I agree. It's like, imagine if you really upset me (let's just say) and you called me a racist...could you imagine me coming to your place of employment and bothering you....like stalking you? I mean, really? What is wrong with people? People do stuff like that, though.

You'll have to excuse me for not keeping up with what is going on in CO. I also don't get much time to watch television, anymore. I literally work 7 days a week. Maybe I should have said THAT instead of about where I live in regards to not hearing about it.

Didn't you know? She invited him over! And she had had sex with him before! Obviously an invitation into my home is ALSO an invitation into my vagina!

Ugh. People get buyer's remorse when they get a bad haircut, or a meal they don't like in a restaurant. They don't get buyer's remorse when someone else puts their penis where it doesn't belong.

/endrant.

Or just said that you hadn't heard about it.

But in italics. And all caps. So I knew you meant it.

Idk - I don't live in Colorado. It made national news.

A lot of people get their news on GC (thanks to posters like DS who troll news sites all day for interestion stuff - seriously - I don't believe him when he says he has some sort of job other than that, I think John is paying him) but I wasn't about to start yet another thread about rape.

You could start a thread, though. It would be a good topic, if you were willing.

This particular topic is a little too politically and emotionally charged for a lot of posters on GC, and a little too little politically and emotionally charged for a lot of posters on GC.

It'd probably end up in closure.

Oh there is buyer's remorse from sex. And there are people that take advantage of that, which is why those who are actual victims are sometimes scared to come forward, because they worry they won't be believed. That being said, it doesn't matter if she takes you home, is wearing crotchless panties, and shows you the sex tape you two made last week...if she utters one "no" or "stop", that's it. I fail to understand why this seems to be a hard concept to some people. It's just not that difficult to understand.

True. I feel like I derailed the thread when talking about victim-blaming but, I do think we need to consider how cyber-bullying affects people and how we shouldn't just say, "Well, they can get off that site." I'm mainly thinking about THAT SITE (you all probably know what site I am referring to) where you can post a thread about what a skank so-and-so is. It's pretty upsetting and I would be horrified if someone made a thread about me on that site. I can't even imagine.

There may be buyer's remorse for sex, but there's not buyer's remorse from RAPE.

Hence the "putting a penis where it does not belong."

Is it still there? I thought it didn't exist anymore...

Oh, it is. In fact, it goes by a different name. If you want, I can pm you the site name. I just don't want to give it any recognition on this site.

Yes, my point was that some people call it rape when it's not, something I have no sympathy for. Obviously, actual rape is a different story since the whole concept is having contact that you DO NOT want (or ask for, since "she came on to me"/"she dressed slutty"/"we did it before" seems to so often be the "excuse" the rapist comes up with).

I guess I missed that...but nah, I don't even want to look it it. It just pisses me off.

There are a multitude of sites based on the same premise.

On the cyberbullying thing - I do think there's a bit of a difference between types of cyberbullying. For example, starting a thread like "SALLY IS A WHORE!" is different than starting a thread like "SALLY IS A WHORE, CALL HER AND TELL HER, HER NUMBER IS 555.0812, HER EMAIL IS sallyisa@whore.edu, HER HOME ADDRESS IS 515 Hooker Ave" etc.

I don't like it when people bring this up. Obviously there's some false reporting going on with any crime. The problem is, the number of cases that are reported and have actually happened (and subsequently are dismissed for lack of evidence) far far outweigh the number of false reports.

Also, it should be pointed out that many many of the cases that get dismissed in rape are not dismissed because it was proven that it didn't happen - it's just really easy to blame the victim and not be able to prove that it did happen.

I'm a firm believer that all rape cases should be taken seriously, particularly due to the sheer number of rape cases that go unreported and how very hard it is to come forward (even when police do have strong evidence of rape many times the victim does not want to come forward for many different reasons).

There was a workshop on my campus one year while I was in undergrad that reported that 1 in 4 women has been raped - I'll need to look and see if I can find where they got that.

This doesn't even get into cases of the rape of men, which is an even more seriously under-reported crime.

Rape isn't about sex, it's about power (so is bullying and cyberbullying). By letting false reports outweigh (in our mind) actual legitimate cases of rape, we're giving rapists even more power.

Also, please to not forget the initial reports of actual rape that are rescinded by the victim because of the unintended consequences of reporting the rape, including shaming, victim blaming, and retaliation.

I'm so confused.

Whore.edu? Grad school, here I come.

Tangent: Seriously, this type of thing baffles me. When I was an undergrad, but school was transitioning from "commuter school" to "traditional school," but we still had a great deal of non-traditional students. Sure, there were times that people would say "I can't stand Sally. I hear she's a slut" but it didn't seem to go any farther. It makes me sick that college students would go to those lengths in order to bully someone.

Yeah, we went from cyberbullying to rape. It's because of a comment I made about "victim-blaming."

If her name and some other identifying information (last name, residence, sorority...something that would make it clear who the girl in question is), that's no different than posting her phone number. It's still cyberbullying. She'll have that follow her, and her potential employers will see it, her family will see it...etc. The internet is a part of our lives whether we like it or not, and when it effects real life (like the job example), that's over the line. I think the problem is a combination of people not understanding the impact it will have (especially for teens and younger kids), not caring, and not facing repercussions. I do hope we get better protection legally from this sort of behavior soon. That might help deter the "I don't care" set from spreading their horribleness.

Thanks for that summary. :)

Haha, any time! I was confused, myself. Then I remembered what I wrote and realized that sparked the discussion.

It's still cyberbullying, but it's like that blurry/fuzzy line between freedom of speech and hate speech. A defendant may be able to slip under the line of "freedom of speech" with your example. With mine, their first amendment defense isn't quite so strong (because it can be construed as inciting a particular course of action).

Of course it's over the line if it affects real life. But, there is a difference between affecting someone's job prospects and giving people the tools and incentive to commit other various criminal activities.

I'm not disagreeing with any of this, just pointing out the issue. I don't know who would let false outweigh true. As someone who has been in a "situation", let's say, I understand it should be taken seriously.

Not if it's libel, though the problem is that Suzy probably doesn't have the money or resources to bring a civil suit and have this crap removed. Affecting job prospects is stepping into real life, period. And the first amendment doesn't protect one from printing/saying untrue things to cause harm.

Well, there's also a difference between a civil case and a criminal case. So, varying degrees of a problem - the seed is the same (bullying).

As an aside, bullying of all natures is a seriously under-reported occurance, as well.

The limits on the first amendment do actually include libel/slander. It's just a lot easier for those limits to be effective when the offense is happening in a contained environment instead of the entire internetz. (It would be much harder to get away with posting flyers around Suzy's town/place of work/school saying Suzy is a slut/thief/be creative than posting it on the internet.)

I strongly agree.

Perez Hilton says he will stop bullying.

http://wonderwall.msn.com/#wallState...-1577682.story

He really is a bully because he has become famous for revealing details of celebrities' personal lives and taunting celebrities. He wouldn't have become famous if he was only a snarky smartass. That's not exciting enough for gossip columnists like Perez Hilton. On that note, are gossip columnists bullies? Hmmmmm...I think so to some extent. I think that any avid gossiper is a version of a bully.

http://wonderwall.msn.com/#wallState...-1576650.story

Meh. I'm torn.

When dealing with children -- I think so.

When dealing with adults -- Celebrities are pretty much "public domain," so satire/mockery/parody comes with the territory. If we were to call gossip columnists bullies, we'd have to call SNL, MadTV, etc bullies as well.

Yes and no...celebrities have little expectation of privacy. Though I'll say it does bother me when paps harass them when they have their kids in tow. Not cool.

Gossip is different than satire/mockery/parody.

True, but a lot of the satire/mockery/parody originates with gossip.

ETA: Ex. I think that if we didn't have the Perez Hiltons of the world blatantly saying "Clay Aiken is in the closet!" we'd still have SNL skits showing Clay with subtle mannerisms/a lisp.

I agree. So, where are the margins? There have to be margins or else we wouldn't have a thread about bullying and cyberbullying. Are there no margins when we're talking about adults and especially celebrities?

I'd be interested in seeing others' thoughts.

I was never bullied, never was a bully, and I have a very "hard" exterior, so I'm probably not a good person to ask lol I can understand why bullying sucks, but I still don't fully "get it" when it comes to adults.

Now that I think of it, when I referred to "social media spillover" earlier in this thread, I was referring more to stalking. "Bullying" (as I know it) shouldn't affect grown folks (I know that this is definitely not the case, but I can't fully wrap my mind around it).

Stalking and bullying are not that different when you think of the instances where bullies were also stalkers.

LOL @ your "hard" exterior

I was thinking in the most literal sense.

Bullying = Give me your lunch money; OMG Sally's a whore; HAHA Rick's gay

Stalking = Climbing in your window, snatching your people up, etc

I see the overlap, though.

====

And you know I can't stop talking about my member.

There are groups that push to out gay politicians/preachers/etc. who speak against gay rights. I'm generally against it, I think, but I get why they do it.

I think the line is crossed when it goes from talking about them to targeting them. The ADA (ASA?) who targeted the college student for promoting the 'radical homosexual agenda' wasn't just blogging against him but carried it over into real life as well. He made this guy his obsession. Interestingly I think the celebs that do the best follow the "just ignore it" advice that parents give their kids. Anderson Cooper just doesn't talk about his sexuality even though everyone I know or have seen just assumes he's gay.

I'm not sure that there's a hard and fast line, much like with any bullying behavior. It seems like it's a 'know it when you see it' thing, though that doesn't work well for legal purposes.

I don't think anyone is avoiding any issues. We've already stated that some of the people on here bring GC into real life (cyber-stalking, etc), but the vast majority of the "bullying" that goes on here doesn't do that. Calling someone a bitch or disagreeing with someone =/= bullying.

I created the thread and I'm the only Delta in the room. There goes the elephant. :)

Yes, Tippiechick, you don't have to imagine an elephant to discuss what you did and apologize for it again. :) Others who feel that they have done something and want to discuss it are free to do so. Those who have had something done to them via GC are free to discuss that. I certainly don't know the details of the bullying that has occurred on GC. People who know the details are free to discuss if that's the direction they want the thread to go in.

Dramatic.

I don't consider it real cyberbullying when you can clearly leave a website like GC and not return (or come back as someone different, which folks do on here all the time) and you don't know most or any of the folks in real life. On the other hand, when people have your email, home phone number and/or address, or you're on a school or job site and you actually know the people and have to see them in real life, that's something different entirely.