Bullying is unanimously wrong, but the definition of bullying can become shockingly lax. There have been recent instances of bullying in relation to “sexting” resulting in suicide. Bullying and alienation usually have three outcomes: the victim ends her life to end the accompanying pain; the victim becomes the oppressor by violently “fighting back”, or the victim holds onto the feelings and memories with results that vary incalculably. Perceived moral superiority often leads to the bullying most void of compassion. For example, I’ve been bullied for being perceived as a bully. A question we should ask ourselves is: “What is the appropriate way to treat someone out to destroy your family.”


We not may be aware of something vital as we introduce an idea.  It will be placed in the backdrop of the observer’s current values. The values and beliefs will generate the appropriate accompanying emotions. An idea that implicitly puts the values into question will also put those accompanying feelings into question. Contrary viewpoints imply the listener’s feelings on them to be invalid as well. We’ve been indoctrinated from youth to (exclusively) follow our hearts, which is stupid. It’s like telling the horseman to follow wherever his horses take him. Even if the will is inherently equal to emotion in terms of importance, there must come times when it’s important for it to overpower them. Those times are in direct violation of that dogma. Conflicting emotions are also felt in unison. How do you decide between them? Are you supposed to? Is it a sign from God to remain indecisive!? In order to remain logically consistent (and not a hypocrite), one must decide where the inherent meaning lies, transcendent of said emotions. In summary, following your heart to the fullest leaves no room for courage, but plenty for life-shattering despair.


With the inflated-but-unaware importance we put on emotions, the heart’s direction is then solely determined by one’s circumstance. Not as magical is it seems when the smoke and mirrors are lifted away. (See Cinderella III for a prime example of this b*llsh*t.)


I am not a conservative, but staunch liberals often fail to see the emotionally destructive power of new ideas in the current cultural climate. It’s the same cultural climate that leads feminists to the same chauvinist pitfall that their male counterparts fell into back when they were actually fighting for gender equality. (Yes, I went there.)


No matter what one’s morals are, there will inevitably be those that fall out of our perceived “positive characteristics” As a culture, I don’t think we’ve adequately addressed how to appropriately react to those we find morally inadequate. At this point, I’m not prepared accept the idea of “there is no moral inadequacy.” There would be no fault in Hitler then…. (As horrible as Hitler was, I am eternally grateful for his role as a philosophical device.)


There is a YouTube commentator called Phillip DeFranco. He recently uploaded a video commenting on a church asserting that anti-bullying rhetoric is being used to discredit Christian viewpoints. I’ll play The Devil’s Advocate in defense of the church. If and when the conservative Christians fall from prominence, our cultural stance on (moral) superiority will remain as it is until properly identified and contained. But in the meantime…‘Till the next new target of our collective scorn!

-Daniel Ballow