Honestly, the ideal classroom for lower grades, from my perspective at least, is a small classroom that contains children from almost all ability levels (excepting those outliers with extremely special needs). In smaller classrooms a teacher can cater to each student's individual needs better and allow for the socialization and more challenging content to the benefit of the students. Unfortunately, smaller classrooms means more classrooms, more teachers and higher budgets.
Kids are bullied for dumb stuff. I was bullied for having a pet rabbit, wearing clothes from the Indian store, having short hair, and being good at floor hockey. Would I want to change these things? No. It is completely random what kids pick on each other for. The only thing you can do that will help is not to change what you do, but not to react in a way to their teasing that gives them entertainment. Roll your eyes and it becomes boring to pick on you. It's tough for the teachers to catch every little thing, so you do have to become somewhat self-reliant, but saying that the kids should change whatever makes them stick out is stupid.
but saying that the kids should change whatever makes them stick out is stupid.
It depends what things you are doing that make you stick out. If you are being made fun of because of your hair color, well, that doesn't mean you should get some die. In fact, that would just create more ammunition. However, if you are picked on because you are socially awkward, you should probably work on that.
Most teachers are aware of long standing bullying and students that are frequently bullied, particularly in lower grades when the students mostly stick to one classroom. While they can't see everything, they most certainly can and do intervene. I was bullied a lot in junior high and early high school. I had a minimum of one injury per hallway and stairway from being pushed and shoved. Honestly, I preferred that to what seemed like an unending stream of verbal bullying. I refused to change who I was, but I also was borderline suicidal. If it weren't for my mother, I doubt I would have made it. I know this sounds melodramatic, and looking back I don't understand why I let it get to me so much, but it was how it was. It didn't help that I was in a very small school (my graduating class was 64 people) and I was THE weirdo that was openly bi, outspoken, willing to talk and debate in class (teacher's pet), was involved in the performing and language arts, joined the wrestling team, often wore boys clothing, etc. Some of my teachers were very helpful, though. They were very aware of the situation and put a stop to it whenever possible. My guidance counselor was particularly helpful. She nailed some of the bullies and also helped me graduate early so I could get the heck out of there.
@ Emi: You are completely correct that those strategies work. Unfortunately, not all students have the emotional control, self-confidence, nor the maturity to enact those strategies.
However, if you are picked on because you are socially awkward, you should probably work on that.
Picking on kids for being awkward just makes the awkward worse. I've seen non-awkward kids get picked on and become less self confident and super shy. It's one thing to help people who are awkward, or tell them they are awkward or make you uncomfortable with their behavior, but 9 out of 10 time ostracizing and ridiculing them will not correct the problem, in my experience.
Picking on kids for being awkward just makes the awkward worse. I've seen non-awkward kids get picked on and become less self confident and super shy. It's one thing to help people who are awkward, or tell them they are awkward or make you uncomfortable with their behavior, but 9 out of 10 time ostracizing and ridiculing them will not correct the problem, in my experience.
I didn't say ostracizing and ridiculing will correct the problem, it is the problem. All I'm saying is that the most effective solutions lie in the hands of the victim. Any help that anyone can provide, within practical boundaries, will be of relatively little effectiveness compared to the things the victim can do for themselves.
I suppose when I think about it, I was bullied a little bit in elementary school. I was super shy and afraid to talk to people, and I quickly became "quiet kid." It was easy for people to make fun of me because, I admit, I was a little bit of a dork. I did have a few friends that I clung onto, and if it wasn't for them, I probably would have been more affected by the teasing.
But when I think back about these times, I wasn't really emotionally scarred, other than being a little socially awkward in middle school before discovering the awesome nerdsdom of being in band. I think the reason for this is that I actually sometimes fought back in my own unique ways. I was also very lucky to have a mom that really listened to me, and who was also a teacher herself. In kindergarten there was this boy who couldn't keep his hands to himself, if you know what I mean. One day he touched me in the hallway and I angrily pushed him down. When the teacher asked why, I was too embarrassed to say, so I got in trouble. But when my mom asked why I told her the truth, and I never saw that kid in class again. (We also found out I wasn't the only girl being harassed).
Another time I was being picked on by a kid who kept getting me to do his homework (I guess he guilted my kindhearted self, I don't really remember). He also put pencil shavings in my snacks. One day he got in my face, jumping around like a crazy person, so I kicked him. Unfortunately I accidentally kicked him in a very bad place, and I got super in trouble. I was so embarrassed that I didn't even defend myself. But at least he never bothered me again. There was also this big kid who was mean to everyone. Me and another dorky kid got revenge by putting mustard in his seat. We got in trouble of course, but it was so worth it.
Eventually I just told on everyone as soon as they did something to me, and I got the reputation of being a tattle tale. Anyway, my mom transferred schools when I was supposed to enter 6th grade, so I was forced to go to a school in another district. I was so mad at my mom, because I wouldn't be with my few best friends anymore. But from the very first day at that school, everyone was so nice to me. I made friends really fast, and had no enemies. You could actually call me "popular," although it wasn't in the snobby way. This boosted my confidence way up, and I broke out of my quiet shell. In 7th grade my mom transferred again and I got to go to the middle school in my own county that I would have originally gone to. Since I was much more confident, and there had been a year break from everyone, they seemed to forget that they ever picked on me. And then I joined band, where virtually everyone is nice and accepting. Yay!
@ Apreche: While I am all for personal responsibility, to say that a child being bullied can stop the bullying by changing their behavior is simply untrue and impractical. 1) If the child is being teased for having "poor social skills", then how is a child that is obviously ignorant of social skills and being victimized at their primary place of socialization to magically develop those skills? Not only do most children have terrible social skills (particularly bullies themselves), but those skills take time, experience, and guidance to form and take shape. 2) What are you defining as "poor social skills". I have often seen the students that are more socially mature be picked on by those with lower social skills. Should the child regress to fit in with their peers or should their peers be faces with the consequences for behaving in an inappropriate manner? 3) If a child attempts to make conversation or friends, they will (having previously been bullied) have an even greater difficulty of receiving any sort of constructive response. 4) Once the bullies have a target, they usually won't relent until forced or until they move to another target. If a child changes one behavior, then the bullies will often just look for something else.
1) It is true that social skills are not easy to get. However, part of getting them is even recognizing that you don't have them. Bullied kids are victims, it is true, but having the attitude of a victim and blaming all of the problems on others, even if it is true, is counter-productive. Simply taking responsibility and actively trying to fix it, assuming that other people can not be "fixed" will put a kid on the fast track to being more sociable and awesome.
2) By terrible social skills I'm talking about the cases with kids like the scary fanboys you see at conventions. I can tell you from personal experience that one reason people like this, not just kids, are bullied is because they are simply unpleasant to be around. Even people who aren't bullies will harass them. Why? It's because they just want them to go away or fix themselves. And if those two options aren't going to happen, they at least want the person who is causing their own suffering to also suffer.
3) You don't have to jump straight into making conversation. In fact, that's the kind of socially inept thing that you see overly-friendly stereotypical homeschool kids do. Going up to another kid and politely saying "Hi, my name is ***. Would you like to play with me?" is totally dorky, and of course it will get you ridiculed. Instead, you need to take a similar approach as I did with the Mr. Bean kids. You don't have to have a conversation. Just have a change in attitude. When someone is laughing at you, laugh with them instead. If you change your attitude such that what used to be harassment is good natured ribbing between friends, you'll find that bullies really just want to be friends and play video games just like you do.
4) It depends on what behavior you change. If they made fun of you for having green pencils, and you go get yellow pencils, that's obviously not going to work. In fact, it's a signal that the bullying worked on you. The only thing you can change about yourself that will solve the problem is your attitude.
I mean, look at me. I have hundred of people constantly saying things to me that would be normally be considered bullying. Jokes about why I'm gay. Jokes about having no girlfriend. Getting ripped a good one whenever I say something wrong or stupid. Getting ripped an even bigger new one when I suck at something. I get ripped again if I change my mind on something, or do something other people perceive to be out of character. I get people trying to poke me just because I don't want to be poked.
Nothing in my life has changed in terms of people bullying me or saying harassing things. All that has changed is my attitude. It just doesn't bother me, and it's funny. If someone pesters you, and you don't like it, they're a bully. If you join in on the self deprecating humor, suddenly that bully is a friend. When I was in middle school, a gay joke would have angered me and made me hate the person who saidit. Nowadays the same exact joke is just uber-lols, and I'm great friends with the person who says it. What changed? My attitude.
Look at this thread. Just about every single person was bullied in some way at one point or another. I bet if you ask every person on the street, they will tell you as well. Even popular kids tease the hell out of each other. I honestly believe that just about every single kid in every single school is teased or picked on or bullied to varying degrees. Every person you meet on the street will tell you they were picked on in some way in school. And I think the difference in determining who becomes the extreme victims are how those victims react. Nobody is singled out as a target, because everyone is a target. It's simply that the squeaky wheels get more grease.
It would be nice if we could end all bullying, but the practicality of doing that is extremely difficult. It is as impossible, if not more impossible, to police bullying than it is to police copyright. And even in the presence of strong policing, it may not be a significant deterrent. The only practical, long-term, effective solution is for the victim to change their attitude. Does it seem unjust that the victim should be the one who has to fix the problem? Of course it does. But the real world doesn't have justice built into it. Justice is a human idea, not a law of nature. It just sucks, and better to deal with it than to cry about how cruel the world is.
Scott, I am not saying there is nothing a person can do to stop being bullied. However, you are discussing "bullying" in upper high school and beyond. I am discussing issues of bullying from elementary school to junior high. I also fundamentally disagree with your definition of bullying. Friends ribbing each other is very, very different from being targeted by one or many people and physically and verbally harassed on a daily basis. When a student is throwing items at another student, pushing them, shoving them, openly embarrassing them, verbally degrading them, etc. it is a VERY different scenario than what you are describing in your personal instances. Most of your examples of "being ripped a new one" are friends teasing you and you openly tease back. It is a form of friendly communication - not hostile communication that would qualify as bullying. If you see that as bullying, then I think you have a very warped view of your relationships. Please enlighten me as to what "attitude change" a student can make that will stop a bully from beating them and degrading them? You say social ineptitude causes bullying. I completely agree, but the social ineptitude is on the side of the bully more so than on the victim. If a person is a fan-boy, then certainly bathing regularly and getting some other interests might help them have fuller lives and teachers and parents should help in that regard. However, the bully is the person that needs to be addressed. Parents, teachers, and psychologists can all help stop a bully from being a bully.
I would question the assumption that bullying can be eliminated. Of course the methods and effects can be somewhat mitigated, but there seems to be an assumed conceit that bullying is anomalous and / or unique. The linked article, though interesting, had some significant problems with bias that made it very difficult to accept the conclusions that were drawn. I don't have the time or inclination to break these out specifically so I will, instead, propose a sort of side-line on one particular idea.
An assumption that prevailed through both the discussion here and the linked article, that I would question first is the link between bullying and intelligence. The idea that smart people get bullied because they are not popular. Especially, in the article, because they are concerned with other things and therefore are outside of the social game. This would suggest that within a group of like-minded people, all intelligent and articulate, there should be no bullying. Anecdotally I can attest to the contrary, but like I said I lack both time and desire to draw upon specific resources here. Let it suffice to say, than, that bullying may be less a result of social stratification through intellectual differentiation, and more a function of social hierarchies in general. That is, the bully picks on that which is different. What makes that different may be completely arbitrary, and may in fact be only the fact that they are the one being picked on.
To note my own bias in this conversation. People think I'm smart because I am not, and am aware of it. A simple example in lieu of full explanation, when a co-worker needed to take a screen shot on her computer (A PC where I tend to use mac) I did not know the short cut, so I looked it up online, in front of her, and her response was "Your so good at this, how do you know so much about computers?" Note, there was no slight of hand, no concealment of methods, and I used google, her home page search engine, not some hidden forum. My self awareness, however, and willingness to ask for help, is seen as intelligence by many. I note this as bias because I have suffered for this self awareness, and it was the primary vector for much of my teasing in Jr. High school. Quite against what the linked article suggests, recognizing the false boundaries and general "fake as a twinkie" nature of the social game only served to make me feel more ostracized for not being able to understand the unspoken rules that everybody else seemed to grok so easily. Understanding that it was all a construct didn't help me feel better about it, worse, it made it all the more frustrating.
I would argue that it is the nature of Man to unite against. Any group will tend to build a hierarchy, and likely, will tend towards rejection of the dissimilar. If it is a self-selected group (a club or a smaller clique that chooses to spend time together for example) this takes the form of social jest and ribbing, that can as well be very hurtful, but rarely escalates to full on bullying. If the group is, however, mixed and lacking in a self-selection method, like a classroom in which any randomly allotted group of students will have to interact, these same social stratification methods will be more exaggerated and can become violent even. To take it further, if there is an imposed intermixing of otherwise separate or self selected groups, say when an area of land is designated by a group of countries to be the new homeland of a previously disenfranchised people, there is almost sure to be conflict, and again it will often be exaggerated and can become violent, as they sub groups and social strata vie for dominance.
Perhaps I have rambled. I should get back to work anyway. Thanks for reading!
When a student is throwing items at another student, pushing them, shoving them, openly embarrassing them,
If someone pushes you or shoves you, then they should really just go to jail. We don't even really need second chances. Violent kids need to be removed after the first incident and put in a special place. If we have actual cameras in schools recording violent incidents, and we should, then a student acting violently in self defense should not receive any punishment whatsoever if they do not also have no pattern of non self-defense violence.
Children have a stronger sense of social justice than adults, and in most cases I think they actually know better than we do. That's why they are always arguing about who started it. It's because the person who started it is the person in the wrong, and the other person was just in their defense. When adults fail to determine who started it, and fail to punish only the person who started it, that is how children lose faith in justice, adults, and our justice system. You can't teach kids about democracy, freedom and justice in history class when the school itself is 1984. The hypocrisy is too transparent, and children see right through it.
As for embarrassment, what is embarrassment?
to cause confusion and shame to; make uncomfortably self-conscious; disconcert; abash: His bad table manners embarrassed her.
Embarrassment is only a problem if you are a person who can be embarrassed. You can only be embarrassed under certain circumstances.
1) You have done something you are ashamed of, and people have found out. 2) People are led to believe you have done something you would be ashamed of if you had done it, but you did not.
The solutions to embarrassment are:
1) Genuinely don't care what other people think about you. 2) Don't do anything you would be ashamed of. 3) Don't be ashamed of anything you do.
Allow me to present an embarrassing bully scenario.
Guys are playing basketball in gym class. Bully pulls down shorts of victim. lols! embarrasing! Not necessarily. Whether this is bullying or not is determined by the reaction of the victim, not by the action of the bully.
I remember once this happened, and someone pants pretty much the smartest, most well-adjusted, normal, kid in school. The kind of kid that was just sort of friendly with everyone. He was slightly above average at everything, but not exceptionally good at anything in particular. Wasn't a bully nor was he a typical bully victim. But he got pants during gym class anyway.
What happened? The bullies started to giggle, but the kid went with it. He took his shorts all the way off and he says "I didn't know you liked my ass that much," and he keeps playing. Totally not embarrassed, totally just cool with it.
It wasn't a good natured ribbing between friends, at least not in its intent. But the act was the same. And the reaction of the victim changed the entire scenario. Now the bully was the one who looked stupid and immature. If the same thing had been done to a different kid, they would have reacted differently. Maybe they would have had a fit of rage. Maybe they would have tried to do something stupid, like retaliating with a pants of their own. Maybe they would have tried to tell a teacher, putting their weakness on display. They could have also just ran away and cried, also not a good way to go.
Ribbing between friends and bullying differs in intent, but it does not differ in execution. And if you react to bullying with bad intent the same way you would react to good natured teasing, then it becomes good natured teasing.
Think of it like this. Imagine a battlefield with bullets flying everywhere. There is no way to stop the bullets. There are automatic turrets that shoot anything that moves. They were setup by evil aliens. We can't stop them. However, if we wear bulletproof armor, we can survive. Some people wear armor, some don't. Everyone is getting shot, but only those without armor actually get hurt. Stopping the bullets should be the ultimate goal, but it is incredibly difficult and out of our reach. Wearing armor is an effective solution that we can use right now. It's not the right answer, but it's what we've got.
Again, Scott, you are expecting children to be able to react as adults or emotionless zombies. Embarrassment can be caused by outside sources and feeling embarrassed isn't a fault that need be changed. Embarrassment can actually act as a great way to learn social skills - if you do something inappropriate you feel embarrassed or ashamed. Certainly feeling too embarrassed or allowing others to have too much power over your emotional state is something to be improved, but most 10 year olds are only beginning to understand their emotions, so controlling them to the degree that you are expecting is a bit beyond them at that point.
A child being violated by having their pants pulled down is bullying. The child feeling exposed, embarrassed and violated or not has no bearing on whether or not the action is aggressive bullying. Now the child's actions can change certain future actions, but it doesn't mean that the person wasn't bullied. Moreover, however the child in your particular scenario reacted, you have no clue as to how they felt. While it is great to teach kids to roll with punches, it is completely inappropriate to teach them that there is something wrong with them if they have an emotional reaction.
Your battlefield analogy is flawed. The kind of armor you are advocating is near impossible for most adults and even more out of reach for children. More importantly, the kind of armor you advocate would equate to being able to turn off all emotions at will (a state likened to sociopaths and psychopaths). While bullying will never stop, it can certainly be mitigated and far more effective action should be taken not only after the bullying, but also before any bullying ever takes place to help keep school as positive an environment as is possible.
I also disagree with you on the stance of children having a stronger sense of moral justice. Many kids in those situations will actively place blame elsewhere even when they (knowingly or unknowingly) are partially to blame. Regardless of who started an incident, if the child being bullied reacts in an inappropriate way (retaliation/aggressiveness instead of defence and alerting an authority figure), then that child should be held accountable for their part in the incident. Certainly the root cause must be addressed, but being bullied does not give a child carte blance to react inappropriately.
It seem to me, and I may be misreading, that you are assuming that these children already have an understanding of what is "appropriate" and of the boundaries of consent, as opposed to school being a time when social structures are both discovered and built.
Otherwise this would require defining "inappropriately" whilst not being able to reference either intent or understanding of either the attacker or the attacked.
Well what I think is important to look at is how the victim will also be put in punishment related situations. One of the reasons when I was bullied and I did not fight against it was because of a fear of authority. If you are a promising student, then you have a fear that something you do or say against your students will follow you throughout your education. It's like a permanent record, you wonder about how that shit is going to follow. When two kids get into a fight, BOTH of them will get in trouble. Despite who started it or the history of the two children, they both will get blindly punished instead of looking at every angle that should be looked at.
Besides, if you think about a high school victim, how often is it all their own fault for getting picked on? We tell children to ignore them or try and make piece with the bully, but it just always work because the bully him/herself is so mean. Even if the victim should learn more about dealing with pressure and having to defend themselves, the bully deserves punishment in some form.
School should not be about dealing with dickheads, it should be about education. It feels like the only way we can stop it is if we crack down insanely on kids for bullying by going the whole nine yards with security cameras, interviewing students, and Zero Bullying Tolerance. Note: If you interview other students instead of the bully or victim, you'll get a clearer perspective. If the same kid is said to be a bully on more than one occasion, they you should be able to safely assume that person is a liar and deserves punishment. And if they don't learn from what happens to them? Well, it's their future that's going down the toilet.
I think that if we are to let children grow, parents need to them a few basic rules: 1. People can be insulted for anything. 2. The things you experience in school, is not reflected with the rest of your life. 3. Your education is what's really important thing.
While there are times when it's acceptable to let things go the course, we sometimes do have situations (Like Judith's) where things need to be taken in to affect.
@ Nuke: I've never seen educators blindly punish both parties equally. In my school, at least, whoever became physical first had twice as long a suspension period as any student that became physical after that point. Any instigating remarks were also taken into consideration.
Your suggestion of interviewing other students can backfire on the student being bullied if they are unpopular. These events don't happen in a vacuum. Usually educators are previously aware of which student is the bully, but you have to treat each circumstance fairly as the usual bully may or may not be the one at fault in that particular instance.
2. The things you experience in school, is not reflected with the rest of your life.
I would have to amend this with a "if you're lucky."
I worked at a grade school for a number of years, and my mom is a 1'st grade teacher. As such I have spent more than my fair share of time in said grade school and been able to watch the same situations continue and propagate that I was once a part of. the point is, that I keep hearing people say "Don't do that, act like an adult." or "Do you think grown up's do that?"
More often than not these are in reference to things like, calling somebody names, talking about them behind their backs, teasing, or intentionally excluding them. All things that are CONSTANT amongst adults. I've even confronted some of the teachers about it, with a hopeful, if less than helpful answer that they hope they can have some effect on what the future adults will be like. To the last, however, they admit that it never stops. The same social interactions that they deal with in first graders continue on through the professional world. The only difference is that as you get into a bigger and bigger pond it's easier to find a littler corner to escape to.
Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, go to a metal show. Ever.
Let me rephrase.
If someone inappropriately puts their hands on you without consent, then they should really just go to jail.
That's still counterproductive, because not all non-consensual touching is necessarily jail-worthy. You don't want to teach a child that when someone does something they don't like, someone else will rescue them. If we're dealing with genuine assault, I could see your point, but shoving a kid into the lockers is not worthy of jail time. A kid has to learn how to assert himself without resorting to violence or outside authority as the first option. That's why learning how to deal with bullies on your own is an incredibly essential part of growing up.
Certainly the root cause must be addressed, but being bullied does not give a child carte blance to react inappropriately.
Damn right. Kids play the "but he started it" game to avoid personal responsibility, not to assert it. There are almost no one-sided fights anywhere, and this is doubly true in the case of school bullying. If you get shoved into the lockers and then punch the kid in the mouth to retaliate, you've made your choice and have to suffer the consequences. Children have a very poor sense of social justice, and that's why you have to reprimand both parties who engage in a physical altercation.
I'm not saying that motherfuckers don't need a good cockpunch every now and again, but it's still not right. You do it because you have to do it, and you face the consequences of doing it. You don't take a swing at someone and then dodge responsibility, because that is childish. A true adult owns up to what they do, and outright admits why they did it.
Essentially, there are degrees of bullying. If a child asserts themselves, most bullying will stop, as long as they learn how to assert themselves properly. If they've asserted themselves and the bullying continues, then we have a problem that warrants outside intervention.
Again, Scott, you are expecting children to be able to react as adults or emotionless zombies.
Yes, yes I am expectking children to be able to react as adults. Go look at a school. Bullying works on some kids, and doesn't work on others. All kids are being bullied, at some point. The ones who end up receiving it more are the ones who react poorly. The most effective way to not receive it more is to change the reaction. It comes easier to some than others. It comes earlier or later to some than others. Regardless, we should try to bring it about as soon as possible. If I have a child, I want it to have a mature adult mindset and attitude as early as possible.
There is sort of a problem, I believe, in our society's understanding of causality. We believe that we must treat children differently because they are children. And it is true, biologically, that the development of a child's mind is such that care must be taken and certain things must be done. Howver, I fully believe that for the most part, children act like children because we treat them as such, and not vice versa.
Children rebel against authority, rather than respect it, because authority does not respect them. Children who bully others are probably bullied by their parents, I've seen that one too many times as a camp counselor. Children lie because they are lied to by adults. Children take justice into their own hands because justice is preached and not practiced by adults. Children distrust adults and teachers because they display transparent hypocrisy. Teenagers especially are particularly rebellious because they are smart enough to comprehend society, yet they are still treated by society as children until they are 21 years old.
I think that if our society as a whole were to implement the golden rule with children, a lot of these sorts of childish problems like bullying would go away. If we speak to children with respect, rather than speaking down to them, then they will speak to each other with respect. If we are not so bothered by the opinions of others, then our children will not be either. If we are not bothered by the opinions of others, or ashamed of ourselves, then our children will not be either. Children learn from example, and most adults set a really shitty one.
And there in lies the problem. In our schools we have children coming from many different homes, all who have lived by a different example from a different set of parents. Some parents set an example that generates a bully. Some generate someone who ultra nice and wonderful, but unprepared for harsh reality. When those two are mixed, it's obvious what will happen.The only fix is to change them or split them up. Sadly, the most practical solution is for the non-bully to change their attitude.
I also think that changing the attitude of both bullies and victims of bullying is an essential part of the education process. Someone with either one of those attitudes will be ill-prepared for the harsh realities of the real world. That's what school is really about, preparing humans to live in the "real world". So if you can generate grade school children with adult mindsets, I consider that a tremendous success. Those children will surely go far in this world.
1) Not all kids that are routinely bullied react poorly to the bullying. Some bullies really do pick a target and do not let go. The idea that a child's reaction causes the continued bullying simply is not the case for all situations. Moreover, a child may often be picked on more for standing up to a bully (on their behalf or on the behalf of others). Ignoring the bully doesn't always work when they have chosen you as their victim until they break you. A group of girls in junior high at my school would choose a less popular kid and actively bully them in an attempt to get them to commit suicide. Even if the student didn't react to their bullying the first 10 times, the girls would keep at it until they "broke" them.
2) It is true that parents and teachers should strive to help their students mature; however, not all students mature at the same rate. More importantly, expecting children to be far more mature than they are naturally not only sets that child up for failure but can hinder their further healthy maturation process. To expect children to be adults sets up an inappropriate and potentially harmful expectation. Think of it this way. If a child might be naturally at point C on the the maturity scale. The adults around that child should help and encourage them to get to point D or E, not jump to Z. These processes take time and are fundamentally tied to physical and intellectual maturation.
3) Children rebel against authority for many, many reasons. It isn't as black and white as you make it, Scott. Children test boundaries to learn the boundaries, not merely out a deep seeded feeling of unfairness. Those boundaries must be set and enforced, but also explained and shown to be beneficial. When a child proves that they are responsible, then responsibilities and freedoms should be given to them. When they show that they are not, it would be harmful to the child to allow them those responsibilities and freedoms.
4) The ideas you are advocating are already in use. Educators do speak to their students with respect and are encouraged to use language and ideas that are beyond the child's current understanding to help them to grow. However, you have to allow them to GROW. Just treating a child like an adult does not make them an adult. It also exposes them abruptly and without context to responsibility and situations they have no ability to understand and will likely them cause harm. There is a happy medium here that you are missing.
Even if the student didn't react to their bullying the first 10 times, the girls would keep at it until they "broke" them.
If they continue trying after even just one attempt, then your reaction was not the correct one. A proper reaction will either turn the person into at least a friendly acquaintance, or it will dissuade them from ever even thinking about messing with you ever again. The sad thing about this, is you usually don't have that many chances. First impressions are too important. If your first reaction is a bad one, your weakness is exposed. It's now much more difficult to cover it up. That doesn't mean you have to break someone's jaw to keep them away, though that might work. A witty comeback is enough. Just make sure the comeback is actually witty. "I know you are, but what am I?" is just going to make things worse for you.
2) It is true that parents and teachers should strive to help their students mature; however, not all students mature at the same rate. More importantly, expecting children to be far more mature than they are naturally not only sets that child up for failure but can hinder their further healthy maturation process. To expect children to be adults sets up an inappropriate and potentially harmful expectation. Think of it this way. If a child might be naturally at point C on the the maturity scale. The adults around that child should help and encourage them to get to point D or E, not jump to Z. These processes take time and are fundamentally tied to physical and intellectual maturation.
This is why stratification is necessary. Some kids mature faster than others. Some are at P getting to Q. Some are still at A. Putting the As in the same room as the Ls or the Ps is asking for trouble.
Also, I have neglected to mention perhaps the number one way to prevent being bullied is simply to have some friends. Bullies will go after an individual, but not a posse. Of course, kids who are bullied more are the type who have a hard time making friends.
Obviously this is a gross over-simplification, but split a school into three categories of kids. Bullies, victims, and the normal kids who are not bullies nor are they victims of bullying. If the normal kids are nice and good, why are they not friends with the victims? There is something about those victims that not only makes them targets for the bullies, but also makes the nice normal kids avoid them. If they didn't have this thing, then they would have a bunch of friends, and bullies wouldn't really come near.
If they continue trying after even just one attempt, then your reaction was not the correct one. A proper reaction will either turn the person into at least a friendly acquaintance, or it will dissuade them from ever even thinking about messing with you ever again.
OK, that's just stupid. Yes, most of the time, the proper reaction will stop the behavior, but there are persistent assholes in the world, Scott. Those people can only be handled by outside authorities. They are by no means common, but they exist.
Even if the student didn't react to their bullying the first 10 times, the girls would keep at it until they "broke" them.
If they continue trying after even just one attempt, then your reaction was not the correct one. A proper reaction will either turn the person into at least a friendly acquaintance, or it will dissuade them from ever even thinking about messing with you ever again. The sad thing about this, is you usually don't have that many chances. First impressions are too important. If your first reaction is a bad one, your weakness is exposed. It's now much more difficult to cover it up. That doesn't mean you have to break someone's jaw to keep them away, though that might work. A witty comeback is enough. Just make sure the comeback is actually witty. "I know you are, but what am I?" is just going to make things worse for you.
Firstly, they never went after me. Secondly, ignoring the girls or seeking an authority figure is the best action to take in those scenarios. Your argument is that there is always an option that a child can identify and inact that will make the bully their friend? Your ideal and reality are so far apart that I can no longer address you seriously on this subject.
1) Not all kids that are routine bullied react poorly to the bullying. Some bullies really do pick a target and do not let go. The idea that a child's reaction causes the continued bullying simply is not the case for all situations. Moreover, a child may often be picked on more for standing up to a bully (on their behalf or on the behalf of others). Ignoring the bully doesn't always work when they have chosen you as their victim until the break you. A group of girls in junior high at my school would choose a less popular kid and actively bully them in an attempt to get them to commit suicide. Even if the student didn't react to their bullying the first 10 times, the girls would keep at it until they "broke" them.
Both of those reactions are bad reactions to bullies... Standing up to bully = Bully gets anger/opposition from someone, exactly what they want (and if the target is not the one standing up to them, that makes the target seem even weaker) Ignoring the bully = Bully sees weakness and exploits it further, silence is just as bad as getting mad
I agree with Scott that most bullying starts off as joking or ribbing that goes further when rather than responding normally (laughing, sending something back at them, etc.), the target displays some form of weakness (anger, crying, discomfort, etc.).
Both of those reactions are bad reactions to bullies... Standing up to bully = Bully gets anger/opposition from someone, exactly what they want (and if the target is not the one standing up to them, that makes the target seem even weaker) Ignoring the bully = Bully sees weakness and exploits it further, silence is just as bad as getting mad.
Leaving what options? You can't both react and not react.
I agree with Scott that most bullying starts off as joking or ribbing that goes further when rather than responding normally (laughing, sending something back at them, etc.), the target displays some form of weakness (anger, crying, discomfort, etc.).
That isn't how all bullying starts out, though. Your assumptions are huge, unsupported and seem to place the blame of bullying on the victim of the bullying. The irrationality of your statements are close to the level of Scott's. I agree that those being bullied can make choices that help to lessen or deflect the bullying. That isn't always the case and a victim (particularly a child) cannot be expected to react perfectly in all situations. Having authority figures step in is often necessary and those authority figures should be a primary defense against bullying.
Having authority figures step in is often necessary and those authority figures should be a primary defense against bullying.
I would not say that it is "often" necessary. There are situations where it most certainly is necessary, but as I've said, one needs to learn to assert oneself before resorting to the authority figure.
Standing up to bully = Bully gets anger/opposition from someone, exactly what they want (and if the target is not the one standing up to them, that makes the target seem even weaker) Ignoring the bully = Bully sees weakness and exploits it further, silence is just as bad as getting mad
Well, no, ignoring the bullying is pretty much the only way to deal with most bullies. You basically have to become calmly assertive. Demonstrate to the bully that their efforts are useless and do not affect you. This isn't the same thing as not fighting back, FYI. You may have to get mildly physical (pushing past someone, etc), but the end result is that you don't respond directly to the attempt at bullying. The bully is creating the situation, and you have to take control of it and turn it into your situation.
This is a hard thing to convey to children, because it's the sort of thing that can really only be learned by experience. That's why I'm saying that a kid needs to learn to assert himself first, before any authority figures intervene.
Having authority figures step in is often necessary and those authority figures should be a primary defense against bullying.
Having authority figures step in usually worsens bullying. Now the kid who has been protected looks like a momma's boy or a teacher's pet or whatever. Authority stepping in can only help if its action is extreme enough to end the bullying completely, such as expelling the bully entirely. Even in an environment with no bullies at all, the former victim may still have trouble making friends.
When I was a camp counselor I got a kid who was a bully completely removed from the situation. The kids who were victimized really liked me after that, but they didn't really get along any better. They just got through camp all quiet-like without much friendship. Meanwhile, the normal kids, neither bullies nor bullied, became slightly bullyish, though not complete bullies. They were angry because the kid I got rid of for being a bully to the victims was just a good friend to them.
In another year as camp counselor I encountered another situation with an infamously bad kid, who was a bully to kids and counselors alike. Most counselors were afraid to have him in their cabin. One counselor managed to deal with him pretty well. The solution seemed to be that the counselor befriended him rather than being an oppositional authority figure. The good cop, without the camp director as the bad cop. The kid was misbehaving and bullying for attention, mostly. He transformed the kid by getting the rest of the kids in the cabin to react appropriately to the antics. The kid got the attention he wanted from clowning instead of misbehaving, eventually, and everyone laughed together. But this only really worked because he was able to get the victims, the rest of the cabin, to change their attitude towards the bad kid.
Comments
I was bullied a lot in junior high and early high school. I had a minimum of one injury per hallway and stairway from being pushed and shoved. Honestly, I preferred that to what seemed like an unending stream of verbal bullying. I refused to change who I was, but I also was borderline suicidal. If it weren't for my mother, I doubt I would have made it. I know this sounds melodramatic, and looking back I don't understand why I let it get to me so much, but it was how it was. It didn't help that I was in a very small school (my graduating class was 64 people) and I was THE weirdo that was openly bi, outspoken, willing to talk and debate in class (teacher's pet), was involved in the performing and language arts, joined the wrestling team, often wore boys clothing, etc.
Some of my teachers were very helpful, though. They were very aware of the situation and put a stop to it whenever possible. My guidance counselor was particularly helpful. She nailed some of the bullies and also helped me graduate early so I could get the heck out of there.
@ Emi: You are completely correct that those strategies work. Unfortunately, not all students have the emotional control, self-confidence, nor the maturity to enact those strategies.
I suppose when I think about it, I was bullied a little bit in elementary school. I was super shy and afraid to talk to people, and I quickly became "quiet kid." It was easy for people to make fun of me because, I admit, I was a little bit of a dork. I did have a few friends that I clung onto, and if it wasn't for them, I probably would have been more affected by the teasing.
But when I think back about these times, I wasn't really emotionally scarred, other than being a little socially awkward in middle school before discovering the awesome nerdsdom of being in band. I think the reason for this is that I actually sometimes fought back in my own unique ways. I was also very lucky to have a mom that really listened to me, and who was also a teacher herself. In kindergarten there was this boy who couldn't keep his hands to himself, if you know what I mean. One day he touched me in the hallway and I angrily pushed him down. When the teacher asked why, I was too embarrassed to say, so I got in trouble. But when my mom asked why I told her the truth, and I never saw that kid in class again. (We also found out I wasn't the only girl being harassed).
Another time I was being picked on by a kid who kept getting me to do his homework (I guess he guilted my kindhearted self, I don't really remember). He also put pencil shavings in my snacks. One day he got in my face, jumping around like a crazy person, so I kicked him. Unfortunately I accidentally kicked him in a very bad place, and I got super in trouble. I was so embarrassed that I didn't even defend myself. But at least he never bothered me again. There was also this big kid who was mean to everyone. Me and another dorky kid got revenge by putting mustard in his seat. We got in trouble of course, but it was so worth it.
Eventually I just told on everyone as soon as they did something to me, and I got the reputation of being a tattle tale. Anyway, my mom transferred schools when I was supposed to enter 6th grade, so I was forced to go to a school in another district. I was so mad at my mom, because I wouldn't be with my few best friends anymore. But from the very first day at that school, everyone was so nice to me. I made friends really fast, and had no enemies. You could actually call me "popular," although it wasn't in the snobby way. This boosted my confidence way up, and I broke out of my quiet shell. In 7th grade my mom transferred again and I got to go to the middle school in my own county that I would have originally gone to. Since I was much more confident, and there had been a year break from everyone, they seemed to forget that they ever picked on me. And then I joined band, where virtually everyone is nice and accepting. Yay!
1) If the child is being teased for having "poor social skills", then how is a child that is obviously ignorant of social skills and being victimized at their primary place of socialization to magically develop those skills? Not only do most children have terrible social skills (particularly bullies themselves), but those skills take time, experience, and guidance to form and take shape.
2) What are you defining as "poor social skills". I have often seen the students that are more socially mature be picked on by those with lower social skills. Should the child regress to fit in with their peers or should their peers be faces with the consequences for behaving in an inappropriate manner?
3) If a child attempts to make conversation or friends, they will (having previously been bullied) have an even greater difficulty of receiving any sort of constructive response.
4) Once the bullies have a target, they usually won't relent until forced or until they move to another target. If a child changes one behavior, then the bullies will often just look for something else.
2) By terrible social skills I'm talking about the cases with kids like the scary fanboys you see at conventions. I can tell you from personal experience that one reason people like this, not just kids, are bullied is because they are simply unpleasant to be around. Even people who aren't bullies will harass them. Why? It's because they just want them to go away or fix themselves. And if those two options aren't going to happen, they at least want the person who is causing their own suffering to also suffer.
3) You don't have to jump straight into making conversation. In fact, that's the kind of socially inept thing that you see overly-friendly stereotypical homeschool kids do. Going up to another kid and politely saying "Hi, my name is ***. Would you like to play with me?" is totally dorky, and of course it will get you ridiculed. Instead, you need to take a similar approach as I did with the Mr. Bean kids. You don't have to have a conversation. Just have a change in attitude. When someone is laughing at you, laugh with them instead. If you change your attitude such that what used to be harassment is good natured ribbing between friends, you'll find that bullies really just want to be friends and play video games just like you do.
4) It depends on what behavior you change. If they made fun of you for having green pencils, and you go get yellow pencils, that's obviously not going to work. In fact, it's a signal that the bullying worked on you. The only thing you can change about yourself that will solve the problem is your attitude.
I mean, look at me. I have hundred of people constantly saying things to me that would be normally be considered bullying. Jokes about why I'm gay. Jokes about having no girlfriend. Getting ripped a good one whenever I say something wrong or stupid. Getting ripped an even bigger new one when I suck at something. I get ripped again if I change my mind on something, or do something other people perceive to be out of character. I get people trying to poke me just because I don't want to be poked.
Nothing in my life has changed in terms of people bullying me or saying harassing things. All that has changed is my attitude. It just doesn't bother me, and it's funny. If someone pesters you, and you don't like it, they're a bully. If you join in on the self deprecating humor, suddenly that bully is a friend. When I was in middle school, a gay joke would have angered me and made me hate the person who saidit. Nowadays the same exact joke is just uber-lols, and I'm great friends with the person who says it. What changed? My attitude.
Look at this thread. Just about every single person was bullied in some way at one point or another. I bet if you ask every person on the street, they will tell you as well. Even popular kids tease the hell out of each other. I honestly believe that just about every single kid in every single school is teased or picked on or bullied to varying degrees. Every person you meet on the street will tell you they were picked on in some way in school. And I think the difference in determining who becomes the extreme victims are how those victims react. Nobody is singled out as a target, because everyone is a target. It's simply that the squeaky wheels get more grease.
It would be nice if we could end all bullying, but the practicality of doing that is extremely difficult. It is as impossible, if not more impossible, to police bullying than it is to police copyright. And even in the presence of strong policing, it may not be a significant deterrent. The only practical, long-term, effective solution is for the victim to change their attitude. Does it seem unjust that the victim should be the one who has to fix the problem? Of course it does. But the real world doesn't have justice built into it. Justice is a human idea, not a law of nature. It just sucks, and better to deal with it than to cry about how cruel the world is.
Please enlighten me as to what "attitude change" a student can make that will stop a bully from beating them and degrading them?
You say social ineptitude causes bullying. I completely agree, but the social ineptitude is on the side of the bully more so than on the victim. If a person is a fan-boy, then certainly bathing regularly and getting some other interests might help them have fuller lives and teachers and parents should help in that regard. However, the bully is the person that needs to be addressed. Parents, teachers, and psychologists can all help stop a bully from being a bully.
An assumption that prevailed through both the discussion here and the linked article, that I would question first is the link between bullying and intelligence. The idea that smart people get bullied because they are not popular. Especially, in the article, because they are concerned with other things and therefore are outside of the social game. This would suggest that within a group of like-minded people, all intelligent and articulate, there should be no bullying. Anecdotally I can attest to the contrary, but like I said I lack both time and desire to draw upon specific resources here. Let it suffice to say, than, that bullying may be less a result of social stratification through intellectual differentiation, and more a function of social hierarchies in general. That is, the bully picks on that which is different. What makes that different may be completely arbitrary, and may in fact be only the fact that they are the one being picked on.
To note my own bias in this conversation. People think I'm smart because I am not, and am aware of it. A simple example in lieu of full explanation, when a co-worker needed to take a screen shot on her computer (A PC where I tend to use mac) I did not know the short cut, so I looked it up online, in front of her, and her response was "Your so good at this, how do you know so much about computers?" Note, there was no slight of hand, no concealment of methods, and I used google, her home page search engine, not some hidden forum. My self awareness, however, and willingness to ask for help, is seen as intelligence by many. I note this as bias because I have suffered for this self awareness, and it was the primary vector for much of my teasing in Jr. High school. Quite against what the linked article suggests, recognizing the false boundaries and general "fake as a twinkie" nature of the social game only served to make me feel more ostracized for not being able to understand the unspoken rules that everybody else seemed to grok so easily. Understanding that it was all a construct didn't help me feel better about it, worse, it made it all the more frustrating.
I would argue that it is the nature of Man to unite against. Any group will tend to build a hierarchy, and likely, will tend towards rejection of the dissimilar. If it is a self-selected group (a club or a smaller clique that chooses to spend time together for example) this takes the form of social jest and ribbing, that can as well be very hurtful, but rarely escalates to full on bullying. If the group is, however, mixed and lacking in a self-selection method, like a classroom in which any randomly allotted group of students will have to interact, these same social stratification methods will be more exaggerated and can become violent even. To take it further, if there is an imposed intermixing of otherwise separate or self selected groups, say when an area of land is designated by a group of countries to be the new homeland of a previously disenfranchised people, there is almost sure to be conflict, and again it will often be exaggerated and can become violent, as they sub groups and social strata vie for dominance.
Perhaps I have rambled. I should get back to work anyway. Thanks for reading!
Children have a stronger sense of social justice than adults, and in most cases I think they actually know better than we do. That's why they are always arguing about who started it. It's because the person who started it is the person in the wrong, and the other person was just in their defense. When adults fail to determine who started it, and fail to punish only the person who started it, that is how children lose faith in justice, adults, and our justice system. You can't teach kids about democracy, freedom and justice in history class when the school itself is 1984. The hypocrisy is too transparent, and children see right through it.
As for embarrassment, what is embarrassment? Embarrassment is only a problem if you are a person who can be embarrassed. You can only be embarrassed under certain circumstances.
1) You have done something you are ashamed of, and people have found out.
2) People are led to believe you have done something you would be ashamed of if you had done it, but you did not.
The solutions to embarrassment are:
1) Genuinely don't care what other people think about you.
2) Don't do anything you would be ashamed of.
3) Don't be ashamed of anything you do.
Allow me to present an embarrassing bully scenario.
Guys are playing basketball in gym class. Bully pulls down shorts of victim. lols! embarrasing! Not necessarily. Whether this is bullying or not is determined by the reaction of the victim, not by the action of the bully.
I remember once this happened, and someone pants pretty much the smartest, most well-adjusted, normal, kid in school. The kind of kid that was just sort of friendly with everyone. He was slightly above average at everything, but not exceptionally good at anything in particular. Wasn't a bully nor was he a typical bully victim. But he got pants during gym class anyway.
What happened? The bullies started to giggle, but the kid went with it. He took his shorts all the way off and he says "I didn't know you liked my ass that much," and he keeps playing. Totally not embarrassed, totally just cool with it.
It wasn't a good natured ribbing between friends, at least not in its intent. But the act was the same. And the reaction of the victim changed the entire scenario. Now the bully was the one who looked stupid and immature. If the same thing had been done to a different kid, they would have reacted differently. Maybe they would have had a fit of rage. Maybe they would have tried to do something stupid, like retaliating with a pants of their own. Maybe they would have tried to tell a teacher, putting their weakness on display. They could have also just ran away and cried, also not a good way to go.
Ribbing between friends and bullying differs in intent, but it does not differ in execution. And if you react to bullying with bad intent the same way you would react to good natured teasing, then it becomes good natured teasing.
Think of it like this. Imagine a battlefield with bullets flying everywhere. There is no way to stop the bullets. There are automatic turrets that shoot anything that moves. They were setup by evil aliens. We can't stop them. However, if we wear bulletproof armor, we can survive. Some people wear armor, some don't. Everyone is getting shot, but only those without armor actually get hurt. Stopping the bullets should be the ultimate goal, but it is incredibly difficult and out of our reach. Wearing armor is an effective solution that we can use right now. It's not the right answer, but it's what we've got.
Embarrassment can be caused by outside sources and feeling embarrassed isn't a fault that need be changed. Embarrassment can actually act as a great way to learn social skills - if you do something inappropriate you feel embarrassed or ashamed. Certainly feeling too embarrassed or allowing others to have too much power over your emotional state is something to be improved, but most 10 year olds are only beginning to understand their emotions, so controlling them to the degree that you are expecting is a bit beyond them at that point.
A child being violated by having their pants pulled down is bullying. The child feeling exposed, embarrassed and violated or not has no bearing on whether or not the action is aggressive bullying. Now the child's actions can change certain future actions, but it doesn't mean that the person wasn't bullied. Moreover, however the child in your particular scenario reacted, you have no clue as to how they felt. While it is great to teach kids to roll with punches, it is completely inappropriate to teach them that there is something wrong with them if they have an emotional reaction.
Your battlefield analogy is flawed. The kind of armor you are advocating is near impossible for most adults and even more out of reach for children. More importantly, the kind of armor you advocate would equate to being able to turn off all emotions at will (a state likened to sociopaths and psychopaths). While bullying will never stop, it can certainly be mitigated and far more effective action should be taken not only after the bullying, but also before any bullying ever takes place to help keep school as positive an environment as is possible.
I also disagree with you on the stance of children having a stronger sense of moral justice. Many kids in those situations will actively place blame elsewhere even when they (knowingly or unknowingly) are partially to blame. Regardless of who started an incident, if the child being bullied reacts in an inappropriate way (retaliation/aggressiveness instead of defence and alerting an authority figure), then that child should be held accountable for their part in the incident. Certainly the root cause must be addressed, but being bullied does not give a child carte blance to react inappropriately.
It seem to me, and I may be misreading, that you are assuming that these children already have an understanding of what is "appropriate" and of the boundaries of consent, as opposed to school being a time when social structures are both discovered and built.
Otherwise this would require defining "inappropriately" whilst not being able to reference either intent or understanding of either the attacker or the attacked.
Besides, if you think about a high school victim, how often is it all their own fault for getting picked on? We tell children to ignore them or try and make piece with the bully, but it just always work because the bully him/herself is so mean. Even if the victim should learn more about dealing with pressure and having to defend themselves, the bully deserves punishment in some form.
School should not be about dealing with dickheads, it should be about education. It feels like the only way we can stop it is if we crack down insanely on kids for bullying by going the whole nine yards with security cameras, interviewing students, and Zero Bullying Tolerance. Note: If you interview other students instead of the bully or victim, you'll get a clearer perspective. If the same kid is said to be a bully on more than one occasion, they you should be able to safely assume that person is a liar and deserves punishment. And if they don't learn from what happens to them? Well, it's their future that's going down the toilet.
I think that if we are to let children grow, parents need to them a few basic rules:
1. People can be insulted for anything.
2. The things you experience in school, is not reflected with the rest of your life.
3. Your education is what's really important thing.
While there are times when it's acceptable to let things go the course, we sometimes do have situations (Like Judith's) where things need to be taken in to affect.
Your suggestion of interviewing other students can backfire on the student being bullied if they are unpopular. These events don't happen in a vacuum. Usually educators are previously aware of which student is the bully, but you have to treat each circumstance fairly as the usual bully may or may not be the one at fault in that particular instance.
I worked at a grade school for a number of years, and my mom is a 1'st grade teacher. As such I have spent more than my fair share of time in said grade school and been able to watch the same situations continue and propagate that I was once a part of. the point is, that I keep hearing people say "Don't do that, act like an adult." or "Do you think grown up's do that?"
More often than not these are in reference to things like, calling somebody names, talking about them behind their backs, teasing, or intentionally excluding them. All things that are CONSTANT amongst adults. I've even confronted some of the teachers about it, with a hopeful, if less than helpful answer that they hope they can have some effect on what the future adults will be like. To the last, however, they admit that it never stops. The same social interactions that they deal with in first graders continue on through the professional world. The only difference is that as you get into a bigger and bigger pond it's easier to find a littler corner to escape to.
I'm not saying that motherfuckers don't need a good cockpunch every now and again, but it's still not right. You do it because you have to do it, and you face the consequences of doing it. You don't take a swing at someone and then dodge responsibility, because that is childish. A true adult owns up to what they do, and outright admits why they did it.
Essentially, there are degrees of bullying. If a child asserts themselves, most bullying will stop, as long as they learn how to assert themselves properly. If they've asserted themselves and the bullying continues, then we have a problem that warrants outside intervention.
There is sort of a problem, I believe, in our society's understanding of causality. We believe that we must treat children differently because they are children. And it is true, biologically, that the development of a child's mind is such that care must be taken and certain things must be done. Howver, I fully believe that for the most part, children act like children because we treat them as such, and not vice versa.
Children rebel against authority, rather than respect it, because authority does not respect them. Children who bully others are probably bullied by their parents, I've seen that one too many times as a camp counselor. Children lie because they are lied to by adults. Children take justice into their own hands because justice is preached and not practiced by adults. Children distrust adults and teachers because they display transparent hypocrisy. Teenagers especially are particularly rebellious because they are smart enough to comprehend society, yet they are still treated by society as children until they are 21 years old.
I think that if our society as a whole were to implement the golden rule with children, a lot of these sorts of childish problems like bullying would go away. If we speak to children with respect, rather than speaking down to them, then they will speak to each other with respect. If we are not so bothered by the opinions of others, then our children will not be either. If we are not bothered by the opinions of others, or ashamed of ourselves, then our children will not be either. Children learn from example, and most adults set a really shitty one.
And there in lies the problem. In our schools we have children coming from many different homes, all who have lived by a different example from a different set of parents. Some parents set an example that generates a bully. Some generate someone who ultra nice and wonderful, but unprepared for harsh reality. When those two are mixed, it's obvious what will happen.The only fix is to change them or split them up. Sadly, the most practical solution is for the non-bully to change their attitude.
I also think that changing the attitude of both bullies and victims of bullying is an essential part of the education process. Someone with either one of those attitudes will be ill-prepared for the harsh realities of the real world. That's what school is really about, preparing humans to live in the "real world". So if you can generate grade school children with adult mindsets, I consider that a tremendous success. Those children will surely go far in this world.
2) It is true that parents and teachers should strive to help their students mature; however, not all students mature at the same rate. More importantly, expecting children to be far more mature than they are naturally not only sets that child up for failure but can hinder their further healthy maturation process. To expect children to be adults sets up an inappropriate and potentially harmful expectation. Think of it this way. If a child might be naturally at point C on the the maturity scale. The adults around that child should help and encourage them to get to point D or E, not jump to Z. These processes take time and are fundamentally tied to physical and intellectual maturation.
3) Children rebel against authority for many, many reasons. It isn't as black and white as you make it, Scott. Children test boundaries to learn the boundaries, not merely out a deep seeded feeling of unfairness. Those boundaries must be set and enforced, but also explained and shown to be beneficial. When a child proves that they are responsible, then responsibilities and freedoms should be given to them. When they show that they are not, it would be harmful to the child to allow them those responsibilities and freedoms.
4) The ideas you are advocating are already in use. Educators do speak to their students with respect and are encouraged to use language and ideas that are beyond the child's current understanding to help them to grow. However, you have to allow them to GROW. Just treating a child like an adult does not make them an adult. It also exposes them abruptly and without context to responsibility and situations they have no ability to understand and will likely them cause harm. There is a happy medium here that you are missing.
Also, I have neglected to mention perhaps the number one way to prevent being bullied is simply to have some friends. Bullies will go after an individual, but not a posse. Of course, kids who are bullied more are the type who have a hard time making friends.
Obviously this is a gross over-simplification, but split a school into three categories of kids. Bullies, victims, and the normal kids who are not bullies nor are they victims of bullying. If the normal kids are nice and good, why are they not friends with the victims? There is something about those victims that not only makes them targets for the bullies, but also makes the nice normal kids avoid them. If they didn't have this thing, then they would have a bunch of friends, and bullies wouldn't really come near.
Standing up to bully = Bully gets anger/opposition from someone, exactly what they want (and if the target is not the one standing up to them, that makes the target seem even weaker)
Ignoring the bully = Bully sees weakness and exploits it further, silence is just as bad as getting mad
I agree with Scott that most bullying starts off as joking or ribbing that goes further when rather than responding normally (laughing, sending something back at them, etc.), the target displays some form of weakness (anger, crying, discomfort, etc.).
I agree that those being bullied can make choices that help to lessen or deflect the bullying. That isn't always the case and a victim (particularly a child) cannot be expected to react perfectly in all situations. Having authority figures step in is often necessary and those authority figures should be a primary defense against bullying.
This is a hard thing to convey to children, because it's the sort of thing that can really only be learned by experience. That's why I'm saying that a kid needs to learn to assert himself first, before any authority figures intervene.
When I was a camp counselor I got a kid who was a bully completely removed from the situation. The kids who were victimized really liked me after that, but they didn't really get along any better. They just got through camp all quiet-like without much friendship. Meanwhile, the normal kids, neither bullies nor bullied, became slightly bullyish, though not complete bullies. They were angry because the kid I got rid of for being a bully to the victims was just a good friend to them.
In another year as camp counselor I encountered another situation with an infamously bad kid, who was a bully to kids and counselors alike. Most counselors were afraid to have him in their cabin. One counselor managed to deal with him pretty well. The solution seemed to be that the counselor befriended him rather than being an oppositional authority figure. The good cop, without the camp director as the bad cop. The kid was misbehaving and bullying for attention, mostly. He transformed the kid by getting the rest of the kids in the cabin to react appropriately to the antics. The kid got the attention he wanted from clowning instead of misbehaving, eventually, and everyone laughed together. But this only really worked because he was able to get the victims, the rest of the cabin, to change their attitude towards the bad kid.