• 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.

School shooting Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
CaptainHowdy said:
No, my claim is that Nikolas Cruz was bullied. Emma Gonzalez acknowledging that she and her peers ostracized Cruz is one source. The neighbor quoted in the story on that Nazi website, CNN, is another source.

I never claimed that Emma was the worst or the only student that bullied Nikolas Cruz.
Click to expand...

Your claim is wrong. I assume you live in the US and are familiar with the concept of freedom of association. Implicit in that is the freedom to also choose who you do not wish to associate with. If individuals or even informal groups choose not to associate with an particular person they are perfectly entitled to do so. Everyone, including you, chooses who they wish to associate with and who they do not. There is no way that this can be described as bullying.
 
Types of bullying;

https://www.ncab.org.au/bullying-advice/bullying-for-parents/types-of-bullying/

"encouraging others to socially exclude someone"

https://www.verywellfamily.com/types-of-bullying-parents-should-know-about-4153882

"Relational bullies often ostracize others from a group"

https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/WhatIsBullying/Pages/Types-of-bullying.aspx

"Social bullying which includes consistently excluding another person.."

Interestingly, none of those sites (and the others which say the same thing) mention situations where a persons behaviour is the cause of the exclusion.

The message I get from the anti-bullying sites is that where someone does nothing wrong, but is excluded because a bully takes a dislike them and picks on someone so as to manipulate others as well, that is bullying.

The anti-bullying sites are silent when a kids behaviour is such it is no wonder they are excluded.

I think that it is not bullying when a kid does something which is clearly socially unacceptable or anti-social and that brings about his or her own exclusion.
 
johnny karate said:
It should be noted that these sources don’t make the claim that ostracization itself is bullying, but rather that ostracization can be a used a bullying tactic. In other words, the intent to bully has to be there first.

Emma Gonzalez’s statement taken in full context (before rightwing conspiracy theorist scumbags took a hatchet to them) make it abundantly clear that they were scared of him because of his violent and erratic behavior, and that was the reason they refused to socialize with him.

There was no intent to bully, and therefore it wasn’t bullying.
Click to expand...

Agreed, he caused the others to avoid him. That cannot be bullying, by any definition that is independent of the debate. Claims he was bullied are not driven by any independent definition, they are purely to demonise the other Parkland kids who are speaking out.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
No, my claim is that Nikolas Cruz was bullied. Emma Gonzalez acknowledging that she and her peers ostracized Cruz is one source. The neighbor quoted in the story on that Nazi website, CNN, is another source.

I never claimed that Emma was the worst or the only student that bullied Nikolas Cruz.
Click to expand...

You need to look at why he was ostracised and definitions of bullying that are totally outwith this debate. It is perfectly reasonable to ostracise someone whose behaviour is anti-social.

If you can show Cruz was only nasty to Gonzales, but was fine with other kids, but she then organised all the kids to ostracise him, you may have a case of bullying.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
It's actually simple logical progression from the extreme SJW liberal point of view. They are the people pushing the narrative that we must be "inclusive" and "tolerant" of everybody no matter how different they are and warning us about "triggering" and "microagressions" against any so-called minority. They are the one's who have elevated teasing and not speaking to the weird kid into bullying and probably a hate crime.

In the multicultural paradise of the future where "diversity is our strength" it will be immoral to not be friends with Nazis, if you take the SJW messages to the logical extreme.
Click to expand...

It is the Right wing who is saying that the victims were the real cause of this shooting by not being friends with a nazi. Why are you calling the right wing commentators SJW's now, doesn't that mean anything anymore?
 
3point14 said:
Still not seeing it the way you intended.

Okay, here's where we started...








My inference from this is that you do think that shunning a kid is bullying. Is this the bit I have wrong?
Click to expand...

The bit you have wrong is assuming I think they shouldn't have done it and not doing it would have changed anything.

Because I have been saying the opposite
 
3point14 said:
We clearly have very different definitions of 'bullying'
Click to expand...
Indeed

You don't think ostracising people is bullying

I think ostracising people is bullying

Mainly because it can be a very nasty thing to do. Which is why it has been used as a punishment since we started living in groups. You could argue it's even still used now in a different way with things like solitary confinement in prisons.
 
Porpoise of Life said:
I'd say there's a difference between ostracizing someone because they're fat/nerdy/redheaded/not cool, or ostracizing someone because of their unpredictable, creepy and aggressive behavior...

While the former could be bullying (doesn't have to be, but could be), I don't think the latter is...

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-gonzalez-admit-bullying-school-shooter/
Click to expand...


The article closes with a good summary;

“It is not the obligation of children to befriend classmates who have demonstrated aggressive, unpredictable or violent tendencies,” Robinson wrote. “It is the responsibility of the school administration and guidance department to seek out those students and get them the help that they need, even if it is extremely specialized attention that cannot be provided at the same institution.”
Click to expand...
 
Dave Rogers said:
Not sure what you think you're laughing at. "At the end of the day the actual act of doing it and the impact is the same." People avoided him because he was violent, abusive and threatening, and they were scared ******** of him. There were reportedly multiple attempts to alert the school to the problem which were ignored. What are kids supposed to do when someone presents an obvious threat and the adults who are supposed to protect them refuse to do so?

What's next, paedophiles claiming they're being bullied because the kids won't get in the car when they're offered a sweetie?
Dave
Click to expand...


Only if they are neo-Nazi pedophiles, probably.
 
TheGoldcountry said:
It's not a matter of disagreement. You have a very tight definition of bullying, where simply avoiding social interaction with someone else fits.
Click to expand...


Slight nitpick.

It isn't a "tight" definition. It's an incredibly loose one. A definition tortured and stretched beyond all recognition solely for the purpose of trying to blame the victims.

That's fine, but don't be surprised if others question this.
Click to expand...


And they should. Because the definition is bull ****.
 
So the bullying claims are sounding a lot like the MRA nonsense about how women are mean to these guys for not sleeping with them.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
Agreed. But the brave new multicultural world isn't really rational or reasonable. Besides that, people have been quoted as saying that people didn't want to be friends with Cruz and other people have been quoted as saying he was bullied. My belief that he was bullied is informed by the latter more so than the former.
Click to expand...



Then it is informed badly.

You want to jump on a misuse of the word "ostracize" and try to turn that into some weird perverted definition of "bullying".

It isn't bullying, or even really ostracizing, to not want to hang out with someone in school because they scare the **** out of you and have given plenty of perfectly valid reasons for you to feel that way.

That's just good sense.
 
Darat said:
Perhaps in your fantasy world but not in the real world.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Captain Howdy is secretly a shill for the ACLU. Of course they have a mission that is undoubtedly occasionally odious even to them, but in their mission of decoupling rights from qualfication, they would likely agree that in a world where the rule is tolerance and inclusion, we must tolerate and include those whose stated primary mission in life is to end tolerance and inclusion. I do not think, however, that we ordinary people must be so doctrinaire.
 
quadraginta said:
It isn't bullying, or even really ostracizing, to not want to hang out with someone in school because they scare the **** out of you and have given plenty of perfectly valid reasons for you to feel that way.

That's just good sense.
Click to expand...

You seem to keep trying to switch it from ostracising when the students said that is what they did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom