Is there a word for when a bad person who got exposed for things deliberately finds "questionable" things about the person who exposed him?

Submitted ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨TinyLittlePuni@lemmy.world⁩ to ⁨[deleted]⁩

This man (who is 38) got exposed by my friend for messaging her 13 year old sister inappropriately in a chatroom. She screenshotted the chatroom and posted it online. This caused a years long obsession with her and he claims he’s signed up on every site so he can monitor and report her. Besides stalking her and making a whole site where he archives everything she says so he can twist it to make her look bad, he’s also doing this thing where he finds things he deems “questionable” about her (and also other people who exposed him) like:

“None of these toxic people like dogs. That should tell you everything you need to know”
“These people support piracy. I’m glad I have a conscience, I cannot say the same for the toxic people I’ve encountered.”
“Every one of these people have been banned (because he spams reports on multiple accounts). The continued existence of my site proves I’m not the guilty party here.”

He also admits to spamming reports on her, for instance if she makes a very obvious joke he deliberately takes that joke literally in the reports. He wants to get her banned.

I’m helping my friend file a police report but I’d like to know if there’s a name for this particular aspect of the harassment.

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

BrrdShrrmp@lemmy.ca ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
“DARVO” maybe?

DARVO (an acronym for “Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender”) is a reaction that perpetrators of wrongdoing, such as abusers or sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior.[1]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO

source
ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Ad hominem fallacy. The person who has been exposed for various things, instead of trying to refute the argument of the accuser (e.g. “they’re misrepresenting the facts”, “I couldn’t have done that here’s an alibi”)

Instead, they are just accusing the accuser of something to make others distrust them. All of the examples youblisted were ad hominem attacks against your friend.

source
- RFKJrsBrainworm@sh.itjust.works ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  The Republican way
  
  source
floo@retrolemmy.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Vindictiveness or being vindictive

That’s probably the closest to what you’re describing

source
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
“Whataboutism.” Firefox flags the word as misspelled, but it’s just a new word and if you search it, you’ll find a lot of articles. It’s a controversial debate tactic in which you attempt to shift the focus from something you want to protect (or yourself) to something the other person wants to protect (or themselves).

A good example of this is when we say “Trump is in the Epstein files” and people on the right say “well so is Bill Clinton.” Except the left really doesn’t want to protect Slick Willy (or any child predator, for that matter) so it’s not a good whataboutism. Normally you would point to something good he’s done, but I can’t come up with any examples.

source
- Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  That would be a slightly different scenario. Here we have the accuser and the accused. Then the accused discredits the accuser by bringing in unrelated facts. As another commenter said, it’s an ad hominem attack. Whataboutism would be, in this context, answering “but Trump/Clinton/Julius Cesar did it too” implying (so it’s not that bad, they are worse than me)
  
  source
Adderbox76@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Conservatism

source
Zirconium@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Stalker??

source
snooggums@piefed.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Retaliation

source
iii@mander.xyz ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Spite

source
Glide@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
A friend of mine once described this kind of behaviour as acting like “welfare moms.” While there’s a certain level of sexism there that I am sure she really didn’t mean in the moment, I get the point she was making: parents who sit at home scheming up the next excuse to call social services on that other parent that they pretend to like but also keep an air of superiority about. And that’s all it is. Convincing yourself that you’re better than everyone else not by lifting yourself up, but by tearing others down.

It’s commen behaviour in narcissists, too. Contrary to popular belief, narcissism is often found in people with low self-esteem. They try to validate themselves by bringing everyone else down below them. It seems like obsession with another person outwardly, but it’s still self-obsession: “this person made me look bad, but they’re so much worse than me. I need to prove it (even to myself).”

source
IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Revenge?

Running a smear campaign?

Being a psycho asshole?

source