Anti-Bullying Campaign is just propaganda

[aestus]

Cyberbullying has more long-term ramifications than just being bullied in real life, despite if you have an online presence or not. I would argue that it may even be worse if you don't have an online presence, because the only things that will be about you online is what people say about you. Being bullied in real life may affect a person with a certain type of crowd, at worse case the whole graduating class. However, sites like twitter and facebook allows people you don't know to participate in the bullying and reaches a far greater amount of people. This results in more bullying from even more people in real life. This can utterly destroy a persons life, especially in smaller communities and the remnants of the bullying will live forever online onto college and into adulthood.

What if you had a daughter who was being bullied and was being called a slut and a whore online. Edited pictures of her could appear in compromising situations and this can pass from a small group of students to now the whole highschool. Now your daughter can't even go out in public without even being rediculed or older guys "testing" the slut reputation with her with unwanted advances. Let's say this now spreads to adults who are lead to believe that some of the rumors are true and now she is not welcome in their business or home. She won't be able to go to the prom or even go enjoy a highschool football game. Even her closest friends ditch her to avoid being associated with her. This could even become so far spread that now even you as her parents are looked negatively and it may affect your dealings with neighbors or business owners.

In small towns, this is devastating and anything short of moving away, your daughter will never have a good life there. There is a high probability that this will lead to your daughter having suicidal thoughts. This is just one example. Now replace it with an example where a son or daughter is rumored to be gay. Again, this is going to lead to suicide, especially if the parents are part of the problem and bullying the kid. Nothing worse than a kid being bullied by everyone, including their own parents.

On a slightly different note...

Your reputation online is now becoming an extension of who you are as a person in real life. The way you act and post stuff online shows how you are that most would not see otherwise. The most revealing information about a person is how a person acts or posts online when the person thinks they're anonymous. More and more jobs are using google as their background check and are adopting this process.

When I hire, I scour the internet for any bits of information about you that I may find. This is actually practiced by many of the bigger companies dealing with technology in OKC. I've had stellar applicants rejected because of alarming behavior or posts online. What most may not realize is that there have been cases where applicants have been turned down due to even a complete lack of identity online in favor of someone who has a healthy online presence. It's like a credit score... having a bad and/or average credit score is often times "better" than no credit score. Having no presence online usually tells me that a person is not comfortable with an online profile (kind of important if you work in the cutting edge world of web application development and web startups), you simply do not participate and therefore are missing out all the advantages of online communications, or you have gone to great lengths to hide yourself, which raises flags for me.

If you're over 40, you can probably get away with not ever dealing with online social websites and your online identity and how it relates to you in real life. However, it is going to matter a great deal for your children as their online presence becomes an extension of who they are in real life. They will be judged by their actions online and sometimes the way they act online is a better clue to the person they really are on the inside unfiltered. Similarly to some children who are overly-sheltered and/or home-schooled by their parents, some of these kids who grow up blocked from being social online and having profiles from their technophobe parents may not be able to deal with being able to have an online presence once the leash is gone and the kid goes to college. Some of these kids will not know how to have a balanced online identity that coincides with their real life identity.

 

[Glocktogo]

Cyberbullying has more long-term ramifications than just being bullied in real life, despite if you have an online presence or not. I would argue that it may even be worse if you don't have an online presence, because the only things that will be about you online is what people say about you. Being bullied in real life may affect a person with a certain type of crowd, at worse case the whole graduating class. However, sites like twitter and facebook allows people you don't know to participate in the bullying and reaches a far greater amount of people. This results in more bullying from even more people in real life. This can utterly destroy a persons life, especially in smaller communities and the remnants of the bullying will live forever online onto college and into adulthood.

What if you had a daughter who was being bullied and was being called a slut and a whore online. Edited pictures of her could appear in compromising situations and this can pass from a small group of students to now the whole highschool. Now your daughter can't even go out in public without even being rediculed or older guys "testing" the slut reputation with her with unwanted advances. Let's say this now spreads to adults who are lead to believe that some of the rumors are true and now she is not welcome in their business or home. She won't be able to go to the prom or even go enjoy a highschool football game. Even her closest friends ditch her to avoid being associated with her. This could even become so far spread that now even you as her parents are looked negatively and it may affect your dealings with neighbors or business owners.

In small towns, this is devastating and anything short of moving away, your daughter will never have a good life there. There is a high probability that this will lead to your daughter having suicidal thoughts. This is just one example. Now replace it with an example where a son or daughter is rumored to be gay. Again, this is going to lead to suicide, especially if the parents are part of the problem and bullying the kid. Nothing worse than a kid being bullied by everyone, including their own parents.

On a slightly different note...

Your reputation online is now becoming an extension of who you are as a person in real life. The way you act and post stuff online shows how you are that most would not see otherwise. The most revealing information about a person is how a person acts or posts online when the person thinks they're anonymous. More and more jobs are using google as their background check and are adopting this process.

When I hire, I scour the internet for any bits of information about you that I may find. This is actually practiced by many of the bigger companies dealing with technology in OKC. I've had stellar applicants rejected because of alarming behavior or posts online. What most may not realize is that there have been cases where applicants have been turned down due to even a complete lack of identity online in favor of someone who has a healthy online presence. It's like a credit score... having a bad and/or average credit score is often times "better" than no credit score. Having no presence online usually tells me that a person is not comfortable with an online profile (kind of important if you work in the cutting edge world of web application development and web startups), you simply do not participate and therefore are missing out all the advantages of online communications, or you have gone to great lengths to hide yourself, which raises flags for me.

If you're over 40, you can probably get away with not ever dealing with online social websites and your online identity and how it relates to you in real life. However, it is going to matter a great deal for your children as their online presence becomes an extension of who they are in real life. They will be judged by their actions online and sometimes the way they act online is a better clue to the person they really are on the inside unfiltered. Similarly to some children who are overly-sheltered and/or home-schooled by their parents, some of these kids who grow up blocked from being social online and having profiles from their technophobe parents may not be able to deal with being able to have an online presence once the leash is gone and the kid goes to college. Some of these kids will not know how to have a balanced online identity that coincides with their real life identity.

Am I the only one that finds your opinion on the subject absolutely chilling? Does anyone who wishes it, deserve privacy or anonymity? In this "up to the nanosecond" media frenzy where it's OK for invasive reporting to pierce the most intimate part of our lives, where people routinely take their phones and email and work and extended family drama on vacation with them, where does one go for sanctuary? Is it really any wonder that people go off the deep end? Isn't it somewhat surprising that it doesn't happen more often? Sad, very sad if you ask me.

 

[aestus]

Am I the only one that finds your opinion on the subject absolutely chilling? Does anyone who wishes it, deserve privacy or anonymity? In this "up to the nanosecond" media frenzy where it's OK for invasive reporting to pierce the most intimate part of our lives, where people routinely take their phones and email and work and extended family drama on vacation with them, where does one go for sanctuary? Is it really any wonder that people go off the deep end? Isn't it somewhat surprising that it doesn't happen more often? Sad, very sad if you ask me.

Well, you can call it an opinion, but in actuality it's reality. I guess I went a bit off tangent in the second part of the my post, but first part is very relevant when it comes to cyber bullying. Don't pass it off as harmless or as not something that isn't serious just because it's online. Not having a profile online is not necessarily going to shelter someone from cyber bullying and things that are said and done to you online will always be there for a very long time.

In the second part of my post, I guess I failed to make my point clear. What I was trying to say is that your online presence is increasingly becoming no different than your real life presence in public. People should post and act online as how they would in real life if they were in the public eye. People make the mistake of thinking that just because it's online, you won't be judged for your actions and don't ever assume you are ever completely anonymous online. If you don't want any bit of information going out about yourself online, treat it like how you would in real life... don't say it in public. Posting online is the equivalent of shouting in public and posting things for only your "friends" online doesn't mean they won't then share what you say to everyone else. Assume that anything you post in forums, chatrooms, email, ect may be used to judge your character. I'm not saying it's right, but it's becoming reality.

Don't act like a fool and certainly don't post stuff you would never say or represent in real life. If you shout obscenities and slander someone out in public, you're a fool if you think that what you say or do publicly won't be used against you or affect your reputation and may cost you opportunities later in life. The internet is the same. People get caught up thinking that their online profiles are separate from themselves in real life and this is the root of most problems. Your actions online ARE you.

 

[BrandonMF]

My audio is screwed so I can't hear what he's saying, so I might not be justifying what he's saying, but I will justify his position on religion. Him being gay, he realizes that it's not a choice like Christians try to convince him it is. He's probably got a lot of built up hatred towards Christians, because even though he may not be Christian, he's still influenced by Christianity in a negative way. He cannot get married, he's oppressed by a majority of society, he's constantly told how he's going to hell for his "choices". I support him for fighting back against oppression, but without hearing his words I can't support any low-blows. I only hope he fights with the truth.

You could use that lame-ass excuse for people who drink, masturbate, enjoy sex outside of marriage, etc., etc., etc. Does that excuse bad behavior on their part? NO? 'cause they're not gay?

Double standard. Gays can deal with the scorn of the Christ Kids like the rest of us savage heathen drunken fornicators. You need to re-define your definition of oppression, too. Oppression isn't "slight disapproval from people who don't matter in my life" just like Freedom isn't, "I can do whatever I want with no consequence." They can't marry, sure, but Gays are so far from oppressed in this country it's hilarious to call what they endure Oppression. Jews were oppressed. Christ was oppressed. They were hunted down and killed in the night. As long as gays can spend their nights together in clubs and people can be openly gay without official repercussion from the state, it's laughable to call it oppression.

I would not call "someone dislikes me/thinks bad of me/is willing to kill me for my lifestyle" oppression at all. It's just life. **** happens to everyone despite race, creed, or sexuality. Someone always disagrees with something you do, from one extreme to the other. Government isn't trying to stop gays from indulging in any lifestyle they please. You could argue "Marriage", but that's weak. They can live together, raise kids together, and do everything else and in fact it's encouraged by a lot of people in government and a lot of social services agencies. The push for Marriage is a political push for societal acceptance of homosexuality in general, not anything to do with "oppression" of someone's basic human right. Heh.

To call that oppression is ludicrous. Silly, even.

 

[Danny Tanner]

You could use that lame-ass excuse for people who drink, masturbate, enjoy sex outside of marriage, etc., etc., etc. Does that excuse bad behavior on their part? NO? 'cause they're not gay?

Double standard. Gays can deal with the scorn of the Christ Kids like the rest of us savage heathen drunken fornicators. You need to re-define your definition of oppression, too. Oppression isn't "slight disapproval from people who don't matter in my life" just like Freedom isn't, "I can do whatever I want with no consequence." They can't marry, sure, but Gays are so far from oppressed in this country it's hilarious to call what they endure Oppression. Jews were oppressed. Christ was oppressed. They were hunted down and killed in the night. As long as gays can spend their nights together in clubs and people can be openly gay without official repercussion from the state, it's laughable to call it oppression.

I would not call "someone dislikes me/thinks bad of me/is willing to kill me for my lifestyle" oppression at all. It's just life. **** happens to everyone despite race, creed, or sexuality. Someone always disagrees with something you do, from one extreme to the other. Government isn't trying to stop gays from indulging in any lifestyle they please. You could argue "Marriage", but that's weak. They can live together, raise kids together, and do everything else and in fact it's encouraged by a lot of people in government and a lot of social services agencies. The push for Marriage is a political push for societal acceptance of homosexuality in general, not anything to do with "oppression" of someone's basic human right. Heh.

To call that oppression is ludicrous. Silly, even.

What? Being gay isn't bad behavior that they can switch on and off like a light.

Gays are hunted down and beaten and killed by those who have been brainwashed to believe it's a choice. Matthew Shepard sound familiar?

The Government is trying to stop gays from indulging in any lifestyle they please. They want to live a normal lifestyle like you and me. They want to get married, they want a family. There are only a handful of states allowing gay marriage and even then, it's not legal on a federal level. About just as many states allow same-sex couples to adopt children. Surely you're aware of the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. It is oppression, on a smaller scale than the Jewish holocaust, sure, but it's still oppression by definition.

 

[hard_r]

Thank you. I understand that I'm a very small minority in our state, so I learn to stand my ground without disrespecting those around me. I glad you understood my comment. I didn't want to support any hateful remarks by this guy, as two wrongs don't make a right, I only wanted to say that I understand why him, being a homosexual, would have resentment towards Christians in general.

A lot could be learned from you.



As soonersfan posted out above you, I'm an atheist. Being so, I put a lot of my faith into science. Many studies have shown that homosexuality is of biological doing. They have no more choice of being born gay than you have of being born with blue eyes (though the latter is better distributed by genetics, you still have no choice in your birth-given eye color). I can't imagine what it'd be like to be a gay child growing up and being confused about himself. Seeing all your friends like girls, your dad and uncles liking girls, seeing it as a typical family on tv and knowing that you're supposed to like girls, but not sure why you don't. While I understand the main purpose of any living creature is procreation and obviously two men can't fulfill that obligation, I think it's great that we're slowly becoming tolerant towards gays.

I don't believe we should put Hollywood glam on it, any more than we should any other culture, belief, or lifestyle to make up a cultural gay. I don't think any straight man having sex with a guy makes him gay. It just makes him a straight guy banging a dude. For the sake of my argument, I believe homosexuality isn't a choice any more than heterosexuality (did you and I choose to be straight? I didn't, I automatically like boobies!), so the same goes for a gay man being married to a woman. It doesn't make him straight, it makes him a gay man married to a woman.

I'm not going to try to change your stance on it, but I did want to give you a neutral argument as a heterosexual arguing for homosexuals.

I just want to say that I agree with every word you wrote here. I am also an athiest. I don't see why people can't just "mind they bees" and live and let live. Somebody's gay? SO what? How does that affect you? Somebody's a Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, athiest, whatever? As long as they aren't shoving it down your throat, Leave them be! I am an athiest who supports the right to be religious, a straight man that supports the right to be gay, a meat eater who supports the right to be vegetarian, etc.

BTW: I am glad there are people like you and I here in the bible belt to show people that being an athiest doesn't mean persecuting the religious. And that we can have a civil discussion. And support other's right to whatever religion they choose.

 

[Danny Tanner]

I just want to say that I agree with every word you wrote here. I am also an athiest. I don't see why people can't just "mind they bees" and live and let live. Somebody's gay? SO what? How does that affect you? Somebody's a Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, athiest, whatever? As long as they aren't shoving it down your throat, Leave them be! I am an athiest who supports the right to be religious, a straight man that supports the right to be gay, a meat eater who supports the right to be vegetarian, etc.

BTW: I am glad there are people like you and I here in the bible belt to show people that being an athiest doesn't mean persecuting the religious. And that we can have a civil discussion. And support other's right to whatever religion they choose.

Thanks. I, like most people, don't like religion being forced down my throat. Even many who are religious will admit it leaves a sour taste in your mouth. I try not to do the same with atheism. While I have no problem announcing my stance and am willing to discuss my beliefs with anybody who's curious, I try not to throw it in everyone's face.

 

[SoonerATC]

I just want to say that I agree with every word you wrote here. I am also an athiest. I don't see why people can't just "mind they bees" and live and let live. Somebody's gay? SO what? How does that affect you?

It affects me because many gays (not all, but many) don't "live and let live". People like Dan Savage force their own lifestyles upon children who are not mature enough to make logical decisions yet. Whether we agree on this or not, I firmly believe being homosexual is not "normal", and a child should not be influence to think it is.

The military is another good example. Don't ask, don't tell was a good policy. I won't ask and you don't tell. It was gay activists who felt they had to force me to accept their lifestyle who fought to overturn DADT.

 

[hard_r]

It affects me because many gays (not all, but many) don't "live and let live". People like Dan Savage force their own lifestyles upon children who are not mature enough to make logical decisions yet. Whether we agree on this or not, I firmly believe being homosexual is not "normal", and a child should not be influence to think it is.

The military is another good example. Don't ask, don't tell was a good policy. I won't ask and you don't tell. It was gay activists who felt they had to force me to accept their lifestyle who fought to overturn DADT.

Well, to the same effect, many christians (not all, but many) force their lifestyle on children as well. Before they are mature and educated enough to make a decision. I would say to a much greater extent. Someone else being gay does not affect you anymore than someone else being religious affects me.

As for DADT, I'm fine with the "Don't ask" part. But if someone is ok with revealing that, why should they get kicked out? It's no different than all the strait soldiers talking about their sexual conquests and having pictures of their ladies, etc. If that's going to be the policy, then it should go both ways, If you reveal that you are strait, you are kicked out too. Doesn't make sense when it's applied to the strait soldiers, does it? Why should homosexuals be treated differently? That is the definition of oppression right there.

 

[mons meg]

This conversation seems to have veered from the basic premise that Dan Savage is a big poopy head....gay or not.