Distinguishing attacks from accepted mocking

Post Reply New Topic

This has been an issue for me. Distinguishing a social "attack" from "socially acceptable mocking". Because to me personally, both things belong in the same drawer. I'd actually rather want to be "verbally attacked" than "socially mocked".

I believe I have now realized what the "scientific" distinction is.

To NTs, the group means everything. They are so social that what they care about is being accepted by the group, and that it works out well for the group. The individual is not of importance in itself, the individual is only important to the extent to which it can contribute to the well being of the group.

So when you say something offensive, it can belong to 2 different categories:

1. An actual attack
2. Socially acceptable mocking


Whether an offensive comment belongs to group 1 or 2 depends on whether that comment benefits the well-being of the group as a whole, disregarding all feelings of the individuals.

That means it is "all right" to call someone fat, if everyone can agree that they are overweight, because it benefits the group that overweight people do not get too high of a social status (unless this is out-weighted by other factors). But it is not all right for that "fat" person to respond that the person that called him fat, is fat too, when he is not. That would be considered a "real" attack, and it would no longer just be "for fun". When the slim guy called the overweight guy "fat", it was "just for fun".


This is the main reason why I prefer to be alone, and do not want to join any group if I can avoid it. Being social reduces you to being nothing but the judgments of the group to which you belong. They can f**k off if you ask me!!


If one cannot accept that this is "okay", one can never truly become a social person.


Have you had trouble distinguishing attacks from accepted mocking?

I can't tell the difference either.

Social status means nothing to me because I never had any and don't care about stuff like that anyways.

People occasionally pretend they are just joking, but I think it's almost never ok to call a woman or girl fat. No matter what the reaction.

It's easier to tell the difference when you're reasonably confident that the person talking does actually enjoy your company and (possibly more importantly) respects your competence. And honestly, if you have to wonder if they do, then they likely don't.

several things

when society decides a thing is unacceptable/shamable then at that point anyone gets to call out people

fat shaming for many years WAS acceptable, it is becoming unaccepted

slut shaming is currently on the cusp, you can still marginalize womyn for being raped by what she wore, but in most other instances you are not supposed to get after us for how we dress.

orientation is quickly changing in the shaming/bullying area (and I guess gender identity will be 20-30 years behind that, someone else will have to weigh in)

race is no longer really acceptable to marginalize at all

in your example calling a person out for being fat, the reason the larger person cannot respond with "you are fat" to the slim person is it is silly, the best response to fat shaming is - "I can always lose weight, you will always be stupid/an a**"

I don't care about social status, just finding a life mate to enjoy various activities with (a sharing of mutual interests and the making of happy memories therein).

I can't always tell the difference between and attack and teasing, it can take me a while to work it out and sometimes I never manage to. So I just put up with the resulting confusion instead.

Society is too judgmental..it drives me nuts.

But it would be ok to call a man or boy fat?

Why do they call it slut shaming? doesn't that more or less imply a woman who dressed in an attractive manner and got raped is a slut? I just don't feel the term is helpful in trying to get rid of the victim blaming when an attractively dressed female gets raped. Perhaps the flaw is in whole concept that a woman is a 'slut' if they show off a little skin.

it is called that because if a man has many partners or shows off society calls him a "stud"

a womon even dares to be the slightest bit of free she gets called a "slut", I even wear skirts that show half of my thigh and I get weird stares, of if the least bit of my breasts show, but men can wear nothing on top or let their rear ends hang out and no problem.

this is the reason it is called "slut shaming" we are shamed as sluts just for trying to be open or free. and you are correct if we get oogled we get blamed for the way we walked into the room or our makeup or dress, and every time I was raped I was blamed for one reason or another - it was NEVER his fault for assaulting me.

"Mostly" NT weighing in to try to help.

This is a misperception that many people on the spectrum seem to have. To some NT's, the group has significant importance. But at least in Amercian society, for most people, the individual outweighs the group. There are other cultures in which the group outweighs the individual. But this is a cultural thing. Not an NT/ASD thing. Just because people are aware of things like social nuances and the subtleties surrounding status within the group, it doesn't mean that they value the group over the individual. It just means it is probably easier for them to manipulate their own behavior to get the outcome they want because they can understand the nuances and better predict how others will respond to any set of behaviors. People on the spectrum often lack that ability, and I think that is what leads to a lot of the "social underdog" things that I've seen happen. The nuances and subtleties are missed, and along with that, opportunities to "come out on top" are missed, too.

But I would say most NT's value themselves over the group. Otherwise you would not see things like crime, manipulation, taking advantage of others, and other forms of victimization. Clearly these things are prevalent in society as a whole. And it's often because people put their own desires/wellbeing over the group's.



Again, this kind of logic may apply to some NTs, but not all. Most NT people I know do not find any form of mocking socially acceptable, except for the kids in my son's middle school. I do not find any degrading comments directed toward any person acceptable, unless the comments are related to a purposeful choice the person made (for example, when Chris Brown beat Rhianna, I had no problem with people calling him a low-life loser. I called him the same. That is different than calling him that because of his race, his religion, his appearance, etc.)

What I have noticed my son having difficulty telling the difference between, is personal attacks and the "banter" that seems to be prevalent among some peer groups. My daughter has even more difficulty in this area because to her any remark made that is not overtly positive is a personal attack.

Here is how I try to explain it to my son:

When the remark is made among people who are otherwise friendly to each other (ingroup), not intended to drag the other person down or raise the other person up in the eyes of others (social equals), and the person saying it is of equal likelihood of being the "target" of the remark ("fair play"), then it is likely "banter" and not meant as a person attack. It is the way some people "play" and is not meant to make anyone feel bad. Go with the flow. The behavior is socially acceptable, even if it seems outrageous, uncomfortable, unfair, or weird to you.

When the remark is made by someone who is not otherwise friendly toward you (outgroup), is trying to put you down or raise themselves up in the eyes of others (not social equals), and when it would never be tolerated for you or someone else like you to say something similar to teh person (not "fair play"), then it is likely a personal attack, verbal bullying, or some other form of negative behavior. You do not need to go with the flow. Their behavior is socially unacceptable. My son tries to use humor to deflect things like this. My daughter must immediately go to someone in authority because she is not yet able to deal appropriately with things like this on her own.

Its not always easy for me to tell the difference, both when I'm on the receiving end, and when I'm seeing it happen between two other people. My friends are quite sarcastic towards each other and there are many times I think to myself "I can't believe he just called her that!!". I think it over and I realize that they are just joking. Even when I do realize it's just friendly mocking, I still don't understand why it's fun saying mean things to each other.

I'm unable to tell the difference, or even know if they meant it in a nice way, or a cruel way. So I just respond as if they meant it nicely, and if they were hoping to see evidence of hurting my feelings... They failed!

Also, I only interact with people if there's a purpose for it, so as long as my actual agenda is being accomplished, whether people choose to behave nicely or rudely is irrelevant to the task at hand. For my part, I will try my best to be polite, but another person's rudeness is a reflection of them, not me.

I wouldn't call someone fat, no, I don't think it's ok. As a woman I don't know for sure if men feel the same way and also think it's wrong. I think it's insulting and hurtful.

I have a very hard time telling the difference.

It's not the "well-being of the group" that matters, it's the status of the person.

This group value = social person concept is just.....wrong.