Hatefulness is Harmful, Even on the Internet

[Taylor V. Smith]

I have a personal principle about giving. Insofar as I am able, I try to abide by the words, "Give to everyone who asks of you." My wife feels that this is irresponsible, because I cannot be assured that my gifts will be used for positive ends. Perhaps she is right. However, I do not observe this principle exclusively for the benefit of others. I also do it to prevent my heart from becoming hardened to the human condition. Sometimes my gifts will be abused. I cannot prevent this. Nevertheless, my humanity will persist. Were I to say, "No," my heart would slowly grow calloused toward humans in need, until eventually I felt nothing at all.

Many people believe (apparently) that trolling, personal attacks, discriminatory language, and other derogatory actions are harmless when performed virtually. They will likely never meet their victims, nor develop any meaningful type of relationship with them. Accordingly, where is the harm to personal interest? This attitude is gravely wrong. While their victims may be nameless and faceless, they are nonetheless human. When you call a forum user or Avatar "stupid," "cowardly," or worse, or even simply treat them condescendingly, you are performing these actions toward another human. A real human. Overtime, these activities become easier, more natural--even more perversely, fun. This is the very form of a calloused soul.

I am passionate about many things. I am passionate to combat sex slavery and human trafficking. I am passionate to seek justice, encourage the oppressed, defend the fatherless, and plead the case of the widow. For these things, I am willing to be pretty merciless toward offenders. My heart will suffer, but it will be worth it because the end is good.

The Internet is useful. It is a utility. It is not good, it is not evil, it is a tool. Will I make the same sacrifices and jeopardize my humanness for a tool? No, categorically.

 

[OmarFW]

The actions of a person do not have an inherent effect though. The magnitude of their effect is determined by how much the receiving party allowed them to affect them.

If someone doesn't care about you being mean to them, why does it matter? Furthermore, what if you don't actually have the intention of hurting someone's feelings?

No it isn't 100% harmless, but because of the shield of anonymity the internet provides, the effects are minimized and can only be felt by someone exaggerating them on their end. You could say that it's the fault of the person who had their feelings hurt. The internet is a hostile place because people are hostile by nature and that isn't going to change any time soon. If you pet a rabid dog and get bitten, that's your fault.

 

[nightarcher]

Your post brings to light one of the many reoccurring stories that is present in the media: cyber bullying. The internet is not completely anonymous, and it's when the hatefulness starts to hit home on a personal level that it begins to deeply trouble the victim. Most of these attacks are often unprovoked. I believe the internet is ruining the moral fabric of society.

 

[Taylor V. Smith]

The actions of a person do not have an inherent effect though. The magnitude of their effect is determined by how much the receiving party allowed them to affect them.

Your post brings to light one of the many reoccurring stories that is present in the media: cyber bullying. The internet is not completely anonymous, and it's when the hatefulness starts to hit home on a personal level that it begins to deeply trouble the victim. Most of these attacks are often unprovoked. I believe the internet is ruining the moral fabric of society.

Yes, indeed. My argument, though, is not that hurtfulness is harmful to the victim, but that it is harmful to the offender.

 

[OmarFW]

Yes, indeed. My argument, though, is not that hurtfulness is harmful to the victim, but that it is harmful to the offender.

I would call it more an expression of someone who is already damaged. People use the internet to vent because it is essentially a punching bag that can't punch back. When you remove all repercussions, people will jump at the chance to vent their pent up frustration and rage upon strangers.

Perhaps that is helpful for some people, while it is damaging to others. It's definitely not good for people like me to keep their anger stored inside them.

 

[Victor Leigh]

True, the internet exists in cyber space and cyber space is virtual reality. So how can things in the internet harm things in real life? Well, our minds also exist in virtual reality. And there is no doubt that whatever affects our minds will also affect us in real life. So when our minds are affected by things which happen in the internet, then our real lives will be affected, too.

So, yes, hate harms, even if it's in the internet.

 

[nightarcher]

Yes, indeed. My argument, though, is not that hurtfulness is harmful to the victim, but that it is harmful to the offender.

I know, I was spinning it from the victim's side to give another view point. The person performing the attacks will likely start to isolate themselves from social interaction in real life if they haven't already. While I don't see harmless trolling to be bad, some levels of trolling on the internet have gotten out of hand, like with the hacker group Lulzsec or whatever it was called..

 

[Sandra Piddock]

The actions of a person do not have an inherent effect though. The magnitude of their effect is determined by how much the receiving party allowed them to affect them.

If someone doesn't care about you being mean to them, why does it matter? Furthermore, what if you don't actually have the intention of hurting someone's feelings?

No it isn't 100% harmless, but because of the shield of anonymity the internet provides, the effects are minimized and can only be felt by someone exaggerating them on their end. You could say that it's the fault of the person who had their feelings hurt.

Sorry, but I can't agree with that. The fact is that when someone is verbally violent to another person, others see it and are fuelled by it, so one 'mean' remark becomes a concerted attack on a person who is just exercising his human right to express his views. It's not just about how the victim perceives and receives the attack, it's about others scenting blood and moving in for the virtual kill.

I pride myself on being a very strong and honest person, but I was subjected to a virulent and protracted attack because of my answer to a discussion about gay marriage. I know something of how some areas of the gay community feel about this, because my daughter is a lesbian. Her view coincides with the views of almost all her gay friends - both male and female. They consider that the gay marriage lobby may actually lose empathy for the majority of gays, who only want equal civil rights, so that their partners can inherit automatically on death, and enjoy the same pension and next of kin rights that apply to heterosexual couples.

I relayed my views - as I always do - in a clear and respectful manner. Despite this, I was vilified as an unfit mother whose daughter only said such things because she knew that was what I wanted to hear. I was trying to force her into conventional marriage so that she conformed to my ideal of a daughter and provided me with grandchildren to boss around in my old age!

On one level, I was almost amused, because these people obviously knew nothing about myself or my daughter. She's the last person to say something just because it's what another person wants to hear. If anything, she's even more forthright than I am. As for me, I just want her to be happy, and if her happiness depends on a female partner, that's fine by me. She's also provided me with a grandson who I am very proud of and have no intention of bossing around.

I stayed away from that site for months, even though several friends came to my defence and got the offending people banned from the site for their attack. The truth was that I was actually scared to post there - or on any other forum - in case a similar thing happened. I had the support of good friends, and I knew these people could never find me physically - even in the unlikely event that they had the courage to come looking - but ut took a while for me to get over that.

I'm not an impressionable teenager - I'm 60, and I've seen it, done it and worn out several of the t-shirts, yet this cyber bullying had a profound effect on me. For that reason, I will always come down on cyber bullies. I'm a moderator on a couple of forums, and I can do something about this sort of behaviour. Like Taylor, I don't enjoy it, as my natural disposition is to help people and get along with them, and in one way, banning is a negative action, which causes me some deep soul searching, even when I know it's the only way to go. Some people just won't take a telling, though, and you have to do what's necessary.

 

[Matie]

Words are still words and they still hurt, whether they are said in your face in the form of a derogatory comment, or posted in a Facebook wall or message board. Hell, even in LinkedIn groups I've seen that rudeness.

I left a Graphic Design group recently because in a thread about reviewing portfolios, some guy that allegedly works as a recruiter said that he didn't find any of the works good, and started talking snottish trash about how not anyone can become a designer just by making a portfolio on Behance, etc. And then more snottish people started joining him, creating a hostile climate towards start-ups, freelancers and beginners.

The 'crowd effect' that you mention is fairly common, it is like some form or morbid anonymous gratification.

 

[OmarFW]

Sorry, but I can't agree with that. The fact is that when someone is verbally violent to another person, others see it and are fuelled by it, so one 'mean' remark becomes a concerted attack on a person who is just exercising his human right to express his views. It's not just about how the victim perceives and receives the attack, it's about others scenting blood and moving in for the virtual kill.

There is definitely a mob mentality present in most communication online, but I wouldn't really say people would bother wasting their time to attack someone simply because someone else did unless it's concerning a very primitive character flaw. I also think that the experience you described was not someone simply being mean for the sake of being mean, but someone who legitimately had an opinion about you and didn't bother filtering it with empathy or politeness.

There's the reason the internet is such a volatile and hostile place. If angry people are given an anonymous setting where they can say whatever they want without repercussions, they'll vent and bitch and rage their hearts out; most of the time projecting certain frustrations onto strangers who fit certain criteria. To them, the people they are being mean to aren't even real. They might as well be fictional characters in a movie.

Expecting the internet to be nicer is unrealistic so learning to not let the actions of trolls and aggressive people affect you is far better. As much as it sucks that there are so many mean people online, that's just how things are and it isn't going to change any time soon. It's just a reflection of real life since there are mean people in reality as well. If someone is being a dick to us in person, do they deserve the time of day from us? Of course not. That doesn't mean you should stop expressing your viewpoints online, it just means you need to ignore some of the responses you get from doing so.

Besides, the people being mean are strangers who have no personal involvement in your life, so what reason is there to care about what they say? It's your choice if you decide to bend your emotions around the words of strangers and it's your fault if that ends up shooting you in the foot.

 

[Matie]

Besides, the people being mean are strangers who have no personal involvement in your life, so what reason is there to care about what they say? It's your choice if you decide to bend your emotions around the words of strangers and it's your fault if that ends up shooting you in the foot.

I can see your point that there is also a degree in which we mustn't let these things affect us, as we have control on how we react. If a troll or someone makes a mean-spirited comment in your profile, message board, blog, etc it's up over if you let it get to you or not.

 

[A.P.W.]

The actions of a person do not have an inherent effect though. The magnitude of their effect is determined by how much the receiving party allowed them to affect them.

If someone doesn't care about you being mean to them, why does it matter? Furthermore, what if you don't actually have the intention of hurting someone's feelings?

No it isn't 100% harmless, but because of the shield of anonymity the internet provides, the effects are minimized and can only be felt by someone exaggerating them on their end. You could say that it's the fault of the person who had their feelings hurt. The internet is a hostile place because people are hostile by nature and that isn't going to change any time soon. If you pet a rabid dog and get bitten, that's your fault.

Hello
I was just reading your reply and just had to post, If a thousand people called another thousand people a name such as 'Idiot' for example, this is the kind of behaviour we witness in a playground, pretty childish...wouldn't you say! Saying these words, whether it hurts people or people will allow it to hurt them, It will not and can not change anything at all. I would have to disagree with you about people being hostile by nature, I really do feel that hostility is a learned trait brought about by ignorance, a baby in a pram can not be hostile, as a child you could become hostile for a number of reasons, others more passive, If you look into humanities you will find that the common denominator is to be liked by others, accepted in society, finding our feet and peace.

Angela

 

[A.P.W.]

Words are still words and they still hurt, whether they are said in your face in the form of a derogatory comment, or posted in a Facebook wall or message board. Hell, even in LinkedIn groups I've seen that rudeness.

I left a Graphic Design group recently because in a thread about reviewing portfolios, some guy that allegedly works as a recruiter said that he didn't find any of the works good, and started talking snottish trash about how not anyone can become a designer just by making a portfolio on Behance, etc. And then more snottish people started joining him, creating a hostile climate towards start-ups, freelancers and beginners.

The 'crowd effect' that you mention is fairly common, it is like some form or morbid anonymous gratification.

Yes I agree with you on this, the kind of ignorance for others emotions on the internet is pretty harsh, it's a case of sheep i'm afraid, It is but cowards who attack and run to the safety of anonymity.

 

[Victor Leigh]

OmarFW

No, I cannot agree with you that you cannot be affected by the internet unless you allow it to. Take, for example, what I am doing now.

I am making a post. Do I think before I post? Yes, I do. Do I care if anyone reads my post? Yes, I do. Do I feel anything if someone responds to my post by telling me point-blank in the face, that my post is stupid? Yes, I do.

 

[A.P.W.]

Hi (again)

I feel that the kind of abuse that continues to go on within the internet is one of a persistant kind, the where the insistant person has nothing in particular on their agenda but to try and intimidate some one else, with the safety of anonymity which only fools and cowards try to hide behind. It is merely the threshold for such comments to affect you and what level of mental health and support back up that you have. Hence the statement that 'you can not be affected by the internet unless you allow it to' adding 'you can not possibly please everyone ALL of the time' best offer--of take it or leave it advice, 'if you leave yourself wide open, someone will come in'

 

[OmarFW]

I would have to disagree with you about people being hostile by nature, I really do feel that hostility is a learned trait brought about by ignorance

People aren't born hostile, but anger is inherit to life and hostility is born from anger. Everyone has anger about something and everyone has the potential to vent that anger when given the opportunity. For many, that opportunity is the internet.

No, I cannot agree with you that you cannot be affected by the internet unless you allow it to. Take, for example, what I am doing now.

I am making a post. Do I think before I post? Yes, I do. Do I care if anyone reads my post? Yes, I do. Do I feel anything if someone responds to my post by telling me point-blank in the face, that my post is stupid? Yes, I do.

So what? You are one person. Do your responses reflect the responses of everyone else? No they don't. You care about that because you are choosing to care, and someone could choose just as easily to not care.

Just because you personally don't react that way doesn't mean nobody else does. Have you ever even considered not reacting to something someone says online that would otherwise upset you?

So for example, if I started lambasting your posts with harsh insults repeatedly, what reason do you have to care about what I say? You can't have an emotional reaction to something without a reason, and I declare that the reason for someone reacting to a stranger online is almost always an irrational one.

Think about all of the popular youtubers who get thousands of troll comments on their videos every single day about how they suck. Do you think they can afford to take those seriously? Think about how many people hate Justin Bieber's music. Do you think it brings him down to know that they do? Probably not.

 

[Taylor V. Smith]

That's silly. First, the existence of hatefulness is not a justification of hatefulness. If it did, a murderer could justify his or her actions based on the reality that other murders occur. We may all be "one person," but no modern civilization would accept this defense in a court. Second, the efficacy of hatefulness is not a justification for hatefulness. Were it, an attempted murder would be absolved from guilt, because he or she would not have harmed his or her intended target.

The existence of abusive behavior does not justify it. Moreover, even if the recipient of hatefulness (Justin Bieber, in your example) is unaffected, this does not justify the initial behavior. That would be a very perverse morality, indeed.

 

[OmarFW]

That's silly. First, the existence of hatefulness is not a justification of hatefulness. If it did, a murderer could justify his or her actions based on the reality that other murders occur. We may all be "one person," but no modern civilization would accept this defense in a court. Second, the efficacy of hatefulness is not a justification for hatefulness. Were it, an attempted murder would be absolved from guilt, because he or she would not have harmed his or her intended target.

The existence of abusive behavior does not justify it. Moreover, even if the recipient of hatefulness (Justin Bieber, in your example) is unaffected, this does not justify the initial behavior. That would be a very perverse morality, indeed.

Nobody ever said it was justified, but what are you going to do about it? Complain? That's like pouring clean water into an ocean of piss.



Nobody ever said the internet was fair or just. It's silly to act like it is. Whether it's justified or not is irrelevant.

No matter how many times you get someone banned or punished somehow for hurting your feelings, it will happen again and again. You are better off not caring about dumb stuff like that as you can never truly make it go away.

 

[A.P.W.]

Hi all on thread, I believe that the answer to all of these issues is Democracy and Peace to you allx

 

[Taylor V. Smith]

Nobody ever said it was justified, but what are you going to do about it? Complain? That's like pouring clean water into an ocean of piss.

Nobody ever said the internet was fair or just. It's silly to act like it is. Whether it's justified or not is irrelevant.

No matter how many times you get someone banned or punished somehow for hurting your feelings, it will happen again and again. You are better off not caring about dumb stuff like that as you can never truly make it go away.

Heh, this is philosophy's conundrum, eh? The original post doesn't lay out a plan to stop the behavior. Just suggests that it is harmful to the offender as to the victim.