Gravity of detraction in a specific case

[AnneOnymous]

If someone who is a stranger attacks you or commits some fault against you, would it be considered detraction to reveal their fault to people who do not know them and would likely have no previously formed reputation in mind for that person? I wish to note that the revelation was NOT meant to be malicious, but in seeking emotional support and ensuring other people were not in danger. Would love to hear opinions on this…

 

[CarmeliteKnight]

If a stranger harms you yes you should tell someone, like the authorities. That’s what they are there for. That’s what God commissions them to do.

 

[AnneOnymous]

Thank you for your response! This is not what I meant exactly, so I will elaborate. I was verbally attacked first publicly, then privately, as well as falsely accused of manipulation by a stranger. In order to seek emotional support and to ensure that my reputation was safeguarded if this stranger told these lies to others that know ME, I told several others about this situation. I gave some of the people this person’s name, but not all, but I know that none of them actually knew the person. Does this change your opinion?

 

[CarmeliteKnight]

If someone was knowingly spreading lies about your friend or an acquaintance wouldn’t you want your friend/acquaintance to tell you? I see no harm in it. It let’s other people be aware that someone purposefully bares false witness agianst someone. It will help them be on the look out for this person trying to slander them aswell.

I see no harm in it. This is also assuming what you are telling me is 100% true.

 

[AnneOnymous]

I am speaking the truth, yes, and thank you once again!

 

[adgloriam]

and to ensure that my reputation was safeguarded if this stranger told these lies to others that know ME

Depends on the likelihood of that happening. That would be harassment and persecution by the person in question. Is that likely? Were there any indications towards that outcome? What are the concrete characteristics of the social group where the slander originally took place and in what group do you expect it to take place in the future?

You do realize you are mostly defenseless if the persons to which you are slandered aren’t your friends, or are more friends of the slanderer. This is part of social games, in general, and the mere possibility of you knowing people enough to take preventive measures -who would know the slanderer, at all- reflects a small group of socially connected people.

Generally, good sense does prevail. Except in groups/societies that are small or where people hold a stake.

I see no harm in it

I’ve seen this logic too many times justifying gossip in small societies. There has to be very strong motive to prompt a preventive defense, the only time when slander is allowed is in preventing a scammer by warning others (in this case the scam of unjust slander).

 

[AnneOnymous]

“Depends on the likelihood of that happening. That would be harassment and persecution by the person in question. Is that likely?”

I definitely thought so in the immediate aftermath and still consider the possibility that this person would try to turn people against me. I do agree that people who know me better than the attacker, especially if they don’t know the attacker at all, would not be at a considerable risk of being turned against me. Regardless, it seemed easier to inform people I was accused of manipulating of the accusation made against me than to clean up what would likely be a bigger mess had I kept it to myself.

 

[adgloriam]

accusation made against me than to clean up what would likely be a bigger mess

Good faith is on the side of the other to a considerable extent. You might just have damaged the reputation of a person (done injustice to) who would have done nothing against you. The Gospel calls you to reconcile with your enemy asap (the best possible scenario). You can’t justify morality of a action on someone else’s hypothetical sin before he acted - that would require certainty that the slanderer is an habitual slanderer.

that this person would try to turn people against me

This is a strong indication of some personalities. If you’ve seen him do that before you are strongly justified, his reputation would precede him on this.

I gave some of the people this person’s name

It would have been more charitable to preserve the slanderers identity only reveling it if push came to shove, nevertheless warning those you wanted to alert.

as well as falsely accused of manipulation by a stranger

The person is a stranger? How would he have slanderer you publicly and know anything about you? What is manipulation? Getting someone to do your will without their full knowledge and consent.

 

[AnneOnymous]

I. I agree with this wholeheartedly. None of the people I told about my attacker had any previous connection to the attacker, so the impact would be far less significant if at all, but I still agree. The person did offer a partial apology some time afterwards (NOT before I told the majority of the people I had told), but due to the severity of their fault against me and a disingenuous and condescending tone even in the “apology”, I thanked them for it and cut contact. Pertaining to your comment about the Gospel, I’ve always been under the impression that forgiveness (the release of ill will toward one for faults against you) is required but reconciliation (seeking further contact with a person who has wronged you) is not. Perhaps you believe otherwise? I’m interested to know!
II. What little I know about this person indicates: instability, possessiveness, and unchecked tendencies of rage. I had and still have legitimate concern that this person would try to turn people against me by any means necessary and could pose a psychological or perhaps even physical threat to people I care about.
III. All I can say is that I agree.
IV. Though the person is a stranger, we have mutual connections. The attacker claimed that their profanity-ridden berating was in defense of their friend (my acquaintance) but clearly without the person’s knowledge. One of the attacker’s more ridiculous accusations against me was that I manipulated our mutual connection’s family members into being my friends because I’m too scary and crazy for them to want to be associated with me on their own.

 

[adgloriam]

Pertaining to your comment about the Gospel, I’ve always been under the impression that forgiveness (…) is required but reconciliation (…) is not. Perhaps you believe otherwise? I’m interested to know!

After the sermon of the Mount, no less. And there’s more than one reason as well explained:

Mt 5:23. Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you,
Mt5:24. leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Mt 5:25. Settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him.q Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison.
Mt 5:26. Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.

because I’m too scary and crazy

Personally, I think it would be interesting to meet a person fitting this description.

manipulated our mutual connection’s family members into being my friends

Friendship is a good thing. You are not supposed to bring evil out of friendship, it exists to bring about good.

profanity-ridden berating

That’s a way of speaking (in his defense, he probably doesn’t know any better.)

What little I know about this person indicates (…)
Though the person is a stranger

I’d take it easy, that description seems a bit too much. I don’t believe “possessiveness” without grounding. Instability is relative, to the person being provoked. “Unchecked tendencies of rage” - you should see me when I’m mad

 

[AnneOnymous]

I-II: Thank you for Scriptural reference.
III: Haha, thank you, and nice to “meet” you! I believe my attacker referred to me as such because they find my level of openness and trust to be abnormal.
IV: I couldn’t agree more…being accused of making friends to benefit some fictional agenda was very hurtful to me. I am always seeking kind people to bring into my life, you cannot have too many positive influences around you!
V: True…and the only part they apologized for was swearing at me. To quote them directly: “I don’t apologize for how I feel, but I do apologize for cursing.”
VI: I suppose this could be a case of rash judgment, I am insightful and not often wrong in my analyses of new people. You definitely are more attuned to seeing the good in people and discounting potential faults/flaws than I!

 

[adgloriam]

Basically he accused you (the truth remaining to be seen).

And you MASS SLANDERED him without thinking twice.

(Which does confirm his initial accusation to a significant extent.)

 

[AnneOnymous]

Slander/calumny implies that I made false claims about my attacker. All I did was reveal the attack against me (and in a few cases, the attacker’s identity, partial or full), at most I would see this as detraction or gossip. And your final statement brings about another question…would you consider excessive self-preservation (especially if at others’ expense) to equate to manipulation?

 

[AnneOnymous]

I also wish to point out the revelation of the person’s attack against me was not a personal account, I took screenshots of what was said to me and passed them along. Not sure if this changes your opinion but I figured I’d elaborate further!

 

[PetraG]

Thank you for your response! This is not what I meant exactly, so I will elaborate. I was verbally attacked first publicly, then privately, as well as falsely accused of manipulation by a stranger. In order to seek emotional support and to ensure that my reputation was safeguarded if this stranger told these lies to others that know ME, I told several others about this situation. I gave some of the people this person’s name, but not all, but I know that none of them actually knew the person. Does this change your opinion?

I think that we also have to be careful that in avoiding detraction we don’t keep misbehavior secret that should not be secret. You are talking about serious behavior. If you repeat what the behavior was and do not draw sweeping conclusions, I don’t think that is malacious at all. You’re not required to allow someone to totally trash your reputation.

 

[AnneOnymous]

This was definitely my mindset, though I can admit I may not have been at peak logic in the immediate aftermath. I am resilient and more than used to being attacked, but I can admit that I was shaken and not completely in control of myself. Obviously I am biased, but I do consider what was done to me a serious and preposterous offense. I was accused of manipulating people into friendship, craziness/scariness/abnormality, and making the attacker’s and my mutual acquaintance feel hurt. I wish to make clear that the mutual connection has NEVER shown me or anyone else to my knowledge the slightest indication that such is true.

 

[PetraG]

This was definitely my mindset, though I can admit I may not have been at peak logic in the immediate aftermath. I am resilient and more than used to being attacked, but I can admit that I was shaken and not completely in control of myself. Obviously I am biased, but I do consider what was done to me a serious and preposterous offense. I was accused of manipulating people into friendship, craziness/scariness/abnormality, and making the attacker’s and my mutual acquaintance feel hurt. I wish to make clear that the mutual connection has NEVER shown me or anyone else to my knowledge the slightest indication that such is true.

This whole thing does not smell good, especially that you don’t feel “at peak logic” or completely in control of yourself even though you are usually on an even keel. The total warping of reality is not what normal people do when they fly off the handle.

I think you need to be aware that you could be dealing with a sociopath. In that case, the best possible thing you could do is to stay as far off of this person’s radar as possible. If you ask experts how to deal with someone who actually is a sociopath, the answer is: don’t.

“Do not join the game. Intrigue is a sociopath’s tool. Resist the temptation to compete with a seductive sociopath, to outsmart him, psychoanalyze, or even banter with him. In addition to reducing yourself to his level, you would be distracting yourself from what is really important, which is to protect yourself.”
and
“The first rule involves the bitter pill of accepting that some people literally have no conscience… Do not try to redeem the unredeemable.”
Martha Stout, The Sociopath Next Door

One of the things that can make you feel crazy is that you may carry around the idea that people are generally good in a basic way. Whether they’re culpable or have some kind fo imbalance, I don’t know, but some people are bad news and are very unlikely to change. Accept that, and sometimes things aren’t nearly so crazy. Things can get a lot scarier, because sociopaths are people who will cut off their noses to spite their faces, but realizing that not everyone is good makes things less crazy.

You’re right to try to defend your own reputation, but to be on the safe side keep a very low profile and do not directly confront this person. If you have to deal with them, do it on a win-win basis. You don’t want them to feel you’ve “beaten” them or that you are an opponent.

And what if this was just one nasty interchange with someone who is OK? Well, laying low won’t hurt you or them. Trying not to get into a drama won’t hurt you or them. Confirming with yourself that you know what actually happened and you are not crazy–it won’t hurt you or the other person.

(That book “The Sociopath Next Door” is at a lot of libraries. It is an eye-opener.)

 

[SeraficLeo]

When I lived in the States a local detective came to my house and said someone said I posted on Facebook that ‘all gays should be burned alive and their flesh melt off then burn forever in hell.’ All I remember is the sick, morbid obsession with fire and burning. When the detective first showed up I was terrified there was a death or killing in my family or something. Then she (it was a native looking womam) told me (or rather strongly implied) that I was on the FBI terrorist watch list. Did not ask me questions or anything. Funny thing is that at that time they/she had no idea I was a U.S. citizen by birth (it was under Obama). I was and am of course not on any watch list and had and have no problems travelling.

My point is only that people will make up stuff all the time if they don’t like you. When my morality is in doubt I always turn to the Sermon on the Mount.

 

[PetraG]

My point is only that people will make up stuff all the time if they don’t like you.

No, they really don’t. Most people would never do anything remotely like you’re describing.
But some will, maybe 1 in 20 or so. They do just the kind of outrageous things you’re describing.
These are the kind of people you just stay away from, when there is an option.

 

[Emeraldlady]

would you consider excessive self-preservation (especially if at others’ expense) to equate to manipulation?

Are you talking about a physical threat to your life?