Skip to main content
26 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 22, 2016 at 5:09 history tweeted twitter.com/StackAcademia/status/723378076436959232
Apr 15, 2016 at 18:16 comment added Dilworth @JeffE and CaptainEmacs, in fact from the story the OP describes, it is reasonable to assume that the aggressor in this case is not someone who likes to fight on an endless basis, but picks on the OP only and exploits the fact that the OP is being "nice" and "harmless". I thus stand by my claim: being "aggressive" on a low scale, by asserting the boundaries, is likely to take the aggressor off the OP's back.
Apr 14, 2016 at 22:46 comment added JeffE @Dilworth As I teach my students, "obviously" is a synonym for "it's almost certainly not true that". Some people just want to fight.
Apr 14, 2016 at 16:36 comment added Captain Emacs @Dilworth "infinite" is a mode of speech, of course. However, you would be surprised how much energy aggressive people have. But I'll take an intuitionist operational view of infinity: as much as you can respond/react, they have always an response to add upon. I have seen very energetic people being pushed out of their position by "infinitely aggressive" types. I disagree that aggression is best controlled by fear. It really depends: for people that test boundaries, they want a reaction, and that satisfies them. For others, see my comment above.
Apr 14, 2016 at 16:17 comment added Dilworth That said, I would reserve my advice: it is not for everyone. Some people cannot become aggressive just like that. For them, avoidance might be a possibility (though, objectively, a less effective one).
Apr 14, 2016 at 16:09 comment added Dilworth @CaptainEmacs, by the way, nobody has infinite resources of energy. Everyone has a limit. I claim that aggressive people at work mostly have even less resources of energy: they just have not been confronted before with a counter attack. Of course, these are speculations, but also other suggested approaches are.
Apr 14, 2016 at 16:05 comment added Dilworth @JeffE, there should be no citation here, just as there are no citations needed for the appeasement/ignoring approach. It's common sense: an aggressor can be controlled best by fear. If you ignore him/her they will continue to attack, as they get some sort of gratification from it. Of course avoidance/changing room/running away is also an option. But I would say slightly less effective.
Apr 14, 2016 at 16:01 answer added Captain Cranium timeline score: 8
Apr 14, 2016 at 13:54 comment added JeffE Fighting back, and consistently — [citation needed] "I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." — George Bernard Shaw
Apr 14, 2016 at 12:35 review Close votes
Apr 14, 2016 at 14:30
Apr 14, 2016 at 12:19 answer added Enasi timeline score: 1
Apr 14, 2016 at 12:04 comment added Captain Emacs @Dilworth I agree that "ignoring" as a strategy may not work. However, there is a fine line between aggression and assertion. In fact, some people confuse it, and that again can escalate. When I suggest letting it taper out, I do not mean ignore. I mean bore. If well done, it's devastatingly effective. There are people who can suck energy out of the most enthusiastic/energetic company. Black holes. Strive to become a black hole for that person.
Apr 14, 2016 at 10:54 comment added Dilworth Yes, I agree, that the OP should not start an endless war with the aggressive person. But he should be aggressive with him as well. Not as in starting a war, but as in asserting his boundaries and his reluctance to be a victim of the aggressor insults. Ignoring him would not work IMHO.
Apr 14, 2016 at 10:15 comment added Captain Emacs @Dilworth Depends. Some people are naturally aggressive, and they have infinite resources of energy. Being aggressive back does not work here, they thrive on it; here, letting every issue taper out will bore them. Some people are aggressive as they want to test your boundaries. Here, a firm, resolved, response is the best. Some people are aggressive because they are scared. Here, a disengagement or non-committal relation helps to indicate you do not intend to compete with or against them. Without more information about the case, it is hard to guess whether it's one of these categories.
S Apr 14, 2016 at 10:09 history suggested JoErNanO
Add relevant tags.
Apr 14, 2016 at 10:08 comment added Dilworth The best way, empirically I would say, to deal with aggressive behavior directed towards you is being aggressive back. Fighting back, and consistently. After a couple of incidents like that the aggressor will most probably retreat altogether or even become friends with you.
Apr 14, 2016 at 9:40 review Suggested edits
S Apr 14, 2016 at 10:09
Apr 14, 2016 at 9:39 answer added JoErNanO timeline score: 12
Apr 14, 2016 at 9:14 comment added Captain Emacs @user2212461 Yes, there are techniques to handle that. They depend on the details of the case. Thus, a few questions: can you be moved from his office? When he insults you in front of others, is this camouflaged or open? My advice in the meantime: avoid going down to his level unless you enjoy that game. There are other ways - and main point is emphasise and keep distance.
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:36 comment added user2212461 sorry I just had to write it that way, felt like a release already @Sathyam
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:35 comment added Sathyam Hate is a very strong word to use in my opinion, especially in Academia.
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:29 comment added The Guy I know this will sound negative, and I'm not trying to advocate it but can't you treat him the same way he treats you! Maybe he will switch the office or stop being disrespectful!
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:16 answer added User001 timeline score: 4
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:16 comment added ff524 Any chance you could arrange to sit in a different office?
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:15 history edited ff524 CC BY-SA 3.0
edited tags
Apr 14, 2016 at 3:09 history asked user2212461 CC BY-SA 3.0