this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
274 points (97.2% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
574 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Looking at it from the other side, it's actually rare that an innocent kid is beat up without context.
Usually there's 2 kids that have a beef and have been egging each other on for days. Eventually one kid says something and the other kid snaps and makes the first move but the second kid was just as guilty.
If you only look at "who started it" the second kid gets off scot free, while the first kid gets punished. Not really fair.
"Zero tolerance " attempts to fix this by recognizing that both kids likely played a part.
You are delusional to the highest degree. Kids in school don't fight even, it's one-sided 99% of the time.
The reason for this (and the rule) is bullying. Bullies fight bullied, and everyone gets suspended because "they were fighting". Since you announced in advance that was the policy, this enables you to conveniently ignore the bullying that has taken place, and instead act as if all bullying-related fights (read: all fights pretty much) are simple fights that do not require any more attention because the issue has been dealth with with punishment.
In turn, this means that a bully who already has a bad rap and generally doesn't care about grades or standing with school admin because both are already at rock bottom can target any one kid and make their admin standing rock bottom because it will appear as if that kid is fighting all the time and constantly suspended.
There's no "other side". The kid who initiated violence is the one in the wrong, even if the other one has been egging him on. "Oh but what if the egging on is one sided and the kid can't take it anymore?" That is a symptom of your bullying reporting being garbage, not of the natural order of kids. If that kid is taking it out violently it means they've tried every other avenue including telling an adult and nothing has changed.
I'm not saying it's right, just that's their rationale. I literally discussed this with a middle school principal a few days ago and that was what she said.
Regardless of what you think about the policy, the fact is that your kids will have to abide by it.
Fact: if your kid is being bullied, they need to communicate to a person of authority. Answering a bully with violence is the wrong choice 99% of the time. They are usually bigger than you and have backup.
Also usually it doesn't progress to a fight the very first time, usually it takes weeks, and during this time you would have many opportunities to tell a teacher or something.
Again, not advocating that this is right, but that's their rationale.
Bullying is a one directional situation. It's straight physical and mental abuse. And saying zero tolerance is right because it's two way or the bullied kid can tell an adult is akin to saying a woman could just leave the man beating her.
It's naive. It's harmful. And it's ineffective.
Your middle school principal you discussed with this is only a single administrator. I'm sure different schools have had various rationale for implementing the policy and any anecdotal response doesn't speak to the entirety of school administrators.
And what I'm saying is that the school administrator has a vested interest in "removing bullying" by making all bullying-related in incidents be actually something else.
I agree that violence is never the answer, but maybe next time instead of talking to someone who wants to not have to deal with bullying, talk to the students who are being bullied. I guarantee you that every single one of them has tried to alert an adult and the reaction was either "well he's not doing anything too bad so I can't do anything" or "he's been put in detention temporarily and I am the only one aware that it was related to bullying".
Every single instance of kids fighting in schools can be fixed by having actual support systems in place against bullying. Figure out who the bullies are, and remove them from the bullied's life. Treat bullying as we treat parental abuse currently, it should be unacceptable that a treacher knew what was happening and did nothing, yet it happens daily.
Fact: currently, if a kid is being is being bullied, they need to learn how to end a fight.
What exactly is a person of authority going to do of you go to them? If they are going to actually do anything, is that thing going to stop it? I guarantee it won't. Their rational might be this, but as it stands either you are blissfully unaware of the reality of bulling or you are aware and simply do not care.