[HN Gopher] Treating bullying as everyone's problem reduces inci...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Treating bullying as everyone's problem reduces incidence in
       primary schools
        
       Author : PaulHoule
       Score  : 104 points
       Date   : 2024-11-16 14:34 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (phys.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (phys.org)
        
       | Sakos wrote:
       | > The results from the UK trial of 13% reduction in bullying are
       | less compelling than those from earlier studies in other European
       | countries. However, the U.K. trial took place during the COVID-19
       | pandemic, which involved major classroom disruption for pupils
       | and considerably higher levels of absenteeism, and researchers
       | believe this may have affected the results.
       | 
       | 1) 13% just doesn't seem like a lot to me
       | 
       | 2) I wonder what those other studies showed.
        
         | notahacker wrote:
         | I think the bigger question, since it apparently involves
         | reported bullying incidents rather than teacher-observed ones,
         | is whether the change in policy results in underreporting or
         | overreporting of bullying. Plausibly it could be a lot more
         | than a 13% fall if kids feel much more incentivised to report
         | it, or a negligible effect if there's a 13% chance of it not
         | being reported because bullied kids don't want to get their
         | bystander classmates into trouble...
        
       | normanthreep wrote:
       | well this is excellent news for the people of hn, the largest
       | community of childhood bullying survivors on the internet
       | 
       | it's never too late
        
         | matt3210 wrote:
         | would we be on HN if we were the popular kids in school?
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | There are a _lot_ of tech-bros, who were definitely not the
           | nerds in school and are in tech mostly because of money and
           | prestige.
        
         | tamimio wrote:
         | I was never bullied and was the popular kid, and honestly, I
         | don't like the concept that all these 'nerds' you see nowadays
         | were bullied back in school and it's why they became nerds, in
         | fact, I never heard of school bullying outside of the US
         | schools, or generally North Americans ones. Maybe movies
         | contributed to that, or reinforced such a phenomenon?
        
           | barbazoo wrote:
           | Grew up in Germany in the 80/90s, we had plenty of bullying.
        
           | viraptor wrote:
           | Nah, it's common everywhere. Kids can be cruel and some will
           | be given the opportunity of access to someone not fitting in.
        
         | Der_Einzige wrote:
         | 1. 4chan is much larger than HN ;)
         | 
         | 2. People here like to act like it didn't happen to them. If
         | you didn't see it, it still happened. Nerds are hated in
         | America because life imitates the shitty art of John Hughes et
         | al.
        
       | pupppet wrote:
       | Dang who would have thought teachers looking the other way and
       | pretending it wasn't happening wasn't an effective deterrent for
       | future bullying.
        
         | CalRobert wrote:
         | It's even better when the teachers are the ones doing the
         | bullying.
        
           | switch007 wrote:
           | I remember being bullied by the science teacher for not
           | wanting to sit next to the cigarette she was burning to
           | demonstrate something I can't recall lol. In the late 90s.
           | She hated me after that
        
           | 77pt77 wrote:
           | You're in luck!
           | 
           | That's really common!
        
           | drewcoo wrote:
           | That's their job, isn't it?
        
         | declan_roberts wrote:
         | Don't forget punishing the kids who fight because of zero
         | tolerance rules.
        
       | 082349872349872 wrote:
       | _1984_ (1948), a book written by an author who hadn 't had the
       | happiest* boarding school experience, can be read as a story in
       | which we skip the fast-forward (part I) to get to the story-
       | within-a-story (part II) which asks a cliffhanger question:
       | 
       | > _deeper than this lies the original motive, the never-
       | questioned instinct that first led to the seizure of power and
       | brought doublethink, the Thought Police, continuous warfare, and
       | all the other necessary paraphernalia into existence afterwards.
       | This motive really consists..._
       | 
       | which is answered by O'Brien (in part III):
       | 
       | > _...How does a man assert his power over another, Winston? "
       | Winston thought. "By making him suffer," he said._
       | 
       | * _Such, Such Were the Joys_ (1952)
        
         | djoldman wrote:
         | https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/joys/english/e_joys
        
         | javajosh wrote:
         | Love the book but I always thought this needed a little bit
         | more explanation. It seems in our world people seek power for
         | many reasons and only a small minority seek it simply to make
         | people suffer. For example, people seek power to increase their
         | own safety and pleasure. The suffering of others is incidental
         | to their goals. In addition, since suffering is universal and
         | requires no human actor to inflict. It seems rather like a huge
         | waste of effort. I think it's better to read O'Brien's
         | statement as something more specific to the world of 1984 and
         | Big brother rather than something general that applies to all
         | power seeking. We don't really learn that much about the
         | workings of the inner party and the kind of propaganda that
         | they are subjected to or subject each other to, and this might
         | be evidence of what that looks like.
        
           | tw202411161608 wrote:
           | > It seems in our world people seek power for many reasons
           | and only a small minority seek it simply to make people
           | suffer.
           | 
           | Are you sure? Your assessment is probably specific to
           | regional experience; I'd probably have agreed with you at
           | another point in my life. It's not something I was familiar
           | with before living here, and it's not the same kind of
           | (hierarchical/organizational/bureaucratic) power alluded to
           | in the quoted passage, but in Austin I'm acutely aware that a
           | not-insignificant subset of "normal" people here seem to be
           | driven to seek enough power in whatever position they occupy
           | that will allow them to make others miserable. I see it in
           | people here who are nasty to me for no reason, and I see it
           | in people here who are nice to me but nasty to others for no
           | reason.
           | 
           | It's a shame that "the cruelty is the point" is so tightly
           | bound to politics, because it captures in a few words a
           | perfect description of the phenomenon.
        
         | 77pt77 wrote:
         | > By making him suffer
         | 
         | Nietzsche had written extensively about this way before.
         | 
         | Nowadays we know that humans (and other animals) bully because
         | they derive immense health benefits from being the aggressor.
         | 
         | Those benefits are trivial to detect many decades after the
         | fact.
         | 
         | Until those benefits are offset by a hefty price to pay,
         | nothing will change.
        
           | hiatus wrote:
           | > Nowadays we know that humans (and other animals) bully
           | because they derive immense health benefits from being the
           | aggressor
           | 
           | Which health benefits are those?
        
             | iwontberude wrote:
             | I assume by poisoning those around you with cortisol, one
             | becomes (comparitively speaking) less of a fuck up. It's
             | the Tanya Harding ('s boyfriend) approach to success.
        
         | rawgabbit wrote:
         | I believe the keyword here is "assert". As people have free
         | will, you can either motivate/entice/lead them or you can
         | demotivate/punish/control them or a combination of the two.
         | 
         | "Assert" implies O'Brien has already chosen the punitive route.
         | In other words, O'Brien is not revealing some deep secret of
         | human power dynamics. Instead, O'Brien is giving a self
         | congratulatory self justifying explanation for his wrong doing.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | > Instead, O'Brien is giving a self congratulatory self
           | justifying explanation for his wrong doing.
           | 
           | It is at the minimum of very different kind of self-
           | justification than what you'd usually expect from a villain.
           | 
           | When Winston answers with the the expected "for your own
           | good" narrative, O'Brien rejects it and punishes him for it:
           | 
           | > The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not
           | interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in
           | power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only
           | power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand
           | presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the
           | past, in that we know what we are doing.
        
       | BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
       | I've been thinking a little about this subject lately. It seems
       | like bullying is a thing that serves the function of exacting the
       | repressed violent desires of the social body. Who is selected for
       | bullying is determined not primarily by the bully, but by the
       | social group as a whole. To me this helps explain why it's such a
       | ubiquitous behavior; it's a mechanism for a social group to act
       | outside of its norms in the enforcement of its norms. To be
       | clear, I think it's terrible, just interesting to think about
       | this way.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | Bullies lower the fitness of targets to elevate their own
         | standing. It's neanderthal-level social darwinism.
        
           | MathMonkeyMan wrote:
           | Neanderthal aren't around anymore, so I'd say it's Sapien-
           | level social darwinism.
        
             | dijit wrote:
             | Everyone except africans has some non-trivial amount of
             | Neanderthal DNA in them.
             | 
             | According to popular science that is.
             | 
             | https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-
             | an...).
        
         | bokoharambe wrote:
         | I love that you point out that bullying is social and its
         | relation to the ordinary enforcement of social norms. And I
         | think this points more broadly to the function of social
         | violence as a whole: much of it is regulatory and follows from
         | repressive logics that exist in less overt forms. In other
         | words can't have a notion like that of sex without also having
         | sexism and gendered violence.
        
         | next_xibalba wrote:
         | Interesting. You've almost framed it in Gerardian terms:
         | 
         | Students all want the same thing: status, popularity, etc. Not
         | everyone can these things though. Their scarcity is their
         | value. The competition over this finite resource creates
         | conflict and hostility. This pent up hostility has to be
         | channeled to avoid chaos. A scapegoat is informally agreed
         | upon: the oddball, the misfit, the outcast. These people are
         | all the more obvious due to the extreme herding that happens in
         | schools. The bully acts as the "executioner" of this
         | "sacrifice". The boundaries of group unity are enforced, the
         | shared complicity enforcing cohesion, and group identity and
         | control are upheld.
         | 
         | I remember from my school days how much hostility was directed
         | toward people who wouldn't or couldn't "fit in". I even
         | internalized those feelings. "Why won't he/she just act
         | normal?"
         | 
         | I'm not fully sold on Gerard, but his theories are kind of
         | mesmerizing in their pat explanation of group dynamics.
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | > Who is selected for bullying is determined not primarily by
         | the bully, but by the social group as a whole.
         | 
         | I disagree. I think that the person who is bullied is primarily
         | selected by the bully, and the only influence that others have
         | is that the bullied person doesn't have enough (or large
         | enough) others around them in order to defend them. Others may
         | then pile in once the target has been selected, but it's not in
         | any way a collective decision.
         | 
         | You could just as well say that society chooses the people who
         | get mugged, or the people whose houses are burglarized, or the
         | people who are raped or murdered. I'm sure you could come up
         | with some neo-Freudian way to convince somebody that makes
         | sense, but it doesn't make sense. It's generalization to the
         | point of uselessness if not complete absurdity.
         | 
         | I was bullied as a child. I was picked because I was an easy,
         | bookish target without many friends, and definitely without
         | tough friends. The bullying ended when I hurt a bully in a way
         | that everyone found out about, and that state was maintained
         | when I made a group of friends who would have defended me if a
         | bully had approached me. The cause of all of this was obvious,
         | not subtle or mysterious.
        
           | BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
           | The social group's norms are those the bully aims to appeal
           | to, either because they directly believe in them or because
           | they want others' approval. The person who's easy to target
           | is often easy to target precisely because they're excluded
           | from friendships that would protect them. The group has no
           | mind; it can't explicitly decide something. The decision is
           | structurally embedded in the group, and goes beyond any
           | individual, including the bully that takes the action.
        
           | bluefirebrand wrote:
           | > influence that others have is that the bullied person
           | doesn't have enough (or large enough) others around them in
           | order to defend them
           | 
           | Yes, this is how the crowd selects the target. It's implicit
           | in the fact that the crowd has indicated they won't defend
           | the target
           | 
           | "Having no friends" is a signal that the herd isn't going to
           | do anything to help you
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | Game theory of bullying. Which works right up until you realize
         | a lot of bullies have mental health issues and are probably not
         | going to produce identical "rationalized" results to someone
         | who isn't.
        
           | BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
           | What I said doesn't assume the bully is some kind of rational
           | actor playing a game. They're more like an organ in the
           | social body.
        
             | akira2501 wrote:
             | A social body relies on signals. If the signals are not
             | predictable then you're facing the exact same problem.
             | You've also opened the door on a single bad signal
             | infecting the social body and pushing towards outcomes that
             | would not occur if that single influence was not otherwise
             | present.
             | 
             | If you're going to rely on this dynamic, then you're going
             | to have this consideration.
        
       | protocolture wrote:
       | >Children in schools that implemented the program were 13% less
       | likely to report being bullied
       | 
       | And of course the goal is to prevent bullying from being reported
       | so this is an absolute win for educators.
        
         | barbazoo wrote:
         | Is that what that means? Less reporting, not less bullying?
        
       | alexpotato wrote:
       | Many years ago, one of the popular news shows (Dateline or 20/20,
       | I can never remember which) did a special on bullying.
       | 
       | They showed one elementary school where the entire organization
       | (teachers, students, staff etc) implemented some kind of holistic
       | approach to bullying that actually worked. They even interviewed
       | a group of kids where they said "Oh yeah, Tom used to be the
       | bully and we were all afraid of him but now we're all best
       | friends".
       | 
       | I don't remember the exact plan implemented but it struck me as
       | both simple and common sense with excellent outcomes.
       | 
       | Despite much searching on IMDB, Twitter, Google and even using
       | LLMs, I have yet to find the exact episode. Now that I have kids
       | of my own, I'm even more interested in finding it. Any
       | suggestions from the HN crowd?
        
         | Freak_NL wrote:
         | Were they using KiVa perhaps? It's the Finnish anti-bullying
         | program which seems to be applied worldwide quite successfully.
         | 
         | https://www.kivaprogram.net/
        
           | nicoty wrote:
           | Fumny you mention that, guess what the article is about.
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | > we were all afraid of him but now we're all best friends
         | 
         | All without addressing the underlying problem that made people
         | afraid of Tom in the first place?
         | 
         | > with excellent outcomes.
         | 
         | Apparently excellent short term outcomes. The real question is
         | does this actually solve the long term problem and is it
         | possible that the strategies used to create this outcome
         | actually aggravate long term outcomes?
        
         | timst4 wrote:
         | OLWEUS most likely
        
       | ninalanyon wrote:
       | This is how bullying has been dealt with in Norway for decades.
       | Nice to see the UK might be trying to catch up.
        
       | matt3210 wrote:
       | I hate to be this guy, but being bullied in school is a direct
       | cause of my success in software (and my failure in relationships
       | I guess). I retreated to academics because I was unpopular. I was
       | unpopular in school now I am popular professionally (All the
       | LinkedIn recruiters love me).
       | 
       | I don't mean to say bullying is good but I personally am thankful
       | to my high school bully for keeping me focused on computers
       | (Thanks Fred, I owe you a beer next time we run into each other).
        
         | nkrisc wrote:
         | Not trying to discount your personal experience, but I do feel
         | I ought to point out that you don't actually know what would
         | have happened if you hadn't been bullied.
         | 
         | It's good to be satisfied with where your life has taken you,
         | but that's because you can't actually change what's happened
         | and you can't know how it might have gone otherwise.
        
         | elashri wrote:
         | Another possible interpretation is that your personal
         | experience (which is valid and I respect) is considered
         | survival bias [1]. As another commenter said we don't know if
         | this would happen if you did not get bullied. And what happens
         | to others who got bullied? We can't draw anything from that.
         | Does bullied people usually tend to more successful
         | professionally later is a different and big question that needs
         | some data to support.
         | 
         | Maybe there are many more people who got bullied and got
         | negative effects of their self-worth and confidence which lead
         | to them struggle in one way or another professionally and
         | socially. Maybe there isn't that many too.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias
        
         | OliveMate wrote:
         | I hate to be that other guy, and I in no way way want to
         | override your own experiences but... I'm sure my experiences
         | with being bullied have actively hindered me in my life, even
         | 20+ years on. Particularly dealing with confrontation, this
         | constant feeling of 'otherness' around others, and frequent
         | nightmares about people I used to know.
         | 
         | Again, the other reply about not really knowing how you'd turn
         | out applies to me, but it's hard not to think about it.
        
       | dijit wrote:
       | I always found it really frustrating that a "zero tolerance"
       | policy to bullying seemed to disproportionately affect people who
       | eventually fight back.
       | 
       | I would guess it's a combination of "nobody sees the first hit"
       | (since your attention is elsewhere, of course) and that bullies
       | get quite good at testing boundaries and thus know how to avoid
       | detection.
       | 
       | But, really, it's truly frustrating that as I child I was bullied
       | relentlessly, and when I finally took my parents advice and stood
       | my ground, I was expelled from school (due to zero tolerance).
       | Those bullies continued to torment some other kids, of course.
       | 
       | This is far from an uncommon situation, over the years I've heard
       | many more scenarios like this.
        
         | loloquwowndueo wrote:
         | That sucks, sorry that happened to you.
         | 
         | How did you stand your ground?
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | One of them ripped a necklace off of me, then spat on me.
           | 
           | I should add that this was after the day before when they had
           | caught me walking home and pushed me into the local pond
           | (during winter) and that the necklace was given to me by my
           | great grandfather that had died very recently (and the bully
           | knew that). In hindsight, I shouldn't have been wearing it.
           | 
           | So I punched him in the face, he reeled a little and his
           | friends went to work on me before a teacher stepped in- as
           | they were the other side of the play-ground and needed to
           | close the distance.
           | 
           | Unfortunately all they'd seen was me hitting the bully.
           | 
           | So, expelled.
        
             | loloquwowndueo wrote:
             | Got it, thanks for sharing.
             | 
             | Overly harsh consequences are only fair if detection of the
             | responsible/initiating party is foolproof.
        
         | Loughla wrote:
         | I was also expelled for fighting back. This was how I learned
         | that documentation is important in life.
         | 
         | When I got the paperwork saying I was out, my parents sent back
         | all the correspondence with the school, the dates the bully
         | bothered me, and the responses (or lack thereof) from the
         | school. I was reinstated and the bully went to another
         | district.
         | 
         | Bullying in my day was at least bearable because it was
         | confined to times when I was physically near the bully. Kids
         | today have it so much worse with social media. It's genuinely
         | terrifying. I don't wonder why many teens are anxious.
         | Everything they do is documented.
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | > Bullying in my day was at least bearable because it was
           | confined to times when I was physically near the bully. Kids
           | today have it so much worse with social media.
           | 
           | I don't get it. Anything a bully can do to you over social
           | media, they can also do to you without using the internet at
           | all. Anything they needed to be near you to do, they still
           | need to be near you to do.
        
             | nicksergeant wrote:
             | There's twice as much surface area. Bullies can now do
             | their thing 24/7 from behind the screen _and_ still
             | physically torment.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | Again, whatever they can do from behind a screen now,
               | they could also do in your absence before.
        
               | ab5tract wrote:
               | No, they couldn't.
               | 
               | Just a single obvious example: What tools did they have
               | to broadcast photoshopped images of you to all of your
               | peers?
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | Printers.
               | 
               | If you're thinking "what tools did they have to create
               | photoshopped images of you with?", why would you
               | attribute that to social media?
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | Even just as text, they can easily take your name and
               | spread rumours speaking as if they were you.
               | 
               | Even just as text, you can get dog-piled: we evolved to
               | be social creatures, and for groups of 150-200; for most
               | of us, if we're called names by that many people in quick
               | succession, it breaks us. That's a small online mob, as
               | these things go.
               | 
               | But bullies these days also have effectively zero
               | marginal cost cameras, so they can take as much video as
               | it takes waiting for you to mess up, then do a Cardinal
               | Richelieu -- "If you give me six lines written by the
               | hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in
               | them which will hang him."
               | 
               | In my day, you could take up to about 24 pictures quickly
               | before needing to take the film out and put new film in,
               | and that would take a while to develop and actually cost
               | money, so that just didn't happen (that I've heard of).
               | 
               | But it's not just taking photos of things that actually
               | happened and misrepresenting them, even one picture is
               | enough to put your classmates into AI generated porn...
               | which is, as you may expect, a thing that kids these days
               | are getting into trouble for doing. In my day, such image
               | manipulation was manual and expensive* and therefore
               | reserved for celebrities, though I doubt that's any real
               | relief to Sarah Michelle Gellar in one example I
               | remember, nor to GWB and (today the relatives of) bin
               | Laden in the other.
               | 
               | * we had a single copy of Photoshop... donated to the art
               | department, which had only one (old) Mac on which to run
               | it. Hard to pirate that kind of software even if you knew
               | how to use it, definitely couldn't get unsupervised
               | access to that machine.
               | 
               | But it's not just still images these days, a brief audio
               | recording of your voice and that can also be synthesised.
               | Dictaphones were just starting to get affordable in my
               | last year of mandatory education, and we pranked a
               | teacher by mixing their last lesson with new age
               | relaxation music, burning a CD of that, printed a cover
               | saying something about curing insomnia, and giving it to
               | them as a "last day gift". Now everyone has a dictaphone
               | in their pocket, now you can synthesise anyone's voice
               | saying anything, make images of them appearing to do
               | anything.
               | 
               | But even just text, the internet made it a different
               | world than when I was at school. The psychological impact
               | of being told you, personally, are Officially Bad, that's
               | something that sticks with us and hurts us even when it
               | comes from a pattern of illuminated pixels on their
               | Mandatory Rectangular Communication Prism caused by
               | someone on the other side of the planet who had no
               | business talking to us in the first place; and that
               | distant person can be incited to form part of a mob by a
               | pattern of illuminated pixels on _their_ Mandatory
               | Rectangular Communication Prism.
        
             | exe34 wrote:
             | it sounds like you just don't know what it's like to be
             | bullied. it's not just about the verbal knowledge that
             | tomorrow at school you'll be hit. it's the visceral anxiety
             | that tomorrow at school you will be hit. without social
             | media, you can try to block it out of your mind and pretend
             | it's not happening. with social media, I assume, you are
             | constantly reminded of what's happening, because now the
             | bully can reach out to you and directly remind you.
             | 
             | the reason I said assume there is because I went to school
             | before social media - but my biggest bully was my dad, so
             | it was impossible to completely escape the bullying. in
             | fact I loved going to school, because those bullies I could
             | handle. I gave them as much grief as I took. but the one at
             | home I was stuck with, because he controlled all my
             | movements and time with people outside school hours.
             | 
             | I expect cyberbullying isn't very different, traumatically
             | speaking.
        
         | chollida1 wrote:
         | Wow, expelled seems very harsh.
         | 
         | I know when i was a kid we would get suspended for a few days
         | if we had a fight. Banning a kid from that school for life seem
         | pretty harsh.
        
           | j45 wrote:
           | Suspension or expulsion of the victim is far too common.
        
         | BurningFrog wrote:
         | I've come to think zero tolerance policies are universally bad.
         | 
         | Some tolerance and considering circumstances is actually the
         | sensible way to handle most anything. But that sounds like
         | being "soft on crime", and the PR side is usually more
         | important than the actual problem.
        
           | plasticchris wrote:
           | The real problem is that school personnel don't want to deal
           | with the parents of the actual problem kids, so they get away
           | with it even under zero tolerance.
        
           | martin-t wrote:
           | That's because the narrative in the last decades has shifted
           | towards tools, not actions and intentions being good or bad.
           | 
           | In the past, it was normal and encouraged to use any tools
           | available to you to defend yourself. Psychological abuse is
           | still abuse and you have the right to defend yourself, the
           | most natural, available and effective immediate defensive
           | tool being violence.
           | 
           | In recent years, violence has become a massive taboo. It's a
           | tool that is universally labelled as bad no matter the
           | circumstances. Instead, everyone is encouraged to portray a
           | "good victim" by demonstrating helplessness and
           | waiting/hoping for people in positions of power to help.
        
         | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
         | In many schools it's not even about fighting back. The "zero
         | tolerance" policy indiscriminately punishes both parties
         | involved. It's painted as some kind of virtuous, positive thing
         | by labeling it "zero tolerance". But it is just sheer laziness
         | on the part of teachers, administrators, and the district. They
         | basically wash their hands clean of investigating or
         | understanding the situation, and of keeping classes safe for
         | kids who aren't breaking the rules.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | "Justice is expensive and uncomfortable, let's just use
           | collective punishment on everyone in the immediate area."
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Yea, you don't have to fight back in order to be punished
           | under "zero tolerance." You just have to be _involved_ ,
           | including as the victim. Kids get punished all the time for
           | rolling up into a ball while the aggressor beats them.
        
         | Puts wrote:
         | Unpopular opinion, but most people who get bullied are a little
         | "off", a little weird in some way that affects their
         | likability. And this also affects the adults where even they
         | judge the kid being bullied harder. For example if you are
         | autistic and lack verbal skills, that's going to be seen as you
         | lacking social skills. And obviously if someone got hit, who's
         | most probable to have started it? Maybe the kid that "lacks
         | social skills".
        
           | joe5150 wrote:
           | This is an incredibly popular opinion! Unless the "unpopular"
           | part is that this is somehow fine or justifiable.
        
             | Puts wrote:
             | Well I think there are a lot of people out there who define
             | bullying as "when a random person in a group is selected to
             | be harassed". And if you ask them what they think about it
             | they would say "It's horrible and totally unacceptable".
             | 
             | But "disciplining" someone that is acting weird on the
             | other hand is the right thing to do, that is not "bullying"
             | to them. But for the person that becomes the subject of
             | this it becomes, "you sit wrong", "you talk wrong", "you
             | eat wrong", "your sense of humor is wrong" until it feels
             | like you can't do anything right. Some people even think
             | they can fix your "wrong" behavior by hitting you, and then
             | it becomes physical bullying.
             | 
             | A lot of people wanna believe that bullying is like the
             | fist scenario because that is easier than actually having
             | to start accepting people the way they are - even if they
             | are a little "weird".
        
               | dijit wrote:
               | I couldn't possibly disagree more.
               | 
               | Once you're boxed in as a bullied person, you will
               | continue to be bullied.
               | 
               | They're not "educating" you, and it's a little sick to
               | suggest it.
        
         | j45 wrote:
         | You're right - it's far too common, and serves an objective of
         | ultimately turning young people away from education, while not
         | getting to learn what was possible for them and isn't heir
         | lives.
         | 
         | Maybe it's a feature of industrial education - enable creation
         | of compliant adults where bullying is disproportionately
         | allowed by tolerating it, and also build bullies to manage
         | future compliant adults.
         | 
         | Bullying is everywhere including in the ranks of teachers and
         | leadership in a school. Those who play the game of bureaucracy
         | (bureaucracy must survive at any costs) must concede to
         | enabling a system of too often failing upwards while standing
         | on the capable folks.
         | 
         | Too many schools abdicate their responsibility and hide behind
         | doing their job and turn it into a daycare of expecting
         | children to figure it out on their own.
         | 
         | Bullying too often is toxic parenting coming to school.
         | 
         | Standing up for one's self in the right circumstance,
         | especially when the leaders, institutions and experts in our
         | lives, especially as children intentionally traumatizes
         | children that the world is like this, and because it doesn't
         | bother teachers or affect them it will only get so much
         | attention.
        
         | anonymousiam wrote:
         | Defending yourself is always the right move. When one of my
         | sons was being bullied in elementary school, I taught him how
         | to fight and encouraged him to do so. The bullying ended, but
         | he was suspended. I confronted his principal and got her to
         | admit that she would defend herself if someone was pummeling
         | her. She didn't like this, and subsequently expelled my son,
         | who later won honors awards after transferring to a different
         | school.
        
           | martin-t wrote:
           | I absolutely agree with you but I can't avoid noticing an
           | extremely common, yet pervasive irony.
           | 
           | The rules of the school no doubt forbid physical violence and
           | expect children to use a process set up by the system to
           | defend themselves against bullying / being wronged. That
           | system failed and because you rightfully saw your son's right
           | to self defense more important than following the rules, you
           | encouraged him to defend himself outsides the confines of the
           | system and its rules.
           | 
           | Later both you and your son were bullied / wronged by the
           | principal. The rules of the state you live in ("laws") no
           | doubt forbid physical violence / being wronged. That system
           | failed...
        
         | rgrieselhuber wrote:
         | If you look at institutions that are more concerned with
         | punishing the type of people who will fight back than the
         | bullies themselves, the motivations behind these sorts of
         | policies make a lot more sense.
        
         | martin-t wrote:
         | > "nobody sees the first hit"
         | 
         | This perpetuates the myth that "real" bullying is physical and
         | that psychological abuse is not bullying. Most of the bullying
         | i've seen was psychological and partially material (usually
         | taking things from the target or damaging them).
         | 
         | The only instances where i've seen physical bullying were in
         | low grades where the children had not yet developed the mental
         | capacity for creative verbal abuse or in higher grades where
         | bullying was left unchecked for so long that the aggressors
         | felt confident they could get away with it.
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | A grade school tried to punish me for stopping someone from
         | hitting me by grabbing their wrist.
         | 
         | I said, to punish a nonviolent intervention would only
         | incentivize future reactions would be violent, they had to
         | think about their policy, because as I put it, "if grabbing
         | their wrist for self defence was going to be punished the same
         | as me punching them in the face" I'd settle for brutal violence
         | in the hopes to persuade others not to hit me.
         | 
         | Children vs principals with masters degrees in a logic debate
         | and the kids win. Sad
        
       | iwontberude wrote:
       | Kiva also makes great cannabis edibles, definitely cuts down on
       | adult bullying.
        
       | declan_roberts wrote:
       | School really is the problem. In its current form, it can not be
       | sustained without radical reform.
       | 
       | If you look at the suicide rate of children under 14 month-to-
       | month, they only stop killing themselves when they're not forced
       | to go to school (Summer and Winter vacation).
       | 
       | Probably the only place in your entire life that you'll be
       | subject to physical and emotional violence.
       | 
       | Calls to "abolish the department of education" are going to get
       | louder and louder.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | Put a gopro on every kid and teacher. Document everything.
       | Problem solved.
        
       | cluckindan wrote:
       | Physical assault is a serious crime and calling it simply
       | "bullying" is saying "boys will be boys".
       | 
       | The "bullies" who beat me up in elementary school all went ahead
       | to have careers in things like dealing kilos of meth and
       | torturing people to death.
       | 
       | Not hyperbole, btw.
        
         | doubled112 wrote:
         | That boys will be boys line is crap. I was a boy and somehow
         | managed not to abuse people.
         | 
         | One of my favourite stories is that my wife went to watch a
         | court case and it was one of my childhood bullies. He was up
         | for forcible confinement. She thought she recognized the name.
         | 
         | I also read in the news (with great satisfaction) that his
         | brother, who was part of the group, had been tasered and beat
         | for resisting arrest.
         | 
         | Sometimes you get what is coming to you. They're all trash and
         | I think I turned out alright. In a weird way, I think it does
         | build character and resilience.
        
           | bdangubic wrote:
           | boys will be boys term was invented by shitty parents who
           | raised shitty boys
        
       | Kozmik1 wrote:
       | Can anyone comment on the current prevalence of bullying in
       | schools in the UK vs the USA? We have been considering moving
       | from the Us to the UK but perceived higher likelihood of bullying
       | for our mixed race kids is one concern holding us back. It's hard
       | to know if we are exaggerating that concern or if it is
       | warranted, it would seem hard to know the level of hostility of a
       | school environment prior to moving there.
        
       | rr808 wrote:
       | Kinda feel the new generation needs a bit more bullying. I'm
       | kinda shocked my kids have such a low bar, they have become super
       | fragile. Some bullying I think made me a better person. Of course
       | not too much
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-16 23:00 UTC)