When I was about 10 years old, my family moved from a military base in Ontario to a working-class subdivision in Saint John, N.B. It was the first time I had ever lived off a base, and I was something of a fish out of water.
The kids in my new neighbourhood were pretty tough. Most had lived on the same street their entire lives. They weren’t used to having new people in their ‘hood.
My sins, apart from being new, were that I was smart (but not as smart-mouthed as I am now), I was shy and I was tiny.
There was a cement bridge at the top of my street that I had to cross to go anywhere, and that, of course, was where the kids hung out.
I think you can see where this is going.
Back in those days, we didn’t have simple, convenient, catch-all phrase – “bullying” – to describe what went on. I’m glad for that, because the things that happened and why they happened go a lot deeper than simply: “I was good, they were bad.”
All those kids on the bridge weren’t evil, tortured souls. They did some pretty mean things as a group, but they didn’t all go on to lead lives of crime, and I didn’t go on to become a saint.
And that’s, unfortunately, what the word “bullying” does. It reduces a complex set of social problems and issues around poverty, power, mental health, social status, learning abilities, self-esteem, parenting and life experience to an oversimplified concept for which we expect to find a single, simple solution.
In our own sincere, but somewhat misguided way, we feel that slapping a label on a problem brings us closer to understanding or solving it. But to try to solve “bullying” by criminalizing “bullies” or penalizing parents or demonizing the school system is not going to work.
Let’s be honest about this: kids can do stupid things. Their brains are not fully formed, they don’t have enough life experience to have perspective on anything, and they exist in a world which is a constant struggle to establish where they “fit in” and how much personal power they have.
I’m not just talking about the “bad” kids, here. ALL kids exercise poor judgement from time to time. To slap a label on them: “You’re a bully; you’re bullied” doesn’t acknowledge that all kids have a bit of bad and a bit of good in them, and that they’re constantly experimenting with that.
Look at your own kid. Is she or he a “bully?” Of course not. Is she a little insecure, and harassing another kid over her appearance or her friends? Maybe, but she volunteers on weekends at the food bank. Is your son chasing someone home regularly and threatening to beat him up for no apparent reason? Yeah, but he’s the star pitcher on the baseball team.
My point is that we need to address the issues behind the behaviours and leave these useless labels behind. Yes, the harassment of kids by other kids is wrong and needs to be addressed and prevented or punished. But can we dig a little deeper to find out what’s really going on?
Those kids on the bridge had nothing better to do. They were poor, bored, and in some cases had terrible parental role models. Calling them “bullies” wouldn’t have solved the problem. A community centre and a bit of mentoring might have.
The kids in my new neighbourhood were pretty tough. Most had lived on the same street their entire lives. They weren’t used to having new people in their ‘hood.
My sins, apart from being new, were that I was smart (but not as smart-mouthed as I am now), I was shy and I was tiny.
There was a cement bridge at the top of my street that I had to cross to go anywhere, and that, of course, was where the kids hung out.
I think you can see where this is going.
Back in those days, we didn’t have simple, convenient, catch-all phrase – “bullying” – to describe what went on. I’m glad for that, because the things that happened and why they happened go a lot deeper than simply: “I was good, they were bad.”
All those kids on the bridge weren’t evil, tortured souls. They did some pretty mean things as a group, but they didn’t all go on to lead lives of crime, and I didn’t go on to become a saint.
And that’s, unfortunately, what the word “bullying” does. It reduces a complex set of social problems and issues around poverty, power, mental health, social status, learning abilities, self-esteem, parenting and life experience to an oversimplified concept for which we expect to find a single, simple solution.
In our own sincere, but somewhat misguided way, we feel that slapping a label on a problem brings us closer to understanding or solving it. But to try to solve “bullying” by criminalizing “bullies” or penalizing parents or demonizing the school system is not going to work.
Let’s be honest about this: kids can do stupid things. Their brains are not fully formed, they don’t have enough life experience to have perspective on anything, and they exist in a world which is a constant struggle to establish where they “fit in” and how much personal power they have.
I’m not just talking about the “bad” kids, here. ALL kids exercise poor judgement from time to time. To slap a label on them: “You’re a bully; you’re bullied” doesn’t acknowledge that all kids have a bit of bad and a bit of good in them, and that they’re constantly experimenting with that.
Look at your own kid. Is she or he a “bully?” Of course not. Is she a little insecure, and harassing another kid over her appearance or her friends? Maybe, but she volunteers on weekends at the food bank. Is your son chasing someone home regularly and threatening to beat him up for no apparent reason? Yeah, but he’s the star pitcher on the baseball team.
My point is that we need to address the issues behind the behaviours and leave these useless labels behind. Yes, the harassment of kids by other kids is wrong and needs to be addressed and prevented or punished. But can we dig a little deeper to find out what’s really going on?
Those kids on the bridge had nothing better to do. They were poor, bored, and in some cases had terrible parental role models. Calling them “bullies” wouldn’t have solved the problem. A community centre and a bit of mentoring might have.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment