Social pecking order -11/28/06

[Dr. Doog]

I got the first burst, but I didn't understand the second burst of anger Tum0

bullies are bad

[Tom Flapwell]

Keep in mind that what we have here are Ozy and Millie theorizing, not Jeremy confirming their theories. He may or may not mesh with the research.

I can tell you that the "Ghostwriter" subplot in which Hector deals with a bully is one of the most useless-looking stories I've ever seen on educational TV. It's not even internally consistent.

[Steve the Pocket]

Long time reader first time post.

Just wanted to pipe in and mention that the theme of this recent thread was undone by recent research. ... Seems bullies have an overly exagerrated sense of themself. It is when their sense of self is pricked or deflated by others that they instigate violence.

Actually it sounds more like the strip is confirming the evidence you just presented: bullies act like... well, bullies because they feel superior to their victims, not out of some insecure need for compensation.

And I've heard the "bullies only pick on [blank] people because they, the bullies, are secretly [blank] too and just projecting their hate on others" argument plenty of times, and I've never been remotely convinced by it. Maybe it's because it seems to be accusing the bully of being [blank] as if it were a bad thing and overlooks their real sin -- being a jerk. So, yes, major kudos to D.C. for challenging this questionable theory.

[Dr. Doog]

same thing as the argument "people who are homophobic are just insecure about their own sexuality" or whatever, I think that the only point in saying that is to anger the homophobe by calling them gay without insulting homosexuality. Because it doesn't make sense.

[Gizensha]

same thing as the argument "people who are homophobic are just insecure about their own sexuality" or whatever, I think that the only point in saying that is to anger the homophobe by calling them gay without insulting homosexuality. Because it doesn't make sense.

But it isn't calling them gay. It's saying that they think (or, rather, fear) that they might be gay because homosexuality exists.

It's presenting people of an us vs them mindset a them that is physically identical to the us, and several of whom don't realise they're part of the they until a variable point in their life.

To someone who insists on having an us vs them attitude that concept must be absolutely terrifying.

And I distrust psychology. Anything that basically founded on the assumption that there is such a thing as 'normal'... Don't trust.

[Dr. Doog]

but even suggesting them is to them an insult. You may tell me that I might possibly be gay and I wouldn't care. but to tell the homophobe will give him something to ponder (or punch you for)

[Steve the Pocket]

So what you're saying is, it's less a legit theory than a new way of saying "I'm rubber; you're glue" -- only less juvenile-sounding and more likely to be taken seriously.

...Meh, I can live with that I guess.

[Tom Flapwell]

Or they might be afraid that a gay person will turn them gay.

[Dr. Doog]

well...if the gay person is really hot...

[Angstwolf]

And I've heard the "bullies only pick on [blank] people because they, the bullies, are secretly [blank] too and just projecting their hate on others" argument plenty of times, and I've never been remotely convinced by it. Maybe it's because it seems to be accusing the bully of being [blank] as if it were a bad thing and overlooks their real sin -- being a jerk. So, yes, major kudos to D.C. for challenging this questionable theory.

I've never believed it either, because I'm secretly [blank], and I usually come to the defense of people who are openly [blank] instead of bullying them.

Please note: The [blank]s here can be replaced with anything you aren't thinking.

[Steve the Pocket]

I'm [blank]er than you are, I bet.

[Tom Flapwell]

You are blanker than he is: you've removed your avatar. Why is that, anyway? It was bad enough when you stopped using your own artwork.

[Muninn]

Please note: The [blank]s here can be replaced with anything you aren't thinking.

rutabega?

[Az]

It's a COMIC STRIP. Does it really matter if the opinion of the artist is backed up by facts? NO.


You talk about 'bullies' as if they are some genetic mutation from humans which can be classified and studied. Not all bullies are alike and you can't classify what makes them do what they do. In fact useing 'they' isn't right either. They are PEOPLE. We have all been bullied and we are all bullies to someone. You can't go around acting like it's a disorder to be studied to find a cure.

Um... Hope I didn't come off as overboard as you seem to be taking it. I was just mentioning it because the strip was taking the old notion that bullies are bullies because they have low selfesteem. I was just mentioning that our understanding of the motivation for bullies has shifted.

And as to your comment re everyone bullies someone and is bullied by etc... that really isn't relevant to predatory bullies. This is a specific condition.

Again, you can't act like there is some solution to it. In my own experience, in the space of a year the biggest bullies have turned and become friends. The rudest jerks have become my favorite people. People change constantly and so does society. You never solve a problem, only change it.

There are solutions for extreme conditions. That is what the strip is focused on. A predatory bully. Not somoene that just happens to have a range of social interactions.

[Angstwolf]

I'm [blank]er than you are, I bet.

Quite possibly! I'm not all that [blank], but I'm [blank] enough to count as being [blank].

Please note: The [blank]s here can be replaced with anything you aren't thinking.

rutabega?

I've never believed it either, because I'm secretly rutabega, and I usually come to the defense of people who are openly rutabega instead of bullying them.

Ummmm... sounds okay to me!