just imho but i think you are a bit too clinical and making a mountain out of a molehill. self and paid voting is not necessarily "abusive". it isn't harm anyone, it is only perceived as harmful. the sexual abuse cases coming out may be more to do with political dramatization, power plays and changing social norms than what you term as "anti-social" behavior. is the behavior appropriate? no. is there a need for a huge public court case and media circus? no. one harm does not excuse another. i can exhibit antisocial behavior of not saying hello in the morning (which oddly stresses out many people). it is the definition of something as "anti-social" that is the problem. why has bad behavior not been cut out thru natural selection? pretty damned clear cut. we have the most rich and powerful people in government exhibiting anti-social behavior, and they are awarded for their bad behavior. if our own society chooses to accept anti-social behavior as the norm, the trait will only be enhanced.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Thank you for your reply.
I agree with this. It's not necessarily abusive, but it can be. For this article, I was thinking just about the subset of that behavior that is abusive.
I also agree that the definition of the word "antisocial" is sort of slippery, but I was thinking of predatory forms of behavior that go beyond ignoring social amenities to actively harming others. The Colman & Wilson paper was a study of Anti-social personality disorder, which has a specific psychiatric definition (listed in their paper), but of course my article did have a broader focus.