--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > <snip> > > > > Middle School last week after presenting the school with > > > > an assembly concerning bullying and creating a culture of > > > > respect in a school. She told me that because of the > > > > focus on bullying today, students are misusing the term, > > > > as you have here, > > > > > > I don't know whether students are "misusing the term," but > > > I wasn't. Check Mr. Dictionary, please. > > > > > > I suspect the principal has adopted the "power differential" > > > sense of the term because it serves her purposes in educating > > > the children. > > > > No, it is a part of all the definitions I read, Websters' > > for example. Do you think we can't look things up too? > > I can't decide whether this is a tactic--pretending that I > didn't just get done saying "Check Mr. Dictionary, please" > five lines above and hoping nobody else will notice--or > whether you're losing the ability to keep track of what > you read. > > "Webster's," by the way, has long since become a generic > term; any publisher can use it for their dictionary. It > no longer carries any special authority. > > The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition, > has this definition: > > "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one > habitually cruel to others who are weaker." > > "Especially" does not mean "limited to." > > The verb "to bully" is defined thus: > > "1: to treat abusively; 2: to affect by means of force > or coercion; intransitive verb: to use browbeating > language or behavior: BLUSTER" > > ----- > * To save you time and embarrassment, I'll point out > that "Collegiate" in the title does not mean "dumbed > down." The M-W Collegiate is the one used by most book > publishers and is considered among the most authoritative. > ----- > > Of course the "power differential" notion is *part of* > most definitions, but it's usually in the "especially" > sense, i.e., the term "bully" does not *require* that > a power differential exist. > > > But more importantly, there is a whole body of knowledge about > > bullying behavior that I am referencing. There is no use of > > the term in a social situations that doesn't include this > > important piece. You know this, which is why you chose the > > term as adding more inappropriate drama to your charge. > > Well, actually, I know to the contrary. And "inappropriate > drama" is not the best way to make one's case, so it's not > an approach I'd be likely to take. > > <snip> > > > > What you are mischaracterizing as bullying is your judgement > > > > that Sal was being unfriendly to others maybe. > > > > > > No, I meant "bullying" in the more general sense of the term. > > > > All the definitions I have read contain the power differential > > as a part of what defines it as bullying. You have to go to > > uncommon usage to find examples of it being used any other way. > > Quite possibly in the social sciences or psychology context, > but in common parlance the term frequently does not involve > the power differential component. > > > > > (In the context of your use of the term "stupid, stupid Sal" > > > > exactly one kajillion times that seems a bit hypocritical.) > > > > > > You seem to have a lot of trouble grasping the "taste of > > > one's own medicine" concept. > > > > I understand how you are using it. When you do it, it is a > > taste of ..., when others do it is hypocrisy. > > Um, no, it isn't. You do not, in fact, understand how I'm > using it. Or rather, you've decided you'll impose your own > context even though you know it's not the same as mine. > That's just what you *do*, attempt to erase all other > contexts and substitute your own, as if the others never > existed. > > > > > I might characterize her as being bitingly sarcastic, and you > > > > are welcome to say that she was some other version of poopy > > > > pants, but she was not a bully here. > > > > > > > > It is interesting that the one person who actually did try to > > > > gain some technological leverage over others here, and got > > > > bounced for it, never earned your use of the term. > > > > > > "Technological leverage"? No idea what you're talking about. > > > > Flooding search engines and outing people oneline. > > Still don't get it, sorry. You mean because he used > technology to make posts here? Since we all do that, > what's the distinction you're trying to make? > > <snip> > > > > Since you know the distinctions that define this term, I can > > > > only conclude that you are unfairly loading your language to > > > > make it seem as if she was actually capable of violating > > > > someone in a lower power position. > > > > > > Actually, you are pretending an optional distinction > > > is mandatory in an attempt to make me wrong. I'm sure > > > you're familiar with the term "cyberbullying." There > > > aren't many instances of "power differentials" in > > > cyberspace, but the term is commonly used to refer to > > > peer-to-peer interaction. > > > > Cyberbullying would be another mischaracterization of Sal's > > behavior if you used it for her. The power differential in > > this case is flooding social interaction groups with negative > > material about someone. > > That's one kind of cyberbullying. And to call "flooding" a > matter of "power differential" is just really empty spin. > > > It is not a term properly used in the kind of interactions > > we have here. > > Of course, that wasn't my point. Nice sidestep. > > > > One might, however, make a case for the creation on > > > forums like FFL of ad hoc power differentials via a > > > person's alliance with a clique of the more forceful, > > > prominent posters. In that sense, Sal's alliance with > > > Barry's clique could be said to create a power > > > differential between her and many of the folks she > > > habitually beat up on who are not so allied. > > > > This is not a term used for adults for good reason. We > > don't have to be a part of this social group, we can just > > leave. Our income is not dependent on it and we are under > > no obligation to stay as kids are in schools where this > > behavior occurs. Now you are attempting to ruin the > > important distinctions of another term to avoid just > > copping to your misuse. > > Now you've spun your way into outer space, Curtis. What > you've done is to create your own definition narrowly > tailored so it doesn't apply to Sal, and then accused *me* > of misusing it. Sorry, doesn't fly. > > > > > This would be much worse than just letting someone have it > > > > here. It adds an element of drama to a fairly common > > > > situation in an attempt to spin it as more than that. > > > > > > As usual, Curtis, the spinning is all yours. Nice try, > > > no cigar. > >
> > Sal never bullied anyone here. Your use of the term has > > been called out. Agreed. She was too impotent to even be called a bully. Her posts was simply intensely negative regarding anything "spiritual". If the suggestions here are true I wish her well in her counselling.
