Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Romney the Bully
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


(3)
Message 196 of 264 (663119)
05-21-2012 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 2:08 PM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
But that's what I'm getting at, however. Why don't you consider it "fighting back"? Swinging the law at somebody is swinging a pretty big stick. If you're in a fight for your life, or a fight for someone else's life, why wouldn't you swing the biggest stick you can get your hands on?
1) Only an immediate display of aggression will eliminate his feeling of transgression. He has been attacked, and so he feels the need to attack back, right now. It's simple fight-or-flight, and the flight option has been removed.
2) Calling the cops is functionally identical to "tattling," which we all learned as children is looked upon poorly by our peers (particularly those who have been "tattled" upon, and most people tend to side with the aggressor when no lasting harm is perceived because the aggressor is identified as the "stronger" or socially dominant party relative to the victim). The long-term view of events required by waiting until after the assault has already transpired to call the cops necessitates waiting long enough for the adrenaline-fueled fight-or-flight response to wear off; at that point, he can no longer respond with an act of personal aggression and so his sense of transgression can no longer be satisfied. He feels like he's "done nothing," and that somehow, if only he'd been "brave enough," he could have prevented the assault or at least paid it back, even if that idea is patently ridiculous.
Bluntly, calling the cops doesn't feel enough like fighting back because it does not involve a display of personal aggression. Our social instincts function such that only personal displays of aggression can prove social dominance, while relying on the support of others to act entirely in your stead is viewed as weakness...even though the actual results of each tactic should prove the opposite.
It seems that dronester somehow believes that fighting back personally and calling the police afterward are mutually exclusive, when this is only the case if fighting back will result in the death of the victim (so that he/she cannot call the police). And in fact, when faced with a group of assailants wielding a deadly weapon, it may prove unwise to fight back at all, because resistance will simply increase the risk of injury or death. In other cases, where death or injury is obviously the intended goal, you lose nothing by fighting back and gain a small chance at survival.
Which, of course, is why "what if you saw your girlfriend being gangraped, hur hurr" is not at all equivalent to "a group of guys, one armed with sharp scissors, tackles you in an attempt to cut your hair."
What disappoints me, however, is the insistence on identifying the victim of a crime as a "pussy." I understand the whole social pecking order macho displays of dominance blah blah blah, or rather I understand that it exists. But it offends me greatly to play the "blame the victim" game, and it is absolutely nothing more than blaming the victim to identify the victim as a valid target for denigration and insult, regardless of that victim's behavior. I don't care if the boy cried for his mommy and wet himself while set upon by multiple assailants - the victim is not the one in the wrong, the bullies are. If anyone should be identified as weak pussies, it should be the morally deficient assholes who needed a whole gang of guys and a pair of scissors to feel safe enough to express themselves.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 2:08 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by dronestar, posted 05-21-2012 3:44 PM Rahvin has not replied
 Message 201 by onifre, posted 05-21-2012 4:42 PM Rahvin has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(1)
Message 197 of 264 (663123)
05-21-2012 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 2:08 PM


Superior reading comprehension skills? Grand irony
Crash writes:
I agree that fighting back with the cops is EXACTLY not "fighting back" according to you and Oni.
Yeah, unlike yours and Rahvin's other false accusations above, this time Crash, you sure quoted my ENTIRE post Message 188 "EXACTLY."
Seriously Crash, I remain bewildered by your "ability" to sway people on the forum.
Edited by dronester, : clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 2:08 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by crashfrog, posted 05-22-2012 8:49 AM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(2)
Message 198 of 264 (663126)
05-21-2012 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Rahvin
05-21-2012 3:00 PM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
Rahvin writes:
It seems that dronester somehow believes that fighting back personally and calling the police afterward are mutually exclusive,
Amazing. Besides magically conflating what I and others stated, can you also tell me what my sock colour is?
Rahvin writes:
What disappoints me, however, is the insistence on identifying the victim of a crime as a "pussy."
Be specific, where did I insist that? (You and Crash are on a dishonest rampage today!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Rahvin, posted 05-21-2012 3:00 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


(1)
Message 199 of 264 (663129)
05-21-2012 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by Evlreala
05-21-2012 2:51 PM


Evlreala writes:
Saying that this is my stance is dishonest, are you having trouble following along? QUOTE WHERE I SAID THIS WAS MY STANCE. Was that clear? Do you need me to explain it further to you?
Would you like me to go back and quote you every time you referred to Romney leading a gang of boys to assault another boy as "something from 40 years ago"? Even now, you refuse to acknowledge it for what it was. You continue to insist on referring to it as "something from 40 years ago", which gives the impression that it was just an every day thing like taking a walk in the park or drinking out of the drinking fountain. It was something from 40 years ago. How many of us remember just any regular ole something from 40 years ago?
Yeah yeah yeah, I said I was done. This will be my last post. You win. I can't be as hard headed as you are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Evlreala, posted 05-21-2012 2:51 PM Evlreala has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Evlreala, posted 05-21-2012 5:44 PM Taz has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 200 of 264 (663130)
05-21-2012 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 12:10 PM


Now it's a fuckin fight!
That's exactly what Oni has stated, and what you stated - that you both consider it a supreme act of pussying out to get the cops involved when people assault you or your girlfriend, and that when Mitt Romney gets a bunch of his boarding school asshole buddies together to attack you with scissors, it's just not cricket to do anything but try and fail to fight off five or six guys with nothing but your bare fists.
I didn't say calling the cops makes you a pussy, I said YOU calling a group of dudes holding a guy down and cutting his hair as a prank at a prep school "assault" makes YOU a pussy. If YOU want to scream "assault" in every situation, like in my example of pushing you at a mall, then YOU sir are the pussy.
See, it's about YOU, not the gay kid who probably fought back for all we know.
Nor was I calling the victim a pussy like Rahvin keeps crying about.
You're both so caught up in your own self-righteous bullshit that you can't comprehend what's being said to you.
Although getting that lunatic rant from Rahvin was well worth the misunderstanding.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 12:10 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 201 of 264 (663131)
05-21-2012 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Rahvin
05-21-2012 3:00 PM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
What disappoints me, however, is the insistence on identifying the victim of a crime as a "pussy."
I wasn't, but that's what you wanted to read into it because you're too caught up in your own bullshit to understand what the fuck is being said.
I was calling crashfrog a pussy IF he was calling cutting a kids hair "assault".
He said it was assault, and I said yeah it's assault if you wanna be a pussy about it. Nothing to do with the victim, at all. Not even close to it. But you read into it as though I was. Why?
I understand the whole social pecking order macho displays of dominance blah blah blah
Oh yeah, you're so above those primitive displays of male dominance so you sit back and judge it from a computer screen. You're sooo cool dude. Can I be your online best friend?
- Oni (The COMEDIAN)
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Rahvin, posted 05-21-2012 3:00 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Rahvin, posted 05-21-2012 5:50 PM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 202 of 264 (663132)
05-21-2012 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 10:38 AM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
Sure. Why not fight back with every tool at your disposal, including the law?
Sure, if you want to be a pussy about it. Call the cops. You are well within your rights to do so.
"Hi, officer. These four guys cut my bangs, can you arrest them please?"
So you'd fight back with your fists - which almost certainly won't work
NO! You panic and memorize faces so you can describe it to the cops when you finally stop crying.
Fighting back with your fists is male monkey dominance blah, blah, blah.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 10:38 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 203 of 264 (663133)
05-21-2012 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 2:08 PM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
I agree that fighting back with the cops is exactly not "fighting back" according to you and Oni.
There are situations in which fighting back with the cops is warrented. Of course there are. I have not stated otherwise.
If I saw my girlfriend being raped I would fight at that very moment, and then of course involve the cops. I could not however sit back and do nothing and just remember faces. It would not be a natural instinct.
But in the case of some dudes holding me down and cutting my hair, come on, cops? Really? Personally I feel I can handle that myself. Especially at a prep school. But if you also feel that situation warrents YOU calling the cops and calling it assault, go for it. But in my eyes that some pussy shit to do.
Cops have better things to do than worry about your hair being cut by some rich kids at a prep school. In fact, the cops I know would call you a pussy for not handling it.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 2:08 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 204 of 264 (663134)
05-21-2012 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by dronestar
05-21-2012 10:18 AM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
I agree with you Oni, if schoolboys tried to trim my hair, I'd certainly fight back.
I'm surprised it has been met with such resistance. Fuck, it was fun to fight when I was a kid.
From the responses you been getting, it SEEMS people like Rahvin, if they ever witnessed their girlfriend being violently and repeatedly gang-raped, I'd imagine they would just cower submissively, accepting the assault while "You memorize faces and names, and you call the cops" afterwards.
How lucky their girlfriends are.
Yeah well, he's too above that sort of lower primate activity of fighting with fist-to-cuffs, didn't you know? He's too smart for that. He can't be bothered with it.
The irony. Rahvin accuses ME of hyperventilating hyperbole. It burns.
It's the only way to support his ridiculous position of calling a prep school prank "assault with a deadly weapon." You should go back and read crashfrog's "If a BLACK MAN...blah, blah, blah" analogy. These two are really pulling out all the cliche's in this thread.
Rahvin doesn't get half as worked up about the murder of women and children via US foreign policies as he does about this topic. Consistency much?
I think he couldn't get past the word "pussy" and stopped comprehending from that point on.
He accused me repeatedly of being a comedian like a lunatic, which I have no idea still what the hell he was driving at. But it was great to see the cool, calm, collect Rahvin lose his shit.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by dronestar, posted 05-21-2012 10:18 AM dronestar has not replied

  
ooh-child
Member (Idle past 344 days)
Posts: 242
Joined: 04-10-2009


(3)
Message 205 of 264 (663136)
05-21-2012 5:25 PM


Stictly hypothetical?
Is this discussion (getting into) hypothetical territory, or has anyone actually experienced having their hair cut against their will in high school?
Has anyone seen this kind of action at any point in school?
Apparently the kid who had this actually happen to him didn't report it to authorities, or if he did it was ignored. And, since he didn't tell anyone in his family about it, he obviously felt very privately about his reactions.
BTW - this did happen to a sophomore with whom I went to school. He went home & killed himself. No one was charged with anything.

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by onifre, posted 05-21-2012 5:43 PM ooh-child has replied
 Message 208 by Evlreala, posted 05-21-2012 5:46 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied
 Message 210 by fearandloathing, posted 05-21-2012 5:56 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied
 Message 227 by Artemis Entreri, posted 05-22-2012 10:50 AM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(3)
Message 206 of 264 (663140)
05-21-2012 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by ooh-child
05-21-2012 5:25 PM


Re: Stictly hypothetical?
He went home & killed himself.
Was the hair cut that bad?
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by ooh-child, posted 05-21-2012 5:25 PM ooh-child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by ooh-child, posted 05-21-2012 5:59 PM onifre has replied

  
Evlreala
Member (Idle past 3075 days)
Posts: 88
From: Portland, OR United States of America
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 207 of 264 (663141)
05-21-2012 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Taz
05-21-2012 4:12 PM


Would you like me to go back and quote you every time you referred to Romney leading a gang of boys to assault another boy as "something from 40 years ago"? Even now, you refuse to acknowledge it for what it was. You continue to insist on referring to it as "something from 40 years ago", which gives the impression that it was just an every day thing like taking a walk in the park or drinking out of the drinking fountain. It was something from 40 years ago. How many of us remember just any regular ole something from 40 years ago?
The point I'm trying to make is you're using a tactic most often used by people who lack empathy. The tactic is pretty simple, actually. Don't specifically refer to things you're talking about. Instead, use a general term. So, if it's rape you're talking about, say it was a personal dispute. If it was a drunk driver plowing into a car killing a family of 5, call it a traffic accident. If it was a gang assault, call it a prank or "something". Heck, I'll do you a favor by violating godwin's law here by pointing out that top nazi officials called systematically exterminating millions of jews "statistics".
This is a strawman argument and and irrelevant conclusion, Taz.
Are you denying what happened isn't something that happened 40* years ago?
Can you point out where I ever mentioned rape, let alone anything on how I referance rape?
Can you quote me where I ever denied what took place?
You appear incapable of doing anything but commiting ad homminum attacks.
Kindly remove your head from your rectum and come back when you can act the part of an adult.
Yeah yeah yeah, I said I was done. This will be my last post. You win. I can't be as hard headed as you are.
We'll see..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Taz, posted 05-21-2012 4:12 PM Taz has not replied

  
Evlreala
Member (Idle past 3075 days)
Posts: 88
From: Portland, OR United States of America
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 208 of 264 (663142)
05-21-2012 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by ooh-child
05-21-2012 5:25 PM


Re: Stictly hypothetical?
Is this discussion (getting into) hypothetical territory, or has anyone actually experienced having their hair cut against their will in high school?
Yes, it happened to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by ooh-child, posted 05-21-2012 5:25 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


(1)
Message 209 of 264 (663143)
05-21-2012 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by onifre
05-21-2012 4:42 PM


Re: Ehhh, not really...
I was calling crashfrog a pussy IF he was calling cutting a kids hair "assault".
How is that different from calling the victim a pussy if the victim were to go to the police or school authorities and call the incident an assault?
He said it was assault, and I said yeah it's assault if you wanna be a pussy about it. Nothing to do with the victim, at all. Not even close to it. But you read into it as though I was. Why?
You've stated multiple times that you agree that technically the events described constitute an assault, but that actually calling a spade a spade makes one a pussy.
That's irrational, Oni. If the spade is a spade, you call it a spade, and you shouldn't be mocked for it. If a series of events meets the precise definition of "assault," then you call those events an "assault." There's no reason to call someone a "pussy" just because he understands the English language and uses what you agree is an accurate word to describe the events.
In fact, acknowledging that the events did technically (and thus actually) constitute an assault means that to then call those same events "just a prank" is in fact disingenuous and dishonest. It diminishes the import of the events as they happened. It minimizes the trauma of the victim, simply because you (presumably) think that there could not possibly have been significant trauma involved, and that the victim should "man up."
He said it was assault, and I said yeah it's assault if you wanna be a pussy about it. Nothing to do with the victim, at all. Not even close to it. But you read into it as though I was. Why?
Because there is no functional difference between calling crashfrog or myself a "pussy" for calling the events an assault, and calling the victim a "pussy" if he were to call the events an assault. Sicne there are victims of similar assaults who do in fact report those assaults to relevant authorities, you are in effect calling every victim who does so a "pussy."
I've been the victim of bullying. I've been assaulted by classmates, typically in large groups. In one case I actually sustained a real injury, though that wasn't the intent of the bullies. In another incident, I was sexually assaulted and mocked by a group of girls (had a boy done to a girl what those girls did to me, he would have gone to juvenile hall). The school authorities, of course, viewed those incidents as you must - just "pranks," which was certainly true of the intent of the assailants, and I was just a "pussy" or a "tattletale" for making such a "big deal" out of it. I felt almost as humiliated reporting the sexual assault as I did when the event actually occurred. I was a victim, Oni, and in discussing this other incident that dealt with the actions of Mitt Romney, you in effect called me a "pussy" for being a victim who accurately describes events that have actually occurred. Some of those events were deeply traumatizing to me at the time, and some still make me feel shame and humiliation today, decades later, when I recall them, even though rationally I comprehend that I was a victim and my victimization was not my fault. Calling victims "pussies," even when you were only doing so unintentionally and indirectly, still strongly triggers those feelings, and is in fact why it's wrong to even suggest that a person is a "pussy" for either reporting an incident to the authorities or for accurately identifying what happened.
I'm glad that you found my uncharacteristically emotional reaction to having those buttons pushed entertaining. I, of course, was and am not laughing. Will you now call me a "pussy" for having been a boy who was sexually assaulted by a group of girls? Should I have just "manned up" and enjoyed it? Should I have fought back, even though they were girls and I would have gotten in far worse trouble than they ever did?
If the boy whose hair was cut had called the incident an assault and reported it to the authorities, I would not call him a "pussy," regardless of whether he fought back with his fists or not.
Oh yeah, you're so above those primitive displays of male dominance so you sit back and judge it from a computer screen. You're sooo cool dude. Can I be your online best friend?
I'm capable of dispassionate argument largely because I'm sitting at my computer screen. I have the exact same instincts and social conditioning I've described - but wen I'm thinking about it instead of just going with it, I can accurately describe what's actually happening and decide for myself if those instincts and socially conditioned responses actually make appropriate sense in a given situation. They very often do not, and so as I argue dispassionately while sitting back at my computer screen, I'll say something that runs directly counter to those same instincts and socially conditioned responses.
There's no fallacy in identifying a heat-of-the-moment reaction as less wise than an alternative. There's absolutely nothing wrong with analyzing a situation from the perspective of a neutral third party. In fact, the best way to "judge" irrational behavior like male dominance posturing is from a detached, intellectual standpoint. It's the only real way to analyze which of our behaviors are rational, and which not.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by onifre, posted 05-21-2012 4:42 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by onifre, posted 05-21-2012 6:53 PM Rahvin has replied
 Message 215 by onifre, posted 05-21-2012 7:14 PM Rahvin has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(2)
Message 210 of 264 (663144)
05-21-2012 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by ooh-child
05-21-2012 5:25 PM


Re: Stictly hypothetical?
Has anyone seen this kind of action at any point in school?
I was initiated in the boy scouts, but all that really happened was I got locked in the back of a small U-Haul trailer for 20 minutes or so, no real threat of violence.
In HS I got initiated as a freshman by a group of 4 or 5 guys in the bathroom, I felt different about that. I ended up being suspended with the other guys because I did fight back. A teacher walked in and I was guilty for defending myself; if the teacher had not have walked in I guess I would've taken my lumps and went on with life.
I feel if a group of people do something to you that you don't want done, hold you down and cut your hair, then it is an assault.
Assault varies widely, in some places you can get an assault charge and never touch the other person, if you do touch them then it is assault and battery. IMO what Romney did was assault and battery, being scissors were involved then it would be assault and battery with a dangerous weapon with intent to inflict fear. I don't think he meant to do harm to the guy other then scare him, still a crime though. JMO

A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
― Edward R. Murrow

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by ooh-child, posted 05-21-2012 5:25 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024