Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#41

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #40
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Linking to six websites on the general subject of bullying is hardly a well-reasoned presentation of research and evidence to support an argument. In addition, several of these websites specifically contradict the advice of the author and encourage kids to stand up for themselves in the face of bullying. 2. The average reader is unlikely to conduct a PubMed search for research and scholarly works related to the su…

The article didn't appear in The Guardian. You misread my comment. I don't understand where you think this argument is going to take you. Whatever critiques you may have of the way Kazdin has boiled down the huge volumes of research on this topic for a Slate article, he's not a reporter. He's the president of the American Psychological Association, a professor at Yale, and the director of the Yale Parenting Center; h…

[deleted]

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#42

Post by fauigerzigerk »

philwelch wrote: post #20
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #17

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 auth…

"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. P…

I think you are wrong, but I guess we'll need some statistics to resolve that one.

However, the point I was trying to make has nothing to do with the share of nerds among the victims. The point is that it's unnecessary to select particularly weak people because anyone targeted by a determined group of bullies becomes weak and most of the time there's no way to turn the situation around.

It's a mistake to think that anyone could be strong enough to do that, nerd or not.

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#43

Post by fauigerzigerk »

sethg wrote: post #25
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #17

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 auth…

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.

There are way too many witnesses for that argument to hold water. Usually everyone knows who is being bullied and who is doing the bullying.

When confronted the bullies will present a long list of reasons why the victim deserves to be a victim. Of course violent attacks are kept semi private if you can call it that considering those "happy slapping" pics that are being posted on the internet and sent to people's phones en-masse.

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#44

Post by philwelch »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #42
philwelch wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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. P…

I think you are wrong, but I guess we'll need some statistics to resolve that one. However, the point I was trying to make has nothing to do with the share of nerds among the victims. The point is that it's unnecessary to select particularly weak people because anyone targeted by a determined group of bullies becomes weak and most of the time there's no way to turn the situation around. It's a mistake to think that a…

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people? No. But here's your assertion:

People who become victims are completely random.

They're not. People who are gang members don't get bullied in prison because the other members of their gang will retaliate. Popular kids don't get bullied in school because their friends will retaliate. And while smaller kids may be weaker targets than bigger kids, nerds or white prisoners are usually bullied because the bullies don't like them.

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#45

Post by berntb »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #37
berntb wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assumed that you quoted a point from the article: Anecdotal experience isn't proof of statistical relatedness. Edit: And about the GP's claim that the author's being incompetent and writing unfounded advice. Check their jobs at the end of the article. (They might be incompetent and/or wrong, but they will certainly have lots of relevant data in published papers!)

I never said anything about them being incompetent. And publishing data in other unrelated (and unreferenced) publications doesn't make an argument unfounded. They didn't support this claim in this article, either directly or indirectly by clearly linking to relevant studies or research.

I took the term "hollow and completely unfounded advice" as "incompetent", since TFA was written by absurdly competent academics -- in their area.

I'm sorry if it upsets you that they didn't give enough references for your taste, to evaluate your anecdotal experiences.

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#46

Post by inovica »

kingkawn wrote: post #12

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

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#47

Post by fauigerzigerk »

philwelch wrote: post #44
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are wrong, but I guess we'll need some statistics to resolve that one. However, the point I was trying to make has nothing to do with the share of nerds among the victims. The point is that it's unnecessary to select particularly weak people because anyone targeted by a determined group of bullies becomes weak and most of the time there's no way to turn the situation around. It's a mistake to think that a…

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people? No. But here's your assertion: People who become victims are completely random. They're not. People who are gang members don't get bullied in prison because the other members of their gang will retaliate. Popular kids don't get bullied in school because their friends will retaliate. And while smaller kids may be weaker targets than big…

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people?

Yes you did. Nerdy, unpopular with poor social skills, that's what I would call weak in exactly the social sense that's relevant here.

If you bothered to research this matter you would be surprised how much what you are saying is a cliche.

I'll concede, though, that the victims are probably not completely random in a formal statistical sense.

[Edit:] Sorry, our posts crossed. I didn't mean to change mine while you were replying

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#48

Post by philwelch »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #47
philwelch wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people? No. But here's your assertion: People who become victims are completely random. They're not. People who are gang members don't get bullied in prison because the other members of their gang will retaliate. Popular kids don't get bullied in school because their friends will retaliate. And while smaller kids may be weaker targets than big…

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people? Yes you did. Nerdy, unpopular with poor social skills, that's what I would call weak in exactly the social sense that's relevant here. If you bothered to research this matter you would be surprised how much what you are saying is a cliche. I'll concede, though, that the victims are probably not completely random in a formal statistical…

"there is a much broader group of people who become victims than most people think"

True, but if that was your point why didn't you just say it in the first place? In any social context that has bullies, the bullies predominantly belong to some social subgroups, and predominately victimize other social subgroups. Don't make it sound like you're disputing that fact when you're saying something much more mundane and agreeable.

"that's what I would call weak in exactly the social sense that's relevant here"

Sorry, I thought you meant weak in the sense of "less able to put up a fight".

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#49

Post by fauigerzigerk »

philwelch wrote: post #48
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I ever say nerdy schoolboys and white prisoners were particularly weak people? Yes you did. Nerdy, unpopular with poor social skills, that's what I would call weak in exactly the social sense that's relevant here. If you bothered to research this matter you would be surprised how much what you are saying is a cliche. I'll concede, though, that the victims are probably not completely random in a formal statistical…

"there is a much broader group of people who become victims than most people think" True, but if that was your point why didn't you just say it in the first place? In any social context that has bullies, the bullies predominantly belong to some social subgroups, and predominately victimize other social subgroups. Don't make it sound like you're disputing that fact when you're saying something much more mundane and ag…

I did say it in the first place but "completely random" was a bit of an exaggeration (even though part of it is really chance). What I dispute is that popular, strong, successful, socializing people never become victims or that they can turn the situation around (short of joining a gang maybe).

They may have friends, but not, for instance, at that new workplace or at that new school. In many cases it's not the victims' character that makes them vulnerable.

Re: Bullies can be stopped, but it takes a village

#50

Post by sethg »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #43
sethg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are way too many witnesses for that argument to hold water. Usually everyone knows who is being bullied and who is doing the bullying. When confronted the bullies will present a long list of reasons why the victim deserves to be a victim. Of course violent attacks are kept semi private if you can call it that considering those "happy slapping" pics that are being posted on the internet and sent to people's phon…

Of course everyone knows, but if the people who actually witness the offense aren't willing to come forward (because they think that the victim deserved it or because they want to stand with a fellow student against Authority, or whatever), then standard disciplinary processes can't do anything.

The analogous adult case is when a crime syndicate or a terrorist organization assassinates one of its enemies in broad daylight in the middle of a crowded street, and the police can't find anyone to testify that they witnessed the hit. If you don't change the priorities of the bystanders, you can't change anything else.

Post reply on HN