Jump to content


Photo

our children being bullied


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#1 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 12 November 2014 - 09:54 PM

i'm a newbie here.

 

so i'm sorry if i'm repeating stuff that folks have said before?

 

but re: the our kids getting bullied? etc.

 

 

I think It is completely reasonably for us to tell our kids to smack em in the face.

 

we all know they won't....

 

cause they are decent.

 

but I have no ephical problems with a nice one punching out a bully. no problem at all.

 

I always told me son to never use his fists, unless It was necessary, but if it was,

 

I never had any problem's with him giving them back what they did to him.



#2 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 12 November 2014 - 10:00 PM

its just sad my son is so pacifist. he never will.

 

he has my permission to do it, but he won't. :-(



#3 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 12 November 2014 - 10:37 PM

i can remember someone hit my kid from behind with a brick?

 

cause he was different. there was no reason. it was just some stupid kid trying to impr4ess a girl.

 

i went to massive effort to find out who did it to him, with the intension of making them suffer.

 

but he told me to let it go. he is better than me.

 

and people say aspies aint no good?

 

i would of made that person suffer badly, except for an aspie telling me not too. so i think aspies are pretty good :-)



#4 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 13 November 2014 - 07:43 AM

That's horrific. I bet your kid was encouraged by teachers etc. not to retaliate, too? I have so many memories of kids at school beating the hell out of me, giving me a black eye, splitting my lip etc. and just being told to ignore them. It's been what I've been taught my entire life - 'Don't stand up for yourself', 'Just accept it when horrible things happen to you', 'Don't make a scene - conform.' Once at school some idiot split my lip. I chased him for a good 10 minutes until a teacher caught us, him with me chasing him but otherwise unhurt, me with blood all over my face. We were both sent to the headmaster's office, and then after another 10 minutes of sitting in silence, the kid was allowed to go. I got suspended for 'spitting blood'. Yes, you read that correctly - I got suspended for bleeding. How dare my blood not stay in my blood vessels after someone hit it! How unreasonable of me!

 

In my opinion as kids we (not just autistics, but every kid who is getting bullied) are encouraged to not stand up for ourselves, which in turn kills our self esteem later in life. Bullies are the real winners in life - just look at MPs. I bet a huge number of them bullied people when they were at school. They want those they see as weak to be crushed. I think it's time for change



#5 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 13 November 2014 - 03:37 PM

True, we live in a bullies' world.  To 'succeed' you need to be ruthless and tread on those who are weaker than you.  This applies in as much to politics as it does to business.  This is not my interpretation of success.



#6 Sally44

Sally44

    K2

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5045 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands

Posted 13 November 2014 - 05:43 PM

It is a very hard question to answer.

 

In school children are always told not to retaliate and to tell a teacher.  Problem is that many children with an ASD just don't know how to handle this kind of thing [and how does any kid?], but those with an ASD even less so.

 

I remember being called into school about my son having pushed another child so they fell over and banged their head.  Apparently there was no reason for him having done that.  But when I asked my son he told me that this same child had pushed him off a wall and he had badly scraped his leg.  It was just that that had happened a couple of days previously and no teacher had seen it and he hadn't told anyone.  So it appeared "out of the blue".

 

My own parents advice to me would be to hit them back and hard.  But you aren't always able to do that.  And sometimes it is more than one against one.

 

I think most people have an episode of being bullied at some point.  But there isn't any set formula to resolve it.  I suppose being scarier and crazier than the bully usually stops them.  But might get you into severe trouble yourself.

 

All organisations should have a policy on bullying.  Whether that is in education or the work place.  I think the only way I have seen it work is where older pupils - and the ones the other kids like and look up to - are mentors that stamp out bullying of younger pupils.  Making bullies look like the ones with issues is the way to do it. Use people who are not scared of them because they are bigger, older, higher up the ladder etc so that they have control over the bully.  And name and shame them.  Because once the bully has lost their 'power' they lose their control.



#7 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 14 November 2014 - 09:39 PM

thanks for your replies people.

 

it's always nice to come on, and get a night where I have things to reply to, so I don't go into deep "lonely mode", like my lighthouse/ vodka night a few days ago.

 

lol

 

before I carry on, please no one feel emotionally blackmailed into answering me

 

(me saying that might not make sense in this post, but in other posts I made a few nights ago, even I can see I became a bit pitiful,

 

but going back to the original subject of re: school bullying,

 

my experience of childhood at school, was, I received vastly more emotional bullying than physical bullying.

 

but I was bought up in an environment of it being "the only things bullies understand is fighting fire with fire."

 

my recalls of those horrible days, were people non stop picking on me emotionally, but I was not capable of fighting them back on the emotional level so I didn't (or if I did, my attempts were pathetic and failed.)

 

but if anyone physically bothered me, it did seem the feeling of the time amongst those adults in charge was,

 

"bullys are cowards, who only ever thump people who they know are too scared to fight back, so the best think you can do, is to fight back."

 

I indeed did this a few times, and on those rare occasions, the bully always came up to me next day, and asked "to be friends," cause when I decide to use my fists, I don't hold back.

 

I adhor violence of any form, be it then or now,

 

but i'd have to say laddo, back in my day, fighting fire with fire, was accepted and "silently encouraged."

 

but if we move on to my step son's time at school, by then all that had gone (so perhaps that was the time of when you were @ school?)

 

i'd always take him aside, when I heard of people bothering him physically with violence, and tell him i'd always stand beside him in school disapline meetings, if he had absolutely no choice but to fight back.

 

but the lads a nice guy & he never listened to my advice. I've never known him fight fire with fire. i'm not sure if that was the school system encouring him to do so, but I guess it might be?

 

but in his example, the new "school way didn't help". he just got hurt more and more, and when he finally left that school.. guess what, the bullies just moved on to the next kid :-(

 

I aint no big expert of managing schools bullying issues,

 

but all I know is on those occasions I had to fight back, it worked. re: the physical bullying. where as my step son's path he chose didn't stop it.

 

there could be many dynamic's involved that because of my potential aspergers condition- i'm not aware off.

 

I just know my son felt terribly ashamed, and embaressed about it all. he wanted to appear a man to me, and yet refused to fight. I so respect him for that.

 

but I feel bad for him that I could not come up any other idea, and the schools way of "not fighting fire with fire" didn't work for him either.

 

I think sally44 might have a good point.

 

i'm not sure that "senior mentoring thing" was present during my lad's time at school. It definitely wasn't during my time at school.)

 

but I can see value in older respected kids, going around and explaining to the younglings that bullying is not acceptable in their own subtle ways.

 

if it was mentor kids that the young kids respected,

 

(i.e. they were into their music, or ran social clubs they liked, I could see that serving a good function.)

 

I think if my daughter's get troubles with my grandkids getting bullied, i'm gonna suggest to them they sends the bairns to a school where such a system is in place.


Edited by dotmarsdotcom, 14 November 2014 - 09:58 PM.


#8 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 14 November 2014 - 10:08 PM

I also would like to add,

 

I have recently recalled someone else who posted very much similar discussions to this,

 

and they were saying bullies pick on people who are lacking in confidence? and that bullies can sniffout people like that in an instant?

 

so sending our kids to night classes to learn basic self defense moves,

 

can make the world of difference :-)

 

I know my brother enrolled his lad in such a class at a very early age (seven years old?)

 

we aren't talking about army stuff here. we are talking just a few basic self defence moves.

 

a few moves that can disable a bully without actually hurting them?

 

I think all schools should also have that as part of their mandatory educational time table for the pupils. if that was part of the curriculum, in combination with sallys mentoring idea,

 

they bully's would have no one to prey on & there perhaps would no longer be any bullies at schools :-) :-)


Edited by dotmarsdotcom, 14 November 2014 - 10:12 PM.


#9 Sally44

Sally44

    K2

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5045 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands

Posted 16 November 2014 - 11:21 AM

I agree that children, or adults, with low confidence and self esteem can often be identified by bullies.  Or the bully tries their tactics on a couple of people and the ones that retaliate verbally or physically they leave alone.

 

The modern way of "reporting bullies" does not appear to work.  Even if the bully is reprimanded the child or adult that reported them can then get bullied by the 'wider group' for having reported them.

 

You only have to look at large organisations such as the NHS.  There is supposed to be encouragement and support for "whistle blowers", but time and time again those very people are ignored, shunned or even lose their job due to being bullied about having reported something.  This seems to completely sideline the fact that whatever was reported must have been very serious for the person to have reported it.  

 

I think it is a basic flaw of human and animal nature to be a bully.  There is good leadership, and then there are bullies or dictators that lead who are atrocious leaders, but they control people or the masses by fear.  And it is not something that humans learn from history as we have 'bullies' as leaders in many countries time and time again over the generations.  If we could truely settle our differences by talking there would be no war.



#10 dotmarsdotcom

dotmarsdotcom

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:no expections

Posted 19 November 2014 - 12:42 AM

good post sally44.

 

you are totally right.

 

people do always say, "report a bully" and we'll sort it out?

 

but it often doesn't work that way.

 

such a person is then "marked" as a squealer.

 

just like you have seen it in the nhs, I have seen it in the city.

 

re: the loan insurance/ libro/ forex scandals.

 

people had to give up multi million dollar incomes to expose that stuff.

 

...and no one's going to employ them again?

 

it is a very difficult area to address.. but I do still like your idea of getting to them when they are young?

 

the mentoring system... to explain to them bullying aint cool. & if you get to people young, and educate them differently, before they imprint, it might work.



#11 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 20 November 2014 - 07:03 AM

I agree that children, or adults, with low confidence and self esteem can often be identified by bullies.

 

The modern way of "reporting bullies" does not appear to work.  Even if the bully is reprimanded the child or adult that reported them can then get bullied by the 'wider group' for having reported them.

 

You only have to look at large organisations such as the NHS.  There is supposed to be encouragement and support for "whistle blowers", but time and time again those very people are ignored, shunned or even lose their job due to being bullied about having reported something.  This seems to completely sideline the fact that whatever was reported must have been very serious for the person to have reported it.  

 

I think it is a basic flaw of human and animal nature to be a bully.  There is good leadership, and then there are bullies or dictators that lead who are atrocious leaders, but they control people or the masses by fear.  And it is not something that humans learn from history as we have 'bullies' as leaders in many countries time and time again over the generations.  If we could truely settle our differences by talking there would be no war.

 

Not only children with low confidence or self-esteem, but also children who are sensitive or 'different' in any way.  I'd even say that it's the sensitivity/difference that so often tends to create the former.  Shyness, low self-esteem are not innate and pervasive, but hypersensitivity is very likely to be, especially when combined with autism.

The modern way of "reporting bullies" does not appear to work. 

Agreed.  It's a joke, a scandal.  Like so many 'guidelines', 'policies' and 'laws' they may look good on paper, but in practice they are used selectively, 'creatively' and in highly discriminatory ways - according to the 'procedures' and 'culture' of the organisation involved.  (I should know, for I've been a victim of this corporate scam, and a whistleblower several times over).  The people are being hoodwinked on a massive scale - as always, and often with the collusion of the mass media.  Over the years, deception and plausible denial have been honed and raised into veritable art forms in the NT world.

Animals can be forgiven for bullying (although I wouldn't apply that word to animals), but most humans have no excuse, for they can reason and empathise.  They know when they're doing wrong, causing harm, etc. yet persist against their consciences.  (Of course, full-blown psychopaths totally lack consciences). 

No, we don't learn from history, and I believe this is very much due to our deeply-ingrained tendency to bring up boys in the way we do.  Mothers, influenced by the dubious mores of a dysfunctional society, bear most of the responsibility for allowing and encouraging this.  So ironic, for motherhood embodies the essence of selflessness, nurturing and love.  We encourage negative traits and then complain about crime violence and war, wondering why 95% of prisoners are male, and why virtually all wars are caused by disagreements between men who have bullied and lied their way up to the top of the social ladder.  (Margaret Thatcher may have physically been a woman, but that's academic for psychologically she was a classic alpha male!)  Women and girls who bully are simply identifying with those negative traits associated with so many 'successful' men.  Again, I blame NT society for this.


Edited by Mihaela, 20 November 2014 - 07:04 AM.


#12 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 20 November 2014 - 08:10 AM

Not sure I agree with bullying being a male thing. Men are getting such a bad press these days and decent men are often ignored as they are blanketed as being inherently bad by the media. Notice how men are often suggested to 'get in touch with their feminine side' and romantic fiction often focuses on men having to 'change their ways' for a woman's sake. The whole thing smacks of the notion that women are 'better' than men when really we are just different. A very NT notion, I might add. It feels like apologist culture to me, where an entire group of people is made to feel guilty for the historical actions of people within their group. The same thing happens a lot with white people - for example, calling someone a 'cracker' on TV is generally seen as acceptable but the N word is not. Same goes for portrayal of men - recently the Disney film Frozen got bad press because of its unrealistic depiction of women for the main character being stereotypically pretty but the main male character was also an unrealistic depiction of men - muscular, handsome and generally a bit of a tool. However, this depiction of the man was totally ignored. To me, this is very dangerous towards either sex as one being portrayed as 'better' than the other always causes problems.

 

The way women tend to bully people is usually different from how men tend to bully people. (Having been a regular victim of both types, I became to notice the differences.) Men tend to be quite blunt in their bullying, while female bullying seems to be done in a very 'female' way - unravelling the victim's self esteem slowly but surely, excluding their victims in the workplace and subtly making them feel like they don't belong as part of a social group. Male victims of female bullying are also almost entirely ignored because there is still the assumption (from both other men and women) that men should take it on the chin - there's a good reason why the phrase 'man up' exists.



#13 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 21 November 2014 - 06:37 AM

Not sure I agree with bullying being a male thing. Men are getting such a bad press these days and decent men are often ignored as they are blanketed as being inherently bad by the media.

You misunderstood me.  Maybe I wasn't making things clear enough.  Bullying is not a male thing at all, but is associated with various traits that society sees as being masculine rather than feminine - and encourages in the rearing of boys.  Just in case you feel I'm not aware of the bad press men receive, I'm a great supporter father's rights and of Angry Harry's website and have made comments on there expressing my strong feelings over the raw deal suffered by men in the name of flawed 'feminist' ideology.  (Not my idea of feminism at all).

Notice how men are often suggested to 'get in touch with their feminine side' and romantic fiction often focuses on men having to 'change their ways' for a woman's sake. The whole thing smacks of the notion that women are 'better' than men when really we are just different. A very NT notion, I might add. It feels like apologist culture to me, where an entire group of people is made to feel guilty for the historical actions of people within their group.

Men should never change their ways for women's sake, but we should all strive to change our ways for humanity's sake.  I think maybe, it boils down to a matter of semantics and a modern tendency for 'matronising' language.  In a sense men do have 'feminine sides' - the 'anima' of Jung, just as women have the animus.  There's nothing wrong (and everything right) when any of us (male or female) nurture our positive life-enhancing traits (what Fromm called 'biophilic' traits), and reject those traits that are harmful and anti-life (Fromm's 'necrophilic' traits - which I prefer to call 'biophobic').  Unfortunately, NT society itself tends to identify biophilic traits with femininity, and biophobic traits with masculinity.  Society reflects our archetypal tendency towards dualistic black-and-white thinking and loves to generalise, but reality is never that simple. This way of thinking has been caused by the way society encourages sex roles when bringing up children.  There happen to be two rather than one or three sexes - ideal material for our dualist ways of thinking.  Society links those sex roles to particular traits which are labelled more or less, rightly or wrongly, masculine or feminine.  Some of these traits quite rightly have unavoidable moral dimensions.

Same goes for portrayal of men - recently the Disney film Frozen got bad press because of its unrealistic depiction of women for the main character being stereotypically pretty but the main male character was also an unrealistic depiction of men - muscular, handsome and generally a bit of a tool. However, this depiction of the man was totally ignored. To me, this is very dangerous towards either sex as one being portrayed as 'better' than the other always causes problems.

I agree, so much of this happens at a subconscious level.  We are so heavily influenced by the society in which we live, and don't see the glaringly obvious, let alone question it.  Even the Jehovah's Witnesses in their idealised, naive drawings of Adam and Eve fall prey to these silly stereotypes: a handsomely, tall, rugged Adam with his neatly trimmed beard and short hair and a 'glamorous' Eve whose long styled hair looks as if she's just come out of the neighborhood beauty parlor (sic)!  And of course they're both thoroughly Caucasian-looking, and their hair length conforms to 'accepted' gender .  They conform to the stereotypical all-American man and woman.  Hilarious but so ignorant!

 

The way women tend to bully people is usually different from how men tend to bully people. (Having been a regular victim of both types, I became to notice the differences.) Men tend to be quite blunt in their bullying, while female bullying seems to be done in a very 'female' way - unravelling the victim's self esteem slowly but surely, excluding their victims in the workplace and subtly making them feel like they don't belong as part of a social group.

 

I too have experienced both.  I tend to prefer 'male-type' verbal bullying than the more insidious 'female-type'.  My female Aspie 'friend' of mine (with the 'other issues') has mainly male-type Aspie traits.  She's a bully and openly proud of it, but very bad at it (at least with me), and her bullying is very much of the male type.  One of the most unusual people I've ever known.  She was trying to bully me yesterday, and although she uses the voice and words of a classic male bully, her expression always shows a trace of a smile - possibly due to having AS - as if she's acting out a role and trying to suppress her true feelings.  I like her and care for her, despite her many seriously bad personality issues! 

Male victims of female bullying are also almost entirely ignored because there is still the assumption (from both other men and women) that men should take it on the chin - there's a good reason why the phrase 'man up' exists.

True, and I really hate this.  The British stiff-upper-lip nonsense and the public school tradition have a lot to answer for, and so do traditional religious attitudes towards the sexes.



#14 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 21 November 2014 - 09:33 AM

Sorry, I misunderstood. My fault!

 

I'm a great supporter father's rights and of Angry Harry's website and have made comments on there expressing my strong feelings over the raw deal suffered by men in the name of flawed 'feminist' ideology.  (Not my idea of feminism at all).

 

It is so refreshing to see someone take this balanced view of things. It seems that usually with the most vocal people on genders issues, we only get people taking things to extremes, with 'feminists' who have a skewed view of all women as intelligent, morally-good members of society who can do no wrong on one end of the scale and chauvinistic, trolling woman haters who view women as little more than cooking, cleaning sex machines at the other end of the scale. At the end of the day men and women are different, and that's a good thing. Men and women should be learning from each other, not constantly fighting. I feel sorry for the people who buy into the 'women are better' mentality as they fail to see the true enemy - it is not men as a whole, but capitalism. A huge number of women still feel uncomfortable with their bodies because advertising tells them that to be acceptable, they must spend huge amounts of money on expensive makeup, dieting supplements and worse, plastic surgery. All too often I have found myself trying and failing to comfort women who are naturally beautiful both inside and outside that they look fine without makeup etc. The female celebrities that promote all this should be ashamed with themselves, but the millions they gain from endorsing such products likely destroy their consciences. If they ever had one to begin with - there is something very narcissistic and psychopathic about the need to be in the media limelight all the time. Having said that, in the past I have found myself thinking I must be more muscular to be considered attractive and have had women trying to comfort me that I look fine as I am. It's no accident that male celebrities tend to be well-muscled, have strong (surgically altered) jawlines etc.

 

Unfortunately, NT society itself tends to identify biophilic traits with femininity, and biophobic traits with masculinity.  Society reflects our archetypal tendency towards dualistic black-and-white thinking and loves to generalise, but reality is never that simple. This way of thinking has been caused by the way society encourages sex roles when bringing up children.  There happen to be two rather than one or three sexes - ideal material for our dualist ways of thinking.  Society links those sex roles to particular traits which are labelled more or less, rightly or wrongly, masculine or feminine.  Some of these traits quite rightly have unavoidable moral dimensions.

 

Another good point. Girls are beginning to be allowed to pursue more 'male' careers and lifestyles without discrimination - more and more girls are taking up 'masculine' sport such as football, for example - but rarely are boys allowed to pursue more 'female' lifestyles without heavy bullying from both other boys and girls. In my ideal world, no lifestyle would be regarded as more 'male' or 'female' as all this does is encourage discrimination and make people feel like they're not 'masculine' or 'feminine' enough, which in turn leads to a heavily depressed society. But that is how those in power want us to be, unfortunately - it makes us easier to control. It is a sign of a very sick society that a man can be heavily bullied to the point of committing suicide just because he admits he has emotions and shows vulnerability. We no longer depend on such traits for survival, so why do we still do this?

 

My female Aspie 'friend' of mine (with the 'other issues') has mainly male-type Aspie traits.  She's a bully and openly proud of it, but very bad at it (at least with me), and her bullying is very much of the male type.  One of the most unusual people I've ever known.  She was trying to bully me yesterday, and although she uses the voice and words of a classic male bully, her expression always shows a trace of a smile - possibly due to having AS - as if she's acting out a role and trying to suppress her true feelings.  I like her and care for her, despite her many seriously bad personality issues! 

 

I do worry about your friendship with this woman, Mihaela. I just hope that she doesn't have some dark motive for all her strange behaviour, like trying to rob you or anything. Obviously you know her and I don't and it's your decision to remain friends with her, but... be careful, okay? You've mentioned women taking advantage of your caring nature in the past in other posts and I'm concerned it may happen again.

 

True, and I really hate this.  The British stiff-upper-lip nonsense and the public school tradition have a lot to answer for, and so do traditional religious attitudes towards the sexes.

 

I think there are elements of Americanisation in this attitude, too - the sort of 'big, bold and loud' ideology that seems to make up so much of the USA. It reminds me of a teenage boy who wants everyone to think he's really cool but most people really think he's a bit of a berk.

 

 

 

 



#15 Canopus

Canopus

    Kilimanjaro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2093 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 November 2014 - 06:35 PM

I agree that children, or adults, with low confidence and self esteem can often be identified by bullies.


I disagree. Experience tells me that most bullies are assertive people with a high level of confidence and self esteem.

Even the Jehovah's Witnesses in their idealised, naive drawings of Adam and Eve fall prey to these silly stereotypes: a handsomely, tall, rugged Adam with his neatly trimmed beard and short hair and a 'glamorous' Eve whose long styled hair looks as if she's just come out of the neighborhood beauty parlor (sic)! And of course they're both thoroughly Caucasian-looking, and their hair length conforms to 'accepted' gender . They conform to the stereotypical all-American man and woman. Hilarious but so ignorant!


This is because the Jehovah's Witnesses are an American religion. A former JW who converted to Islam (and has been disfellowshipped by her own parents) told me that the United States was the only country with the right political, economic, and social climate during the 19th century that would allow a religion like the JW to flourish. Even today it is a very American centric religion where much of what the JW writes about is biased towards the US and American people.

I think there are elements of Americanisation in this attitude, too - the sort of 'big, bold and loud' ideology that seems to make up so much of the USA. It reminds me of a teenage boy who wants everyone to think he's really cool but most people really think he's a bit of a berk.


American culture is loosely based on 18th century British culture which is why it is so big bold and loud. Almost the opposite culture from the disciplined Victorian England.

#16 Sally44

Sally44

    K2

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5045 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands

Posted 21 November 2014 - 07:08 PM

I think you misread what I said canopus.  I said that bullies can often identify children or adults with low confidence.  That is why they bully them, because they feel they will get away with it.  Someone with more confidence and more assertive would tell them to take a hike.

 

As a child I was bullied by other girls.  Not sure why.  It was two separate occasions and two different girls.   In the workplace I was bullied by a former boss.  Those were horrible instances, but I came out the other end and I think I gained confidence enough so that now I just would not let anyone make me feel like that again.



#17 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 21 November 2014 - 10:23 PM

I'm not so sure bullies do have high confidence. Sure, they have enough front to appear as if they're confident but I think deep down, a lot of them are actually deeply insecure. It's often the reason why they bully other people - to mask their own insecurities and to direct attention away from it. I've known many bullies in my time and they have usually had issues with family and such



#18 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:57 AM

I disagree. Experience tells me that most bullies are assertive people with a high level of confidence and self esteem.

 

If you re-read Sally's post you'll see she's not saying at all - as she repeats in her next post.  Bullies certainly do home in on those who show a lack of confidence - which inevitably includes Aspies.  But they also exploit these people to serve their own ends, and may even protect their victims against other bullies.  This gives them control over their victims who become caught as pawns in a vicious circle. The dynamics of bullying can be very complex.

 

This is because the Jehovah's Witnesses are an American religion. A former JW who converted to Islam (and has been disfellowshipped by her own parents) told me that the United States was the only country with the right political, economic, and social climate during the 19th century that would allow a religion like the JW to flourish. Even today it is a very American centric religion where much of what the JW writes about is biased towards the US and American people.

Don't I know it! :)  American culture and their tendency to create neo-Christian sects has long interested me.  Their reasoning skills seem to be very weak and shallow - as does their level of 'spirituality'.  Of course, by definition religion puts faith before reason, but the particular mix of the American psyche (especially their fixation with materialism) and politically right-wing beliefs really makes these sects have a very different flavour to those not originating in the USA.  You're absolutely right when you link political, economic and social factors to the success of these sects - which all began with self-identified prophets with an eye for making profits (of the commercial type!).  All religions attract their own distinct personality types; those who don't psychologically feel at home in them (and may dare to question certain dogmas) either leave or are 'disfellowshipped'.  We tend not to realise that there's a very close correlation between religions and personality types.

 

American culture is loosely based on 18th century British culture which is why it is so big bold and loud. Almost the opposite culture from the disciplined Victorian England.

I never saw it in this way, but you could very well be right.  I wonder if the peculiarly American love affair with guns, violence and extreme punishments reflects this too?  I know several Americans who don't behave like this, and they feel very frustrated living in country where so many do. 


Edited by Mihaela, 22 November 2014 - 04:03 AM.


#19 Waterboatman

Waterboatman

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Berkshire, in a rural spot.

Posted 22 November 2014 - 07:39 AM

I shall relate something that involved my mother and her sister, they went to school in the 1930's and 1940's.

Their mother, my grandmother was good with her hands and made all their clothes, dressed like the 'princess's', the term used by my mother. They went to the local village school, being dressed and behaved well, they were picked on and bullied a bit, maybe my aunt more than my mother. It was spotted, words were said and they went to another school, it may have been fee paying, my grandfather I think was made to pay? 

My mother past her scholarship for the 'Grammar' school, my aunt did not and had to be paid for.

 

Its those who care, that must look out for those they care for. 



#20 Canopus

Canopus

    Kilimanjaro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2093 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 November 2014 - 02:01 PM

Don't I know it! :)  American culture and their tendency to create neo-Christian sects has long interested me.  Their reasoning skills seem to be very weak and shallow - as does their level of 'spirituality'.  Of course, by definition religion puts faith before reason, but the particular mix of the American psyche (especially their fixation with materialism) and politically right-wing beliefs really makes these sects have a very different flavour to those not originating in the USA.  You're absolutely right when you link political, economic and social factors to the success of these sects - which all began with self-identified prophets with an eye for making profits (of the commercial type!).  All religions attract their own distinct personality types; those who don't psychologically feel at home in them (and may dare to question certain dogmas) either leave or are 'disfellowshipped'.


The US is the child of Protestantism. When Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg then little did he realise that it would result in the creation of a new nation based on his ideologies on the opposite side of the Atlantic. The American economic ideology based on the pragmatic mercantilism of the Dutch Calvinists who founded New Amsterdam on Manhattan Island in the 16th century, and the American political ideology results from the English Nonconformists with their small government mindset who emigrated to the US during the 18th century.

Although Europe and the US developed along separate lines during the 19th century, the outcome became somewhat recursive after 1945 with American culture diplacing European cultures in Europe.

We tend not to realise that there's a very close correlation between religions and personality types.


I have been saying this for several years. The JW appeals strongly to a certain personality type and it isn't the way that my brain is wired.
 

I never saw it in this way, but you could very well be right.  I wonder if the peculiarly American love affair with guns, violence and extreme punishments reflects this too?  I know several Americans who don't behave like this, and they feel very frustrated living in country where so many do.


It probably does although American JW rarely have guns at home. I have noticed a strong correlation between places in the US that are trigger happy and places populated by Bible bashing types. Texas being a particularly strong example.

#21 Waterboatman

Waterboatman

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Berkshire, in a rural spot.

Posted 24 November 2014 - 10:50 AM

Bullying also happens at an insitutional level, this is normally called abuse. Its difficult to judge wether an action is abuse or bullying unless it is really blatant and or is observed by an independent observer.

The routine medication of young children diagnosed with a huge variety of conditions, which where completely  unknown when I went to school in the 1960's and 1970's. Is as far as I am concerned 'abuse'.

Why has the dreadful state affairs come to pass? 

Is it because corporal punishment is no more? It stopped mid 1970's. In previous years a 'naughty' 'talkative' 'jack in the box' would have had their bottom smacked  by teacher, I remember having a gentle tap on my bottom when I was about five, my school reports mentioned that I was talkative. Without that simple scaled response, a teacher is powerless in effect. So now a 'naughty' child is diagnosed with goodness know what and filled up with something to keep them quite!

Can we get back to a more sensible way of doing things? 

Who in the world schools their children in a more balanced and sensible fashion, do tell if you know.


Edited by Waterboatman, 24 November 2014 - 11:58 AM.


#22 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 24 November 2014 - 12:26 PM

Are you saying should we beat children again to stop them misbehaving? That obviously has no positive effects either as there were still plenty of bullies back in those days, plus former bullies from those days have since grown up to become psychopaths. If anything it's just going to teach them that if someone wrongs you, it is acceptable to inflict physical pain upon them. This leads to behaviour like spousal abuse later in life. What we need to do is start actually talking to kids and find out why they misbehave and bully other kids. There's always a reason for bullies being the way they are, whether it's coming from a broken family, being bullied themselves or being physically, emotionally and/or sexually abused.



#23 Waterboatman

Waterboatman

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Berkshire, in a rural spot.

Posted 24 November 2014 - 02:42 PM

I am one of the generation that went through school with corporal punishment as an option, I only remember being smacked as a five year old as I did not feel anything other than a gentle pat. The option to smack plus other sensible options were used only as needed, granted I went to a good Army school in West Germany, and on later to a reasonable sized fairly good junior in the UK.

I knew of no bullying of any kind during my stay at the school in Germany, small children can be exasperating, yet the teachers were of a calibre to cope without fuss. 

I really do not think there was any bullying of any significance in the junior school either, I had my legs pinched by the person next to me, others said move somewhere else, my neighbour was affable otherwise so I stayed put. 

The secondary school was just a lot bigger, it was still dominated by a proper Grammar School ethos, and was yet to decline. The cane was a little used threat. First year, I knew the toughs personally, good blokes, never gave me any cause for worry, we are such a different generation! Second year a different streamed class, some trouble, yet I actually became friends with one of them. Once puberty hit and I started to get big, thats me very long free flowing hair down to the middle of my back and Jesus boots, nothing just very few friends.

 

Most bullying is due to the vulnerability of the victim. 

 

If a dispute breaks out between two, one is armed with only a feather duster, and the other is not allowed to touch or restrain in any way, but only has a thermal nuclear weapon. Sounds slightly silly, a child being naughty in a way perhaps that it needs a quick shock to stop it, yet your not allowed to do anything. So the child is later goes through the medical system?? Is that not as daft as using a thermal nuclear weapon against someone with a feather duster??

 

There are many ways to prevent bullying.

One is, do not make neatly packaged helpless victims, and care nothing for what happens, saying it the schools job to do that.

Keep schools small enough so that its easy to spot something wrong, and have a simple consistent discipline.

Keep politics out of everything, all the fluffy liberal nonsense thats being going on over recent generations, is one of the main causes of the current mess.

 

It will take a generation or two to fix things, that is something for parents of the upcoming generation to sought out, it really is not a subject for those who are not and will never be involved in bringing up children.

 

Thats it from me, I will not make another post on this topic.



#24 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 24 November 2014 - 03:25 PM

Liberalism is a good thing! I really don't understand how treating each other with respect and dignity can be considered a bad thing. It just fits in with the 'anything different must be destroyed' mentality that starts the majority of wars and led to the extinction of all human species apart from homo sapiens. (Unless autism is a branch-off from a former species of human - personally I think this could be likely.) To me, strong conservatism is so narrow-minded. The whole concept is based on refusing to acknowledge or accept that everyone is different and tries to make everyone conform to the same views. It's essentially watered-down fascism. Liberalism is the only way to stop autistic people being mistreated as they are, not conservatism that teaches children that violence is the answer.



#25 Canopus

Canopus

    Kilimanjaro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2093 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 November 2014 - 06:01 PM

Bullying at school is not a subject which is well understood but is almost certainly intertwined with the question as to why certain kids are more popular than others. Contrary to what many people think, very popular kids are rarely regular bullies and bullies rarely envy the very popular kids.

I have speculated that body language and non-verbal communication plays a large part in bullying but this is rarely even looked at by analysts of bullying. Do those who bully possess advanced powers at being able to read people and those who are bullied have deficiencies in this area? Are there big differences in psychology between those who bully alone and those who bully as part of a group? Do different bullies like to pick on different types of people?

There's always a reason for bullies being the way they are, whether it's coming from a broken family, being bullied themselves or being physically, emotionally and/or sexually abused.


I don't buy into the argument that bullies are the result of broken families; or that they are people who feel insecure and lack confidence; or were previously bullied themselves.

#26 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 25 November 2014 - 08:52 AM

Well I've known many bullies and got to know them better as they've got older. Most of them do come from broken families and nearly everyone is insecure about something or other. People just have different ways of showing it. I'm not saying bullies should be sympathised with but I think it can be obstructive to just think of them as bad people as that way they will always continue to act as they do just to prove a point. Human psychology always goes far, far deeper than if people are just good or bad. That's the same kind of logic that causes people to judge and bully aspies in the first place. Plus, let's face it, we're all bad in some way or another. Everyone's actions affect another person negatively at some point in their lives. All we can do is try to reduce this by trying to understand one another better.



#27 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 25 November 2014 - 10:21 AM

You know your American history, Canopus, far better than I do.  Most interesting.  I've researched the Protestant work ethic and its links to right-wing Christian fundamentalism and the punitive, judgmental mindset.  It's no accident that the USA has the largest prison population in the world as well as the highest imprisonment rate.

 

The JW appeals strongly to a certain personality type and it isn't the way that my brain is wired.

Nor mine.  Independent thinkers are not welcome and considered a threat.  No surprise either about the correlation between guns and the 'Bible Belt' either.

 

Waterboatman said:

 

Bullying also happens at an insitutional level, this is normally called abuse. Its difficult to judge wether an action is abuse or bullying unless it is really blatant and or is observed by an independent observer.
 

It certainly does, and whatever we choose to call it, the effects on the victim are the same.  So is the main cause: power and control.

 

The routine medication of young children diagnosed with a huge variety of conditions, which where completely  unknown when I went to school in the 1960's and 1970's. Is as far as I am concerned 'abuse'.

This is abuse rather than bullying, but the reasoning is the same: control, yet the justification is in theory well-intentioned.  Ritalin, almost routinely given to children with ADHD has become the control method of choice and made very fat profits for US-based multinational Novartis. Some children just aren't suited to the school environment - and for various reasons, yet the authorities insist on pushing square pegs into round pigeon-holes.

 

Laddo said:

 

Are you saying should we beat children again to stop them misbehaving? That obviously has no positive effects either as there were still plenty of bullies back in those days, plus former bullies from those days have since grown up to become psychopaths. If anything it's just going to teach them that if someone wrongs you, it is acceptable to inflict physical pain upon them. This leads to behaviour like spousal abuse later in life. What we need to do is start actually talking to kids and find out why they misbehave and bully other kids. There's always a reason for bullies being the way they are, whether it's coming from a broken family, being bullied themselves or being physically, emotionally and/or sexually abused.

 

I agree entirely.  The only possible justification for giving a small child a quick slap is if that child is in imminent danger, in which case it's almost instinctive and reinforces in the child the need to keep away from danger. 

 

Most bullying is due to the vulnerability of the victim. 

 

It's due to the personality of the bully, combined with the presence of a vulnerable target.

 

One is, do not make neatly packaged helpless victims, and care nothing for what happens, saying it the schools job to do that.

Keep schools small enough so that its easy to spot something wrong, and have a simple consistent discipline.

 

Aspies are destined to be vulnerable to bullying and exploitation if they don't receive protection and support from parents and teachers - and other children. It's the school's job to protect the more vulnerable children from the less vulnerable, after all, the school is theoretically acting in 'loco parentis'.  If a parent learns that their child is being bullied, and the school repeatedly allow it to continue, then that child should be removed from the school to reduce lasting psychological damage.

 

Liberalism is a good thing!

Liberalism can mean two quite different things.  The idea of human rights and freedom (as opposed to licence) can only be good.  The trouble with good ideas is that they're often used for political ends, change their meaning and become ideologies.  So called 'radical' feminism and other interests have hijacked liberal principles to erode our freedoms, and this process continues unabated.  We're blindly and blithely ambling along the primrose path to fascism.  The signs are there for all to see; that's if we take off our blinkers.

I really don't understand how treating each other with respect and dignity can be considered a bad thing.

It's 100% good. 

It just fits in with the 'anything different must be destroyed' mentality that starts the majority of wars and led to the extinction of all human species apart from homo sapiens.

This arrogant anthropocentric view of the world we all share will ultimately cause our own extinction, unless we change our way of thinking.

(Unless autism is a branch-off from a former species of human - personally I think this could be likely.)

Fascinating!  I wonder....

To me, strong conservatism is so narrow-minded.

As a radical traditionalist iconoclast (!) I fully agree.  It's not just narrow-minded but selfish and dangerous too.

 

Canopus said:

 

Bullying at school is not a subject which is well understood but is almost certainly intertwined with the question as to why certain kids are more popular than others. Contrary to what many people think, very popular kids are rarely regular bullies and bullies rarely envy the very popular kids.

Popularity is proportional to how much we have in common with the peer group/gang.  If we are popular, it's a sign that we're conforming well to that group's approved stereotypes, and this reinforces our self-esteem and confidence.  If have little in common, such as different social class, accent, colour, religion, musical tastes, support a rival football team, dislike sport, wear 'unfashionable' clothes, etc. we're seen as 'different' and risk becoming vulnerable to bullying.  Aspies by definition are very unlikely to be popular.  Popularity is closely tied to culture and subcultures, and Aspies don't easily fit to these.

I have speculated that body language and non-verbal communication plays a large part in bullying but this is rarely even looked at by analysts of bullying. Do those who bully possess advanced powers at being able to read people and those who are bullied have deficiencies in this area? Are there big differences in psychology between those who bully alone and those who bully as part of a group? Do different bullies like to pick on different types of people?

Undoubtedly body language comes into it.  Aspies are more likely to respond in 'inappropriate' ways, i.e. non-NT ways.  Sociopathic bullies do have better powers of reading people.  This is largely how they 'succeed' in life. I'd imagine that the psychodynamics of groups that bully are very different, in that the majority of those involved do so to appear 'normal' to the leader/s.  This saves them from being bullied themselves.  They receive protection, but only at the price of trading their freedom and humanity.

I don't buy into the argument that bullies are the result of broken families; or that they are people who feel insecure and lack confidence; or were previously bullied themselves.

It depends upon the individual; they can be any or none of these.  Many who bully have sociopathic or narcissistic traits, and these seem to be caused by childhood psychological trauma, head injury or brain tumour.  Children who become sociopathic bullies are most likely genetically predisposed, for many traumatised children never become bullies.

Edited by Mihaela, 25 November 2014 - 10:26 AM.


#28 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:31 AM

To all the proponents of smacking children about to show your authority: does beating someone physically smaller and weaker than you not just reek of being power-hungry to you? Also, if you wronged someone, would you appreciate them hitting you? That's the message that beating kids sends out. It also teaches boys that it is okay to beat future girlfriends/wives later in life... But under the borderline fascist, Daily Mail ideologies that still run rampant throughout this country, that's probably ideal for a lot of people... It's disgusting and pathetic.


Edited by Laddo, 26 November 2014 - 10:49 AM.


#29 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:00 AM

'I got caned, so should everyone else' or any 'I do/did X so why can't everyone else?' seems to be the slightly narcissistic ideology of British people today. If it were as simple as that, then it would be perfectly acceptable for NTs to say to us 'I can socialise, why can't you?'. Such black and white thinking (which if often cited as an autistic trait yet actually seems to be a human trait) will be the downfall of this species.



#30 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 27 November 2014 - 07:14 AM

Such black and white thinking (which if often cited as an autistic trait yet actually seems to be a human trait) will be the downfall of this species.

 

I agree.  It's certainly no part of my thinking. I've spent most of my life thinking in polychrome, and I have a thing about rainbows too!  Going back to monochrome, the grey areas of ethics interest me, as well as the grey unexplored areas where religion, politics, philosophy and psychology meet.  I've also thought a lot about dualistic modes of thought.  As you say, it's a very human trait found just as much in neurotypicals.  I'd go as far as to say that it's the norm in NT society to think in this negative, narrow shallow way.  I've tried to trace it back to its original inspirations in the natural world - which is full of dualities: light/dark; silence/noise; sun/moon; night/day; land/sea; earth/air; water/fire; hot/cold, male/female; birth/death; living/dead; young/old; animal/vegetable; organic/mineral, etc.  Some are distinct pairs, while others are relative in degree.  We humans, naturally extend these experiences to the ways we think - positions in time and space (up/down; left/right, near/far, past/present; present/future, midnight/midday; midsummer/midwinter, etc.); morality (good/evil; right/wrong; appropriate/inappropriate, etc.); virtues; religious (sinful/righteous; heaven/hell, god/devil, etc.); politics (right/left; libertarian/totalitarian, etc); making judgments; self/other, own tribe/foreign; black/white; sane/insane; Aspie/NT; etc.  In many ways thinking is impossible without dualistic themes, but in other cases dualistic thinking can be very dangerous and unethical.  It's sorting out one from the other that so many people find difficult, that's if they're even willing to try.  So many become so accustomed to particularly harmful ways of the clear-cut 'either/or - type' thinking that it becomes almost instinctive.  Real life doesn't work in this strict binary fashion. 

 

Surely, all forms of discrimination must arise from negative dualistic thinking.

So far I've yet to see black-and-white thinking as a particularly autistic trait, and feel that this old chestnut needs abandoning.



#31 The Exodus

The Exodus

    Salisbury Hill

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:York, England
  • Interests:Gaming, music, playing guitar (rather badly), astronomy, (some) psychology

Posted 27 November 2014 - 06:57 PM

To 'succeed' you need to be ruthless and tread on those who are weaker than you.  This applies in as much to politics as it does to business.  This is not my interpretation of success.

 

Well said. Violence is how the world is run now. We're taught to never harm another yet the world always seems to be at arms with some group, organisation or a contending country. You can't teach children that harming another is wrong when, over the course of a hundred years, hundreds of millions (perhaps billions; I don't have the precise statistics) have been harmed and killed in the name of another country. The ones that are supposed to be setting examples in high power, the ones who take the helm, they seem to condone this action almost disinterestedly at times. 

 

The world is depressing, and it's the only one we'll ever know. We have to get used to it. 



#32 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 28 November 2014 - 04:23 AM

Very true.  The adult neurotypical world hardly makes a good role model for our children.  This must surely be why civilised progress (the only true progress) happens so very, very slowly.



#33 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 29 November 2014 - 03:14 PM

 

Well said. Violence is how the world is run now. We're taught to never harm another yet the world always seems to be at arms with some group, organisation or a contending country. You can't teach children that harming another is wrong when, over the course of a hundred years, hundreds of millions (perhaps billions; I don't have the precise statistics) have been harmed and killed in the name of another country. The ones that are supposed to be setting examples in high power, the ones who take the helm, they seem to condone this action almost disinterestedly at times. 

 

The world is depressing, and it's the only one we'll ever know. We have to get used to it. 

 

So very true. So many countries are founded on violent acts.

 

The world is almost too depressing. Every day I'm bombarded with stories of how politician X has screwed over the people, or organisation Y has failed and thousands of people have lost their jobs all because some idiot in a suit got greedy and/or miscalculated costs, or people dying in country Z because of a pointless war, and every time I hear this it hurts my head. Like physical pain shooting through my brain down my spine. Does anyone else get this when hearing of negative news? Some offshoot of sensory issues or something?


Edited by Laddo, 29 November 2014 - 03:14 PM.


#34 Canopus

Canopus

    Kilimanjaro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2093 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 November 2014 - 05:55 PM

You know your American history, Canopus, far better than I do.  Most interesting.  I've researched the Protestant work ethic and its links to right-wing Christian fundamentalism and the punitive, judgmental mindset.  It's no accident that the USA has the largest prison population in the world as well as the highest imprisonment rate.


I'm no expert on American history or Protestantism. The book Banking - The Root Cause of Injustices of Our Time by Diwan Press is not American specific but is a good read about the development of Protestantism and its effects on the economy. I also recommend books by Morris Berman, especially The Twilight of American Culture, who refers to the US as a nation of hustlers.
 

Nor mine.  Independent thinkers are not welcome and considered a threat.


JW are trained to be subservient and respect hierarchy because the religion is one based on hierarchy rather than equality. I have not yet got to the bottom of education and JW but experience points in a direction that they are rarely intuitive people or deep thinkers. They appear to be more into arts and cultural matters like films or music than intellectual pursuits. The JW who converted to Islam claimed that the JW ideology was shallow and lacked spirituality.
 

Popularity is proportional to how much we have in common with the peer group/gang.  If we are popular, it's a sign that we're conforming well to that group's approved stereotypes, and this reinforces our self-esteem and confidence.  If have little in common, such as different social class, accent, colour, religion, musical tastes, support a rival football team, dislike sport, wear 'unfashionable' clothes, etc. we're seen as 'different' and risk becoming vulnerable to bullying.  Aspies by definition are very unlikely to be popular.  Popularity is closely tied to culture and subcultures, and Aspies don't easily fit to these.


I have wondered if you take a popular kid and move them to a different school then would they be just as popular? What about a school in a different country with a different language and culture? If popularity is portable then it suggests that it results from an ability to naturally pick up social cues and adjust to the local environs whereas unpopularity can be caused by rigidness either as an inability to pick up social cues or act in order to fit in locally.

Undoubtedly body language comes into it.  Aspies are more likely to respond in 'inappropriate' ways, i.e. non-NT ways. Sociopathic bullies do have better powers of reading people.  This is largely how they 'succeed' in life. I'd imagine that the psychodynamics of groups that bully are very different, in that the majority of those involved do so to appear 'normal' to the leader/s.  This saves them from being bullied themselves.  They receive protection, but only at the price of trading their freedom and humanity.


You might like to read about Jack Welch of General Electric.

It depends upon the individual; they can be any or none of these.  Many who bully have sociopathic or narcissistic traits, and these seem to be caused by childhood psychological trauma, head injury or brain tumour.  Children who become sociopathic bullies are most likely genetically predisposed, for many traumatised children never become bullies.


I'm of the opinion that a significant proportion of bullies are trained to bully by their families or people they associate with. If parents are vindictive themselves - and could be employed in a position where being vindictive is an advantage such as a security guard, Job Centre worker, or mean corporate boss - then they are likely to pass on their vindictive traits to other members of their family.

#35 The Exodus

The Exodus

    Salisbury Hill

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:York, England
  • Interests:Gaming, music, playing guitar (rather badly), astronomy, (some) psychology

Posted 30 November 2014 - 07:55 PM

 

- every time I hear this it hurts my head. Like physical pain shooting through my brain down my spine. Does anyone else get this when hearing of negative news? Some offshoot of sensory issues or something?

 

 

Not specifically. I do get these strange feelings, like a faint blast of heightened sensitivity in the form of electricity, but that's mostly when I feel excited about doing something rather than when receiving bad news. I've become rather apathetic to bad news and supposedly traumatic events that are generally broadcast and I usually just stare at the TV sometimes, vaguely wondering what would happen if I were in that situation, and then forget about it a few hours later. 

 

On a slightly unrelated note, Tool wrote a song about how all people seem to enjoy bad news to a certain extent. I don't know how much of it I agree with, but I do know that the human condition isn't quite straight as an arrow. 



#36 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 01 December 2014 - 08:32 AM

I don't follow the news and only find out things haphazardly.   The 'news' nearly always consists of variations on particular themes, and I know those themes only too well, so I find little point in gaining regular 'fixes' with them over and over again.  I find it so very depressing that society chooses not to learn from its mistakes.  I can feel the suffering of others too strongly if I let myself dwell on it, a situation I try to avoid for it can seriously affect my life.



#37 Laddo

Laddo

    Ben Nevis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent
  • Interests:Art, films, TV, music, games, science, the universe

Posted 01 December 2014 - 12:22 PM

In my opinion, the news is quite useful for getting basic information about an event, although I rarely trust the full news story these days. All too often the facts are manipulated to keep the people on the government's side. And it works. It works. People actually believe the rubbish that's vomited at them from their TVs. You should be glad you don't watch TV, Mihaela. There is still some good stuff, but most of the programmes are barely different to Victorian freak shows. So much of it these days is just poor-people-baiting.



#38 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 02 December 2014 - 07:14 AM

...I rarely trust the full news story these days. All too often the facts are manipulated to keep the people on the government's side. And it works. It works.

 

...You should be glad you don't watch TV, Mihaela. There is still some good stuff, but most of the programmes are barely different to Victorian freak shows. So much of it these days is just poor-people-baiting.

It's always wise to read between the lines.  Often it's what is not included in a news story (for that's often all it is: a story) that, if known, would completely change our views.  Manipulation of the news has become a high art and nowadays uses very sophisticated methods.

I used to watch TV with my mother every so often and couldn't help but notice the insidious slide in a downwards direction.  It has become a drug for the masses who, for the sake of our 'leaders' must be encouraged not to think for themselves.  Britain has very successfully followed the well-tried US model - known as 'dumbing down'.  Yes, there's still some good stuff but it's being swamped with socially toxic waste.  As for 'poor-people baiting', I see this as a perfect example of an increasingly selfish and dysfunctional society.  The more a society and its 'leaders' talk about 'care', the less true care there is, and the meaning of the word becomes restricted.

I knew someone who was addicted to the Jeremy Kyle Show, and her daily routine was literally geared around getting back home in time to watch it.  Every weekend, a friend of hers would phone her and they'd exchange the 'thrills' of another 'show' (Big Brother) as it happened.  Quite pathetic.  This kind of uncivilised behaviour is a modern manifestation of the Victorian freak shows - appealing to narcissists, sociopaths, snobs, voyeurs, and generally inadequate brainwashed people.  Even our news stories are designed for maximum entertainment value, i.e. deliberately sensationalised.



#39 Waterboatman

Waterboatman

    Snowdon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Berkshire, in a rural spot.

Posted 02 December 2014 - 05:25 PM

:offtopic: Gentle reminder you are wondering off topic.

Bullying is a twin focused problem. First there has to be a victim, someone who can not escape, or will not escape. Next there has to be a person who will take advantage.

 

It is also a problem of non observance. :police:

 

This is a reality of our existence, throughout time those who can not justify their existence perish. 



#40 Mihaela

Mihaela

    Mt Blanc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cheshire
  • Interests:Too many!

Posted 02 December 2014 - 06:30 PM

true, it's so easy for Aspies to become passionately distracted! :D

"....can not escape, or will not escape."

I don't know about 'will not'.  Ask any victim of bullying if they'd rather escape if at all possible.  I know an Aspie girl who's being bullied at school.  None of us choose to be bullied.

 

Yes, non-observance, or rather turning a blind eye and victim-blaming, allow bullying to flourish.

I've always justifed my existence however much I've been bullied and have never had any intention of perishing.  I bounce back, gaining strength each time.


Edited by Mihaela, 02 December 2014 - 06:30 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users