Yesterday, I asked a question about the various “bullying” laws the left is proposing.
I asked – would it be considered bullying if I were to steal a young lesbian’s “Lady Gaga” CD – music that she found important in helping her discover her own identity – and to threaten to destroy it in an elaborate “ceremony” designed entirely to mock stereotypes of lesbianism.
I took a poll – and most agreed with me that that action would be bullying.
Of course, I’d never do such a thing.
But the real reason for the question was to ask liberals; if my hypothetical example was “bullying”, what would this be?
Because to me, the only difference between PZ Myers’ stunt from few years back – giggling about descrating a host from a Catholic service – and the sort of bullying that’s got lefties all exercised is the lack of a gay victim.
Plus it’s perfectly acceptable to ridicule, harrass, sue, harangue, mock, and hate Christians.
We can handle it. Our God is bigger than their god.
OK, Mitch, I’ll start out with the fact that the perpetrator in your example was childish, idiotic and wrong. But was it “bullying”? I’m asking the question because I don’t know the facts of the story behind the catholic wafer. Here’s a bullying definition I found………”a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller or weaker people.” was it “habitual”? More importantly, was the victim “smaller or weaker”? Just askin’.
A note to Kermit. Again, I’d agree qwith most of the stuff in your first sentence. But it’s your next sentiment that bugs most of us “non-believers”. Your God’s bigger than there’s. Bigger? Better? More real? It’s this condescending attitude of absloute superiority that invites some of the ridicule.
That’s OK. We put up with condescension all the time. You believe in some old man in the sky. You have an imaginary friend you talk to. You believe in fairy tales. My God is bigger than theirs, because 99% of the time their god is themself.
The scraggly handful on the Plaza in Minneapolis are fervently hoping to be repressed.
Earsall,
Was it habitual – Myers has built a bit of a second career as an eminemento in the atheistblogging community.
Is the victim smaller or weaker – Myers has a huge following, and enjoys all the absurd protections we give professors’ behavior. In terms of public mindshare, he’s pretty big.
I’m going to hazard a guess that he wouldn’t have tried it if he weren’t fully protected by his position and celebrity.
He was basically playing “keepaway” with a consecrated host – a rather important object to a believer. That game that was frequently part of bullying when i was a kid.
I’ve taken the time to read a number of Myer’s posts. I’ve seen his type of academic bully at work: possessing a deep intellect, unshakable convictions and a delight in making those he considers his intellectual inferiors wet their pants in public. Think of John Houseman’s role as Professor Kingsfield in “The Paper Chase” and add the underlying misanthropy of Jack Nicholson’s Melvin Udall in “As Good as it Gets” to get a full picture.
I had an English professor my freshman year (He is now deceased and will not be identified) who exemplified the type. He delighted in choosing one or two students in his class for recurrent humiliation (not me, thankfully.) He seemed bored by the role of teaching undergraduates even though he couldn’t have been older than 45 at the time. One of his students later became a prize winning novelist and wrote in glowing terms of her mentor. I couldn’t help but think that anyone with merely average ability was bound to disappoint him and thus earn the occasional verbal slap up side the head for intellectual deficiency. Sad.
Mitch, this is unfair, and you know it.
You are trying to apply leftist standards to the left. You know that is not how it is supposed to work.
This wasn’t bullying. Meyer’s actions weren’t directed towards any particular individual.