• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Being bullied

Sometimes, it takes a lot more courage to just grin and bear it.
Self control? Yep. Humility? Patience? Yep. Selflessness, such as taking it for the good of your family? Yep.

Courage? Just not seeing it. Perhaps you can elaborate on how it takes more a lot more courage to take it than it does to confront the person yelling.

Somteimes, that is the only realistic course of action. Surely that can't be in dispute?
Well, considering that I have stated, oh, about a dozen times (including in the post to which you are responding) that sometimes that's the only prudent course of action, I have to wonder why you're asking that question.
 
Yes, I do think it can take e great deal of courage indeed to have to face a situation every day where you know you are going to have to grin and bear it. And I don't think it always takes courage to confront people.

That's still just an assertion, so I decided to look in the dictionary. What definition are you using?

Webster:
mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty

Encarta:
the ability to face danger, difficulty, uncertainty, or pain without being overcome by fear or being deflected from a chosen course of action

Webster 1913
That quality of mind which enables one to encounter danger and difficulties with firmness, or without fear, or fainting of heart; valor; boldness; resolution.

Random House
the quality of mind or spirit that enables a person to face difficulty, danger, pain, etc., without fear;

The problem I personally have with these definitions and thus understanding your assertion relates to the fear component. Some say it is without fear. Others say it requires not being overcome by fear. So, please elaborate by choosing a definition or making one of your own (I have a poetic license, so I have the authority to grant you permission). Then explain to me how fear fits into the equation so that I may understand.
 
It is very kind and gracious of you to grant me permission to define what I mean by courage, but I'll go with Webster. Or any of the others. And if you can't see that courage might be needed in a situation like that, then I don't see that there is much I can do to convince you, except perhaps leave it up to life to do that. To me, it couldn't be more clear. And I certainly don't think that you always need courage in order to confront people. I assert this, you assert the opposite. I doubt the twain shall ever meet.

This is an exercise in futility. Those can be fun sometimes, but this one isn't.
 
It is very kind and gracious of you to grant me permission to define what I mean by courage, but I'll go with Webster. Or any of the others. And if you can't see that courage might be needed in a situation like that, then I don't see that there is much I can do to convince you, except perhaps leave it up to life to do that. To me, it couldn't be more clear. And I certainly don't think that you always need courage in order to confront people. I assert this, you assert the opposite. I doubt the twain shall ever meet.

To me, the most useful definition of courage is the willingness to avoid the path of least resistance in order to remain true to one's convictions. For some people, confrontation IS the path of least resistance, because that's part of their nature. Particularly if they have learned that it's not part of most people's nature, so they know they will rarely meet resistance.
 
To me, the most useful definition of courage is the willingness to avoid the path of least resistance in order to remain true to one's convictions. For some people, confrontation IS the path of least resistance, because that's part of their nature. Particularly if they have learned that it's not part of most people's nature, so they know they will rarely meet resistance.

Just to relate a real-world example: When I was younger, I had serious anger-management issues. In junior high school particularly, there were those who would try to taunt me into fighting them, perhaps in an attempt to move themselves up in the pecking order by some small amount. I resisted the urge to fight because I thought that fighting was wrong. Even though every instinct in my body told me I needed to lash out and attack, I remained true to my beliefs and (for the most part) kept myself under control.

This was particularly difficult when I walked away from a fight and had to listen to the rest of the school talking about my cowardice. That's when I REALLY wanted to lash out and prove them wrong...but I suffered in silence instead.

Should I be considered a coward for sticking to my guns in this difficult situation?


PS: At the time I thought fighting was wrong because of my Christian upbringing; "turn the other cheek" and all that. Today I just believe that it's a stupid way to settle disputes.
 
Yes, I am arguing that in certain circumstances the behavior of the victim will do little to disuade bullying.

I have described how I was bullied by a guy three years older and much larger than me because I had silver buck teeth.

I would have loved for UncaYimmy to pay for the dental work to have prevented that.

In my other case, I was 8, she was a 50 year old nun who was my teacher. I was supposed to do what, exactly? Kick her in the habit?

How DARE anyone suggest it was my fault.
 
Last edited:
I have described how I was bullied by a guy three years older and much larger than me because I had silver buck teeth.

I would have loved for UncaYimmy to pay for the dental work to have prevented that.

In my other case, I was 8, she was a 50 year old nun who was my teacher. I was supposed to do what, exactly? Kick her in the habit?

How DARE anyone suggest it was my fault.
Its one thing to tell a bullying victim to stand up to his or her tormentors but its another thing when a weaker or outnumbered victim is victimized. I've actually observed Varsity athletes bully handicapped kids.
 
Its one thing to tell a bullying victim to stand up to his or her tormentors but its another thing when a weaker or outnumbered victim is victimized. I've actually observed Varsity athletes bully handicapped kids.

Well, if they'd just stand up (especially those in wheelchairs) and fight back, they wouldn't be in such straights...

sigh
 
It's amusing to me to think that, had I reacted in some way that would have gotten me fired, after so long without a job, there'd be plenty of people here who would have been disappointed in my lack of self-control. Not in me, per se, but in my inability to be mature and refuse to be goaded into getting myself fired. As it stands now, I'm pleased with myself, and I'm the only person who, ultimately, I need to impress. But I also know I haven't let my friends down, either, especially after all they've done to help me get my life back. I'm glad of that, too.

This is a temporary job. It has a known limit. After it's over, I'll likely never see that particular woman again. It seems to me that a mature person knows she can put up with a lot for a little while, and strives to do what benefits her family, rather than gain some temporary and hollow "victory" that helps her widdle feelings, but leaves her unemployed, while the screamer still has an income.

If this incident had goaded me into dropping self-control, my subsequent reaction would have been extreme, and would have resulted in my losing my job. I note that UY says:

Self control? Yep. Humility? Patience? Yep. Selflessness, such as taking it for the good of your family? Yep.

Courage? Just not seeing it. Perhaps you can elaborate on how it takes more a lot more courage to take it than it does to confront the person yelling.

yet I can't see how his notion of "courage" is supposed to outweigh all those other things he listed, which I did display (his 'neener-neener, you did not' aside). The so-called "courage" to yell back at an irrational person isn't any sort of courage at all, and certainly not a type I'd value in any way. Any child can yell. She was already so loud that I'd have had to yell to be heard above her. And I know exactly how that plays out.

See, the supervisors are few in the office, and they're vital. It's too late in this temporary game to train someone to take her place, so they can't be lightly discarded. If there's a sticking point, a point of contention in the office, it's the grunt who will be used to relieve it, not the trained supervisor. The grunt can be replaced with someone off the street. The supervisor at this stage cannot.

The sort of false "courage" of which he speaks will not pay the bills. It would have made me feel a huge failure to have lost my job for refusing to display self-control, humility, patience, or selflessness. I did not lose my sense of self-worth through my actions, and knew full well I easily could have done just that. I've done it before, you see, and had plenty of lessons from my past to show me that the one thing I absolutely could not do was lose my cool. I was successful, and I'm proud of myself for managing something I once could not.

UY's just noise, but I'm content to let him broadcast it to everyone. It's doing him no favors, but it's doing me plenty. :D
 
Its one thing to tell a bullying victim to stand up to his or her tormentors but its another thing when a weaker or outnumbered victim is victimized. I've actually observed Varsity athletes bully handicapped kids.

Well, if they'd just stand up (especially those in wheelchairs) and fight back, they wouldn't be in such straights...

sigh

This nonsense about "standing up" to bullies is just fantasy thinking. Sure, sometimes stabbing someone with a pencil ends it (an example from the thread), but sometimes fighting back makes everything worse. And sometimes the power differential is so great that the victim is paralyzed (no pun...). No one has even attempted to explain how these cases can be distinguished.

Fundamentally, we have vague references to "victim behavior." Whenever this notion is criticized, we hear melodramatic protestations that no one is making general claims about ALL victims.

So here we are: how do we identify people bullied because of "victim behavior" and those who are simply being targeted for no reason at all.

If it's not a general claim, there needs to be evidence or a method for identifying the specific sub-class in question.

And even if that were possible, we still have the causality issue hanging over everything.

This whole thing was just an excuse to brag and insult forum members.
 
Last edited:
This nonsense about "standing up" to bullies is just fantasy thinking. Sure, sometimes stabbing someone with a pencil ends it (an example from the thread), but sometimes fighting back makes everything worse. And sometimes the power differential is so great that the victim is paralyzed.

Fundamentally, we have vague references to "victim behavior." Whenever this notion is criticized, we hear melodramatic protestations that no one is making general claims about ALL victims.

So here we are: how do we identify people bullied because of "victim behavior" and those who are simply being targeted for no reason at all.

If it's not a general claim, there needs to be evidence or a method for distinguishing the specific sub-class in question.

And even if that were possible, we still have the causality issue hanging over everything.

This whole thing was just an excuse to brag and insult forum members.


Oh, no, see....we're supposed to stand up to the bully, with rising, stirring music swelling in the background, so that he crumples, clutches his now bleeding nose, and runs away crying while all the nerdy, unpopular kids get to laugh at him for a change. And now, seeing the error of his ways, he never bullies anyone again. In fact, he grows up to be quite the little Milquetoast, becomes an obsequious bum, and never has an ounce of self-worth ever again.

That's the way it works in the movies, so naturally, real-life will mirror it exactly, right? :rolleyes:
 
Sometimes, it takes a lot more courage to just grin and bear it.

It takes no courage to do that.

Somteimes, that is the only realistic course of action. Surely that can't be in dispute?

That's not a course of action, it's a course of inaction. Courage can be used to induce action but so can anger, frustration, etc.

When a bully moves on to another victim it is only a matter of time before they return to you. You are relying on chance to intervene in the mean time to protect you. Each time it gets harder to act because you have conditioned yourself to take the abuse.

Bullies at work are very difficult because they have usually risen throught the ranks with no problems before being put into a position of power. When you bring up their behaviour to superiors the reaction is often "Really? Them? They aren't like that!"
 
Fundamentally, we have vague references to "victim behavior." Whenever this notion is criticized, we hear melodramatic protestations that no one is making general claims about ALL victims.

There is a difference between "someone being bullied" and a "victim of bullying."

It isn't the behaviour of a victim we are concerned with, it is the behaviour of the person being bullied. It is that behaviour that decides if they will become a victim or not.

If someone has dealt with a bullying situation and it has stopped, there is little to argue about. They have obviously handled it correctly. There is no one right way to handle such situations but the evidence shows that each situation needs to be dealt with in some manner. Inaction doesn't work with bullies. If it did, advice of parents to "just ignore it" would be sage advice and not seen as useless like most on this thread have pointed out.
 
Last edited:
There is a difference between "someone being bullied" and a "victim of bullying."

It isn't the behaviour of a victim we are concerned with, it is the behaviour of the person being bullied. It is that behaviour that decides if they will become a victim or not.

This has not remotely been established. I'm not denying that there are some cases where this is possibly true, just that no one has provided an even remotely plausible model for distinguishing cases.

Once again, if we just took you as you exist now and dropped you in different circumstances, some would lead to you being the victim of bullies, some wouldn't.

Unless you think the Latin Kings would leave you alone after a stern talking to...

If someone has dealt with a bullying situation and it has stopped, there is little to argue about. They have obviously handled it correctly. There is no one right way to handle such situations but the evidence shows that each situation needs to be dealt with in some manner. Inaction doesn't work with bullies. If it did, advice of parents to "just ignore it" would be sage advice and not seen as useless like most on this thread have pointed out.

Provide some evidence for that.

Just going on personal experience, I can remember some kids who were eventually left alone out of sheer boredom. Some of the ones that attempted to protest gave fuel to the bullies and generated continued harassment.

Sometimes fighting back works. Sometimes it makes things worse.

You have offered nothing to distinguish which tactics work in which situations, or any basic evidence to suggest that a certain victim profile is necessary for bullying.

You're just completely making stuff up based off subjective experience.
 
Qayak and UncaYimmy:

Please tell me how to stand up for yourself in this type of situation.

Imagine you are a 13 year old girl. You have a new outfit, and today you are daring to wear some tinted lip gloss for the first time. You walk out the door feeling happy about yourself.

At school waiting for your first class, a very popular, good-looking boy notices and says in a totally sarcastic voice, "oh, you look so beautiful today." A couple kids around him giggle so he keeps on, "will you be my girlfriend?" etc., etc. Pretty soon most of the kids in the immediate vicinity are laughing. Because of course the idea of you being attractive is a joke. A couple are looking uncomfortable and trying to ignore it.

How do you respond to that? Tell them firmly to stop? That would be hilarious for them. Ignore it? That is pointless, because they know you hear them. Pretend it doesn't hurt? Yeah, you can try all you want, but remember you're a 13 year old girl and it hurts very badly. Come up with some funny, stinging reply? Doesn't work -- you're panicking and your mind is an absolute blank. Laugh along with them (yes, I've seen that advice given)? Absolutely not.

Now the teacher finally calls the class to order and announces that we are dividing everyone into groups of 3 for a project, "so get together with 2 friends!" Everyone is super happy about this -- except of course you, because your heart is pounding and you know you have to find a way to accomplish this in about 30 seconds before everyone is teamed up. The kids who were just laughing at you are out of the question. The kids who were looking uncomfortable about it, avoid eye contact with you and team up with other people (they may feel bad about the teasing but they still don't want to be associated with you). You look around for the other bottom-of-the-ladder kids, but too late because they are already teamed up. So now it's too late, you are standing there alone, and the teacher has to ask the teams if anyone will let you join them. Finally someone takes pity.

How do you "stand up to" exclusion?

You find out that there's a rumor going around that you are a lesbian. The basis for this rumor is that you haven't dated any of the boys in the class. (Note: this is a small school, about 20 kids in the class, only 6 of whom are boys, and all of them were joining in the laughter mentioned above.) You don't actually know what "lesbian" really means exactly -- late bloomer, still interested in cartoons -- but this is a Christian school so you do know that it means something very, very bad and disgusting.

How do you "stand up to" rumors?

It's crap like that all day, every day. There's nothing to be done except endure it. Can't talk to the teachers -- that's "tattling" and "whining" (even some of the supposedly adult posters here think so). You're at a small school, and your position in the social heirarchy is fixed until the day comes that you can move on.

I will admit, I was an easy target and didn't stand up for myself well. But to tell an awkward, shy kid to stand up for themself -- I don't know, the only analogy I can think of is telling someone with insomnia to just go to sleep. It sounds so easy when it comes naturally.

I don't have any easy answers about any of it. But blaming someone after the fact, and attacking them as weak because they had a painful time growing up, is definitely not the answer.
 
Last edited:
It takes no courage to do that.



That's not a course of action, it's a course of inaction. Courage can be used to induce action but so can anger, frustration, etc.

When a bully moves on to another victim it is only a matter of time before they return to you. You are relying on chance to intervene in the mean time to protect you. Each time it gets harder to act because you have conditioned yourself to take the abuse.

Bullies at work are very difficult because they have usually risen throught the ranks with no problems before being put into a position of power. When you bring up their behaviour to superiors the reaction is often "Really? Them? They aren't like that!"

Please, this is a childish definition of "courage."

Which takes more courage: showing up to work every day knowing that your supervisor might harass you but realizing you and your family need the job?

Or losing your ****, having an argument, getting fired, leading to you sitting at home unemployed?

And yes yes, now you'll offer all sorts of advice like, "pull the supervisor aside and let them know you didn't appreciate the way you were talked to...blah, blah." You don't know the situation. I've seen people fired for much less. Only the people in that situation will have a sense for what will lead to firing or continued harassment.

The cliche, psuedo-psych advice givers on this thread speak in such generalities and have such little knowledge about the specific circumstances in question. Yet they truly believe their Dr. Laura-esque suggestions are sufficient to dub someone a coward if they aren't followed.
 
Last edited:
I have a facebook account and I found a few of the bullys in my life there also. I messaged one and asked him if he had bashed anyone on the head with a book lately and I asked another if he had spit on anyone lately. So far no reply.
 
Please, this is a childish definition of "courage."

Which takes more courage: showing up to work every day knowing that your supervisor might harass you but realizing you and your family need the job?

Or losing your ****, having an argument, getting fired, and leading to you sitting at home unemployed?

I agree. It takes a huge amount of courage to go to work every day with a psycho boss. Unrealistic expectations and inconsistent reactions make for a very daunting workplace.

I had a job where my purpose was to take abuse from and support the raving lunatic. I was paid well and was able to leave it at work, for the most part. But, it was clear that every mistake was mine. Even if I had all the documentation to back up the fact that the mistake originated, propagated by and finally approved by the boss, it was my mistake. I took all the blame.

There were lots of benefits from the job, some which still help me years later, but there was no opportunity to stand up. Let me rephrase that: the cost of standing up was well known and too high for me to accept. So I banked the big checks and built up a reputation as one who could work in awful conditions with the worst of the worse in my profession and it has served me well in my career.

Taking the BS in the short term served me well. Standing up to the BS would have ruined a great opportunity for me and my family. To me, standing up would have been the easy way out. Trust me, I considered it every day on the way to work. In the end, I played the hand I was given as well as I could and I have no regrets.

Not that you need it slingblade, but I respect your decision. I hope the next job is better.
 
I agree. It takes a huge amount of courage to go to work every day with a psycho boss. Unrealistic expectations and inconsistent reactions make for a very daunting workplace.

I had a job where my purpose was to take abuse from and support the raving lunatic. I was paid well and was able to leave it at work, for the most part. But, it was clear that every mistake was mine. Even if I had all the documentation to back up the fact that the mistake originated, propagated by and finally approved by the boss, it was my mistake. I took all the blame.

There were lots of benefits from the job, some which still help me years later, but there was no opportunity to stand up. Let me rephrase that: the cost of standing up was well known and too high for me to accept. So I banked the big checks and built up a reputation as one who could work in awful conditions with the worst of the worse in my profession and it has served me well in my career.

Taking the BS in the short term served me well. Standing up to the BS would have ruined a great opportunity for me and my family. To me, standing up would have been the easy way out. Trust me, I considered it every day on the way to work. In the end, I played the hand I was given as well as I could and I have no regrets.

Not that you need it slingblade, but I respect your decision. I hope the next job is better.
I had the same type of boss at Sportime. She blew it all the time but it was always someone elses fault. I got laid off and I have a better job closer to home. Sportime will be out of business by December of this year. I wish I believed in karma. I'd say it caught up to her.
 

Back
Top Bottom