Post a picture, argue with me!

Redwing wrote:

I guess I just found it to be a weird data point. It's not a nit-pick or knock against the study either, I find it to be a really fascinating subject, I guess I just don't understand that particular point.

I've also noticed they don't necessarily say that this example of males using possessive language is a bad thing, so I'm just projecting my own morals on the data, but I think most people would agree with my assessment that it's probably not a positive data point with regard to male attitudes. I'd really like to know what the female alternative is, it looks to be proportional, so I don't think it can be explained as males doing the introducing more often.

I'm probably overthinking it!

I think it's weird too, and it does hint at misogyny in my brain. What I want is for it not to be that though, or at least to a good extent. That may not make me the best judge.

My wife has a habit of grabbing me and saying, "MINE." a lot, by the way. As a totally irrelevant data point.

My guess is that the women studied were talking about other people's husbands, wives, and significant others, while the men tended to only talk about their own. The most common replacements for the word "my" in "my girlfriend" is another possessive pronoun: "his", "your", "hers". I see it less as an indication of attitudes about possession and more an indicator of subject matter.

My newsfeed is a buffet of arguable images.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/MZvt9nD.jpg)

Seth wrote:

My newsfeed is a buffet of arguable images.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/MZvt9nD.jpg)

Heh? What does the image have to do with the message?

Actually, you can. My kids are growing up essentially bully-free. I did, as well. Bullying is a culture. It can be fought.

Created by someone who either was a bully, or has a bully child in jail.

If I were a Bluejay, I would TOTALLY bully a puffin.

I think? I think that's the message of the image?

On Reddit's /r/AdviceAnimals, it's "unpopular opinion puffin", used for unpopular opinion memes.

https://www.uta.edu/news/releases/20... at least one source thinks that if nothing else, we're currently doing it wrong, if what we were going for in implementing Anti-Bullying measures, was "effectiveness".

First of many studies, I'm sure.

EDIT:
Looks like he advocates something like martial law for kids:

Jeong and Lee suggested that schools should develop "more sophisticated" strategies that go beyond implementing preventive programs and move towards "systemic change within the schools," such as employing guards, using metal detectors or conducting bag and locker searches.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...

oddity wrote:

https://www.uta.edu/news/releases/20... at least one source thinks that if nothing else, we're currently doing it wrong, if what we were going for in implementing Anti-Bullying measures, was "effective".

First of many studies, I'm sure.

It should not be surprising that the places with bullying problems institute Anti-Bullying measures and places that do not, don't have them.

That's an excellent point.

There seems to have been a bit of a bandwagon effect with these programs, so there exists the possibility that if what he's saying is correct, they are creating a problem which previously did not exist, when instituted in environments where perhaps bullying had been nominal or effectively non-existent.

...I'm confused, are we really discussing whether or not there is bullying in a school... and whether or not laws should be implemented based on any perceived notion of the level of bullying in a school?

Frankly, I'd be willing to bet pretty much every school in America has bullying to some degree or another. Unless you have Ender's Game style monitor's in everyone's brain and can confirm nothing is happening somewhere... I'd say better to be safe than sorry and implement these kinds of laws everywhere... We don't limit drunk driving laws to only places with high profile drunk driving incidents, they're everywhere, regardless of the likelihood that people in a town will do it.

I love that your example of a school where bullying might be possible to eliminate is Ender's Game, where

Spoiler:

one student killed another student with his bare hands.

Yonder wrote:

I love that your example of a school where bullying might be possible to eliminate is Ender's Game, where

Spoiler:

one student killed another student with his bare hands.

I meant it more in the sense that, without that level of child surveillance, I would never be able to agree with any study/statement that says something along the lines of "Our school doesn't have bullies."

Not that the school in the book was in any way indicative of anything... just thinking of the monitor from the book, not the schools.

There's no such thing as bully culture!

BTW, Re: Ender's Game

Spoiler:

Ender killed two students with his bare hands, Stiltson and Bonzo.

sometimesdee wrote:

There's no such thing as bully culture!

BTW, Re: Ender's Game

Spoiler:

Ender killed two students with his bare hands, Stiltson and Bonzo.

Spoiler:

He only killed one when he had a monitor, and it was allowed. They wanted to see what he'd do.

LouZiffer wrote:
sometimesdee wrote:

There's no such thing as bully culture!

BTW, Re: Ender's Game

Spoiler:

Ender killed two students with his bare hands, Stiltson and Bonzo.

Spoiler:

He only killed one when he had a monitor, and it was allowed. They wanted to see what he'd do.

Spoiler:

He didn't have any (internal) monitor on for either of them. Stilson attacked them the very day Ender's monitor was removed. Mind you, it was a strictly monitored environment in other aspects.

You're right sometimes, dee. Which I suppose meant the monitor worked.

NERDS!

Quintin_Stone wrote:

NERDS!

Spoiler:

BULLY!

Nomad wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

NERDS!

Spoiler:

BULLY!

Seth wrote:

My newsfeed is a buffet of arguable images.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/MZvt9nD.jpg)

I'm enjoying the Escher-like logic of "society of victims" comments like the ones above are, effectively, saying "shut up and deal with it" as if that doesn't make someone a victim. People just love painting themselves as the martyrs, though, spouting "unpopular" or "common sense" approaches people "just don't like to hear."

Incidentally, saying stupid stuff and pre-emptively acting like everyone is going to argue because they just can't handle what you're saying kinda... sounds like you're making a victim of yourself.

Bullying to some degree probably exists in most schools. But what the study is pointing out, is that the methods currently being used seem to be escalating the the effectiveness of bullying and possibly even increasing its prevalence in locations where previously it had possibly been a minor issue: "nominal or effectively non-existent". It's a situation where potentially "We have to do something!!", equates essentially to 'anything is better than nothing'... and that is clearly not always the case.

There are some schools where no actual bullying is taking place, but still some students may feel intimidated by other students, even where the sources of intimidation are unaware that it's occurring. In situations like these, drawing attention to the power dynamics and such, would probably result in an upswing of negative activity, rather than negation of the effects of the unconscious intimidation.

It's interesting to note that one of his suggestions for a possibly more effective method of deterring bullying - onsite security, metal detectors, etc looked like this when his study was complete. "Our prediction that students in schools with more security measures would be less likely to be victimized was not supported by the study findings.". He goes on to theorize that still more security measures would likely result in the reduction in victimization that he was expecting. Which is probably true, but the costs of such may be prohibitive in many situations, for possibly not much benefit.

On a conceptual level, one way to undermine bully culture is to make it a point of honor for the most powerful kids to look after the least powerful on an ongoing basis. In other words, attach shame rather than glory on bully behavior. Make the mindset inclusive rather than exclusive.

The stand up to it school of bully remedies might make sense in the olden days when yours truly was growing up, when you could whack a guy in the nose to try to get him to stop, but how do you stand up to a bully on twitter or facebook? Bullying is for the most part, about a particular type of communication and when you can be communicated to almost always you can be bullied almost always. What if that bullying involves sexual abuse and/or a bad decision sexting? As adults, many eventually learn to ignore jerks, but I find it is harder for younger people to do that.

I feel like "just ignore them" doesn't work the way it used to on the Internet, either. Really not sure what the answer is, aside from the appeal to authority.

And that might be what makes both the "stand up to it" and "just ignore it" approaches work better IRL. Bullying someone following either approach has real consequences IRL if you get caught at it. Online, it seems like when someone is doing it flagrantly anybody "in charge" just shrugs and says "Eh, nothing we can do about it."

"Stand up to them" includes an aspect of Mutually Assured Destruction. The teacher (or whoever) may not care to figure out "who started it", but everybody involved is going to get some retribution. So there's a trade there of "accept punishment now, hopefully authorities will pay more attention later and bullies will back off and find an easier target". Without that chance of authority intervention, it's just the less powerful trying to fight back and continuing to get beat up.

"Just ignore them" includes an aspect of "eventually an authority will notice something's up, just endure it until then", and having the instigator be more obvious when it does come to light.

Bullying becomes a more serious problem when you can't rely on authorities to step in when they notice a problem (as has happened in U.S. schools, from what I've heard). Online, the assumption is that there are no authorities to step in at all. And at that point, it's open season on the powerless.

Seth wrote:

My newsfeed is a buffet of arguable images.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/MZvt9nD.jpg)

]

When I first read that I just replaced "Bullying" with "Rape" and was horrified. Would that be the message we send to rape victims? That we will never, ever get rid of it and they should cope?

f*ck that sh*t. Serioulsy I don't swear much on these boards (especially since I know it will censor it) but f*ck THAT sh*t.

Bullying is not some human requirement like breathing. It is a behavior which can be changed.

We have a whole thread about how your nightmare scenario is also known as "par for the course" in far too many western communities.

Seth wrote:

We have a whole thread about how your nightmare scenario is also known as "par for the course" in far too many western communities.

QFMFT.

IMAGE(http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/54619/large/TMW2013-10-31color.png?1382658064)