Bullying overweight children

[Paracelsus]

Via Yahoo! News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070712/ap_on_he_me/diet_fat_children;_ylt=Ao.ZVXqLdnT78gdYamHH_PGISbY F

Overweight children are stigmatized by their peers as early as age 3 and even face bias from their parents and teachers, giving them a quality of life comparable to people with cancer, a new analysis concludes. Children as young as 3 are more likely to consider overweight peers to be mean, stupid, ugly and sloppy.

A growing body of research shows that parents and educators are also biased against heavy children. In a 1999 study of 115 middle and high school teachers, 20 percent said they believed obese people are untidy, less likely to succeed and more emotional.

Horrible! I have always thought that parents and the public school system do not do enough to prevent or punish bullying; this simply is a reflection of our society's 'blame the victim' mentality when it comes to bullying and harassment. The worst part of this whole sorry tale is that the adults are joining in! :mad:

[01101001]

Yep. I liked it better in the olden days when there weren't no bullies.

[Nick]

In my day [circa 1960's] all the bullies were fat kids picking on [me] skinny kids... what goes around comes around, I suppose.

Nick

[Jeff Root]

I thought the big problem is "no-fault" handling of disagreements.
When the 180-pound kid takes something away from the 100-pound
kid and the 100-pound kid complains, they both get the same
dressing-down from The Man.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[BigDon]

What! This is new?! Or even news?

Let me tell you the sad story of Dave G. In Junior High school 7th grade he weighed 360 pounds. (I was there at the football weigh in) He was physically round. But he was a trooper. He was known as "Tuba" his entire school life. Every Friday we had a graded mile run. Now mind he took longer than everybody else but he finished everytime. Unlike a lot of kids who were a lot less than half his wieght.

One day almost the entire class recoiled when Dave came in about 4 minutes before the end of the period and asked the coach what his time was and the coach said, "I don't know, I don't have a calender". Which was unfair because he was also the coach of the football team and Dave was his star center. No other 7th grader could get past him. (The coachs had a policy of stopping the timing after 20 minutes. Dave almost always got an exception)

We just lost him last year at the age of 46.

[Paracelsus]

I agree that this is not something new, BigDon, but it has gone under the radar. This study spells it out explicitly, which makes it harder to ignore or sweep under the rug. :)

I'm sorry to hear of your loss. :(

[hawaii50girl]

Back when I was in ninth grade my gym teacher didn't like me because of my weight and I had to get out of the class because I throught that it was unfair of for her to pick on me. I had to write a paper and go to the fitness center and walk around the track to get credit and to pass the class.

[snarkophilus]

I subscribe to the Calvin and Hobbes philosophy: being miserable builds character.

Anyway, I don't put much stock in that article. Kids get picked on for all reasons... too fat, too thin, too tall, too short, too dumb, too smart.... You need to compare those to see if the weight thing really is significant, or if it's just a fancy way of saying "sometimes, people pick on other people."

Youngsters who report teasing, rejection, bullying and other types of abuse because of their weight are two to three times more likely to report suicidal thoughts as well as to suffer from other health issues such as high blood pressure and eating disorders, researchers said.

What about those who report teasing/bullying for other reasons? Two to three times more likely as what? And do the blood pressure and eating disorders have any relationship to the social bias, or are they effects or causes of being overweight?

[Noclevername]

Bullies are bullies. They'll always find a weakness.

[Ilya]

I subscribe to the Calvin and Hobbes philosophy: being miserable builds character.

In my experience, being miserable only builds character if you find strength/resources to overcome whatever makes you miserable. If you don't, then being miserable only grinds you down.

[Ronald Brak]

Personally I find things have improved a lot with regards to bullying. When I was a kid if you got beat up by other kids and complained about it to an adult they'd beat you for losing. As long as there wasn't hospitalization or much blood involved, children could pretty much beat up other children if they wanted. But last year there was a child hitting another child at the beach and people called the police and the police actually came and dealt with the problem seriously instead of just laughing at the callers. It was really weird. And good.

[RalofTyr]

In my day, the dinosaurs ate the fat kids.

[Paracelsus]

In my day, the dinosaurs ate the fat kids.

ROFLMAO!!

You made me spit out my coffee from laughing so hard! :lol:

[Jeff Root]

In my day, the dinosaurs ate the fat kids.
I'd forgotten about that. I think that stopped when I was in
kindergarten or first grade. Then it took a year or two for the
fat kids to grow back to the point where they became more
of a nuisance than the dinosaurs.

-- Jeff, in absentia

[Paracelsus]

I'd forgotten about that. I think that stopped when I was in
kindergarten or first grade. Then it took a year or two for the
fat kids to grow back to the point where they became more
of a nuisance than the dinosaurs.

-- Jeff, in absentia

How were they a nuisance? :confused:

Or were you making a joke?

[Josh]

For some reason, I thought that when I opened this thread I was going to read a bunch of reasons for why bullying fat kids is good for them because it'll make them lose weight (through stress, or trying to run away ... whatever). I'm very disappointed.

When I was at school (maybe 7 or 8) I made a joke about another kid being fat ... I made the joke .. and then he sat on me and wouldn't let me up. I think that was fair.

[farmerjumperdon]

I agree that this is not something new, BigDon, but it has gone under the radar. This study spells it out explicitly, which makes it harder to ignore or sweep under the rug. :)

I'm sorry to hear of your loss. :(

Under who's radar?

Been going on at least since I was in junior high (40 years ago) and a person would have to be living in a social and cultural vacumm to not be aware of it.

Obese people just happen to often be a target; one of many. Mean kids are mean, if it weren't the obese kid it would be the littlest kids, or the chess club nerds, or those outcast for any number of reasons.

My primary sympathy goes out to their unhealthy condition. The chances of "losing" them early is so greatly increased that it is unconscionable that parents let the obesity happen to begin with.

I'd agree that it gets swept under the rug though. The administrators and teachers too often turn a blind eye.

[mugaliens]

Via Yahoo! News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070712/ap_on_he_me/diet_fat_children;_ylt=Ao.ZVXqLdnT78gdYamHH_PGISbY F



Horrible! I have always thought that parents and the public school system do not do enough to prevent or punish bullying; this simply is a reflection of our society's 'blame the victim' mentality when it comes to bullying and harassment. The worst part of this whole sorry tale is that the adults are joining in! :mad:

I think I hear what you're saying, and wonder when being the "victem" of a prevantable and correctable condition become acceptable. The victem role is defeatist before events happen, as clearly explained in the Karpman Emotional Triangle (http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=229), particularly the part about how "The Drama Triangle is centered on the role of the Victim, which Karpman depicted by placing that role as the bottom point of the triangle."

When someone lifts your wallet, you're a victem. When they get away with a thousand bucks because you foolishly carried that much in this era of credit cards and cashier's checks, that's not being a victem. That's simply foolishness. So is overeating, underexercising, and parental negligence which allows both in one's offspring.

[Ronald Brak]

I'm afraid our bodies just aren't made to live in developed nations world of plenty. Genes that would normally help us survive become a hazard in a world that contains double fudge sundays. Personally I'd like to see most junk foods come with a large lable that reads:

WARNING - This food contains little or no nutritional value. Eating more than a small portion of this food is hazardous to your health.

Then if the company improves the quality of the food to meet some minimal standards it could change the lable to:

This food is of low nutritional value. Consuption should be limited in the interests of maintaining health.

This should both educate people about what they are eating and encourage companies to improve the quality of the food they sell.

[Ronald Brak]

When someone lifts your wallet, you're a victem. When they get away with a thousand bucks because you foolishly carried that much in this era of credit cards and cashier's checks, that's not being a victem. That's simply foolishness. So is overeating, underexercising, and parental negligence which allows both in one's offspring.

If someone picks your pocket you are a victim of a crime. It doesn't matter if there were five cents or five thousand dollars in it. Maybe it's foolish to carry five thousand dollars in your wallet, but that's a seperate matter, a crime with a perpertrator and a victim still has been comitted.

If you are fat you are fat. If someone flicks you with towel because you are fat then you are a victim of being flicked with a towel. Being fat, even if you intentionally became fat by gorgeing yourself on buckets of lard because you thought it would help you win the Miss Wales beauty contest does not change this.

[mugaliens]

If you are fat you are fat. If someone flicks you with towel because you are fat then you are a victim of being flicked with a towel. Being fat, even if you intentionally became fat by gorgeing yourself on buckets of lard because you thought it would help you win the Miss Wales beauty contest does not change this.

I see. So if you choose to run headlong into a brick wall, inviting the resulting newtonian reaction, you're a "victem" of physics, just as if you choose to eat too much, inviting obesity and the resulting sociological reaction, you're a "victem" of social dynamics.

Society simply is. No single individual has the power to change it (and even large groups will exert extraordinarily immense amounts of effort towards changing it).

Granted, there are societal issues we can and should address. However, when it comes to most issues, it's far wiser to accept society for where it's at, and spend one's energy switching to healthy fruits and vegetables, going for extended walks, etc. Far more relaxing and cardiovascularly healthy, too.

By doing so we remove ourselves from the "victem" role, remove ourselves from the Karpman triangle (all positions of which are unhealthy), and take responsibility for that about ourselves which we can, and should change.

By the way, Rondald - I did like your proposed food labels. Given the history of similar labels on cigarettes, I believe it'll take that and a very concerted effort on the part of everyone to re-educate society to change their eating habits. Again, not sure if it's worth the effort - better to simply focus on one's own health while setting and enforcing the consequences of unhealthy lifestyles (like more proportionate health insurance rates).

[mugaliens]

Addendum: In the Karpman Emotional Triangle (http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=229), the "victem" is not a legitimate state, but rather, a role, a position of helpless knowingly or unknowingly chosen by the individual. It's akin to someone lying down in traffic, performing the "woe-is-me-isms" when all they have to do is stand up and exit the traffic.

The key is that they either may not want to exit, deriving some reward for remaining in the victem role, often enhanced by enabling co-dependants, or that they're unable to exit because they simply learned that unhealthy behavior and never learned healthy behavior.

In either case, removing one's self from the victem role often requires healthy intervention. When it comes to obese children, that should be from enlightened parents. Sadly, if the parents were well versed in emotionally healthy behaviors, their children usually are as well.

In contrast, being a true victem involves something happening to you in spite of your having taken reasonable precautions, and there are some obese people out there (a small minority) for whom obesity really is an endocrine problem, and not the result of unhealthy thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

[Ronald Brak]

I see. So if you choose to run headlong into a brick wall, inviting the resulting newtonian reaction, you're a "victem" of physics, just as if you choose to eat too much, inviting obesity and the resulting sociological reaction, you're a "victem" of social dynamics.

I don't think the word victim applies here as there is no perpertrator in the case of the brick wall, but I suppose you could say you were the victim of your own stupidity. But in my country it doesn't matter what shape, colour or creed you are, if you are assaulted you are the victim of assault and the person who did it can be charged. If you assault yourself you can be required to recieve psychiatric treatment and you might be described as a victim of mental illness.

[Swift]

I see. So if you choose to run headlong into a brick wall, inviting the resulting newtonian reaction, you're a "victem" of physics, just as if you choose to eat too much, inviting obesity and the resulting sociological reaction, you're a "victem" of social dynamics.

Society simply is. No single individual has the power to change it (and even large groups will exert extraordinarily immense amounts of effort towards changing it).

Granted, there are societal issues we can and should address. However, when it comes to most issues, it's far wiser to accept society for where it's at, and spend one's energy switching to healthy fruits and vegetables, going for extended walks, etc. Far more relaxing and cardiovascularly healthy, too.

My bold.
I'm sorry, but that's defeatist. Granted, it is very hard to change societies. But it happens, and it happens through the many small efforts of individuals. Having grown up through the civil rights movement in the US, I witnessed it happen.

Yep, fat kids (and adults) should be helped to change their habits, but it is ultimately their responsibility. But that does given anyone the right to bully them. I was a VICTIM of bullying when I was a kid (yep, it happened back when there were dinosaurs) and I'm glad people are finally doing something about it.

[m1omg]

I was bullied too, because of my physical handicap , and I would not wish to experience that even to my worst enemies!

[01101001]

Anyone here never been bullied?

[Tucson_Tim]

Anyone here never been bullied?

Never. Not once. ;)

[mfumbesi]

I was a larger than average kid.(I don't think I was obese, I've looked at my old photos).
Being larger than average was a good and bad in my case.
Kids my age were scared of me, I regularly fought them and won (this was nice for me), then the older kids wanted to rein on me (very bad in rural Africa).
Luckily I had older cousins, I would get one of them and you would be fist food (this would be bad for you and your health).
I also couldn't tell the adults (parents and teachers) as you ended up being either laughed at for being a coward or worst beaten.
But it was incredibly fun.

I had a pose of cousins and neighborhood kids, as you know there is strength in numbers, this how we sometimes "brought down" older bullies.
Imagine ten 10 year olds furiously hurling stones at a 14 year old.

[Argos]

It´s funny... I was ridiculed for being skinny... But now I have my revenge [I´m still thin], since women seem to love it! :)

[triplebird]

Bullies are usually equal-opportunity harrassers. They can--and do!--pick on anything they can: height, weight, intelligence, hair color, hair shape (i.e. curly or straight), skin color, eye color, religion, gender, disability, whatever. Being overweight in and of itself doesn't make the difference between bullied and not. Heck, I was bullied in school for being smaller and skinnier than most everyone else--often by kids that were overweight.

And it's true bullying is often swept under under the rug. I think schools (and many parents) believe if they ignore it, it will go away...

[Doodler]

I agree that this is not something new, BigDon, but it has gone under the radar. This study spells it out explicitly, which makes it harder to ignore or sweep under the rug. :)

You fun-nee.

It hasn't gone "under" the radar, its been passed and approved with a friendly IFF code of acceptable behavior.

[mfumbesi]

Never. Not once. ;)

Were you home schooled.

[Tucson_Tim]

Were you home schooled.

New to the internet, eh? Didn't you notice the little winky smilie? :lol:

[Noclevername]

Bullying isn't caused by the victims, it's caused by the bullies. They feel the need to push someone around to make themselves feel powerful. And it works, too, they usually get a gang of followers this way. Vestigial monkey instincts gone wrong. Focussing on "why" they choose to pick on fat kids or nerds or small kids or wimps or blacks or jews or [place social outcast here] is misguided; the bullies just find whoever's convenient to demonstrate their supposed Alpha-ness on.

[mfumbesi]

New to the internet, eh? Didn't you notice the little winky smilie? :lol:

I saw it, I am desperately trying to increase my number of posts.:lol:

[banquo's_bumble_puppy]

and it continues when we grow up (supposedly)...I recently saw an example of this on the bus....it was a hot day and ther was this young/overweight lady and she was shall we say dressed for the weather....anyways when she got off the bus I could hear one of two young ladies remarking: "disgusting"....

making fun of overweight people is still acceptable (not to my mind)....watch tv

[Paracelsus]

I don't think the word victim applies here as there is no perpertrator in the case of the brick wall, but I suppose you could say you were the victim of your own stupidity. But in my country it doesn't matter what shape, colour or creed you are, if you are assaulted you are the victim of assault and the person who did it can be charged. If you assault yourself you can be required to recieve psychiatric treatment and you might be described as a victim of mental illness.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Absolutely! Bullying is a form of assault and is never justifiable, any more than robbery is justifiable. Granted, people have a responsibility to eat right and exercise, but we are talking about children here! I'm guessing that these kids did not purposefully make themselves obese, nor do they somehow revel in their outcast status or 'victimhood'. I'm sure there are some rebels among them, but most kids just want to fit in. They aren't consciously bringing this upon themselves. Even if they were consciously defying social norms in body weight and shape, this would not justify the bullies' actions.

I was also bullied as a child, although not for my weight. Bullying does not build character. Yes, one can overcome the negative effects of bullying with time, strength, and a lot of therapy; but bullies will always leave lasting scars on their victims. There is no silver lining in being bullied.

[Gillianren]

Look, I wasn't overweight as a child, because I could be more physically active then than I can now, but I was a victim (please note spelling) of bullying just the same. Those seemed, some days, to be the choices--be a bully or be a victim. There actually were kids who were neither, but I never figured out how.

Being overweight is usually an individual's fault, or at minimum the fault of the parents feeding them too many empty calories and limiting their activity (possible), but not always, and saying "it's okay to pick on fat people" still isn't fair either way. It isn't okay, in my opinion, to pick on anyone.

[Doodler]

Granted, people have a responsibility to eat right and exercise, but we are talking about children here!

So what? While I generally agree with your point, I will never support any measure offering special protection to specific segments of the population, regardless of reason.

If they're young and facing this prejudice, better to train them to deal with it now than set them up for a rude slap in the face when they turn 18.

[Noclevername]

So what? While I generally agree with your point, I will never support any measure offering special protection to specific segments of the population, regardless of reason.

If they're young and facing this prejudice, better to train them to deal with it now than set them up for a rude slap in the face when they turn 18.

(Just shakes head sadly. There is no way to respond to someone who thinks this is an appropriate way to treat children.) :silenced:

[Ilya]

If they're young and facing this prejudice, better to train them to deal with it now than set them up for a rude slap in the face when they turn 18.

What "slap in the face"? School bullies routinely get away with behaviours which in over-18 world are called felonies. Specifically assault, extortion, robbery, and malicious destruction of property. Once bullies (and victims) are 18, this behaviour sharply drops off, if not disappears altogether -- because perpetrators go to jail. "Training" children to "deal" with that sort of thing is pointless at best and destructive at worst. Notice that word "training", even sadistic military training, implies a controlled situation with somebody responsible in charge. NOT a situation where sadism is the goal.

Moreover, as some pointed out, I may well go to jail for teaching my children how to "deal" with felony assault without calling police. Sorry, but given we live in society where a victim of assault is expected to call police rather than tear off the attacker's balls, I will not wait until my children are 18, and will teach them (and more importantly, the bully) what "felony" really means.

[Doodler]

You honestly think bullying stops when people turn 18?

What planet are you living on?

[Noclevername]

You honestly think bullying stops when people turn 18?

What planet are you living on?
You honestly think letting kids get bullied is okay? Clearly, you must've had some pretty mild bullies growing up!

[Paracelsus]

[I] I will not wait until my children are 18, and will teach them (and more importantly, the bully) what "felony" really means.

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

The victim needs to be protected, but the bully needs to learn that such behaviors are unacceptable and unconscionable. Too many people focus on 'what's wrong with the victim'; the focus should be on what's wrong with the bully! Why does he or she derive such pleasure out of causing someone else pain?! BTW, many bullies don't 'grow out of' this behavior; the behavior simply becomes more subtle and pernicious. The schoolyard bullies of today become the workplace bullies of tomorrow. If this behavior isn't nipped in the bud in childhood, it will continue into adulthood, as Doodler pointed out.

The bully needs to be taught tolerance and empathy, if possible; failing this, the bully needs to be taught that he or she will pay a steep price, should he or she ever intimidate or harass another person.

Doodler, I agree that children should be taught how to deal with being bullied or harassed, as bullies are plentiful in the adult world too. But I don't believe that just throwing them in and letting them sink or swim is the proper way to do this.

I don't believe in special protections for certain groups either; I think all bullying should be stopped, no matter the identity of the target.

[Ilya]

You honestly think bullying stops when people turn 18?

What planet are you living on?

Don't know about other planets, but on planet Earth, when activity which previously earned one a stern lecture and a few days' suspension, suddenly starts earning a year in jail, occurences of that activity drop sharply. Not stop of course, but drop significantly.

[Doodler]

You honestly think letting kids get bullied is okay? Clearly, you must've had some pretty mild bullies growing up!

Nope, the ones I dealt with owned firearms. I'm all for clamping down on bullies, don't get me wrong, but at the same time, bullying WILL HAPPEN. You cannot please everyone all the time, especially in the cutthroat world of child social politics. Someone, somewhere, is going to have it in for you, and they're going to let you have it with both barrels.

While I'm all for dealing with the problem from a punative standpoint, at the same time, its a form of adversity that we're not totally wasting our time learning to cope with, especially the milder and more childish forms of harassment.

As someone who was bullied pretty roughly from time to time, some of the more supposedly "difficult" people I've had to work with are pussycats compared to the guys who made high school hell to go through.

[Jeff Root]

My (very limited) experience is that fat kids tend to be the bullies,
not the victims of bullies. However, I think it is entirely plausible
that those fat kids became bullies because they were denigrated
(not bullied) over and over and over by practically everyone they
met. Obviously not every fat kid becomes a bully, and not every
bully is fat. But every experience I can recall of bully and victim
had the bully significantly larger than the victim.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Jeff Root]

The original article starts out:

Overweight children are stigmatized by their peers as early as
age 3 and even face bias from their parents and teachers, giving
them a quality of life comparable to people with cancer, a new
analysis concludes.

Youngsters who report teasing, rejection, bullying and other types
of abuse because of their weight are two to three times more likely
to report suicidal thoughts as well as to suffer from other health issues
such as high blood pressure and eating disorders, researchers said.
Nothing there that I didn't already know or isn't exactly what I
would have expected.

The interesting questions are "Why do children (or adults) bully
others as they do?" and "Why are fat people generally considered
to be worthy of ill-treatment?"

Unless and until you have answers to those questions, you will
have no idea what to even try to do about the problem.
You might as well try to stop kids from breathing through their
left nostrils.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[mugaliens]

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Absolutely! Bullying is a form of assault and is never justifiable, any more than robbery is justifiable.

Of course not.

Granted, people have a responsibility to eat right and exercise, but we are talking about children here!

We're also talking about their parents, peers, teachers, school administrations (for choosing unhealthy food selections), etc. All persons of influence or in authority are responsible for the obesity of today's children. I'm glad some schools are finally giving the liquid sugar vending machines the boot.

I'm guessing that these kids did not purposefully make themselves obese...

Ibid. Children must be taught to behave responsibly (including diet and exercise).

There is no silver lining in being bullied.

The world will always have it's fare share of bullies. I'm not condoning bullying in the slightest. I simply accept it as reality. Learning to deal with them appropriately while young is far better than trying to learn to deal with bullies when you're, say, 25.

And, yes, that is a silver lining.

[Spock Jenkins]

Do we even have a fair definition of what everyone considers "bullying"? Some people think that simply calling kids names is bullying. Well, in that case everyone is bullied and everyone is a bully at school. Is it just when it gets physical? Or is merely the threat of physical violence enough to be considered bullying?

The problem with enforcing any measures to stop bullying is that the grey area is so huge - zero tolerance won't work. They try zero tolerance on other things and we constantly see articles about the rediculous lengths administrators go to enforce them. Kids get suspended over having a plastic knife to help get their lunch ready. You can't suspend every child that calls another child, "fatty". However, after a few months of being called "fatty" by a lot of different people - I'd bet that a person would be pretty likely to say they're being bullied. But is that bullying, or is that just kids being kids?

[Paracelsus]

Do we even have a fair definition of what everyone considers "bullying"? Some people think that simply calling kids names is bullying. Well, in that case everyone is bullied and everyone is a bully at school. Is it just when it gets physical? Or is merely the threat of physical violence enough to be considered bullying?

The problem with enforcing any measures to stop bullying is that the grey area is so huge - zero tolerance won't work. They try zero tolerance on other things and we constantly see articles about the rediculous lengths administrators go to enforce them. Kids get suspended over having a plastic knife to help get their lunch ready. You can't suspend every child that calls another child, "fatty". However, after a few months of being called "fatty" by a lot of different people - I'd bet that a person would be pretty likely to say they're being bullied. But is that bullying, or is that just kids being kids?

I'd say that a single incident of name-calling is not bullying, but a string of incidents or evidence of a pattern of actions intended to systematically torment and humiliate another kid is bullying.

A good definition of what constitutes bullying is described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying

Bullying is the intentional tormenting of others through verbal harassment, physical assault, or other more subtle methods of coercion such as manipulation. There is currently no legal definition of bullying.
In colloquial speech, bullying often describes a form of harassment perpetrated by an abuser who possesses more physical and/or social power and dominance than the victim. The harassment can be verbal, physical and/or emotional.
Norwegian researcher Dan Owelus defines bullying as when a person is "exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons." He defines negative action as "when a person intentionally inflicts injury or discomfort upon another person, through physical contact, through words or in other ways."[1]

[Spock Jenkins]

I'd say that a single incident of name-calling is not bullying, but a string of incidents or evidence of a pattern of actions intended to systematically torment and humiliate another kid is bullying.

Seem easy enough at it's surface. So let's say in a class of 150 4th graders everyone only calls the heavy child (Billy), "fatty" once during the school year. You've got 180 or so days in a typical school year. Nobody is guilty of bullying, but Billy tells the administration that he is being bullied because he is called, "fatty" nearly every day at school. So do you suspend every child that calls Billy one name one time? That's not remotely realistic. I think this is what some of the other posters are thinking of when they say that Billy needs to develop thick skin and learn that this type of thing is just part of life.

Now let's say that the 100th child calls Billy, "Fatty" and Billy gets mad enough to fight about it. Billy is bigger and lays a pretty good beat down on Bobby. Is Billy the bully? Is Bobby? Bobby only called one child one name one time. Billy got physical. Again - more gray area.

[Delvo]

Actually, despite the comments that there's nothing new here, there is something new. The article said that obesity wasn't only being picked on for itself, but was also associated with some other specific things:

...mean, stupid... and sloppy...

...untidy, less likely to succeed and more emotional.

That's five separate items (counting "sloppy" and "untidy" together as one) that aren't inherently part of being obese but are apparently associated with it in kids' minds. They also happen to be behavioral traits rather than physical ones. But, since the main cause of obesity these days is behavior, the possibility of a real connection between these things is worth considering; these other behaviors could be increased by obesity, or could contribute to obesity, or could result form the same original cause(s) as obesity. So people who make these associations could be basing them on experience.

[Spock Jenkins]

Actually, despite the comments that there's nothing new here, there is something new.

I don't recall any heavy kid being picked on just for being heavy. Just because a study broke them out doesn't mean children didn't always make those associations. This is not a new phenomena. I remember the good old "cut-down" fights growing up in the '80's. The whole purpose of the fight was to go back and forth with new and creative ways to insult the person you were fighting against. It rarely got physical - but would escalate to a whole group of observers laughing at the loser of the fight (the child who couldn't come up with the good insults). Kids have always been mean. It takes a long time to really learn and understand how your words and actions impact others.

It's not that I think the behavior is okay, I just take issue with everyone pretending that somehow this is something different than what anyone else grew up with. If anything, the heavier children have it a lot easier now days simply because they have far more peers in a similar situation than what they did years ago. They have opportunities for friendships that they didn't have when there was only one or two truly obese kids in a grade level years ago.

[Paracelsus]

Actually, despite the comments that there's nothing new here, there is something new. The article said that obesity wasn't only being picked on for itself, but was also associated with some other specific things:



That's five separate items (counting "sloppy" and "untidy" together as one) that aren't inherently part of being obese but are apparently associated with it in kids' minds. They also happen to be behavioral traits rather than physical ones. But, since the main cause of obesity these days is behavior, the possibility of a real connection between these things is worth considering; these other behaviors could be increased by obesity, or could contribute to obesity, or could result form the same original cause(s) as obesity. So people who make these associations could be basing them on experience.

What experience would that be? These other kids are not doctors, nor do they read medical journals or textbooks. I could see the 'sloppy' or 'untidy' characterization, but where do these kids get the 'mean' and 'stupid' traits, other than from sheer bigotry?

I went to high-school with an extremely bright, very sweet-natured guy--who happened to be about 30 lbs overweight. My aunt is also extremely overweight (100+ lbs over); she happens to be one of the gentlest, sweetest people I've ever known.

Where are the studies that show that overweight people have nastier dispositions and/or lower IQs than thin people? If there are such studies, I'd appreciate it if someone on this thread would find them and cite them.

[Palomar]

Oh, I can relate to the original article. I was overweight as a kid (in the Skinny Nazi 1970s). People (peers mostly) either ridiculed and shunned, or accepted; little middle ground. I had an outgoing personality with a good sense of humor (still do), so that helped. There'll always be a "battle of the bulge" for me; some of it is genetic: A photo of 5 maternal great-aunts lined up for a photo is proof. :-\ Same body type.

I'm white, and I've found that regions predominated by white people are the worst. People are brainwashed from Day 1 that only one body type is acceptable: Slim. Unfortunately, last I knew we humans don't come from a factory.

I currently reside in an area with a high Hispanic population and they're more sane/relaxed about the issue. No obsessing endlessly about how many carbs are in those 5 grape tomatoes in the salad, or how many jumping jacks and laps around the block we should take before eating that broccoli! :rolleyes:

Whites mostly are obsessed with weight to the point of it smacking of a mental disorder. Tabloids are proof of this: They're either bashing Kirstie Alley for being "a big fat cow!!" or harping on Callista Flockhart for being "dangerously thin -- is she anorectic?!!"

Gee...can anybody win?

But yes, growing up there was often a stigma that being overweight was akin to it being a crime or a sin. Other imperfections are apparently "okay" though...so long as others can't see your imperfection.

A lot of it is scapegoating 1 group of people onto which society thrusts its self-loathing. Another part of it is hypocrisy.

[Paracelsus]

True, there are more kids in the same boat, but the prejudice against fat people appears to be as strong as ever, which is a mystery to me given the fact that fat people are now in the majority. When I was in my teens and early twenties, I was on the lower end of the mid-range of clothing sizes; I now have to get the smallest clothing size on offer to even keep the clothes on my body. This goes for clothes in adult clothing stores and for clothes in teen-oriented stores like American Eagle Outfitters. I am approximately the same size now as I was as a teen. This is yet more proof that the 'average-sized' person is a lot larger than he or she used to be.

How then can there be so much prejudice against the majority of the population?? This makes absolutely no sense to me.

[Paracelsus]

I'm white, and I've found that regions predominated by white people are the worst. People are brainwashed from Day 1 that only one body type is acceptable: Slim. Unfortunately, last I knew we humans don't come from a factory. Whites mostly are obsessed with weight to the point of it smacking of a mental disorder. But yes, growing up there was often a stigma that being overweight was akin to it being a crime or a sin. Other imperfections are apparently "okay" though...so long as others can't see your imperfection.

A lot of it is scapegoating 1 group of people onto which society thrusts its self-loathing. Another part of it is hypocrisy.

Amen, RE white people being the hardest on weight!! I grew up in the South, and this was absolutely true for me. I was ridiculed endlessly for having a 'black girl's butt', even though I was very slim and I had an hourglass figure. I always envied girls who had the stereotypical flat 'white girl's butt'; it wasn't until J Lo flaunted her fab curves that having a rump like hers became acceptable and even desirable.

As far as prejudices reflecting societal self-loathing, I completely agree. I think the hatred of fat people is starting to shift a little, but there are some prejudices that remain steadfast. Ugly people and smelly people will probably never get a break, regardless of whether their conditions are due to medical disorders (Treacher-Collins syndrome, hemifacial microsomia (ugliness); trimethylaminuria or bromhidrosis (smell)) or poor personal care. People with impairments in social skills (Asperger's syndrome, Tourette's syndrome, social phobia) or mental illness may be getting a little more of a break now due to greater prevalence/awareness of some of those diseases (autism, depression), but people who have these types of disorders are still ostracized to an incredible degree and treated like second -class citizens. IMHO, the more society fears a given condition, the worse the individuals with the condition are treated.

[farmerjumperdon]

I see. So if you choose to run headlong into a brick wall, inviting the resulting newtonian reaction, you're a "victem" of physics, just as if you choose to eat too much, inviting obesity and the resulting sociological reaction, you're a "victem" of social dynamics.

Society simply is. No single individual has the power to change it (and even large groups will exert extraordinarily immense amounts of effort towards changing it).

Granted, there are societal issues we can and should address. However, when it comes to most issues, it's far wiser to accept society for where it's at, and spend one's energy switching to healthy fruits and vegetables, going for extended walks, etc. Far more relaxing and cardiovascularly healthy, too.

By doing so we remove ourselves from the "victem" role, remove ourselves from the Karpman triangle (all positions of which are unhealthy), and take responsibility for that about ourselves which we can, and should change.

By the way, Rondald - I did like your proposed food labels. Given the history of similar labels on cigarettes, I believe it'll take that and a very concerted effort on the part of everyone to re-educate society to change their eating habits. Again, not sure if it's worth the effort - better to simply focus on one's own health while setting and enforcing the consequences of unhealthy lifestyles (like more proportionate health insurance rates).

Not a very good example since the issue is that of violating someone's rights, civilly if not criminally. I don't think it is illegal to run into a brick wall. It is definitely illegal to steal someone's wallet. Physical assault is physical assault. Hitting is wrong. The kid that learns that hitting is OK is much more likely to be the violent adult. If we expect to minimize violence, it starts with addressing kids that think unwelcome hitting is just another "cute" behavior necessary for social development. Anybody who thinks unwelcome physical contact is ever acceptable or cute: B as in B, S as in S.

[Palomar]

True, there are more kids in the same boat, but the prejudice against fat people appears to be as strong as ever, which is a mystery to me given the fact that fat people are now in the majority. When I was in my teens and early twenties, I was on the lower end of the mid-range of clothing sizes; I now have to get the smallest clothing size on offer to even keep the clothes on my body. This goes for clothes in adult clothing stores and for clothes in teen-oriented stores like American Eagle Outfitters. I am approximately the same size now as I was as a teen. This is yet more proof that the 'average-sized' person is a lot larger than he or she used to be.

How then can there be so much prejudice against the majority of the population?? This makes absolutely no sense to me.

Because unfortunately (doubly unfortunately and no, that's not intended to be a pun) quite a few overweight people have the same prejudice, and project their self-loathing onto other overweight folks. I've personally witnessed overweight women giving others acid glares and belittling treatment, whereas slender women (in the same office environment) were generally nicer to their hefty counterparts.

A big-boned, overweight woman of my (former) acquaintance constantly ridiculed others' "big lard butts." On and on.

Basically the issue is: Do you have self-esteem or other-esteem? Self-esteem is independent; other-esteem is dependent. Too many folks confuse the two and it leads to a lot of misery.

Actually, the dieting/weight-loss industry is hypocritical too: Let's see where they'd be if everyone did lose the weight and keep it off. :rolleyes: They'd be out of business, wouldn't they? They need "fat" people, right? ;)

[farmerjumperdon]

(Just shakes head sadly. There is no way to respond to someone who thinks this is an appropriate way to treat children.) :silenced:

I think the prepare-them-for-life arguement to try to justify bullying is somewhere in the throw-them-in-and-see-if-they-float method of teaching them to swim.

If they drown, they wouldn't have been good enough for the real world, heh?

And if they get bullied to the point of becoming suicidal, they would never have fit in anyway, heh?

Great approach. Soon we'll be rid of those that can't swim and can't take a lifetime of bullying. Unless they become murderous - then the whole approach kind of backfires.

[Tucson_Tim]

Adding a little humor from a (paraphrased) Dennis Leary stand-up routine . . .

When hearing "Well, he is big boned" when referring to a fat guy Dennis said "Big boned?! Big boned my <buttocks>. Dinosaurs were big boned. He's just big <buttocks>"

(I know, doesn't read too well without the profanity :lol:)

[Paracelsus]

I think the prepare-them-for-life arguement to try to justify bullying is somewhere in the throw-them-in-and-see-if-they-float method of teaching them to swim.

If they drown, they wouldn't have been good enough for the real world, heh?

And if they get bullied to the point of becoming suicidal, they would never have fit in anyway, heh?

Great approach. Soon we'll be rid of those that can't swim and can't take a lifetime of bullying. Unless they become murderous - then the whole approach kind of backfires.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Columbine, anyone??

[Delvo]

Just because a study broke them out doesn't mean children didn't always make those associations.What I meant was not just that that part might be new, but also that even if it's always been that way, having a study that shows it is new.[/QUOTE]

What experience would that be?{?QUOTE]Their own.

[QUOTE=Paracelsus;1036148]I could see the 'sloppy' or 'untidy' characterization, but where do these kids get the 'mean' and 'stupid' traits, other than from sheer bigotry?Possibly from meeting them and observing their behavior. A particular pattern seen repeatedly is often the source of prejudice.

Where are the studies that show that overweight people have nastier dispositions and/or lower IQs than thin people?I don't know of any.

[Spock Jenkins]

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Columbine, anyone??

Those kids weren't fat.

Slightly off topic:

Why is it always acceptable to stereotype and ridicule white people in the U.S.? A couple posts back, Palomar makes a post saying all white people are a certain way. After Paracelsus is saying in this thread how awful it is to generalize and redicule heavy children - she concurs with the post generalizing white people.

We just had to complete an on-line harassment prevention and awareness course at work. It consisted of 6 stories and a test. In five out of the six stories, the villain was a white male. The remaining story didn't have any males in it. This is done so as not to offend any other minority group - but it's no big deal to offend and generalize white males.

[Gillianren]

I didn't attend a school with a populational majority of white people until college, and I'm here to tell you, the fat kids still got picked on for being fat. Also, it's just as hard to find clothes for a size 14 as it was when I was a child; I've not seen any evidence to indicate that clothing sizes in stores have increased, and I've seen a lot to indicate that they haven't.

If every fourth-grader calls the same kid fat once, that's an unsustainable school situation for that one kid, and every kid needs to be taught that it's not okay, because every kid clearly has some kind of problem--especially given how seldom I, for one, interacted with most of the kids who weren't in my class, and that's a school with a major overcrowding problem if there are 150 fourth-graders in one classroom. I'm not going to say I never insulted anyone, but I sure would have been more creative than to call a kid "fatty." Even given that I was of average weight at the time.

We want simple answers. Unfortunately, there aren't any.

[farmerjumperdon]

Adding a little humor from a (paraphrased) Dennis Leary stand-up routine . . .

When hearing "Well, he is big boned" when referring to a fat guy Dennis said "Big boned?! Big boned my <buttocks>. Dinosaurs were big boned. He's just big <buttocks>"

(I know, doesn't read too well without the profanity :lol:)

I had an aunt and cousin (mother and daughter) who were morbidly obese. They ate at least twice as much as needed, really piling it on. They always used the big-boned line, as well as the it's-my-metabolism excuse. The aunt became very ill for a while, but eventually pulled thru. Her lifestyle changed considerably and she no longer ate like an elephant. Low and behold, she was no longer big-boned.

It was a wake up call for my cousin, who decided to get serious about the matter. She too is no longer quite so big-boned.

[triplebird]

When I was in my teens and early twenties, I was on the lower end of the mid-range of clothing sizes; I now have to get the smallest clothing size on offer to even keep the clothes on my body...This is yet more proof that the 'average-sized' person is a lot larger than he or she used to be.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks they're shrinking. A few years ago, I wore an adult Medium shirt size. Now, I've "devolved" back into the youth size bracket--not necessarily a bad thing, IMO, the clothes are often cheaper and are more durable. Maybe I'll think differently when I'm 45 and still shopping in the boys' department, however :) .

...it's just as hard to find clothes for a size 14 as it was when I was a child; I've not seen any evidence to indicate that clothing sizes in stores have increased...

The sizes themselves haven't changed, but the dimensions the sizes represent have. For example, a shirt I have from several years ago is an adult Small with a 34 inch chest measurment. A shirt I recently acquired is also a Small, but now has a 38 inch chest.

Those [Columbine] kids weren't fat.

Yes, but they still were bullied nonetheless.

[Spock Jenkins]

If every fourth-grader calls the same kid fat once, that's an unsustainable school situation for that one kid, and every kid needs to be taught that it's not okay, because every kid clearly has some kind of problem--especially given how seldom I, for one, interacted with most of the kids who weren't in my class, and that's a school with a major overcrowding problem if there are 150 fourth-graders in one classroom. I'm not going to say I never insulted anyone, but I sure would have been more creative than to call a kid "fatty." Even given that I was of average weight at the time.QUOTE]

Quite clearly a hypothetical example to illustrate the point that we both agree on.

[QUOTE=Gillianren;1036261]We want simple answers. Unfortunately, there aren't any.

Even if it's 1/3rd of the grade level (not class-room) doing it three times a year - the point is that it doesn't take one individual to obviously act like a bully for another individual to feel bullied.

[Paracelsus]

Those kids weren't fat.

Slightly off topic:

Why is it always acceptable to stereotype and ridicule white people in the U.S.? A couple posts back, Palomar makes a post saying all white people are a certain way. After Paracelsus is saying in this thread how awful it is to generalize and redicule heavy children - she concurs with the post generalizing white people.

We just had to complete an on-line harassment prevention and awareness course at work. It consisted of 6 stories and a test. In five out of the six stories, the villain was a white male. The remaining story didn't have any males in it. This is done so as not to offend any other minority group - but it's no big deal to offend and generalize white males.

I am not ridiculing white people. I'm speaking from experience growing up and going to school as a white female in the South during the 70s and 80s. Clearly, these attitudes towards body shape have changed somewhat, as I've indicated.

Also, in my experience, the worst offenders were white females not white males, as far as harassment over body shape went, although guys chipped in too.

[Jeff Root]

Amen, RE white people being the hardest on weight!! I grew up in
the South, and this was absolutely true for me. I was ridiculed
endlessly for having a 'black girl's butt', even though I was
very slim and I had an hourglass figure. I always envied girls
who had the stereotypical flat 'white girl's butt'; it wasn't
until J Lo flaunted her fab curves that having a rump like hers
became acceptable and even desirable.
First, until this post I was unaware of any consistent
difference in shape between black girls' butts and white
girls' butts. That's a new concept to me.

Second, if males in the south ever preferred "stereotypical
flat white girls' butts" to curvier ones, I've never heard of
such a thing before. That's a new concept, too.

Third, if you think that J Lo was the first, or the hundredth,
or even the millionth girl to have a widely-appreciated big
bottom, then you were born yesterday. (Though I've seen so
little TV in the last 20 years that I may have seen only one
video of J Lo on one single occasion. Her rear did appear to
be unusually bulgy, and it did look quite nice.)

If you really had "an hourglass figure", then you had as close
to the ideal shape possible, and any "ridicule" you recieved
either came from other girls who were envious of you, or from
boys who found your shape attractive and were trying to tell
you so without actually telling you so. Or both.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

If you really had "an hourglass figure", then you had as close to the ideal shape possible, and any "ridicule" you recieved
either came from other girls who were envious of you, or from
boys who found your shape attractive and were trying to tell
you so without actually telling you so. (my bold)
Or both.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Never understood that last part. Ridicule is ridicule as far as I'm concerned. From what I could observe in high school (during the 80s), the "ideal shape" consisted of an abnormally-thin, long-legged chick with no butt and huge boobs, hence the popularity of aerobics classes, liposuction, and breast implants.

Also, "ideal shape" doesn't matter if you also wear huge, coke-bottle bottom glasses and are a complete geek/brainiac with zero fashion sense. So, in my case, ridicule was not flirting; it was just ridicule, hour-glass notwithstanding.

[Jeff Root]

Great approach. Soon we'll be rid of those that can't swim and can't
take a lifetime of bullying. Unless they become murderous - then the
whole approach kind of backfires.
Already has. Some of Doodler's posts make me want to punch
his face in twenty or thirty times with my bare fist. Please note
that I've never done anything like that, and at 54 years old, and
a moderately skinny 5" 6" 125 pounds, I'm not likely to. Doodler
would be one of my first choices to remove from society, if I had
such a choice, which I'm glad I don't. (At least until I serve on
a jury.) Fat people I can stand. I have have some very good
friends who are really big. I wish they weren't so big but I like
them anyway. People with attitudes similar to Doodler's -- no.
Don't like them at all. I'll stay as far away from them as possible.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Noclevername]

Also, in my experience, the worst offenders were white females not white males, as far as harassment over body shape went, although guys chipped in too.
Trust me, the guys were mostly doing it to go along with the girls. Having gone through adolescence, I'm sure even the teenage guys who badmouthed you still "watched the walk-away". Should've moved north, guys up here have always openly appreciated rounded bottoms.

[Tucson_Tim]

Not sure I want a woman with an "hour-glass" figure. Have you looked at an hour-glass? That would be some kind of mutant. :lol:

[Paracelsus]

Not sure I want a woman with an "hour-glass" figure. Have you looked at an hour-glass? That would be some kind of mutant. :lol:

:p

Okay, I wasn't quite that narrow in the waist. ;)

No ribs removed from this girl!

Having gone through adolescence, I'm sure even the teenage guys who badmouthed you still "watched the walk-away".

Will never understand that about guys, but will take your word for it. ;)

I should post one of my teenage pics just for kicks and giggles. I looked like a complete DORK. :rolleyes:

[GDwarf]

I thought the big problem is "no-fault" handling of disagreements.
When the 180-pound kid takes something away from the 100-pound
kid and the 100-pound kid complains, they both get the same
dressing-down from The Man.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis
Exactly! I still remember how I got a suspension for being punched in the face...

[Jeff Root]

Never understood that last part. Ridicule is ridicule as far as
I'm concerned.
Okay, so a problem was that you didn't understand some of the
nonverbal communication used by your peers. I had some problem
with that, too.


From what I could observe in high school (during the 80s), the
"ideal shape" consisted of an abnormally-thin, long-legged chick
with no butt and huge boobs, hence the popularity of aerobics
classes, liposuction, and breast implants.
Quite aside from the grotesqueness of the concept in general, I
would hope that there were no instances of breast implants done
while the person was still in high school! Only one person I've
ever seen who possibly had no butt. I'm not sure. He was in a
wheelchair. He certainly had no legs. I don't know what he had
left to sit on. Otherwise, I'm not sure what "no butt" means.


Also, "ideal shape" doesn't matter if you also wear huge, coke-
bottle bottom glasses and are a complete geek/brainiac with zero
fashion sense.
Having poor vision is of course never good. If it can be
corrected with glasses, that's good, but I agree that extreme
myopia or hyperopia aren't attractive traits. Having "zero
fashion sense" would tend to indicate that the person really
isn't such a brainiac. Not caring about or following fashion
is one thing, but not being able to comprehend what looks good
and what doesn't is another.

Einstein would have been ridiculed for his bottom, too, if it
looked like Marilyn Monroe's. :D


So, in my case, ridicule was not flirting; it was just ridicule,
hour-glass notwithstanding.
Maybe, maybe not. Do you loathe yourself, as hinted at by the
earlier post? If so, it sounds unwarranted. Self-criticism is
generally good; self-loathing generally isn't.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

Maybe, maybe not. Do you loathe yourself, as hinted at by the
earlier post? If so, it sounds unwarranted. Self-criticism is
generally good; self-loathing generally isn't.

No, Jeff Root, I don't loathe myself (and that last was kind, BTW, thanks! :)). I am just realistic about what I looked like in HS. I have since lost the glasses and gained some fashion sense; I look much better in consequence. :)

As for what 'no butt' means, I mean a girl or woman who has very little curve to her behind, if you look at her from the side. Compare J Lo's rear to, say, Kate Bosworth's behind when she was in her anorexic phase.

How did we get on this subject anyway?? :eek: Er, do any of the other women on this thread feel a little strange talking about women's body parts with guys, or is it just me? I'm not saying any of the guys are saying something wrong and welcome y'all's feedback :); it just feels a little...odd. I usually have these kinds of talks with other women, not guys. It is interesting, though; women usually never hear how guys feel about these things. We just make assumptions about what guys like and don't like, etc.

It's kind of cool, in a very weird way, to hear what guys really think about all of this. :think:

[Jens]

I see. So if you choose to run headlong into a brick wall, inviting the resulting newtonian reaction, you're a "victem" of physics, just as if you choose to eat too much, inviting obesity and the resulting sociological reaction, you're a "victem" of social dynamics.

Society simply is.

Sorry, that sounds silly to me. Are you saying that killing is part of human society, always has been, so we should stop making murder a crime? Sorry, pal, you let your head get in the way of an axe. Your problem. We could decriminalize rape, too. There would be a good side, granted: we wouldn't have to spend any money on police or law enforcement.

IMO, all societies have rules of behavior, regardless of what human nature is. That's what raises us (arguably) above other animals. We have laws against things like murder and rape and bullying precisely because people would do it in the absence of a law. Otherwise, the laws wouldn't be needed.

[Jeff Root]

IMO, all societies have rules of behavior, regardless of what human
nature is. That's what raises us (arguably) above other animals. We
have laws against things like murder and rape and bullying precisely
because people would do it in the absence of a law. Otherwise,
the laws wouldn't be needed.
I think that with or without laws, similar rates of crime-like actions
would be committed, by the same relatively small number of people.
Without laws, whenever I saw somebody doing something I didn't
like, and I happened to be bigger than the guy doing it, or my gang
happened to be bigger than his gang, I or my gang would teach him
or his gang a lesson. Which creates a mess, so people get together
and agree on laws which control vigilanteism. With laws, more
care is taken to be sure the accused are actually guilty, and that
punishment or treatment are reasonable. It takes longer and is
more expensive that way, but it's less scary.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Tucson_Tim]

No, Jeff Root, I don't loathe myself (and that last was kind, BTW, thanks! :)). I am just realistic about what I looked like in HS. I have since lost the glasses and gained some fashion sense; I look much better in consequence. :)

As for what 'no butt' means, I mean a girl or woman who has very little curve to her behind, if you look at her from the side. Compare J Lo's rear to, say, Kate Bosworth's behind when she was in her anorexic phase.

How did we get on this subject anyway?? :eek: Er, do any of the other women on this thread feel a little strange talking about women's body parts with guys, or is it just me? I'm not saying any of the guys are saying something wrong and welcome y'all's feedback :); it just feels a little...odd. I usually have these kinds of talks with other women, not guys. It is interesting, though; women usually never hear how guys feel about these things. We just make assumptions about what guys like and don't like, etc.

It's kind of cool, in a very weird way, to hear what guys really think about all of this. :think:

Something you'll never hear a man say to another man: "Do these jeans make my butt look big?". (At least not in Tucson. :))

[Swift]

<snip>
Even if it's 1/3rd of the grade level (not class-room) doing it three times a year - the point is that it doesn't take one individual to obviously act like a bully for another individual to feel bullied.
In my own personal experience, most of the bullying I experienced came from only a few individuals; lots of "acts" from a few, not one or two acts from many. I think it would be good to target those repeat offenders.

[Paracelsus]

Something you'll never hear a man say to another man: "Do these jeans make my butt look big?". (At least not in Tucson. :))

:lol::lol::lol:

[Ilya]

I think that with or without laws, similar rates of crime-like actions
would be committed, by the same relatively small number of people.

Sorry, but you are dead wrong. Just look at the number of "crime-like actions" committed in, say, Somalia (no effective law) and at the number of men (they are almost all men) committing these actions. Both are staggering.

Without laws, whenever I saw somebody doing something I didn't
like, and I happened to be bigger than the guy doing it, or my gang
happened to be bigger than his gang, I or my gang would teach him
or his gang a lesson. Which creates a mess, so people get together
and agree on laws which control vigilanteism.

Eventually. In practice, it sometimes takes hundreds of years.

[Swift]

www.freewebs.com/f14dude
F14Dude,
A piece of friendly advice. Stop posting this link to your website in different forums where it has nothing to do with the topic.

[Jeff Root]

I think that with or without laws, similar rates of crime-like actions
would be committed, by the same relatively small number of people.
Sorry, but you are dead wrong. Just look at the number of "crime-like
actions" committed in, say, Somalia (no effective law) and at the
number of men (they are almost all men) committing these actions.
Both are staggering.
There is a civil war going on in Somalia. I have no idea how
many different "sides" are engaged in the conflict. The USA had
a civil war. Over 600,000 people were killed in four years of
fighting.


Without laws, whenever I saw somebody doing something I didn't
like, and I happened to be bigger than the guy doing it, or my gang
happened to be bigger than his gang, I or my gang would teach him
or his gang a lesson. Which creates a mess, so people get together
and agree on laws which control vigilanteism.
Eventually. In practice, it sometimes takes hundreds of years.
I doubt that a populated region anywhere in the word has been
lawless for over a hundred years, anytime in recorded history.
Can you cite any cases showing otherwise?

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[mugaliens]

Not a very good example since the issue is that of violating someone's rights, civilly if not criminally. I don't think it is illegal to run into a brick wall. It is definitely illegal to steal someone's wallet. Physical assault is physical assault. Hitting is wrong. The kid that learns that hitting is OK is much more likely to be the violent adult. If we expect to minimize violence, it starts with addressing kids that think unwelcome hitting is just another "cute" behavior necessary for social development. Anybody who thinks unwelcome physical contact is ever acceptable or cute: B as in B, S as in S.

Thanks for summarizing the existing laws. I agree wholeheartedly that they're on target.

Now, let's get back to the reality of what people actually experience throughout life from ages zip to adulthood.

[Dragon Star]

In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it. The truth hurts, however it's absolute necessity to see reality.

If a bully makes fun of you because you because you punched a telephone pole and broke your hand, guess what, you're an idiot.

If a bully makes fun of you because you're under/overweight, guess what, you likely are.

If a bully makes fun of you for wearing your underwear on your head at that crazy party last night, guess what, you should have been more responsible.

I don't defend bullying, however, I have seen people change their ways for the better as a result. Just on the other side of the fence, sometimes the truth hurts too much and causes depression and other ill effects. But I will say this: I'm absolutely glad I had bullies in High School, and I know countless others who would say the same. It was great preparation on how to deal with people on multitudes of levels, which I find vital to success. Lets face it, children who have difficult childhoods often times are given the necessary tools for success later in life. Look at our parents and grandparents who lived through the great depression. Most of them are the backbone of America and the world because their experience gave them an edge. Doesn't make it right, but I'd just incorporate it into part of life. I work with minorities every day all day long, as it is part of the construction industry, and I hear all of the horror stories...however I look into the eyes of successful people who have no regrets.

[GDwarf]

I'd disagree there. Bullying can change behaviour, sure, so can any negative re-enforcement.

However, I was bullied for being a bookworm. I'd argue that that isn't something you'd want to discourage.

Besides, there are other ways to correct behaviour that don't involve punching kids or spreading malicious rumours about them.

In fact, if you try to correct an adult's behaviour that way you'll find yourself in court (criminal and/or civil) for Assault (criminal), Battery (Civil) and Slander (Civil).

[Gillianren]

I, too, was teased because of being a bookworm. What's even more fun, I was teased for having freckles. Tell me how that's negative?

[Paracelsus]

I was teased for being interested in science (which made me 'weird' in their eyes), not being interested in fashion or boys, wearing thick glasses, and having a big butt, even though I was slim overall.

Dragon Star, I suppose I can see where your argument would hold, as far as my disinterest in fashion goes. As for the rest, how is being interested in science bad? And what did they expect me to do about the size of my butt or my glasses??

I needed the glasses to see. Should I have not worn them and bumped into things instead??

I wasn't overweight, but my build is my build. As any woman could tell you, it is easier to change one's overall size than to change one's proportions. Should I have starved myself down to a skeleton to have a 'white girl's butt'??

How does your logic apply in cases where a kid differs from social norms as a result of a horrific accident, disease, or birth defect? The poet Lucy Grealy (Autobiography of a Face) had to have a third of her jaw removed when she was a very young child due to Ewing's sarcoma (a rare kind of cancer). She went through several reconstructive surgeries, but she never looked conventionally attractive, or even normal, afterwards. Kids at school bullied her mercilessly for how her face looked. She was doing everything she could to look normal, and her facial disfigurement wasn't something she had brought upon herself. How then can you possibly justify the actions of the people who bullied her??

The bullying did not make her stronger, BTW. It broke her; her self-esteem was shattered by it. She used drugs, booze, and sex to numb the pain from those old wounds (as related in Ann Patchett's book Truth & Beauty) and wound up dead from a heroin overdose at a very young age.

[Ronald Brak]

I'll mention that it's easier to significantly change skin colour than to significantly change weight for many people. For a couple of thousand pounds a (dis)reputable plastic surgeon can alter your albedo, but many fat people spend much more money on diet plans and a lot of effort on exercise without becoming thin. Careful diet and exercise helps fat people lose weight, but results in many merely becoming less fat rather than slim.

If anyone thinks it's easy for most fat people to lose large amounts of weight, as an experiment, I suggest trying to halve your current body fat percentage. Chances are you'll find it rather difficult. Some people have suggested that fat people lack willpower, but when they hand out the awards for bravery in Australia each year, they always go to a wide selection of body types and there appears to be no correlation between weight and having the willpower to risk your life to save others.

[Ilya]

There is a civil war going on in Somalia. I have no idea how
many different "sides" are engaged in the conflict. The USA had
a civil war. Over 600,000 people were killed in four years of
fighting.

I was not talking about Somalia today, but about Somalia in 1990's. No overt war, but no government either. Just hundreds of "warlords", i.e. gang leaders with delusions of grandeur, and everyone not in warlords' retinue fair game for those who are. Even excluding wars between the gangs, the amount of murder and rape of the "non-attached" was staggering.

Granted, that was an extreme situation which could not last for many years (you can kill and rob food producers for only so long), but...

I doubt that a populated region anywhere in the word has been
lawless for over a hundred years, anytime in recorded history.
Can you cite any cases showing otherwise?


I would say Ireland was lawless from the beginning of recorded history until late 17th Century. It was much like Somalia -- hundreds of cattle-stealing "chiefs", every one of them lording over a tiny gang and looking to stab all the others in the back. Which is why English had no trouble rolling over Ireland whenever they wanted (which was not often because the place was too poor to be worth ruling) -- there was always a chief willing to sell out the others.

[Noclevername]

In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it. The truth hurts, however it's absolute necessity to see reality.

If a bully makes fun of you because you because you punched a telephone pole and broke your hand, guess what, you're an idiot.

If a bully makes fun of you because you're under/overweight, guess what, you likely are.

If a bully makes fun of you for wearing your underwear on your head at that crazy party last night, guess what, you should have been more responsible.

I don't defend bullying, however, I have seen people change their ways for the better as a result. Just on the other side of the fence, sometimes the truth hurts too much and causes depression and other ill effects. But I will say this: I'm absolutely glad I had bullies in High School, and I know countless others who would say the same. It was great preparation on how to deal with people on multitudes of levels, which I find vital to success. Lets face it, children who have difficult childhoods often times are given the necessary tools for success later in life. Look at our parents and grandparents who lived through the great depression. Most of them are the backbone of America and the world because their experience gave them an edge. Doesn't make it right, but I'd just incorporate it into part of life. I work with minorities every day all day long, as it is part of the construction industry, and I hear all of the horror stories...however I look into the eyes of successful people who have no regrets.
Like I said, bullies will always find a target. It doesn't matter if it's something controllable (weight) or something not (height), social/ethnic/religious background, skin/hair/eye color, appearance, interests or hobbies, handicaps, or whatever. Any excuse will do, real or percieved.

[Palomar]

In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it. The truth hurts, however it's absolute necessity to see reality.

If a bully makes fun of you because you because you punched a telephone pole and broke your hand, guess what, you're an idiot.

If a bully makes fun of you because you're under/overweight, guess what, you likely are.

If a bully makes fun of you for wearing your underwear on your head at that crazy party last night, guess what, you should have been more responsible.

I don't defend bullying...

You don't? :lol: :lol:

What gives any human being the right to continually harass or pick on another person's "imperfections" -- whether real or perceived? Considering no one is perfect, said bully should sweep off her/his own back porch.

Most of the bullies I encountered in life (whether directly to myself or picking on others) had at least 1 glaring fault. In psychology it's called projection: "There's something wrong with me and I unconsciously know it, so I'll focus on YOUR fault."

Or they came from troubled homes and took private frustrations/anger out on others (in school, at the office).

Or they were the low self-esteem sort who could only feel good about themselves when busy tearing down others.

If you think they're inadvertently doing others a favor, think again.

I guess the rest of us can only aspire to being as Perfect and Wonderful 24/7/365 as our "social benefactors" the bullies are. :rolleyes:

[Swift]

In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it. The truth hurts, however it's absolute necessity to see reality.

If a bully makes fun of you because you because you punched a telephone pole and broke your hand, guess what, you're an idiot.

If a bully makes fun of you because you're under/overweight, guess what, you likely are.

If a bully makes fun of you for wearing your underwear on your head at that crazy party last night, guess what, you should have been more responsible.

I don't defend bullying, however, I have seen people change their ways for the better as a result. Just on the other side of the fence, sometimes the truth hurts too much and causes depression and other ill effects. But I will say this: I'm absolutely glad I had bullies in High School, and I know countless others who would say the same.
I'm sorry, but that's a load. I was bullied because I was smart (one taunt was "Einstein"). Gee, I guess they meant it as a compliment - NOT. Kids know, that no matter what is actually said, it is meant to put you down.

Now, I guess bullies did teach me a valuable leason, that the world can be a nasty place, that there are horrible people out there looking to try to hurt you, and that one needs to try to not let those people ruin your self-esteem. But it also made a shy kid even more shy, something that took years to get over. I'm glad you enjoyed your bully experience in High School - I HATED IT, and can't imagine wanting anyone else to go through that. There has to be better ways to learn life-leasons. Sure, you can teach babies to swim by throwing them in the pool (gurgle, gurgle, oops, Oh well, evolution in action), but one can also learn by taking swim leasons.

[Paracelsus]

I'm sorry, but that's a load. I was bullied because I was smart (one taunt was "Einstein"). Gee, I guess they meant it as a compliment - NOT. Kids know, that no matter what is actually said, it is meant to put you down.

Now, I guess bullies did teach me a valuable leason, that the world can be a nasty place, that there are horrible people out there looking to try to hurt you, and that one needs to try to not let those people ruin your self-esteem. But it also made a shy kid even more shy, something that took years to get over. I'm glad you enjoyed your bully experience in High School - I HATED IT, and can't imagine wanting anyone else to go through that. There has to be better ways to learn life-leasons. Sure, you can teach babies to swim by throwing them in the pool (gurgle, gurgle, oops, Oh well, evolution in action), but one can also learn by taking swim leasons.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

I'll reiterate: the focus here should be on preventing the bullying from taking place, versus helping the target to just 'deal with it' or, worse, telling the target that he or she deserves this mistreatment.

[DyerWolf]

There is a difference between teasing and bullying. There is also a difference between being teased and being ribbed.* Some people don't see the distinction. There is one advantage to being placed in an adverse situation: you learn how to deal with adversity.

We used to tell kids to punch the bully in the nose. Not because it taught the bully a lesson, but because it made the kid being bullied learn he can stand up for himself.**

Kids who are teased don't enjoy it. But they generally do learn to take care of themselves. Fat or skinny, gay or straight, male or female, ugly or attractive, weak or strong, we all get unwanted attention in one way shape or form - learning how to deal with it is actually good for us.

I remember more than one fat kid who got sick of being teased, got fit and actually improved their self-esteem (which, ultimately, is what matters)...




*took me a while to find a word/phrase that wasn't PG-13/R

**Works for women as well. My sister was being bullied at a bus stop when she was a kid, and finally got sick of it. She punched the bigger kid in the belly, made him throw up, and he never picked on her again (she was 5 at the time).

Another friend did something similar when she was in med school and the local BMOC thought he could put his hands where he wanted. She broke his wrist (without thinking about it - Jiu Jitsu is good training) and he didn't take any further liberties.

[Ilya]

We used to tell kids to punch the bully in the nose. Not because it taught the bully a lesson, but because it made the kid being bullied learn he can stand up for himself

Yes. If there is one lesson to learn from being bullied, it is how to defend oneself physically. I certainly learned that!

Unfortunately, in today's social atmosphere a) the bullied child gets punished for defending himself, and b) the parent can get into legal trouble for teaching a child to defend himself.

So bullies win, unless, as I said earlier, the parent calls the police and treats bullying as a criminal matter. Taking another kid's lunch money is extortion. Putting thumb tacks on a chair is assault.

[DyerWolf]

@ Ilya:

But is that what we want? Do we want to criminalize childish behavior? Trust me, the criminal justice system is the wrong system to deal with that issue. An assault charge/conviction for a seven year old who puts a tack on another kids chair? I think a spanking will solve that issue.

I disagree that a parent can get in trouble for teaching his child to defend himself. Self-defense is recognized in every state's laws.

If the kid who defends himself gets in trouble with the school administrators, then the administrators are weak and the parents should stick up for their kid.

(Side note: the fear from Columbine -type violence is justified - but caused more by integrating mentally unstable children who should not be mixed with the general population. In almost every instance the killers were, if not psychotic, on (or off) some type of medication for behavioral problems.)

(Second side note: When I was a kid, the "serial killer" was the fear-du-jour, then it became the "tri-state killing spree," then postmen goin "postal" - now its "school massacres." The reality is each of these are gory aberations that get lots of attention, but don't mean that a person is likely to become a victim thereof...)

I remeber one fat teen who got sick of being teased and shot himself in the head.

I doubt that's the 'Paul Harvey' version. The kid probably had lots more wrong with him than that. Suicide is not so simply explained.

[Ronald Brak]

I remeber one fat teen who got sick of being teased and shot himself in the head.

You are really quick. That was up there for like 3 seconds before I deleted it. I didn't think that comment was dealing with the issue constructively.

[DyerWolf]

No wonder my computer hung up. -- want me to delete?

[Ronald Brak]

No wonder my computer hung up. -- want me to delete?

If you want to clean up the thread, otherwise don't bother.

[Tinaa]

When my children were made fun of I always told them that "the bully is trying to make themselves feel better by making you feel worse." It didn't necessarily soothe my child's hurt feelings but it did give them some insight into why the hateful words were said.

I teach technology/keyboarding in a sixth grade center. We have a no-bullying policy and act quickly when we see it. Getting a child to tell on other children is not easy. I also teach about cyber-bullying.


I've taught sixth -twelfth grades. The seventh and eighth graders are the worst. Those kids are absolutely cruel. Believe it or not, I think our kids have become more tolerant in many ways than than my generation was. I worked seven years at the HS with a diverse student body numbering well over 2000. I was pleasantly surprised at the tolerance shown to the "different students". I saw acts of kindness that really floored me. We will always have the jerks to deal with but most of our students are going to make this world better.

[Paracelsus]

The seventh and eighth graders are the worst. Those kids are absolutely cruel.

Seventh and eighth grades were the worst for me. Even though I wasn't particularly popular in HS, I wasn't tormented mercilessly like I was in middle school.

[Gillianren]

We didn't really have a lot of physical bullying at my school, but when it did happen, it was for reasons that could not have been controlled. Like the girl who beat me up in high school. I was not yet overweight--big-boned, yes; there is such thing, and my bones both add about 20 pounds to my weight and permit a great deal to hang on my frame unnoticed--but within normal weight parameters. I was, however, uncoordinated and smart. Possibly being white contributed; I never bothered asking. But a girl I'd known practically all my life beat me up in gym class for no reason she stated.

It started out back in first grade or so with her picking on me for being smart.

[Kelfazin]

I take issue with the people saying that all fat people could become thin if they would just eat right and exercise. This is patently untrue and offensive. I would suggest picking up a copy of Penn and Tellers Bulls**t episode on obesity.

[Jeff Root]

Tinaa,

How does your school define "bullying"?

As I start writing this, I'm not at all sure how to define it,
but I distinguish between bullying and another activity that
people here seem to be including in the category of bullying.
I might call that other activity "teasing", "playing", "having
fun", "goofing off", or "flirting".

Bullying involves someone who has more power than another either
harming or threatening a person with less power. The "power" is
typically brute physical strength, or the appearance of strength
because of the overall size of the person, but it can as well be
social-political power: I can can force you to tell me the
combination to your locker because I know why you skipped phy ed
last Friday, and I'll tell everybody if you don't co-operate.

Bullying seems to be essentially a show of power. The victim
may be physically injured or not, may lose some property or not,
may be coerced or not, but generally is intimidated or hurt in
some way.

On the other hand, if you are intimidated just by the sight of
Big Don coming toward you in the hallway, that isn't his fault,
and I can't say that he's bullying you.

Likewise, if you are so short that silly me pretends to use the
top of your head to lean on, that may really annoy you, but I
wouldn't say that it is bullying. I'm not trying to hurt you,
I'm not trying to coerce you, I'm not trying to intimidate you,
I'm not trying to show you or anyone else that I have power over
you. I'm just trying to be funny-- whether I succeed or not.

I think it is absolutely essential that the distinction be made
between bullying and play. Unfortunately, I don't think that is
possible in many situations. So you either allow bullying where
you shouldn't, or prohibit play where you shouldn't.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Moose]

I'm responding to some claims that have been made earlier in this thread. Claims that are major hot-buttons for me.

I don't think anybody here could legitimately call me stupid or ignorant (which is equally true of just about everybody else on this board). I knew then, as I know now, that overeating and deep-fried foods were horribly unhealthy for me, and why. I have three conditions that restrict my dietary options somewhat, and these restrictions tend to interact. I can probably now hold my own against the below-average subset of nutritionists. I'm smart, and I have access to a great deal of knowledge on how to keep myself healthy.

And my Cook-Fu is very strong.

But you know what? It's not about my knowledge or my intelligence, or my ability to prepare healthy foods I genuinely want to eat. I don't enjoy fast foods very much. I'm rarely interested in sit-down restaurants because it's a come-down from my own cooking. I don't want to eat crap.

And yet, every time my chronic depression gets ahead of me, I hit the local deep-fried chicken stand. Or McDicks. Or the all-you-can-eat chinese buffet. Nobody's got a gun to my head. I almost wish someone did. It's far less insidious than being driven by my own demons.

Overeating is the cause of obesity in exactly the same way that gravity is the cause of falling down stairs. It's a technically correct answer, but has no useful value whatsoever.

Chronic Depression is a disease. It's a lot like controlling alcoholism, except there's even less support or sympathy for it. A sufferer will battle it to some degree every single day for the rest of their lives. Depression is a major factor in causing obesity. It's an enabler, in a way. It erodes (sometimes drastically) one's ability to make sensible choices. It often leads people to making self-destructive choices. And those choices usually end up making the depression worse. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I spent nearly all of my childhood trying to avoid a great many people who, for whatever reason, through a number of means, appeared to be deliberately and relentlessly trying to break my spirit at every single opportunity. I've spend much of my adulthood trying to avoid people who've tried (and sometimes succeeded) to deliberately and relentlessly rip me off.

I've spent nearly three-quarters of my life dangerously depressed, or trying to keep ahead of it, almost from the moment I've entered school onwards. I've spent the same three-quarters of my life clinically overweight. It's not a coincidence.

No problem exists in a vacuum (except possibly asphyxiation and dust mites.) Bullies are a major factor (but not the only factor) in causing childhood obesity. If you want to end childhood obesity, you'll first have to deal with the bullying along with the other causes. And that'll require something more from society than the usual short-sighted platitudes and institutionalized neglect.

[Moose]

Likewise, if you are so short that silly me pretends to use the top of your head to lean on, that may really annoy you, but I wouldn't say that it is bullying. I'm not trying to hurt you, I'm not trying to coerce you, I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm not trying to show you or anyone else that I have power over you. I'm just trying to be funny-- whether I succeed or not.

And yet, it causes a loss of face (or some degree of humiliation) in our society, intentional or not, to the "butt" of the joke. Nobody likes to lose face.

I'm not trying to step on my kitten's tail while making dinner. I'm just trying to step around the other one. It still hurts her like hell when I screw up like that.

I used to joke in a _very_ self-depreciating way with a loved one. Strictly between us it was funny, and because I initiated the joke to which I was the object, there was no loss of face on my part. But occasionally she'd want me to repeat that joke publicly. (Among friends, but still...) It stops being self-depreciation when you remove the "self" part. That was a major point of irritation for me, though that isn't what ended the relationship.

[Jeff Root]

I take issue with the people saying that all fat people could
become thin if they would just eat right and exercise. This is patently
untrue and offensive.
Actually, it is patently true.

If a person takes in 1500 calories per day but expends 2000 calories
per day, he will lose whatever fat he has. I don't really know but I
presume it occurred all the time in Stalin's weight-loss camps.

As it happens, my body type is pretty average: neither endomorphic
nor ectomorphic nor mesomorphic, and I get practically no excersize
at all, and eat anything I feel like eating, yet my weight consistently
remains below average. Any way that I can build ten pounds of
muscle without getting up from this chair?

Editing to add:

Obviously this says some of the same things Moose said just above,
who posted while I was typing.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Kelfazin]

In junior high I was picked on for having acne (he used to ask, in front of the whole class, if I counted my pimples every morning to keep track of them). Yea, there are medications and treatments you can do to limit the effect acne has, but sometimes it's going to get you no matter what. The bully didn't care, he just wanted to attack somebody. To me, the people on this thread talking about all fat people simply being too lazy to do something about their weight are just as bad. For a lot of people, yea, overeating is simply habit. Stop going to McDonald's and ordering 2 big macs. For others, they could be eating 500 calories a day and exercising every other day and still gain weight. Stop being that bully.

[Moose]

Actually, it is patently true.

I'm going to repeat something I've said two (of my) posts ago, for emphasis.

Overeating is the cause of obesity in exactly the same way that gravity is the cause of falling down stairs. It's a technically correct answer, but has no useful value whatsoever.

[Spock Jenkins]

I would suggest that while ones natural metabolism has a lot to do with it, for most it is lifestyle. Choice or not, depression or not - eat less / move more is the easiest way to lose weight. For some it means eating a lot less and moving a lot more - for others it's a simple matter of exchanging cookies for an apple for that afternoon snack.

As far as acne goes - I think that's the hardest part of being a teenager. There really is little you can do about it other than survive those years. I was thin, I didn't work in fast food, and my family rarely ate greasy things (mom liked to cook meat in water) - but I had it bad. I tried seeing a dermatologist, however all medication I tried dried out my skin so bad it turned bright red and caused far more discomfort than acne did. I just had to ride it out.

Fortunately I was at least 6 inches taller than just about everyone in my class and didn't get picked on much. Not because I was mean or in fights at all, but because nobody wants to find out what the big kid can do if provoked. I'm in my mid 30's and I've still never been in a fight.

[Kelfazin]

Actually, it is patently true.

If a person takes in 1500 calories per day but expends 2000 calories
per day, he will lose whatever fat he has. I suppose all those people that actually try this and it doesn't work are just doing something wrong. Hm.
I don't really know but I
presume it occurred all the time in Stalin's weight-loss camps.
I can see it now, the new diet fad. 2 slices of bread per day and all the forced labor you can take (or not take, doesn't matter) :lol:. Incidentally, I googled for Stalin weight loss camp and couldn't find anything. Were they labor camps al la A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich?

As it happens, my body type is pretty average: neither endomorphic
nor ectomorphic nor mesomorphic, and I get practically no excersize
at all, and eat anything I feel like eating, yet my weight consistently
remains below average. Any way that I can build ten pounds of
muscle without getting up from this chair?

I'm not sure what building muscle without exercise has to do with people that can't lose weight even if they do exercise.

[Kelfazin]

I would suggest that while ones natural metabolism has a lot to do with it, for most it is lifestyle. Choice or not, depression or not - eat less / move more is the easiest way to lose weight. For some it means eating a lot less and moving a lot more - for others it's a simple matter of exchanging cookies for an apple for that afternoon snack.

Yes, for most people, diet and exercise will work, I don't debate that point. But saying (or implying) all fat people are fat because they choose to be by their actions is wrong. It's unfair, untrue, and offensive to those that can't make the choice.


As far as acne goes - I think that's the hardest part of being a teenager. There really is little you can do about it other than survive those years. I was thin, I didn't work in fast food, and my family rarely ate greasy things (mom liked to cook meat in water) - but I had it bad. I tried seeing a dermatologist, however all medication I tried dried out my skin so bad it turned bright red and caused far more discomfort than acne did. I just had to ride it out.
We hada good diet when I a kid too. I inherited my acne though. My dad had (still has) a pretty serious "infestation". I was fairly lucky though, I found a medication that worked pretty well without any other serious side effect (Erythromycin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythromycin)) and I was able to stay on that until I got older and the acne left my face.

Fortunately I was at least 6 inches taller than just about everyone in my class and didn't get picked on much. Not because I was mean or in fights at all, but because nobody wants to find out what the big kid can do if provoked. I'm in my mid 30's and I've still never been in a fight.

I wasn't big or strong when I was being picked on. I just ignored as best I could and learned diplomacy. Now I'm in my early 30's and never been in a fight either lol.

[Jeff Root]

Actually, it is patently true.
I'm going to repeat something I've said two (of my) posts ago,
for emphasis.

Overeating is the cause of obesity in exactly the same way that gravity
is the cause of falling down stairs. It's a technically correct answer, but
has no useful value whatsoever.
That's what I was talking about when I said you had already posted
pretty much the same thing while I was typing.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Spock Jenkins]

Yes, for most people, diet and exercise will work, I don't debate that point. But saying (or implying) all fat people are fat because they choose to be by their actions is wrong. It's unfair, untrue, and offensive to those that can't make the choice.

I wasn't big or strong when I was being picked on. I just ignored as best I could and learned diplomacy. Now I'm in my early 30's and never been in a fight either lol.

I hope I wasn't implying that all obese people are that way by choice. Jeff is correct. Everyone who eats 1,500 calories and burns 2,000 will lose weight. For those that have difficulty losing weight just don't burn those 2,000 calories very easily. Slow metabolism or whatever. There are skinny folks that can't gain weight no matter how hard they try because they burn calories even when inactive.

As far as being big and strong - I was tall. 6' 2" and about 150 lbs at the end of eighth grade. I wasn't particularly strong - but no sense in telling anyone else that.

[Jeff Root]

Actually, it is patently true.

If a person takes in 1500 calories per day but expends 2000 calories
per day, he will lose whatever fat he has.
I suppose all those people that actually try this and it doesn't
work are just doing something wrong. Hm.
No, there are no people who took in 1500 calories per day and
expended 2000 calories per day but failed to lose fat. None.
Zero. Not one single person. What you are saying is physically
impossible.

The energy has to come from somewhere, and if it doesn't come
from food just eaten, then it comes from the body's reserves,
and the principle reserve is fat.

If you can show good evidence of any person expending more
calories every day than he/she takes in, without losing fat,
I'll pay $100,000 for the info.


I don't really know but I presume it occurred all the time in
Stalin's weight-loss camps.
I can see it now, the new diet fad. 2 slices of bread per day and
all the forced labor you can take (or not take, doesn't matter).
Incidentally, I googled for Stalin weight loss camp and couldn't
find anything. Were they labor camps al la A Day in the Life of
Ivan Denisovich?
Yeah, that's the ticket.

Others expressed this idea decades ago. Nothing new.


As it happens, my body type is pretty average: neither endomorphic
nor ectomorphic nor mesomorphic, and I get practically no excersize
at all, and eat anything I feel like eating, yet my weight consistently
remains below average. Any way that I can build ten pounds of
muscle without getting up from this chair?
I'm not sure what building muscle without exercise has to do with
people that can't lose weight even if they do exercise.
It's exactly the same situation: Tubby wants to lose his fat,
but doesn't have the willpower to limit his calorie intake to
less than his calorie expenditure; Dipstick wants to gain muscle,
but doesn't have the willpower to do sufficient exercise. As a
result, neither of us is shaped the way we could be if we had the
requisite willpower.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Swift]

Originally Posted by DyerWolf
We used to tell kids to punch the bully in the nose. Not because it taught the bully a lesson, but because it made the kid being bullied learn he can stand up for himselfYes. If there is one lesson to learn from being bullied, it is how to defend oneself physically. I certainly learned that!

Unfortunately, in today's social atmosphere a) the bullied child gets punished for defending himself, and b) the parent can get into legal trouble for teaching a child to defend himself.

So bullies win, unless, as I said earlier, the parent calls the police and treats bullying as a criminal matter. Taking another kid's lunch money is extortion. Putting thumb tacks on a chair is assault.
In another thread there is a big debate about whether humans are intrinsically violent creatures or not. I will admit, I'm not sure, but I think that teaching and culture are the biggest factors governing human behavior, not raw biology. And so, it is possible for us to change human behavior and make us less violent. That to me is a good thing. So, do we get there by teaching children to physically fight anyone who gives them trouble, or by trying to find non-violent ways to solve problems?

Do I think that by preventing bullying the world will become a peaceful garden? Am I so naive that I think that physical force will not be necessary, at times, for the foreseeable future? No, I'm too grounded in the real world.

The journey of a 1000 miles to peace is traveled one step at a time. I think trying to change this childhood behavior is an important step on this journey.

[Kelfazin]

No, there are no people who took in 1500 calories per day and
expended 2000 calories per day but failed to lose fat. None.
Zero. Not one single person. What you are saying is physically
impossible.

The energy has to come from somewhere, and if it doesn't come
from food just eaten, then it comes from the body's reserves,
and the principle reserve is fat.

If you can show good evidence of any person expending more
calories every day than he/she takes in, without losing fat,
I'll pay $100,000 for the info.

Archie Thompson (http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/misc/archiethompson.html)


When Archie Thompson was born, in June 2002, he weighed a perfectly normal 8lb 4oz but by 15 months he weighed 4 stone and by the age of two that had risen to 6 stone. This has had a profound effect on his health causing breathing difficulties and already one heart attack. It was feared that Archie may not live for more than another year.
His father Nigel Thompson was concerned and, in desperation, called in social services for help. The first they did was investigare Sarah for overfeeding Archie. With this discounted, he was admitted to the local hospital where doctors would monitor his eating and were surprised that he ate perfectly normally for his age and continued to gain weight at an alarming rate.

[Spock Jenkins]

The first they did was investigare Sarah for overfeeding Archie. With this discounted, he was admitted to the local hospital where doctors would monitor his eating and were surprised that he ate perfectly normally for his age and continued to gain weight at an alarming rate.

What this proves was that although he ate at a normal rate, his body did not burn calories at a normal rate. Jeff is still correct. If you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight. As stated before - some people just have a really hard time burning calories.

[Kelfazin]

They don't know if that's the cause, they know almost nothing of MOMO disease.

[Ilya]

Do I think that by preventing bullying the world will become a peaceful garden? Am I so naive that I think that physical force will not be necessary, at times, for the foreseeable future? No, I'm too grounded in the real world.

The journey of a 1000 miles to peace is traveled one step at a time. I think trying to change this childhood behavior is an important step on this journey.

I am sorry, but after reading your post several times I still do not understand what your point is.

[SeanF]

They don't know if that's the cause, they know almost nothing of MOMO disease.
They don't know what's causing him to not burn the calories, but it's a given that not burning the calories is what's causing the weight gain, as Jeff and Spock said. Otherwise, he'd be the equivalent of a perpetual motion machine.

As Moose (I think it was Moose) said, though, it's about as helpful as pointing out that gravity causes falls.

[DyerWolf]

In another thread there is a big debate about whether humans are intrinsically violent creatures or not. I will admit, I'm not sure, but I think that teaching and culture are the biggest factors governing human behavior, not raw biology. And so, it is possible for us to change human behavior and make us less violent. That to me is a good thing. So, do we get there by teaching children to physically fight anyone who gives them trouble, or by trying to find non-violent ways to solve problems?

Do I think that by preventing bullying the world will become a peaceful garden? Am I so naive that I think that physical force will not be necessary, at times, for the foreseeable future? No, I'm too grounded in the real world.

The journey of a 1000 miles to peace is traveled one step at a time. I think trying to change this childhood behavior is an important step on this journey.


I think creatures (all of them, including us) are intrinsically violent and non-violent, too - without that being a contradiction. In the competition for resources, trees outcompete other plants - which if they could might complain about the treatment from the trees.

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade.
Rush, The Trees http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3rOaAd2nEA *

Lions only kill what they need for food - unless it happens to be other lions or cheetahs they find competing within their territory. Rabbits will eat meat if they find it. They will also beat the crap out of each other for rabbity reasons.

People aren't much different. Lions and tigers and bears aren't really much competition for a group of humans. But humans are competition for other humans. Additionally, to some degree, unhealthy or unconforming members of the group can actually be detrimental to the wellbeing of all (hence the "He's different, let's kill him" mentality).

The teasing has a purpose: it encourages non-conforming individuals to shape up, or toughen up, or submit, or just go away. The individual either changes to conform, asserts his/her own dominance, becomes a drone or leaves. Similarly, people recognize that bullying is different, and equally dangerous (the group member that harms the group must also be dealt with) and so we have laws or people like me that enjoy thumping bullys (yes, I used to be a skinny kid - but I outgrew that).

Bottom line - I think we've all experienced it in one way shape or form, but few of us are permanently scarred or incapable with dealing with a little of the mud that gets flung around in daily life.

Nietzche wasn't the only one who recognized that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

Just ask the Spartans.

*(not the best recording/version)

[mugaliens]

Physics is absolute. There is absolutely no way to gain mass (fat) without caloric intake exceeding bodily expenditure, genetic disorder or not.

[Kelfazin]

Physics is absolute. There is absolutely no way to gain mass (fat) without caloric intake exceeding bodily expenditure, genetic disorder or not.

Ok I concede the point and withdraw my statement.

[Jeff Root]

If you can show good evidence of any person expending more
calories every day than he/she takes in, without losing fat,
I'll pay $100,000 for the info.
Archie Thompson (http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/misc/archiethompson.html)
When Archie Thompson was born, in June 2002, he weighed a perfectly
normal 8lb 4oz but by 15 months he weighed 4 stone and by the age of
two that had risen to 6 stone. This has had a profound effect on his
health causing breathing difficulties and already one heart attack. It
was feared that Archie may not live for more than another year.
His father Nigel Thompson was concerned and, in desperation, called
in social services for help. The first they did was investigare Sarah for
overfeeding Archie. With this discounted, he was admitted to the local
hospital where doctors would monitor his eating and were surprised
that he ate perfectly normally for his age and continued to gain
weight at an alarming rate.
That's excellent. If it turns out that Archie has been expending
more energy each day than he takes in in his food, I'll pay up!

It might be interesting and useful to analyze his exhaled breath
for carbon dioxide content. Obviously the other end needs to be
analyzed too, no pun intended, but unavoidable. Oh dear, I did
it again. Sorry. I don't see these things until I type them.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

dditionally, to some degree, unhealthy or unconforming members of the group can actually be detrimental to the wellbeing of all (hence the "He's different, let's kill him" mentality).

The teasing has a purpose: it encourages non-conforming individuals to shape up, or toughen up, or submit, or just go away. The individual either changes to conform, asserts his/her own dominance, becomes a drone or leaves.

The problem is that many of society's most valuable members are non-conformists. Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking were certainly non-conformists, as were Vincent Van Gogh, Edgar Allen Poe, Mary Shelley, Richard Feynman, Charles Darwin, etc. Scientists and artists tend to be 'odd men out' in general. Get rid of all of your 'odd ducks' and you destroy the flower of civilization.

As for bullying making people stronger, I cite information available from this website: http://www.safeyouth.org/scripts/teens/bullying.asp

How does bullying affect teens who are the targets of bullies?

Bullying can lead teenagers to feel tense, anxious, and afraid. It can affect their concentration in school, and can lead them to avoid school in some cases. If bullying continues for some time, it can begin to affect teens' self-esteem and feelings of self-worth. It also can increase their social isolation, leading them to become withdrawn and depressed, anxious and insecure. In extreme cases, bullying can be devastating for teens, with long-term consequences. Some teens feel compelled to take drastic measures, such as carrying weapons for protection or seeking violent revenge. Others, in desperation, even consider suicide.5,6,7 Researchers have found that years later, long after the bullying has stopped, adults who were bullied as teens have higher levels of depression and poorer self-esteem than other adults. (my bold)

Doesn't sound like being bullied is making the victims stronger, does it?

[DyerWolf]

@ Paracelsus:

I'm not saying bullying is good for folks (or kids). I merely commented on teasing. Bullying on the other hand is detrimental, and we have societal fixes for it.

As for the "teens have a hard time" citation - I don't disagree. You can always find individuals for whom something like that is traumatic. In fact, ask me or any other person who was ever bullied, and we'll admit we didn't like it.

There is a difference however.

Most folks, like me, overcame whatever allowed us to be victimized, and in some cases became champions of the weak.

I also agree that some non-conformists are good for our society - but some are not. Bill Gates and Tiger Woods probably weren't the coolest kids in school - but how many of us wouldn't mind living in their homes for a week?

You know the creepy guy that makes your kids uncomfortable in the mall? Or the woman who seems nice - but you know there's something off about her? Adults don't tease, but we do ostracise - and sometimes for a good reason.

[GDwarf]

There is one advantage to being placed in an adverse situation: you learn how to deal with adversity.
Sure. You might learn to deal with it. However, gasp, you'll find that bullies learn to deal with your adapting to it. You stop responding to what they're saying? Then they start hitting you. You hit them back? They just hit you harder. Bullies are not, contrary to popular belief, all people with deep-seated emotional issues who curl up and die if you frown at them rather then cowering.

So, what advantage is there to having your spirit constantly torn at? Every time you achieve something you're laughed at for it, every time you fail it gets rubbed in your face.

I strongly suspect that you were not bullied. Or, if you were, not seriously, since you apparently have no idea what it's like.

We used to tell kids to punch the bully in the nose. Not because it taught the bully a lesson, but because it made the kid being bullied learn he can stand up for himself.**
And, of course, it is impossible for someone to ever have any self esteem unless they've been bullied.

I'm sorry, but that's just bull. You can learn to stand up for yourself and how to deal with adversity without being bullied. Bullying has no advantage, and the fact that you would defend it confuses me greatly.

I'm hoping that this doesn't count as a slippery slope fallacy, but it would seem to me that your reasoning would imply that war, disease, famine, and genocide are all desirable, since they teach people to be stronger. I'm going to assume that you see problems with going around encouraging those things from happening or, at least, not stopping them from happening. So, how is bullying any different?

I may as well say this, though I know it's been said before in this thread: Bullying doesn't build you up, it doesn't help you find hidden strength, it slowly and surely grinds you down until the world becomes a very bleak place, I tended to cry quite often, and I felt perpetually depressed. How, exactly, was this good for me?

As soon as the bullying stopped my life became much better, I started making new friends, being more out-going, and just generally a more social person. Had it continued I'd probably sit alone during my free time, and have skipped prom since I'd know no-one. As opposed to having a good circle of friends and actually doing stuff on Friday nights.

Mind to say again that bullying is a good thing?

[Maksutov]

Amen, RE white people being the hardest on weight!! I grew up in the South, and this was absolutely true for me. I was ridiculed endlessly for having a 'black girl's butt', even though I was very slim and I had an hourglass figure. I always envied girls who had the stereotypical flat 'white girl's butt'; it wasn't until J Lo flaunted her fab curves that having a rump like hers became acceptable and even desirable....Having been in the South for 17 long years now, I agree re what you've described.

In addition it's even more prevalent among white, male Southerners, to the point where it's considered a matter of honor to have no butt at all, in order to demonstrate one's racial purity.

The funny thing is, I'm 100% northern European/New England Yankee, but I have a few muscles in the gluteus maximus area that are not quite flat. Might have been a result of pitching in baseball during Little League, high school and college, as well as playing on the line both ways in football, plus being on the college wrestling team, running, and spending lots of time in the weight room.

My girlfriends always found that area of musculature quite attractive, even to the point of one taking me to a clothing store with her friends so that she could show me off while wearing some rather tight pants she had chosen. Neat to be whistled at by some attractive ladies!

But here in the South, it was interesting that my racist redneck BIL once said that in his opinion the only position he thought I was qualified for was in the fast food industry, since I had the big butt for such a job. My response was that he was just jealous, because all I needed to keep my pants up was a belt.

I had already noticed how many white Southern males wear suspenders.

Southern gals have a derogatory term for women who have nicely shaped derrières: "bubble-butts".

Envy strikes again.

[Tinaa]

Tinaa,

How does your school define "bullying"?

As I start writing this, I'm not at all sure how to define it,
but I distinguish between bullying and another activity that
people here seem to be including in the category of bullying.
I might call that other activity "teasing", "playing", "having
fun", "goofing off", or "flirting".

[snip]

Bullying seems to be essentially a show of power. The victim
may be physically injured or not, may lose some property or not,
may be coerced or not, but generally is intimidated or hurt in
some way.

[snip]

I think it is absolutely essential that the distinction be made
between bullying and play. Unfortunately, I don't think that is
possible in many situations. So you either allow bullying where
you shouldn't, or prohibit play where you shouldn't.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Here are the official definitions from our handbook.

Bullying is written or oral expression or physical conduct that a school district’s board of trustees or the board’s designee determines:
1. to have the effect of physically harming a student, damaging a student’s property, or placing a student in reasonable fear of harm to the student’s person or of damage to the student’s property; or
2. to be sufficiently severe, persistent, or pervasive to create an intimidating, threatening, or abusive educational environment for a student.

Harassment is
1. conduct that meets the definition established in district policies DIA (LOCAL) and FFH (LOCAL); or
2. conduct that threatens to cause harm or bodily injury to another student, is sexually intimidating, causes physical damage to the property of another student, subjects another student to physical confinement or restraint, or maliciously and substantially harms another student’s physical or emotional health or safety.

Teasing is a form of bullying IMO. I admit much of it is a judgment call on the teachers part. I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it. The main rule in my classroom, much like this board, is Be Polite! No name-calling, don't touch another student or their stuff, no hollering across the room, etc. I am rather rigid with the few rules I have. I, in turn, do not discipline a child in front of their peers. I will redirect inappropriate behavior by reminding a student of the classroom rules. I have had very few incidences of the type of behavior that required a discipline referral to the principal. All of those were incidences of bullying.

[Maksutov]

First, until this post I was unaware of any consistent
difference in shape between black girls' butts and white
girls' butts. That's a new concept to me.Do you have cable/satellite TV? Do you get BET? Check it out. Second, if males in the south ever preferred "stereotypical
flat white girls' butts" to curvier ones, I've never heard of
such a thing before. That's a new concept, too.They say they do. That's based on first-hand experience. http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif What they actually like is a different matter. And whom they eventually wind up marrying is yet another matter entirely.

[Noclevername]

Most folks, like me, overcame whatever allowed us to be victimized, and in some cases became champions of the weak.

I also agree that some non-conformists are good for our society - but some are not. Bill Gates and Tiger Woods probably weren't the coolest kids in school - but how many of us wouldn't mind living in their homes for a week?

You know the creepy guy that makes your kids uncomfortable in the mall? Or the woman who seems nice - but you know there's something off about her? Adults don't tease, but we do ostracise - and sometimes for a good reason.
So all those kids who got beat up for being short, or black, or jewish, or wearing glasses, or walking with a limp, or being good at math "overcame" those things?

Gee, how good for them.

[Maksutov]

Not sure I want a woman with an "hour-glass" figure. Have you looked at an hour-glass? That would be some kind of mutant. :lol:"Hourglass" is just a "figure" of speech. http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

[Maksutov]

What every obese kid needs is a Bad Santa (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0307987/)* to serve as a mentor and protector.


*WARNING: ADULT LANGUAGE IN SOME SUBLINKS

[Maksutov]

So all those kids who got beat up for being short, or black, or jewish, or wearing glasses, or walking with a limp, or being good at math "overcame" those things?

Gee, how good for them.Of course they did.

If they didn't, then they deserved to weeded out.

Bullies are obviously public servants, working for the common good.

[DyerWolf]

@ GDwarf: Please recall that I originally distinguished between ribbing, teasing and bullying. I specifically said that bullying is ADVERSE to the wellbeing of both the individual and group. I did suggest that a person can learn something positive from adversity. But I did not suggest that a person needed the adversity in the first place, or that being bullied was good.

The other thing I suggested is that most folks weather the slings and arrows of childhood. Some don't. It sounds like you had a rough patch but something changed and things got better. My sincere congratulations.

Contrary to your assertion, I did get picked on as a kid. Two things changed that - I learned to fight (and got good at it through practice) and I got big (so most people thought twice about wanting to get physical with me). You may recognize the next part: once I got too big to pick on physically, some of the kids teased me for social gaffes, pimples, my clothes, etc. It didn't matter that I could defend myself physically: at 14 I was still Napoleon Dynamite (and I didn't have a car, and the girls all wanted to date seniors, and I still played D&D, etc. etc. ad nauseum). I am not suggesting this is the only or best alternative. It is simply what I did.

The point I'm trying to make is that the teasing and bullying didn't kill me. Twenty years later, my perspective on the frustrations of childhood and adolescence are considerably different than that of someone for whom the wounds are still fresh. The lessons I learned then inform the way I treat others today. I hope you have a similar perspective eventually.



@ Noclevername: Respectfully, that's not even wrong.

Side note: Marines have a reputation for being tough and confident.

What most people don't know is that most Marines are short and were either skinny kids or fat kids.

Most people do know that you tangle with a Marine at your own risk...

[Noclevername]

@ GDwarf: Please recall that I originally distinguished between ribbing, teasing and bullying. I specifically said that bullying is ADVERSE to the wellbeing of both the individual and group. I did suggest that a person can learn something positive from adversity. But I did not suggest that a person needed the adversity in the first place, or that being bullied was good.

The other thing I suggested is that most folks weather the slings and arrows of childhood. Some don't. It sounds like you had a rough patch but something changed and things got better. My sincere congratulations.

Contrary to your assertion, I did get picked on as a kid. Two things changed that - I learned to fight (and got good at it through practice) and I got big (so most people thought twice about wanting to get physical with me). You may recognize the next part: once I got too big to pick on physically, some of the kids teased me for social gaffes, pimples, my clothes, etc. It didn't matter that I could defend myself physically: at 14 I was still Napoleon Dynamite (and I didn't have a car, and the girls all wanted to date seniors, and I still played D&D, etc. etc. ad nauseum). I am not suggesting this is the only or best alternative. It is simply what I did.

The point I'm trying to make is that the teasing and bullying didn't kill me. Twenty years later, my perspective on the frustrations of childhood and adolescence are considerably different than that of someone for whom the wounds are still fresh. The lessons I learned then inform the way I treat others today. I hope you have a similar perspective eventually.



@ Noclevername: Respectfully, that's not even wrong.

Side note: Marines have a reputation for being tough and confident.

What most people don't know is that most Marines are short and were either skinny kids or fat kids.

Most people do know that you tangle with a Marine at your own risk...
So all any bullied kid has to do, is to become able to outfight their bullies! Thanks for the good advice, now I'll know what to tell any small kid who gets beaten; "Biggen up!" :rolleyes:

So if what I said "isn't even wrong", tell me what I really should've said, then. Because as I recall, this thread is about bullying, not "hey, you could stand to lose some weight, here's a good diet and exercise plan."

[DyerWolf]

I was sharing my experiences, Noclevername. Please re-read:
I am not suggesting this is the only or best alternative. It is simply what I did.

Please don't lose sight of the theme of my post, simply because you feel the method I used as a child doesn't apply to your situation.

* most folks weather the slings and arrows of childhood;
* a person can learn something positive from adversity;
* Twenty years later, my perspective on the frustrations of childhood and adolescence are considerably different than that of someone for whom the wounds are still fresh;
* The lessons I learned then inform the way I treat others today.


So if what I said "isn't even wrong", tell me what I really should've said, then.
You've listed some things people have been picked on for. But those things are not wrong or bad. Being Black or Jewish or being 'good at math' are just part of who a person is. You don't overcome those things. You shouldn't want to.

What you overcome is shame for being different. You overcome being susceptible to another's cruelty. I would hope you overcome being a victim.

[Noclevername]

I was sharing my experiences, Noclevername. Please re-read:


Please don't lose sight of the theme of my post, simply because you feel the method I used as a child doesn't apply to your situation.



You've listed some things people have been picked on for. But those things are not wrong or bad. Being Black or Jewish or being 'good at math' are just part of who a person is. You don't overcome those things. You shouldn't want to.

What you overcome is shame for being different. You overcome being susceptible to another's cruelty. I would hope you overcome being a victim. In an ideal situation, maybe. But trying to overcome childhood traumas isn't that easy, and it's not something everyone has the opportunity to do. There's a reason they're called "formative years", and being scarred deeply during that time can and has ruined people's lives even decades later. It's not something to take lightly.

ADDED: It doesn't apply to most people's situations. If you could "get over it", then you're one of the lucky few.

[Jeff Root]

In an ideal situation, maybe. But trying to overcome childhood traumas
isn't that easy, and it's not something everyone has the opportunity
to do. There's a reason they're called "formative years", and being
scarred deeply during that time can and has ruined people's lives even
decades later. It's not something to take lightly.

ADDED: It doesn't apply to most people's situations. If you could
"get over it", then you're one of the lucky few.
Without supporting evidence, I find it impossible to believe that
more than a very small percentage (single digits) of teenagers
or pre-teens are traumatized by bullying or other harrassment to
the point of being "scarred deeply". I think you are projecting your
own personal experience onto the rest of the population, and your
personal experience is relatively unusual.

I was exposed to rather minimal bullying or harrassment. On one
occasion a big fat kid took something of mine, possibly by mistake,
thinking it was his, or possibly because he thought he could get
away with it. I dunno. We got into a very minor scrap. I don't
recall any of the details. Nobody got hurt, nothing got broken.
We got a talking to by the assistant principle and I got my stuff
back. On another occasion I had some kind of altercation with a
bigger but not quite as fat guy. No idea what started it. He did
intimidate me, and I ended up swinging my pencil at him. It sounds
unbelieveable, but my memory of the event really was that the
eraser end was going to hit him. Honest. I didn't hit him very hard
though because the pencil point only went into his arm (at the place
where the hero is always injured in movies) a tiny bit. I didn't see
any blood. Both of those events were in junior high school, and I
don't recall any others. In high school, one kid started hitting me
in class. Unlike the others, this guy was only slightly larger than
me, but like the others, I have no idea why he attacked me. I sat
there and got hit a couple of times, and then he went to the boy's
room to wash his bloody knuckles while I tried to figure out what
that was all about. (Possibly he hit the back of my chair. Ha!)
Going back to elementary school time, I recall one kid who chased
me around for a few minutes. I thought I was smart enough to
evade him, even though he ran faster, but no, I wasn't that smart.
Or he was smarter. Nothing much came of that event, though.

Far and away, the painful memories I have are of stupid things I
have said or done. Relatively few painful memories of stupid things
other people have said or done.

In any case, I think the two important things are 1) to distinguish
between bullying-- actually hurting, coercing, threatening, or
intimidating someone-- and merely teasing or having fun with others
without harming them; and 2) to understand why kids (or adults)
do the things in #1.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

Without supporting evidence, I find it impossible to believe that
more than a very small percentage (single digits) of teenagers
or pre-teens are traumatized by bullying or other harrassment to
the point of being "scarred deeply". I think you are projecting your
own personal experience onto the rest of the population, and your
personal experience is relatively unusual.

I was exposed to rather minimal bullying or harrassment.

My experience was considerably worse than that.

Minimal bullying may not produce significant long-term effects, but I assure you that severe bullying will. As for how many people remain scarred afterwards, please refer to one of my earlier posts for research on that subject.

It took me a couple of decades to get over what happened to me to the point that I could let people into my life. I'm still not fully over it. It affects my relationships with people to this very day.

Added: This thread is bringing out some very raw emotions in a lot of people. I'm not sure this is necessarily a good thing but will soldier on, nonetheless.

[Dragon Star]

I'm sorry,

Don't lie, no your not.

but that's a load. I was bullied because I was smart (one taunt was "Einstein"). Gee, I guess they meant it as a compliment - NOT. Kids know, that no matter what is actually said, it is meant to put you down.DUH. What is your point here? "I know, I'll make the point that is so painfully obvious no one will refute it!"



In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it.

You, and others, totally missed my intentions.

Okay, so you say that you were bullied for being smart...know why? Because you were. BINGO! Truth. Why in the world would you be offended by this? If it wasn't because you were smart, it was because you had glasses (as mentioned before), crooked teeth, bad hair, exc...

As for the big butt comment, you found an exception (thus my use of the word "USUALLY"). It's as if I posted statistics saying 9/10 people hate statistics, and you jump up and down saying "BUT I DON'T!" Okay, point is?

There has to be better ways to learn life-leasons. Sure, you can teach babies to swim by throwing them in the pool (gurgle, gurgle, oops, Oh well, evolution in action), but one can also learn by taking swim leasons.This is a bad analogy. You comparing hardships of life to throwing babies in a pool? I fail to see the connection. There are two roads, you either are the bully or the bullied (very very few made it through school being neither or both), and unless you challenge public schools entirely, this will always exist.

Live has many similarities to natures laws, as long as their are prey, there are predators, vise versa.

[Van Rijn]

I'm sorry, but that's a load. I was bullied because I was smart (one taunt was "Einstein"). Gee, I guess they meant it as a compliment - NOT. Kids know, that no matter what is actually said, it is meant to put you down.

Now, I guess bullies did teach me a valuable leason, that the world can be a nasty place, that there are horrible people out there looking to try to hurt you, and that one needs to try to not let those people ruin your self-esteem. But it also made a shy kid even more shy, something that took years to get over. I'm glad you enjoyed your bully experience in High School - I HATED IT, and can't imagine wanting anyone else to go through that. There has to be better ways to learn life-leasons. Sure, you can teach babies to swim by throwing them in the pool (gurgle, gurgle, oops, Oh well, evolution in action), but one can also learn by taking swim leasons.

For me, it was "professor." There were a lot of bullies in grade school and junior high, and I hated it. Luckily, I managed with few bullies in high school. I think that partly had to do with the school and partly with me growing up.

This thread does remind me of one time I turned things around a bit. In fourth grade, I was saying something or other about "ions" and a kid that had often taunted me told everyone that there was no such thing. So, I went to some trouble to bring one of my father's text books to school to show him, whereupon he laughed in my face. Before I realized what I was doing, I had grabbed his shirt with both hands, yelling "THERE" (PUSH) "ARE" (TUG) "SO" (PUSH) "IONS!" (TUG - RRRRIPPPP!). That was my only time I was ever admonished by the principal not to attack other students, "even if they don't believe in ions." :lol:

[Ilya]

You, and others, totally missed my intentions.

The way your previous post was phrased, "missing your intentions" was pretty much a given:

In my experience, excluding mental disabilities, if bullies can find something to bully you for, there is usually some sort of truth behind it. The truth hurts, however it's absolute necessity to see reality.

If a bully makes fun of you because you because you punched a telephone pole and broke your hand, guess what, you're an idiot.

If a bully makes fun of you because you're under/overweight, guess what, you likely are.

If a bully makes fun of you for wearing your underwear on your head at that crazy party last night, guess what, you should have been more responsible.

I don't defend bullying, however, I have seen people change their ways for the better as a result.



Okay, so you say that you were bullied for being smart...know why? Because you were. BINGO! Truth. Why in the world would you be offended by this? If it wasn't because you were smart, it was because you had glasses (as mentioned before), crooked teeth, bad hair, exc...

Because your previous post implied (and I do not believe a single person on this board took it differently) that desirable outcome of being bullied for being smart is "changing their ways" and not being smart any more. I accept that's not what you meant... but it sure came across that way.

And even given correct interpretation, your post still does not wash. MOST bullying does not involve any behaviour on the target's side which needs/should be changed. Most bullying is just cruelty.

[Ilya]

You've listed some things people have been picked on for. But those things are not wrong or bad. Being Black or Jewish or being 'good at math' are just part of who a person is. You don't overcome those things. You shouldn't want to.

What you overcome is shame for being different. You overcome being susceptible to another's cruelty. I would hope you overcome being a victim.

I'd love to see some unbiased statistic on this subject (I doubt there is any), but in my experience, "overcomings" you listed DOES NOT occur, unless you learn to physically batter bullies into leaving you alone (which, as I keep stressing, modern American school system punishes). Learned helplessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness), the expectation of being a victim, is a far more likely outcome, which may or may not get "overcome" in adulthood.

[Paracelsus]

Dragon Star, Jeff Root, and Dyerwolf, I have some questions for each of you: How would you react if your child were being bullied at school? How would it make you feel to see his/her pain and distress? What would you do about it?

Would you tell him or her that he/she deserved it and tell him or her that he or she must conform in order for the bullying to stop?

Would you tell him or her that he or she wasn't really being bullied?

Would you tell him or her to ignore it?

Would you tell him or her to punch the bully in the nose? If so, how would you react when he/she got in trouble for following your advice?

What would you do if you told him or her to do one of the above and the bullying continued or worsened?

Would you go to your child's school and demand that the bully or bullies be removed from school and/or punished for their misbehavior? This is what I'd do.

What would you do if your child was so traumatized by the bullying that he or she became depressed and needed to be put on medication?

How would you feel if the bullying traumatized your child so badly that he or she committed suicide? This HAS happened in other cases.

BTW, bullying need not be physical to be classified as bullying. Bullying may also take the form of name-calling, rumor-mongering, isolating and ostracizing the victim, or myriad other gas-lighting techniques. Psychological bullying is very prevalent among girls and can be far more damaging in the long run than physical bullying, as it is invisible to all but the bullies and the victims. Physical bullying leaves evidence in the form of cuts, bruises, torn or dirty clothes, etc. Psychological bullying leaves no physical evidence and is often done in the absence of any witnesses who would be sympathetic to the victim's plight. Often, if the victim reports this bullying to an adult, the adult will very likely accuse him or her of making trouble, lying, being a tattle-tale, etc. The victim is therefore in a lose-lose situation and may suffer day after day, week after week, for years, if he or she remains in the same classes/school as the bullies.

How could someone NOT be permanently damaged under those circumstances??!!!

[Tucson_Tim]

Maybe they subscribe to the Friedrich Nietzsche philosophy:

That which does not kill us makes us stronger.

Conan does!

[DyerWolf]

Dyerwolf, I have some questions for you:

My answers reflect both what I intend to do if faced with the situation, and what I did as a kid. They also include 'lessons learned' since that time. Some of your questions also include non-bullying problems, or ancillary issues which I will also address. Thanks for the opportunity to respond. Good questions BTW - especially since I am about to have my first child.


How would you react if your child were being bullied at school? I would talk to my kid. I would listen. I would also tell him that it's not only okay to defend himself, he has a right (perhaps even a responsibility) to stick up for himself. I would assure him that I will support him (if he gets in trouble at school - I've got his back). Depending upon the nature and severity of what was occurring, I might contact the school. But first, I would give him a chance to solve the problem on his own.

How would it make you feel to see his/her pain and distress? What would you do about it? I know my kid is going to face situations which are painful and stressful. It will probably tear me up a bit, but I will have to help him through the situation. As I wrote above, I would try to give him the 'tools' and support with which to address the situation himself.

Would you tell him or her that he/she deserved it and tell him or her that he or she must conform in order for the bullying to stop? No. (Please remember that my comment several posts above did not imply this.)

Would you tell him or her that he or she wasn't really being bullied? No.

Would you tell him or her to ignore it? Definately not. I think you have to face these things head-on. The proper technique to use is as varied as there are people and situations. Types of response include confrontation (verbal or physical in response to the actual or implied threat), humor (a scathing wit can shut up some folks), or being the bigger person. Notice that this last is not the same as ignoring it. Even in the past few years I've had abusive bosses and petty co-workers say some pretty nasty things about me. But by reflecting that their bad opinion is actually a compliment (think about it, if a ****-head likes you, there's something wrong) I refused to get drawn into their game. After things cooled down, other bosses and coworkers admired my restraint. One (very senior boss) even said - you must be doing something right if ____ doesn't like you.

Would you tell him or her to punch the bully in the nose? If the bullying is physical, yes. The response has to match the threat. Note: this doesn't change the bully's behavior. It just makes it 'cost' more to bully that particular child. The bully looks for an easier target.

This actually happened in my case. I didn't get big until I was in my 20's. In my late elementary and middle school years, I was a ridiculously skinny kid, who finally got tired of getting pushed around and I started scrapping. I got my butt kicked the first few times, but I learned to get a few hard licks in. Eventually, I got better at fighting and it hurt the bullies too much to mess with me. They went and found softer targets - but left me alone.

-- See also my response to GDwarf - it didn't stop the psychological bullying, but the skills I learned scrapping applied there as well. I wasn't very good with the verbal riposte at first, but with practice, managed to turn snide remarks around pretty well.

If so, how would you react when he/she got in trouble for following your advice? I would defend my child's right to defend himself.

What would you do if you told him or her to do one of the above and the bullying continued or worsened? Things do tend to escalate before they get better. When I started fighting back, I still had the reputation of a wimp. Bigger bullies came around for a while to see if I really meant it. I did. They eventually left me alone.

However, if the bullying became dangerous - and stopped being bullying but looked more like assault or abuse, I would step in fast and hard - with the authority of a parent, the police or my lawyer as necessary.

Would you go to your child's school and demand that the bully or bullies be removed from school and/or punished for their misbehavior?
Depends on the situation. Probably not at first.

What would you do if your child was so traumatized by the bullying that he or she became depressed and needed to be put on medication? If this occurred, I think I would need to look to the root causes of why my child is so traumatized. Why they're being ostracised and determine if there is a deeper problem involved. If my kid needed professional help, I'd find it for him.


BTW, bullying need not be physical to be classified as bullying. ~Snip~ Psychological bullying is very prevalent among girls and can be far more damaging in the long run than physical bullying, as it is invisible to all but the bullies and the victims. I recognize this as true. Girls are crueler to each other than they are to men or than men are to each other. Even as adults, women don't get dressed up to impress men - but rather other women. The thing is, the kid needs to learn to handle mental and emotional conflict as well as physical. Sticking up for yourself is good.

~Snip~ Often, if the victim reports this bullying to an adult, the adult will very likely accuse him or her of making trouble, lying, being a tattle-tale, etc. The victim is therefore in a lose-lose situation and may suffer day after day, week after week, for years, if he or she remains in the same classes/school as the bullies. The problem here is the adult, not the kid.

How could someone NOT be permanently damaged under those circumstances??!!! I can't adequately answer this question. It makes it very hard for a kid to be picked on at school, and not find support at home - especially if what they really get is counter attacks at home that reinforce the damage done by other children.

While I can't fully answer your question, I do know something about making yourself a hard target. If the other person knows you won't strike back or defend yourself, there is no reason for them to stop. IF they know you can give as good as you get, or will at least make it harder for them, they will typically look elsewhere for their sport. But some situations need outside intervention. Whether its the police, a school counselor, a bigger kid, friends, a lawsuit or just a hug depends on the circumstances.



How would you feel if the bullying traumatized your child so badly that he or she committed suicide? This HAS happened in other cases.

I kept this for last for a reason. I don't think any suicide can be solely attrubuted to bullying. Suicide is much more complex. I've had a lot of training in suicide prevention and intervention. The best thing a potentially suicidal person can do is seek professional help. The best thing you can do for a potentially suicidal person is get them professional help - fast. Lay people are not equipped to handle the full course of treatment necessary, so if someone says or does things that cause you concern - confront them directly. Literally ask "are you feeling suicidal?" Stay with them until you can get assistance. Call 911 if necessary.

[Gillianren]

I hate that quote. It's patently untrue. That which does not kill us often leaves us battered, weakened hulks terrified of being hurt that much again. (Edit: DyerWolf posted while I was writing; this was in response to the dread quote TucsonTim mentioned. I'm also not saying I think he believes it.)

If bullying really got people to "overcome" their faults (leaving aside kids who are bullied for being smart, short, Jewish, et. al.), wouldn't all those fat kids getting bullied stop being fat? And yet I think we can all acknowledge the American epidemic of obesity. So clearly, there's something not right here.

As for "all it takes is willpower to lose weight," I think Jeff completely missed the whole metabolism issue. Sure, all you have to do is burn those five hundred extra calories. But there are often reasons it's really harder for some people to burn them than others. And even at my ideal weight, I personally would be about a size 14, because that's the thinnest my hips will ever be--that's bone, kids, and it doesn't compress too well. Likewise ribcage and, well, other bits that do compress to a certain extent but really, really hurt when they do.

I, too, eat badly due to depression. And because of chronic pain--it hurts to stand long enough to cook something healthy, even when I have the focus to do so, and I don't have anyone who'll cook for me.

And yes. I was bullied for being smart. Whether people believe it or not is frankly irrelevant to me. And since I was a pretty pacifistic child--I didn't think it was any more right for me to hurt them than it was for them to hurt me--I didn't fight back. But hey, that's okay--in my school district, due to gang problems, it was policy that even when you don't fight back, you get in trouble for fighting. Seems some gang members would pick on someone until that person fought them, not fight back and therefore not be the one to get in trouble, and get their gang to pound on whoever-it-was with them outside of school.

[Tucson_Tim]

I hate that quote. It's patently untrue. That which does not kill us often leaves us battered, weakened hulks terrified of being hurt that much again.


Lighten up. It was a joke. Didn't you see the "Conan" part?

[Delvo]

The advice to beat the bully up is peculiar in the same way that the concept of duelling is. It acts like the good, innocent side will surely win the fight, despite the fact that that's obviously not true. And for the target/victim to lose a fight can only make things worse.

[Moose]

What would you do if your child was so traumatized by the bullying that he or she became depressed and needed to be put on medication?

If someone spills a single drop of water on your forehead, it rolls off, and you get on with your life. If someone spills individual drops on your forehead, regularly, for weeks, years, or decades on end, it's called torture and is prohibited by international treaty.

One can shrug off single instances of abuse if they're relatively mild and rare. But relentless bullying scars for life.

From the time I was seven (immediately post-move) until the time I hit college (where all bullying except economic abruptly ended), I was miserable. I was bullied relentlessly. I received no help whatsoever. None. It was generally known by the adults in my life I was being tormented, but I got no tangible help whatsoever. I should have had medical support to cope with the constant depression. I should have had some sort of protection. I should have had counseling. But I had nothing. I was totally on my own.

I was physically abused on at least a monthly basis. Stalked or threatened with physical abuse on a weekly basis (with stretches of daily). I'd had my belongings stolen and destroyed. I was rumored about viciously. All of my victories were dismissed and my mistakes were rubbed in my face relentlessly. And it's hard to argue they were mistakes at all: one especially persistent rumor was that I "talked to my bike". My mistake? I was caught playing Knight Rider with a younger friend when I was seven. The rumor persisted until I graduated from high school.

When they couldn't find anything to spread rumors about, they'd make stuff up.

Occasionally teachers would join in.

Now? There's a huge difference between the image I project among strangers (stiff, cold, pompous, caustic, and sarcastic) and who I really am (warm, very silly, gentle). It took me a lot of work (and some understanding friends in college) to learn how to smooth down the scarring enough to once again show the goofy, teddy bear who loves science and technical things that I really am.

I'm still aloof with strangers, among other anxiety-related problems. I don't think anything will ever change that, but people who take the time to get to know me and earn my trust do get to see the real me.

How would you feel if the bullying traumatized your child so badly that he or she committed suicide? This HAS happened in other cases.

Only lack of opportunity, lack of imagination, and one really special feral cat kept me from becoming either a statistic or a national headline during the absolute nightmare I call the 11th grade. (There's a story there, but maybe another time.)

If I knew then what I know now... But then, I also now know how to seek and get help, and how to recognize when I need it. I wish I'd known as a child my family doctor was the one person worthy of what little trust I might have scraped together at that point. He was the one person who has ever taken my depression seriously. And he had the ability to genuinely offer effective help.

How could someone NOT be permanently damaged under those circumstances??!!!

I've never been in a position where I wasn't having to cope in some way with the psychological damage that was done to me for over a third of my lifetime. Even now, where my life is going perhaps better than it's ever been, I'm working to cope with the many consequences.

I don't consider myself a victim of bullying, but it took me a long time and a lot of work to stop seeing myself that way.

I'm a survivor of profound, long-term, psychological, emotional, and physical abuse. And I continue to heal, slowly.

[Moose]

Lighten up. It was a joke. Didn't you see the "Conan" part?

This is a subject that for many is so profoundly unfunny that jokes are very unlikely to be well received, Tim. There's a time and place. I would argue this is neither.

[DyerWolf]

The advice to beat the bully up is peculiar in the same way that the concept of duelling is. It acts like the good, innocent side will surely win the fight, despite the fact that that's obviously not true. And for the target/victim to lose a fight can only make things worse.
I disagree. I think it's better to defend yourself and lose, than not defend yourself and let yourself down as well.
No one is as invested in your life as you are. You should take care of yourself.

Think of it this way. Bully "A" likes to punch smaller kids in the stomach to make them cry. "B" and "C" are smaller kids.

One day at school, A punches B and C in the stomach and laughs when they cry. The next day, A again punches B and laughs when he cries. This time, however, when he moves to strike C, C hits him in the nose and makes it bleed. The other kids laugh at A, who in turn beats up on C until he cries.

The next day, A punches B in the stomach and laughs when he cries. Again, when he moves to strike C, C hits him in the nose and kicks him in the shin. He beats up C again, but C gets in a few good licks and A leaves the fight with a bleeding nose, a black eye and a bruised shin.

The next day: What do you think is going on in the minds of the three kids?

[Tucson_Tim]

This is a subject that for many is so profoundly unfunny that jokes are very unlikely to be well received, Tim. There's a time and place. I would argue this is neither.

Are you speaking about your own experiences?

[Moose]

I don't think any suicide can be solely attrubuted to bullying. Suicide is much more complex.

Having been suicidal (or dangerously close to it) three times in my life, I would suggest you reconsider your assessment. Some kid in the future may totally depend on you taking them seriously. Let me assure you from direct personal experience that bullying most definitely can be the sole cause of suicide.

My first flashpoint was during my 11th grade. It was solely due to a four-month period of horrific, daily abuse from which I was totally unable to escape nor obtain any sort of help or relief from adults, frequently eyewitnesses, who knew bloody well (but either failed or were unwilling to recognize) how badly I was being abused.

The best thing a potentially suicidal person can do is seek professional help.

Agreed, but again from personal experience, seeking is not finding. This is harder than you seem to be ready to recognize.

The last time I was despondent (due to a long-term but undiagnosed physiological problem of all things), it took me four months (and several doctors visits) from the time I decided I needed help from the point where I was able to communicate it to my doctor. And that was one of the most difficult things I've ever had to do. Not the most. But certainly within the "top" five I can conveniently identify.

The best thing you can do for a potentially suicidal person is get them professional help - fast.

Agreed. But this so seldom happens before the first public attempt. It's rare enough even after. (Was it Ohio State where that kid went postal long after having exhibited what should have been blatantly clear warning signs of needing immediate help?)

[Moose]

Are you speaking about your own experiences?

And recognizing what should be the obvious presence of other survivors of abuse in this thread.

[Tucson_Tim]

And recognizing what should be the obvious presence of other survivors of abuse in this thread.

Sorry to read about your problems. Counseling is probably the best after-the-fact course of action.

[Dragon Star]

Dragon Star, Jeff Root, and Dyerwolf, I have some questions for each of you:

Oh goody.

How would you react if your child were being bullied at school?React, or the lack thereof? It's simply part of life, nothing really I can do about it. "Oh sweety, they're just jealous" is a crock of crap when you are the one abused. Nothing a parent says makes it any easier or fairer.

How would it make you feel to see his/her pain and distress? What would you do about it?I simply can not take part truthfully in these questions since I don't have children, however, what can you do about it? Buttering the toast only makes it soggy.

Would you tell him or her that he/she deserved it and tell him or her that he or she must conform in order for the bullying to stop?No, I'd likely not say anything. But since you're trying to make a point, I'll go along as though I would.

Would you tell him or her that he or she wasn't really being bullied?lol, what???

Would you tell him or her to ignore it?Only to take it with a grain of salt if I were to say anything.

Would you tell him or her to punch the bully in the nose?Depends on how far it actually goes. Once it goes to a level of self defense, break their skull if you feel like you need too.

If so, how would you react when he/she got in trouble for following your advice?Pay the medical bills.

What would you do if you told him or her to do one of the above and the bullying continued or worsened?Break their legs this time.

Would you go to your child's school and demand that the bully or bullies be removed from school and/or punished for their misbehavior? This is what I'd do.Talk about making things worse...sheesh.

What would you do if your child was so traumatized by the bullying that he or she became depressed and needed to be put on medication?Er...it shouldn't ever reach this point. Either home school the child or relocate them if they want. Other then that, I'd buy the medication.

How would you feel if the bullying traumatized your child so badly that he or she committed suicide?My answer would have this thread locked within minutes, likely with a few temp bans.

[Noclevername]

Without supporting evidence, I find it impossible to believe that more than a very small percentage (single digits) of teenagers
or pre-teens are traumatized by bullying or other harrassment to
the point of being "scarred deeply". I think you are projecting your
own personal experience onto the rest of the population, and your
personal experience is relatively unusual.



Obviously I didn't make clear what I meant, sorry. So, let me reword it; of those who've been victims of bullies, and not just teased (although, to a child or adolescent, long periods of consistent teasing/social rejection is still traumatic itself), most that I know of still bear major psychological scars. I'm not an expert, nor am I aware of any major research on the subject, just going by the cases I know, and everyone I've talked to.

[Van Rijn]

But hey, that's okay--in my school district, due to gang problems, it was policy that even when you don't fight back, you get in trouble for fighting.

There weren't any gang problems that I was aware of in the schools I went to, but I ran into that too: The idiot administrators that would say, "It takes two to have a fight." No protests that you were the one desperately attempting to avoid a fight and the other kid was known for picking fights would have any effect. That sort of thing was almost as bad as the bullies themselves.

During grade school we moved around the country a lot. One year I went to three different schools. On one hand, you lose friends that way. On the other hand, you leave bullies behind, and sometimes bad schools.

[Van Rijn]

Only lack of opportunity, lack of imagination, and one really special feral cat kept me from becoming either a statistic or a national headline during the absolute nightmare I call the 11th grade. (There's a story there, but maybe another time.)


And there's the other direction this can go. All in all, I think I got off pretty light in the bullying department compared to some, but I can sure understand the feelings of helplessness and anger that would lead someone to find a way to really get back at their tormentors. My sister's husband (a teacher) says they're not ignoring the issue these days, but I'm not convinced that they are dealing with it any more effectively.

[A.DIM]

Is obesity contagious? (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12343-is-obesity-contagious.html)

[Paracelsus]

DyerWolf, I appreciate your candid and thoughtful answers to my questions. Thanks! :)

My answer would have this thread locked within minutes, likely with a few temp bans.


Dragon Star: Please clarify this statement. Your last post seemed rather, ah, sardonic, and verged on flaming. Was this your intent? If so, why? My questions were not meant to offend; I genuinely wanted to explore your respective points of view. :confused:

[Moose]

Dragon Star: Please clarify this statement. Your last post seemed rather, ah, sardonic, and verged on flaming. Was this your intent? If so, why? My questions were not meant to offend; I genuinely wanted to explore your respective points of view. :confused:

To be perfectly honest, given the content of his other answers, and my sarcasm detector not even twitching, I'd sort of rather he didn't. He's probably right about the results.

I can, however, say from personal experience that that's the sort of, bluntly, parental neglect that will put a kid on the fast track to self-destruction. Had I believed, even for a minute, that my folks truly "had my back", I doubt I would have ever gotten to the point of being either suicidal or potentially homicidal, no matter how bad it got.

[Moose]

And there's the other direction this can go.

Oh absolutely. One major reason I ended up not becoming homicidal as well as suicidal is that the idea that it was in my power to do so simply never occurred to me.

With the prevalence of the coverage these kids have gotten since Columbine, ignorance of the take-em-all-with-me option will never be a factor again.

What makes me sad is that it took no less than Columbine to raise awareness enough to even begin to address bullying, and the majority of the pundits went off on their usual control agendas. Ohio State showed that we're still not handling the issue even remotely well enough.

[Paracelsus]

To be perfectly honest, given the content of his other answers, and my sarcasm detector not even twitching, I'd sort of rather he didn't. He's probably right about the results.

I can, however, say from personal experience that that's the sort of, bluntly, parental neglect that will put a kid on the fast track to self-destruction. Had I believed, even for a minute, that my folks truly "had my back", I doubt I would have ever gotten to the point of being either suicidal or potentially homicidal, no matter how bad it got.

Yeah, you're probably right, although I'm betting that he'll answer anyway. If his answer is so rude that it gets him banned, that's his look-out.

[Moose]

Yeah, you're probably right, although I'm betting that he'll answer anyway. If his answer is so rude that it gets him banned, that's his look-out.

Actually, he said that he was concerned that his answer would provoke overheated responses.

[Paracelsus]

Actually, he said that he was concerned that his answer would provoke overheated responses.

I didn't interpret it that way, but I could be mistaken. I'll take your word for it. :)

[Dragon Star]

Yeah, you're probably right, although I'm betting that he'll answer anyway. If his answer is so rude that it gets him banned, that's his look-out.

Me banned? Not as likely, and if so it would be because I instigated the result, not because it was a rude response. I don't make it my business to offend others, thus my lack of explanation because I know others will take offense. However you trying to squeeze me into giving an answer you know you (and others) won't like seems like a obvious thing not to do. Seems to me that you are looking for things to be angry about, as do others on this topic. I just don't get how people let themselves get so emotional over this, being overly emotional glazes the eyes and like a fire begs for fuel. Were you angry at that kid in preschool for years because he took your green crayon? Did it make you want to commit suicide or cut yourself? No, know why? Because it simply doesn't mean anything at that age. You got mad, perhaps cried, and ten minutes later found another green crayon to use to color your pony. Why must we let ourselves crumble under such pressure like we do? Simply because we give into the knowledge that their intentions are no longer to use the crayon themselves, but to use it against us? How silly, I think. Just the knowledge of intent causes people to go insane. :neutral:

And to note: My previous viewpoint is of the interaction between a child and a bully, not as much between myself and the child on an emotional level. I would never neglect the child, I just simply won't fill their mind with lots of false security. It's not that I would do nothing, I would just simply handle it differently then letting anger and outrage try to make a difference. It's not a losing battle, it's a war already lost.

[Dragon Star]

I didn't interpret it that way,

Shocking.

[Paracelsus]

However you trying to squeeze me into giving an answer you know you (and others) won't like seems like a obvious thing not to do. Seems to me that you are looking for things to be angry about, as do others on this topic. I just don't get how people let themselves get so emotional over this...I would never neglect the child, I just simply won't fill their mind with lots of false security. It's not that I would do nothing, I would just simply handle it differently then letting anger and outrage try to make a difference. It's not a losing battle, it's a war already lost.

I wasn't trying to 'squeeze you' into saying anything, Dragon Star. I was simply trying to clarify what you wrote, as the intent of your post was unclear to me.

I'm not 'looking' for things to be angry about on this thread; those things are already right under my nose--here and in real life. The issue of bullying extends way beyond childhood and the schoolyard; workplace bullying is a serious issue in this country, and I have certainly experienced more than my fair share of that too. Workplace bullies were schoolyard bullies once. Don't you think that nipping this behavior in the bud during childhood would result in a decrease in workplace bullying? If it did, don't you think that would be a good thing?

As to why many of us get so emotional about this, please read our earlier posts describing the various hells we went through as children. We aren't talking about single incidents; we are describing patterns of abuse that traumatized us as children and, in some cases, continue to cause us pain as adults. Would you expect a rape victim to be able to discuss rape or rapists without getting emotional? If not, then why would you expect adult survivors of peer abuse to be unemotional about the subject of bullying?

I agree, however, that one must apply rational solutions to this problem, not solutions born out of anger or desire for revenge. That said, everybody has to agree that there is a problem that needs solving before a solution can be found.

That last part of your post contains the kind of response I was asking for. Had you made those statements in your 6:10 pm 7/28/07 post, I would not have needed to ask for clarification. Thank you for posting them now.

[Dragon Star]

The issue of bullying extends way beyond childhood and the schoolyard; workplace bullying is a serious issue in this country, and I have certainly experienced more than my fair share of that too.

Just about everyone has, THAT'S LIFE. I go through it just as you do every day at work, from people who don't think I belong where I am because of my age, appearance, and lack of experience. To them I'm not good enough. They've done just about everything they can to deterr me from my chosen career, put stickers on my truck, slander, exc... Too bad for them I simply don't give a damn. I've taken not a thing they say seriously, and as a result, more of them have tried to be my friend as of late. I've never lost sleep, nor will I give in to their gimmicks.

Workplace bullies were schoolyard bullies once. Don't you think that nipping this behavior in the bud during childhood would result in a decrease in workplace bullying? If it did, don't you think that would be a good thing?Sure, and I would like to end world hunger, cure cancer, and give all the little girls in the world a pink pony. It just isn't going to happen. You can't always get what you want, and you'll find you usually get what you need. That's all that really matters.

As to why many of us get so emotional about this, please read our earlier posts describing the various hells we went through as children.:hand:

What do you think I am, an alien?

We aren't talking about single incidents; we are describing patterns of abuse that traumatized us as children and, in some cases, continue to cause us pain as adults. Apparently. :rolleyes:

Would you expect a rape victim to be able to discuss rape or rapists without getting emotional?In no way once-so-ever do I believe that bullying has the effects of Rape Trauma Syndrome. Verbal and minor physical abuse doesn't touch being forced into sexual activity for reasons that don't belong on this forum.

I agree, however, that one must apply rational solutions to this problem, not solutions born out of anger or desire for revenge. That said, everybody has to agree that there is a problem that needs solving before a solution can be found. You think that's the problem? Everyone does agree that is a victim. The problem is that it's a paradox, there is no solution without changes so drastic it would change society entirely.

Here is my questions to you, WHAT do you plan to do about it? HOW do you change the status quo?

[Paracelsus]

I go through it just as you do every day at work, from people who don't think I belong where I am because of my age, appearance, and lack of experience. To them I'm not good enough. They've done just about everything they can to deterr me from my chosen career, put stickers on my truck, slander, exc...

I'm sorry to hear you have been going through that. There's no excuse for any of that BS--none.

In no way once-so-ever do I believe that bullying has the effects of Rape Trauma Syndrome. Verbal and minor physical abuse doesn't touch being forced into sexual activity for reasons that don't belong on this forum.

Having been through both, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one. This all depends upon the severity of the bullying, of course, but my experience with the former was as bad or worse than the latter.

Here is my questions to you, WHAT do you plan to do about it? HOW do you change the status quo?

Well, first we have to define what constitutes bullying. This sounds like as good a definition as any: when a person is "exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons." [such] as "when a person intentionally inflicts injury or discomfort upon another person, through physical contact, through words or in other ways.

Second, there are anti-bullying programs in schools that have been demonstrated to be effective. An eye-opening (for me at least) report is available here: http://www.aic.gov.au/conferences/schools/rigby.pdf

First, I think the results are, on the whole, encouraging. Nearly all the programs showed some significant results. In schools where programs had been very thoroughly implemented, the reductions were sometimes quite large.

Secondly, it is important to begin early. Young children can be influenced, it seems, to be less involved in bullying, more readily than older children. Early intervention is clearly very desirable. (my bold)

Thirdly, we are evidently more successful in helping children to protect themselves from the bullies than in stopping those who bully. (my bold) Victimised children are more strongly motivated to learn how to change their behaviour than those who bully. Clearly we need to redouble our efforts in dealing more effectively to discourage the behaviour of
those who bully others in schools, if only because these children are more likely than others to become aggressive and violent adults.

Fourthly, given that current evidence suggests that problem-solving methods may be at least as effective as punitive methods in dealing with perpetrators, greater awareness of how and when these methods can be used is strongly recommended. (See Rigby, 2001). .

Clearly, these kinds of programs are efficacious, without resulting in the kind of 'knee-jerk' idiocy that bans on 'weapons' in schools have fostered. Yes, this kind of thing will change society--for the better, I think.

[Dragon Star]

I'm sorry to hear you have been going through that. There's no excuse for any of that BS--none.

No, and there is no reason to get upset about it either. Just part of life.



Having been through both, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one. This all depends upon the severity of the bullying, of course, but my experience with the former was as bad or worse than the latter.

...nothing I can say to that. Why didn't your parents remove you from that school?

Second, there are anti-bullying programs in schools that have been demonstrated to be effective. An eye-opening (for me at least) report is available here: http://www.aic.gov.au/conferences/schools/rigby.pdf



Clearly, these kinds of programs are efficacious, without resulting in the kind of 'knee-jerk' idiocy that bans on 'weapons' in schools have fostered. Yes, this kind of thing will change society--for the better, I think.

If they are so effective, why aren't they implemented in every school? I've been to many many schools in my life in quite a few states, all of which were the same and had the same twisted idealism.

However, on that note I'll rest my case...it's not a contest of ideas here, it's a contest of mentality. I suppose some are just wired stronger then others.

[Gillianren]

I never really considered taking them all with me. That would have been wrong. Again, I had no more right to hurt them than they did to hurt me. But suicide? Yeah, I thought about it.

Tucson Tim, I did realize that it was a joke. I just really do really, really hate that quote. It's wrong, but a lot of people don't seem to realize that.

I would not at all be surprised to discover that a large proportion of seriously-bullied kids end up with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. That's a real medical problem that can go undiagnosed and untreated for far too long.

[Paracelsus]

Why didn't your parents remove you from that school?

If they are so effective, why aren't they implemented in every school? I've been to many many schools in my life in quite a few states, all of which were the same and had the same twisted idealism.

However, on that note I'll rest my case...it's not a contest of ideas here, it's a contest of mentality. I suppose some are just wired stronger then others.

My mom (I was raised in a single-parent household) was too busy trying to put food on the table to notice. On the rare occasions she DID notice, she ascribed to your philosophy that it was just a part of life I had to learn to deal with.

As for why these programs aren't being implemented in more schools, I have no answer to that other than to say that the belief that bullying is simply a part of life persists in many places. More schools have been implementing these programs since Columbine, however.

As for the last part, yes, I'm 'wired' very strongly, thank you.

[Jeff Root]

Dragon Star, Jeff Root, and Dyerwolf, I have some questions
for each of you: How would you react if your child were being
bullied at school? How would it make you feel to see his/her
pain and distress? What would you do about it?
I'm replying without having looked at any posts after yours.


Would you tell him or her that he/she deserved it and tell him
or her that he or she must conform in order for the bullying to
stop?
I might if my kid was doing something annoying which is causing
the bullying. If my kid is holding his or her nose with his/her
fingers whenever Bluto is nearby, because Bluto stinks and my
kid is sensitive to smells, prompting Bluto to rough up my kid,
then I may tell my kid that this particular stink is probably
not going to harm them, and if they can, they should tough it
out, like I did once with a boy in elementary school who stank
horribly (but was NOT a bully).

If the bully can be de-stinked, great, but whether he can be
de-stinked or not, he needs to understand that his method of
handling the annoyance is counterproductive and will not be
tolerated.

If my kid's sin was that he/she wore something green, then I
would tell my kid to hold off on wearing anything green until
the problem with the bully was straightened out.


Would you tell him or her that he or she wasn't really being
bullied?
Not unless he or she wasn't really being bullied. I would need
to know whether he or she was really being bullied.


Would you tell him or her to ignore it?
No, but depending on what the purported "bullying" actually
consists of, I might tell my kid to pretend to ignore it.
That would be a difficult call because appearing to ignore bad
behavior often prompts even worse behavior.

Maybe my kid likes the aesthetics of a pristine snow-covered
field, and another kid likes the aesthetics of that same field
trampled with his own footprints. In this case, the "bullying"
consists of nothing more than the other kid destroying the
perfect beauty of a field covered in snow, against my kid's
protests. My kid could get very angry at such wanton, senseless
destruction, and grab a baseball bat to chase off the vandal.

It might be wise to tell my kid in such a case to just try not
to be bothered by it. Different strokes for different folks.

But what if, instead of appreciating a pristine field of snow,
my kid is painting a scene from Die Walküre on the side of my
garage (with or without permission), when Billy-Bob comes along
and covers it over with a Fauvist rendition of Skelator versus
He-Man?

Everybody needs to use judgement to decide what kind and degree
of physical action is appropriate to control other people's
unwanted behavior in any particular situation.


Would you tell him or her to punch the bully in the nose?
Yes, I would tell my kid to punch a bully in the nose if he or
she judged that someone was in danger, and punching the bully in
the nose would probably reduce or eliminate that danger without
causing an even worse problem, if no less-destructive means of
dealing with the bully was available.


If so, how would you react when he/she got in trouble for
following your advice?
Amazed and proud that my kid had saved the day. Or not,
depending on exactly what actually happened. I hope I can
trust my kid to explain reasonably truthfully what happened,
rather than having surveillance cameras and Big Brother watching
everyone 24/7. But I know that anyone can have a moment of poor
judgement, or anger, or fear, or greed. My kid could be the
one who was the bully. The kids have to use judgement, and the
adults have to second-guess as to whether that judgement was ok,
if and when they find out about the incident.


What would you do if you told him or her to do one of the above
and the bullying continued or worsened?
I can't imagine. There are way, way, way too many different
possible scenarios.


Would you go to your child's school and demand that the bully or
bullies be removed from school and/or punished for their
misbehavior?
Probably not. If the bully is so evil or so insane that he
can't stop himself from bullying when it is made clear to him
that what he is doing is unwanted behavior, then removing him
from school will just make him a terrorist-at-large, and
punishing him will just make him even more evil or more insane.

Whatever it is that causes the bully to be a bully must be
addressed, or the bully will just become an even worse bully.


What would you do if your child was so traumatized by the
bullying that he or she became depressed and needed to be put
on medication?
1) Continue breathing. 2) Continue eating. 3) Continue doing
whatever else I would normally do. 4) Provide the kid with
the needed medication (since you stipulate that it is needed).
5) Become depressed myself.

I think that was a poor question. Do you agree? Possibly you
can impove on the question by making it more specific?


How would you feel if the bullying traumatized your child so
badly that he or she committed suicide?
Is that a rhetorical question? If so, the intended effect is
not apparent. If it is not meant as a rhetorical question, it
seems highly weird. I suspect that it was meant as an actual
question, and is highly weird. Please explain why you asked
this question. Obviously I would not answer "I would feel
fine and dandy". If you did mean it as a rhetorical question
(that is, for its effect on the reader, to make a point, rather
than to obtain information), then please explain what point was
intended.

This HAS happened in other cases.
What do you mean by "other cases"? Are we talking about some
particular case, here? If so, I was not aware of it. What
"case" are we talking about?


BTW, bullying need not be physical to be classified as bullying.
You don't need to convince me of that. I have said as much,
above. Of course I realize you are writing for everyone who
may read this, not just me.


Bullying may also take the form of name-calling, rumor-mongering,
isolating and ostracizing the victim, or myriad other gas-
lighting techniques.
In my experience, it is overwhelmingly the bullies who are
called names, rumored about, isolated, and ostracized-- because
they are bullies. But I agree that it is done by bullies to
others, too.


Psychological bullying is very prevalent among girls and can be
far more damaging in the long run than physical bullying, as it
is invisible to all but the bullies and the victims.
Usually not completely invisible, I think.


Physical bullying leaves evidence in the form of cuts, bruises,
torn or dirty clothes, etc.
I'll be contrary. I suspect that physical bullying usually
leaves no clear physical evidence.


Psychological bullying leaves no physical evidence and is often
done in the absence of any witnesses who would be sympathetic to
the victim's plight. Often, if the victim reports this bullying
to an adult, the adult will very likely accuse him or her of
making trouble, lying, being a tattle-tale, etc.
That is 180 degrees from anything I've ever heard before.
I can't imagine an adult accusing a kid of being a tattle-tale
for reporting bullying behavior-- whether in 2007 or 1957.


The victim is therefore in a lose-lose situation and may suffer
day after day, week after week, for years, if he or she remains
in the same classes/school as the bullies.
This sounds completely weird to me. I can't imagine any bully
harassing anyone in any of the school classes I was in without
being found out and dealt with, unless the harassed student
did not report the harassment. It could not have happened
during class while the teacher was there.


How could someone NOT be permanently damaged under those
circumstances??!!!
It depends on the nature of the bullying, and on the victim.

But the circumstances suggested by your description (bullying
going on within the school and within the classroom, over the
course of a school year, with the teacher being informed but
not taking the complaints seriously) seems unbelieveable.
I haven't seen anything like it, and I can't accept that any
competent teacher would ignore complaints about bullying.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

Thank you for answering my questions, Jeff Root. :)

Is that a rhetorical question? If so, the intended effect is
not apparent. If it is not meant as a rhetorical question, it
seems highly weird. I suspect that it was meant as an actual
question, and is highly weird. Please explain why you asked
this question. Obviously I would not answer "I would feel
fine and dandy". If you did mean it as a rhetorical question
(that is, for its effect on the reader, to make a point, rather
than to obtain information), then please explain what point was
intended.

Yes, that was a rhetorical question. The point was that bullying can and does traumatize children to the point of driving them to suicide. I have contemplated suicide as a result of being bullied, as have Gillianren and Moose (from their posts on this thread).

But the circumstances suggested by your description (bullying
going on within the school and within the classroom, over the
course of a school year, with the teacher being informed but
not taking the complaints seriously) seems unbelieveable.
I haven't seen anything like it, and I can't accept that any
competent (my bold) teacher would ignore complaints about bullying.

RE the quote above, the key here is the term 'competent'. You are correct to say that competent teachers would not allow their students to be bullied in their classrooms. However, there are a lot of incompetent teachers out there who don't give a crap about the welfare of their students or simply can't control their students such that bullying behavior would not occur under their supervision. There are also adult bullies who become teachers and think bullying is perfectly acceptable.

I'll let the other BAUTers on this thread answer the rest of your questions or will defer to a later post. Am rather fatigued at the moment.

[Tucson_Tim]

Tucson Tim, I did realize that it was a joke. I just really do really, really hate that quote. It's wrong, but a lot of people don't seem to realize that.


Well, I realize it and that's why I made it into a joke but it seems that some of the participants in this thread are still scarred and are not able to handle it. Sorry about that.

[Jeff Root]

Even without knowing or understanding why bullies bully, I think
bullies can be divided into two groups: Those who will learn from
their peers that it is better for them to be kind to others than to
be cruel; and those who will not learn it. The first group can be
dealt with by the other kids, if those kids have been given the
knowledge and understanding of how to deal with such bullies.
The second group requires intervention by adults.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[Paracelsus]

Well, I realize it and that's why I made it into a joke but it seems that some of the participants in this thread are still scarred and are not able to handle it. Sorry about that.

I appreciate your sensitivity to this issue, Tuscon_Tim. Thanks, man. :)

[Paracelsus]

Even without knowing or understanding why bullies bully, I think
bullies can be divided into two groups: Those who will learn from
their peers that it is better for them to be kind to others than to
be cruel; and those who will not learn it. The first group can be
dealt with by the other kids, if those kids have been given the
knowledge and understanding of how to deal with such bullies.
The second group requires intervention by adults.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Can't disagree with that. :)

[Tucson_Tim]

I appreciate your sensitivity to this issue, Tuscon_Tim. Thanks, man. :)

You're welcome, woman. :)

[Lurker]

Having been suicidal (or dangerously close to it) three times in my life, I would suggest you reconsider your assessment. Some kid in the future may totally depend on you taking them seriously. Let me assure you from direct personal experience that bullying most definitely can be the sole cause of suicide.

My first flashpoint was during my 11th grade. It was solely due to a four-month period of horrific, daily abuse from which I was totally unable to escape nor obtain any sort of help or relief from adults, frequently eyewitnesses, who knew bloody well (but either failed or were unwilling to recognize) how badly I was being abused.



Agreed, but again from personal experience, seeking is not finding. This is harder than you seem to be ready to recognize.

The last time I was despondent (due to a long-term but undiagnosed physiological problem of all things), it took me four months (and several doctors visits) from the time I decided I needed help from the point where I was able to communicate it to my doctor. And that was one of the most difficult things I've ever had to do. Not the most. But certainly within the "top" five I can conveniently identify.



Agreed. But this so seldom happens before the first public attempt. It's rare enough even after. (Was it Ohio State where that kid went postal long after having exhibited what should have been blatantly clear warning signs of needing immediate help?)

Moose... since I am on your ignore list I doubt that you will ever see this, but I am moved to comment anyway. I do not believe that bullying in and of itself moves someone to suicide. I believe this because I too have been there... I too had a difficult time when I was in school...

In the end, however, it was not the teasing... the bullying... that was the problem, it was my reaction to it... how it I internalized it. I spent much of my life suffering from depression brought on by a genetically induced neurotransmitter imbalance. It left me incapable of coping with life... unable to deal with the world around me. It was not the odd bully I ran into... it was not the way I was teased on the odd occasion... it was my inability to deal with it because of a very real, chemically induced, illness.

Five years ago I was very successfully treated with a medication known as an SSRI+ and the difference for me has been amazing!! The world has not changed... the bullies and troublemakers have not disappeared... but the way that they affect me has changed more than 100 fold. As a result, I would suggest that, for your own peace of mind, you get evaluated for this type of condition. There should be no stigma associated with such an evaluation... it is an illness little different from high blood pressure or diabetes. If the result of the evaluation is negative, all the much better. If you suffer from this condition, it can be treated more easily... more effectively in many cases than either high blood pressure or diabetes...

As Shakespeare wrote: “The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves if we are underlings.”

[Dragon Star]

Moose... since I am on your ignore list I doubt that you will ever see this, but I am moved to comment anyway. I do not believe that bullying in and of itself moves someone to suicide. I believe this because I too have been there... I too had a difficult time when I was in school...

In the end, however, it was not the teasing... the bullying... that was the problem, it was my reaction to it... how it I internalized it.

QFT.

[Lurker]

QFT.
QFT??

[Van Rijn]

In the end, however, it was not the teasing... the bullying... that was the problem, it was my reaction to it... how it I internalized it. I spent much of my life suffering from depression brought on by a genetically induced neurotransmitter imbalance. It left me incapable of coping with life... unable to deal with the world around me. It was not the odd bully I ran into... it was not the way I was teased on the odd occasion... it was my inability to deal with it because of a very real, chemically induced, illness.QFT.

Lurker and Dragon Star: Are you saying that, no matter the cause, it's just an issue with your brain chemistry? Ignore the cause, always, because it's just you?

My sister used to be one of the most stable people I knew. Then my nephew died. After that, she became nearly suicidal, and intensely depressed. She has gotten slightly better, but it's still touch and go.

I was very happy, really enjoying the way my life was going, then I got Crohn's disease. The pain levels were such that it quite literally was torture. There were times I woke up (after taking something to knock me out) with my throat raw from screaming. I had NEVER BEEN LIKE THAT BEFORE. And, yes, I started thinking about options to stop the pain. Luckily, I got better.

I don't care how strong you are. If there is sufficient cause, it will affect you. It will probably change your brain chemistry a tad as well.

[Dragon Star]

What I am saying is that if I have an ability, and you do not, then you lack an ability. Wouldn't you agree?

It's true that the problem causes the reaction, I don't refute this, however if you can control the reaction then the problem ceases to exist.

Rape, Death, Disease are all sudden traumatic changes (ones that can not be prepared for), bullying is a progressive traumatic change, one which often can be prepared against. No, it's not all cake and ice-cream, however I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of people who take bullying so seriously they contemplate suicide or murder did so because they mentally couldn't withstand it. It doesn't mean the bullying was any worse for them, they just mentally weren't strong enough to deal with it. However, and I place large amounts of emphasis here, there are always exceptions to the rule.

[Van Rijn]

What I am saying is that if I have an ability, and you do not, then you lack an ability. Wouldn't you agree?


Before I answer, I'd ask what ability you are referring to and how you know you have it?


It's true that the problem causes the reaction, I don't refute this, however if you can control the reaction then the problem ceases to exist.


"If you can control the reaction" is a key point. For many things, that is not an option, but stopping the cause is. What's better: Jumping off a cliff without a parachute and attempting to control your descent, or just not jumping off a cliff?


Rape, Death, Disease are all sudden traumatic changes (ones that can not be prepared for), bullying is a progressive traumatic change, one which often can be prepared against. No, it's not all cake and ice-cream, however I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of people who take bullying so seriously they contemplate suicide or murder did so because they mentally couldn't withstand it.


Quite likely because many of them had it much worse than anything you ever faced.


It doesn't mean the bullying was any worse for them, they just mentally weren't strong enough to deal with it.


Why doesn't it mean that bullying was worse for them?


However, and I place large amounts of emphasis here, there are always exceptions to the rule.

The problem is that you seem to be assuming there is a rule. I have absolutely no doubt that a good many have suffered horrific attacks. I see no reason to assume that lack of "mental strength" (and what a loaded term that is) is needed to react badly to the situation.

[Lurker]

Lurker and Dragon Star: Are you saying that, no matter the cause, it's just an issue with your brain chemistry? Ignore the cause, always, because it's just you?

My sister used to be one of the most stable people I knew. Then my nephew died. After that, she became nearly suicidal, and intensely depressed. She has gotten slightly better, but it's still touch and go.

I was very happy, really enjoying the way my life was going, then I got Crohn's disease. The pain levels were such that it quite literally was torture. There were times I woke up (after taking something to knock me out) with my throat raw from screaming. I had NEVER BEEN LIKE THAT BEFORE. And, yes, I started thinking about options to stop the pain. Luckily, I got better.

I don't care how strong you are. If there is sufficient cause, it will affect you. It will probably change your brain chemistry a tad as well.
No... if you read my post, I was very specifically addressing emotional conditions as opposed to physical ones. My comments had nothing to do with someone suffering from Crohn's disease, leukemia, or any other type of ailment. I did not suggest that any of these had anything to do with neurotransmitters. What I did say was that there should be no stigma attached to a neurotransmitter imbalance because such a condition is just as real and just as debilitating as high blood pressure or diabetes... This is an important point since many do not want to be diagnosed with depression or bipolar disease because it is classed as a "mental illness" and as such the diagnosis can cause severe stigma and even ruin careers.

I cannot speak to all situations, I am neither a psychiatrist nor physiologist. Having said that, however, I would say that I know something about losing someone very close to me. After I was treated for my condition, I met a woman who loved me for all that I was rather than inspite of what I was. For thie first time in my life I could love and share love. We intended to share the rest of our lives together. Unfortunately, she fell ill and was taken away from me about a year and a half ago.

I know what it is like to lose someone close... when she died I didn't think I would be able to continue... A part of me wanted very badly to lie down at her side and die right along with her. Instead, I took time and came to terms with the loss... I chose to let the best of her live on through me. I would still trade my life to spend just one more afternoon with her, but I will find the strength to live out the remainder of my life without her.

I do not know your sister nor anything about her. However, I stand by what I say. There are many in this world who lose a lover or a loved one. Some never recover from the the loss while others manage to move on with their lives. I think the difference is the ability of some to cope with loss and the inability of others to handle it. The situation with your sister is unfortunate indeed and I hope she gets the help she needs. I do know what if I had lost someone like My Rose before my treatment I would have most likely been much the same condition. I wish her the best...

[Van Rijn]

No... if you read my post, I was very specifically addressing emotional conditions as opposed to physical ones.


But you were talking about people that had been physically attacked.


My comments had nothing to do with someone suffering from Crohn's disease, leukemia, or any other type of ailment. I did not suggest that any of these had anything to do with neurotransmitters.


I think you missed my point in mentioning that. It was an attack. The pain was extreme and it kept on going. There was a progression of the disease: Various things tried, but it kept getting worse (for a long time, anyway). It was, very literally, torture. Chronic pain isn't the same as acute pain that goes away in a few days. It wasn't a person causing the torture, but the effect was the same. And, yes, constant stress and chronic pain can cause changes to the nervous system.


What I did say was that there should be no stigma attached to a neurotransmitter imbalance because such a condition is just as real and just as debilitating as high blood pressure or diabetes... This is an important point since many do not want to be diagnosed with depression or bipolar disease because it is classed as a "mental illness" and as such the diagnosis can cause severe stigma and even ruin careers.


I have no problem with this statement. However, the way your post read, to me, suggested that a bad reaction to bullying could only be due to "mental illness." My point is that any human being subjected to enough stress can react badly. It doesn't require unusual brain chemistry.


I do not know your sister nor anything about her. However, I stand by what I say. There are many in this world who lose a lover or a loved one. Some never recover from the the loss while others manage to move on with their lives. I think the difference is the ability of some to cope with loss and the inability of others to handle it.


I think that different circumstances play a huge role. It isn't just coping skills, but the exact details of what one faces. Since I can't know exactly what someone else has faced, I will not attempt to say how much of their reaction is due to circumstances and how much is due to brain physiology.


The situation with your sister is unfortunate indeed and I hope she gets the help she needs. I do know what if I had lost someone like My Rose before my treatment I would have most likely been much the same condition. I wish her the best...

Thanks.

[Gillianren]

That is 180 degrees from anything I've ever heard before. I can't imagine an adult accusing a kid of being a tattle-tale
for reporting bullying behavior-- whether in 2007 or 1957.

I suggest beginning to imagine it; it happened to me.

I fail to see how "hit the bully in the nose" is a viable solution. Is that just me?

[Moose]

I suggest beginning to imagine it; it happened to me.

It never happened to me directly, but it may as well have. Seeing people punished for "tattling" early in my schooling certainly clammed me up pretty good. It taught me I couldn't confide in teachers for any sort of relief.

I fail to see how "hit the bully in the nose" is a viable solution. Is that just me?

No. At least it never helped me any. Someone argued it was better to try and fail than to not try. Both were hard on what was left of my self-esteem. But failing invariably led to escalations. Sometimes serious ones.

[Maksutov]

It never happened to me directly, but it may as well have. Seeing people punished for "tattling" early in my schooling certainly clammed me up pretty good. It taught me I couldn't confide in teachers for any sort of relief....It continues in urban "culture". (http://www.hightimes.com/ht/news/content.php?bid=664&aid=24)

BTW, due to being the biggest, most athletic kid in my classes through high school, I didn't get bullied that much. Even when the bullies ganged up on me (no matter how strong you are, if enough guys decide to take you down, well...), I found a way to "disarm" them. No one in the school system was better at hitting targets with verbal barbs than yours truly. As the group of yahoos knew they had been insulted and were trying to figure out exactly how, I'd make my escape.

But, the real bullying came from the WASP society I grew up in, where the son of a recent immigrant was considered sub-human. It was hard for a kid to deal with bullying from adults who were part of the power structure.

[Delvo]

I fail to see how "hit the bully in the nose" is a viable solution. Is that just me?It can work in individual cases, but what's really sick is people recommending that as a universal policy, to substitute for handling the situation any other way, an excuse for adults not to do anything.

And for those claiming it's a natural part of life: it depends on the rather unnatural situation of having large numbers of kids herded together out of the adults' way where they can form their own little subculture in the relative absence of adults. That's not the setting we're designed to grow up in at all.

[Spock Jenkins]

To be fair to the parents and teachers - it is very difficult to tell when a kid is telling the truth or just whining or even trying to get other kids in trouble as their way of being mean. I see it in my own kids. I'll watch my five year old antagonize my three year old until my three year old pulls his hair or attempts to bite him. Then my five year old screams bloody blue murder and pretends he wasn't doing anything to provoke my three year old. This goes the other way as well. Typically if I caught the provoker in the act - that is the child that will serve their time out. If I don't catch anybody in the act - either I'll let it go and let them know that I didn't see anything, but I'll be watching closer. Sometimes they'll both get a time out together.

Some kids develop reputations for crying wolf that follow them through school. If real bullying starts happening as they get older - it becomes difficult for teachers and partents to find out exactly what happened.

Kids can be mean. They can find your weakness and exploit it in such a way that's emotionally damaging to you but next to impossible to punish them for.

I do agree with others on the this forum that speak of teachers ignoring or not believing that bullying is taking place. I know of an individual that received threatening notes in their locker (signed even) and nothing was done. The was a pattern that went for some time until they left that school. Seems the bully was one of several generations that attended that private school and the parents had been long time supporters. Can't be them, must be the victims fault somehow.

[Noclevername]

Rape, Death, Disease are all sudden traumatic changes (ones that can not be prepared for), bullying is a progressive traumatic change, one which often can be prepared against. No, it's not all cake and ice-cream, however I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of people who take bullying so seriously they contemplate suicide or murder did so because they mentally couldn't withstand it. It doesn't mean the bullying was any worse for them, they just mentally weren't strong enough to deal with it. However, and I place large amounts of emphasis here, there are always exceptions to the rule.

So you expect a young child, who has no life experience, to "prepare themselves?" Why do you assume bullying cannot be sudden or surprising? And why do you seem to be implying that the kids who "can't stand it" somehow deserve their suffering?

exceptions to the ruleWhat "rule" is that?

[Lurker]

But you were talking about people that had been physically attacked.

I was talking about people who have been bullied...



I think you missed my point in mentioning that. It was an attack. The pain was extreme and it kept on going. There was a progression of the disease: Various things tried, but it kept getting worse (for a long time, anyway). It was, very literally, torture. Chronic pain isn't the same as acute pain that goes away in a few days. It wasn't a person causing the torture, but the effect was the same. And, yes, constant stress and chronic pain can cause changes to the nervous system.

I make a distinction between the stresses caused by physical illness and that caused by social situations. If I suffer from severe joint inflamation as a result of arthritis, this produces pain. If someone insults me... if someone uses obscenity to describe me, my family, my loved ones... if I lose a loved one... this is a different sort of situation. If the things that people say about me are not true, then they are as noise... if I lose a loved one, I have the choice as to whether I move on or not.

I am aware of the difference between chronic pain and the chronic feelings of loss that come from losing a loved one. A year and a half ago, I passed some kidney stones after a rather prolonged period of pain and discomfort. I can say that there was much more choice involved in how I handled the loss of my Rose than there was in handling the pain from kidney stones...


I have no problem with this statement. However, the way your post read, to me, suggested that a bad reaction to bullying could only be due to "mental illness." My point is that any human being subjected to enough stress can react badly. It doesn't require unusual brain chemistry.

I never said only... what I did say is that it is among the possibilities and that there should be no problem with getting evaluated. Fore some time Rose was diagnosed as suffering from a low grade viral infection. Further testing brought her brain tumor to light. It is often the case that a set of symptoms can be caused by more than one condition.

In many cases, mental illness goes undiagnosed because there is such a stigma associated with the condition. I have a genetic condition that results in depressed levels of serotonin and norepinephrine and that leads to chronic depression. I have been successfully treated and can live a normal life, but because chronic depression is considered a mental illness I must deal with the prejudice that results. The chances are very slim that I will never be allowed to hold a government security clearance again. I have most likely lost at least one job because my condition. I ended up in an emergency room in handcuffs because someone who knew about my condition reported that my medication was not working. I was evaluated as perfectly normal and released.


I think that different circumstances play a huge role. It isn't just coping skills, but the exact details of what one faces. Since I can't know exactly what someone else has faced, I will not attempt to say how much of their reaction is due to circumstances and how much is due to brain physiology.

I am neither a psychiatrist nor a psychologist. I simply state that there should be no reason for the stigma associated with this type of condition and that individuals should be evaluated for it in the same fashion as for high cholesterol if the symptoms warrant.

[Paracelsus]

I make a distinction between the stresses caused by physical illness and that caused by social situations. If I suffer from severe joint inflamation as a result of arthritis, this produces pain. If someone insults me... if someone uses obscenity to describe me, my family, my loved ones... if I lose a loved one... this is a different sort of situation. If the things that people say about me are not true, then they are as noise... if I lose a loved one, I have the choice as to whether I move on or not.

Lurker, I'm sorry, but the above statement is absolutely wrong. The brain perceives social stressors and psychological pain AS IF a painful physical stimulus had been applied. Here is a review of the available data: http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085641

Being ignored, excluded, and/or rejected signals a threat for which reflexive detection in the form of pain and distress is adaptive for survival. Brief ostracism episodes result in sadness and anger and threaten fundamental needs....Available research on chronic exposure to ostracism appears to deplete coping resources, resulting in depression and helplessness.


Chronic ostracism is a form of bullying.

Another study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=16890354&ordinalpos=5&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsP anel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

...Additionally, for those in the social rejection conditions, greater reports of social distress were associated with greater reports of pain unpleasantness to the thermal stimuli delivered at the end of the game. These results provide additional support for the hypothesis that pain distress and social distress share neurocognitive substrates. Implications for clinical populations are discussed.

[Lurker]

paracelsus -- you just gotta love this place for missing the forest for the trees sometimes. My initial point was a simple one. One should not rule out an evaluation for chronic mental illness when considering the causes of the reactions of someone to bullying in a social setting.

Van Rijn then asks:

Are you saying that, no matter the cause, it's just an issue with your brain chemistry? Ignore the cause, always, because it's just you?
and sites the example:
I was very happy, really enjoying the way my life was going, then I got Crohn's disease.
I simply said that I made a distinction between between physical disease and a response because I wanted to limit the discussion to bullying, not because I was making a distinction as to the cause. If I limit the discussion of a cancer drug to a certain type of cancer, this does not mean it will not have a positive effect on other types of cancer, I am simply limiting the discussion to a specific subset...

My only point was that in such situations an evaluation for mental illness should be considered along with other things. We live in a society where evaluation for mental illness can be a threatening, career ending, type of move. I know this, I have been through it. I know people who could be helped by psychoactive drugs who refuse to even consider it because they don't want to have a sentence of "mental illness" hung around their neck.

If this society wants to stigmatize mental illness that's up to its memebers... we have been doing so in this society and as others have for hundreds of years. Those who suffer from such conditions can, in many cases, be helped. I think it is an awful statement about our advanced, free society that there is still the terrible stigma associated with such conditions and that it is considered such a terrible thing to even be evaluated for such a condition.

[Paracelsus]

One should not rule out an evaluation for chronic mental illness when considering the causes of the reactions of someone to bullying in a social setting.

Lurker, as I previously cited on this thread, there is plenty of evidence that chronic bullying causes mental illness in the victims. How would you propose to differentiate between pre-existing mental illness and mental illness induced by prolonged maltreatment?

Should a rape victim be screened for pre-existing mental illness if she reacts 'badly' to being raped? As for whether the two are equatable, please see my response to this question in an earlier post.

I totally agree with you that mental illness should be treated instead of stigmatized, but calling a victim of bullying 'crazy' for 'overreacting' to the bullying just adds insult to injury and does nothing to help.

I'm sorry to hear about your Crohn's disease, BTW.

[Lurker]

Lurker, as I previously cited on this thread, there is plenty of evidence that chronic bullying causes mental illness in the victims. How would you propose to differentiate between pre-existing mental illness and mental illness induced by prolonged maltreatment?

Should a rape victim be screened for pre-existing mental illness if she reacts 'badly' to being raped? As for whether the two are equatable, please see my response to this question in an earlier post.

I totally agree with you that mental illness should be treated instead of stigmatized, but calling a victim of bullying 'crazy' for 'overreacting' to the bullying just adds insult to injury and does nothing to help.

I'm sorry to hear about your Crohn's disease, BTW.


Paracelsus - I don't have Crohn's disease... please read the posts more carefully.

As for screening for "for a pre-existing mental illness" for a woman who has been raped, I have made no such suggestion. I have, however suggested that it would be a good idea for someone who cannot handle the loss of a loved one or other such situations. I have specifically not attempted to define "equivalence" here, but I don't really see that rape and the death of a loved one from natural causes would really qualify as "equivalent".

However, you make my point with your comment: but calling a victim of bullying 'crazy' for 'overreacting' to the bullying just adds insult to injury and does nothing to help. I am not suggesting anything of the sort. I am suggesting evaluation. At one point a few years ago I was having pains that turned out to be strain in my chest muscles. As part of the diagnostic process an electrocardiogram was administered to see if was suffering from "heart irregularities"; I was not. The administration of the test did not suggest that I was... it was a precautionary measure. An evaluation for mental illness should, in my opinion be considered just the same way.

Further, a diagnosis of mental illness has nothing to do with being 'crazy' or 'overreacting'. It is a diagnosis of abnormalities that are in many cases very treatable. Knowledge is power... if one suffers from such a condition this knowledge gives one a fighting chance of correcting the condition. Your attitude that this means calling someone 'crazy' is the stigma that I live with each day now that I have been successfully treated for chronic depression. It is what caused me to be sent to the emergency room in handcuffs when there was nothing that was was wrong with me... It is what caused someone on this board to ask if my medication was working when they considered my words a bit to intemperate...

[Tucson_Tim]

you just gotta love this place for missing the forest for the trees sometimes.

Why do you always have to denigrate the members of this board?

[Lurker]

Why do you always have to denigrate the members of this board?
Why can't the members of this board get things right in the first place? :p

[Paracelsus]

Paracelsus - I don't have Crohn's disease... please read the posts more carefully.

Ooops, you're right! :o Sorry about that! I'm sorry to hear that you lost a loved one.

I have specifically not attempted to define "equivalence" here, but I don't really see that rape and the death of a loved one from natural causes would really qualify as "equivalent".

They most certainly aren't equivalent. I never said they were either. We are talking about different kinds of traumatic events.

An evaluation for mental illness should, in my opinion be considered just the same way.

I have no objection to this. However, the presence of depression in a victim of bullying does not equate to the victim having a mental illness that is independent of what they have experienced at the hands of their tormentors. Victims of bullying often have symptoms of PTSD in addition to depression and/or anxiety. If you treat the overt symptoms of the victim's distress without removing the victim from the situation that caused the distress, you will not be treating the underlying cause of the illness and may even exacerbate it.

It is not enough for the clinician to diagnose the victim as 'depressed' or as having 'generalized anxiety disorder'. The cause or causes of these conditions must be determined in order for the clinician to properly treat the person's mental illness. The patient's mental illness may have a strong genetic component (manic-depression has a very strong genetic component), in which case medication will be necessary. However, there are other cases where the mental illness is situational, in which case the environmental causes of the patient's distress must be evaluated and ameliorated in order to treat the patient's illness. Medication may also be necessary in these instances but should not be used as the sole treatment for reactive depression.

[Tucson_Tim]

Why can't the members of this board get things right in the first place? :p

It must be very frustrating for you. :rolleyes:

[Van Rijn]

I make a distinction between the stresses caused by physical illness and that caused by social situations.


In the bullying I'm familiar with, there are ongoing attacks, where you go to school wondering how you're going to get hurt that day.

The same was true with the illness - I would wake up wondering what bad thing would happen that day. It was torture. If you don't get that, too bad.

I wouldn't have brought it up if I wasn't familiar with both, and if there weren't similar themes.

[Van Rijn]

I'm sorry to hear about your Crohn's disease, BTW.

That's me. I brought up a couple of other issues that I'm familiar with that also cause extreme mental stress.

[Paracelsus]

Yeah, Lurker pointed that out. :o

Sorry 'bout that, Van Rijn!

[Dragon Star]

Before I answer, I'd ask what ability you are referring to and how you know you have it?

I'm referring to my ability to let something that happened well before the present go. I know I have it because I'm not crying about it.

"If you can control the reaction" is a key point. For many things, that is not an option, but stopping the cause is. What's better: Jumping off a cliff without a parachute and attempting to control your descent, or just not jumping off a cliff?This seems to be a very popular angle to take in this thread, and still no one observes that still no one is doing anything different (besides a few schools, as was pointed out earlier). Because nothing is changing, is why I express my point of view. I agree that stomping the cause is to beat this to a pulp, but it's sooo much easier said then done. Bad behavior is like a drug, and the victims are the police...it's a losing battle.

Quite likely because many of them had it much worse than anything you ever faced. How ignorant and selfish of you. Just because I don't mind what happened and talk about it all the time in internet forums has no bearing on what I went through.

Why doesn't it mean that bullying was worse for them? My apologies, it should read: "It doesn't necessarily mean.."

The problem is that you seem to be assuming there is a rule.Figurative speech, anyone?

I have absolutely no doubt that a good many have suffered horrific attacks. I see no reason to assume that lack of "mental strength" (and what a loaded term that is) is needed to react badly to the situation.So you would say that someone who was better fit and prepared mentally would be effected the same as someone who was less fit and prepared? Bold statement indeed. It's far too situational to judge it in such a way. I'm only expressing that it is a sufficient explanation as to why some people just crack.

Lets prepare an example: A guy is walking down the street to the local diner, and all the sudden someone comes right up and blows the head off the guy walking in front of him, robs him blind, and runs off.

Guy A- Dude, like, he totally walked up and just blew his head off! OMG! How terrible! *continues on to dinner*

Guy B- Faints. Has nightmares, flashbacks, depression, anxiety, lack of hunger, exc...

Would you not say that Guy A was able to deal with it in a better way due to the fact he has seen such things before? Would you also not say that Guy A was mentally stronger in dealing with this specifically?

[Lurker]

They most certainly aren't equivalent. I never said they were either. We are talking about different kinds of traumatic events.


And I meantioned this only because of this comment of yours...

Should a rape victim be screened for pre-existing mental illness if she reacts 'badly' to being raped? As for whether the two are equatable, please see my response to this question in an earlier post.

I totally agree with you that mental illness should be treated instead of stigmatized, but calling a victim of bullying 'crazy' for 'overreacting' to the bullying just adds insult to injury and does nothing to help.

I never suggested anything like this and I don't understand why you bring this up... it has nothing with what I am suggesting...


I have no objection to this. However, the presence of depression in a victim of bullying does not equate to the victim having a mental illness that is independent of what they have experienced at the hands of their tormentors. Victims of bullying often have symptoms of PTSD in addition to depression and/or anxiety. If you treat the overt symptoms of the victim's distress without removing the victim from the situation that caused the distress, you will not be treating the underlying cause of the illness and may even exacerbate it.

Once again I never suggested treatment... I specified EVALUATION. Certainly there can be no danger from evaluation. I have not equated mental illness to anything in any of my posts. I have simply suggested that evaluation may be in order. I have said nothing about treatment except in response to a diagnosed condition. I really don't understand what the issue is here... knowledge is power... why not evaluate...



It is not enough for the clinician to diagnose the victim as 'depressed' or as having 'generalized anxiety disorder'. The cause or causes of these conditions must be determined in order for the clinician to properly treat the person's mental illness. The patient's mental illness may have a strong genetic component (manic-depression has a very strong genetic component), in which case medication will be necessary. However, there are other cases where the mental illness is situational, in which case the environmental causes of the patient's distress must be evaluated and ameliorated in order to treat the patient's illness. Medication may also be necessary in these instances but should not be used as the sole treatment for reactive depression.
This is what is involved in evaluation. As in any other diagnostic process the cause of the depression needs to be determined. The tools exist now that can be used determine whether someone is depressed from a tramatic event or from genetic make up or even a genetic predisposition that results in falling into depression more easily than others.

I have said nothing about treatment... I have discussed evaluation only and as such I don't understand why this causes such a response. Surely the knowledge gained from such an evaluation is better than remaining in the dark.

[Lurker]

It must be very frustrating for you. :rolleyes:
Well as the mods have not seen fit to issue any warnings to me over this mater, it must be very frustrating for you to have to police this thread for them...

[Lurker]

In the bullying I'm familiar with, there are ongoing attacks, where you go to school wondering how you're going to get hurt that day.

The same was true with the illness - I would wake up wondering what bad thing would happen that day. It was torture. If you don't get that, too bad.

I wouldn't have brought it up if I wasn't familiar with both, and if there weren't similar themes.
My only point was that there is no harm in an evaluation... what is the problem??

[Moose]

Would you also not say that Guy A was mentally stronger in dealing with this specifically?

I wouldn't let the psychopath you've depicted in example A anywhere near anybody I care about, for what it's worth. Someone who can blow off a murder without blinking like that is simply not right in the head. Or is so desensitized to the point of being (as a statistical correlation, not necessarily a cause) a complete jinx on absolutely everybody around him. Either way, he's bad news and to be avoided at all costs.

B falls well within the range of normal, healthy human behavior for dealing with a unique traumatic event such as witnessing a murder. Even cops and soldiers nearly always get the shakes after witnessing (or causing) their first shooting death.

[Tucson_Tim]

Well as the mods have not seen fit to issue any warnings to me over this mater, it must be very frustrating for you to have to police this thread for them...

Have you forgotten your self-proclamation:


I prefer the truth... spoken plainly, gently, and with great humility...

[Lurker]

Have you forgotten your self-proclamation:

nope... I stand by it in all things...

I also believe in karma... that which one places into the world is what comes back to one...

you might want to ponder it...

[Tucson_Tim]

nope... I stand by it in all things...


How does disparaging the entire membership, which you've done on several occasions, fit into the "humility" part? It looks like you place yourself above the rest.

[Lurker]

How does disparaging the entire membership, which you've done on several occasions, fit into the "humility" part? It looks like you place yourself above the rest.
I have not done so... I only pointed to those who get things wrong...

I would add however, that this is probably a bit off topic though...

[Dragon Star]

I wouldn't let the psychopath you've depicted in example A anywhere near anybody I care about, for what it's worth. Someone who can blow off a murder without blinking like that is simply not right in the head. Or is so desensitized to the point of being (as a statistical correlation, not necessarily a cause) a complete jinx on absolutely everybody around him. Either way, he's bad news and to be avoided at all costs.

B falls well within the range of normal, healthy human behavior for dealing with a unique traumatic event such as witnessing a murder. Even cops and soldiers nearly always get the shakes after witnessing (or causing) their first shooting death.

This was only for the sake of example, however you weakly made my point.

[Van Rijn]

I'm referring to my ability to let something that happened well before the present go. I know I have it because I'm not crying about it.


Ah. You have let it go?


Quite likely because many of them had it much worse than anything you ever faced.
How ignorant and selfish of you. Just because I don't mind what happened and talk about it all the time in internet forums has no bearing on what I went through.


That's a pretty strong response for someone who "let it go." And you are discussing this subject, in this thread.


This seems to be a very popular angle to take in this thread, and still no one observes that still no one is doing anything different (besides a few schools, as was pointed out earlier). Because nothing is changing, is why I express my point of view. I agree that stomping the cause is to beat this to a pulp, but it's sooo much easier said then done. Bad behavior is like a drug, and the victims are the police...it's a losing battle.

So, is your argument, "It's okay because nobody can stop it"? I don't agree with that, by the way. Sure, you're not going to stop it completely, but there are ways to reduce it. And, I'm not so interested in how people come to terms with it years after the fact, but what is done to help them at the time it is happening.


So you would say that someone who was better fit and prepared mentally would be effected the same as someone who was less fit and prepared? Bold statement indeed. It's far too situational to judge it in such a way. I'm only expressing that it is a sufficient explanation as to why some people just crack.


The issue, again, is you seem to be assuming that a reaction to extreme stress means something about a person's mental fitness. I'm saying, again, that a normal human being can crack under enough stress. And, by the way, I don't think that becoming highly desensitized is a very "fit" response either.

[Van Rijn]

My only point was that there is no harm in an evaluation... what is the problem??

If that's your only point, I don't have a problem. If someone thinks that their situation warrants an evaluation, that's fine with me. But that isn't what I thought we were discussing. My take on your posts was that you were saying that bullying wasn't the issue, just the person's reaction to bullying. If you weren't saying that, then we don't have a disagreement.

[Dragon Star]

Ah. You have let it go?

I never grabbed it, actually. I only graduated 7 months ago in a few days.

That's a pretty strong response for someone who "let it go." And you are discussing this subject, in this thread.

I just hated how cocky you portrayed yourself in that comment.


So, is your argument, "It's okay because nobody can stop it"?

Yet again, no. Go read my initial responses and you will find I'm not "okay" with it. I just came to accept it more then others.

I don't agree with that, by the way.

Now THIS, I find shocking.

Sure, you're not going to stop it completely, but there are ways to reduce it. And, I'm not so interested in how people come to terms with it years after the fact, but what is done to help them at the time it is happening.

Precisely. No disagreement there.


The issue, again, is you seem to be assuming that a reaction to extreme stress means something about a person's mental fitness. I'm saying, again, that a normal human being can crack under enough stress. And, by the way, I don't think that becoming highly desensitized is a very "fit" response either.

Nor here. I was only providing an example in which people crack when others would not. I'm simply one of those people who doesn't crack when others would. I just won't allow someone to feed off of my fear and anguish.

I was once held down by half of the football team, gagged with a sock and hogtied, and placed on a table in the center of the cafeteria freshman year. I was lucky enough to be discovered by a teacher before lunch started. However, I look at this and almost laugh because it's just so silly. So what? They got in a bit of trouble, and until they graduated two years later still gave me a hard time, but none of that means anything really. Why let something like that influence me years later?

[Delvo]

As I was reminded in a Psychology class today, I've seen a child psychologist's or psychiatrist's report (in the case files I handle working for my state's Special Education agency) that said that the subject's behavior regarding certain incidents of harassment at school was consistent with the behavior of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder patients.

[Van Rijn]

I just hated how cocky you portrayed yourself in that comment.


Ironically, that's how I judged your comment that I was responding to. It seemed to me that you felt you could speak for what other people had faced. Perhaps we are both reading things into each other's posts that weren't intended?


Nor here. I was only providing an example in which people crack when others would not. I'm simply one of those people who doesn't crack when others would. I just won't allow someone to feed off of my fear and anguish.


Wow. Now, to me, this is a very cocky statement. To me, it sounds like you are comparing yourself to others and putting yourself above them. And I will repeat: Any normal human being, faced with enough stress, can "crack."


I was once held down by half of the football team, gagged with a sock and hogtied, and placed on a table in the center of the cafeteria freshman year. I was lucky enough to be discovered by a teacher before lunch started. However, I look at this and almost laugh because it's just so silly. So what? They got in a bit of trouble, and until they graduated two years later still gave me a hard time, but none of that means anything really. Why let something like that influence me years later?

That could be embarrassing. How badly were you hurt?

[Paracelsus]

My only point was that there is no harm in an evaluation... what is the problem??

Well, I must agree with you one that one. Evaluation IS necessary in these cases.

Thanks for clarifying your point. :)

[DyerWolf]

I wouldn't let the psychopath you've depicted in example A anywhere near anybody I care about, for what it's worth. Someone who can blow off a murder without blinking like that is simply not right in the head. Or is so desensitized to the point of being (as a statistical correlation, not necessarily a cause) a complete jinx on absolutely everybody around him. Either way, he's bad news and to be avoided at all costs.

B falls well within the range of normal, healthy human behavior for dealing with a unique traumatic event such as witnessing a murder. Even cops and soldiers nearly always get the shakes after witnessing (or causing) their first shooting death.

Moose - you're overcorrecting the other way. Speaking as someone with experience, most cops and soldiers do not have the problems you're describing. Its a media portrayal.

In fact, B described above, does not fall well 'within the range of a normal, healthy human' behavior. Normal healthy human beings are much more resilient than B.

Guy A on the other hand is probably too sanguine if he can just sit down to a nice sloppy joe or a plate of spaghetti within minutes after watching the murder described.

Were I in guy A's shoes, tho, I must admit that I could sit down to dinner with friends that same night - and the conversation would start off with "You'll never guess what happened earlier this evening..."

[Paracelsus]

Lets prepare an example: A guy is walking down the street to the local diner, and all the sudden someone comes right up and blows the head off the guy walking in front of him, robs him blind, and runs off.

Guy A- Dude, like, he totally walked up and just blew his head off! OMG! How terrible! *continues on to dinner*

Guy B- Faints. Has nightmares, flashbacks, depression, anxiety, lack of hunger, exc...

Would you not say that Guy A was able to deal with it in a better way due to the fact he has seen such things before? Would you also not say that Guy A was mentally stronger in dealing with this specifically?


First off, the guys in your example represent extremes of a spectrum of reactions that people would have to such an event. A more realistic reaction would be a mixture of shock, disgust, astonishment, pity (for the victim), and anger (at the murderer). The witness would probably feel a little shaken up and not particularly hungry after such an event (and may cancel the dinner in consequence) but will probably not be shattered by it (as 'Guy B' in your example was), unless the witness knew and liked the person who got killed. Now, the witness may be somewhat leery of walking along that particular street again, given what had happened to the poor SOB in front of him, but this is also natural.

What would NOT be natural is to have no emotional reaction to such an event, as per 'Guy A' in your example. This would indicate that the witness is extremely desensitized, not to mention heartless and cold-blooded. Such a person is not mentally-stronger than the rest of humanity; he or she is simply more unfeeling. Strength and heartless indifference are not equivalent. You appear to think they are, Dragon Star.

From what you've said on this thread, it appears that bullies put you through all kinds of hell when you were in high school (?). As you mentioned graduating 7 months ago, I assume you are either a recent HS graduate or a recent college grad and thus a young man (early 20s). Yes, some people are naturally more resilient than others, but these people aren't unfeeling, like you claim to be. They still get hurt and will acknowledge that they have been hurt; they simply find a way to move past the pain, without denigrating the impact of what they have experienced. You don't fit that description; you deny that the bullying hurt you in the first place! I seriously doubt that any normal human being could go through what you have said you went through and NOT be hurt by it, particularly as you don't have a wealth of life experiences to draw on for resilience and have not mentioned any other external source of emotional support in your life.

I'm assuming that you are basically a normal, sane human being, so your stated reaction to what you have experienced implies that you are pretty deep in denial and need counselling ASAP.

[Spock Jenkins]

I'm assuming that you are basically a normal, sane human being, so your stated reaction to what you have experienced implies that you are pretty deep in denial and need counselling ASAP.

So you concede the point that he was making that there is a perceived, "normal" reaction to a given situation. You further accept that people react along all ends of the spectrum. That being the case - there is merit to his overall point that some people deal with the stresses of life (being bullied, etc.) in healthier ways than others. Some people are broken more easily than others. His further point would seem to be that some that are broken a little too easily perhaps have further health issues that could be the root cause.

A far simpler example. Two children are learning to tie their shoes. One keeps trying even though it's coming along slowly. They stay with it and eventually learn it. Maybe it takes a couple days, maybe they keep coming untied because they can't do it tightly yet - but they stay with it. The other child doesn't get it right the first time so they break down and start crying, they throw their shoe across the room and don't want to learn how to tie any more. Their learning is effectively done for they day and perhaps the week if their mood doesn't change.

This type of thing would seem to be hard wired in people. Everyone handles stress and challenges differently. The first child is clearly mentally stronger than the second.

Finally - extremes are often used to illustrate a general point. People seem to feel the need to say, "yeah, but those are extremes, they don't count". Of course they're extremes. The general point that Dragon Star was making was pretty clear and I don't think that far off base.

[Paracelsus]

A far simpler example. Two children are learning to tie their shoes. One keeps trying even though it's coming along slowly. They stay with it and eventually learn it. Maybe it takes a couple days, maybe they keep coming untied because they can't do it tightly yet - but they stay with it. The other child doesn't get it right the first time so they break down and start crying, they throw their shoe across the room and don't want to learn how to tie any more. Their learning is effectively done for they day and perhaps the week if their mood doesn't change.

This type of thing would seem to be hard wired in people. Everyone handles stress and challenges differently. The first child is clearly mentally stronger than the second.


I would agree with you in that particular example. Yes, people are hard-wired with different distress thresholds and will handle stress differently. However, the examples you and Dragon Star gave have nothing to do with the chronic stress that results from being bullied. The first example illustrates 'frustration tolerance'; the second illustrates responses to witnessing an isolated traumatic event. neither one of those cases applies to situations where a person is traumatized over and over for years.

Chronic, unremitting stress can wear down the toughest of psyches. For me and others on this thread, the trauma from bullying was chronic and unremitting; this also appears to have been the case for Dragon Star.

If he is truly over his pain, then good for him. A little more compassion on his part for others who may not be is warranted, however.

[Lurker]

If that's your only point, I don't have a problem. If someone thinks that their situation warrants an evaluation, that's fine with me. But that isn't what I thought we were discussing. My take on your posts was that you were saying that bullying wasn't the issue, just the person's reaction to bullying. If you weren't saying that, then we don't have a disagreement.
What I was saying is that if a person has the strong reaction to bullying that is being discussed here, there may be any number of reasons for it; one being an inability to cope. I think that all possibilities should be considered. This includes an evaluation for predisposition toward depression and other mental issues. I don't see why that should be such an issue.

[Paracelsus]

What I was saying is that if a person has the strong reaction to bullying that is being discussed here, there may be any number of reasons for it; one being an inability to cope. I think that all possibilities should be considered. This includes an evaluation for predisposition toward depression and other mental issues. I don't see why that should be such an issue.

As long as the bullying itself is also addressed, I don't have an issue with it.

[farmerjumperdon]

A far simpler example. Two children are learning to tie their shoes. One keeps trying even though it's coming along slowly. They stay with it and eventually learn it. Maybe it takes a couple days, maybe they keep coming untied because they can't do it tightly yet - but they stay with it. The other child doesn't get it right the first time so they break down and start crying, they throw their shoe across the room and don't want to learn how to tie any more. Their learning is effectively done for they day and perhaps the week if their mood doesn't change.

This type of thing would seem to be hard wired in people. Everyone handles stress and challenges differently. The first child is clearly mentally stronger than the second.

I think at least some amount of that is learned, or can be learned. Kids can lack the behavior of perservering, maybe are not taught patience or instilled with the desire to see things through to completion. Also, for lack of a better word right now, spoiled kids might easily give up if they are used to being coddled and catered to at the drop of a hat (or drop of a tear).

Some of the kids I coach are so incredibly high maintenance it boggles the mind. Hopefully some of them will unlearn that, but you just know some won't, and they are the royal pain type of adults. I despise neediness when it becomes a burden to others.

[Gillianren]

What I was saying is that if a person has the strong reaction to bullying that is being discussed here, there may be any number of reasons for it; one being an inability to cope. I think that all possibilities should be considered. This includes an evaluation for predisposition toward depression and other mental issues. I don't see why that should be such an issue.

Personally, given how helpful early treatment is, I think evaluation should be SOP for children regardless of situation, but especially when they are known to have experienced serious physical or psychological trauma. (Which, for the record, I absolutely believe both bullying and persistent teasing to be.) However, as long as there's still a stigma against mental illness, it isn't going to happen.

I recently received a potential diagnosis of PTSD myself, though it's unrelated to childhood exposure to bullies and obnoxious, teasing twits. I've been in counseling off and on since I was in third grade; the events believed to have sparked the PTSD occurred when I was six. I only had it diagnosed now because I'm still in therapy. How many undiagnosed victims might there be?

However.

I don't think someone who shrugs off bullying completely is mentally healthy, either. I don't think therapy is preferable to finding the blasted bullies and making them experience the consequences of their own actions. I don't think everyone who reacts badly to bullies has something diagnosably wrong with them.

[Lurker]

I don't think someone who shrugs off bullying completely is mentally healthy, either. I don't think therapy is preferable to finding the blasted bullies and making them experience the consequences of their own actions. I don't think everyone who reacts badly to bullies has something diagnosably wrong with them.
This is what I don't understand... I did not address the issue of what should be done with the bullies. This is not because I don't care, nor does it mean that I don't think that the bullies shouldn't be dealt with. Nor did I say that everyone who reacts badly to a difficult situation, whether it be the loss of a loved one, bullying, or any other situation has something wrong with them.

[farmerjumperdon]

I don't think someone who shrugs off bullying completely is mentally healthy, either. I don't think therapy is preferable to finding the blasted bullies and making them experience the consequences of their own actions. I don't think everyone who reacts badly to bullies has something diagnosably wrong with them.

Well, now we know what you DON'T think.

[Paracelsus]

This is what I don't understand... I did not address the issue of what should be done with the bullies. This is not because I don't care, nor does it mean that I don't think that the bullies shouldn't be dealt with. Nor did I say that everyone who reacts badly to a difficult situation, whether it be the loss of a loved one, bullying, or any other situation has something wrong with them.

You didn't say those things, Lurker. Dragon Star did--or some of them, at least.

[Lurker]

You didn't say those things, Lurker. Dragon Star did--or some of them, at least.
OK... it would just help a little if comments toward those could be annotated to him... I sometimes feel that I am being addressed on issues that are beyond my points... thats all... :)

[Paracelsus]

Will do. :)

This thread is running to 9 pages now. :eek:

[Lurker]

Will do. :)

This thread is running to 9 pages now. :eek:
This is baut... we can't decide on the safety of pbj sandwiches in less than 9 pages... ;-)

[Dragon Star]

As for me, I'm 18 from (well, graduated anyhow. I've lived in multiple states) Hamilton, OH, and I left in January (I actually graduated over six months early) to take up my current chosen career in Construction working for BE&K Building Group.

I respect you would believe I'm a college grad, however, I believe you knew that before you typed it. :lol:

So you concede the point that he was making that there is a perceived, "normal" reaction to a given situation. You further accept that people react along all ends of the spectrum. That being the case - there is merit to his overall point that some people deal with the stresses of life (being bullied, etc.) in healthier ways than others. Some people are broken more easily than others. His further point would seem to be that some that are broken a little too easily perhaps have further health issues that could be the root cause.

A far simpler example. Two children are learning to tie their shoes. One keeps trying even though it's coming along slowly. They stay with it and eventually learn it. Maybe it takes a couple days, maybe they keep coming untied because they can't do it tightly yet - but they stay with it. The other child doesn't get it right the first time so they break down and start crying, they throw their shoe across the room and don't want to learn how to tie any more. Their learning is effectively done for they day and perhaps the week if their mood doesn't change.

This type of thing would seem to be hard wired in people. Everyone handles stress and challenges differently. The first child is clearly mentally stronger than the second.

Finally - extremes are often used to illustrate a general point. People seem to feel the need to say, "yeah, but those are extremes, they don't count". Of course they're extremes. The general point that Dragon Star was making was pretty clear and I don't think that far off base.

If I didn't think you were a man, I'd give you a kiss. :D

And your exactly right, and appear to be the only one who fully understood my example at face value instead of evaluating the psyche of both people in my example.

@ Paracelsus;

Chronic, unremitting stress can wear down the toughest of psyches. For me and others on this thread, the trauma from bullying was chronic and unremitting; this also appears to have been the case for Dragon Star.

Indeed, however I was practically unaffected by it other then in a positive way I think. Gave me some tough skin and let me bypass some of the pains in life. This doesn't mean I'm totally heartless to everything in life, I've loved, I've lost, and continue to lose... and I feel pain from these things...however while thinking about high-school...it simply doesn't leave any sort of an impression on me. I don't feel as though I'm in denial of this, because I can think about it as much as I want and still I feel nothing. Those in denial simply don't think about it and block it from conscience thought. At the time, sure, I was ****ed as hell, but right after it meant nothing other then a negative experience, which collectively turned out positive for me. Which brings me to yet another realization, nearly every person in this thread is biased in some way due to how they or others were affected. I just seem to be between both sides of the fence in that I was bullied, however I have no horrors resulting from it.

Draw from it what you will, but I don't believe I "need counseling ASAP." At least not for this.

If he is truly over his pain, then good for him. A little more compassion on his part for others who may not be is warranted, however.

You have me there, and you're correct...I don't often show much compassion, however this doesn't mean I don't feel it. I'm just a firm believer that everyone sobbing over each other is going to help the pain. Let it out and let it go...but apparently, as you say, there is more to this then I know.

[Dragon Star]

This is baut... we can't decide on the safety of pbj sandwiches in less than 9 pages... ;-)

Normally I won't signature others comments, however, I find this one to be so totally true I must. :p

[Lurker]

Normally I won't signature others comments, however, I find this one to be so totally true I must. :p
This is quite an honor... :)

I want to thank my mom... and my 5th grade teacher who always said I would be quoted!! And my little bunny Harold who has stuck with me through so much...

[Paracelsus]

I'm just a firm believer that everyone sobbing over each other is going to help the pain. Let it out and let it go...

One has to acknowledge that one has been hurt in the first place in order to heal from an injury.

However, Dragon Star, there is much wisdom in your statement. I agree that one has to let this kind of stuff go in the end as part of the healing process. :)

[Spock Jenkins]

Slightly off topic, but has anyone caught "Shaq's Big Challenge" on ABC? Regardless of what one might think of his marketing angle or basketball career - I give him credit for what he was able to do for six morbidly obese children. Most went from not being able to do one sit up or one push up to doing upwards of 30 situps and 20 push ups and being able to run a mile. One child lost over 75 lbs. He got the school to switch from serving greasy fast food style lunches to things like chicken, rice, and vegetable for the same cost.