What is the "Opposite" of "Aggressor"?

My years of education have not taught me nor has my fairly brief research taught me. I do know that "aggressee" does not exist as a word.

If not "aggressee", what was the USA in 9/11 and Pearl Harbor? A general term would be great and specifics for the type of "invasion."

Also, is the word "aggressor" the best term to use for the "invaders"?

I guess the opposite would be considered a victim? There's another word that fits better, but I can't remember what it is.

I suppose, in purely language terms, opposite of aggression would be Insulative?

Opposite of 'aggressor' then an 'insulate'?



[edit on 1-4-2006 by kegs]

DarkHelmet was correct. In purely language terms, The opposite of 'aggressor' is 'victim.'





seekerof

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Seekerof]

From synonym.com

Antonyms of noun aggressor

Sorry, I could not find antonyms for 'aggressor'.

I would say the opposite of aggressor would be defender. Victim denotes that an act has taken place, whereas aggressor could be used to describe someone's demeanour. Or maybe, retaliator, although that word probably doesn't exist. yet.

Try this:

aggressor
noun

1. In a fight, war, etc: the person, group or country that attacks first, especially if the attack is unprovoked.

Thesaurus: attacker, assailant, offender, invader, intruder, ;
Antonym: victim.

Allwords.com

seekerof

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Seekerof]

Yeah, I appreciate that it's listed somewhere, it's just that, syntacticaly, you can't be a victim of aggressor, only an act of aggression.

"Victim" is the obvious choice, but if it's semantics we're arguing, it's not the opposite.

ag·gres·sor Pronunciation (-grsr)
n.
One that engages in aggression.


ag·gres·sion Pronunciation (-grshn)
n.
1. The act of initiating hostilities or invasion.
2. The practice or habit of launching attacks.
3. Hostile or destructive behavior or actions.

In terms of warfare, semantically the opposite would logically be cowardice.

In war, the opposite of victim is victor.

Originally posted by fingapointa
Yeah, I appreciate that it's listed somewhere, it's just that, syntacticaly, you can't be a victim of aggressor, only an act of aggression.

Umm, if a person is attacked by an aggressor, committing an act of aggression, the person attacked by that act of aggression is likewise known, called, or deemed a or the victim.






seekerof

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Seekerof]

Umm, if a person is attacked by an aggressor, committing an act of aggression, the person attacked by that act of aggression is likewise known, called, or deemed a or the victim.

She's a victim of the act of aggression, the verb;aggressor being the noun. The difference is subtle, you may have missed that.

Look, I'm not saying you guys are wrong and frankly, I'm puzzled as to why you feel the need to stifle any other view other than your own. I think it can be safely said that the definition for the antonym of the noun, aggressor is open to interpretation, m'kay?

'nuff said