The author isn't even really making the argument that this won't be effective, but just that your kid won't do it: One hallmark of a bully is a sophisticated a

The author isn't even really making the argument that this won't be effective, but just that your kid won't do it: One hallmark of a bully is a sophisticated ability to pick victims who won't put up a fight. When you urge your child to stand up to a bully, you're asking him to do something that the bully already figured out he was unlikely to do. That's why the bully picked him in the first place. Bullies tend to choose victims who are socially withdrawn, seem anxious or fearful, are nervous in new situations, or have some physical characteristic that might make them more vulnerable. What makes me angry is that the author is essentially arguing that the kid should continue to be vulnerable and passive, rather than stand up for themselves. If bullies tend to pick on people who are unlikely to fight back, you should fight back so they'll move on to an easier target. Analogy: this is like saying that you shouldn't advise someone whose website just got hacked to secure their app, because they got hacked because they didn't follow proper security protocol, and are therefore unlikely to follow your advice.