Skip to content

Expedition: general discussions.

User Avatar
#5012
Auto-translated
Author
Well, I was just thinking about it, as a thought experiment. Let's say it's not unpleasant for you to deal with someone on the first day. Let's say it's not unpleasant on the seventh, the thirtieth, even the sixtieth - you don't feel the need to tell them off because of the occasional bullying right here and now.
But sooner or later, it does accumulate, doesn't it? A person can't tolerate it forever - whether they're a man, a woman, in a creative field, or a practical one. So, it seems that you still have to tell them off. Otherwise, the bully won't get the message. But how else can you act?
It sounds like the bully understands everything and intentionally chose as a target someone who won't immediately tell them off, but will accumulate it and eventually snap. After which, the bully will point a finger and shout about how that person is inadequate, and that they were just joking 🧐 In principle, that's usually how it happens.
Author
Imagine yourself in Donald Trump's place, but if it were important for you to hear the opinions of those who read you. At least just to understand that you, you scoundrel and vile creature (Donald Trump, I mean), are still causing displeasure to some people with your jokes, even if they don't express it here and now. Even if these jokes are not active, but passive-aggressive. That is, until you receive feedback - at the very least - you will continue to do it without a shred of empathy, even if you assume that you - the same Donald Trump in this example - were, say, taking antidepressants and were bullied in school. And now, in the moment, you feel some kind of power, or rather, impunity, from the fact that 99.99975% (minus three zeros) of people didn't tell you off for your specific tweets. I am absolutely sure that he thinks like this: "I've been getting crap thrown at me my whole life, and therefore that's how it should be, and I will do the same at this point in my life, that's human nature." Otherwise, he wouldn't have become Donald Trump.
Well... it's fair, of course, but if I were in that Donald's place (which I will never be), I would think about it a little from that perspective. At least a little. In a creative field, in a practical field, in economics, in psychology - it doesn't matter, even in philology. This would be food for thought in any case. And after finishing these reflections, I probably wouldn't consider myself entitled to judge certain events from the point of view of morality or empathy, because I would definitely know that I don't have it, and therefore, I don't have such rights.
Well, luckily I'm not in such positions, and there's no point in me straining myself with something like that. But the thought occurred to me at the moment, yes. I like to philosophize sometimes.
First of all: in my message, I was talking about small groups of people who communicate with each other in person. So, the example with Trump is not relevant here. Because in a large sample, someone will definitely be offended by your existence.

Secondly: in personal communication, a mentally healthy person immediately understands from non-verbal reactions, from the tone of voice, even from messages in a messenger, that person X is offended by the jokes. This is also feedback; if the joker doesn't read it, then yes, they have problems with their head. There is no need for any feedback in the form of a registered letter with a notification that you, sir, are supposedly offending me with your humor. Otherwise, it's like with femoids, where you need to get active consent and agree on every action in writing, with audio and video recording, notarized, otherwise it's rape.

And then it's about the fact that the one who is being bullied would do the same if they could, or what? I didn't understand this point.
Небо – мольбы не ждёт
Небо – угроз не слышит
Небо – ведёт особый счёт
Небо – тебя найдёт

По вопросам модерации: [email protected]