Sorry, but this article is total bullshit. Here's why:
They list four possible responses to your child being bullied, including standing up to the bully, ignoring and avoiding the bully, involving the parents of the bully, or involving the teacher/school. They state that these are all likely to be ineffective.
That said, their problem with kids standing up to bullies isn't that it's ineffective, though they paint it that way, but rather that your kid probably won't do so if you tell them to, because if they had the guts to do so, they wouldn't be targets of bullying in the first place.
Their preferred "solution" is to have a conversation with the child and brainstorm ideas and strategies, which essentially come down to: a) avoiding the bully, b) involving the teachers and school. So essentially a mix of two of the strategies they discounted at the beginning of the article.
No evidence or data is presented to back up any of the points. The author even invokes mockery of readers with evidence (albeit anecdotal) that standing up to bullies works.
Feels like we're teaching these kids victimhood and to look to someone else to get them out of a rough spot, instead of having enough confidence and self-respect to stand up for themselves.
Whatever else you may have to say about how this is "total bullshit", this article isn't the standard half-educated reporter writing whatever comes in their head for The Guardian. Alan Kazdin has more scholar hits in his field than anyone commenting here has for theirs.
You're right that there's not a lot of data in the article that backs up his point, but you'll be wrong if you follow that logic to the conclusion you seem to want to take it to.
The key to the solution is for the kid to come up with something. You want the kid to feel some power over the situation, some ability to help themselves and change the context, so they no longer fit the victim profile anymore.
The last paragraph links to a sidebar full of sites with more information and research.
The time-honored assumption is that if your child cleans a bully's clock once...he'll leave your child alone. It would be nice if life worked this way...but it usually doesn't.
This is inconsistent with my personal experience. I would like to know how the author drew this conclusion. Granted I might be a special case. For my size (small) I have always been quite strong/athletic. For my general demeanor (sweet/calm) I have always had the capacity for fearless action and rage even when provoked. And despite being generally peaceful and nonviolent I had martial-arts training from a very young age. I also knew I'd never get into trouble with my parents for "finising" a fight. (Though starting one would be a different matter.) (I've never started a physical fight in my entire life.)
In my experience a bully would start by pushing or shoving or punching the shoulder. Nothing particularly vicious. But a vicious response (bloody or broken nose, black eye) solved the problem quite fast.
These tactics worked well in the urban scruff in and around Boston where I grew up in the 80s and 90s. Fights were always one-on-one matters (relative to a gang attack, multiple-on-one). I don't know if this works in a gang-type situation.
The author pre-discounts my data-point. Which I think is a bogus tactic. I'd like to see his data. I admit mine is anecdotal. I bet his is too.
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.
>> I'd like to see [the author's] data. I admit mine is anecdotal. I bet his is too.
Sigh, just Google his name: www.yale.edu/psychology/FacInfo/Kazdin.html
Edit: I am also stupid. :-) Just check the end of the article.
"Alan E. Kazdin, who was president of the American Psychological Association in 2008, is John M. Musser professor of psychology and child psychiatry at Yale University and director of Yale's Parenting Center and Child Conduct Clinic. Carlo Rotella is director of American studies at Boston College."
Many of the commenters here seem not to understand the setup: when a bullying "relationship" has been established, it already has become a difficult issue.
Standing up against a bully works - but only when it is a fair show of balance of power. Let it be sophisticated or vulgar. If this doesn't happen very soon after supposed bullying starts, it is probably not going to happen. And if the resistance works, where is the bullying here?
It can be observed that even in this flow of comments it is not seen that a shy kid is entitled to life without bullying. By not cutting off the bullying, you're raising the shy kid into accepting that yeah, he truely is a victim, and nothing can be done. It's a jungle, live with it. "Civilization" is just a word, "justice" is a joke, and "human rights" just an invention of a twisted mind. The only way left to put things back in balance for a tormented kid is by getting a gun and showing everybody the exact reason why everybody should have some kind of elementary respect to each other.
People, kids, do have different temperaments. The mind is not tabula rasa. You can't tell a shy kid "stand up and show them" and expect it to happen or have any effect.
It is completely useless to offer solutions which apply only to those who don't really have problems.
That's a very strange account of how bullying works. The impression I get from what people tell me and situations I have witnessed is that the lonely male bully described here is a very rare exception.
The typical situation is a group of people led by a smaller sub-group acting against an individual in pretty obvious ways. The victim is sidelined and ridiculed openly so everybody knows. Teachers always know.
The authors describe the bully as some kind of genius who always selects the right victims and always chooses occasions wisely. That's complete nonsense.
People who become victims are completely random. Take any closed situation where people can't leave at will, like schools, military camps, prisons, the workplace, and anyone can be made a victim. No need for the bullies to choose wisely.
There's just no way anyone can defend himself against a socially dominant group who decides to bully them. The only right way to react is to leave instantly. Victims can be harmed for life if left in a situation like that. That's what I learned from someone very close to me who was a victim of bullying and researched the whole thing extensively later.
If you have kids who are being bullied, just take them away from the bullies immediately!
"People who become victims are completely random. Take any closed situation where people can't leave at will, like schools, military camps, prisons, the workplace, and anyone can be made a victim. No need for the bullies to choose wisely."
This is patently untrue: it's always some particular subgroup that's bullied. School bullies usually target smaller kids, "nerdy" kids, or unpopular kids with poor social skills. Prison bullies usually target small, young, white prisoners who are not members of prison gangs.
I don't think the authors are claiming that bullies are geniuses. You don't need to be a genius to know who you can get away with bullying. You just need to know that if you abuse X then the only people who might witness the abuse are people who are highly unlikely to snitch.
Not saying everyone can do this, but; My grade school friend was being bullied. He asked people's advice on what to do, they said 'don't be violent, just talk to an adult, talk to your parents, and they'll help you resolve this.' He went to his mother, she told him to beat the kid up or learn to live with being treated like shit. He beat up both the kid and his friends by himself. I still laugh thinking about it.
Great story but it doesn't work for everyone. I actually took this approach and because I was big enough it worked. My own child has a different temperament to me and would not do this. The child who goes up against the bully and loses, ends up being deeper in the cycle of bullying because he feels powerless. I don't have an answer - as everyone is different - I'm just pointing out that the above only works for some people
Well, I've never been bullied, but if an adult "bullied" me (as an adult) in any serious way, I would refer him to the police within a matter of minutes. This is the proper solution. Any assault on a child should be dealt with legally, and if it means moving a thug to a reform school, then all the better.
Applying adult standards to child behavior is so fraught with flaws, I don't even know where to begin.
Suffice it to say that, with near universal applicability, all human societies throughout recorded history have made clear distinctions between the boundaries of acceptable social behavior (and punishments for breaching these boundaries) for children and adults.
There's also quite a large accumulated body of modern scientific measurements which suggests that children and early teenagers lack the sufficiently streamlined cerebral pathways (pre-puberty) which would allow them to make the social judgment calls and impulse control to both avoid being a bully and/or a bullied victim. In both roles, they can not balance the short-term costs against the long-term consequences.
You also make a gross assumption about the training and responsiveness of a local police force to situations involving minors in the custody of a school. Baring extreme violence, a history of criminal behavior, or property damage, in most municipalities, this is the fiduciary responsibility of the public school district. For private institutions, a specific set of liability clauses and insurance is part of the enrollment contract.
Like prison guards, school authorities and the police won't protect anyone from bullies. So, just as if you were in prison, you have to respond to bullies yourself.
My son put a quick halt to a bullying situation by responding in kind. Luckily the school was enlightened enough to consider the matter closed at that point.
It's been a while since I was in school, but I haven't been out so long that I'd be naive enough to think that a child whose parent is leading a school-wide crusade against bullying would be LESS of a target for bullies.
ISTM that if you're in a school where not-bullying is seen as the crusade of one individual parent, rather than an issue that a group of concerned parents and teachers are working on together, then the school culture already has serious problems.
How hard might it be to catch a bully in the act with a hidden mike or a friend with a cellphone or some such? That sort of thing was completely impractical in my day -- I'm not sure what tools kids have now.
I suppose it's worth trying, although the victim may not be so keen on having his or her own victimization recorded for posterity.
I have also heard that among girls, one common form of bullying these days is to pretend to be the victim's friend long enough to get some embarrassing confidential information, and then spread that information around. Modern technology makes that kind of sting a lot easier.
[+] [-] ryanwaggoner|16 years ago|reply
They list four possible responses to your child being bullied, including standing up to the bully, ignoring and avoiding the bully, involving the parents of the bully, or involving the teacher/school. They state that these are all likely to be ineffective.
That said, their problem with kids standing up to bullies isn't that it's ineffective, though they paint it that way, but rather that your kid probably won't do so if you tell them to, because if they had the guts to do so, they wouldn't be targets of bullying in the first place.
Their preferred "solution" is to have a conversation with the child and brainstorm ideas and strategies, which essentially come down to: a) avoiding the bully, b) involving the teachers and school. So essentially a mix of two of the strategies they discounted at the beginning of the article.
No evidence or data is presented to back up any of the points. The author even invokes mockery of readers with evidence (albeit anecdotal) that standing up to bullies works.
Feels like we're teaching these kids victimhood and to look to someone else to get them out of a rough spot, instead of having enough confidence and self-respect to stand up for themselves.
[+] [-] tptacek|16 years ago|reply
You're right that there's not a lot of data in the article that backs up his point, but you'll be wrong if you follow that logic to the conclusion you seem to want to take it to.
[+] [-] pchristensen|16 years ago|reply
The last paragraph links to a sidebar full of sites with more information and research.
[+] [-] mdakin|16 years ago|reply
This is inconsistent with my personal experience. I would like to know how the author drew this conclusion. Granted I might be a special case. For my size (small) I have always been quite strong/athletic. For my general demeanor (sweet/calm) I have always had the capacity for fearless action and rage even when provoked. And despite being generally peaceful and nonviolent I had martial-arts training from a very young age. I also knew I'd never get into trouble with my parents for "finising" a fight. (Though starting one would be a different matter.) (I've never started a physical fight in my entire life.)
In my experience a bully would start by pushing or shoving or punching the shoulder. Nothing particularly vicious. But a vicious response (bloody or broken nose, black eye) solved the problem quite fast.
These tactics worked well in the urban scruff in and around Boston where I grew up in the 80s and 90s. Fights were always one-on-one matters (relative to a gang attack, multiple-on-one). I don't know if this works in a gang-type situation.
The author pre-discounts my data-point. Which I think is a bogus tactic. I'd like to see his data. I admit mine is anecdotal. I bet his is too.
[+] [-] ryanwaggoner|16 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] berntb|16 years ago|reply
Sigh, just Google his name: www.yale.edu/psychology/FacInfo/Kazdin.html
Edit: I am also stupid. :-) Just check the end of the article.
"Alan E. Kazdin, who was president of the American Psychological Association in 2008, is John M. Musser professor of psychology and child psychiatry at Yale University and director of Yale's Parenting Center and Child Conduct Clinic. Carlo Rotella is director of American studies at Boston College."
[+] [-] talvisota|16 years ago|reply
Standing up against a bully works - but only when it is a fair show of balance of power. Let it be sophisticated or vulgar. If this doesn't happen very soon after supposed bullying starts, it is probably not going to happen. And if the resistance works, where is the bullying here?
It can be observed that even in this flow of comments it is not seen that a shy kid is entitled to life without bullying. By not cutting off the bullying, you're raising the shy kid into accepting that yeah, he truely is a victim, and nothing can be done. It's a jungle, live with it. "Civilization" is just a word, "justice" is a joke, and "human rights" just an invention of a twisted mind. The only way left to put things back in balance for a tormented kid is by getting a gun and showing everybody the exact reason why everybody should have some kind of elementary respect to each other.
People, kids, do have different temperaments. The mind is not tabula rasa. You can't tell a shy kid "stand up and show them" and expect it to happen or have any effect.
It is completely useless to offer solutions which apply only to those who don't really have problems.
[+] [-] fauigerzigerk|16 years ago|reply
The typical situation is a group of people led by a smaller sub-group acting against an individual in pretty obvious ways. The victim is sidelined and ridiculed openly so everybody knows. Teachers always know.
The authors describe the bully as some kind of genius who always selects the right victims and always chooses occasions wisely. That's complete nonsense.
People who become victims are completely random. Take any closed situation where people can't leave at will, like schools, military camps, prisons, the workplace, and anyone can be made a victim. No need for the bullies to choose wisely.
There's just no way anyone can defend himself against a socially dominant group who decides to bully them. The only right way to react is to leave instantly. Victims can be harmed for life if left in a situation like that. That's what I learned from someone very close to me who was a victim of bullying and researched the whole thing extensively later.
If you have kids who are being bullied, just take them away from the bullies immediately!
[+] [-] philwelch|16 years ago|reply
This is patently untrue: it's always some particular subgroup that's bullied. School bullies usually target smaller kids, "nerdy" kids, or unpopular kids with poor social skills. Prison bullies usually target small, young, white prisoners who are not members of prison gangs.
[+] [-] sethg|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kingkawn|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] inovica|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pchristensen|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mynameishere|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bonsaitree|16 years ago|reply
Suffice it to say that, with near universal applicability, all human societies throughout recorded history have made clear distinctions between the boundaries of acceptable social behavior (and punishments for breaching these boundaries) for children and adults.
There's also quite a large accumulated body of modern scientific measurements which suggests that children and early teenagers lack the sufficiently streamlined cerebral pathways (pre-puberty) which would allow them to make the social judgment calls and impulse control to both avoid being a bully and/or a bullied victim. In both roles, they can not balance the short-term costs against the long-term consequences.
You also make a gross assumption about the training and responsiveness of a local police force to situations involving minors in the custody of a school. Baring extreme violence, a history of criminal behavior, or property damage, in most municipalities, this is the fiduciary responsibility of the public school district. For private institutions, a specific set of liability clauses and insurance is part of the enrollment contract.
[+] [-] bobdole2695|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] philwelch|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ams6110|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] barrkel|16 years ago|reply
> Some readers will now be eager to share stirring success stories that prove standing up to a bully really does work
[+] [-] imgabe|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sethg|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] abecedarius|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sethg|16 years ago|reply
I have also heard that among girls, one common form of bullying these days is to pretend to be the victim's friend long enough to get some embarrassing confidential information, and then spread that information around. Modern technology makes that kind of sting a lot easier.