The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled PA Forums. Please let me (Hahnsoo1) know if something isn't working. The Holiday Forum will remain up until January 10, 2025.

The Wussification of Modern Society

13468913

Posts

  • MrBallbagginsMrBallbaggins Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    And they do do it. When the situation warrants it. You've done jack all to show otherwise.

    And you've done jack all to prove me wrong.

    I don't know why this whole debate got caught up with the sole aspect of violence and fighting. Well, I do, because there are a lot of chucklefucks that wouldn't look past it and insisted on pushing that example as the entire issue, and I was stupid enough to respond to said chucklefucks.

    My original post states that kids should learn that they should stick up for themselves. It never said that everyone should go kick the shit out of eachother, like I said earlier I used fighting as an example because it was what I thought to be the easiest example for everyone to comprehend. Apparently I overestimated many of you.

    The point is, and was, that in most normal fucking instances kids should stand up for themselves and be taught that going to authority figures is a last resort. Obviously I'm not the only one that thinks this, unless you've blocked several of the other posters here and simply couldn't see their posts.

    MrBallbaggins on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    And they do do it. When the situation warrants it. You've done jack all to show otherwise.

    And you've done jack all to prove me wrong.
    I'm not here to prove negatives.
    The point is, and was, that in most normal fucking instances kids should stand up for themselves and be taught that going to authority figures is a last resort.


    Children don't stick up for themselves many times because they've learned it's much easier to go to an authority figure and ask them to fix their problems for them, and then they get a pat on the head for it.

    You do a poor job of getting your point across, do you know that?

    Quid on
  • edited December 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    And they do do it. When the situation warrants it. You've done jack all to show otherwise.

    And you've done jack all to prove me wrong.

    So... you're a creationist?

    Edit: I'm shaking my first at you, Quid!

    Wonder_Hippie on
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Can anyone point to a person who, having used authority figures rather than their own fists, wit, or natural ability to take whatever was thrown at him, grew up wrong in a way that can never be fixed? Or are we all just assuming that cases like these are happening without having any examples to look toward?

    I mean, surely someone here used to go to the teachers or whomever. Did that have a negative affect on you, or does it really not matter at all?

    A cousin of mine hides behind authority figures all the time, and has all his life. This idea that he's beyond being a target has made him act like an arrogant prick from time to time. It's given him the idea that he's untouchable, and any slight against him he takes immediately to the nearest authority figure. You should see him when there isn't one around; he gets all flustered and has absolutely no clue what to do or why his threats aren't making the harasser(s) back off. He gets a look on his face like he can't believe what's happening, and sometimes I decide to help him out. Mostly I don't, because he needs to learn what happens.


    See, that's where the median is in this. I think the true answer is somewhere between "you should fight all the time" and "you should never fight". (though I've been lucky, and in practice I personally have never had to... but as I said before, this is likely due to being morbidly obese and unusually tall as a Jr. High/early High School student where these kinds of situations seem most frequent)

    As long as you don't develop some kind of unhealthy personality as a result of avoiding fights (as in your example), I don't see a problem with avoiding them. Something tells me that, with a personality like the one you described though, even if he fought he'd end up developing some other undesirable trait. God help him if he WON the fight, and fancied himself to be a bully. People who are inclined to develop severe personality flaws will find a way to do so no matter what their life experiences turn out to be. (barring, of course, those situations caused by particularly traumatic experiences like witnessing a murder, rape, etc... but "reporting things to the authorities" doesn't seem like a traumatic experience, so it was likely his underlying personality and not the event itself that brought about his current state.)

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I don't know. People died at my high school. There were deaths! One kid was run over during a fight, and another was fucking stabbed. With a fucking ice pick! Wanna know why the kid got stabbed? It started with a brawl about which side of the football team was better.

    The team apparently had divided itself in half, or something, and they ended up killing. a fucking. kid over it.

    JamesKeenan on
  • HooraydiationHooraydiation Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Can anyone point to a person who, having used authority figures rather than their own fists, wit, or natural ability to take whatever was thrown at him, grew up wrong in a way that can never be fixed? Or are we all just assuming that cases like these are happening without having any examples to look toward?

    I mean, surely someone here used to go to the teachers or whomever. Did that have a negative affect on you, or does it really not matter at all?

    A cousin of mine hides behind authority figures all the time, and has all his life. This idea that he's beyond being a target has made him act like an arrogant prick from time to time. It's given him the idea that he's untouchable, and any slight against him he takes immediately to the nearest authority figure. You should see him when there isn't one around; he gets all flustered and has absolutely no clue what to do or why his threats aren't making the harasser(s) back off. He gets a look on his face like he can't believe what's happening, and sometimes I decide to help him out. Mostly I don't, because he needs to learn what happens.

    If he likes feeling untouchable and seeing other people harmed, even if its by a reprimand from someone else rather than a blow from his own hands, he's kind of a bully himself. Most wusses aren't like that.

    Hooraydiation on
    Home-1.jpg
  • edited December 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • Fallout2manFallout2man Vault Dweller Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    But, as a kid experiencing those cases, you won't be pussyfied, so you have disproved your own point.

    What do you mean? You either choose to rely entirely on authority to solve everything for you, or you solve problems for yourself and end up being unable to stay in any school? Out here they sent kids like that to a school for "Troubled kids" called gateway, typically it was used for gangbangers from the schools on the very poor side of town but some of the kids from where I lived got stuck there too because they didn't bow down to authority. They may still be able to survive but they all had their possibilities and lives cut short of what they could by having a permenant record with a huge black mark and spending the rest of their days at a school for the lowest of the low that no one in this state took seriously.

    Fallout2man on
    On Ignorance:
    Kana wrote:
    If the best you can come up with against someone who's patently ignorant is to yell back at him, "Yeah? Well there's BOOKS, and they say you're WRONG!"

    Then honestly you're not coming out of this looking great either.
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    People should stand up for themselves whenever possible and reasonable. That was my initial position and it's the exact same one I have right now.

    I agree with your statement, but I think we might disagree on the definition of what is "reasonable" in this scenario. I think that's the whole problem.

    Is it reasonable when you won't suffer negative repercussions as a result of fighting? Reasonable when you know you have an unexpected upper hand? Reasonable when it will be endlessly repeated unless you defend yourself?

    There's a few million other possible scenarios that factor into "reasonability". For me though, only the last of the ones I posed seems truly "reasonable" to me. The others are, to me, merely opportunistic and not "reasonable" in the sense that a rational action is reasonable.

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    Well, on the other side of Baggins' retard coin, you can't go around teaching kids that pounding little twats into the ground is the correct response either.

    Wonder_Hippie on
  • MrBallbagginsMrBallbaggins Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    The point is, and was, that in most normal fucking instances kids should stand up for themselves and be taught that going to authority figures is a last resort. Obviously I'm not the only one that thinks this, unless you've blocked several of the other posters here and simply couldn't see their posts.

    To which I ask, "why?"

    What does this achieve? The situations you talk about are fundamentally about where that's not possible.

    If I brought up any of those situations, then I apologize for not being clear about it to begin with.

    I believe that children should be taught to stick up for themselves so that when they hit the real world and don't have anyone to turn to they'll be able to handle themselves and they won't freak out like a relation of mine just did when he learned the world isn't fair and it's not there to help you.

    I believe that if a child doesn't have to cope with adversity themself, at least to a small degree, that when they hit adulthood and the shock sets in it might have something to do with why an estimated 1 in 5 Americans have clinical depression. I think it would make them better, more capable human beings. This is what I was trying to get across with the OP.

    MrBallbaggins on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    But, as a kid experiencing those cases, you won't be pussyfied, so you have disproved your own point.

    What do you mean? You either choose to rely entirely on authority to solve everything for you, or you solve problems for yourself and end up being unable to stay in any school? Out here they sent kids like that to a school for "Troubled kids" called gateway, typically it was used for gangbangers from the schools on the very poor side of town but some of the kids from where I lived got stuck there too because they didn't bow down to authority. They may still be able to survive but they all had their possibilities and lives cut short of what they could by having a permenant record with a huge black mark and spending the rest of their days at a school for the lowest of the low that no one in this state took seriously.

    Yes, but you yourself said that you can't run to authority, so it won't be authoritarian pussyfication. Pluss, won't you be killed if you fight back, anyway?

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    And they do do it. When the situation warrants it. You've done jack all to show otherwise.

    And you've done jack all to prove me wrong.

    I don't know why this whole debate got caught up with the sole aspect of violence and fighting. Well, I do, because there are a lot of chucklefucks that wouldn't look past it and insisted on pushing that example as the entire issue, and I was stupid enough to respond to said chucklefucks.

    My original post states that kids should learn that they should stick up for themselves. It never said that everyone should go kick the shit out of eachother, like I said earlier I used fighting as an example because it was what I thought to be the easiest example for everyone to comprehend. Apparently I overestimated many of you.

    The point is, and was, that in most normal fucking instances kids should stand up for themselves and be taught that going to authority figures is a last resort. Obviously I'm not the only one that thinks this, unless you've blocked several of the other posters here and simply couldn't see their posts.

    See, I think that's where your perceptions are incorrect.

    I think in all scenarios EXCEPT for fighting (the one we're arguing about now), kids have become MORE willing to stand up for themselves.

    Kids are more willing, for example, to QUESTION authority. Less fearful of reprisal from adults or parents if they disagree. More willing to vocalize disagreement, for example.

    They're also more willing to stand up for themselves in terms of their future. In the past, kids were often forced into apprenticeships and/or the business of their parents. This isn't true anymore, and partly because kids are willing to stick their necks out to get what they want. That's definitely saying something for the gumption of children (and former children) these days.

    Anyways, that's why I think the argument ended up being about fighting. It's hard to say that kids are less willing to stick up for themselves these days. Perhaps it's in different ways than in the past, but I think the situation of kids sticking up for themselves has improved as time has gone by.

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • MrBallbagginsMrBallbaggins Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    People should stand up for themselves whenever possible and reasonable. That was my initial position and it's the exact same one I have right now.

    I agree with your statement, but I think we might disagree on the definition of what is "reasonable" in this scenario. I think that's the whole problem.

    Is it reasonable when you won't suffer negative repercussions as a result of fighting? Reasonable when you know you have an unexpected upper hand? Reasonable when it will be endlessly repeated unless you defend yourself?

    There's a few million other possible scenarios that factor into "reasonability". For me though, only the last of the ones I posed seems truly "reasonable" to me. The others are, to me, merely opportunistic and not "reasonable" in the sense that a rational action is reasonable.

    That's all a grey area, I suppose. I define reasonable in this instance as something that you could logically handle yourself.

    MrBallbaggins on
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I still don't know what you mean by "stick up for themselves."

    deadonthestreet on
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I don't know. People died at my high school. There were deaths! One kid was run over during a fight, and another was fucking stabbed. With a fucking ice pick! Wanna know why the kid got stabbed? It started with a brawl about which side of the football team was better.

    The team apparently had divided itself in half, or something, and they ended up killing. a fucking. kid over it.

    Damn. I thought my school was hardcore.

    I went to Rutter Jr. High, and then Florin High School in South Sacramento (before I moved to New Hampshire, which was my escape from madness). If I may, I'm curious about where you went (if for nothing else than to avoid it when I have children... you just beat my horror stories of what I saw at High School by an order of magnitude.)

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    The point is, and was, that in most normal fucking instances kids should stand up for themselves and be taught that going to authority figures is a last resort. Obviously I'm not the only one that thinks this, unless you've blocked several of the other posters here and simply couldn't see their posts.

    To which I ask, "why?"

    What does this achieve? The situations you talk about are fundamentally about where that's not possible.

    If I brought up any of those situations, then I apologize for not being clear about it to begin with.

    I believe that children should be taught to stick up for themselves so that when they hit the real world and don't have anyone to turn to they'll be able to handle themselves and they won't freak out like a relation of mine just did when he learned the world isn't fair and it's not there to help you.

    I believe that if a child doesn't have to cope with adversity themself, at least to a small degree, that when they hit adulthood and the shock sets in it might have something to do with why an estimated 1 in 5 Americans have clinical depression. I think it would make them better, more capable human beings. This is what I was trying to get across with the OP.

    That bolded part? That's just fucking ridiculous. You know zilch about psychology, depression, sociology, human behavior, and have absolutely no stats to support this theory of yours that kids are overwhelmingly running to their mommies when faced with adversity. Most kids don't even have an appropriate figure to fucking run to, so your hypothesis is out the window right there.

    Wonder_Hippie on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I believe that if a child doesn't have to cope with adversity themself, at least to a small degree, that when they hit adulthood and the shock sets in it might have something to do with why an estimated 1 in 5 Americans have clinical depression. I think it would make them better, more capable human beings. This is what I was trying to get across with the OP.
    Then next time actually say that. Don't think that, type something else, and assume everyone gets it anyway.

    Jesus fucking Christ on a unicycle pogostick in Hell. I'm going to bed. Go take a public speaking class or something.

    Quid on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Can anyone point to a person who, having used authority figures rather than their own fists, wit, or natural ability to take whatever was thrown at him, grew up wrong in a way that can never be fixed? Or are we all just assuming that cases like these are happening without having any examples to look toward?

    I mean, surely someone here used to go to the teachers or whomever. Did that have a negative affect on you, or does it really not matter at all?

    A cousin of mine hides behind authority figures all the time, and has all his life. This idea that he's beyond being a target has made him act like an arrogant prick from time to time. It's given him the idea that he's untouchable, and any slight against him he takes immediately to the nearest authority figure. You should see him when there isn't one around; he gets all flustered and has absolutely no clue what to do or why his threats aren't making the harasser(s) back off. He gets a look on his face like he can't believe what's happening, and sometimes I decide to help him out. Mostly I don't, because he needs to learn what happens.

    If he likes feeling untouchable and seeing other people harmed, even if its by a reprimand from someone else rather than a blow from his own hands, he's kind of a bully himself. Most wusses aren't like that.

    I think part of it's a power trip. You can't tell me that someone who knows they can go to someone and have their problem solved immediately won't abuse that. Not only are authorities good bully-shields, they're also good tools for messing with the bullies. Once you realize that, revenge or simple role-reversal is inevitable.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • Fallout2manFallout2man Vault Dweller Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Yes, but you yourself said that you can't run to authority, so it won't be authoritarian pussyfication. Pluss, won't you be killed if you fight back, anyway?

    So basically we're left with either, be killed or kill your future. What a lovely choice isn't it? Maybe we should, I don't know, re-think the system?

    Fallout2man on
    On Ignorance:
    Kana wrote:
    If the best you can come up with against someone who's patently ignorant is to yell back at him, "Yeah? Well there's BOOKS, and they say you're WRONG!"

    Then honestly you're not coming out of this looking great either.
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Yes, but you yourself said that you can't run to authority, so it won't be authoritarian pussyfication. Pluss, won't you be killed if you fight back, anyway?

    So basically we're left with either, be killed or kill your future. What a lovely choice isn't it? Maybe we should, I don't know, re-think the system?

    Actually, it would be be killed running or get a few punches in before being killed, at least in your scenario, so I don't see how a different system would help.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    Well, on the other side of Baggins' retard coin, you can't go around teaching kids that pounding little twats into the ground is the correct response either.

    No, it's not. It works a lot of the time, but I agree it isn't proper. It's just such a shame that the system is set up to support people like these. Seems to me the zero-tolerance policy hasn't stopped bullying, it's just shifted power from the big guys to the little guys.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    People should stand up for themselves whenever possible and reasonable. That was my initial position and it's the exact same one I have right now.

    I agree with your statement, but I think we might disagree on the definition of what is "reasonable" in this scenario. I think that's the whole problem.

    Is it reasonable when you won't suffer negative repercussions as a result of fighting? Reasonable when you know you have an unexpected upper hand? Reasonable when it will be endlessly repeated unless you defend yourself?

    There's a few million other possible scenarios that factor into "reasonability". For me though, only the last of the ones I posed seems truly "reasonable" to me. The others are, to me, merely opportunistic and not "reasonable" in the sense that a rational action is reasonable.

    That's all a grey area, I suppose. I define reasonable in this instance as something that you could logically handle yourself.

    Ah... aye, that's where we differ I think. You're thinking of "reasonable" as in "practical" (i.e. "it can be pulled off successfully"). I'm thinking of "reasonable" as in "rational" (i.e. "it SHOULD be done to resolve the situation appropriately").

    But I can see where you're coming from on it, though I disagree with the approach and the motives behind the decision.

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Yes, but you yourself said that you can't run to authority, so it won't be authoritarian pussyfication. Pluss, won't you be killed if you fight back, anyway?

    So basically we're left with either, be killed or kill your future. What a lovely choice isn't it? Maybe we should, I don't know, re-think the system?

    Actually, it would be be killed running or get a few punches in before being killed, at least in your scenario, so I don't see how a different system would help.

    ? I must have missed this part of the conversation. It sounds more like Mad Max then modern society. I guess some people are into that. ;)

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • MrBallbagginsMrBallbaggins Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    That bolded part? That's just fucking ridiculous. You know zilch about psychology, depression, sociology, human behavior, and have absolutely no stats to support this theory of yours that kids are overwhelmingly running to their mommies when faced with adversity. Most kids don't even have an appropriate figure to fucking run to, so your hypothesis is out the window right there.

    Tell me, do you have information on my knowledge of psychology, depression, sociology, and human behavior?

    Tell me, do you have anything relevant to say to disprove my personal experience other than your own?

    I'm not saying that my personal experiences are better or more relevant than yours. I'm not going to try to make that argument. My personal experience proves nothing, but it would seem others have had similar personal experiences to both you and I. It's useless to debate that anymore. I also never said that the depression rate and the current generations seeming inability to cope are related, I said I thought there could be a connection.

    MrBallbaggins on
  • Fallout2manFallout2man Vault Dweller Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Actually, it would be be killed running or get a few punches in before being killed, at least in your scenario, so I don't see how a different system would help.

    The point was to accentuate how out of touch the system was. You don't have to hit him or punch him, maybe you could shove him out of the way, or figure another clever situation to get out? My point is, sometimes you can't get away just by running, sometimes you may have to take physical action because some people just don't listen to words. Now imagine you escape to a teacher because you were able to trip him or get out of the way. All he has to do in my district was tell that to a teacher and boom, they're both gone. The bully in some cases can even hold that over the head of the victim and use it as ammunition to keep them silent since it'd mean if anyone spoke out they'd both get expelled.

    All it does is not only teach kids to rely entirely on others for solving their problems but it also gives rise to situations where bullies can have far more power over their victims since they can hold the threat of zero tolerance over someone's head.

    Fallout2man on
    On Ignorance:
    Kana wrote:
    If the best you can come up with against someone who's patently ignorant is to yell back at him, "Yeah? Well there's BOOKS, and they say you're WRONG!"

    Then honestly you're not coming out of this looking great either.
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited December 2007
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    Really? Because I think being beaten within an inch of your life is pretty bad.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Tyranny of the weak IS a problem. The main thing is that most schools don't give a rat's ass about your psychological health anymore than they do your physical health, or have no ability to help due to shitty laws.

    Tyranny of the weak does not make might right.

    Incenjucar on
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    So, wait... Your problem is that you only know one way of dealing with the situation, and if that way is limited by your environment you feel helpless?

    I wonder why that sounds so familiar.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • VThornheartVThornheart Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Tyranny of the weak IS a problem. The main thing is that most schools don't give a rat's ass about your psychological health anymore than they do your physical health, or have no ability to help due to shitty laws.

    Tyranny of the weak does not make might right.

    Can I put that on a plaque? Well said.

    VThornheart on
    3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Elki wrote: »
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    Really? Because I think being beaten within an inch of your life is pretty bad.

    I've known more people who've gone into therapy and seriously contemplated suicide than beaten that badly. The difference between physical and psychological wounds is that you can show a teacher or cop a bruise, but depression isn't exactly tangible. Physical bullies get away with less than those who steal or taunt or stalk, and they can be just as damaging. Some people can go over the edge, too.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Tyranny of the weak IS a problem. The main thing is that most schools don't give a rat's ass about your psychological health anymore than they do your physical health, or have no ability to help due to shitty laws.

    Tyranny of the weak does not make might right.

    Can I put that on a plaque? Well said.

    10% of all proceeds go to the SPCA or No-Kill Shelter? If so, deal.

    Incenjucar on
  • HerosCasurusHerosCasurus Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I don't know. People died at my high school. There were deaths! One kid was run over during a fight, and another was fucking stabbed. With a fucking ice pick! Wanna know why the kid got stabbed? It started with a brawl about which side of the football team was better.

    The team apparently had divided itself in half, or something, and they ended up killing. a fucking. kid over it.

    What you're describing sounds more like gang violence than a fight as described by the original OP. There is an obvious difference in the type of place you grew up and his.

    Plus, its never been legal to kill someone at school and i doubt the kids that ran someone over are going to care that they got suspended for fista-cuffs when they are worrying about going to jail.

    The OP is talking about how having a simple fist fight (i.e. no weapons, no guns, no bloody murder) is punished to an extreme extent. And i agree that it makes kids less self-reliant and unable to deal with confrontation. I have seen many people just take verbal abuse and walk away with their figurative tail between their legs. Have some self-respect. Don't let some miscreant ruin your night because you won't stand up and throw a punch when it's necessary. And sometimes it is... there isn't a man in blue to run to in every situation.

    That being said pick your fights. Don't punch a guy in a back alley thats twice your size, looks like he has spent some time in the prison system, and has a characteristic bulge where his piece is located. That's intelligent risk avoidance. Walking away from a punk in a bar who just insulted you, is being a biatch, to use the parlance of our times.

    HerosCasurus on
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    That bolded part? That's just fucking ridiculous. You know zilch about psychology, depression, sociology, human behavior, and have absolutely no stats to support this theory of yours that kids are overwhelmingly running to their mommies when faced with adversity. Most kids don't even have an appropriate figure to fucking run to, so your hypothesis is out the window right there.

    Tell me, do you have information on my knowledge of psychology, depression, sociology, and human behavior?

    Tell me, do you have anything relevant to say to disprove my personal experience other than your own?

    I'm not saying that my personal experiences are better or more relevant than yours. I'm not going to try to make that argument. My personal experience proves nothing, but it would seem others have had similar personal experiences to both you and I. It's useless to debate that anymore. I also never said that the depression rate and the current generations seeming inability to cope are related, I said I thought there could be a connection.

    As Quid already pointed out, the onus is not on me to prove that you're assumptions are correct. You need actual stats to show that kids are overwhelmingly seeking authority to solve their problems, and from there you can talk about theories. It is meaningless because your entire hypothesis is meaningless and baseless.

    Wonder_Hippie on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Adrien wrote: »
    I'm not talking about just physical bullying, though. Size and numbers matter in physical altercations, but not when it comes to stealing and defacing people's stuff, name-calling and other psychological torments. Punching a guy who won't quit calling you names or messing with your stuff can stop him if he's smaller than you.

    In which case he's clearly bright enough to know that he can say you hit him first and he didn't do anything, and 9/10 will emerge unscathed.

    This, to me, is a worse problem them physical bullying. I deal with people like this too often, and the sad thing is that I know I could beat the shit out of them and they'd fuck off but I can't. And they know it. They know it and they continue to be assholes. While I don't get bullied anymore, I know people who take a lot of shit or give a lot of shit, and nothing is done about it at all.

    So, wait... Your problem is that you only know one way of dealing with the situation, and if that way is limited by your environment you feel helpless?

    I wonder why that sounds so familiar.

    I have tried many different methods of dealing with non-physical bullies, and being physical has worked best. I have yet to find a solution to replace that one that works just as well, and my present environment does not allow for the physical approach. So no, I don't know one way of dealing with this situation, I know a bunch of them. Just one works better than the others.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Yes, lets punch people who insult us, Heros. This is a mature and responsible reaction.

    deadonthestreet on
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Adrien wrote: »
    So, wait... Your problem is that you only know one way of dealing with the situation, and if that way is limited by your environment you feel helpless?

    I wonder why that sounds so familiar.

    I have tried many different methods of dealing with non-physical bullies, and being physical has worked best. I have yet to find a solution to replace that one that works just as well, and my present environment does not allow for the physical approach. So no, I don't know one way of dealing with this situation, I know a bunch of them. Just one works better than the others.

    It seems to me like that one doesn't actually work at all.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • Fallout2manFallout2man Vault Dweller Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I have tried many different methods of dealing with non-physical bullies, and being physical has worked best. I have yet to find a solution to replace that one that works just as well, and my present environment does not allow for the physical approach. So no, I don't know one way of dealing with this situation, I know a bunch of them. Just one works better than the others.

    Sometimes it just takes some creative thinking. I once had a guy who hassled me in a life sciences class back in high school. I learned a little about him, and made a few witty remarks that went right for the jugular. He started getting huffy, and challenged me, so I just stood up and stared him down. He just stared at me and eventually quickly lost his nerve and went back to his seat. Ironically he was twice my size. I never had any problems from him after that.

    There are non-violent solutions to certain problems, and we should always aspire to find them. Everyone has mental/emotional weaknesses.

    Fallout2man on
    On Ignorance:
    Kana wrote:
    If the best you can come up with against someone who's patently ignorant is to yell back at him, "Yeah? Well there's BOOKS, and they say you're WRONG!"

    Then honestly you're not coming out of this looking great either.
This discussion has been closed.