Bullying: Are anti-bullying efforts wuss-ifying America?

Dr. Wayne Baker is away this week.
Guest columnist Joe Grimm teaches journalism at Michigan State University and is leading a team of students researching the red-hot issue of bullying. Policy-makers nationwide are looking for guidance on how to tackle this problem. You can read more from Joe’s students at an MSU student-run website.
You can make a difference by reading this column, then adding a comment below.
This is Joe Grimm’s 2nd of five columns …

Some people are telling our MSU reporting team that the definition of bullying has been stretched too far. In blunt terms, these critics say: All this anti-bullying stuff is wuss-ifying America!

We now have a cyberbullying definition and one for bullycide, terms we didn’t even have 15 years ago. Whether or not social aggression is growing—there is no doubt the dictionary is. Social exclusion, in which a group shuns someone, is now part of the bullying lexicon, stretching it even further. Legal bullying definitions are evolving, too, as are laws about it. Some say that the complaints, the laws, the lawsuits are an overreaction.

Last week, in a program titled “Electric Cars and the Wussificaton of America,” Rush Limbaugh said we are inventing terms and traumas to describe all of our difficulties. He said, “I’m not denying the stress is real, but I don’t think we know what it really is compared to our parents and grandparents. But we make it real. I mean, it paralyzes us. There’s no question it does. And the way we deal with things today versus the way they used to be dealt with, such as bullies?”

We generate reams of bullying information for kids. We have them make anti-bullying posters. They fill out bullying questionnaires at school. We used to show kids how to stand their ground. We used to call it growing up. Now, instead of fighting back, they post bullying songs on YouTube or role-play in bullying games.

A new book by Mei-Long Hopgood, “How Eskimos Keep Their Babies Warm,” says that teachers in Japan let students work their differences out on their own, even if someone gets shoved. They turn out fine. Americans and Japanese teachers seem to have very different approaches to aggression.

What do you say?

Is our focus on bullying going to wussify America?

PLEASE, ADD A COMMENT BELOW
AND CLICK ON the “Now You Can Find Us on Facebook” link in the right-hand column.

Originally published at www.OurValues.org, an online experiment in civil dialogue.

Comments

[BT]

The tide shifted once Americans discovered psychology--then all of our problems were caused by someone else. While that may be somewhat true, it creates a society of victims. There are absolutely victims in the world, but even they may not perceive themselves as such...therein lies the difference. We can all bring litigation against someone who has done us wrong, but in not all cases is this possible or even desirable. Life is unfair; that's a fact. We win, we lose. Trying to explain to a teen that the recession we just went through was not an action against her personally, to create personal hardship for her, is an indication of this shift. It's become about the individual. I'm guessing parents of children during the Great Depression did not have these kinds of conversations. So, bullying...it is about power balance. Tell me if I'm wrong, but in corporate America they don't really care how the thing gets done as long as the profit margin is healthy. That doesn't often bode well for the human spirit--we've all seen cubby offices and assembly lines. Now that's the truth of life: It's hard and it is unfair and the sooner we learn to stand up for ourselves, the better off we will all be psychologically. Don't tell kids they are victims it immediately tells them they are powerlesss. Teach them to stand up for themselves, let them figure it out because that's empowering (another psych word). Besides, we all know the end of the story...the geeks get the last laugh when they become corporate CEO's.

[Joe Grimm]

Wow! That covers a lot of ground.

I'd offer a comment on just a small part of that with the power of words and labels in mind.

I think it would be more accurate to identify people as the targets of bullying, rather than as its victims. I also try to refer to the behavior -- the bullying -- rather than the actor -- the bully. Often people who are the aggressors in one situation are the targets in another. Focusing on the undesirable actions seems to be a more precise way to address a complicated set of behaviors. Thanks for writing.