3 ms·

> If there was something that you could have done yourself to prevent or stop it, would you refuse to do it? I still don't know. "Do you go Ender's Game on th

> If there was something that you could have done yourself to prevent or stop it, would you refuse to do it? I still don't know. "Do you go Ender's Game on the bully?" As an adult, I don't want to condone violence, but at some point, it seems like there must come a point where one must stand up & defend oneself. The problem is that you'll very likely get in trouble for it — self defense is not a defense in the eyes of public school administrators. (Aside from Ender's Game, there are some good episodes of SG:SG1 that touch on this topic. It is complex even for adults. The permissibility of violence in this situation is likely conditional on authority figures having turned a blind eye to the situation. The level of nuance here probably exceeds what I'd expect a child being bullied to be able to command. The other problem is that bullies don't always operate alone, and a fight one decides to pick might not be a fair one.) But like I said, it's besides the point: to a degree, yeah, you should teach children to have a "thick skin". But "thick skin" only gets the child so far: it can fend off mild amounts of verbal abuse, but I do not think a child can be effectively taught to deal with repeated, long-term verbal abuse, social ostracization, and physical abuse, and to deal with the emotional consequences thereof. At that stage, bullying is a failure of adults to discipline, in so much as it is allowed to happen and moreso and in particular, to persist.

pdonis 4y ago
> self defense is not a defense in the eyes of public school administrators While this is true, it's also obviously wrong, and the fact that it's widespread in our society makes it even more wrong. Rather than try to expound that in more detail, I'll just reference a post by The Last Psychiatrist that does the job better than I could anyway: https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/10/one_way_our_schools_are_traini.html https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/10/one_way_our_schools_... The TL/DR is at the end: "[W]hat kind of school doesn't want a kid to stand up to a bully, especially when they're doing it to help someone else? What kind of crazy school wants you to back down-- and get someone else to protect you? What kind of school indoctrinates kids that power is only possessed by a) bad people; b) the state? Oh. All of them."
- deathanatos 4y ago
  > While this is true, it's also obviously wrong, and the fact that it's widespread in our society makes it even more wrong. Just to be clear: I don't agree with it. All I'm saying is that child-me understood that it wouldn't be a valid defense after the fact, i.e., that there would be consequences. That, of course, affects one's decision making. That article is very real, though. (But … and I get this gist from other comments on the thread: that article's example is a mild bully. But yeah, that's how public schools react, and how they inadvertently teach.)
s1artibartfast 4y ago
I certainly hope nobody's talking about going full enders game. I think most people are talking about giving as good as you get and proportionate response. Not being afraid to take a punch or get a black eye. If someone's talking about a real psychopath willing to break bones or with a weapon, the only real responses to run and any martial arts with class will teach you as much. Thick skin is just quiet suffering unless it is backed up with real confidence and an actual sense of self-worth. Unless you're an award-winning actor, a boy can still tell if they're getting to you.
- deathanatos 4y ago
  > I think most people are talking about giving as good as you get and proportionate response. The goal is change, i.e., to end the violence. That's the same motivation as Ender. (I shouldn't imply Enders-game levels of violence, sorry, I meant more the metaphor the book sets up: Ender ends the conflict, which is a mirror to his larger role in the plot.) My point is that, had I engaged in violence — I never did, but do I regret that decision? how should I advise a youth? IDK… — I'm not fighting to win that fight, I'm fighting to win all fights. (And, as I said in the original comment, I think the question of what the child should do is itself wrong. By the time a child is thinking whether violence will or won't solve the problem, the alleged adults in the room have already failed the child. It should never have gotten that far to begin with.) A number of commenters in this thread also seem to have the popular media trope of a bully as their impression, which is a fair bit watered down. As the paper states, > poor outcomes throughout the life span, including mental, physical and socioeconomic difficulties. "Throughout the life span". It has permanent, enduring effects, and I don't know that pixels on a screen capture the mental anguish bullies leave in their wake. > Thick skin is just quiet suffering unless it is backed up with real confidence and an actual sense of self-worth. That's a good way of putting it. Unfortunately, I think the years it takes to acquire that mean you're not going to have it until after it's too late. (Or more realistically, I think bullying set back a child acquiring that sense of self-confidence and self-worth.) > Unless you're an award-winning actor, a boy can still tell if they're getting to you. Absolutely that.

pdonis 4y ago

> self defense is not a defense in the eyes of public school administrators While this is true, it's also obviously wrong, and the fact that it's widespread in our society makes it even more wrong. Rather than try to expound that in more detail, I'll just reference a post by The Last Psychiatrist that does the job better than I could anyway: https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/10/one_way_our_schools_are_traini.html https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/10/one_way_our_schools_... The TL/DR is at the end: "[W]hat kind of school doesn't want a kid to stand up to a bully, especially when they're doing it to help someone else? What kind of crazy school wants you to back down-- and get someone else to protect you? What kind of school indoctrinates kids that power is only possessed by a) bad people; b) the state? Oh. All of them."

deathanatos 4y ago
> While this is true, it's also obviously wrong, and the fact that it's widespread in our society makes it even more wrong. Just to be clear: I don't agree with it. All I'm saying is that child-me understood that it wouldn't be a valid defense after the fact, i.e., that there would be consequences. That, of course, affects one's decision making. That article is very real, though. (But … and I get this gist from other comments on the thread: that article's example is a mild bully. But yeah, that's how public schools react, and how they inadvertently teach.)

s1artibartfast 4y ago

I certainly hope nobody's talking about going full enders game. I think most people are talking about giving as good as you get and proportionate response. Not being afraid to take a punch or get a black eye. If someone's talking about a real psychopath willing to break bones or with a weapon, the only real responses to run and any martial arts with class will teach you as much. Thick skin is just quiet suffering unless it is backed up with real confidence and an actual sense of self-worth. Unless you're an award-winning actor, a boy can still tell if they're getting to you.

deathanatos 4y ago
> I think most people are talking about giving as good as you get and proportionate response. The goal is change, i.e., to end the violence. That's the same motivation as Ender. (I shouldn't imply Enders-game levels of violence, sorry, I meant more the metaphor the book sets up: Ender ends the conflict, which is a mirror to his larger role in the plot.) My point is that, had I engaged in violence — I never did, but do I regret that decision? how should I advise a youth? IDK… — I'm not fighting to win that fight, I'm fighting to win all fights. (And, as I said in the original comment, I think the question of what the child should do is itself wrong. By the time a child is thinking whether violence will or won't solve the problem, the alleged adults in the room have already failed the child. It should never have gotten that far to begin with.) A number of commenters in this thread also seem to have the popular media trope of a bully as their impression, which is a fair bit watered down. As the paper states, > poor outcomes throughout the life span, including mental, physical and socioeconomic difficulties. "Throughout the life span". It has permanent, enduring effects, and I don't know that pixels on a screen capture the mental anguish bullies leave in their wake. > Thick skin is just quiet suffering unless it is backed up with real confidence and an actual sense of self-worth. That's a good way of putting it. Unfortunately, I think the years it takes to acquire that mean you're not going to have it until after it's too late. (Or more realistically, I think bullying set back a child acquiring that sense of self-confidence and self-worth.) > Unless you're an award-winning actor, a boy can still tell if they're getting to you. Absolutely that.