So let me get this straight re: verbal abuse/bullying

[WildEyedLiberal]

According to several comments I've read on DU in the past two days:

1) Seung-Hui Cho was perhaps driven to mental illness/homicidal rage as a result of being picked on. Comments such as "Go back to China," allegedly hurled at him in the classroom, are abusive and bullying and help foster an environment in which an incident such as the Virginia Tech tragedy is inevitable. Conclusion: verbal abuse = bullying and bullying = bad, so bad it might even potentially be a factor in school massacres.

2) On the other hand, Alec Baldwin calling his eleven-year-old child a "thoughtless pig" without "brains or decency" is either apparently, while not an ideal choice of words, the typical reaction of a parent losing his patience with a bratty, ill-mannered child, who probably deserved to be put in her place by her father. Kids these days are self-indulgent, spoiled, whiny little brats, including 11 year old Ireland Baldwin (even though no one on DU knows anything about her other than, according to Alec, she's a "thoughtless pig"), so while calling her a "pig" might be over the top, parenting is hard work and it's not up to us to judge. Although, since we don't know exactly how big of a spoiled brat she is, maybe "pig" IS appropriate.

Now, obviously, both 1) and 2) do not represent a consensus of DU opinion and both 1) and 2) have numerous people on the other side of the debate; however, I'd sure like to know how it is verbal abuse for Cho's classmates to tell him to go back to China, but it's NOT verbal abuse for a man to call his prepubescent child a "thoughtless pig" with no "brains or decency." There seem to be a lot of people on this board decrying verbal bullying and blaming it, at least in part, for the Virginia Tech slayings, and yet at the same time, there are an awful lot of apologists for Alec Baldwin, whose specific words are a lot worse than anything Cho was called (that we know about).

In my book, being called a brainless pig by your dad is a lot worse than being laughed at by schoolmates. Schoolmates are under no specific obligations to be your friend or be nice to you (other than the basic obligation of human decency). Parents, on the other hand, ARE responsible for making sure you grow up in a loving, nurturing environment. Yet I see a LOT of defenses here for Alec Baldwin, mostly centered around the idea that "parenting is hard and sometimes people lose their patience and snap" and lots of assumptions about his daughter's general behavior, as well as the assumption that this is an isolated incident (it may be; it may not be. None of us can know). But at any rate: verbally berating someone is either abuse, or it is not. If Seung-Hui Cho being told to go back to China contributed to his sense of isolation and despair that led him to kill, then Ireland Baldwin, while perhaps not a future serial killer, has a whole lot of psychological trauma to look forward to.

Quite frankly, if this exact same story had come out, but instead of Alec Baldwin as the culprit, a conservative - perhaps Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck - I think we all know that 85% of the defenses of this behavior would turn into throaty, righteous condemnations.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I was verbally and psychologically abused as a child

Children take everything to heart, especially if it comes from their parents. I don't like the words Baldwin used when talking to his daughter-the pain of them brought back sad memories.

[WildEyedLiberal]

7. I don't get how people don't understand it is MORE harmful coming from parents

I thank God every day I do not know what that is like from personal experience.

:hug: for you.

[sandnsea]

11. Your parents never exhibited anger?

How did they express their displeasure?

[WildEyedLiberal]

14. Anger =/= calling your kid a "thoughtless pig" with "no brains or decency"

They never said anything remotely approaching that, no.

[sandnsea]

18. No answer

Okay then.

There's lots of ways to screw up your kid besides getting mad once in a while. I've known people who never raised their voice, but maliciously pit their kids against each other, undermine their spouse, kill people with 'kindness', control excessively, etc.

This is one short incident. Funny how he's supposed to be crucified while people with 30 year records of fits much worse than this are elevated to sainthood status.

[WildEyedLiberal]

23. I didn't think such an obvious question required an answer.

Of course my parents got mad. They managed to discipline me in a way that didn't include screaming or namecalling. A parent screaming at a kid is a surefire sign that they've lost control of themselves, and kids are astute enough to pick up on that. And no one said that screaming is the only way to screw up your kid.

I'm not sure who you're referring to who has a 30 year record of worse fits who has been elevated to sainthood :shrug:

[sandnsea]

28. So what's worse

An occasional incident of losing ones temper - or more insidious methods of screwing up a kid.

Parents are parents. Yours weren't perfect. Mine weren't perfect. I wasn't perfect. Alec Baldwin isn't perfect. Kim Basinger isn't perfect. We've all done things that can create serious problems if done over the course of a lifetime. Just because temper is easily observed, it doesn't mean it's the worst kind of abuse, or even abuse at all.

[Morgana LaFey]

37. You can lose your temper without emotionally abusing your child

And it's not productive to try to rank types of abuse -- what you described in a previous post was terribly abusive, the manipulation, etc. Possibly even downright sadistic. No one can know what effect the particular type of abuse will have on this child, or that child. All we know is that it's ALL harmful and ALL abuse includes emotional abuse because it is the parent's job to protect and love the child, so when parents "turn on" the child, it's a huge emotional betrayal and emotional wounding.

[sandnsea]

39. It's not ALL abuse

That's the point. It's also why our caseworkers have so many children that they can't do justice to the kids who are really in life-threatening danger. We've got to stop lumping this all in one big kettle, it isn't all the same and it isn't all going to do permanent damage to kids. The fact is, if Basinger is playing manipulative games with the daughter, SHE may well be the seriously abusive parent here. We don't know and it cannot be judged by one outburst.

[pnwmom]

2. How right you are.

Reminds me of all the p.c. DUers jumping to convict the Duke LAX players because they were all rich, entitled, hooligans. Without knowing any of them anymore than they know Ireland Baldwin.

[MichiganVote]

3. Um...yup...that pretty much sums it up.

Nothing yet has beat the DU Schaivo days tho' for good old fashioned insanity

[gollygee]

4. It depends on how often it happens

being told to go back to China once - not a big deal. Having schoolmates say things like that over and over again for years - yeah that might cause some trauma.

Being called a spoiled thoughtless pig or whatever the girl was called - not a big deal. Particularly if she was acting like a spoiled thoughtless pig (though I would say brat personally). But being called names by your parent repeatedly, over and over again, for years - yeah, again, that might cause some trauma.

I don't think this Baldwin thing is a good example of verbal abuse, because we have no way of knowing if this kind of thing happens all the time, or if she was being a major brat and he just went off on her that time. Parents aren't perfect, but kids can survive being called something unpleasant occasionally, so it isn't a big deal.

It's all about frequency.

[WildEyedLiberal]

13. We don't know how frequently it has happened with either Cho or Ireland Baldwin

Obviously you're right in that there's a big difference between isolated incidents and patterns of behavior.

But it seems like lots of DUers are very quick to assume that, in Baldwin's case, it is NOT a behavioral pattern, when they have no idea. I'm not saying it IS - because obviously I don't know either. But I do recall reading that he's had anger management issues in the past, and that this came up in the divorce hearings, so I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this wasn't just some random out-of-left-field explosion that has no precedent.

Also, in Cho's case, college classmates have spoken of trying to get to know him better, but their attempts were met with hostility. I guess my point is that whatever bullying Cho suffered, to our knowledge (which of course is very incomplete), doesn't seem like it's any worse than what Alec Baldwin called his daughter (and again, we have no further knowledge of their relationship, whether he says things like this often or not), but as a whole there seems to be a lot of sympathy for the bullying Cho suffered, but very little sympathy for Ireland Baldwin - indeed, more sympathy for Alec, based largely on assumptions people have made.

[gollygee]

15. I have noticed those assumptions

But I have no way of knowing in either case. I agree that people shouldn't assume in either circumstance.

[Deja Q]

5. Both can be equally devestating.

One can probably give a nod to "globalization"("migration", really...) as to why the poor kid got berated by his peers...

And with certain groups of people fighting stereotypes, where are the loners decrying the stereotype that anybody who isn't social is going to whip out a big-ass gun and shoot everybody until the blood rises to the survivors' armpits? :eyes:

[msmcghee]

6. The difference is fundamenetal.

In one case the abuse is exclusionary. Most peer-to-peer abuse by children and teens is in that category. They want their target to feel excluded from the favored group - the one they imply that they are in.

Kids don't usually take parental yelling as exclusionary. They see it as an attempt to modify their behavior. Kids will get together with siblings and close friends and complain and share tales of how mean their parents' are. That makes them feel even more a part of their peer group.

You are comparing two very different things.

Young people are genetically programmed to have a very strong need to belong to some respected group of peers - not to be accepted by adults. That's why boys form gangs and sports teams and join the military. In the military it is the respect of their peers they seek. Seeking the respect of officers (by doing things their peers do not see as worthy) is seen as kissing ass.

If you take a young male and exclude them from any desired group membership using humiliation - many of those males will find a way to get back. In some unfortunate cases that will include violence.

[undergroundpanther]

8. Why does ANYONE have to say abusive words at all?

I mean think about it.If you don't have anything nice to say don't say it.
A parent calling their own kid a pig is verbal abuse
a bunch of bullies thinking it's oh so funny to yell go back to china to Cho,and for an immigrant trying to be accepted that is verbal abuse.Would you say to a black person go back to Africa?
Neither comment is necessary or is decent.Both taunts dehumanize whom it is directed at both are deliberately intended to hurt.
And when you deliberately hurt someone,Do you ever shut up long enough to ask,yourself why are you doing it? Is it because everyone else is doing it?
Is it to puff yourself up at someone else's expense? To make a funny and impress your peers,with your sardonic wit? Is it to dominate someone else? To shame someone else so you can feel better about your own shame? Or is it to encourage others to reject them like you do? What purpose does calling someone a pig or telling them to go back to__ serve really other than to Diminish and reject and basically socially declare them worthless as a person,and not worth being accepted.


Now, People throw around verbal abuse alot and pretend it isn't what it is and want others to pretend a it really isn't hurting people.But it IS hurtful that is the whole reason it is even spoken.

Nobody likes being called a pig from a parent or a peer nor does anyone feel accepted or part of the group when they are told to go back to____.

Rejection hurts.Humiliation hurts.Bullying Hurts.It is a weapon used against a person's heart social person and their being.

If Americans were more sensitized to others pain ,more careful and skillful with words,and had enough caring about others well being they'd be realizing the power words have to hurt others. Maybe with a little empathy, and respect for the sacredness of person hood of others like they seek for themselves, they would feel the tips of their own barbs cut when they look into the eyes of their wounded target if they had the guts to do that. Most verbal abusers do not DARE empathize with their targets pain because to do so means they have to accept they are guilty of choosing their words specifically to hurt the target and are responsible for what came out of their own mouths.

Truth is WE are each totally responsible for what comes out of our own mouths.

It is not the hearers choice when you speak an assault upon their person, they can walk away but by then the barb is lodged in their heart.And I ask the person verbally abusing does it feel good to throw bad hurtful abusive language at people? If so, what is wrong with your empathy why is it so desensitized and stunted?

[WildEyedLiberal]

17. I agree

It's inexcusable in both cases. I don't think that there's ever a good reason to use that kind of language against another person.

[jobycom]

9. Puhleese. Could you perhaps slant that any more?

Could you maybe play pretty music and show flowers and innocent little bunnies to accompany the Cho Seung-Hui portrayal and maybe show evil demons and dark, thunderous rumbling while describing Baldwin?

Spell it out more accurately. Cho Seung-Hui, it was alledged, was bullied for years, constantly. We have no idea how Alec Baldwin normally acts with his kid--we have a couple of moments of his life. If that's his normal way of communicating, bad on him. If that's a case of him responding badly to an emotionally painful moment in his life, then that's between him and his child, and they deserve the privacy to make it up without ridiculous extremist descriptons of behavior we know less than absolutely nothing about. This type of incident is exactly what is meant by the phrase "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

We know the finished product with Cho, we don't have any insight into Baldwin's daughter.

And anyone who says they weren't called worse by their parents or never called their children worse is lying or deluded. Or an absent parent.

[ends_dont_justify]

12. Here's a prime example of someone being verbally abusive to alter a situation N/T

[jobycom]

19. You mean the OP? I didn't want to say that. but yeah, that was abusive. nt

[WildEyedLiberal]

24. Care to explain how my OP was "verbally abusive"?

Good God.

[jobycom]

35. The tone was derisive, but abusive was going too far. I reacted to the claim that mine was abusive.

What I was thinking was "Hey, mine's no worse than his!" That's what I should have said. Instead, I hurled the verbal attack on me at you. My bad. Sorry.

[WildEyedLiberal]

44. Thanks. nt

[undergroundpanther]

20. Manipulative people

feeling the sting of shame will defend thier egos by being that way.
Just realize they aredesensitized and want everyone else to be as desensitized as they are so they can keep getting away with verbal abuse and keep pretending it isn't intended to hurt.
Because the more people accepot verbal abuse as normal the more bullies can push the boundaries down and control the behavior of the group and determine the level of empathy contained in it's interactions.Bullies like an environment like a pecking order among chickens to soothe thier own issues.They like group dynamics arranged that way because they like to dominate and peck on the scapegoats because bullies are weakeast of all and they want to hide that.So they go so far as to kill thier own sensitivity and demand others do the same so the little bully feels better.Bully feels better when everyone else feels bad or is silenced from speaking up against abuse...

The other poster tyring to mess with the situation,is in total control of what he writes and it shows his sick unspoken agenda if you realize each and every person is in control of the words they choose to write and responsible for who gets hurt with it too.

[piesRsquare]

25. Wow...

You seem very knowledgeable about this subject...have you been bullied a lot, too? (I have) :hug:

[undergroundpanther]

43. Yeah I have

But you know,once i figured out the situation behind the bullies and asked why and researched it I know thier game and I can expose it and take away the mask.When you do that bullies tend to shut up and go away or implode in a fit of rage and show everyone what a creep he is.

[jobycom]

45. Question--how is this post not manipulative and bullying?

I mean, you are talking about either me, or the OP--you say as much in your last line. Therefore every line is an attack on one of us. An attack without specifics that we could respond to, I might add (which is why I'm not sure which of us you are attacking). My own post was a defense of someone, which is the opposite of manipulation or abuse. I've reread it several times now and see nothing resembling an attack on anyone, though I clearly criticize a method the OP uses and I guess that can be construed as an attack on the poster. His post was derisive in tone, but not attacking anyone directly, other than Alec Baldwin to some degree.

On the other hand, your post is a constant negative commentary on "manipulative people," and you reveal at the end that you perceive one of us to be manipulative. Clearly the only post in this series meant as a direct attack on a person, rather than on a post, was yours. You accuse one of us directly of have a "sick, unspoken agenda," and indirectly of wanting to get away with "verbal abuse" and "pretend it isn't intended to hurt." Honestly, that sound a lot more like what you are doing in this post than what either I or the OP did in ours? So why is your post not manipulative, or bullying? How is your passive-aggressive attack on one of us more virtuous?

[WildEyedLiberal]

22. You kind of made my point

We DON'T know whether the Baldwin incident is an aberration or a pattern of behavior, but that hasn't stopped lots of people from assuming that Ireland Baldwin is a raging spoiled brat who deserved what she got. Based on what? Because he wouldn't have called her that if it weren't true?

My point is that we really need to re-evaluate our standards for what constitutes verbal abuse and whether or not we consider it to be across-the-board unacceptable. If it was unacceptable for students to mock Seung-Hui Cho, it should be unacceptable for Alec Baldwin to call his daughter a pig. That doesn't mean he's Satan or that he should never see his child again - just that such behavior as he displayed in the voicemail is unacceptable.

And no, I was never called anything like that by my parents, and I'm neither lying nor deluded about it. I was a stubborn, bullheaded kid, but my parents earned my respect by treating me with dignity, and when I needed discipline, they understood that conveying serious disappointment in my actions - letting me know that I had let them down - was far more effective than screaming and calling me names. They were right, too.

[jobycom]

32. That's not all you said in your OP.

"There seem to be a lot of people on this board decrying verbal bullying and blaming it, at least in part, for the Virginia Tech slayings, and yet at the same time, there are an awful lot of apologists for Alec Baldwin..."

My response was that Cho was abused verbally for years at school, in a manner that ostracized him. To compare that to Baldwin snapping at his daughter is wrong. More than that, you are attacking the "apologists" for Alec Baldwin as though they are being inconsistent. To do this, you are minimizing what happened to Cho, and inflating what happened to Baldwin.

"In my book, being called a brainless pig by your dad is a lot worse than being laughed at by schoolmates."

Again, the minimizing of what happened to Cho so that you can create a false comparison, and then make a conclusion you don't have enough information to make. We don't know Baldwin's relationship with his daughter. We don't know if this is unusual language in their relationship. I've known quite functional families where the name-calling and language was loose, honest, and offensive to outsiders, and I've known dysfunctional families where the parents treated the children with such formality that they felt like strangers.

"If Seung-Hui Cho being told to go back to China contributed to his sense of isolation and despair that led him to kill, then Ireland Baldwin, while perhaps not a future serial killer, has a whole lot of psychological trauma to look forward to."

Again, you don't know enough about her to conclude that, and you are again minimizing the alienation and psychological torture of years of verbal attacks on Cho.

Your post jumped to conclusions about Baldwin based on one moment of their relationship, without knowing either party in the relationship, while grotesquely minimizing the abuse Seung-Hui Cho faced, all to prove points I don't believe stand when the facts are presented more accurately.

If there are those speculating that Baldwin's daughter is a brat and deserved to be called a pig, I didn't see them, and I agree that we don't know anything about her and can't conclude that. But that was only one of several points you made, and since I didn't see the posts where people did that, I wasn't responding to that.

[Left Is Write]

26. While I don't disagree with your main point - my parents NEVER called me a name.

Not pig, not brat, not anything worse. I'm neither a liar nor deluded.

I've never called my kids names, either (though God knows "brat" came to mind more times than once during our trials with my oldest last year).

[jobycom]

33. It doesn't have to be a name.

Your parents never said anything that hurt you? Never told you they were disappointed? Never gave you a silent treatment? Never want too far at anything? I didn't say everyone had been called names, I said they'd been called "worse." I've known parents who could crumple a kid by speaking their name in a certain tone of voice, or by whispering "I'm disappointed in you," or by not believing a child who was telling the truth. No parent is perfect, no lifetime can be spent without misunderstandings or expressions of disapproval. We don't know enough about Baldwin to say what his words meant to his daughter. I didn't defend his words, I said we don't know anything about their relationship. He may be an abusive parent, or this may be the way they deal with each other. But either way, every child has had to overcome a parent going too far. The measure of a parent isn't the worst thing they've done (except in certain unforgivable instances, of course), it's the essence of the way they deal with their children. Do they form communicative, constructive relationships, or do they distance themselves and bully their children?

That's what I meant. If you say your parents were always perfect and never had a low moment that made you feel horrible, I can't say you're wrong, I guess. But I can say I can't imagine that being possible.

[Left Is Write]

38. I'm not saying anything about Alec Baldwin, because I agree with you on that point.

And no, my parents didn't say hurtful things to us kids. Saying "I'm disappointed in your behavior" is a whole lot different from "You are a rude, thoughtless pig."

[jobycom]

40. That depends on the parent and the kid.

I honestly can't believe you were never hurt as a kid. I just can't.

[Left Is Write]

42. Believe what you want.

I was hurt a lot. Mostly by kids in school. Arguments with friends. Snottiness from my siblings.

My parents were the people I went to to take the hurt away. They didn't cause it. Yes, they got angry, and yes, I did stupid stuff I got in trouble for. However, my parents managed to discipline my siblings and me without belittling us.

[cherokeeprogressive]

30. Threats

Maybe it's where a person is brought up, or what their heritage is. But when my dad said "I'm gonna straighten you out", it was usually a prelude to an ass-whipping. If he said "I'm gonna straighten your ASS out", it meant slipping a National Geographic in my jeans might be a good idea. I never reached the bookshelf in time. Too slow, and too obvious.

Wikipedia says this about assault: "Assault is a crime of violence against another person. In some jurisdictions, including Australia and New Zealand assault refers to the actual violence, while in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, England and Wales, assault refers only to the threat of violence, while the actual violence is battery. Simple assaults that do not involve any aggravation such as use of a deadly weapon are distinguished from aggravated assaults."

All I'm saying is that was how my dad talked to me, almost to the letter, and it always led to "corporal punishment" at the very least. So in "Chris' World", what he did qualifies legally as assault if his daughter tells a judge and jury that she thought he was going to hit her.

"... when I come out there next week, I'm gonna fly out there for the day, just to straighten you out, on this issue. I'm gonna let you know, just how disappointed in you I am..."

"I'm gonna get on a plane. And I'm gonna come out there for the day, and I'm gonna straighten your ass out, when I see you. Do you understand me? I'm gonna really make sure you get it. Then I'm gonna get on a plane, and I'm gonna turn around and I'm gonna come home. So you better be ready..."

"you are a rude, thoughtless, little pig."

[jobycom]

34. Threats.

It would take more than her claiming she thought her dad meant he was going to hit her when he got there for it to be assault. There would have to be some legitimate reason for her to feel that way. There may have been--I don't know, and I haven't tried to claim Baldwin is a good father. All I've said is that we don't know enough from one incident to judge anything about him except that he lost his cool.

[sandnsea]

10. environment vs. incident

I have one incident regarding Alec Baldwin. According to some reports, there was an environment of animosity towards Cho.

HUGE difference.

[ends_dont_justify]

16. You're preaching to the choir, and bullies. Some perhaps sociopaths

You won't get people to understand all the time, largely because people like the way they live. Take the comment that person made about how 'everyone calls their kids that'. I see someone is projecting guilt...but obviously has no guilt or shame to that, as well.

Just use someone's attitude to label...not label them for petty reasons. Label them for how they may react. Label them in the degree of pity you should give them for not seeing a different way, and how far away you should give that pity to them.

You'll always make someone angry in the world...I've always believed...making people happy and upset at the same time is a given, so making people who want to cause pain unhappy and making people who dislike suffering happy is better than making everyone happy. There's just too many people who enjoy the propagation of pain...to the point they will actively attempt constant negotiation to acceptable degrees of pain they wish to create.

[TahitiNut]

21. Composition Fallacy - a reasoning error

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/composition.html

[Rex]

27. There is no way to predict things like the VT massacre.

Not possible, have better luck predicting the weather. There were indicators, yes. There were apparent warning signs and red flags that something was wrong with Cho, no doubt. Did it all lead to predicting he would kill the people he did? Not a chance.

The guy flipped and it is impossible to predict the time or place when that happens.

[WildEyedLiberal]

29. Oh, I agree

I don't even really agree with the argument that bullying played a definitive role in the massacre. If anything did, it was his mental illness, but obviously lots of mentally ill people don't become killers, so it is as you say impossible to predict. The bullying should never have happened, and is inexcusable, but that is true whether or not Cho killed people or not.

I'm definitely not trying to imply that verbal abuse inevitably leads to a violent backlash. I'm just trying to grok DU's reactions to situations of verbal abuse, and why some incidents are condemned more than others. I realize that comparing these two incidents is at best imprecise, but there seems to be a running theme that verbally berating a human being is worse in some cases than in others.

[Rex]

41. If you're looking for moral equivalency, forget DU GD!

The man is dead so we will never know the truth about why. A lot of people are glad he killed himself, I wish they could have captured the fella and tried to figure out why.

Why, such a good question. I think bullying could hurt someones mental framework, enough to kill people sure maybe so. I read that his grandfather is happy Cho is dead. Good feelings all around the world.

[sam sarrha]

31. he was mentally ill first and had been before the university.... never heard of bullying at the U

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Both are verbal abuse

and bullying is just one part of the puzzle when it comes to these perfects storms called shootings.

They are not the only answer... and anybody sugesting that (at the risk of being called to the carpet for bullying behavior) needs to have their heads examined

There are other elements that come into play

Availabilyt of guns

Our violent culture were our heroes are violent

And even previous events play a role, how much, your guess is as good as mine