Deleted

I've gone for neither. People tried bullying me as a kid, usually ended up with a cut lip. I guess I look like a victim to bullies, but am not.

I never 'think' of myself as either, but that's not to say that on occassion I've 'felt' like both; ying yang, balance, dualism, whatever.

I bully whenever the opportunity arises.

id rather bully than be the victim

Hmm, while this might seem to be an interesting topic, I think the conditions at the moment will more likely determine a person's reaction. I.e., even people who think of themselves as bullies might come up against other, stronger bullies, and thus be a victim at that moment. Ditto for normally neutral persons ...they might actually become bullies ...perhaps without even knowing it.

Baron Max

i tend to avoid ron's clumsy, pawing attempts to psychoanalyze everybody but himself.

reminds me of a prom date that keeps putting his hands where they shouldnt be, because he was drinking daddy's whiskey before the dance.

According to a comment to a thread elsewhere.



In as much of an objectively impartial style as possible then, please, which are you?

--- Ron.

The post by Dr Lounatic is ridiculous and deserves no comment

i tend to avoid ron's clumsy, pawing attempts to psychoanalyze everybody but himself.

reminds me of a prom date that keeps putting his hands where they shouldnt be, because he was drinking daddy's whiskey before the dance.


A ronnie simulator:

http://nihola.nl/Bolletjes/

A ronnie simulator:

http://nihola.nl/Bolletjes/

that thing pisses me off too.

It depends, I let people I like get away with bullying me, cos I don't take it seriously and they know I'm letting them do it. My younger brother bullies me a lot but it's usually to push me into something I might be unwilling to try (like coming to the US, boy does he owe me for that one!).

Otherwise, though I'm not particularly aggressive (quite scatterbrained, in fact), I've never actually been bullied. Mostly because I don't take any crap and give back as good as I get (usually with a very sharp tongue).

you should buy a gun, sam.

Everyone should own a gun.

i agree.

The post by Dr Lounatic is ridiculous and deserves no comment

Have to agree - it's a pretty asinine assessment, assuming of course, one were feeling particularly gracious...

you should buy a gun, sam.

I've had two major altercations in my life. The one time I slapped the guy, really hard, and went to his place of work with a cop.

The second time, I beat up the guy, then had the guy whacked by the cops,

Mostly though, I'm not someone who's easily shaken. And I'm not afraid to fight or draw blood. Not afraid of getting hurt or pain, even.

Guns are the kind of thing you'll never have when you actually need them.

I never lose my cool and I can be very calm in a stressful situation.
If something still happens its plain bad luck. But I've travelled all over, alone, since I was 23. So I'm pretty good at taking care of myself.

samcdkey:
big girl or small men?

i don't see myself as a bully, but i don't consider myself a victim either.

samcdkey:
big girl or small men?

5'4" but very confident. ;)

What Dr Lou really said.

There's only 2 types of people in the world, bullies and victims of bullying.
And victims of bullying are alot like victims of AIDs, they brought in on themselves.
There's no cure, but it's easy to prevent for people who don't deserve it.

Victims of bullying in this day and age are very lucky, traditionally(since before there even were humans) victims of bullying were harrassed to death.
These victims are to me the walking dead, they shouldn't be alive. If I was to start a hitler style movement, I wouldn't round up the jews, I'd round up those who were bullied at school (obviously this would include most jews anyway).
I'd question them casually in a friendly manner "hey man were you bullied at school, hehe" "yeah, I kind of was, haha" and then I'd arrest them and put them in camps ran by elite experienced bullies who would then bully them to death.
There's a reason people get bullied, and it's got nothing to do with the bullies, it's because the victim failed at making the grade as a person.
They often commit suicide for christ's sake, even they realise they shouldn't be.
Animals don't commit suicide because the losers are bullied to death before they get the chance.

Your girlfriend should have been more perceptive and realised answering all the questions enthusiastically would get her in trouble. That's just an idiotic mistake and it shows she SHOULD be bullied.
Saying "whats wrong with wanting to learn?" is missing the point, there's something wrong with not being able to predict the rammifications of such lamo behaviour.
There's a glitch or deformity in her set of social skills.
A lame personality, like a lame hock, is an organisms ticket to an early demise. It will get you picked out of the herd, and this is a natural beautiful thing.

I really don't see her getting out of it now, people saying "inform the school" are so out of touch with reality that it goes beyond being "not funny" and into the realm of being quite funny.
Her last ditch effort should be picking on some small fat girl, telling the cool girls that she saw this unfortunate girl undressing and noticed she had a bulbous wideset vagina.
Now she has to select the victim carefully (since her instincts are obviously shot), pick a truely cool girl and it's over, you lose. They'll never be convinced by a lame girl that a cool girl is lame. True substance of character will always win out.
But another loser, someone they naturally sense is inferior, if your girlfriend can destroy her horrifically enough they'll be impressed.
Nothing tickles a bully(aka normal person) more than witnessing the decimation of a true loser. Do this with enough style and grace and you MIGHT be able to trick them into thinking you're cool. You'll at least confuse their sensory organs temporarily, and you might be able to fly under the radar.

I feel dirty even giving advice to a loser. But for scientific reasons I wouldn't mind seeing how this experiment plays out.

His story reminded me of an incident I had with one of my fathers dogs. It's a male bordercollie. It's a bit crazy. It has no eye for other dogs, just for his games and his companion. Another bordercollie, but female, with which it grew up.

I was walking both dogs in the park. They were not leashed. The male bordercollie was playing his games involving only a stick, ignoring other people and other dogs.

A big german shepherd approached the bordercollie. The bordercollie did not respond. It only looked at the stick. It ignored the shepherd.

The shepherd attacked the bordercollie.

At the moment I was thinking: what a stupid sheperd. What a bully. But in reality the shepherd corrected the unacceptable behaviour of the collie who was acting unnatural.

In a wolf pack such unnatural behaviour would not have been tolerated.

Someone like Ronnie would have been corrected by the human pack also in a natural setting, or disposed off if his behaviour remained unacceptable.

You see the same happening in chimpansee groups..

Hence Dr Lou's statement is not ridiculous.

We merely have a poster selectively quoting another poster.

one more reason why ron should shut his fool mouth.

Everyone should own a gun.

What good is a gun if you don't have any bullets?

I'd rather be a bully than be bullied, but it's not an either order situation. Everyone has a boss, including bullies, the biggest bully is the boss. Victims can easily become bullies, because most bullies were once victims and thats how they learned to become bullies in the first place.

Most highschool bullies arent all that successful, it's the nerds and intellectual bullies who run the world.

What Dr Lou really said.



His story reminded me of an incident I had with one of my fathers dogs. It's a male bordercollie. It's a bit crazy. It has no eye for other dogs, just for his games and his companion. Another bordercollie, but female, with which it grew up.

I was walking both dogs in the park. They were not leashed. The male bordercollie was playing his games involving only a stick, ignoring other people and other dogs.

A big german shepherd approached the bordercollie. The bordercollie did not respond. It only looked at the stick. It ignored the shepherd.

The shepherd attacked the bordercollie.

At the moment I was thinking: what a stupid sheperd. What a bully. But in reality the shepherd corrected the unacceptable behaviour of the collie who was acting unnatural.

In a wolf pack such unnatural behaviour would not have been tolerated.

Someone like Ronnie would have been corrected by the human pack also in a natural setting, or disposed off if his behaviour remained unacceptable.

You see the same happening in chimpansee groups..

Hence Dr Lou's statement is not ridiculous.

We merely have a poster selectively quoting another poster.


Self defense is an instinct that has nothing to do with bullying or aggression. It's not that aggression is natural, it's fear that is natural. If something attacks you, it does not matter if you have the aggression instinct or not, you destroy it. Why do you destroy it? Because no matter how passive you are, once you get hit once or twice and feel pain, it wakes you up to the fact that the entity attacking you is trying to destroy you and will not stop until you destroy it. Nature has nothing to do with it, it's the rational mind, not an emotion.

If you are a dog, and another dog bites you, you'll bite it back without thinking about it. Most gangs, they jump a person into the gang through this sorta test, they surround the person and intiate a sort of hazing event, where they all beat the person up, if the person fights back they get accepted into the gang and if they don't then they get beat up every day from that day on.

It is very rare for a person to get beat up and not attempt to fight back, perhaps some people are better fighters than others, but this has nothing to do with natural as someone can learn the art of war and learn self defense. There are martial artists which teach these things to people who are not naturally violent or aggressive.

If you are a bully, why don't you make yourself useful and teach self defense classes? Why exactly make bullying a profession? Don't you realize there are bullies who defend victims? I'm not asking you to defend victims, I'm just saying if you are a very good fighter you would be much more useful to society if you shared your knowledge and insights.

In my opinion the natural behavior is rational behavior, and bullying is as irrational as victimization because without bullying you can have no victims. What does a bully gain by bullying weak people? money? status? power? Nothing, because a weak person does not enhance your status as a bully, bullying more powerful bullies on the ladder is how you raise your status on the ladder, so just bullying people lower is called kiss up kick down, and it's usually a tactic that middle players use to impress those higher players.

Self defense is an instinct that has nothing to do with bullying or aggression. It's not that aggression is natural, it's fear that is natural. If something attacks you, it does not matter if you have the aggression instinct or not, you destroy it. Why do you destroy it? Because no matter how passive you are, once you get hit once or twice and feel pain, it wakes you up to the fact that the entity attacking you is trying to destroy you and will not stop until you destroy it. Nature has nothing to do with it, it's the rational mind, not an emotion.

If you are a dog, and another dog bites you, you'll bite it back without thinking about it. Most gangs, they jump a person into the gang through this sorta test, they surround the person and intiate a sort of hazing event, where they all beat the person up, if the person fights back they get accepted into the gang and if they don't then they get beat up every day from that day on.

It is very rare for a person to get beat up and not attempt to fight back, perhaps some people are better fighters than others, but this has nothing to do with natural as someone can learn the art of war and learn self defense. There are martial artists which teach these things to people who are not naturally violent or aggressive.

If you are a bully, why don't you make yourself useful and teach self defense classes? Why exactly make bullying a profession? Don't you realize there are bullies who defend victims? I'm not asking you to defend victims, I'm just saying if you are a very good fighter you would be much more useful to society if you shared your knowledge and insights.

In my opinion the natural behavior is rational behavior, and bullying is as irrational as victimization because without bullying you can have no victims. What does a bully gain by bullying weak people? money? status? power? Nothing, because a weak person does not enhance your status as a bully, bullying more powerful bullies on the ladder is how you raise your status on the ladder, so just bullying people lower is called kiss up kick down, and it's usually a tactic that middle players use to impress those higher players.

I'm not talking about selfdefense. There was no selfdefense in anything I said. There were no dogs biting back.

The idea was to sample the generality, not to be concerned with any individual.
With a large enough sample short term local conditions would average out.

--- Ron.

That doesn't mean anything.

it is a pawing, clumsy attempt at mass psychoanalysis.

and it failed, so watch for him to lash out, any minute now.

5'4" but very confident.

Small and vicious. Those are the most dangerous.

Small and vicious. Those are the most dangerous.

Haven't you heard?

All the best things come in small packages :p

My present post to the original "what to do" thread responds to that.

-- Ron.


Ok, tell me, what is Ron's theory of self defense? Please enlighten us, because it seems right about now spuriousmonkey knows more about self defense. Look, I don't even agree with spuriousmonkey on most things, but his strategy of fighting seems more complete than yours.

What is your self defense strategy? Bullying, you may not agree with it, but it's a self defense strategy, pick on the little guy to impress the big guy is a strategy and it does work sometimes. There are other psychological warfare strategies like taking on the biggest guy to scare the crowd, and that works too (to attack the big bully and win allows you to inherit the big bullies power).

Dr lou was trying to pinpoint the cause of bullying.

What the rest are doing is just constructing a Dr Phil session.

And silly me was thinking that the need for self-defense was proportional to the severity of the threat.

This is for anyone who is interested, I'm going to post a bit on warfare and strategy.

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

And

if you know both yourself and your enemy, you will come out of one hundred battles with one hundred victories.

And

One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful.

So, these quotes are directly from Sun Tzu's art of war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_war

Understand that war, by nature is an irrational affair, and in most cases, emotion does not help to produce a winner. Emotional abuse is simply psychological warfare, recognize it.

War must never be seen as a purpose to itself, but as a means of physically forcing one's will on an opponent ("war is the continuation of politics through other means").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_War

There is both soft power, and hard power.

Soft power is how people struggle when there is no physical force.

Hard power is when things are brought into the physical dimension.

War presupposes human weakness and is directed against it.

Money, laws, organization, forms of soft power. Even emotional manipulation which women often use is a form of soft power.

Hard power is simply physically making people do what you want them to do instead of talking them into it. This is what the typical bully advocates, just physically use brute force. The point is the soft and hard types of power exist universally as anyone is capable of either.

Soft power actually controls the world, as intelligent intellectuals invented money as an software which influences man's vices. It's like vice warfare, in that if you are addicted to greed, or whatever emotion, money can give you whatever you want, you may not care at all about the paper itself, but you want what that paper can give you, you need your fix.

This is very much the same as crack dealers selling fixes to people. You can be the toughest hardest of hardcore, and still get addicted to drugs and pimped out by a dealer, or by a bank, or by anyone with that sort of power. So brute force is actually not the only type of power.

Power is generated by organization ability, but of course it is also generated by brute force. Imagine how the world would be if you woke up tomorrow and there were no laws on earth, just men with guns and men without, suddenly you'll have lost a LOT of your soft power, and the advantage swings to the people who have hard power.

Everyone bullies each other to survive in this situation because we have to. Tribes of bullies will form and people who don't go tribal will get bullied to death. Fair? No, but the only reason victims aren't bullied to death is because there are laws, and because of soft power. If victims do not do anything to maintain their soft power, it will be snatched away until there are no laws protecting victims and bullies can have a free for all on them.

The point is, victims either defend themselves, or they will empower bullies to bully them to death. Currently we have laws, use them while they still exist, and maintain your soft power because you could wake up one day and there may be no laws.

That reminds me of the other thread:

"Are we living in a Climate of Fear?"

--- Ron.


We are living in a climate of insecurity, with insecurity comes fear, and with fear comes rational response to fear, which is to seek to control the climate.

Dr lou was trying to pinpoint the cause of bullying.

What the rest are doing is just constructing a Dr Phil session.

I don't think the cause of bullying matters. The reason people are bullied, may be a lot of reasons. Some people are bullied because they bully others, some people are bullied because others fear them, some people are bullied because of some rational objective that they got in the way of, like money.