Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Bullying works!

MainEventChris_'s profile picture

Prince Debit 🇨🇲

7,025 subscribers

193,501 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Comedy
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Proof that bullying works
0:39

Proof that bullying works

NFL Memes

357,543 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Sibling bullying works 😂💪🏽
1:25

Sibling bullying works 😂💪🏽

Wealth Squad Chris

585,752 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

BULLYING WORKS😭 ya’ll keep complaining!!!
0:41

BULLYING WORKS😭 ya’ll keep complaining!!!

🖤 NATTIE NATION 🖤 #1 ✨

86,538 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Jhene got a ring on her finger. Bullying works.
0:51

Sensitive content

Jhene got a ring on her finger. Bullying works.

dell hooks

8,406,121 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The BBC News (World) asked me what I thought about UAW president saying tariffs are good* for 🇺🇸 and he applauds them. They are not. And he’s helping to prove that bullying works.
1:16

The BBC News (World) asked me what I thought about UAW president saying tariffs are good* for 🇺🇸 and he applauds them. They are not. And he’s helping to prove that bullying works.

Flavio Volpe, C.M.

16,864 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Man pretending to be a woman blames the church and the Minnesota shooter’s mother for bullying him into detransitioning, claiming it caused him to snap. He ends with a chilling warning: “Keep doing that. Let’s see how that works out for y’all.”
0:42

Man pretending to be a woman blames the church and the Minnesota shooter’s mother for bullying him into detransitioning, claiming it caused him to snap. He ends with a chilling warning: “Keep doing that. Let’s see how that works out for y’all.”

I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸

183,674 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

Elon Musk and Donald Trump think they can punish people for expressing views they disagree with. Well guess what: that's not how the First Amendment works. I salute Harvard and all those who are resisting Trump's political blackmail and bullying. And shame on those who are not.
1:18

Elon Musk and Donald Trump think they can punish people for expressing views they disagree with. Well guess what: that's not how the First Amendment works. I salute Harvard and all those who are resisting Trump's political blackmail and bullying. And shame on those who are not.

Senator Chris Van Hollen

142,655 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Ireland and Eurovision a little thread: An Irish friend who works in TV has written to make an important point. She believes that Israel is being used as a ‘scapegoat’ for Ireland’s cash-strapped RTE withdrawing from the Eurovision song contest. (Below 2024 Irish contestant Bambi Thug crying about how awful it was when people pushed back at her bullying of the Israeli contestant).
0:29

Ireland and Eurovision a little thread: An Irish friend who works in TV has written to make an important point. She believes that Israel is being used as a ‘scapegoat’ for Ireland’s cash-strapped RTE withdrawing from the Eurovision song contest. (Below 2024 Irish contestant Bambi Thug crying about how awful it was when people pushed back at her bullying of the Israeli contestant).

Nicole Lampert

321,119 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Watch how intimidation works in broad daylight 😡 Shantidoot wearing skull cap behaves as if he owns the entire locality, threatening a vehicle owner to move his car despite his roadside shop being 25 to 30 meters away. No obstruction. No valid reason. Just raw intimidation. This is textbook area domination of Shantidoots. A deliberate signal that certain people are not welcome here, that no shop, no parking, no presence will be tolerated near them. Bullying dressed up as authority 🤦🏻‍♀️
4:25

Watch how intimidation works in broad daylight 😡 Shantidoot wearing skull cap behaves as if he owns the entire locality, threatening a vehicle owner to move his car despite his roadside shop being 25 to 30 meters away. No obstruction. No valid reason. Just raw intimidation. This is textbook area domination of Shantidoots. A deliberate signal that certain people are not welcome here, that no shop, no parking, no presence will be tolerated near them. Bullying dressed up as authority 🤦🏻‍♀️

Oxomiya Jiyori 🇮🇳

59,430 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

this took an embarrassingly long time to get working, but we have our first working vehicle prototype in-game the turret is gyroscopically stable like a real tank turret, and slowly tracks the crosshair like how it works in helldivers 2 balancing vehicles has been a strong point of debate, and I feel the best way to have them feel fair is for the bigger guns to be more sluggish, making it easier for infantry to outmaneuver them, and prioritizing vehicle on vehicle combat rather than bullying troops on the ground the tank can also lock it's rotation so it can strafe and protect it's vulnerable rear armour
2:29

this took an embarrassingly long time to get working, but we have our first working vehicle prototype in-game the turret is gyroscopically stable like a real tank turret, and slowly tracks the crosshair like how it works in helldivers 2 balancing vehicles has been a strong point of debate, and I feel the best way to have them feel fair is for the bigger guns to be more sluggish, making it easier for infantry to outmaneuver them, and prioritizing vehicle on vehicle combat rather than bullying troops on the ground the tank can also lock it's rotation so it can strafe and protect it's vulnerable rear armour

CSAURAGEUL

18,863 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

SUPPORT KIMSOOHYUN PROTEST AGAINST CYBER BULLYING!!! Canadian 🇨🇦 fans have sent a truck video support to the street of soul again..following the Brazilian fans. These photos were taken in Sangam-dong its where korea's leading broadcasters are concentrated. Many journalists and reporters works. We want to say: Please show the world that south korea stands for true democracy where justice is based on solid facts and evidence. Before any final verdict, stop presumed convictions based on false media unproven accusations. Resist media manipulation and online judgement without truth. Believe in kimsoohyun. Support him. Give him back the dignity and rights he deserves. Everyone, please forward this to your social media. All kind hearted people in the world who advocate justice and fairness and oppose cyber violence, please unite together to support kim Soo Hyun and stop cyber violence. #WeStandwithKimSoohyun Cr: Lucyhongliang
1:06

SUPPORT KIMSOOHYUN PROTEST AGAINST CYBER BULLYING!!! Canadian 🇨🇦 fans have sent a truck video support to the street of soul again..following the Brazilian fans. These photos were taken in Sangam-dong its where korea's leading broadcasters are concentrated. Many journalists and reporters works. We want to say: Please show the world that south korea stands for true democracy where justice is based on solid facts and evidence. Before any final verdict, stop presumed convictions based on false media unproven accusations. Resist media manipulation and online judgement without truth. Believe in kimsoohyun. Support him. Give him back the dignity and rights he deserves. Everyone, please forward this to your social media. All kind hearted people in the world who advocate justice and fairness and oppose cyber violence, please unite together to support kim Soo Hyun and stop cyber violence. #WeStandwithKimSoohyun Cr: Lucyhongliang

Van 🍕🍹

123,831 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I don’t know Shehenaz Moosa, this is the 1st time I’ve come across her, so I have nothing against her. In cases where children are involved, parent’s consent is not enough. I’m probably one of the people who receives the most videos like the one she got. I often get extremely disturbing footage, even from families of victims themselves. Some videos are of children telling how someone abused them, sometimes repeatedly (family/friends). But I don’t post them except in rare circumstances, like that mosque bullying case on an island last year. I first try to reason with them and encourage them to go through the proper official channels. It works almost all the time. Why do I do it? It’s cause once a video involving a child is made public especially if their face or identity is visible, it can seriously affect that child’s future and subject them to bullying. We should only publish such content if there’s no other option and if the public interest outweighs the risks. For example, the gov is refusing to act or if other children may be at risk unless it’s exposed. Or in cases where the public would never believe such a thing is happening without seeing it for themselves. Even then, it should be done after a careful risk assessment. The potential benefits must outweigh the harm, the child’s safety and future must be prioritised and highest possible censorship should be applied. I’ve been informed that Gender Ministry staff Shehenaz referred to is 𝘼𝙞𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙩𝙝 𝙄𝙮𝙖𝙙𝙝. If Iyadh did indeed call her to take down a post that further victimises a child, then Iyadh made the right call. We must not post videos involving children on social media unless it’s absolutely needed. There must be a valid reason to do so. Even if a parent asks to upload it, we should exercise restrain. Not all parents have bachelors/masters degree in child psychology. I hope Shehenaz Moosa thinks about this and not repeat such a thing in future. We should learn from mistakes. I know I have learnt a lot from mistakes and judgement errors.
2:02

I don’t know Shehenaz Moosa, this is the 1st time I’ve come across her, so I have nothing against her. In cases where children are involved, parent’s consent is not enough. I’m probably one of the people who receives the most videos like the one she got. I often get extremely disturbing footage, even from families of victims themselves. Some videos are of children telling how someone abused them, sometimes repeatedly (family/friends). But I don’t post them except in rare circumstances, like that mosque bullying case on an island last year. I first try to reason with them and encourage them to go through the proper official channels. It works almost all the time. Why do I do it? It’s cause once a video involving a child is made public especially if their face or identity is visible, it can seriously affect that child’s future and subject them to bullying. We should only publish such content if there’s no other option and if the public interest outweighs the risks. For example, the gov is refusing to act or if other children may be at risk unless it’s exposed. Or in cases where the public would never believe such a thing is happening without seeing it for themselves. Even then, it should be done after a careful risk assessment. The potential benefits must outweigh the harm, the child’s safety and future must be prioritised and highest possible censorship should be applied. I’ve been informed that Gender Ministry staff Shehenaz referred to is 𝘼𝙞𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙩𝙝 𝙄𝙮𝙖𝙙𝙝. If Iyadh did indeed call her to take down a post that further victimises a child, then Iyadh made the right call. We must not post videos involving children on social media unless it’s absolutely needed. There must be a valid reason to do so. Even if a parent asks to upload it, we should exercise restrain. Not all parents have bachelors/masters degree in child psychology. I hope Shehenaz Moosa thinks about this and not repeat such a thing in future. We should learn from mistakes. I know I have learnt a lot from mistakes and judgement errors.

Hassan Kurusee

56,791 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Here’s the clip from the #HarryandMeghan Oprah shitshow where #MeghanMarkle disparages the #PrincessofWales while repeatedly saying she’s not disparaging her. Markle’s main point is that SHE cried and she did NOT make Catherine cry. How does she know? How does she know she didn’t? She doesn’t. There’s a reason you NEVER hear about the Princess being rude to people or having issues with staff or family-because she doesn’t. #PrincessCatherine is very measured and careful in how she treats others while you hear nothing about Markle than her issues with people, conflict, Markle-ing them, and bullying. So what’s the likely scenario? Markle has countless estrangements, Catherine has none. Markle essentially says that because of the conflict (there’s that word again) with her father before the wedding, apparently everyone should have been kissing her ass and allowing any kind of disrespectful behavior because of a situation she and Harry caused with Thomas Markle. This was Meghan Markle’s SECOND wedding yet she’s acting like she’s brand new at it. She’s visibly angry that the Palace didn’t get into the mud with the press about the crying story-she should be GRATEFUL because it wouldn’t have been flattering to her. She and Harry wanted the Palace to fight every single story that they didn’t like & that’s not how it works-that’s how you give negativity life. But catering to her ego is priority. #MeghanMarkleIsAMeanGirl #MeghanMarkleIsABully #MeghanIsTheProblem
4:13

Here’s the clip from the #HarryandMeghan Oprah shitshow where #MeghanMarkle disparages the #PrincessofWales while repeatedly saying she’s not disparaging her. Markle’s main point is that SHE cried and she did NOT make Catherine cry. How does she know? How does she know she didn’t? She doesn’t. There’s a reason you NEVER hear about the Princess being rude to people or having issues with staff or family-because she doesn’t. #PrincessCatherine is very measured and careful in how she treats others while you hear nothing about Markle than her issues with people, conflict, Markle-ing them, and bullying. So what’s the likely scenario? Markle has countless estrangements, Catherine has none. Markle essentially says that because of the conflict (there’s that word again) with her father before the wedding, apparently everyone should have been kissing her ass and allowing any kind of disrespectful behavior because of a situation she and Harry caused with Thomas Markle. This was Meghan Markle’s SECOND wedding yet she’s acting like she’s brand new at it. She’s visibly angry that the Palace didn’t get into the mud with the press about the crying story-she should be GRATEFUL because it wouldn’t have been flattering to her. She and Harry wanted the Palace to fight every single story that they didn’t like & that’s not how it works-that’s how you give negativity life. But catering to her ego is priority. #MeghanMarkleIsAMeanGirl #MeghanMarkleIsABully #MeghanIsTheProblem

Princess CarParkle 👑

118,363 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

I’m just coming online and I saw that a lot of drama has ensued. Some of us go offline to touch grass once in a while. Of course, we have a life outside social media, we don’t depend on Twitter alone. Anyways, let’s start with the video in the first frame. Disclaimer: A long read ahead. This is the Abike that was crying profusely like a baby and showing deep appreciation to Toyin Abraham at the premiere of Malaika, a movie she played lead character. She consistently thanked TA for considering her for the role and that it was a ‘dream come through’ for her. She even went as far as saying ‘I’ve never experienced this kind of BIG DEAL before’. It is that same movie you’re conveniently downplaying today and people are saying you were underpaid compared to how much you got paid to promote another movie. You were an ‘upcoming actor’ in 2023 who was merely a TikTok influencer and TA decided to give you an opportunity to explore more in the movie industry, has she done bad for extending such grace to you? Abike, that same movie put you in the spotlight and gave you more fame than you already had. You can’t deny that! Moving on, in the second frame, you made a proper unboxing video for FA’s movie and posted it on your platforms, knowing fully well that you were featured in another Cinema movie at the time. (Heard you even recommended it on your IG story lmao). That unboxing video was an indirect PR for ATCJ which sort of had an impact on TA’s movie, seeing as your brand has some TikTok influence. That’s how social media works. But some people said it was just an ‘unboxing video’, no big deal. Okay. I know we all want to be the judge and jury badly, but let’s also try to see things from different perspectives/angles. Now imagine you’re working for Access Bank and still advertising for First Bank, as how nau? Or you’re signed as a brand ambassador/influencer for Nike and you’re simultaneously promoting Adidas or Puma, please make it make sense? You mentioned TA’s fans have been bullying you ever since, but your fans on TikTok were also trolling her and even some of your friends insulted her in comment sections. If people ask you what exactly happened, you will say you‘re not ready to share your side of the story. But you were steady throwing subtle shades at her. If no be see finish, wetin wan cause that one? Idc about anything that has transpired, that’s between you two but girl, this woman freaking gave you her platform on a platter! Not once, not twice, not thrice. The least you could do was accord her that simple respect. See how you’ve successfully made her the villain in your story now. Rubbing her name in the mud for cheap talks. It’s all good though. I’m glad you’ve finally said what you had in mind all along. At least everybody will rest now. Enjoy the attention.🥂
1:32

I’m just coming online and I saw that a lot of drama has ensued. Some of us go offline to touch grass once in a while. Of course, we have a life outside social media, we don’t depend on Twitter alone. Anyways, let’s start with the video in the first frame. Disclaimer: A long read ahead. This is the Abike that was crying profusely like a baby and showing deep appreciation to Toyin Abraham at the premiere of Malaika, a movie she played lead character. She consistently thanked TA for considering her for the role and that it was a ‘dream come through’ for her. She even went as far as saying ‘I’ve never experienced this kind of BIG DEAL before’. It is that same movie you’re conveniently downplaying today and people are saying you were underpaid compared to how much you got paid to promote another movie. You were an ‘upcoming actor’ in 2023 who was merely a TikTok influencer and TA decided to give you an opportunity to explore more in the movie industry, has she done bad for extending such grace to you? Abike, that same movie put you in the spotlight and gave you more fame than you already had. You can’t deny that! Moving on, in the second frame, you made a proper unboxing video for FA’s movie and posted it on your platforms, knowing fully well that you were featured in another Cinema movie at the time. (Heard you even recommended it on your IG story lmao). That unboxing video was an indirect PR for ATCJ which sort of had an impact on TA’s movie, seeing as your brand has some TikTok influence. That’s how social media works. But some people said it was just an ‘unboxing video’, no big deal. Okay. I know we all want to be the judge and jury badly, but let’s also try to see things from different perspectives/angles. Now imagine you’re working for Access Bank and still advertising for First Bank, as how nau? Or you’re signed as a brand ambassador/influencer for Nike and you’re simultaneously promoting Adidas or Puma, please make it make sense? You mentioned TA’s fans have been bullying you ever since, but your fans on TikTok were also trolling her and even some of your friends insulted her in comment sections. If people ask you what exactly happened, you will say you‘re not ready to share your side of the story. But you were steady throwing subtle shades at her. If no be see finish, wetin wan cause that one? Idc about anything that has transpired, that’s between you two but girl, this woman freaking gave you her platform on a platter! Not once, not twice, not thrice. The least you could do was accord her that simple respect. See how you’ve successfully made her the villain in your story now. Rubbing her name in the mud for cheap talks. It’s all good though. I’m glad you’ve finally said what you had in mind all along. At least everybody will rest now. Enjoy the attention.🥂

Oluwatobi 🎀

91,263 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🥊GO MAX! - A GIVESENDGO Crowdfunding Campaign to defend Independent Journalists and Investigators including but not limited to WolvesAndFinance from TPUSA attacks of lawfare and intimidation. The URL is in the video and comments below. Legal Defense Fund for Independent Journalists & Investigators Being Threatened by Turning Point USA Why I'm Organizing This: Zach De Gregorio—a financial journalist who runs the YouTube channel Wolves and Finance—received a Cease and Desist letter from Turning Point USA. Not for lying. Not for fabricating evidence. For analyzing their publicly available 990 tax forms and asking questions. This is a pattern of lawfare and legal intimidation by TPUSA and there will be others who receive similar legal threats from them. Journalists shouldn't be bankrupted for good faith journalism and in direct violation of the First Amendment and everything Charlie Kirk stood for including open debate and asking questions. As soon as I learned TPUSA is systematically targeting small independent investigators with legal threats, I knew someone had to organize a defense. TPUSA is betting these journalists are too small, too scared, and too broke to fight back. One C&D letter, and most creators delete their content to avoid a $50,000-$250,000 lawsuit—even if they're 100% right. They're counting on us staying silent. I'm counting on us standing together. TPUSA isn't just going after Zach. They're targeting journalists and small creators who investigate their financial practices—people who can't afford legal defense. It's strategic intimidation. If you've received a TPUSA legal threat for your journalism, contact us today. This fund covers you too. The Hypocrisy That Should Make Your Blood Boil Turning Point USA built their brand on: Charlie Kirk's "debate me!" challenges Free speech advocacy "Ask questions" culture Fighting cancel culture But when independent journalists ask questions about THEIR publicly available tax filings? Lawyers. The organization that claims to defend free speech is now weaponizing defamation law to silence financial journalism about government-required public documents. Imagine a world where...independent journalists are afraid to investigate how powerful organizations spend money because they fear legal threats from well-funded institutions. Imagine only mainstream media with legal departments can hold nonprofits accountable. Imagine analyzing public tax documents becomes "too risky" for ordinary people. That world arrives the moment we let TPUSA succeed. How the Legal Defense Coalition Works Instead of each journalist fighting alone and going broke, we're creating a shared legal fund defending ALL journalists and independent investigators threatened by TPUSA (and their sub organizations) for investigating their organizations. Who This Covers: Zach De Gregorio and other journalists receiving TPUSA legal threats Future investigators they target Anyone doing good-faith journalism or investigation based on public documents What Funds Cover: ✓ Legal defense against C&D letters and lawsuits ✓ Discovery costs, depositions, expert witnesses ✓ Anti-SLAPP motions (Arizona law protects speech on public concern) ✓ Appeals and counter-suits if needed Legal Team: TBD Law Firm (First Amendment/media defense specialists) Our Advantages: Charlie Kirk, TPUSA, Jake Hoffman (AZ State Senator) are public figures requiring "actual malice" standard and the burden of proof for political defamation of public figures in Arizona is incredibly high 990s are PUBLIC documents—analyzing them is protected speech Proper sourcing shows good-faith journalism Arizona anti-SLAPP statute allows early dismissal + attorney fee recovery Pattern of targeting multiple journalists = evidence of abuse of legal process Protection of the United States Constitution and Arizona Constitution The Stakes If we don't stand together: TPUSA silences independent journalism through financial intimidation Analyzing public documents becomes dangerous Only the wealthy can afford to exercise First Amendment rights Every powerful organization adopts the same playbook If we fight back collectively: We prove intimidation fails when communities unite We establish legal precedent protecting financial journalism We show that ordinary people can hold power accountable We send a message: legal bullying doesn't work here Join the Defense 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.
1:31

🥊GO MAX! - A GIVESENDGO Crowdfunding Campaign to defend Independent Journalists and Investigators including but not limited to WolvesAndFinance from TPUSA attacks of lawfare and intimidation. The URL is in the video and comments below. Legal Defense Fund for Independent Journalists & Investigators Being Threatened by Turning Point USA Why I'm Organizing This: Zach De Gregorio—a financial journalist who runs the YouTube channel Wolves and Finance—received a Cease and Desist letter from Turning Point USA. Not for lying. Not for fabricating evidence. For analyzing their publicly available 990 tax forms and asking questions. This is a pattern of lawfare and legal intimidation by TPUSA and there will be others who receive similar legal threats from them. Journalists shouldn't be bankrupted for good faith journalism and in direct violation of the First Amendment and everything Charlie Kirk stood for including open debate and asking questions. As soon as I learned TPUSA is systematically targeting small independent investigators with legal threats, I knew someone had to organize a defense. TPUSA is betting these journalists are too small, too scared, and too broke to fight back. One C&D letter, and most creators delete their content to avoid a $50,000-$250,000 lawsuit—even if they're 100% right. They're counting on us staying silent. I'm counting on us standing together. TPUSA isn't just going after Zach. They're targeting journalists and small creators who investigate their financial practices—people who can't afford legal defense. It's strategic intimidation. If you've received a TPUSA legal threat for your journalism, contact us today. This fund covers you too. The Hypocrisy That Should Make Your Blood Boil Turning Point USA built their brand on: Charlie Kirk's "debate me!" challenges Free speech advocacy "Ask questions" culture Fighting cancel culture But when independent journalists ask questions about THEIR publicly available tax filings? Lawyers. The organization that claims to defend free speech is now weaponizing defamation law to silence financial journalism about government-required public documents. Imagine a world where...independent journalists are afraid to investigate how powerful organizations spend money because they fear legal threats from well-funded institutions. Imagine only mainstream media with legal departments can hold nonprofits accountable. Imagine analyzing public tax documents becomes "too risky" for ordinary people. That world arrives the moment we let TPUSA succeed. How the Legal Defense Coalition Works Instead of each journalist fighting alone and going broke, we're creating a shared legal fund defending ALL journalists and independent investigators threatened by TPUSA (and their sub organizations) for investigating their organizations. Who This Covers: Zach De Gregorio and other journalists receiving TPUSA legal threats Future investigators they target Anyone doing good-faith journalism or investigation based on public documents What Funds Cover: ✓ Legal defense against C&D letters and lawsuits ✓ Discovery costs, depositions, expert witnesses ✓ Anti-SLAPP motions (Arizona law protects speech on public concern) ✓ Appeals and counter-suits if needed Legal Team: TBD Law Firm (First Amendment/media defense specialists) Our Advantages: Charlie Kirk, TPUSA, Jake Hoffman (AZ State Senator) are public figures requiring "actual malice" standard and the burden of proof for political defamation of public figures in Arizona is incredibly high 990s are PUBLIC documents—analyzing them is protected speech Proper sourcing shows good-faith journalism Arizona anti-SLAPP statute allows early dismissal + attorney fee recovery Pattern of targeting multiple journalists = evidence of abuse of legal process Protection of the United States Constitution and Arizona Constitution The Stakes If we don't stand together: TPUSA silences independent journalism through financial intimidation Analyzing public documents becomes dangerous Only the wealthy can afford to exercise First Amendment rights Every powerful organization adopts the same playbook If we fight back collectively: We prove intimidation fails when communities unite We establish legal precedent protecting financial journalism We show that ordinary people can hold power accountable We send a message: legal bullying doesn't work here Join the Defense 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.

Sword Truth

246,005 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Marc Brackett spent 20 years at Yale studying why intelligent people are the worst at understanding their own emotions. What he found will change how you see yourself: 1. Most people cannot name what they are feeling. When Brackett asks a room to find the single word that best describes their emotion, over half struggle. We have never been formally taught to go deep into our emotional lives. We develop a sophisticated vocabulary for things we pay attention to, like wine, but almost none for our own inner states. 2. Emotions quietly control decisions we think are objective. Brackett had teachers grade the exact same middle school essay after being put in a good or bad mood. The grades differed by a full letter, sometimes two. When asked afterwards if their emotional state affected their evaluation, 90% said no way. It did, and they had no awareness of it. 3. No emotion is bad. Everyone is useful depending on what you do with it. Yellow, high energy, and pleasant, is great for brainstorming but terrible for careful decisions. Green, calm, and pleasant, is good for consensus building. Blue drives empathy. Red, anger, points at injustice, and can fuel passion if you channel it instead of being run by it. The goal is not to feel good all the time. it is to use each state well. 4. Jealousy and envy are not the same, and the difference changes how you treat them. Envy is wanting what someone else has. Jealousy is about a relationship, a threat to a bond you already have. It matters because jealousy tends to drive more aggression and violence, so the strategy you would teach a jealous child is completely different from the one for an envious child. Precise labelling enables precise action. 5. Telling someone to calm down, focus, or pay attention almost never works. Brackett points out we bark these commands at children and adults constantly, but we never teach the underlying mental processes for how to actually calm down or focus. Naming the desired state is not the same as giving someone the tools to reach it. 6. 80% of people rate themselves as more emotionally intelligent than the person next to them. which is statistically impossible. Self-report is nearly useless here because there is no reference point. Compared to his father, Brackett says, he is an emotional genius. Compared to the dalai lama, he needs work. Asking people to rate their own emotional intelligence has no validity. 7. 360 reviews measure your reputation, not your skill. When you ask other people to rate someone's emotional intelligence, what you actually capture is whether they like the person, not how skilled they are. The only valid measurement is watching someone solve real emotion-related problems, like decoding expressions or handling a loaded situation. 8. Emotions gate your ability to think and learn at all. A child worried about being bullied between classes cannot focus on the lesson. Brackett failed to focus on his own graduate school entrance exam months after his mother died, and only later understood it had nothing to do with his problem-solving ability. His emotional life was occupying the cognitive space the test required. 9. Emotion regulation is not just about managing negative feelings. We think of it as anger management or stress reduction, all down-regulating. But Brackett asks, who has ever taken a course in optimism induction or happiness maintenance? Regulation also means generating emotions you need, like a leader creating energy in a room, and maintaining good states when others try to pull you out of them. 10. Children with higher emotional intelligence do better on almost every measure that matters. less anxiety, less depression, less likely to abuse alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes, less aggression and bullying. They are seen as better leaders, are more attentive, less hyperactive, and perform better academically. The skill that determines academic performance most powerfully is emotion regulation. 11. The strongest sign of emotional intelligence in the workplace is whether people want to take you with them. Brackett had a Fortune 100 company's executives rate 100 managers, including one question: if you left the company tomorrow, would you do anything to bring this person with you? That question correlated more strongly with emotional intelligence than anything else. People want to be around those who have these skills. 12. Brackett hires on the coffee shop criteria. At Yale, he stopped looking at grades because everyone applying is already smart enough. What he looks for instead is whether, in the first 30 seconds, he thinks he would enjoy grabbing coffee with the person and just talking. That instinct tells him whether they are curious, creative, and know how to ask questions, the things schools rarely teach. 13. Creativity only translates into creative output when paired with emotional intelligence. Brackett cites research showing that people who are biologically more open to experience are only rated as producing genuinely creative work when they also score high in emotional intelligence. The reason is that creating means failing and being disappointed constantly, and without the strategies to manage that disappointment, the creative potential never gets unleashed. 14. The meta moment is a six-step tool for not being hijacked by emotion. Something triggers you. You sense the shift in your body and thinking. You take a breath to activate your parasympathetic nervous system and bring the hijacked state down, so your prefrontal cortex can work again. Then you picture your best self, the version of you that you want to be, and let that guide your response. Brackett jokes that six steps done well can help you avoid the twelve steps later. 15. When you are angry, you search for every reason to stay angry. Brackett describes how anger makes you dig up every past grievance, the vacation three years ago, the promise from last week, the thing from when your child was born. Anger is one of those emotions that hunts for justification. The meta moment is designed to interrupt that spiral before it compounds. 16. Seeing your best self is what makes the breath actually work. Brackett admits that taking a breath alone is not enough, because sometimes you take the breath and calmly decide to go for the jugular anyway. The missing piece is shifting your mindset by asking what your best self would do. He built this idea after a student called him the feelings master, and he started asking how the feelings master would actually carry himself in a hard moment. 17. You never regret taking a moment, and you always regret being dysregulated. Brackett is honest that even after years of this work, he sometimes ignores his own best self and ends up, in his words, sleeping alone on the couch that night. But he has never once regretted pausing to be his best self. The regret only ever comes from the times he let the hijack win.
1:02:08

Marc Brackett spent 20 years at Yale studying why intelligent people are the worst at understanding their own emotions. What he found will change how you see yourself: 1. Most people cannot name what they are feeling. When Brackett asks a room to find the single word that best describes their emotion, over half struggle. We have never been formally taught to go deep into our emotional lives. We develop a sophisticated vocabulary for things we pay attention to, like wine, but almost none for our own inner states. 2. Emotions quietly control decisions we think are objective. Brackett had teachers grade the exact same middle school essay after being put in a good or bad mood. The grades differed by a full letter, sometimes two. When asked afterwards if their emotional state affected their evaluation, 90% said no way. It did, and they had no awareness of it. 3. No emotion is bad. Everyone is useful depending on what you do with it. Yellow, high energy, and pleasant, is great for brainstorming but terrible for careful decisions. Green, calm, and pleasant, is good for consensus building. Blue drives empathy. Red, anger, points at injustice, and can fuel passion if you channel it instead of being run by it. The goal is not to feel good all the time. it is to use each state well. 4. Jealousy and envy are not the same, and the difference changes how you treat them. Envy is wanting what someone else has. Jealousy is about a relationship, a threat to a bond you already have. It matters because jealousy tends to drive more aggression and violence, so the strategy you would teach a jealous child is completely different from the one for an envious child. Precise labelling enables precise action. 5. Telling someone to calm down, focus, or pay attention almost never works. Brackett points out we bark these commands at children and adults constantly, but we never teach the underlying mental processes for how to actually calm down or focus. Naming the desired state is not the same as giving someone the tools to reach it. 6. 80% of people rate themselves as more emotionally intelligent than the person next to them. which is statistically impossible. Self-report is nearly useless here because there is no reference point. Compared to his father, Brackett says, he is an emotional genius. Compared to the dalai lama, he needs work. Asking people to rate their own emotional intelligence has no validity. 7. 360 reviews measure your reputation, not your skill. When you ask other people to rate someone's emotional intelligence, what you actually capture is whether they like the person, not how skilled they are. The only valid measurement is watching someone solve real emotion-related problems, like decoding expressions or handling a loaded situation. 8. Emotions gate your ability to think and learn at all. A child worried about being bullied between classes cannot focus on the lesson. Brackett failed to focus on his own graduate school entrance exam months after his mother died, and only later understood it had nothing to do with his problem-solving ability. His emotional life was occupying the cognitive space the test required. 9. Emotion regulation is not just about managing negative feelings. We think of it as anger management or stress reduction, all down-regulating. But Brackett asks, who has ever taken a course in optimism induction or happiness maintenance? Regulation also means generating emotions you need, like a leader creating energy in a room, and maintaining good states when others try to pull you out of them. 10. Children with higher emotional intelligence do better on almost every measure that matters. less anxiety, less depression, less likely to abuse alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes, less aggression and bullying. They are seen as better leaders, are more attentive, less hyperactive, and perform better academically. The skill that determines academic performance most powerfully is emotion regulation. 11. The strongest sign of emotional intelligence in the workplace is whether people want to take you with them. Brackett had a Fortune 100 company's executives rate 100 managers, including one question: if you left the company tomorrow, would you do anything to bring this person with you? That question correlated more strongly with emotional intelligence than anything else. People want to be around those who have these skills. 12. Brackett hires on the coffee shop criteria. At Yale, he stopped looking at grades because everyone applying is already smart enough. What he looks for instead is whether, in the first 30 seconds, he thinks he would enjoy grabbing coffee with the person and just talking. That instinct tells him whether they are curious, creative, and know how to ask questions, the things schools rarely teach. 13. Creativity only translates into creative output when paired with emotional intelligence. Brackett cites research showing that people who are biologically more open to experience are only rated as producing genuinely creative work when they also score high in emotional intelligence. The reason is that creating means failing and being disappointed constantly, and without the strategies to manage that disappointment, the creative potential never gets unleashed. 14. The meta moment is a six-step tool for not being hijacked by emotion. Something triggers you. You sense the shift in your body and thinking. You take a breath to activate your parasympathetic nervous system and bring the hijacked state down, so your prefrontal cortex can work again. Then you picture your best self, the version of you that you want to be, and let that guide your response. Brackett jokes that six steps done well can help you avoid the twelve steps later. 15. When you are angry, you search for every reason to stay angry. Brackett describes how anger makes you dig up every past grievance, the vacation three years ago, the promise from last week, the thing from when your child was born. Anger is one of those emotions that hunts for justification. The meta moment is designed to interrupt that spiral before it compounds. 16. Seeing your best self is what makes the breath actually work. Brackett admits that taking a breath alone is not enough, because sometimes you take the breath and calmly decide to go for the jugular anyway. The missing piece is shifting your mindset by asking what your best self would do. He built this idea after a student called him the feelings master, and he started asking how the feelings master would actually carry himself in a hard moment. 17. You never regret taking a moment, and you always regret being dysregulated. Brackett is honest that even after years of this work, he sometimes ignores his own best self and ends up, in his words, sleeping alone on the couch that night. But he has never once regretted pausing to be his best self. The regret only ever comes from the times he let the hijack win.

Jaynit

30,837 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat