Bullying

[feral chile]

I've just read an article, and wasn't sure which thread it related to, as it seemed to apply to quite a few.

And I realised, then, that my responses in many of these threads were actually comments relating to bullying of various kinds.

They were loosely based around the notion that we shouldn't let the bullies win, and also that we shouldn't descend into bullying ourselves, even if our target is a bully, as then they still win, because the contagion spreads.

So I thought I'd post this, as an example of how bullying can take many subtle forms, and to see if anyone had any opinions on it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11386496/Dragons-Den-Kelly-Hoppen-Bullies-made-my-life-a-misery.html

[eFestivals]

And I realised, then, that my responses in many of these threads were actually comments relating to bullying of various kinds.

and nothing at all of you taking offence at your own errors being pointed out, where you used bullying as a cover for fair criticism?

FFS. The idiots have taken over the earth.

Edited February 3, 2015 by eFestivals

[feral chile]

and nothing at all of you taking offence at your own errors being pointed out, where you used bullying as a cover for fair criticism?

FFS. The idiots have taken over the earth.

neil, this was not aimed at you in particular, I can assure you if I'd meant to single you out and drag you into this I would have been more direct

And I have responded to people giving me fair criticism, and haven't felt they've been trying to bully me at all. Bunique and midnight have disagreed with my views, for instance. And tony disagrees with me on school uniforms. So I don't think your assessment is a fair or accurate one.

It's not always about you

it was a response to some of the experiences women have reported, such as getting shouted at by men in the street. it was a reference to a LOT of my own experiences that I disclosed, both by men and women. And some of the experiences in the discussion going on about school uniform and discipline.

A lot of those debates, because they're not specifically discussing bullying, I've responded to by using the various themes within them. But 've been privately thinking but it was bullying, using whatever triggers worked.

It CAN also cover unintentional bullying (I don't really like the word, but can't think of a better one to use as a generalisation of all aspects of undermining behaviour).

Any anti-bullying training I've been on has taught me that bullying is in the eye of the beholder. It's abut the behaviour, not necessarily the person.

So, you might tell a joke, and someone might feel offended, upset or intimidated. That doesn't make you a bully. But the person hearing it might feel bullied. And then, once you're aware of that, you can modify your behaviour.

Bullying applies to all of us, the reason I don't like the word is because it implies a power relationship between a bully and a victim, for one thing. But I also don't like labels, because nobody wants to identify as either of those labels.

I'd prefer to think in terms of how we take care of each other, and to acknowledge each other's sensibilities

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

It CAN also cover unintentional bullying (I don't really like the word, but can't think of a better one to use as a generalisation of all aspects of undermining behaviour).

Pointing out someone is wrong is undermining them, and therefore in your view it's bullying to tell someone they're wrong.

It's an idea that's infected idiots everywhere, i'm well aware. It's not an accurate view.

Edited February 3, 2015 by eFestivals

[feral chile]

Pointing out someone is wrong is undermining them, and therefore in your view it's bullying to tell someone they're wrong.

It's an idea that's infected idiots everywhere, i'm well aware. It's not an accurate view.

Have I said that's my view?

I pointed out you were wrong in other threads, and I didn't think I was bullying you. Did you think I was?

I've edited my earlier response while you were writing yours so you might not have read the full version

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

Have I said that's my view?

when you said "It CAN also cover unintentional bullying (I don't really like the word, but can't think of a better one to use as a generalisation of all aspects of undermining behaviour)."

It's impossible to point out someone's error without undermining them. It is NOT bullying to do so.

[feral chile]

when you said "It CAN also cover unintentional bullying (I don't really like the word, but can't think of a better one to use as a generalisation of all aspects of undermining behaviour)."

It's impossible to point out someone's error without undermining them. It is NOT bullying to do so.

Well, when I pointed out your error in the other thread, my attitude left a lot to be desired, and therefore I apologised for it.

As for correcting other people, it's a bit of a dilemma. Do you want to correct every single missed comma etc.?

I would challenge behaviour that I thought was seriously out of order, and have done in various circumstances, even though the person was in a position of authority.

I find that quite easy to do though, because it's more straightforward challenging authority.

I wouldn't necessarily challenge every joke that was a bit off, or offhand comment etc. Maybe we should, I don't know.

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

Anyway, this wasn't my original intention when starting this topic, I was more interested in what people think bullying actually involves, whether peer pressure is a form of bullying, for instance, and whether conformity is also, including school uniform policy etc., and how we can and should address it.

[MrZigster]

I also don't agree with the use of the word "victim" feral. I had cause to point out the extremely antisocial behaviour of a colleague a number of years ago. I refused to be labeled a victim. If I'd put up with said behaviour then maybe that would have been a valid label. I thought "target" was a better word.

[eFestivals]

Well, when I pointed out your error in the other thread, my attitude left a lot to be desired, and therefore I apologised for it.

As for correcting other people, it's a bit of a dilemma. Do you want to correct every single missed comma etc.?

People have a perfect right to correct errors, and to do so isn't bullying.

Yep, it's that simple.

Bullying is something else, something extra.

I would challenge behaviour that I thought was seriously out of order, and have done in various circumstances, even though the person was in a position of authority.

You "would", but you don't.

Or have you forgotten the PM you sent me when you weren't happy to challenge something even when you have complete anonymity with which to do so?

Edited February 3, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Anyway, this wasn't my original intention when starting this topic

if you want to a discussion on bullying, a part of that discussion is likely to be about what bullying is - particularly when you've suggested that it's something that it's not.

[feral chile]

I also don't agree with the use of the word "victim" feral. I had cause to point out the extremely antisocial behaviour of a colleague a number of years ago. I refused to be labeled a victim. If I'd put up with said behaviour then maybe that would have been a valid label. I thought "target" was a better word.

Yes, agreed, I used victim deliberately in the above, because I wanted to emphasise the perception of the relationship when you focus on the labels rather than a particular behaviour and its particular effects.

Of course there are serial bullies, but mostly what we're addressing is unacceptable behaviour. And therefore you have to consider the sensibilities of the person on the receiving end of it.

[feral chile]

People have a perfect right to correct errors, and to do so isn't bullying.

Yep, it's that simple.

Bullying is something else, something extra.

You "would", but you don't.

Or have you forgotten the PM you sent me when you weren't happy to challenge something even when you have complete anonymity with which to do so?

No, I haven't forgotten that at all, was it this one?

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-e765-Leak-reveals-HMRC-plot-to-destroy-PCS/#.VNDDjOlyaos

How do you know what I'm doing to challenge it?

[feral chile]

And correcting errors can be bullying. Couples can put each other down in public, for instance, which is a pet hate of mine.

And correcting someone disabled, someone with dyslexia for instance.

A lot of this will be unintentional, but can someties be deliberate.

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

if you want to a discussion on bullying, a part of that discussion is likely to be about what bullying is - particularly when you've suggested that it's something that it's not.

oh sorry, didn't see this reply, but yes, of course a discussion of what bullying is, is relevant, it's what started me thinking about this.

in the article I posted, there was reference to some subtle forms of what the author saw as bullying, including exclusion, and just a look.

And with due respect, it's not up to you or me to dictate what bullying is, it's whatever causes another person to feel undermined.

I might include attempts to undermine a person, as well. But I think t's up to each individual to decide for themselves.

The official version is that what constitutes bullying is in the eyes of the recipient.

But that's not to say that the perpetrator is an evil sadistic monster, by any means.

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

And correcting errors can be bullying. Couples can put each other down in public, for instance, which is a pet hate of mine.

the correcting isn't the bullying. The bullying is something extra on top of the correcting.

If you start up with the wrong idea about bullying, you're likely to always be in the wrong place.

[eFestivals]

How do you know what I'm doing to challenge it?

from what you told me, you'd be doing nothing at all to challenge it. You wanted me to challenge it for you, remember?

[feral chile]

People have a perfect right to correct errors, and to do so isn't bullying.

Yep, it's that simple.

Bullying is something else, something extra.

You "would", but you don't.

Or have you forgotten the PM you sent me when you weren't happy to challenge something even when you have complete anonymity with which to do so?

neil, when running this site, do you have legal responsibilities as to what you can allow to be posted here?

Would you risk the closing down of your site, and probable prosecution, so that you could publicly publish something you were legally prohibited from doing?

[feral chile]

from what you told me, you'd be doing nothing at all to challenge it. You wanted me to challenge it for you, remember?

I asked you for advice and your opinion, certainly. I can't remember whether I asked you to quote it, I can't imagine why, because if it was already in the public domain, I could have linked to it myself. How did you think I wanted you to challenge it? I culd have just posted a ink to it, and just let you comment?

I'm confused

And it must have been in the public domain, else I wouldn't have known about it.

(since I'm not the brave person who leaked it originally).

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

neil, when running this site, do you have legal responsibilities as to what you can allow to be posted here?

Would you risk the closing down of your site, and probable prosecution, so that you could publicly publish something you were legally prohibited from doing?

the normal libel and defamation rules apply. There is nothing further.

And yes, in certain circumstances I'll put the site's future at risk via that - and have done more than once in the past, to publish a straight-take on something where legal threats have been used both before and after publication to try and stop that thing being published.

I've gone with those pieces because I've been confident about the position I've taken, but my confidence is no guarantee I've got it right (ultimately, only a court decides), and even if my take is right it wouldn't stop me getting dragged into an extremely costly legal case which in itself could see the end of efests. So far I've been lucky with that; the luck mighty not hold.

So yes: I'll *ALWAYS* take a stand. Doing what I feel is right is more important to me than the survival of efests.

[feral chile]

the normal libel and defamation rules apply. There is nothing further.

And yes, in certain circumstances I'll put the site's future at risk via that - and have done more than once in the past, to publish a straight-take on something where legal threats have been used both before and after publication to try and stop that thing being published.

I've gone with those pieces because I've been confident about the position I've taken, but my confidence is no guarantee I've got it right (ultimately, only a court decides), and even if my take is right it wouldn't stop me getting dragged into an extremely costly legal case which in itself could see the end of efests. So far I've been lucky with that; the luck mighty not hold.

So yes: I'll *ALWAYS* take a stand. Doing what I feel is right is more important to me than the survival of efests.

Well you're braver than I am then. I'll go so far, but I won't break the law.

[eFestivals]

Well you're braver than I am then. I'll go so far, but I won't break the law.

then you're deciding that the law-makers are always right.

[feral chile]

then you're deciding that the law-makers are always right.

this is an interesting argument, I'll have to think some more about it

[eFestivals]

I asked you for advice and your opinion, certainly. I can't remember whether I asked you to quote it, I can't imagine why, because if it was already in the public domain, I could have linked to it myself. How did you think I wanted you to challenge it? I culd have just posted a ink to it, and just let you comment?

I'm confused

And it must have been in the public domain, else I wouldn't have known about it.

(since I'm not the brave person who leaked it originally).

You asked me to post about it and have your discussion for you, because you wouldn't risk posting about it even tho you're anonimous with your posts here.

[feral chile]

You asked me to post about it and have your discussion for you, because you wouldn't risk posting about it even tho you're anonimous with your posts here.

Did I? I can't remember why I thought that.

But if I did, then I was being overly paranoid

I think it might have been to do with not wanting to accidentally sabotage anything the unions had up their sleeve, but everything's out in the open now anyway.

EDIT:

I've just read our private messages back. I didn't ask you to post it for me, as far as I can see, but I wanted to discuss it privately with someone. And didn't want to post it publicly.

I didn't feel under personal threat if I had done, but I didn't want anything I did being used as an excuse for anything else.

Overly paranoid, no doubt, but not on my own behalf

(Not that I can't be too scared to act on my own behalf, but I don't think this was the motivation in this particular case - it was more the fear of screwing things up for others, by acting on my own behalf, if anything).

Edited February 3, 2015 by feral chile