Post 46 -- The Bully-Victim dichotomy and Why Both Are Disliked

I was recently introduced to the essay site The Baffler. A fun, long read site that provokes us to think on big issues without the grotesque TED-X pandering and weepy guilt-trips.

Reading through Dave Graeber's The Bully's Pulpit, I stumbled upon a well known fact within psychology circles but otherwise unknown to the rest of the public: bullies and victims are equally disliked. There is good reason for this, too. Victims are not as plentiful as some might initially think; rather, bullies groom and select the best options for targeting for abuse. A good victim is one who reacts, often disproportionately to the actions of the bully. It creates a spectacle and platform of recognition for the bully if his/her victim is one who lashes back or embarrasses themselves in an act of defense.

If the bully is ignored, he/she gets nothing from the encounter, other than some curious discomfort from onlookers. There are two strategies which can be employed here: first, finding a new target, as the attempt failed. For example, a non-style savvy bully attempts to mock the clothing choice of another only to learn his/her understanding of fashion is so limited that his target is far more in vogue than originally believed. A failed strategy is still a learning opportunity for a clever bully, though, and, like the Borg from Star Trek: The Next Generation, they will assimilate that knowledge; second, the bully engages in the long game with his/her victim, where simple, subtle jabs are made over time. The aggravation which develops in the victim comes to a head after dozen pokes, only to result in what appears to be an entirely overblown response. On lookers do not see the weeks of minor incitement taking place and building, meaning their assessment of the situation leaves both bully and victim in a state of disdain among their peers.

Here's where things get interesting in my mind: taking our bully-victim dichotomy, both of which are disliked by their peers, we can move on to another topic of my enjoyment: modern feminism. (NOTE: when I say 'modern feminist', I am specifically referring to third/fourth wave feminism.) What happens when you have a person or group taking on the role of both victim and bully? What we get is modern, online, "fainting couch" feminism. Bully tactics are employed by this group, specifically using emotional manipulation and shaming to wear down their victims. Using the language of -isms to demean, modern feminists attempt to eat away at the reputation, credibility, and respectability of their victims. Anyone who disagrees with a modern feminist will be called a sexist or misogynist by the rad fem and, as is the nature of the internet, any other rad fem who clicks on the associated hashtag. 

That subtle jab of calling someone a sexist does not warrant a response. Being a called a sexist by a couple dozen rad fems does not warrant a response either. Over time, however, that one disagreement leads towards a response so disproportionate to the single statement made that the victim now fulfills the original statements made by feminist bullies--some strange version of Lewis's Law. This is not a new insight, and has been established as well as the grade school bully's tactics against the smaller kids on the playground. Where I'm taking us goes into the realm of assuming both bully and victim role.

Here's a basic example. The '-ist' taunts have been stated and the fervent response is finally made.

Modern Feminist: The wage gap is real!
Future victim: Analysis says otherwise: (source).
Three Modern Feminist: You're a misogynist!
Victim: (no response)
Eight Modern Feminist: You're a sexist racist!
Victim: (no response)
Fifteen Modern Feminist: You're a racist misogynist!
Victim: (no response)
One Modern Feminist: You're a woman-hating, sexist, racist, misogynist!
Victim: Fuck off you cunt!

Here we have the victim of the unjustified taunts lashing out, having him/her acting in an entirely unlikable manner while perfectly fulfilling, in the modern feminists' minds, their taunts. After all, in North America, "cunt" is not as free of a word as it is in the United Kingdom. Now, the léger de main is performed: the modern feminist, having her taunts confirmed both by the response and the nature of the response, assumes the role of victim. By being the victim now, the modern feminist can engage in a whole new range of justified measures against his/her original target as they are no longer the bully, but are now the wronged victim.

The indomitable Mykeru gives a wonderful description of it here.

The modern feminist tactic is simple: bully until you get the response, twist that response to something out of proportion, claim victimhood, and re-engage in the bullying under the guise of the defensive victim. All the while, as people look on, being utterly and entirely disliked for making a bed of nails and complaining about laying on it. School yard, workplace, or Twitter, both bully and victim are equally disliked. When one entity takes on both roles, it comes as no surprise that flippancy and loathing from bystanders is the response.

This has been an unedited rant. @nrokchi