One of the better efforts on this topic but still entirely "victim"-centric.

If I "feel" bullied, then you must be a bully? Nope, sorry, doesn't work for me.

Genuine bullying is persistent, personal, pointless harrassment. If you have a job that needs doing and I'm the one charged with doing it, then it is perfectly reasonable for you to create a "fear" of your reaction to its not being done. Similarly, a father who insists on his children doing their homework and creates a "fear" in the children when he finds them watching TV instead is not being a bully.

Further, the mechanisms in place today for self-perceived "victims" to take action can be easily misused as a form of bullying themselves. A "bully" who is reported to HR will probably have to face annoying and intrusive questioning and may well feel humiliated or coerced into changing behaviour that is perfectly reasonable for fear of falling foul of the person in future. By setting the behaviour bar at a variable height depending on the perception of the "victim" you make the whole issue meaningless.

The AVO/DVO process has been badly corrupted as well. I've faced the Court twice over this issue. The first time my ex-wife was trying to get more custody, so she claimed violence on one day and the next day fileds her custody claim. That took 7 months and a lot of time to get sorted. The next was when the ex called me a liar and I swore at her over a miscommunication to do with the kids. That one was dismissed with her being told to "move on", but it still cost me time and money and the humiliation of having to sit in a crowded court corridor. She, as a self-professed "victim" was taken to the "victims" room and didn;t have to appear in public at all. Who was the bully?

I'm sorry, but this is a bare "C" mark, I'm afraid. Shallow analysis and incomplete research. Could do better.

Next topic; bullying on the Ski fields of Helsinki!

What's with the current obsession with bullying?

It's the topic of the month. I offered to do Graham a piece myself, but I've not been able to get my head around a decent angle on it. The subject is very nebulous and poorly defined.

The stuff being put up so far is simple polemic with little substance.

It consists of either "they done me wrong, cos I said so and I've got lots of degrees so I should know" or "I don't want to be told what to do by someone I don't like". Hardly convincing stuff.

Gore has at least had a good go, but he can't shake the years of indoctrination that says "bullying is never the victim's fault", even though he can't always identify the victim, the cause or what bullying actually is. If a victim says they're a victim that's good enough for him. It might make him feel good about his own social conscience, but it doesn't help anyone to grasp the problem, if there even is a problem.

Why don't you have a crack at it Anti? If everyone has done such a poor job ... I'd most certainly be interested.

In fairness, Cheryl, Gore has had a pretty good go. He sets out a lot of the causative stuff pretty well and has a decent bash at differentiating between simple coercion and bullying, as well as identifying some of the things that make a "victim" out of a "target" and some of the features that differentiate the bully from the simply pushy or abrasive.

I've had a draft ready for days, but I keep going back to it on further reflection. Whether the constant turd-polishing has had any salutary effect is a moot point. I'm glad OLO isn't reliant on my contribution to fill its pages though.

As per the article, Anticeptic is right: You can't rely on the law. There also seems some confusion in his mind about legitimate power which can still be used in a bullying way.

As was stated, let the disacussion roll on.
JG

'People who feel powerless, disenfranchised and rejected are more likely to resort to bullying.' First, I'm getting very tired of the word 'disenfranchised'. It seems to be an excuse for all sorts of bad behaviour, some of it pretty extreme.

Second, why is 'bullying' issue of the year? I doubt the number of jerks in the world has suddenly gone up. More likely, it's because high-powered lawyers have discovered they can sue for damages if they can prove that the boss was impolite towards an incompetent employee. We used to say the boss was angry, or a perfectionist, or never satisfied, or unsympathetic. None of which are illegal, but 'bullying' is.

What should we do about it? Probably not 'enfranchise' the drunk at the train station, or the 9-yr-old who's six inches taller than anyone else in the 3rd grade, or the hard-arsed boss. 'Get over it' usually works. If someone's seriously threatening or uneasonable, there's a host of recourses, including laws defining intimidation. Which don't address 'bullying' for the simple reason it's too vague a concept. One person's bully is another's strong leader.

Some people feel insufficiently forceful, lack self-esteem, aren’t confident Some are just weak. Some are whingers who blame those around them for their misery. Most of them aren't bullies. Many are victims, who quit their jobs because the boss wasn't happy with their work, and said so. They're often the ones who claim to be bullied ... which is no end of help to their claim for unfair dismissal.

Making bullies feel good about themselves sounds nice, but it's probably impractical. Most people change their behaviours because they make too many enemies and not enough friends. For the most part, I think we should ignore bullying, unless and until it's unreasonable enough to be a violation of law. The problem with talking about it as a huge social problem is that, soon enough, some politician will pass a law against it. We still won't know what it really is, so lawyers will have to make it up for us.

The byline of this article reads - "When a person is frightened by persistent bullying behaviours aimed at exerting power and, as a consequence, change their decisions, behaviours or beliefs, then they have been bullied."

This leads me to recall and recount the counter axiom - "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".

That's it. Bullying doesn't work. At least not in the long term. It builds resentment and precipitates possible unpleasant counter-actions.

As an example, my immediate connections with reading this byline quoted above was - Julia Gillard.

"We must have a Carbon Tax!" and "You people must eat your vegetables!" Is this not frightening, exerting power, bullying?

Bullying is becoming the standard method of worldwide governance today.

But don't worry. One day I get to vote. And lookout bullies, I am of the same opinion still.