ambiguity of meaning.

This short video aptly sums up my perspective of bullying by differentiating bullying from simple rudeness (or unkindness) and being mean.

https://youtu.be/w00ZWhhXGwQ

One important addendum though is that it is entirely possible for a victim to be 'bullied' by a person who is merely being rude or mean in situations where the victim has experienced the same rudeness, meanness or bullying for others. A common example would be children pointing out an obvious physical difference (eg. weight) individually without collaboration. Each child is being rude or mean, but the victim, experiencing it repeatedly, can experience it as bullying.

In an age of faceless electronic communication it has never been more important to establish human connection and to be mindful that we are communicating with people not just avatars, handles, or organisational positions.

In an age of faceless electronic communication it has never been more important to establish human connection and to be mindful that we are communicating with people not just avatars, handles, or organisational positions.


Thank you !

I think its the element of time, being rude over time as bullying. Being persistent at it when it is not reciprocated (or is otherwise unwelcome) is trying to control the other person. This is most common when a target is unable to respond or escape, such as when there is a group which allows or supports it, or the person has some authority which the target falls within, or just physical restrictions on leaving a confined area. All that aside its not a cooperative process no matter if the target gets benefit or not - so long as its not welcome (ether directly, or against the letter or spirit of the rules etc). I guess the potential of time also plays a role, so it does not have to be persistent rudeness, but rather exist within circumstance where control is or is being threatened by rudeness. Just thinking aloud obviously :whistle: