totally. I read the title of the post and I winced. Not even because I was especially teased. the gist of the article: "Where teasing provides an arena to safe

totally. I read the title of the post and I winced. Not even because I was especially teased. the gist of the article: "Where teasing provides an arena to safely explore conflict, it can join people in a common cause. Especially when they’re allowed to tease back." I would change that to say that teasing is an arena to safely explore conflict and bring about positive benefits ONLY when the teasing is two-directional. This is the difference between brothers punching each other and a bully punching you in the gut -- if you're not allowed or unable to punch back or throw back a punchline, it's bullying. Unlike physical hurt, teasing can be used as a tool to tie a group closer together by highlighting its contrast with another group, or more hurtfully, specific things about a single individual. Greasers and preppies, nerds and jocks, boys and girls, Inners and Outers...etc. The punchlines are often something the group has in common, but which the excluded individual(s) lack. In other words, hurtful teasing aims to alienate; helpful teasing aims to bind together. Unfortunately, sometimes the two can happen simultaneously. Again, the difference here is the ability to counter. The article brings in all these cases where people are on retaliate-able positions, even when inequality exists. The situation with the frat boys would've resembled the Stanford Prison Experiment if the Inners were allowed to tease the Outers but not vice versa.