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