Author Topic: Righteous Abortion: How Conservative Christians Promote What They Claim to Hate  (Read 3823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Responding in kind isn't murdering them. Just breaking them apart mentally.
And turning you into a copy of them; what do you think they were trying to do to you?  Whether they break you down or you break them down, you all lose

Quote from: kindred
I've never had it that rough. I never LET it get that worse. The most outnumbered I got in high-school was 3:1. I beat them physically and mentally untill they were broken and were essentially doormats. I just insulted them with the truth(they were problem children with failing grades, broken problems and were tossed around to different family members that would hopefully change them for the better)
I don't blame you for finding a strategy to defend yourself, but you have an obligation - to yourself, if nothing else - to not turn yourself into a bigger jerk than the ones you're fighting against.  Your strategy boils down to "they're trying to hurt me, so I'm going to hurt them worse first".  While there are times that's necessary, it isn't a strategy that can justifiably be used except in pretty dire situations, when you've tried every other way to get them off your back.  If you start using it out of the belief that you're making things better in the long run, the only thing you're really doing is rationalizing.

Quote from: kindred
Respond in kind. If you want the world to be better, than beat the assholes to the ground and make their life miserable. I was never able to make the guys that bullied me kill themselves but I was CLOSE. I just gave in and pitied them when I was close. In the end we became friends. They're still assholes to this day. Except since they were my friends, I was okay with that.
Read your own words.  You didn't actually make the world better, you just got them off of your case because you showed them you were meaner and nastier than them.  They're still perfectly willing to be mean and nasty to everyone else, and you're okay with that because they aren't actually bothering you.  So you actually made the world worse through your actions.  It only seems better because they aren't bothering you.

Quote from: kindred
There are three assholes alive in this world because of ME...
That's not the way I read it.  There are three people in the world who you almost caused the deaths of before your sense of basic decency kicked back in.  The fact that you didn't cause those deaths (and if you drive them to it, you're just as responsible as if you gave the car keys to someone you knew was drunk) in no way mitigates the fact that you were trying to in the first place.  You know what you sound like?  A bully who "congratulates" himself because he didn't actually beat several nerds to death, and later became friends with them.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Here's something I picked up a while back, called the four principles of conflict resolution.  It is far more effective at protecting yourself than any amount of picking fights and "doing worse unto them first" until you've shown that you're the biggest and baddest.

1.  Avoid places where conflict is likely.  This can be as simple as "don't walk into dark alleys at night", or "don't associate with someone who likes to badmouth others".

2.  Withdraw from a potential conflict before it begins.  If you see a conflict starting to happen, take steps to keep from getting in the middle of it (note, there are times when this is not possible, or when your inaction will result in someone else getting hurt).

3.  Defuse the conflict before it turns into a fight.  Most people are reacting to outraged egos when they get into conflicts, and if you can get it away from being about their ego, there's no conflict.

4.  Control the conflict once it has turned violent.  If they attack you, take them down and make sure that they're in no position to hurt you or themselves.  It's more important to keep the situation under control than it is to "win".  Especially if it means they're in the hospital or dead, while you're legally and financially liable for your own actions.

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3082
  • Darwins +280/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
I've never had it that rough. I never LET it get that worse. The most outnumbered I got in high-school was 3:1.

I didn't have a choice in the matter, Kindred.  It was easier for the teachers to tell Me to not be so sensitive, rather than disciplining an entire classroom.

Quote
I beat them physically and mentally until they were broken and were essentially doormats. I just insulted them with the truth(they were problem children with failing grades, broken problems and were tossed around to different family members that would hopefully change them for the better).

Doing that would have made Me no better than them.  I won in the end, without drawing blood either physically or psychologically, and I'm happy with the path I chose.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline kindred

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1118
  • Darwins +10/-5
  • Gender: Male
@Astreja

I know how that works. Its called de-escalation which just amounts to know how to NOT be a target and give them a face saving exit. That's how you stop the bullying but stopping it isn't really enough. Bullies are insecure punks that don't deserve mercy.

If you're really smart you'd know that chances are only a small number of people in there are the actual bullies and they essentially just whip the class into a frenzy. If you could turn the burning anger into cold calm hatred, you'd be able to isolate the "real" bullies.

Bullies are bullying you because they have problems and are caving into them. All it takes is rubbing their faces in what problems they have and taking away their only method of self-comfort(bullying) to beat them. They don't need help. They just need to suffer.
"Keep calm and carry on"

"I trust you are not in too much distress"

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
kindred:  Since when do you think inflicting "suffering" has ever solved anyone's problems?  All it does is make those problems worse.

You didn't stop those people who bullied you from being bullies.  You simply stopped them from bullying you, because you proved you were meaner and nastier than them.  They're still bullies, and they still treat other people like scum (as you said, they're still assholes).  Just not you.

Most bullies dehumanize their victims, which is how they rationalize treating them so badly (they're "prey").  There are two ways to deal with that; one is for the victim to lash out and demonstrate to the bullies that they're a fellow predator (even though that is not the intent of the victim, they just want the bullies to stop.  This also includes the strategy you used); and two is to get everyone else to realize the damage that their indifference is doing to the victims.

Stopping bullying isn't about turning the bullies into victims - beating them, as you said.  It's about stopping them from using the tactics of bullying to try to deal with their own problems.  And in no way does making them suffer resolve this.  It might even make it worse because now they're under pressure from the person making them suffer, as well as everything else they've been dealing with.  They're already suffering, so how does making them suffer more do any good?

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12702
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
You didn't stop those people who bullied you from being bullies.  You simply stopped them from bullying you, because you proved you were meaner and nastier than them. 

From kindred's perspective, that was all he needed to do.  Their issues are not his responsibility.

They're still bullies, and they still treat other people like scum (as you said, they're still assholes).

That is not his responsibility.

Most bullies dehumanize their victims,

And mashing in the teeth of the bully by a vicitim goes a long way toward re-humanizing the victim.

is for the victim to lash out and demonstrate to the bullies that they're a fellow predator

Or at least prey that is not to be screwed with.  Moose aren't predators, but you won't find many predators willing to take on a full grown bull moose.

Stopping bullying isn't about turning the bullies into victims - beating them, as you said. 

It can be.  From the perspective of the bullied, it works.

It's about stopping them from using the tactics of bullying to try to deal with their own problems. 

That is not the responsibility of the bullied.

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
From kindred's perspective, that was all he needed to do.  Their issues are not his responsibility.
You will note that kindred is saying that he can solve the problems of bullying by making bullies suffer so that they have to face up to those issues.  My point is that he can stop people from bullying him by doing that, but he can't stop the problem of bullies in that way.

Quote from: screwtape
That is not his responsibility.
No, his responsibility is to deal with his own problems without making things worse for other people.  We have a word for people who deal with their problems by making others suffer; it's called "bullying".  I'm not going to say that he was wrong in the way he got those bullies off his back, but I am going to challenge his idea that this is an appropriate solution for dealing with the overall problem of bullying, as he is advocating.

Quote from: screwtape
And mashing in the teeth of the bully by a vicitim goes a long way toward re-humanizing the victim.
I emphatically disagree.  I had to suffer lots of bullying when I was growing up, and all striking back did was almost turn me into a bully myself.  It was realizing just how terrifyingly close I came to becoming exactly like the people I hated and resented that allowed me to re-humanize myself.

Quote from: screwtape
Or at least prey that is not to be screwed with.  Moose aren't predators, but you won't find many predators willing to take on a full grown bull moose.
This makes sense in the wild, where the only strength something can rely on is its own, or sometimes the strength of its close family.  Where everything and everyone is a potential enemy.  But it doesn't work out so well in civilization.  The whole point of having civilization in the first place is to come up with ways to deal with our problems that don't involve keeping a figurative hand on someone's throat to make sure they do what we want.

Quote from: screwtape
It can be.  From the perspective of the bullied, it works.
It doesn't stop the problem of bullying.  At best, it stops the one person from being bullied.  But it does so through the use of methods which are not very dissimilar to those used by the original bullies to begin with.

Quote from: screwtape
That is not the responsibility of the bullied.
No.  It's the responsibility of everyone else who isn't being bullied, if we claim to live in a civilization worth being called one.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12702
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
jaime, I agree with almost everything you said.  The one exception is, sometimes you have to beat the living shit out of some asshole because he's fucking with you and that is the only way to make him stop.  That is a sad commentary on people.  Some of them are too primitive to deal with any other way.  Until the human animal evolves a better, less chimpy brain, that is the fact of it.  See the bar room pool scene from the movie Kalifornia.

I had some bullying issues when I changed schools mid-8th grade.  No more than average and it was the usual suspects.  Because I was afraid of striking back the first time, it made me a target for subsequent incidents.  I firmly believe that had I pummeled the first guy into submission, I would have had fewer problems.  I do not think people are outside the animal kingdom, and sometimes the only way to respond is with violence.  Once you show that you are prepared to dish it out, the motherfuckers will back off.

High school is a lot like prison.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
I'm not saying that there's no cases where striking back is unwarranted, either.  I just don't see it as a viable solution for the overall problem of bullying, as a whole.  I struck back when I was bullied, and it just made the bullying worse, plus got me in trouble for being violent because the bullies were smart enough to wait until the teachers weren't looking, so all they saw was me having (apparently) struck first.  This started when I was six or seven.  I spent most of elementary school in a classroom for people with behavioral disorders, because I had a hair-trigger temper from how frequently I was bullied.  I had less than half-a-dozen friends from that entire horrible time, not counting friends of convenience (people who were friendly enough alone but participated in the teasing in public) who I quickly learned to recognize and avoid.  For that matter, I had less than half-a-dozen even counting friends of convenience.

I almost became what other people expected me to be, largely because I struck back and struck back hard.  The only reason I avoided it is because I realized that I had seriously hurt someone who's only real crime was in going along with how everyone else treated me, who was terrified of how viciously I'd learned to react to teasing but didn't know any other way to react to me.  Mean, vicious, and nasty could all have been adjectives that people described me with before I even officially became a teenager.  I was a bundle of pissed-off fury primed to go off if someone so much as looked at me the wrong way.

But that wasn't me, that was the face I had never realized I was presenting to others.  And when I did realize it, I made a firm commitment to myself to change .  And I succeeded, though it was a long and harsh road to walk, and one I had to still walk mostly alone till long after I graduated from high school.  I don't have visible scars from then, but they're there, on the inside, etched with acid.  They still hurt.  Two decades later, I'm still aching from the wounds of that horrible time.

So while I can understand that sometimes, there may be little choice but to hit back, I categorically do not accept that hitting back is any kind of a long-term solution to the problem of bullying.  It comes too close to making the victim into a bully or worse.  Most real bullies, the ones who do the worst harm, are the ones who've suffered such deep and terrible wounds that nothing matters except feeling something other than the pain of those wounds.  If we want to really fix the problems of bullying, we have to break that cycle, and that means not making their suffering even worse than it already is.  It's true that if someone is already that broken, that you might have to inflict more pain to set things right, just as someone might have to re-break a bone that wasn't set right.  But the person being bullied is the absolute last person who should be making that decision.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6951
  • Darwins +941/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
^^^^Sorry. :(
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline shnozzola

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1977
  • Darwins +112/-2
I've never had it that rough. I never LET it get that worse. The most outnumbered I got in high-school was 3:1. I beat them physically and mentally untill they were broken and were essentially doormats. I just insulted them with the truth(they were problem children with failing grades, broken problems and were tossed around to different family members that would hopefully change them for the better).
There are three assholes alive in this world because of ME...

I struck back when I was bullied, and it just made the bullying worse, plus got me in trouble for being violent because the bullies were smart enough to wait until the teachers weren't looking, so all they saw was me having (apparently) struck first.  This started when I was six or seven. 

I guess this thread is totally changed, but what the heck.  I wonder, with some of the things you guys have been through as kids, if you think life is mostly nature or nurture, or some kind of balance between the two?
“The best thing for being sad," replied Merlin, beginning to puff and blow, "is to learn something."  ~ T. H. White
  The real holy trinity:  onion, celery, and bell pepper ~  all Cajun Chefs

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3082
  • Darwins +280/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
If you're really smart you'd know that chances are only a small number of people in there are the actual bullies and they essentially just whip the class into a frenzy. If you could turn the burning anger into cold calm hatred, you'd be able to isolate the "real" bullies.

Not worth My time or effort.  The responsibility of identifying and dealing with the bullies clearly fell to the teachers and principal of the elementary school I attended.  They failed... Miserably.

Quote
Bullies are bullying you because they have problems and are caving into them. All it takes is rubbing their faces in what problems they have and taking away their only method of self-comfort(bullying) to beat them. They don't need help. They just need to suffer.

I disagree vehemently, and I reiterate:  That would make Me no better than them.  I will not stoop to emulate something that I abhor, although I do reserve the right to defend Myself against future attacks.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline kindred

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1118
  • Darwins +10/-5
  • Gender: Male
From kindred's perspective, that was all he needed to do.  Their issues are not his responsibility.
You will note that kindred is saying that he can solve the problems of bullying by making bullies suffer so that they have to face up to those issues.  My point is that he can stop people from bullying him by doing that, but he can't stop the problem of bullies in that way.

This is pretty much what I mean. Force the bullies into a binary path of learn to deal with your problems another way or crush them into their problems till they want to die.

Sink or swim. If they sink, another asshole dies. If they swim, they stop being assholes. Win win situation.

Either face adversity and win OR just die.



"Keep calm and carry on"

"I trust you are not in too much distress"

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
This is pretty much what I mean. Force the bullies into a binary path of learn to deal with your problems another way or crush them into their problems till they want to die.

Sink or swim. If they sink, another asshole dies. If they swim, they stop being assholes. Win win situation.

Either face adversity and win OR just die.
False dichotomy.  The fact that you think there are only two paths does not mean that there are not others, which Astreja and I have been trying to tell you.

You will not stop the problem of bullying by pretending that you can "solve" it by advocating that all the bullies be bullied until they either stop or they snap.  You will simply create more bullies, and you will also create more Columbines.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +304/-32
  • Gender: Male
...  You will simply create more bullies, and you will also create more Columbines.

Isn't that the point?  From the perspective of someone who wants to "spread around the suffering" I mean.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
...I'll check back in a couple of weeks. In the mean time, I want you to think about the golden rule and what it means to you.

Alright kindred, it's been a couple of weeks...what does the golden rule mean to you?
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline kindred

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1118
  • Darwins +10/-5
  • Gender: Male
...I'll check back in a couple of weeks. In the mean time, I want you to think about the golden rule and what it means to you.

Alright kindred, it's been a couple of weeks...what does the golden rule mean to you?

It's a situational rule. One that is usefull in a setting where you can enforce long term punishment to create an atmosphere conducive to cohesion.

Take for example obeying the Rules of Engagement. If you are losing a war and losing means annihialation, then the ROE is of no use and you can use anything to survive. If you are on the winning side, you need to consider long term consequences and the ROE is now more important. Strict adherance to the ROE will mean you get to minimize the stigma of your war effort and minimize the compensation that need be dealt out after said war.
"Keep calm and carry on"

"I trust you are not in too much distress"

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
It's a situational rule. One that is usefull in a setting where you can enforce long term punishment to create an atmosphere conducive to cohesion.

Take for example obeying the Rules of Engagement. If you are losing a war and losing means annihialation, then the ROE is of no use and you can use anything to survive. If you are on the winning side, you need to consider long term consequences and the ROE is now more important. Strict adherance to the ROE will mean you get to minimize the stigma of your war effort and minimize the compensation that need be dealt out after said war.

Lets try a different, more individual approach.

Robert is trained in several different fighting styles. He is healthy, well educated and has a stable family/social network. Robert feels that it is his duty to use his skills to try to manage society and shape it into a more beneficial exchange for everyone.

Jason is poor, undisciplined, uneducated and comes from a chaotic social environment but he is not an alcoholic or drug addict. However, he is malnourished and feels oppressed by the cold upper middle class. Jason thinks that people like Robert owe him restitution for all his suffering at their hands.

As fate would have it, Jason is about to loose everything because he hasn't been able to find a job and his unemployment just expired so he sets out to mug some people for cash. He heads down town to the upscale club district and waits outside an ally behind one of the poshest night clubs in the area. He waits in the shadows.

Robert leaves the night club and heads towards the parking garage off a back ally behind the building. As he quickly counts his leftover cash he is suddenly approached by what looks like a meth addict wielding a knife. He can tell the man is desperate, which is the most dangerous kind of man to meet in a dark ally. Robert pauses to think how things might be different if he were allowed to openly carry his firearm. Would this knife wielding stranger have bothered to approach him if he could see the .40 caliber Smith & Wesson? The question is moot. Robert can tell, by the way his attacker is holding the knife and standing, that Jason is not trained for this kind of situation. He knows at least 10 different ways to disarm and subdue his attacker without even bothering with the gun.



Now, in this setting, what do you think should happen according to your interpretation  of the golden rule?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2012, 12:41:11 PM by jaybwell32 »
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
Now, in this setting, what do you think should happen according to your interpretation  of the golden rule?

This is actually pretty easy, and in my opinion, doesn't even require consideration of the Golden Rule.

If Robert is confident he can handle the situation without the gun, he doesn't draw it -- this is basic "escalation of force".  Robert disarms Jason and, if it's feasible, restrains him until the authorities arrive.  That's it.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
This is actually pretty easy, and in my opinion, doesn't even require consideration of the Golden Rule.

If Robert is confident he can handle the situation without the gun, he doesn't draw it -- this is basic "escalation of force".  Robert disarms Jason and, if it's feasible, restrains him until the authorities arrive.  That's it.

But Robert's options do not end with just merely defending or protecting himself. He could just as easily give Jason the money he was just counting.
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
But Robert's options do not end with just merely defending or protecting himself. He could just as easily give Jason the money he was just counting.

I suppose so, but that didn't occur to me.  I guess I was just presupposing that a criminal act is something to be resisted, not surrendered to.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
I suppose so, but that didn't occur to me.  I guess I was just presupposing that a criminal act is something to be resisted, not surrendered to.

It all depends on your personal perspective and how you understand or interpret the golden rule. You obviously would never mug somebody no matter how desperate you become. But even so, in Roberts case he has 100% control of the situation. Giving the man his money can be viewed as an act of charity at that point, it's hardly a surrender.

On the other hand, depending on Roberts world view he might feel that it is within his rights to shoot the mugger in the face.

I created this scenario in the hopes of gaining a better understanding of kinred's perspective but I guess it can serve as an open question to the forum at large.
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
I suppose so, but that didn't occur to me.  I guess I was just presupposing that a criminal act is something to be resisted, not surrendered to.

It all depends on your personal perspective and how you understand or interpret the golden rule. You obviously would never mug somebody no matter how desperate you become. But even so, in Roberts case he has 100% control of the situation. Giving the man his money can be viewed as an act of charity at that point, it's hardly a surrender.

Giving someone money to avoid violence is never an act of charity.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Giving someone money to avoid violence is never an act of charity.

I agree with you 100% on this. All I'm saying is that other people might not see it the same way we do.
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5279
  • Darwins +603/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Giving someone who's trying to rob you money, even if they're not actually threatening you, is essentially rewarding them for their actions.  It shows them that robbery works.  In other words, by giving them money, you've making it more likely that they'll commit robbery in the future.  You aren't actually solving anything, just deferring it.

As for that, I suppose Robert could rob Jason instead, show him what it feels like.  Not that Jason has much money, but he probably has something he cares about on him.  Except that makes Robert worse than Jason.

Offline kindred

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1118
  • Darwins +10/-5
  • Gender: Male
@jaybwell

He'll defend himself. A mugger is a mugger. A risk to die is a risk to die. He wouldn't risk it. If he knew that there'd be a lower risk of injury or death by disarming the mugger he would.

The criminal element are people who are willingly or forced by circumstance to encroach on other peoples freedom. When you're freedom is threatened by somebody, you are within your rights to fight.
 
"Keep calm and carry on"

"I trust you are not in too much distress"