Total Pageviews

Wednesday 20 May 2015

Not all insecure people are haters, but all haters are insecure people.-- by Jack Schafer Ph.D

The Psychopathology of Hate
Hate masks personal insecurities. Not all insecure people are haters, but all haters are insecure people. Hate elevates the hater above the hated. Haters cannot stop hating without exposing their personal insecurities. Haters can only stop hating when they face their insecurities.
Stage 1: The Haters Gather
Haters rarely hate alone. They feel compelled, almost driven, to entreat others to hate as they do. Peer validation bolsters a sense of self-worth and, at the same time, prevents introspection, which reveals personal insecurities. Individuals who are otherwise ineffective become empowered when they join groups, which also provide anonymity and diminished accountability.
Stage 2: The Hate Group Defines Itself
Hate groups form identities through symbols, rituals, and mythologies, which enhance the members' status and, at the same time, degrade the object of their hate. For example, skinhead groups may adopt the swastika, the iron cross, the Confederate flag, and other supremacist symbols. Group-specific symbols or clothing often differentiate hate groups. Group rituals, such as hand signals and secret greetings, further fortify members. Hate groups, especially skinhead groups, usually incorporate some form of self-sacrifice, which allows haters to willingly jeopardize their well-being for the greater good of the cause. Giving one's life to a cause provides the ultimate sense of value and worth to life.
Stage 3: The Hate Group Disparages the Target
Hate is the glue that binds haters to one another and to a common cause. By verbally debasing the object of their hate, haters enhance their self-image, as well as their group status. In skinhead groups, racist song lyrics and hate literature provide an environmentwherein hate flourishes. The life span of aggressive impulses increases with ideation. In other words, the more often a person thinks about aggression, the greater the chance for aggressive behavior to occur. Thus, after constant verbal denigration, haters progress to the next more acrimonious stage.
Stage 4: The Hate Group Taunts the Target
Hate, by its nature, changes incrementally. Time cools the fire of hate, thus forcing the hater to look inward. To avoid introspection, haters use ever-increasing degrees of rhetoric and violence to maintain high levels of agitation. Taunts and offensive gestures serve this purpose. In this stage, skinheads typically shout racial slurs from moving cars or from afar. Nazi salutes and other hand signals often accompany racial epithets. Racist graffiti also begins to appear in areas where skinheads loiter. Most skinhead groups claim turf proximate to the neighborhoods in which they live.
Stage 5: The Hate Group Attacks the Target Without Weapons
This stage is critical because it differentiates vocally abusive haters from physically abusive ones. In this stage, hate groups become more aggressive, prowling their turf seeking vulnerable targets. Violence coalesces hate groups and further isolates them from mainstream society. Skinheads, almost without exception, attack in groups and target weaker victims. The adrenaline "high" intoxicates the attackers. The initial adrenaline surge lasts for several minutes; however, the effects of adrenaline keep the body in a state of heightened alert for up to several days. Each successive anger-provoking thought or action builds on residual adrenaline and triggers a more violent response than the one that originally initiated the sequence. Anger builds on anger.
Stage 6: The Hate Group Attacks the Target with Weapons
Haters prefer weapons, such as broken bottles, baseball bats, blunt objects, screwdrivers, and belt buckles. These types of weapons require the attacker to be close to the victim, which further demonstrates the depth of personal anger. Attackers can discharge firearms at a distance, thus precluding personal contact. Close-in onslaughts require the assailants to see their victims eye-to-eye and to become bloodied during the assault. Hands-on violence allows skinheads to express their hate in a way a gun cannot. Personal contact empowers and fulfills a deep-seated need to have dominance over others.
Stage 7: The Hate Group Destroys the Target
The ultimate goal of haters is to destroy the object of their hate. Mastery over life and death imbues the hater with godlike power and omnipotence, which, in turn, facilitate further acts of violence. With this power comes a great sense of self-worth and value, the very qualities haters lack. However, in reality, hate physically and psychologically destroys both the hater and the hated.
Universal Application
The Seven-Stage Hate Model has a wider application. For example, when a coworker, for various reasons, becomes a hate target, the hater immediately seeks out others in the office who dislike, or can be persuaded to dislike, the hated coworker (Stage 1). The group establishes an identity using symbols and behaviors. They use a lifted eyebrow, a code word to exclude the hated coworker from a lunch invitation, or any number of other actions to demean and isolate. The haters may even adopt a name for their group (Stage 2). At this point, the haters only disparage the hated coworker within their group (Stage 3). As time passes, the haters openly insult the hated coworker either directly or indirectly by allowing disparaging remarks to be overheard from afar (Stage 4). One morning, the hated coworker discovers his desk rearranged and offensive images pasted over a picture depicting his wife and children (Stage 5). Both sophomoric and more malicious acts of hate have the same effect. Eventually, the haters sabotage the hated coworker's projects and attempt to ruin the individual's reputation through rumors and innuendoes (Stage 6). In so doing, the haters make the work environment intolerable for the hate target (Stage 7). Scenarios like this occur every day across America and, indeed, around the world. The targets of hate may change, but the hate process remains constant.

Psychology of hate groups[edit] Hateful intergroup conflict may be motivated by "in-grouplove," a desire to positively contribute to the group to which one belongs, or "out-group hate," a desire to injure a foreign group.[34] Both individuals and groups are more motivated by "in-group love" than "out-group hate," even though both motivations might advance a group's status.

 This preference is especially salient when a group is not situated in a competitive position against another. This partiality towards cooperative behavior suggests that intergroup conflict might decline if group members devoted more energy to positive in-group improvements than to out-group competition.[35]Groups formed around a set of moral codes are more likely than non-morality-based groups to exhibit "out-group hate" as a response to their especially strong sense of "in-group love."[36]

Intergroup threat occurs when one group's interests threaten another group's goals and well-being.[37] Intergroup threat theories provide a framework for intergroup biases and aggression.[38]
One type of intergroup threat theory, realistic group conflict theory, addresses competition between groups by positing that when two groups are competing for limited resources, one group's potential success is at odds with the other's interests, which leads to negative out-group attitudes.[39] If groups have the same goal, their interactions will be positive, but opposing goals will worsen intergroup relations. Intergroup conflict may increase in-group unity, leading to a larger disparity and more conflict between groups.
Symbolic threat theory proposes that intergroup bias and conflict result from conflicting ideals, not from perceived competition or opposing goals.[40] Biases based on symbolic threat tend to be stronger predictors of practical behavior towards out-groups than biases based on realistic threat.[41]
Realistic group conflict theory and symbolic threat theory are, in some cases, compatible. Integrated-threat theoryrecognizes that conflict can arise from a combination of intergroup dynamics and classifies threats into four types: realistic threat, symbolic threat, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes.[37] Intergroup threat theories provide a framework for intergroup biases and aggression.[38]Intergroup anxiety refers to a felt uneasiness around members of other groups, which is predictive of biased attitudes and behaviors.[42] Negative stereotypes are also correlated with these behaviors, causing threat based on negative expectations about an out-group.[43]
According to the 7-stage hate model, a hate group, if unimpeded, passes through seven successive stages.[44][45]In the first four stages, hate groups vocalize their beliefs and in the last three stages, they act on their beliefs. Factors that contribute to a group's likelihood to act include the vulnerability of its members as well as its reliance on symbols and mythologies. This model points to a transition period that exists between verbal violence and acting out that violence, separating hardcore haters from rhetorical haters. Thus, hate speech is seen as a prerequisite of hate crimes, and as a condition of their possibility.
Hate group intervention is most possible if a group has not yet passed from the speech to the action stage, and interventions on immature hate groups are more effective than those that are firmly established.[45] Intervention and rehabilitation is most effective when the one investigating a hate group can identify and deconstruct personal insecurities of group members, which in turn contribute to the weakness of the group. Perhaps most critical to combating group hate is to prevent the recruitment of new members by supporting those who are most susceptible, especially children and youth, in developing a positive self-esteem and a humanized understanding of out-groups.[46]

See also[edit]

Saturday 7 March 2015

Bullies created a Facebook group for people who wished I was dead: Teenage victim admits online abuse made her feel suicidal Amy Louise Paul was victim of online bullying Bullies joined hate group to taunt her on Facebook It made her so upset she considered suicide Found help thanks to Childline


A teenager who considered killing herself because online bullies made her life hell has shared her story in the hope it will help other victims.
Amy Louise Paul, from Peterborough, features in a new video for counselling service Childline who helped her through her ordeal.
She said: 'When I was 13 I had a disagreement with one of my friends at school and I thought it was all sorted. Then one of my other friends said "she's made a Facebook group about you for all the people who wish I was dead already."'
Amy Louise aged 13 with her mother, Lisa: They have both praised Childline for their support after she was a victim of online bullies
Amy Louise aged 13 with her mother, Lisa: They have both praised Childline for their support after she was a victim of online bullies
She added: 'The website was shared and sent out to people to join the group and as far as I'm aware many people did.'
People joined the Facebook group and left cruel comments about the teenager.
Amy Louise said the impact of the bullying affected her happiness and wellbeing. 
'Before the cyber-bullying started I was happy but afterwards I didn't want to talk to anyone or be around anyone and I even cut myself off from my family, she said. 
Online abuse: The teenager felt suicidal after a hate group was set up to taunt her on Facebook
Online abuse: The teenager felt suicidal after a hate group was set up to taunt her on Facebook
'I used to love school and was always excited to be going in to learn new things but I started to dread going. And I couldn't just leave it at school because it followed me home. I'd go on the computer and I'd be worried that someone would say something about it while I was online.  It invaded everywhere.'
She said it became so upsetting, it made her question her will to live and she even contemplated suicide.
She recalls: 'I was very upset, words can't describe how upset I was. I thought everything had been taken away from me and I didn't know what to do. 
'It made me so I didn't want to wake up in the morning. I didn't want to go to school or see anybody and it made wanting to carry on living very difficult. At one point I did want to take my own life.'
When Amy Louise's mother, Lisa, 45, a shop manager, found out about the hate group set up to target her daughter she was furious but felt helpless about what could be done.
Moved on: The student is smiling again now the Facebook group has been taken down and she got the help she needed to overcome her ordeal
Moved on: The student is smiling again now the Facebook group has been taken down and she got the help she needed to overcome her ordeal
In a previous interview with the Daily Mail said said: 'The first I heard about the hate group was when I collected Amy Louise after school; she was crying uncontrollably and told me what happened.
'I was absolutely furious that the school knew and had not called to tell me what was happening. Then I discovered they had not punished the girl responsible. I had frequent meetings with them but they weren't interested, they didn't take it seriously and I think the problem is some governors don't even understand what a computer is, let alone cyber-bullying.'
She added: 'The police came 24 hours after I reported what was happening but then never got back to us.
'People sweep it under the carpet but they are playing with children's lives. My daughter was in such a terrible state.'
The bully was made to take the Facebook group down by their headteacher but Amy Louise continued to feel the impact on her confidence and because 'people were still talking about it'. 
It was Childline who eventually helped her after she reached out to them via their website.
Lisa said: 'The only people who've been really useful are ChildLine - they have been brilliant and gave us lots of good advice.'
No escape: Age 13, left, Amy Louise felt had no way to get away from the online bullies
Ordeal: Amy Louise has shared her story in the hope it will help other victims of cyber-bullying
No escape: Age 13, left, Amy Louise felt she had no way to get away from the online bullies but now she's happier, right, age 17 and urging other victims to seek help
Some adults who grew up in a world where there were no mobile phones or social network websites may struggle to comprehend the scale and impact of cyber-bullying.
But NSPCC statistics reveal that 38 per cent of young people have been affected by it. A third have received abusive emails and24 per cent have received abusive text messages.
It can lead to depression and anxiety, and in some tragic cases, teenagers have taken their own lives because they have felt unable to cope.
The NSPCC offer advice on their website to children and parents on how to deal with cyberbullying including tips on online safely and privacy settings.
Amy Louise urges anyone suffering from cyber-bullying to seek help, either by confiding in their parents or teachers or in Childline like she did. 
'Quite simply if I hadn't spoken to Childline I doubt I would still be here today,' she admits.
Now Amy-Louise has finally been able to move on from her ordeal and has even drawn some positives from it.
She said: 'It was a horrible experience but from it I learnt that I can be strong and not let people get to me. The experience made me strive to push myself and I'm off to college now to study law, politics and English. I also joined the Air Cadets and play in their band at an international level.'

Victims of cyberbullying fight back in lawsuits


When a Georgia middle school student reported to police and school officials that she had been bullied on Facebook, they told her there was not much they could do because the harassment occurred off campus.
So the 14-year-old girl, Alex Boston, is using a somewhat novel strategy to fight back: She's slapping her two classmates with a libel lawsuit.
As states consider or pass cyberbullying laws in reaction to high-profile cases around the country, attorneys and experts say many of the laws aren't strong enough, and lawsuits such as this one are bound to become more commonplace.
"A lot of prosecutors just don't have the energy to prosecute 13-year-olds for being mean," said Parry Aftab, an attorney and child advocate who runs stopcyberbullying.org. "Parents are all feeling very frustrated, and they just don't know what to do."
Almost every state has a law or other policy prohibiting cyberbullying, but very few cover intimidation outside of school property.
Alex, who agreed to be identified to raise awareness about cyberbullying, remembers the mean glances and harsh words from students when she arrived at her suburban Atlanta middle school. She didn't know why she was being badgered until she discovered the phony Facebook page. It was her name and information, though her profile picture was doctored to make her face appear bloated.
The page suggested Alex smoked marijuana and spoke a made-up language called "Retardish." It was also set up to appear that Alex had left obscene comments on other friends' pages, made frequent sexual references and posted a racist video. The creators also are accused of posting derogatory messages about Alex.
"I was upset that my friends would turn on me like that," she told The Associated Press. "I was crying. It was hard to go to school the next day."
Alex learned of the phony page a year ago and told her parents, who soon contacted administrators at Palmer Middle School and filed a report with Cobb County Police.
"At the time this report was taken in May 2011, we were not aware of any cyberbullying law on the books that would take her specific situation and apply it to Georgia law," said Cobb County police spokesman Sgt. Dana Pierce.
Police encouraged the Boston family to report the fake account to Facebook. Alex's family said despite requests to Facebook to take the page down, the company did not do so. The website was taken down around the time the lawsuit was filed a week ago.
Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes and Cobb County school officials declined comment on the case. The two students named in the lawsuit haven't hired an attorney and their parents couldn't be reached for comment.
The thorny issue of whether schools may censor students who are off campus when they attack online has led to split decisions in federal courts. Administrators and judges have wrestled over whether free speech rights allow students to say what they want when they're not at school.
Justin Layshock of western Pennsylvania was suspended after he created a MySpace parody in 2005 that said his principal smoked marijuana and hid beer behind his desk. The suspension was overturned by a federal judge, who found that school officials failed to show the student's profile disrupted school operations. The judge's decision was later upheld by an appeals court.
In West Virginia, Kara Kowalski sued school officials after she was suspended from her high school for five days in 2005 for creating a web page suggesting another student had a sexually transmitted disease. A federal appeals court upheld the suspension, dismissing Kowalski's argument that the school shouldn't punish her because she created the site at home.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear either case.
Jason Medley, of Houston, filed a defamation lawsuit in June against three of his daughter's classmates. The classmates were accused of filming themselves making false sexual remarks about his daughter and posting the video to Facebook.
The complaint was settled months later with apologies from the girls and a small donation to charity, Medley's attorney Robert Naudin said.
"The girls involved likely now understand the wrongful nature of what they did and the harm that can come of such conduct," he said. "They made a donation out of their allowances to a charitable organization that fights against cyberbullying."
In Georgia, lawmakers have given school administrators new powers to punish students if they bully others at school, but legislation that would expand the laws to include text messages and social media sites never reached a vote this year.
Seven states have added off-campus harassment to their bullying laws in recent years, though Georgia is not one of them.
"Cyberbullying really goes beyond the four walls of the school or the four corners of the campus, because if you use a cellphone, PDA or social media site, then those activities follow the child both into the school and out of the school," said House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, a Democrat from Atlanta who co-sponsored the legislation that would have expanded Georgia's bullying law. "It's important for the state to really get ahead of this. It's already happening, but it's going to be more exacerbated and more difficult the longer we go."
Alex and her family have started a petition to encourage lawmakers to strengthen Georgia's law. Her lawsuit seeks a jury trial and unspecified damages.
"At first blush, you wouldn't think it's a big deal," said Alex's attorney, Natalie Woodward. "Once you actually see the stuff that's on there, it's shocking."
___
Follow Greg Bluestein at http://www.twitter.com/bluestein and Dorie Turner at http://www.twitter.com/dorieturner.

Friday 6 March 2015

FACEBOOK NOT PROTECTING IT'S USERS

What you need to know:
  • Cyber bullying can be a crime.
  • If you're being cyber bullied, there are things you can do to protect yourself.
Did you know that social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all ban cyber bullying? Or that cyber bullying can be illegal? If you have been bullied online, have seen bullying online or are worried that you may have bullied someone else online and you don’t know what to do next, you can get free, confidential legal advice from Lawmail.

What is bullying?

Bullying is behaviour that:
  • is meant to be hurtful;
  • targets a certain person or group of people;
  • happens more than once; and
  • embarrasses, threatens or intimidates the person being bullied.

What is cyber bullying?

Cyber bullying is bullying carried out online or through mobile phones.
This could include using SMS, email or social networking sites to harass or abuse someone.

Is cyber bullying a crime?

Cyber bullying can be a crime under either South Australian or national law when it involves:

Menacing, harassing or offensive use of the internet or a mobile

It is a crime to use a phone or the internet in threaten, harass or seriously offend somebody. A message or post could be considered offensive if it is likely to cause serious anger, outrage, humiliation or disgust. The maximum penalty is 3 years in jail.

Real life examples

In 2010, a 20 year old guy in QLD sent threats and hate-filled texts and Facebook messages to his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend. He was found guilty of using phone and internet services in a menacing, harassing or offensive way and placed on probation with an order to attend counselling.

In 2011, a teenager in NSW made a Facebook page called “All ___ Police Are Corrupt”, which included the names of several local police officers. He was charged with harassing and offensive use of the internet.

Threats

It is a crime to intentionally frighten someone by threatening to hurt them. This can be through your phone, text message, emails or online posts. Threatening to kill someone carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail.
It is also a crime in South Australia to make (or encourage others to make) threats of physical harm to a person because of their race.

Real life examples

In 2006, a teenager in NSW threatened to kill two of his teachers and a girl at his school on his MySpace page. He was charged with making threats.
In 2009, a guy in WA posted a video on YouTube that showed him making threatening comments towards people of a particular ethnic and religious background. He was charged under racial hate laws.

Stalking

Stalking is when someone gets repeated attention that intimidates or frightens them. Stalking can include making unwanted phone calls, emails, text messages and messages on Facebook/Twitter etc. Stalking is a crime in South Australia if you call, message or otherwise bother somebody twice or more with the intent to harm, harass or scare them. The maximum penalty is 3 years in jail (but can be higher if the person uses a weapon or breaks a court order).

Real life example

In 2009, a guy in VIC copied pictures from a girl’s profile and posted them on adult websites, along with her name and contact details. He was found guilty of stalking and sentenced to jail.
In 2011, a teenager in WA who had befriended an American girl on Facebook began sending her threatening messages and unwanted gifts. He was arrested for stalking.

Unauthorised access

It is a crime under state and national law to log into a person’s online accounts without permission. The maximum penalty is 2 years in jail.

Defamation

It is a crime in South Australia to publish untrue information about someone in order to cause them serious harm. The maximum penalty is 3 years in jail.

Real life example

In 2009, a teenager in SA made a harassing Facebook page about a local police officer. He was found guilty of defamation and placed on a two year good behaviour bond.

Encouraging suicide

It is a crime under both South Australian and national law to cyber bully someone in a way that intentionally encourages or causes them to kill themselves. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment. 

What can happen…

Cyber bullies can also get in trouble with internet or mobile phone service providers, websites, schools and non-criminal courts.

Websites to take down comments/pictures

Most websites have ways of checking what’s being posted. Users can flag and report any nasty contents to the website administrator. Websites can remove things in your account which they find inappropriate.

Warnings or suspension from communication services or websites

Most websites and phone companies have Terms and Conditions which control what users are allowed to do. Cyber bullying can break these rules.
Websites may give warnings or remove inappropriate content themselves. They may even delete a user’s account if they discover cyber bullying. 
Phone companies can suspend or cancel a person’s phone number and phone contract if they use it to repeatedly harass others through calling or texting.
In more serious cases, the website or phone company may report illegal behaviour to the police.
- See more at: http://www.lawstuff.org.au/sa_law/topics/bullying/cyber-bullying#sthash.7aA91Xi4.dpuf