Some individuals will never extend basic respect to others not due to misunderstanding or conflict, but because they exploit social hierarchies and power dynamics for personal validation. In such cases, especially in professional environments where parting ways isn’t feasible, passive tolerance can be interpreted as submission. This often leads to what social psychologists call instrumental aggression where someone uses another as a tool to elevate their own status or maintain dominance within a group.
If respect is not actively asserted and boundaries clearly enforced, you risk becoming a scapegoat or pawn in their social maneuvering, a phenomenon well documented in dominance theory and social dominance orientation. Allowing such behavior reinforces toxic group dynamics and weakens your perceived social capital, ultimately compromising your psychological safety and professional integrity.
Guys come join the philosophy corner if you want to share your input.
@Andythegreat I have myself seen again and again in group dynamics and work environments how only the weaklings become scapegoats of bad behaviours from others.
Those evil impulses from others that exist in the world always find a door for expression somewhere. They express through bad people who resonate with like thoughts and energies, and then get projected on the weakest and most vulnerable of the lot.
However, those who hold themselves in high esteem and have a sense of self-respect about themselves are never such targets, people instantly notice and feel they are not the people to budge with.
This does not mean directly enforcing anything, but indirectly, through your presence and the power and strength you live with can invariably attract, subtly, as if by subtle forces a different kind of reality for yourself.
I think many people have interesting opinions to share about subjects such as these let us move this to the philosophy corner to keep it separate from the official discussion here.
Not really. I’m speaking from my own experiences and observations. I recently had my own run in with someone “demanding” respect that did not end well for them.
And no, I don’t believe I can earn everyone’s respect, not at all! I wouldn’t want to try. Sounds exhausting.
I do make a distinction between courtesy and respect.
Anywho, I readily admit I misunderstand things at times. Perhaps it was the case here. Have a good day, @anon78457040
The invisible element of the three patterns you’ve mentioned is this: our own tacit participation.
These dysfunctional interactional styles ‘work’ on us because we (often unintentionally) give too much of our power to the other person. To the gaslighter, to the guilt-tripper, to the passive aggressive person.
That is one reason why a program like GLM can make such a profound difference. It shifts the underlying patterns that are feeding and powering the whole dynamic.
that stuff feels less and less tricky with practice yet still… is probably the longest lasting process of resolving than any other Ive ever encountered so far when it comes to mental topics. Impressively powerful I would say. I wonder if some people out there are at a level where they never fall into such tricks. They must be immensely practiced. And defiant at times of need. That takes either a strong heart or heavy stubbornness. Just guessing.
While I understand the appeal of viewing this issue through a lens of personal energy or self-respect, that perspective oversimplifies a well-documented social phenomenon.
Scapegoating is not about inner weakness, it’s about group dynamics.
Research in social psychology, particularly Social Dominance Theory and Scapegoat Theory, shows that individuals are targeted not because they’re weak, but because they’re perceived as non-threatening or different. Even strong, competent people can become scapegoats if they disrupt the dominant social narrative.
Systemic abuse is opportunistic, not spiritual.
Bullies don’t assess your aura, they look for people who lack institutional protection or social backup. This includes:
Newcomers
Minorities
Independent thinkers
High performers who threaten fragile egos
(see: Janoff-Bulman’s Just World Fallacy — the mistaken belief that bad things only happen to people who “deserve” it)
"Presence" is valuable but not always enough.
A calm, grounded demeanor is powerful, yes. But in toxic environments, people can still be targeted due to envy, projection, or power plays. Believing that inner strength makes someone “untouchable” ignores countless examples of respected individuals being sabotaged, mobbed, or isolated.
The “energy-only” view can unintentionally blame victims.
Suggesting people are scapegoated because they didn’t emit the right inner signal can feel dangerously close to saying “they attracted it” — which invalidates the actual harm done by toxic people and broken systems.
Beyond the psychology, this way of thinking is just inhumane.
Saying people are mistreated because they’re “weak” doesn’t just ignore reality, it quietly justifies the abuser and shifts blame to the victim.
I don’t subscribe to that. When I see someone being targeted even if they’re seen as “weak” by the group I speak up. I call out what’s wrong, even if it bruises the egos of the ones doing harm.
Silence or spiritual rationalizing doesn’t help it protects the aggressor.
If we care about justice, we should stop moralizing people’s suffering and start holding those responsible to account.
Because in the end, we wouldn’t accept this happening to our own sons, daughters, or parents so why should we accept it happening to anyone?
Trust me, if these individuals are directly called out and held accountable, the fear of losing their social standing will often force them to change their behavior within 24 hours. Bullies only have the confidence to act when they know they have backing, remove that support, and their power quickly fades. All the doors of expression will quickly shut as if this aspect of them never existed.
If we fail to act, we not only enable this behavior to continue but also betray those who could become victims of this predatory conduct.
That idea may sound appealing, but it doesn’t hold up in reality. Many people who hold themselves in high esteem who are confident, self-respecting, and competent do become targets. Not because they’re weak, but because they disrupt fragile egos.
This will be my last message on the topic. Thank you all for the discussion, and have a great day.
Can we please move these long ass philosophy/psychology conversations to a different thread? They’re just clogging space and taking away from the original intent of this thread?
This. Overtime, people won’t even attempt to do it to you, as they will intuitively know that you won’t tolerate it.
Yep.
It is.
I disagree. There are those who will see your silence or unwillingness to get involved with their chaos as weakness, leaving conflict as no other outcome. And he’s using “put them in their place,” in its common casual usage, as in: “Since you would not leave me alone, I now have to deal with you in a manner in which you won’t attack again.”
We’ll get to them. Right now, we’ve been focusing more on the product itself, then we’ll go back and work on presentation. However, we do appreciate those who are pointing this out to us.
