Wow. I think this (here at Making Light, not the train wreck at Boing Boing) is quite probably the first discussion of this sort that I've witnessed since I've been following this sort of discussion (and I've been following this sort of discussion for more than fifteen years) that did not descend into a 'my culture is better than yours' superiority fest almost immediately. Kudos, Making Light people.
Russell Coker #375:
Some of the personality traits that lead to what may be considered "trolling" online seem likely to attract the attention of bullies in a school environment. Someone who is persistent, pedantic, and not afraid to express their opinon when it differs from others is probably going to attract the wrong kind of attention in school, and often get accused of trolling on the net.
Good observation. I think some of that may be the case with me - though I wasn't really a very outspoken teenager. But I do think my fellow students were aware that my mind worked a bit 'differently', and that certainly contributed to my being singled out as a victim - along with the fact that I was physically much smaller and weaker than everybody else.
And it definitely fits what went on with me and that online debate a couple of years ago. "Persistent, pedantic, and not afraid to express a different opinion" - that's me.
Serge #372:
One of the people who picked on me in high school became my best friend in college. And he later became a Mountie.
Yeah, I also made friends with one of the instigators of my bullying, later. I found out that she was the poster child for broken families etc.; there's some truth in the popular psychological assumption that bullies are often people who are deeply unhappy themselves (although I also do believe that *some* really are just over-endowed with malice.)
I think that experience actually helped me heal quite a bit. Possibly this relatively early healing is one of the reasons why my bullying-induced insecurity isn't quite as extreme as that of many other bullying victims. Someone upthread said - paraphrased - that their default assumption when joining a group of people was that they were unwelcome. I remember that from my teenage years, but I overcame it, later. (I'm 33 now.) I still feel a great deal of social awkwardness, but I do not assume anymore that people will just randomly hate me etc. Most of my awkwardness stems from the fact that, having not experienced anything like 'normal' socialising at a formative age, I simply don't know very well how to deal with groups 'properly'.
Sorry about monologuing so much here today. Just adding random data points, really.
G'night.
I should perhaps add a bit about what exactly I think was wrong with my arguing behaviour in those long-ago fannish discussions about my 'hot button' topic:
The basic situation was that there was a big group of people (the majority of a fandom, really) who felt very happy about something that had happened in the source text, and, in the way of - perhaps - most people who feel happy about something, did not feel much inclined to analyse their happiness. Since the setting was fandom and not academia, I should simply have accepted that. Feeling happy about something and not analysing it is perfectly appropriate fannish behaviour, and I've done the same in many situations.
However, *I* was deeply *unhappy*, and thus felt compelled to analyse why the thing that made everyone else so happy had the opposite effect on me. When I did this, I discovered the aforementioned distasteful philosophical etc. implications of the 'happy' interpretation of the text (and of the text itself, because the happy interpretation was pretty much part of the text). This discovery made the majority's happiness even more baffling, and a little disturbing, too.
I had been very active in the fandom before getting emotionally 'out of phase' with it, so my natural reaction was, of course, trying to engage people about all the stuff I had found beneath the surface of the text. Well, it shouldn't come as a surprise that people weren't thrilled with that approach... ;-) I think they mostly tried to ignore my inappropriate insistence on analysis, but some - kindly - did try to respond, in which cases I invariably asked them - insistently - for textual evidence for their happy reading of the text that did *not* have the horrible implications I had found. (None was forthcoming.)
The fact that I kept insisting on wanting to see 'evidence' as much as constitutes bullying behaviour according to some definitions in this thread, I think (too tired to reread now, sorry!) I don't think *all* such insistence is wrong - but it was probably wrong *in that context*. You may - you even *should* - insist on seeing the evidence in an academic discussion, or in political discussion, but in fandom you must be able to accept that people will base some of their central opinions on emotion rather than analysis.
I'm very deliberately steering clear of any discussions of that topic in the fandom at large nowadays - but I still occasionally rant about it in semi-private. (If I knew why that particular topic is such an extreme hot button topic for me I'd know a whole lot more about my subconscious, methinks...)
I honestly don't remember bullying anyone. I was an extremely 'cerebral' teenager and understood, and quite consciously disapproved of, the social dynamics of bullying. I believe that prevented me from the kind of instinctive lashing out against even weaker (or equally weak) members of the group that many bullied people seem to feel tempted to do. In fact, I don't really 'get' malice of any kind; it's an utterly alien mindset to me to want to hurt someone, or derive pleasure from seeing someone hurt. (A big 'me too!' re: the cringing at humiliation humour expressed upthread!) -- Well, okay, I hurt characters in stories, but that's different - and it's an entirely different kind of pleasure that's involved there. *g*
The only case of potential bullying behaviour of my own that I can think of - though I don't think it fits, as it is more about 'being right' than about 'winning'/'asserting power' - is my online arguing behaviour, which is probably too insistent in some cases - especially when I'm arguing in fandom, which is chock full of insecure people. When I'm attacking a position in an argument, it's always clear to me that I'm attacking the position, and not the person - but that may not be so clear to the person whose position is coming under attack. (I come from a family of relentless arguers; I suppose that shaped me somewhat.)
But I have to admit that there are situations where I really can't get behind the concept of "all interpretations/all opinions are equally valid"... I'm usually fine with agreeing to disagree - I have good friends with whom I disagree deeply on everything from religion to politics - but I need to feel that the other side actually has some rational basis for their position. Or rather, I can accept an irrational basis in the realm of religion, but not so much in, say, politics, or in interpreting a text. So, say "I feel there is a God", and I won't try to argue you out of it; but say "I just *feel* that [policy X] is wrong" and expect me to ask you to give me some actual reasons for that assessment. And if you can't, then expect me not to have all that much respect for that aspect of your political opinion.
In most cases, I am nevertheless able to let it go. As I said, there's so far only really been one topic on which I have been completely hung up for years, and therefore obnoxious in discussion... (and that topic concerns the interpretation of a popular cultural text. I'm not sure what that says about my politics! Shouldn't I care more about those than about some tv show?! *g* Mind you, it does have political and philosophical implications that I find extremely distasteful.)
Hi there,
European (German) bullying victim and occasional borderline online troll here. ;-) I don't have much time to discuss this today, sadly, but I, too, have found the discussion here very interesting; it has set me to wondering about my behaviour in a fannish kerfuffle a few years ago. So, for now, I'd just like to add my experience as a further data point:
I was bullied extensively between ages twelve and fifteen or so, and was a tolerated outsider from the age of fifteen till finishing school at 19. I wasn't the only bullying victim in my class, but I think I was the one most of the class focused on the most. Bullying was partly physical (being chased - while on foot - by a group of boys on bikes comes to mind), party psychological (just generally being shunned and being called names and so on), and partly a mix of the two (girls pulling my trousers down in public after previously stealing my knickers after swimming class).
What did not play a big role in my bullying experience was being argued down; in fact, language remained one of the few areas in which I felt a certain amount of power throughout. Not enough to fight the mob; but certainly, language (and logic) felt like allies, not enemies to me.
So online argument (nor any other type of argument) does not constitute a trigger situation for me, and in fact, I argue, uhm, vigorously. Perhaps too vigorously. I think my behaviour in some online arguments may be felt as bullying or trollish by some, although I think it is not about power as such, for me. But I can be very passionate and insistent when I feel I'm 'right'. And while in some areas of life, what's 'right' is subjective, I do think that not *everything* is subjective, or not completely subjective, at least.
I really do hope that I am not a case of a bullying victim turning into a bully later in life... (What gives me some hope is that I am not consistently so obnoxious; in fact, I can only really think of one discussion topic which causes me to behave badly consistently.)
Gotta go, maybe more later.
Addendum/correction: I think it may have been later than 1980, actually - but not much later, as I think I started school in 1983. But I think the period of astronaut games was probably nearer to 1983 than 1980, as those were fairly complex games.
@Daniel Klein: You don't happen to be born in Germany, in the mid to late 70s, and now live in Canada, do you? Because if you do, you may be the person who planted the seed for turning me into a life-long sf fan in kindergarten (Frankfurt, ca. 1980)...
(I know it's unlikely. It's not that rare a name... *g*)
Currently reading Always Coming Home. It's a lovely book. I'm reading it very slowly, so as to savour it more thoroughly.
[Forgive me if I have recommended this here before: people who enjoy Le Guin, and also people who are interested in believable fictional societies (that aren't necessarily either utopian or dystopian) and the complicated interaction of different cultures, including examinations of the 'Noble Savage' cliché, may enjoy the fabulous comic Finder. It's my favourite comic bar none, and one of my favourite pieces of speculative fiction in general. I love it so much that I'm currently trying (and failing spectacularly, but that's not Finder's fault) to write my m.a. thesis about it.
In Germany, I think the politician with *by far* the most amusing name is this guy:
http://www.abgeordnetenwatch.de/cajus_julius_caesar-650-10711.html
(Yes, he's real.)
Oh, and ditto on the ditto sheets! I have no idea what they were called here in Germany, but they were purple, yes, and had a very distinctive smell - must be the same thing. My generation of students (born in the mid-seventies) were probably among the last to know that smell - I think my school got a photocopying machine when I was in second grade, so that smell really was the smell of my very earliest school years (i.e. when school was still fun.)
Strangely enough, I love a number of smells that are not usually the first to come to mind when trying to think of pleasant smells. Unfortunately, for two of them, I don't even know what to call them. But, for what it's worth:
1.) The indefinable smell of some of our local subway stations. Machine oil is definitely a related smell, and the 'subway station smell' is often strongest near the escalators, which suggests it's likely some special lubricant. I have no idea why I love this smell - but I started using the subway relatively late in my childhood, so maybe it got associated, somehow, with a sense of adventure and newness?
2.) Probably something used to treat wood. Associated with childhood memories of playgrounds with a variety of fantastically-shaped wooden playing equipment - I particularly remember a kind of communal rocking horse, seating five or six people, shaped like a viking ship.
3.) Machine oil proper. Associated with making things, a workshop smell.
4.) Hot streets after a summer rain. Summer afternoons, during school holidays.
@ Ambar: Whoah. Thanks. That site's... impressive. In fact, I think it's probably way over my head - my knowledge of the American political system and of statistics and stuff is not *that* great ;-). But I'll certainly dig around there a bit and see what I can understand...
My poll information comes from here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/7360265.stm
Uhm, bit OT, but I just noticed that apparently McCain has been gaining *a lot* of ground in the Gallup polls in the last two days (5%+). And Obama's been losing some (2%-), leaving him with a lead of just six percent, after October 20th's 11 percent lead. What's happening there? Have I missed the introduction of some crucial gamechanger on or around the 20th?
(I'm asking here because this is a website full of politically knowledgeable people and I'm getting a bit scared now, over here in Europe. I think this U.S. election matters a lot for the whole world, as there are some pretty big things that need to happen in international politics in the next few years if we want to avoid a variety of disasters, and they won't happen without the U.S...)
Neither book nor audio book, but a tv show: Life on Mars, for a Manchester accent. My advice would be to keep to the first series, though. The second one was of somewhat spotty quality, and the ending was an insult. (Actually, the second series would have been okay - if the ending hadn't completely robbed it of any sense it could have made.)
I should perhaps mention that with that opinion I am part of a tiny minority; nearly everybody else absolutely loved the ending.
Very OT, but: in German, Donald Duck's nephews are called Tick, Trick and Track. So, ever since finding out about Trigg and Track Palin, I've been regretting that there isn't a Tick Palin to go with them... (a Dick Palin would do, too, in a pinch.)
Less OT: Entries like this are the reason why Making Light is one of my prime sources on American politics. Thank you.
Diatryma @263:
Cooking, though, escapes me. I have such a weird relationships with food already, I don't want to risk wasting more of it than I have to.
See, that's exactly the attitude that's the problem: expecting every failure to be catastrophic (which in the case of cooking translates as 'inedible'). But the truth is, most failed cooking experiments are still edible, they're just not *great*. Not every FAIL is EPIC. ;-) So, basically: don't be so afraid of making mistakes; they probably won't kill you, and you'll know what to do better the next time. After a while, you get the hang of it.
(Same goes for other skills/crafts, of course - but cooking is the one that I feel everyone needs to have at least the basics of, and far too many people are irrationally scared of.)
I mainly write (occasional articles for webzines, and fanfic - oh, and an M.A. thesis, at the moment. *g*). Also, I'm a professionally trained goldsmith, though I haven't worked much in the last few years. Trying to get back into it now, though.
And I used to do medieval book illumination, until about twelve years ago, when I decided I had to give something up to free up some time for other things I wanted to do.
Designing and building websites is also fun, but I've fallen behind on my web coding skills/knowledge.
Oh, and I'm a decent enough cook, and can be reasonably handy around the house, but those I don't really count as creative activities; they're just necessary everyday life skills.
I pity people who can't make stuff. I know far too many people who've never really made anything in their lives, and their lives usually seem to be sadder than those of people who can/dare to make stuff (of course, there are always exceptions). I put 'dare' because I don't buy the idea that you have to be specially gifted to be able to make anything. I think everyone can make *something*, but most people aren't encouraged enough to try when it counts most, i.e. in early life. Just recently I reflected on how much 'knowing how to cook' is really just 'not being afraid to try things/improvise'... (The widespread inability to cook is one of the saddest aspects, to me, of a culture in which 'making things' is seen as the province of specialists only.)
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 9 |
| 2008 | 12 |
| 2007 | 1 |
Total: 22 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Hmpf:
Show all comments by Hmpf.