Seriously? Uh, how about dignity?
Dignity: bearing, conduct, or speech indicative of self-respect or appreciation of the formality or gravity of an occasion or situation.
How interesting that you would say it's "at risk" when you allow someone to yell at you without standing up for yourself. This could be very interesting to explore further. On the topic at hand, I was referring to risking something tangible rather than perception by others.
Hmm, yet one definition of a coward is, "someone lacking courage."
Please do not snip definitions without an ellipsis. It shows intellectual dishonesty.
Coward
Noun: a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.
Adjective: lacking courage; very fearful or timid. proceeding from or expressive of fear or timidity
Let's recap how we got here. Helen, I believe, claimed that it took extreme courage to quietly accept being yelled at. I and qayak argue that this doesn't take courage. You then accuse us of calling people cowards. When I say that the absence of courage does not equal cowardice, you then give an incomplete definition of coward in an effort to somehow "trap" me into having to admit I called someone a coward.
Here's a clue. I have no problems calling someone a coward. I think your behavior here would be vastly different should you have to face any consequences beyond this anonymous forum. Only the MA prevents me from phrasing it another way, but I believe you get the drift.
You have gone into unnecessary detail about your life holding it up as an exemplar of how to avoid bullies. You also spend time explaining why certain people on this thread lack courage, are cowards. Then you say stuff like:
More hypocrisy and straw men. If I share what I did, I am "giving advice" and telling people that my way is the only way. When others share their stories, they are just examples to discuss. You have shared your own stories as well. As for the cowards thing, well, that's just you making up arguments for other people. Again.
So you're not, in any way what-so-ever, suggesting that people exhibiting "classic victim behavior" stop doing so?
I described my
opinion of her behavior, and I stand by it. I even used the phrase
my opinion. I did not tell her that she
should have done anything differently nor did I tell her what she
should do in the future. Considering she didn't answer any of my questions, I didn't know enough to offer advice, and she certainly didn't ask for advice. What I did do was give what I believe is an interpretation of the events that she and others reading this thread didn't see. Did you forget that this is a discussion forum where there are usually many more readers than posters? What I did was typical of a discussion. Too bad you had to get all worked up about it.
Everyone here is capable of interpreting this none-to-subtle implication. It's arrogance and ignorance, the Romulus and Remus of your silly argument.
My arrogance is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Either I'm right or I'm wrong. If arrogance pisses you off so much, you should take a break or find another outlet because it's easy to perceive arrogance in the written word where none exists. However, in my case, I am most definitely arrogant. I'm also abrasive. There's the Ignore feature if you don't like me and the Report button should I break the rules. Other than that, it's really not a topic for discussion.
BTW, why is it acceptable for you to directly insult me personally but it's a travesty for me to (allegedly) subtly imply insults to a group while contributing to a discussion? The hypocrisy you demonstrate is astounding, but it least it demonstrates your point about bullying behavior on the Internet.
Yes, actually I am. This is just boring now. The audience is yours, Mark Antony.
It was boring before. Your tirades made it interesting.
Really? Well, I have a very adult dictionary, let's see what it says.
