Barnes and Noble "Diverse Editions"

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You miss the point of the sayings.

No. I've missed nothing. It is you who mistakenly believe that the point of the saying can be looked at from only your side of the equation.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

What someone else says only effects me if I choose to let it.

Yes. And you've been indoctrinated to believe that you can't let it. Real men don't cry. Never let 'em see you sweat. Suck it up. Buck up little camper. I'm rubber and you're glue. All those fun things adults who don't really want to have to deal with messy feelings teach children to say.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Ignoring someone who is being a jerk isn't the same as giving them permission to be a jerk.

Sure it is. If everyone did it, jerks would all believe they're kings of all who who ignore their transgressions and enable their bad behavior by pretending nothing is happening (unless, of course, you believe they can see just how bravely you're defying them in your own head).

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Can words hurt? Sure, if you let them.

Nope. It has nothing to do with "letting them." Words hurt. You can repress that hurt, or you can deal with it.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

But if they do, maybe you are better off figuring out _why_ your feelings were hurt.

Not really rocket science. My feelings got hurt because someone made the effort to hurt my feelings. That hurt doesn't have to cripple me (or anyone), but pretending I'm invulnerable to it isn't the way to go either.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Do you have poor self esteem? Are you too sensitive and see insult everywhere?

Spoken like a true man's man. Feelings are weakness. Sensitivity is bad. It's my fault the bad person was mean to me.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No. I've missed nothing. It is you who mistakenly believe that the point of the saying can be looked at from only your side of the equation.


Yes. And you've been indoctrinated to believe that you can't let it. Real men don't cry. Never let 'em see you sweat. Suck it up. Buck up little camper. I'm rubber and you're glue. All those fun things adults who don't really want to have to deal with messy feelings teach children to say.


Sure it is. If everyone did it, jerks would all believe they're kings of all who who ignore their transgressions and enable their bad behavior by pretending nothing is happening (unless, of course, you believe they can see just how bravely you're defying them in your own head).


Nope. It has nothing to do with "letting them." Words hurt. You can repress that hurt, or you can deal with it.


Not really rocket science. My feelings got hurt because someone made the effort to hurt my feelings. That hurt doesn't have to cripple me (or anyone), but pretending I'm invulnerable to it isn't the way to go either.


Spoken like a true man's man. Feelings are weakness. Sensitivity is bad. It's my fault the bad person was mean to me.

yea, I didn't really expect you to either understand or make any attempt to understand.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

yea, I didn't really expect you to either understand or make any attempt to understand.

Right back atcha.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You miss the point of the sayings. The only person whose actions I control are my own. What someone else says only effects me if I choose to let it. Ignoring someone who is being a jerk isn't the same as giving them permission to be a jerk. My mother also use to say "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all". They are two sides of the same coin.

Can words hurt? Sure, if you let them. But if they do, maybe you are better off figuring out _why_ your feelings were hurt. Do you have poor self esteem? Are you too sensitive and see insult everywhere? Do you trust and hang out with the wrong people? The two best life lessons I ever learned were don't hang out with people who like to insult other people and either be comfortable with who you are or make the effort to change what you don't like.

The gaslighting and victim blaming are strong in this kind of thinking.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

The gaslighting and victim blaming are strong in this kind of thinking.

In what way? How is it victim blaming to choose not to allow other people to define you? Part of the idea is that knowledge that what the other person is saying is not true. The idea isn't when someone says that you are a loser then you say "oh, well I must be a loser".

The idea is that when someone else says you are a loser, then you look at yourself, you see you are not a loser, thus the other person is full of it. It in no way gives a pass to the other person, it simply says don't let other people define you and make you feel bad about yourself. Don't give other people power over how you feel about yourself. It's the opposite of victim blaming and is absolutely the opposite of gaslighting. If the other person is acting like an ass, then they are acting like an ass and should be treated like an ass.
It's an acknowledgement that you can't live your life in your echo chamber never hearing things you don't want to hear. In the real world, you hear plenty of things you don't what to hear. But if it's not true, why allow it to effect you?

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

In what way? How is it victim blaming to choose not to allow other people to define you? Part of the idea is that knowledge that what the other person is saying is not true. The idea isn't when someone says that you are a loser then you say "oh, well I must be a loser".

The idea is that when someone else says you are a loser, then you look at yourself, you see you are not a loser, thus the other person is full of it. It in no way gives a pass to the other person, it simply says don't let other people define you and make you feel bad about yourself. Don't give other people power over how you feel about yourself. It's the opposite of victim blaming and is absolutely the opposite of gaslighting. If the other person is acting like an ass, then they are acting like an ass and should be treated like an ass.
It's an acknowledgement that you can't live your life in your echo chamber never hearing things you don't want to hear. In the real world, you hear plenty of things you don't what to hear. But if it's not true, why allow it to effect you?

It’s actually a textbook example of both. You’re saying if you let what someone else says get to you it is your fault for letting it get to you. Literally victim blaming. You wouldn’t tell a person who got beaten with sticks and stones “oh it only hurts if you let it” the same applies here. You can’t control this beyond a one off encounter, and one off encounters are never what the phrase is used against. It’s when the abuse is repeated and or on a medium to large scale.

And to contort this into not living in an echo chamber and not wanting to hear certain things is classic gaslighting.

We’re not talking about people with differing opinions on politics. We’re talking about one or more people mocking and belittling another person. They are very entitled to not have that kind of thing happen.

And before you say something like “I went through it and turned out fine” if you went through suffering and are okay with others going through the same because you turned out fine, you did not in fact turn out fine.

Note I’m using the general you, not specifically referring to any one person.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

It’s actually a textbook example of both. You’re saying if you let what someone else says get to you it is your fault for letting it get to you. Literally victim blaming. You wouldn’t tell a person who got beaten with sticks and stones “oh it only hurts if you let it” the same applies here. You can’t control this beyond a one off encounter, and one off encounters are never what the phrase is used against. It’s when the abuse is repeated and or on a medium to large scale.

And to contort this into not living in an echo chamber and not wanting to hear certain things is classic gaslighting.

We’re not talking about people with differing opinions on politics. We’re talking about one or more people mocking and belittling another person. They are very entitled to not have that kind of thing happen.

And before you say something like “I went through it and turned out fine” if you went through suffering and are okay with others going through the same because you turned out fine, you did not in fact turn out fine.

Note I’m using the general you, not specifically referring to any one person.

That sir is a crock.

I've been teaching kids' karate for over 20 years. About a third of my students take karate because they have been picked on at school. My job is to teach them two things, first when someone picks on you, it's not a reflection on you, it's a reflection on them. Second, how not to be picked on. One has to do both. It takes time to rebuild a kid's self confidence after they have been picked on, it takes a lot of positive reinforcement.

Bullies pick on kids they think are easy victims. It's part of my job to teach them not to be easy victims. If you don't do that, then you are just setting them up to be picked on again, and again, and again. That doesn't mean it's "their fault". It's the fault of the bully, but that doesn't solve the problem. Talking about blame the victim doesn't solve the problem, i.e. getting the kid in a place where he or she won't keep getting picked on. It just a bit like hash tagging on twitter, it just doesn't solve a thing.

There have been a lot of studies on bullies and bullying. Bullies look for people who won't defend themselves, who have no confidence. They look for kids who will react in a certain way, a way that makes the bully feel that he or she has a power over them.

Most bullies have issues, but that's someone else's problem unless that kid is in my class. Then it's my job to teach them that bullying other kids is bad, why it's bad.

One of the major things we do in karate is set up an environment where bullying is not ok and where the kids are taught to stick up for their friends. The older kids are taught to be inclusive (younger kids just are naturally inclusive). That's why a lot of kids stick, because it's the first time in their lives other kids are telling them "hey, good job". But, you can't stay in the bubble all the time. That's where the other part comes in to play.

I've seen a lot of kids come through and over time, a lot of kids develop enough self confidence to defend themselves and to get bullies to leave them alone. It's a lot of work, but it's rewarding.

I also teach some self defense seminars. Contrary to popular belief, 90 percent of self defense is not getting in the situation. Be proactive. Pay attention to your surroundings. Don't go to the wrong bars. Don't go into that dark parking lot alone. Don't walk down an empty street in a bad section of town at night. Don't be the teenager in the slasher movie. No it's not your fault is something bad happens, but that's cold comfort. It's much better not to be in the situation. This isn't a hard concept. So, no it's not blaming the victim.

In these situations, chanting the "blame the victim" mantra isn't just wrong, it gets people hurt.

[MGlitch]

Good for you, here’s the thing though they’ve done studies on the long term affects of bullying. It’s not just about standing up to the one bully. That treats the symptom while leaving a rotting core. And all your chanting of “don’t let words hurt you” has resulted in generations of psychologically scarred human beings.

Oh good you’re teaching self defense and continuing to instill the idea into people that when bad things happen to people they are to blame. You realize this literally perpetuates the situation because even if the people you teach are never in those positions they now carry the nugget of “wisdom” thanks to the class that the victim should have done something to not have had whatever happen to them.

“It’s better to not be in the situation” no it’s better for the cause of the situation, the bully or criminal, to not create the situation. What you are doing is victim blaming.

In these situations doing what you’re doing allows the situation to continue to happen because you’re forever treating the symptoms rather than the cause.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I also teach some self defense seminars. Contrary to popular belief, 90 percent of self defense is not getting in the situation. Be proactive. Pay attention to your surroundings. Don't go to the wrong bars. Don't go into that dark parking lot alone. Don't walk down an empty street in a bad section of town at night. Don't be the teenager in the slasher movie. .

If you're teaching women's self defence, or children's, you're (a) ignorant and (b) doing it wrong. Stranger attacks in public are nowhere near "90%". They're not even the majority.

As far as children and bullying goes? Blaming kids for being easy marks, and telling them to change their behaviour? Do you instruct disabled kids to stop acting disabled, non-neurotypical kids to stop acting non-neurotypical, non-white kids to act more white, Muslim kids to act more Christian, LGBTQ kids to go back in the closet? Because bigotry is a huge part of schoolyard bullying.

I'm a huge fan of karate and come from a martial arts background and family, but I'm side-eyeing the hell out of your attitude. Karate is technique, about self-management, about resilience, about being fit enough to run away from a situation if you can, or to defend yourself if you're cornered and have no other way out. It's not about telling yourself to never have hurt feelings and to interiorise blame for the terrible actions of others.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Good for you, here’s the thing though they’ve done studies on the long term affects of bullying. It’s not just about standing up to the one bully. That treats the symptom while leaving a rotting core. And all your chanting of “don’t let words hurt you” has resulted in generations of psychologically scarred human beings.

Oh good you’re teaching self defense and continuing to instill the idea into people that when bad things happen to people they are to blame. You realize this literally perpetuates the situation because even if the people you teach are never in those positions they now carry the nugget of “wisdom” thanks to the class that the victim should have done something to not have had whatever happen to them.

“It’s better to not be in the situation” no it’s better for the cause of the situation, the bully or criminal, to not create the situation. What you are doing is victim blaming.

In these situations doing what you’re doing allows the situation to continue to happen because you’re forever treating the symptoms rather than the cause.

Nice straw man argument. Let me put this in nice capital letters so you can't keep pretending I'm saying something I'm not.

WE DO NOT TEACH THAT IF SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS TO YOU, YOU ARE TO BLAME. WE TEACH THAT IT PEOPLE PICK ON YOU, IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT AND THEY IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEM.

There, see. That's not so hard to understand if you stop sticking your fingers in your ears and chant "teaching methods to avoid being picked on is blaming the victim".

It's no different than teaching safe driving techniques, the safe ways to avoid getting computer viruses or any other life skill.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Nice straw man argument. Let me put this in nice capital letters so you can't keep pretending I'm saying something I'm not.

WE DO NOT TEACH THAT IF SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS TO YOU, YOU ARE TO BLAME. WE TEACH THAT IT PEOPLE PICK ON YOU, IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT AND THEY IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEM.

There, see. That's not so hard to understand if you stop sticking your fingers in your ears and chant "teaching methods to avoid being picked on is blaming the victim".

It's no different than teaching safe driving techniques, the safe ways to avoid getting computer viruses or any other life skill.

Cute, now let me quote you saying you believe the reverse:

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You miss the point of the sayings. The only person whose actions I control are my own. What someone else says only effects me if I choose to let it. Ignoring someone who is being a jerk isn't the same as giving them permission to be a jerk. My mother also use to say "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all". They are two sides of the same coin.

Can words hurt? Sure, if you let them. But if they do, maybe you are better off figuring out _why_ your feelings were hurt. Do you have poor self esteem? Are you too sensitive and see insult everywhere? Do you trust and hang out with the wrong people? The two best life lessons I ever learned were don't hang out with people who like to insult other people and either be comfortable with who you are or make the effort to change what you don't like.

Be proactive. Pay attention to your surroundings. Don't go to the wrong bars. Don't go into that dark parking lot alone. Don't walk down an empty street in a bad section of town at night. Don't be the teenager in the slasher movie.

You might not literally say the words to them "IT'S YOUR FAULT" but you are still sending that message.

It's like how a lie through omission is still a lie, just because you haven't said something doesn't mean you aren't saying something.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

If you're teaching women's self defence, or children's, you're (a) ignorant and (b) doing it wrong. Stranger attacks in public are nowhere near "90%". They're not even the majority.

As far as children and bullying goes? Blaming kids for being easy marks, and telling them to change their behaviour? Do you instruct disabled kids to stop acting disabled, non-neurotypical kids to stop acting non-neurotypical, non-white kids to act more white, Muslim kids to act more Christian, LGBTQ kids to go back in the closet? Because bigotry is a huge part of schoolyard bullying.

I'm a huge fan of karate and come from a martial arts background and family, but I'm side-eyeing the hell out of your attitude. Karate is technique, about self-management, about resilience, about being fit enough to run away from a situation if you can, or to defend yourself if you're cornered and have no other way out. It's not about telling yourself to never have hurt feelings and to interiorise blame for the terrible actions of others.

For a librarian, your reading skills stink. I said that 90% of self defense situations are avoidable. That is completely true and not something I made up. Self defense is defending yourself from being physically attacked, not what to do if someone is mean to you in the office. It actually is rare for the vast majority of people (when was the last time you were punched or someone pulled a gun or knife on you?) and for most people happens because they were either looking for a fight or were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Self defense teaches you how to recognize that you are somewhere you shouldn't be and how to get out of the situation and hopefully how not to get in the situation in the first place.

Being bullied isn't a self defense situation. It requires a different set of skills and a different approach. There is a lot of research on bullying. Why kids bully and who they bully. While kids books might focus on the minority de jour, in most situations, that's not what bullying is about. It's more about a kid whose role models are bullies.

Most kids are incredibly accepting of people different than they are. One of my students for the past six years has down syndrome. The other kids are very accepting of him and work with him. The older kids are very protective of him. That's what we teach, look out after your friends.

We have Jews, Muslims, Hindi, blacks, whites, and most Asian groups in class. We have kids who when they are older, come out as gay. No issues. Kids have to be taught to pick on people different than they are. They can be cruel because they don't understand how what they do effects other kids, but as adults we have to explain the idea of putting yourself in the other kid's place and how would you feel if someone said that to you. Kids understand that pretty well.

Karate is a specific martial art. It's a fighting skill and depending on the style of Karate, can include a number of various philosophies or life approaches. It was developed in a fighting culture and really has little to do with self defense in modern America. Some systems are very focus on fighting, others are more focused on the philosophical aspects of the martial arts. Being a 20 year black belt simply means that if I were to get into an actual fight, I would likely be more skilled than the other guy.

Real story. Several years ago, I was threatened by a guy with a tire iron at a traffic light. No idea what his issue was, I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. While he was posturing and yelling, I stayed in my car, pulled out my iPhone, took his picture, punched in 911 and showed it to him. He ran. That is what self defense is really about. Not getting out of the car and using defense against club attack number 15. It means listen to your instincts and don't get in the elevator with the guy who creeps you out. That is what self defense really means.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

For a librarian, your reading skills stink. I said that 90% of self defense situations are avoidable. That is completely true and not something I made up. Self defense is defending yourself from being physically attacked, not what to do if someone is mean to you in the office. It actually is rare for the vast majority of people (when was the last time you were punched or someone pulled a gun or knife on you?) and for most people happens because they were either looking for a fight or were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Self defense teaches you how to recognize that you are somewhere you shouldn't be and how to get out of the situation and hopefully how not to get in the situation in the first place.

I'm not a librarian, Mr Reading Skills.

And I'm not talking about people being "mean to you in the office" (where the hell did you get that??)

I said that if you are teaching self-defence to women and children, focusing on stranger attacks in public is very much the wrong approach. And I am talking about physical violence, of which sexual assault is one of the primary forms for these classes of victims. I've never been punched deliberately (apart from in training). I have been sexually and indecently assaulted a number of times. Almost never by strangers in public - only once in that situation, on a bus as a child. Broad daylight. Crowded bus. Wearing jeans and a Tshirt. "Normal" looking attacker who assaulted me without warning. And this personal experience is borne out in all reputable stats. This is, overwhelmingly, the violence we experience.

Go on, ask me why I didn't report that bus assault.

The vast majority of attackers are known to the victim, and frequently either related or in positions of power over them. Your approach to "avoid the situation" would involve women and children avoiding family members, intimate partners, teachers, coaches, tutors, scout leaders, priests, etc etc etc. It makes no sense in this context at all.

Women's self-defence is a thing, but it's not primarily "stay out of dark alleys" and "avoid sketchy-looking strangers".

[Paperbackstash]

This discussion has strayed far, far beyond the original topic.

It's still an interesting new subject, though. *eyes it from the sideline*

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Cute, now let me quote you saying you believe the reverse:





You might not literally say the words to them "IT'S YOUR FAULT" but you are still sending that message.

It's like how a lie through omission is still a lie, just because you haven't said something doesn't mean you aren't saying something.

No, I'm not. That's just your spin on it. Guess what, just because I haven't said something very much means that I did not say it. I don't use codes, dog whistle or any of the other silliness that it's become popular to accuse people of. You can win any argument if people allow you to put words in their mouths. It's just a rhetorical device to use when you don't have a good argument.