Once a cyberbully always a cyberbully

I'm sure there are instances when a cyberbully stops becoming a cyberbully and realizes the error  of her/his ways such as publicly signing a pact on not to ever be involved in cyberbullying such as the Deaf Hope pact with over 200 signatures.

From this day forward I publicly commit myself to end all violence. Additionally I shall strive to contribute to a safe and supportive cyberspace. I shall neither participate in, encourage, nor endorse any form of cyberbullying.  

In the spirit of femtorship and mentorship and in the spirit of comm-unity, I promise to respect, honor and learn from myself as well as others.  

Sign the Pact  

Signed by on September 27, 2008:

It's unfortunate that Deaf Hope took down the "The Pact" link.

Now, in general, once a person becomes a cyberbully over the internet and doesn't stop then it can become a vicious circle. The circle gets bigger. The hole digs deeper.  A cycle that never ends just to ensure the continuing character assasinations of people by personally going after named individuals. But the maxim "once a cyberbully always a cyberbully" is not always true but in general I hope people would get the gist of where I'm going with this.

The word "cyberbully" can and do apply to adults. A child can cyberbully a child. A child can cyberbully an adult. An adult can cyberbully a child. An adult can cyberbully an adult. Everybody knows exactly what it means and what it's all about. No need to get "technical" about it because it can confuse the matter at heart when it's about bullying. Excessive harassment is bullying gone too far. You can have an adult bully. By convention you can have an adult cyberbully which is an adult who take to the internet (or phone) as the preferred method to harass and bully others. In other words, cyberbullies use their computer screen as their shield because a cyberbully would not ordinarily say those harassing words or comments online to the same person in person.

The legal definition of "cyberbullying":

Cyber bullying refers to any harassment that occurs via the internet, cell phones or other devices. Communication technology is used to intentionally harm others through hostile behavior such as sending text messages and posting ugly comments on the internet.  

The National Crime Prevention Council defines cyber-bullying as “the process of using the Internet, cell phones or other devices to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person.”  

Cyber-bullying could be limited to posting rumors or gossips about a person in the internet bringing about hatred in other’s minds; or it may go to the extent of personally identifying victims and publishing materials severely defaming and humiliating them.

From the National Science Foundation on recognizing cyberbullying:

Cyberbullying is not only associated with children and adolescents. The Cyberbullying Research Center website run by Justin Patchin, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, and Sameer Hinduja, an associate professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida Atlantic University, claims to receive more inquiries from adults than teens.  

"We get a lot of emails, phone calls and comments on this blog from adults who are being bullied through technology. They stress to us that cyberbullying is not just an adolescent problem. Believe me, we know," they write on their website.  

"We know that cyberbullying negatively affects adults too. It's just that we spend the majority of our efforts studying how this problem impacts school-aged youth due to their tenuous developmental stage," they write.

A woman explains that cyberbullying occurs among adults just as well and as viciously, too.

"Cyberbullying does not just apply to children. There are adult groups dedicated to harassing and defaming others as well," says an adult woman in an online article titled "The Anonymous Attacks of Adult Cyberbullying Cross the Line and Enter the 'Real World.'"  

"Cyberbullying does not just apply to children. There are adult groups dedicated to harassing and defaming others as well, along with websites created online specifically to make fun of and demean individuals. These people can be found in communities linked to blogs and chat rooms and they use the disguise of “anonymity” to harass their prey. Sometimes, these bullies will take their online squabbles offline and press people online to harass their prey's family and friends. As a bully myself, then a victim of large-scale bullying, let me tell you my story.

In November of 2006, my grandfather had a massive heart attack. My way of dealing with my pain was to go online and take it out on nameless, faceless bloggers, and I posted things to people that would probably result in me being beaten up if it were said to someone in 'real life.' When one of these people I attacked told me my grandfather deserved his death, I upped my ante, lashing out at these words with racial slurs, vulgar names and just about anything else you can imagine."

These people, despite their differences, are part of a group that has one thing in common-all of them have been impacted in some way by cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying is a huge problem over the internet. Not just among the deaf/hh community but everybody. It's also a problem over cell phones through texting or voice.  There were past public and private discussions on cyberbullying within the deaf/hh community. It continues to be discussed. I have covered the cyberbullying topics several times in my blogs.  Courts have recognized that cyberbullying is not protected speech. People who continue to regularly use the internet to harass, make fun of, defame, attack, spew hate, produce ad hominems and such at private individuals whether the person is an adult or child is a cyberbully in my book. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Once a bully always a bully. Once a cyberbully always a cyberbully but there is always hope that a bully can change. The only guarantee to not be a bully whether online or in the physical presence is not to behave like one.

Separating Facts From Fantasy

Why is the author of Deaf Anthology writing up fictional stories about CI and kids with CIs who are somehow terminally depressed enough to kill their own parents, friends or whatever like this fictional story emblazoned at the top of one Deaf blog page "SHOCKING NEWS: CI DEAF CHILDREN KILLED THEIR PARENTS IN LOS ANGELES, DEAF ANTHOLOGY EXCLUSIVE! " ? Despite the clear warning that all Deaf Anthology blogs are fictional and the warning is prominently displayed at the very top of the blogsite, even that wasn't enough to get the readers' attention, some actually believed that the story was true (read the comments, you'll get a kick out that). The story was either so believable or repugnant to readers the fictional story ended up being taken down by the blog author.

I guess because so many people objected to it and that it was starting to become a rumor (scroll down until you see the yellow highlight) on the internet? Who knows exactly why this fictional story was taken down. But the question I have is that are some people simply desperate to try and paint a bad picture about cochlear implants and the people who wear them in the form of a fictional murder story? Is this good or bad form?

Do stories like these are looked upon with a certain subtle glee hoping that these things would happen hoping it'll give them enough to make a point (and that would be anybody's guess). But in the real world when was the last time you heard about a deaf guy or a kid with a CI go on a murder rage? All I can remember in the news about a deaf or hard of hearing person committing murder crime that received a lot of press or are reported in the Deaf community are mostly by criminals who are Deaf. A crimie where a Deaf person murders another Deaf person who are either a relative, an in-law, friends, lover or a by-stander. Now, I'm not trying to be one sided but that's all I can remember. I guess stories do become sensationalist news because it's about a Deaf on Deaf crime. So, I don't know if the media are biased in reporting these stories but I suppose the guilt lies in the Deaf community for reporting these stories far and wide in their blogs and emails that enabled me to remember these specific stories.

The stories I remember are:

The Simich Jr's murders "Deaf Man (Simich) Kills Deaf Sister and Deaf Brother-in-law. Silent Murders. "

The Joseph Mesa murder case where a Deaf man murdered two Deaf classmates at Gallaudet University.

A 43 year old Deaf lesbian who murdered a Deaf woman and then hacked her body into several pieces.

And this year's murder which is actually a 27 year old murder case that was recently solved that led to the arrest of a Deaf man who officials believed he murdered his 15 year old Deaf girlfriend back in 1981.

Sure, it could be a matter of time until a deaf person with a CI commit a murder crime against a deaf, hh, Deaf or hh person. But will the Deaf blog world go on a sensationalist blog spree talking about how CIs are bad and how wearing a CI may have caused the deaf person with a CI to commit this heinous crime against a hearing, deaf, hh, or Deaf person? But just let us hope that day will NEVER happen just as we hope that we will NEVER see another Deaf on Deaf murder crime again or any deaf on deaf, hh or hearing crime.

But this Deaf Anthology thing is a blog that produces some fictional stories that squarely shows that the author is against cochlear implants. Although it is a literary expression and doesn't "mean anything" just as writing a fictional book about assassingating a current U.S. president may not "mean anything." I'm sure many people will take a jaundice view of such a novel or writing even if they claim that it doesn't "mean anything." Somehow, as it seems to me, I wonder if there is ever the possibility that some people are actually hoping that those stories will someday come true like this one here. But for now it's just a fantasy for some Deaf readers to enjoy. And I wonder how would hearing people react to those stories?

All in all, it's better to separate facts from fantasy or else people will believe just about anything even if you do have a disclaimer clearly displayed saying it's all a fantasy or fiction. Still, some people will believe what they want regardless even if the evidence is right before their eyes.

UPDATE: Despite what the Yahoo cache says it did have the disclaimer up but I was informed that there was no disclaimer at the top at the time when "CI Deaf Children Killed" was written. I suppose a disclaimer went up later as an afterthought (probably by people asking if the story was true) and the fictional story was subsequently removed for unknown reasons (but I can make a pretty good guess why).