When does abusing the abuser become abuse in itself?  

rm_Trillogy 59M
103 posts
4/18/2006 5:37 pm

Last Read:
8/24/2006 5:47 pm

When does abusing the abuser become abuse in itself?


I started following a members blog here, because I was interested and wanted to know more about her. As I read through her blog, it was the usual things that a lot of us write about. Nothing profound, just general stuff. Then I came across a post by her indicating that a person had come into her blog and abused her. She quoted part of what he had said and it was about the last few posts being boring to him. I thought "wow", he must have really said some bad stuff in the other part (that I wasn't seeing) to have her so mad and banning him.

She later decided to un-ban him and let his post show for a bit so that people could comment on it (she had already had some posts telling her what a jerk he was and all that). She then went on to say "after all, I am a nice person". She said she would leave it up for a day or so, that way people could tell him what they thought of him. Well, the mob came out and lynched him. I read his whole post, and the one after it where he tried to apologize for mis-stating his words. I couldn't believe it. All he really said was that he found the last few boring, but loved her writing.

I read through a number of her blogs. No one ever said anything in the other blogs other than giving high praise to her.

Is this what blogging is suppose to be about? Building your own ego up? Only allowing "yes men" and "doormats" to write in it? If he had been truly abusive, then I can certainly see banning him. But, finding the writings boring doesn't seem abusive to me.

This guy from what I could tell was insecure. In his profile, you could tell he most likely didn't interact with people all that well. I felt sorry for him. You could tell he was infatuated with the blogger. I suspect he is crushed now.

Needless to say, I lost interest in learning more about this lady. But, I would like to know your thoughts.

redrobin012057 59F

4/18/2006 9:51 pm

We/I feel that this site has become too competitive in its nature.Some people don't know fact from fantasy,truth or a lie,real or just make believe.Its so easy to find prey on here,some are more gulliable than others.

Just my thoughts.

Robin!!


rm_Trillogy replies on 4/19/2006 4:34 am:
I think I was bothered by the way the rest went after him, without regard for his actions. It was like they were out to please her.

redrobin012057 59F

4/19/2006 5:08 pm

Some are like that, its a crazy world we live in to justify actions of others , its futile and understand your frustrations.Clearly this was mob mentality in pursuit just to win favoritism with the blogger.


Cinderella21957 59F

4/19/2006 8:00 pm

This got me thinking....and this is what I have taken as research

Each of these three moral insights is the basis for a kind of moral argument. The insight that morality urges us to respect others is one of the core ideas in an approach to morality called "deontology." For this reason, arguments that are based on the insight that morality urges us to respect others are typically called DEONTOLOGICAL arguments. The second insight deals with harm and benefit. Harm and benefit have to do with the results or consequences of actions. For this reason, arguments that are based on the moral insight that morality favors benefiting others and opposes harming others are typically called CONSEQUENTIALIST arguments. Finally, arguments that are based on the claim that morality is a rational system of requirements can be called SYSTEMATIC arguments.

Cinders!!!

Cinders
If you take your eyes off your goals,
all you see are obstacles.


Cinderella21957 59F

4/19/2006 8:38 pm

Further:There are two main deontological, or respect-based moral arguments. Both are based on the idea that persons have a certain dignity, a kind of moral sacredness, that morality requires us to recognize in our interactions with them. The most familiar kind of deontological argument is based on the idea of rights. It is based on the idea that we can respect persons by respecting their rights. The other argument is based on the idea of autonomy or freedom, and involves the idea that we can respect a person by never using her as a mere tool against her will.
Arguments that appeal to moral rights are among the most familiar, the most common, and the most effective moral arguments. Such arguments often appeal to the idea of human rights, such as the right to life, liberty, property, freedom of expression, and so on. If an action deprives a person of these rights without her consent, then that fact provides very strong evidence that the action is immoral. The argument itself is quite simple:

Premise: Action or policy X violates someone's rights.

Conclusion: There is some reason to believe (=there is some evidence) that X is immoral.

If you are interacting with a person in order to achieve some purpose, then you are treating her as a means. That is, you are treating her as a tool to achieve some purpose. However, if you give her the opportunity to agree to the interaction, you are respecting her ability to make her own choice (that is, her freedom as rational beings). You must not "use" a person for your own ends without regard to her own feelings or goals.

Cinders
If you take your eyes off your goals,
all you see are obstacles.


rm_Trillogy replies on 4/20/2006 2:43 am:
Well Cinders, it's interesting and somewhat applies.

GoddessOfTheDawn 105F
11238 posts
4/26/2006 1:23 am


I must say I'm curious now as to what blog you are referring to. I have several in mind this could be about.

In my book
› everyone's blog is THEIR space
› treat people with the respect you'd like to be treated with
› there ARE things that should be 'discussed' in private
› you don't just put people's handles out there
(when I use a handle I usually ask for permission first)

I do agree there are idiots, not just on the blogs but everywhere on the site. I get stupid mails and some.... let's say strange comments too. I have deleted my share, have sent out mails asking as to what that was about and such ....

Anyway, sorry for rambling on, I guess we all treat our blog in our own way. I can understand your reasoning very well though. Not everyone in my blog agrees with what I say, and people can speak out, give their opinion. I can learn lots from others.

Isn't it great we're not all the same!


rm_Trillogy replies on 4/26/2006 2:09 am:
GOTD, I felt in this case, the way it was handled was very poor. This fellow really didn't make that bad a comment. And, you could tell he almost idolized her. There didn't seem to be any reason to hold him up to ridicule. She did it simply to have him ridiculed and then the comment "after all I am a nice person" comment.

GoddessOfTheDawn 105F
11238 posts
4/26/2006 3:24 am

    Quoting GoddessOfTheDawn:

    I must say I'm curious now as to what blog you are referring to. I have several in mind this could be about.

    In my book
    › everyone's blog is THEIR space
    › treat people with the respect you'd like to be treated with
    › there ARE things that should be 'discussed' in private
    › you don't just put people's handles out there
    (when I use a handle I usually ask for permission first)

    I do agree there are idiots, not just on the blogs but everywhere on the site. I get stupid mails and some.... let's say strange comments too. I have deleted my share, have sent out mails asking as to what that was about and such ....

    Anyway, sorry for rambling on, I guess we all treat our blog in our own way. I can understand your reasoning very well though. Not everyone in my blog agrees with what I say, and people can speak out, give their opinion. I can learn lots from others.

    Isn't it great we're not all the same!

Trillogy replies on 4/26/2006 2:09 am:
GOTD, I felt in this case, the way it was handled was very poor. This fellow really didn't make that bad a comment. And, you could tell he almost idolized her. There didn't seem to be any reason to hold him up to ridicule. She did it simply to have him ridiculed and then the comment "after all I am a nice person" comment.


in one sentence: that sux

and.... it says so much more about HER than about HIM


rm_Trillogy replies on 4/27/2006 2:08 am:
Well, I was very interested in her. She seemed to be in me as well and wanted me to learn about her from her blog. I believe I did. At least enough to decide I would rather not go any further. I'll email you privately about the blog.

rm_sj365 55F
2414 posts
4/28/2006 1:50 pm

Masses are asses.

*sigh*


rm_Trillogy replies on 4/29/2006 12:38 pm:
sj, well put and in very few words.

ladythriller64 55M/52F
6 posts
5/1/2006 10:11 am

Hi trillogy, just thought I'd have a nosey at your blog after our recent disagreement on one of the articles...your reply to ssl on the 24th here, strikes me as a little hypocritical in comparison with your comments to me recently...in your own words here, you state "if I only heard my own voice, I would be lost in the wilderness." How true, If someone opens up and publicly reveals their views and opinions based on their personal experience, you CAN learn more. I'm disappointed you didn't. Although I feel that you tried to deny me my own voice, I wish you well as I can recognise you are obviously a decent, caring person.


rm_Trillogy replies on 5/1/2006 3:06 pm:
ladythriller, I'm glad you stopped by. However, I believe you misunderstand a few things. Because I didn't agree with you, doesn't mean in the least, that I am closed minded. I looked at your view and I don't agree with you. To me, is a crime of violence, not sex. You feel it's sex, I feel it's violence. We disagree and because I didn't agree, you shouldn't be disappointed that I didn't learn something. Ever think that perhaps you shouldn't be disappointed that I didn't learn something, that perhaps you might have learned instead?

I have very strong feelings about being a violent crime, formed over years. And, it wasn't formed at a whim. It was based on my experience as a police officer for close to 5 years and 16 years on a city council where we made laws. It's also based on the victims. So, I didn't just pick it out of the air.

I hope you stop by again, because I do enjoy learning from others. And, I also enjoy others learning from me, if I have new information for them.

Also, because I disagree with you on one subject, that doesn't mean I won't be 100% behind you on another. Or learn something new from you.

ladythriller64 55M/52F
6 posts
5/2/2006 1:51 pm

Thanks for your reply and your e-mail, I appreciate the chance to communicate both our views and as I said in my reply to your e-mail please look at my latest post on the article...You'll discover why I have such strong feelings. (I have a right to)..I think that comments written are often "read" in a different context to the way they were intended. I agree with you (as I previously stated), that IS an act of violence and should be treated as such...I was trying to explain the after-effects for the victim. Their feelings and views about sex after this type of crime are so immensely changed to what they previously thought and felt. I'm saying that for the victim to be able to move on they need to re-learn their old feelings about what sex should be, not these new horrors that they do now equate with sex. To do that they shouldn't be told it's not sex, someone HAS forced sex upon them, aswell as violence and that's why it still affects their sex life with a loving partner, sometimes for years after. That's why I feel it needs to still be recognized, to validate what they feel about sex after . I also agree that from the attacker and the publics point of view it is, and should be a criminal act of violence, not seen as sex that the victim took part in...god forbid anyone would see it that way. Totally dismissing the sex aspect of is to deny it happened, making it assault, it is both...I spent more years coming to terms with the sex aspect than the violence, because everyone understands the trauma of violence and there is plenty of support for the violence as that is a crime in its' own right. I hope this helps clarify my own feelings and I don't think is ONLY about sex, I just don't want it to be ONLY about violence, because it wasn't for me...it was both and both have quite separate effects on the victim. I still thank and respect you for your obvious stand against in whatever form or however we class it. Thanks for "listening".


rm_Trillogy replies on 5/2/2006 2:45 pm:
ladythriller, I think we most likely are on the same page when it comes to the actual crime of . Where we differ is in the validation. I don't believe it has to be considered sex to validate your feelings and the difficulty in having loving sex after the violence. I could go on and on about this, but I have writen to you in reply to your message to me. Maybe it will make some sense.

_RoSe_ 47F
994 posts
5/9/2006 9:52 pm

Its a shame people can be so cruel and self serving. And no that is not what writing blogs is all about...or shouldn't be.

"A life without passion is not a life; it is merely an existence."
~Rose~


rm_Trillogy replies on 5/10/2006 2:32 am:
texas rose, thank you for coming by. I in turn, visited your blog. You paint very well indeed. I hope you stop by often.

Become a member to create a blog