|
Post by mouse on Jul 25, 2009 13:48:02 GMT
So where do the parents come in? I have to seriously wonder, if the little bully-brat is under age, why the parents shouldn't bear some of the responsibility. as you say beth of course they should bear SOME of the responsibility and the school some of the blame parents..school..bully...AND some times the parent of the victim is also partly to blame ie a kid gets bullied for not being clean or havung a scruffy uniform etc ...then part of the blame is on the parents for not ensuring the victim is clean there are all sorts of factors and each case if different or has different roots
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jul 25, 2009 22:38:15 GMT
I'm not sure to what extent the parents are responsible here, but I think that if an underage child damages property, the parents can be made to pay for damages. Could be the school is responsible to some extent if the offense happened during school hours and on school property. Of course, an older child or teen should bear some responsibility, but if the parents are not brought into it at all, it seems to me that is remiss. Some parents encourage the bullying - not a guess, a fact.
|
|
|
Post by Alpha Hooligan on Jul 31, 2009 10:53:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Jul 31, 2009 23:34:16 GMT
I think your [ironic] words are right. Alpha, but the reading is the wrong way round. Sneaks are not allowed. It's a total hypocrisy that teaches children from the earliest age that they must be their own vigilantes while knowing that they will be punished for being vigilantes. Racism is the exception. As long as you can show 'racism', you are exempt from the traditional rule of don't come snivelling, stand up for yourself and accept our punishment for doing so.
True, in the long run, the problem bullies have may be more important to solve than the problems they cause, but the real solution is the social engineering that would prevent those problems from developing at all. 'Violence begets violence' and all that. True, but it all depends on circumstances and 'culture'. Running away can 'beget' violence and 'bullying' too. Standing up can 'beget' violence - but among a certain kind of the violent it can also beget respect. Things are never as simple as social worker graduate women like to imagine from their background of no experience or understanding whatsoever of the people they are dealing with.
I met an old acquaintance in the 1980s, who after jail and the Royal Navy had gone into the London Probation Service and cut some ice with aspirant thugs because he had done time for shooting his father (if by ricochet), because he'd stuck the Navy and because he'd come out of that macho environment to do a wimp job like Probation Officer because he'd seen the sad old men those stupid kids admired incapable of running a life without a warder to direct them with time off to buy drugs and sex to take their mind off being total social inadequates. So you want to die in jail or thrown out to a pension with the only 'friends' you have ever known, those you could buy when you can't buy them now?
Why do we use this schoolchild word 'bullying' when we mean intimidation and violence? 'Bullying' is a sort of not so bad, just schooly stuff term. We could say the Nazis 'bullied' Jews and Romany and Communists and Homosexuals. Doesn't sound so bad then. So let's first replace this PC euphemism 'bullying' with the reality of 'intimidation, threat, 'protection racket', violence, hatred'.
|
|
|
Post by Alpha Hooligan on Aug 1, 2009 12:20:31 GMT
You make several good points here.
AH
|
|