Don't say the name, don't memorialize, we don't want copy cats...

in #hive-12231510 months ago

It is common these days for people to want to remove mention of people such as the names of mass shooters. It is likewise a reason they want to take down some statues.


Don't memorialize a person. We don't want people to be copy cats.

In a day where they are increasingly trying to make people think the same things, act the same way, and expect the same things they are making it more and more difficult to "Stand out!"

A person may be lonely. They may feel ostracized. They want to be remembered for something.

Mass murder may seem like an easy way to insure they are remembered...

So our answer is to not share information because we don't want to encourage that.

In thinking about this I think we are making a mistake.

I think we are trying to take a "simple" but likely incorrect approach to a bigger problem.

The rot, poor education, reliance on chemicals to keep our minds working, etc. All of these things contribute to what lead that person there. Yet we allow those things to fester and grow. We simply think "If we remove these certain triggers that will help."

As the rot spreads and grows any number of things can lead to triggers.

We reward and encourage a lot of bad things these days... Those things are like a cancer that spreads through the minds of society and infect everything they touch.

Mostly our education system is becoming less and less worthy of being considered "education".

These days it is more of an "indoctrination" center...

We must force you into this box... no not THOSE boxes. We don't like box B, and C. You must be inside box A.

The real problem is one that has been a problem for as long as I can find:

Some people try to elevate themselves in cultural hierarchy at the expense of others.

If the person wants to be in the IN crowd they time it correctly and they verbally, physically, or perhaps both do something to a perceived "undesireable". "Get out of here nerd!!!"...

The in crowd might notice and accept them into their ranks. Meanwhile the "nerd" is suffering.

This also happens with animals so it is not a completely human thing.

Yet with our technology and increasing separation from people behind screens it is harder and harder for those ostracized to find people that they can create their own support system with. A digital only friendship is not the same. Not remotely. It can be turned off when it is inconvenient. No need to learn to navigate those inconvenient times.

Throw this in with people being forced to learn how to handle their own mind. How can they learn if they are told "there is a pill for that"? Sure there are some cases where medication may help people but they should be RARE cases in society rather than common.

I taught my children that telling me "I'm bored" was a thing you didn't want to do. I told them to me that translates to "I am lazy, entertain me." There is SO much to do in life that you do not have the time to do all of it. This especially true if you embrace your mind and exercise it just like you do your body. I always have things to think about. If I am sitting in a lobby somewhere that is generally what I am doing.

When I was a teenager one day I decided I was "at war with boredom" and I have as far as I can tell completely obliterated the concept from my own life. There is far too much for me to do to ever be bored. I will die before I've done all the things I'd like to do. In fact, that list keeps growing.

This was a hodge podge of thoughts that I felt like writing. I apologize for it being more disjointed. It was just where my mind went. Have a great weekend!


And the in-crowds' answer to the lonely geek... you just got to be like us.

The womens' advice to ugly/short men trying to get a date is be better looking and taller.

The people who shout loudest about inclusivity are the first to omit / ignore / forget these marginalized people (especially men)

Women - "Men should love us at any size"
Incels - "We would just like a date" "How dare you demand women to do anything," the women reply.

What is very sad is that the people who give the most to society. The inventors, the scientists, the mathematicians, they are all shunned by the in-crowd. And it may be that they go on to create great things, because there is no distractions in their lives.

While, the good looking guys and girls, all they do is socialize. And when they are old and ugly, no one will remember that they existed.

Congratulations @dwinblood! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)

You distributed more than 65000 upvotes.
Your next target is to reach 66000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Check out our last posts:

Women's World Cup Contest - Recap of day 9
Hive Power Up Day - August 1st 2023
Women's World Cup Contest - Recap of day 8

I read a comment once lauding bullying as an evolutionary filter that prevented the environmentally unfit from too strongly impacting the species. This has, like many other ideas that took me aback, floated around in the back of my mind while I sorted what I thought about it.

"This also happens with animals so it is not a completely human thing."

While I don't want to, because of the off hand comment you provide above, I am forced to acknowledge that there is some truth to the idea that bullying is an evolutionary force, something that enables species - not just us small boys on playgrounds suffering from mean people - to ensure their fitness. The world is a dangerous place. All of us are actually no more than tasty meals that deliver themselves to our predators when we stumble into their hunting grounds.

The fact that other species also exhibit bullying behaviour lends support to this theory that bullying contributes to evolutionary fitness. While purely considering humanity as animals enables some justification of such social cruelty, that is not all there is to humanity. We vaunt ourselves as something more than mere animals, make reference to our spiritual beliefs, sublime arts, and scientific understanding to support a belief we are higher creatures than our fellow species on Earth.

I hope that is true of us, and that more substantial forces than physical needs are operant that justify my inherent value of kindness and mercy more highly than lust, greed, or power. The considerations I have given consciousness informed by the No Hiding theorem of physics, which suggest that our conscious minds are immortal because they are information that cannot be lost to the universe, support that hope. Our actions while we live, viewed in the light of immortal spiritual consciousnesses, become more permanent than anything carved in stone, and, unless we can ameliorate and rectify such acts in the hereafter through communicating with others, such as those we have done wrong, I can see that regretting unchangable acts forever could indeed be a hellish fate.

I appreciate your contribution to my reflections on these matters. Your insights are beneficial and substantive because you strive to be rational, honest, and beneficial to your fellows.


Well really I kind of derailed my initial reason for writing the post. It happens. I was more thinking about the "Don't give the bad guy press, don't say their name" thing in order to stop copy cats. I think we should report information and instead be focusing on other factors for why that person thinks they should be a copy cat. PARENTING, Education, Mental Health, etc.

Yet I kind of side tracked myself with the bullying because that is one of the things that a lot of mass shooters claim to be reacting to.

There was a story from India where this Outlaw who murdered and stole had a sudden change of conscience and he renounced his ways and sought to be a monk, or something along those lines. A teacher was helping him realize the nature of reality and his part in it, and one day when he was about to have the answer, on the doorstep of his enlightenment, the teacher had manifested himself as levotating and had sent him to go to a temple and make offerings there, and he hurried as fast as he could to only find his teacher waiting for him, with this trolling the teacher finally pointed him to a gathering of many teachers where they were sat around the table, when he got there he took a seat and the teacher took a stick and starred hitting the the guest teachers on the head, after each one he'd declare, this pot is ready, and he got to the monk who by now was somewhat annoyed and perturbed, feeling like a fool, so when he got hit on the head he cried out, demanding they stop fooling around with him. This pot isn't ready yet, said the teacher. Now the story is much better than my poor recollection of it, but the point was that tolerance that can't be gauged by anything other than trolling.

The mother who strives to be rational, honest, beneficial could just as easily cuddle the young and leave them at a great disadvantage by smothering their sense of self preservation and ability to appreciate challenges.

I knew there was a reason I insist that trolls are necessary. I appreciate the insight.


HaHa! Indeed, the more annoying the troll, the more it puts me in the position of testing my tolerance or experiencing its threshold. Everyone has such a threshold. If by tolerance I mean "static agreement", then I have given the term a different meaning and "fixed" it.

"Tolerance" I understand in a context as a dynamic between me and the world. I therefore cannot simply "be tolerant", there is no such thing (as for missing a point of reference), but in context I experience my personal threshold/boundary of what seems acceptable or unacceptable to me. It is therefore highly subjective.

Whereas I think a troll neither challenges nor really engages in such challenging competition. A troll by my definition is an immature will-o'-the-wisp, something that flutters around without making sense, like a speech output device that does just that because of its technical ability to throw out verbs.
A troll by this definition has no address, does not seek dialogue or argument and counter-argument. It just appears somewhere and trolls away after a while. The troll is random and aimless in my mind.
In German, the term exists in the animal kingdom; one says, for example, that the young boar trolls away. Or one says to a child "troll yourself", which means something like "sniff around" or "run around".
A mother who lets her young trolling around, lets them explore the world, has in mind that it may get a bleeding nose, an accident, an uncomfortable encounter as well as a friendly and easy one. She is reasonable in that she does not want to avoid the one and only support the other. For she knows that the world in which the kid trolls around offers everything she cannot do alone.

If the young gets hurt she will have empathy and care for it. If the young gets pleased she will cheer with it. Of course, sometimes she will fail and tell her little troll that it was its own fault to have gotten a bloody knee.