|
In anthropology terms, I'd say that the phrase you mentioned in the title rings true, that "when outraged, people take action." There are many instances in time and space where outraged groups fought back against those whom they believed to have harmed them. It's a survival instinct. I'm not sure on what the specific terms are, but there are other social science branches that have objectively looked at this phenomenon.
In peace studies, for example, there are two kinds of action:
1. Violent action (think Nelson Mandela)
2. Non-violent action (think Martin Luther King, Jr.)
Both leaders were outraged at what was going on, and both leaders took action. Both leaders saw what was happening to minorities, and they decided to do something about it.
When individuals are outraged, they seek action in one of two ways, too:
1. Violent action (e.g., self-defense, defensive aggression, criminal aggression, unlawful aggression, seeking physical revenge, spreading libel or slander, spreading rumors, name-calling, yelling, etc.)
2. Non-violent action (e.g., communication, complaints, verbal boundaries, legal boundaries, lawsuits, leading or joining peaceful protests, ghosting, publicizing true victimizations, advocating, finding alternative options, calling the police, making a citizen's arrest)
Outrage is such a strong word and a strong feeling. It is generally experienced after cumulative abuses, cumulative traumas, cumulative (poly)victmization, and/or cumulative wrongs have been done against a person or a group of people. Thoughts that coincide with feeling outraged may include:
1. Enough is enough!
2. I cannot stand this happening to me (or people like me) anymore!
3. When is this going to stop?
Victim-blaming and/or victim-shaming occurs when systemic/structural violence gets blamed on individuals or groups of people, which sounds like this:
1. You don't have to pay attention to those words or actions; just ignore them.
2. You are too sensitive.
3. Well, the majority of people who fit your description (looks, personalities, cultural beliefs/practices, socioeconomic status) are <fill in negative here>.
4. How can you change your thoughts to reduce your reaction to what you're hearing? (this represents an inappropriate CBT approach when the issue is not nor should not be the responsibility of the victim; it should be the responsibility of the offender, or the widespread offenses that continue to occur; this is what "continuous traumatic stress" looks like; it's not past traumas or "little t's"; discrimination, bigotry, prejudice, stigma, microaggressions, hate speech, and hate crimes are all forms of trauma that attacks certain groups of people, including people categorized by their skin color, height, weight, disability, mental illness, personality type, age, SES, etc.)
Such are considered secondary traumas and therefore adds to the outrage they feel. This is why peacemaking circles, restorative justice, compromises, new protective laws, and our First Amendment (if not others as well) are in place. We can use our First Amendment rights to freely speak about the wrongs being done to us. We can use peacemaking or restorative justice circles to bring offenders and victims together for a productive chat. We can advocate for new protective laws and/or policies, so that minorities aren't being harmed by discrimination, harassment, bullying, unethical practices, hate crimes, etc.
Thus, I agree that when outraged, people will take action. What that action is depends on the situation and all who are involved.
|