| This is likely true, but it does not negate the notion that some people are very sensitive. For example, you've ever played on a competitive sports team, or were in the military, you may be desensitized to some things that some may consider aggressive. Cultural issues are important as well: some cultures argue, others do not. Some cultures vocalize objections, some do not. Some are direct, some indirect. Germans and Dutch are really direct - their candor may be perceived as harsh by some. That said, they're also very emotionally calm. I grew up 1/2 Irish/Scottish in a big family, my god man did we argue (and still do). But it's just arguing, it doesn't mean much. I'd call it 'emotive verbalization' and there's no name calling or anything. Often someone can be loud and direct, and it seems terse, but if you actually listen, they might not be condescending, name calling or anything. It just feels that way. Some people are also simply not used to actually being held accountable. A boss who suddenly draws some hard lines ... this may make some feel uncomfortable. Some people confuse negative articulation of work as an insult i.e. "this is sht" might be interpreted as "you are sht" when it's not. None of this remotely excuses actual bullying - I'm just saying there's a lot of grey and context. So if someone is constantly threatening, name calling, publicly admonishing, being unfair, demeaning, inconsistent, derogatory, digging into personal issues - this is bullying. But being demanding, loud, assertive, and sometimes being angry (so long as it's not directed at anyone) - this may or may not be bullying. More poignantly - the article does woefully lack information about specific kinds of bullying behaviour, that's in fact the very first thing on my mind as I read it. This is really subjective stuff, it needs to be spelled out. |
A supervisor can be generally unpleasant, impatient, lacking empathy, and demanding and not be a bully.