Bullying

[Coriolis]

Simple idea in this case : the parents work normally. No need to imitate traditional teaching with 2-hour sessions for each course. Just teach self-teaching and demand (I did mean demand and not ask) them to do some homework. The child will probably be willing to do it if he knows that's the only reasonable way to avoid bullying. I mean, many poor parents are able to tell their children "I wish I could give you more home comfort or better food or better toys, but we can't afford them". Children are not stupid. I think I'll teach my son economics before 7 because I think teaching these subjects at late teenage or early adulthood is a retarded thing to do. Most college-like things can be taught to children if prepared in the appropriate way.

Homeschooling may take only a hour a day for the parents.

Isolation shouldn't be feared too much. Online socialization is real socialization.

Most parents don't have the experience or resources to homeschool effectively, beyond the earliest grades. Younger children especially also cannot just be left at home alone. I know quite a few homeschoolers. Most of them subscribe to some online curriculum, which costs money and still needs parental supervision for the kids to follow through. This generally turns into Mom giving up her job to do this - another case of mothers solving society's problems for free.

I prefer to fix the public schools so they do the job we are all paying them to do already, through our tax dollars.

 

[Red Memories]

Most parents don't have the experience or resources to homeschool effectively, beyond the earliest grades. Younger children especially also cannot just be left at home alone. I know quite a few homeschoolers. Most of them subscribe to some online curriculum, which costs money and still needs parental supervision for the kids to follow through. This generally turns into Mom giving up her job to do this - another case of mothers solving society's problems for free.

I prefer to fix the public schools so they do the job we are all paying them to do already, through our tax dollars.

There is that...but I feel like I benefitted quite a bit from my homeschooling. At the same time, I don't know if I would've been homeschooled had my mother not experienced heavy bullying in her own experience and they felt the system would actually teach me.

But you speak honestly too. "Homeschooling" is often buying a curriculum to do at home and having the parent work with you.

 

[Coriolis]

There is that...but I feel like I benefitted quite a bit from my homeschooling. At the same time, I don't know if I would've been homeschooled had my mother not experienced heavy bullying in her own experience and they felt the system would actually teach me.

But you speak honestly too. "Homeschooling" is often buying a curriculum to do at home and having the parent work with you.

Homeschooling is a good solution for individual students in unusual circumstances, and parents should always have that option. It is not a systemic fix to the problems of public schools. When the families who are most invested in their children's education leave the public schools, as homeschoolers often are, it just makes improvement that much harder. When they homeschool for religious reasons, they are often just putting blinders on their children. Their right, but not in the best interests of the child, or the people that child will encounter as an adult.

 

[Frosty]

Homeschooling is a good solution for individual students in unusual circumstances, and parents should always have that option. It is not a systemic fix to the problems of public schools. When the families who are most invested in their children's education leave the public schools, as homeschoolers often are, it just makes improvement that much harder. When they homeschool for religious reasons, they are often just putting blinders on their children. Their right, but not in the best interests of the child, or the people that child will encounter as an adult.

Have you ever read the book “Educated” by Tara Westover?

I am currently a few chapters in and apparently its a pretty good memoir. Its basically about her childhood raised in a very religious family and her fight as an adult to claim an education for herself.

I havent gotten all the way through it, so I cannot recommend it yet. But apparently it is a very good book that cuts into these themes.

Bit of a derail I suppose tho from me here

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I was trying to use Ni last night to play with certain images that have archetypal resonance for me, and I hit on something interesting about broader social support for bullying, even by those who don't engage in it themselves. I remember a decent amount of authority figures essentially engaging in "victim blaming" when I was bullied; there was the underlying assumption that it was my fault somehow. And they never gave any practical steps or information about how I could make myself a target, it was all some vague judgement on my inner character as deficient, like I needed "to stop making myself helpless" or "not let people push my buttons." I can't help but think that in statements like that there was the judgement made that there must be some aspect of myself that made the bullying justified.

Obviously it should be clear to everyone now that there are a large percentage of American adults who see bullying as admirable behavior, at least if it isn't directed at them.

 

[FemMecha]

What is difficult about this issue is that people always feel justified when they bully. It results from distorted perceptions combined with punitive behaviors. When people stop trying to punish people for what they perceive they have done wrong, they cease to be bullies or in more extreme cases, abusers. The difference between constructive criticism and boundaries and bullying is that the bullying behavior serves the single purpose of attempting to inflict pain. It is not about informing, but about making someone feel helpless, lowered self-worth, or even fear. The bully gains a feeling of satisfaction from domination, control, and knowing someone they hate is suffering. Anyone who enjoys the suffering of others is a bully or abuser. Period.

Anyone who bullies can get help and change.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

What is difficult about this issue is that people always feel justified when they bully. It results from distorted perceptions combined with punitive behaviors. When people stop trying to punish people for what they perceive they have done wrong, they cease to be bullies or in more extreme cases, abusers. The difference between constructive criticism and boundaries and bullying is that the bullying behavior serves the single purpose of attempting to inflict pain. It is not about informing, but about making someone feel helpless, lowered self-worth, or even fear. The bully gains a feeling of satisfaction from domination, control, and knowing someone they hate is suffering. Anyone who enjoys the suffering of others is a bully or abuser. Period.

Anyone who bullies can get help and change.

I didn't watch this until now, but it rang true for me. I've certainly never found power structures reliable when it comes to anti-bullying; it doesn't surprise me that it's still the case.

 

[MarkSabier89]

For me, the school also became the very place where I was subjected to moral violence, less often physical. It's terrible and I don't understand why children are so cruel. I had enough life with my father, but the kids could add from above.

 

[Bacopa]

It's weird how kids that get bullied are usually the kids that don't tell their parents cause they have a bad relationship with them. Bullies look for those people who feel unloved in the first place.

 

[Coriolis]

It's weird how kids that get bullied are usually the kids that don't tell their parents cause they have a bad relationship with them. Bullies look for those people who feel unloved in the first place.

An interesting notion. I suppose kids who feel loved and secure at home will have more confidence to stand up to bullies, knowing that they will be supported at least in one area/setting of their life.

More generally, though (question directed at all readers): is it ever acceptable to bully someone? Are there ever circumstances in which someone is deserving of being bullied?

 

[yeghor]

An interesting notion. I suppose kids who feel loved and secure at home will have more confidence to stand up to bullies, knowing that they will be supported at least in one area/setting of their life.

More generally, though (question directed at all readers): is it ever acceptable to bully someone? Are there ever circumstances in which someone is deserving of being bullied?

No it is not. It is criminal activity.

"Bullying is the use of force, coercion, hurtful teasing or threat, to abuse, aggressively dominate or intimidate. The behavior is often repeated and habitual.

One essential prerequisite is the perception (by the bully or by others) of an imbalance of physical or social power. This imbalance distinguishes bullying from conflict.

Bullying is a subcategory of aggressive behavior characterized by the following three criteria: (1) hostile intent, (2) imbalance of power, and (3) repetition over a period of time.

Bullying is the activity of repeated, aggressive behavior intended to hurt another individual, physically, mentally, or emotionally."

 

[Lark]

An interesting notion. I suppose kids who feel loved and secure at home will have more confidence to stand up to bullies, knowing that they will be supported at least in one area/setting of their life.

More generally, though (question directed at all readers): is it ever acceptable to bully someone? Are there ever circumstances in which someone is deserving of being bullied?

I'd say no with a great deal of certainty but it would also require some defining of the terms.

I never knew a bully who wouldnt try and spin their behaviour in a "I'm the real victim here" way. Claim they were the injured party and only sticking up for themselves etc.

 

[Coriolis]

I'd say no with a great deal of certainty but it would also require some defining of the terms.

I never knew a bully who wouldnt try and spin their behaviour in a "I'm the real victim here" way. Claim they were the injured party and only sticking up for themselves etc.

You raise a good point here. I have certainly heard this kind of justification from people engaging in behavior that fits the definition of bullying. I wonder how often a bully really is an injured party who is just not going about addressing his own situation in the right (most productive) way, vs. just someone trying to justify his own bad behavior. I was taught growing up that bad behavior on someone else's part never justifies bad behavior from me, but this point of view is hardly universal.

No it is not. It is criminal activity.

"Bullying is the use of force, coercion, hurtful teasing or threat, to abuse, aggressively dominate or intimidate. The behavior is often repeated and habitual.

One essential prerequisite is the perception (by the bully or by others) of an imbalance of physical or social power. This imbalance distinguishes bullying from conflict.

Bullying is a subcategory of aggressive behavior characterized by the following three criteria: (1) hostile intent, (2) imbalance of power, and (3) repetition over a period of time.

Bullying is the activity of repeated, aggressive behavior intended to hurt another individual, physically, mentally, or emotionally."

To follow up with the idea of definitions, how essential is (2) here, namely the imbalance of power? Is it possible to bully someone who truly is a peer? I have seen bullying behavior that attempts to create a power imbalance, but that isn't the same as one that existed to begin with.

 

[FemMecha]

An interesting notion. I suppose kids who feel loved and secure at home will have more confidence to stand up to bullies, knowing that they will be supported at least in one area/setting of their life.

More generally, though (question directed at all readers): is it ever acceptable to bully someone? Are there ever circumstances in which someone is deserving of being bullied?

I'd say no but i think there is a group social dynamic that can bully as an attempt to modify and normalize the individual with the aberrant behavior. It happens in every social context to at least a mild degree. I don't generally trust that process. On an individual level pushing back against a bully requires some aggressiveness so that could be categorized various ways depending on degree and context. I go for fair fight one-on-one and not group conformity pressure.

 

[Lark]

I'd say no but i think there is a group social dynamic that can bully as an attempt to modify and normalize the individual with the aberrant behavior. It happens in every social context to at least a mild degree. I don't generally trust that process. On an individual level pushing back against a bully requires some aggressiveness so that could be categorized various ways depending on degree and context. I go for fair fight one-on-one and not group conformity pressure.

It depends on what the group conformity that's being discussed, I just have terrible visions of someone telling Ted Bundy to "just be yourself" once upon a time.

Groupthink can be a terrible thing, sure, and its rightly criticized but there's a sort that's fine too, all considered.

Plus, fair fights one-on-one? That's a bit romantic, isnt it?

 

[yeghor]

You raise a good point here. I have certainly heard this kind of justification from people engaging in behavior that fits the definition of bullying. I wonder how often a bully really is an injured party who is just not going about addressing his own situation in the right (most productive) way, vs. just someone trying to justify his own bad behavior. I was taught growing up that bad behavior on someone else's part never justifies bad behavior from me, but this point of view is hardly universal.


To follow up with the idea of definitions, how essential is (2) here, namely the imbalance of power? Is it possible to bully someone who truly is a peer? I have seen bullying behavior that attempts to create a power imbalance, but that isn't the same as one that existed to begin with.

I think imbalance of power is not a characteristic of the bullying act but is an environmental factor that enables it. That imbalance of power prevents the victim from thwarting back the bully or marks the individual as easy target for the bully.

When the bully becomes aware of the power level difference (it may be physical or social or legal etc.) he/she deliberately picks up on the target just for enjoyment.

So intent to harm for personal pleasure (sadism) and repetition (again sadism) are the actual identifiers whereas power level difference explains how the bully was able to inflict the bullying.

 

[EcK]

I think imbalance of power is not a characteristic of the bullying act but is an environmental factor that enables it. That imbalance of power prevents the victim from thwarting back the bully or marks the individual as easy target for the bully.

When the bully becomes aware of the power level difference (it may be physical or social or legal etc.) he/she deliberately picks up on the target just for enjoyment.

So intent to harm for personal pleasure (sadism) and repetition (again sadism) are the actual identifiers whereas power level difference explains how the bully was able to inflict the bullying.

Well that type of bully is not really the most proeminent today. I’d say nowadays it’s the weak / cowardly people with low real life status who tend to try and bully people they couldn’t stand up to in real life (because noone would take them seriously). So it’s a whole new dynamic.

 

[yeghor]

Well that type of bully is not really the most proeminent today. I’d say nowadays it’s the weak / cowardly people with low real life status who tend to try and bully people they couldn’t stand up to in real life (because noone would take them seriously). So it’s a whole new dynamic.

How do they do that?

 

[EcK]

How do they do that?

Lack of normal social cues as to relative social status online. No real repercutions and so on.

My point is that I dont think the core trigger is the power imbalance. It’s the lack of consequences.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'd say no but i think there is a group social dynamic that can bully as an attempt to modify and normalize the individual with the aberrant behavior. It happens in every social context to at least a mild degree. I don't generally trust that process. On an individual level pushing back against a bully requires some aggressiveness so that could be categorized various ways depending on degree and context. I go for fair fight one-on-one and not group conformity pressure.

Do you think consequences for speech constitute a bullying group social dynamic? In the situation of contemporary political topicality that much of this discussion is probably revolving around in an unspoken sense, I would say not necessarily. It can, for sure.

Much of it depends on context.

For instance, would any apology that would be made actually be accepted? Are there actual attempts made to help make the point of view more intelligible, or point someone to a source that could?

If not, I'd say it might be a form of bullying.

If however, those things are in fact the case, and the person claims to be bullied, I find that dubious. It seems like what they object to might in fact perhaps being held accountable for their own attempts at bullying. I think behavior that comes from a sense of entitlement regarding one's social position is something that should probably be changed, and if it requires group pressure to do so, so be it.

I certainly wouldn't say speaking to someone who revels in their lack of concern for political correctness in the same blunt fashion they employ is bullying. Nor would i say pointing out contradictions or the logical incoherency of an argument is bullying. This would be the case even if the contradictions were between past behavior and current words.