5 ms·

> Is it disingenuous to tell kids sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me? That phrase's famous usage is as a way to portray self-resp

> Is it disingenuous to tell kids sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me? That phrase's famous usage is as a way to portray self-respect and non-violent defense of oneself after being verbally attacked. In that context, it still has value and is not disingenuous to provide to children.

wahnfrieden 4y ago
the question for you making that statement is whether children usually understand that to be the point. Or whether there are more effective approaches without harmful misunderstandings
themitigating 4y ago
Does it? Only if the other person stops and since they are aware of the phrase would they?
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  It is not about getting people to stop, it is about mitigating the damage. The fact that some bullies seeking a response may eventually stop is incidental.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    How does telling someone that words don't hurt make words not hurt? I can't make knives not hurt simply by saying so.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      If you are not familiar with the mantra, Knives are physical like sticks and stones. "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me" Harm from knives is physical and objective. Words can only hurt to the degree you care about them. You could call me a nasty name right now, and it would not hurt my feelings because I am not invested in your opinion of me. I have an independent sense of self worth. Understanding that you can change the level that you care about the opinions of others is a basic human skill.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        There are several things wrong with this line of thinking. The first error is that telling someone that words don't hurt doesn't automatically create an independent sense of self worth in someone. Instead it teaches people to not share pain caused by words. To some people, this has the appearance of working - namely it isn't brought up again, but it does nothing to solve the problem of the experience of pain people feel. The second is an error in generalization that may very well apply to people who do have this skill, but has disastrous consequences for those that don't. The people who experience live this way would do well to understand the type of person they are giving such advice to before they assume that everyone experiences the world as they do. As someone at the receiving end of advice like this. It doesn't help. What ends up ensuing follows a similar pattern to all patterns based on individuating ideologies - the person isn't doing it right, or didn't try hard enough. People learn to not express their feelings instead. Lastly, making a distinction between objective and subjective pain is trying to carve out phenomenological categories that simply don't exist.
        s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Copying from other comments... Sticks and stones is not a full instruction set, but an introduction to the concept and a reminder. It is not, and should not be considered "one simple trick" to deal with hurtful words. This doesn't mean that it is useless or detrimental. It is a reminder that self-esteem should not be based on the opinions of others. More clearly needs to be done to instill baseline self-esteem. That doesn't mean it's not a helpful reminder of the concept when one encounters derogatory feedback. It is like saying: "When someone says something that makes you feel bad, remember the conversations we had about how just because someone says something, it doesn't mean it is true. People will say things to try to hurt you, but they are just being mean and it isn't true. It reflects on them as a person, not you as a person. However, if someone physically hurts you, this is different." In my mind, "sticks & stones" is the same thing, but shorter and more memorable.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        I'm getting the sense that this is a conversation between a neurotypical person and a neurodivergent person and that is the source of the disconnect between our understandings.
- cupofpython 4y ago
  Where I grew up no one would actually say the sticks and stones line unless they were intentionally being sarcastic and provoking people to bully them (i.e. trolling). It was still a useful phrase to pass around though I understood the lesson to mean "Dont let bullies control you with words". As in, be wary of people trying to manipulate you with hurtful words. The point is to not give your bully information on how they are hurting you because they can leverage it against you Of course words can hurt. the saying wouldnt exist if that wasnt true. We dont go around saying "sticks and stones can break my bones but giving me thoughtful gifts will never hurt me". There is an understanding the bully is trying to hurt with words, because words can hurt, and the response is meant to deny them the emotional reaction they are looking for from you
watwut 4y ago
It does not portray self respect. It says that if you feel hurt by words you are in the wrong. The phrase makes it harder to actually truthfully talk about whatever is going on.
- jacobolus 4y ago
  It’s a way of mockingly refuting an insult on the playground without responding in kind or escalating to a physical fight. (Or as a private internal mantra, a way of keeping your chin up while refusing to engage a bully, ignoring their negative attention so they go away.) Good luck as a 7-year-old trying to “truthfully talk about” the harm you feel when other kids call you mean names.
  - watwut 4y ago
    I was referring to adult discussing the situation with kid, not kids among themselves. But also, I really dont think this phrase works as mocking refutation. First, it is not mocking at all. Second, unless kid is super good confident actor, it will be clear the kid is uncomfortable and hurt. And third, why do you see passivity as preferable over "responding in kind" in case of verbal abuse? Kids who react passively get mocked again and again and again. How exactly respond greatly depends on situation (that is why truthful discussion is necessary), but kids who dont listen to "be passive and polite" advice get verbally abused less often.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]

wahnfrieden 4y ago

the question for you making that statement is whether children usually understand that to be the point. Or whether there are more effective approaches without harmful misunderstandings

themitigating 4y ago

Does it? Only if the other person stops and since they are aware of the phrase would they?

s1artibartfast 4y ago
It is not about getting people to stop, it is about mitigating the damage. The fact that some bullies seeking a response may eventually stop is incidental.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  How does telling someone that words don't hurt make words not hurt? I can't make knives not hurt simply by saying so.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    If you are not familiar with the mantra, Knives are physical like sticks and stones. "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me" Harm from knives is physical and objective. Words can only hurt to the degree you care about them. You could call me a nasty name right now, and it would not hurt my feelings because I am not invested in your opinion of me. I have an independent sense of self worth. Understanding that you can change the level that you care about the opinions of others is a basic human skill.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      There are several things wrong with this line of thinking. The first error is that telling someone that words don't hurt doesn't automatically create an independent sense of self worth in someone. Instead it teaches people to not share pain caused by words. To some people, this has the appearance of working - namely it isn't brought up again, but it does nothing to solve the problem of the experience of pain people feel. The second is an error in generalization that may very well apply to people who do have this skill, but has disastrous consequences for those that don't. The people who experience live this way would do well to understand the type of person they are giving such advice to before they assume that everyone experiences the world as they do. As someone at the receiving end of advice like this. It doesn't help. What ends up ensuing follows a similar pattern to all patterns based on individuating ideologies - the person isn't doing it right, or didn't try hard enough. People learn to not express their feelings instead. Lastly, making a distinction between objective and subjective pain is trying to carve out phenomenological categories that simply don't exist.
      - s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Copying from other comments... Sticks and stones is not a full instruction set, but an introduction to the concept and a reminder. It is not, and should not be considered "one simple trick" to deal with hurtful words. This doesn't mean that it is useless or detrimental. It is a reminder that self-esteem should not be based on the opinions of others. More clearly needs to be done to instill baseline self-esteem. That doesn't mean it's not a helpful reminder of the concept when one encounters derogatory feedback. It is like saying: "When someone says something that makes you feel bad, remember the conversations we had about how just because someone says something, it doesn't mean it is true. People will say things to try to hurt you, but they are just being mean and it isn't true. It reflects on them as a person, not you as a person. However, if someone physically hurts you, this is different." In my mind, "sticks & stones" is the same thing, but shorter and more memorable.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        I'm getting the sense that this is a conversation between a neurotypical person and a neurodivergent person and that is the source of the disconnect between our understandings.
cupofpython 4y ago
Where I grew up no one would actually say the sticks and stones line unless they were intentionally being sarcastic and provoking people to bully them (i.e. trolling). It was still a useful phrase to pass around though I understood the lesson to mean "Dont let bullies control you with words". As in, be wary of people trying to manipulate you with hurtful words. The point is to not give your bully information on how they are hurting you because they can leverage it against you Of course words can hurt. the saying wouldnt exist if that wasnt true. We dont go around saying "sticks and stones can break my bones but giving me thoughtful gifts will never hurt me". There is an understanding the bully is trying to hurt with words, because words can hurt, and the response is meant to deny them the emotional reaction they are looking for from you

watwut 4y ago

It does not portray self respect. It says that if you feel hurt by words you are in the wrong. The phrase makes it harder to actually truthfully talk about whatever is going on.

jacobolus 4y ago
It’s a way of mockingly refuting an insult on the playground without responding in kind or escalating to a physical fight. (Or as a private internal mantra, a way of keeping your chin up while refusing to engage a bully, ignoring their negative attention so they go away.) Good luck as a 7-year-old trying to “truthfully talk about” the harm you feel when other kids call you mean names.
- watwut 4y ago
  I was referring to adult discussing the situation with kid, not kids among themselves. But also, I really dont think this phrase works as mocking refutation. First, it is not mocking at all. Second, unless kid is super good confident actor, it will be clear the kid is uncomfortable and hurt. And third, why do you see passivity as preferable over "responding in kind" in case of verbal abuse? Kids who react passively get mocked again and again and again. How exactly respond greatly depends on situation (that is why truthful discussion is necessary), but kids who dont listen to "be passive and polite" advice get verbally abused less often.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]