My Mama's a Weeaboo - Page 26.
Well... Seems that 'witch' has some empathy. Or hasn't she?
What we already know about bullies (whatever boys or girls) is that they choose a precise kind of people. The kind that make them feel and look high and mighty. " For what point? " - I'm wondering.
For a survival purpose that nowadays is completely obsolete, but still embedded in our genes. What survival purpose?
I'm using the vertebrated animals other than humans as a model for this analogy, especially the mammals who live in a socialised group structure, like wolves or gorillas. I can even use birds. There're always some individuals who can be easily recognized and those are the dominant ones inside those groups. The main advantage of being dominant is that they can mate with a female, even more than one (or otherwise if the dominant is a female), and distribute their dominant genes pool more easily. While the weak ones can't, because well... too weak to survive in a long term. In short the survival of the fittest is occuring here.
And there are many ways for a male/female to make it sure to be recognized as a dominant one; either through fights, or using bright colors for their outlook, or showing how good they are at doing nests, etc... nature as developped at least one for every known genre. But more generally it's brute force that is most privileged to show who's the strongest one and who's the weakest.
With more than 6 billions of humans on this world, we can't say our survival in the gene pool is compromised for now. So this kind of 'primitive' behaviour is not as necessary as thousands of years ago. Since it's still embedded in our genes and not erased during our evolution from ape to human, we however have still that need to show ourselves more dominant than some other ones. However with laws, religion and everything, our today society has made over the years some rules that abolish those primitive behaviours (like fighting, killing for example), and also created ways to make sure the 'weak ones' have a chance to survive.
So humans have developped many ways to make an individual more dominant than someone else. And generally the more astute and creative you are, the more dominant you can be. And yes, even when doing illegal things you need to be pretty astute. So it's no more about being essentially the strongest one, but also the smartest one. Intelligence in every form that can exist has become a more suited dominant factor.
Back about the bullies. Although some times there are still some people who use brute force to show how unecessary dominant they are, humans have developped a new kind of attack to show their dominant status. It's not a normal brute force attack anymore. It's a moral ad hominem attack : mocking, scorning, taunting, treating, and every word you can find in the thesaurus about tantalizing somebody without bodily harm. Those are generally used by people who aren't really the brightest bulb in the box, against people who are really dominant in the smart way. And it also happens that smart people use them too in order to confirm their dominant status; like what we see in a debate for example.
But that doesn't make them automatically be bullies. Because as I said, to show being dominant can make our survival more easy. Bullies however are a group of people who try to show a dominant status when it's NOT NEEDED; more for personal purpose and narcissism than real survival. Which can prove the presence of a latent self-loathing or lack of self-confidence. Why the need to show ourselves being the dominant one when we know we don't need to show it anymore?
Well... Seems that 'witch' has some empathy. Or hasn't she?
What we already know about bullies (whatever boys or girls) is that they choose a precise kind of people. The kind that make them feel and look high and mighty. " For what point? " - I'm wondering.
For a survival purpose that nowadays is completely obsolete, but still embedded in our genes. What survival purpose?
I'm using the vertebrated animals other than humans as a model for this analogy, especially the mammals who live in a socialised group structure, like wolves or gorillas. I can even use birds. There're always some individuals who can be easily recognized and those are the dominant ones inside those groups. The main advantage of being dominant is that they can mate with a female, even more than one (or otherwise if the dominant is a female), and distribute their dominant genes pool more easily. While the weak ones can't, because well... too weak to survive in a long term. In short the survival of the fittest is occuring here.
And there are many ways for a male/female to make it sure to be recognized as a dominant one; either through fights, or using bright colors for their outlook, or showing how good they are at doing nests, etc... nature as developped at least one for every known genre. But more generally it's brute force that is most privileged to show who's the strongest one and who's the weakest.
With more than 6 billions of humans on this world, we can't say our survival in the gene pool is compromised for now. So this kind of 'primitive' behaviour is not as necessary as thousands of years ago. Since it's still embedded in our genes and not erased during our evolution from ape to human, we however have still that need to show ourselves more dominant than some other ones. However with laws, religion and everything, our today society has made over the years some rules that abolish those primitive behaviours (like fighting, killing for example), and also created ways to make sure the 'weak ones' have a chance to survive.
So humans have developped many ways to make an individual more dominant than someone else. And generally the more astute and creative you are, the more dominant you can be. And yes, even when doing illegal things you need to be pretty astute. So it's no more about being essentially the strongest one, but also the smartest one. Intelligence in every form that can exist has become a more suited dominant factor.
Back about the bullies. Although some times there are still some people who use brute force to show how unecessary dominant they are, humans have developped a new kind of attack to show their dominant status. It's not a normal brute force attack anymore. It's a moral ad hominem attack : mocking, scorning, taunting, treating, and every word you can find in the thesaurus about tantalizing somebody without bodily harm. Those are generally used by people who aren't really the brightest bulb in the box, against people who are really dominant in the smart way. And it also happens that smart people use them too in order to confirm their dominant status; like what we see in a debate for example.
But that doesn't make them automatically be bullies. Because as I said, to show being dominant can make our survival more easy. Bullies however are a group of people who try to show a dominant status when it's NOT NEEDED; more for personal purpose and narcissism than real survival. Which can prove the presence of a latent self-loathing or lack of self-confidence. Why the need to show ourselves being the dominant one when we know we don't need to show it anymore?
