In reeling drunkenly from one blog to another, I stumbled across this charming post over at Post-Modern Enlightenment, in which the author takes down a pro-bullying article by a right-winger.
Yes, people write pro-bullying articles.
Yeah, I don’t fucking know either. Anyway, it’s a good read, go enjoy.
aliarasthedaydreamer
Ami Angelwings
Hershele Ostropoler
Cheradenine
jlandrith
kaija24
2020
noahbrand
Cliff Pervocracy
ozymandias
Shora
sirgabe
figleaf
John Hawkins
No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz? 
This is the very reason why I distanced myself from The Men’s Rights Movement.
Although I found common ground in certain areas with them, particularly how I was harmed in the past, a lot of them seemed to have hooked up with the right-wing segment of society and are adhering to the philosophies from extremist neo-conservatives.
It made me uncomfortable reading articles on men’s rights from the people they site in their findings. Because the author’s always find the time to bash anything Liberal, just like the linked article does.
Anyway, bullying shouldn’t be tolerated. I vehemently disagree with it as a form of rite of passage as the author in the linked article implies. Sure, our world isn’t perfect and there’s always going to be people out there who’d just as soon step on your face rather than tolerate your views, but we’re talking about plain hararssement and belittlement on a regular basis for kids, KIDS, who don’t fit the mold of what society demands. I don’t think the author understands the difference between minor annoyances and harassement like stuffing someone in a locker, beating them up, or worse. He seems to conflate them. Big mistake.
He just doesn’t get it.
Edit: Oh wait, sorry. I meant the person the author in the link takes down. I apologise. This post is not directed at the author in the first link. Sorry. Yeesh! I should’ve checked more carefully before spouting off.
@Eagle33 I misjudged you, I thought you were actually one of those social-‘conservatives’ (PS actual conservatives discard clearly harmful institutions, these people are just nutty fundies) I’m always glad to see someone who is willing to take a nuanced stand on gender issues.
Sincerely,
Just as disappointed in people who call themselves conservative, when I do the same as people who call themselves feminist when I do the same.
Does that blogger not have a link to the source page for what they are responding to (it might be there and I just can’t see the link in the post)?
But never the less it sounds to me more like he’s not so much pro-bully as “let the bullying victims fend for themselves, I had to”. That to me says that, while he may have taken a physical stand against a tormentor, he didn’t completely work his way through what happened to him. Yeah he fought back but did he really get the chance to confront the reasons behind the bullying he suffered? Was there any sort of support to help him work through it and decide to work on helping other bullying victims? I wager not.
In short he figures that since he was left to his own devices why not leave today’s kids to do the same? (And I really don’t think the characteristics of the victim are going to play into his thinking. I get the feeling that he would still say, “Why don’t you just fight back?” to a kid who had all the same things going for them as he did, ei… I don’t think privilege matters to him.)
Also, I’m sorry, but forget the author of the reply’s rubbishing of romanticism… to say without pain there is no worthwhile art is not to say that we should encourage pain… pain will propagate itself quite nicely.
@Danny: I think this bit:
He told me specifically that I needed to be aware of the fact that in 21st Century America one out of five boys gets bullied in school on a “regular basis.” I don’t know where he got that statistic but it really made me ashamed of my country. We need to do better. When I was a kid back in 20th Century America everyone got bullied in school. Those really were the good old days.
…is unequivocally pro-bullying. He refers to it, specifically, as a universally good thing.
If you ask me, the Townhall article is just a knee-jerk tribal reaction. “I am of the Right tribe, and our enemies are the Left tribe! The Left is promoting anti-bullying programs, therefore bullying must be awesome!” You really can get some people to support almost anything, just by stating that you’re against it.
Danny: “But never the less it sounds to me more like he’s not so much pro-bully as “let the bullying victims fend for themselves, I had to”. That to me says that, while he may have taken a physical stand against a tormentor, he didn’t completely work his way through what happened to him. Yeah he fought back but did he really get the chance to confront the reasons behind the bullying he suffered? Was there any sort of support to help him work through it and decide to work on helping other bullying victims? I wager not.”
I still have a problem with having victims physically stand up to their bullies. Even some who support anti-bullying still believe a few karate lessons or weight lifting will even the odds.
The problem is not everyone is built for physical confrontations or self-defence. Besides, weight-lifting and karate lessons, those demand commitment. Telling a kid to take karate lessons or lift weights because it will stop others from pushing them around goes against what self-defense is about.
Self-defense should be about defending yourself, yes, but not in every single situation.
Valerie: “@Eagle33 I misjudged you, I thought you were actually one of those social-’conservatives’ (PS actual conservatives discard clearly harmful institutions, these people are just nutty fundies) I’m always glad to see someone who is willing to take a nuanced stand on gender issues.”
Not everyone who has problems with some feminist theories is a staunch conservative or a right-wing nutcase, Valerie. That’s a big mistake those on the left or devout feminists make when looking at their opponents.
That’s why I don’t align myself with feminists or the left either. They’re guilty of othering any opposition as the right-wing extremists are.
@Eagle33 I’m a staunch conservative… just an anachronistically left-wing one.
I get what you say there noah. I guess I’m just odd because I read that and got “survival of the fittest, and if they aren’t fit fuck ’em.”.
Eagle:
I still have a problem with having victims physically stand up to their bullies. Even some who support anti-bullying still believe a few karate lessons or weight lifting will even the odds.
True. Ultimately all that does is support the concept of might makes right.
Not everyone who has problems with some feminist theories is a staunch conservative or a right-wing nutcase, Valerie. That’s a big mistake those on the left or devout feminists make when looking at their opponents.
I wish that could be written small enough to put on a bumper sticker.
Noah and Danny, I think the author’s points was a mix of both your interpretations of it. The guy seems to endorse it because he thinks it teaches boys to defend themselves. That is not an unsound position, but it is also is not a practical one. Plenty of bullied boys grow up to become bullied men. They learn to be victims because going along with it causes much less pain than fighting back. Others become bullies themselves. Others hurt or kill themselves.
The man’s comments remind me of how some people recall getting spanked as children. They look back on it with a bizarre fondness as if it made them better people instead calling the acts for what they were.
Toysolider: “The guy seems to endorse it because he thinks it teaches boys to defend themselves. That is not an unsound position, but it is also is not a practical one. Plenty of bullied boys grow up to become bullied men. They learn to be victims because going along with it causes much less pain than fighting back.”
But are they victims because they want to be? Or because of what “Fighting Back” means and how its taught to them?
When we think “Fighting Back”, too much of it for boys comes from the physical aspect. They’re always told “Give them a good sock in the nose” and that will teach the bully not to push them around. How many times have I also heard some fathers and men also say “Give them boxing lessons” or any other sport involving physical retaliation for the victims?
Now, these boys are not all the same in terms of body mass, size, and weight. So if a boy who isn’t built for sports, karate, or boxing, to be constantly told “Fight Back” physically puts even more pressure on him. If he doesn’t fight back in this way, he’s considered weak and not worth helping.
Part of the bullying thing also involves two other types of people besides the bully and the person being bullied. Those who stand up on behalf of the person being bullied and those people who act as enablers for the bully. These are people I’d try to address. Get them to step up or sit down as the case may be.
Personally I’ve played all four roles. I’ve learned a lot from my experiences. I’ve also learned that people (in general) seem to ‘forget’ how much something hurt. So it’s hard for some blogger somewhere to maybe remember how he really felt at the time when he was being bullied. The blogger simply isn’t remembering things as they actually happened. If he really was bullied he’s forgetting the fear and humiliation that came with it.
I didn’t see the actual blog where the guy defends bullying so I can’t really comment that much but to a very limited extent social dynamics have to be sort of exaggerated in children because they are still learning it. So while we can’t hold children to the same standards we hold adults we still need to expect children to not act like complete assholes to one another.
Most of the reason why I send my children to public school is to learn social skills. At school they learn how to choose friends, how to be polite, how to deal with people who are mean, ugly, smelly, etc. They learn how not to act, and what good to emulate. etc. They get first hand experience at this stuff. That school isn’t the perfect little utopia is a good thing.
So bullying is bad but so is a socially sterilized school. (Not that I think anyone really promotes vicious styled bullying nor does anyone really want all-happy-all-the-time schools either.)
Having been bullied I have a strong recollection of where my fear came from. My fear came not from my peers (what could they do to me?) but from the faculty that encouraged this bullying. Not overtly and they were well meaning… but let’s be honest who are you going to believe, the 14 girls in the classroom or the 1 boy who seems to be in trouble every week? “I didn’t see nuthin'” *slams door*
Interestingly I dated one of those bullies for a time years after the fact and she couldn’t even remember why she did it. She just remembered that she was mean and downright horrible to me because one girl decided I was the one to pick on. In the end the policies at my school taught me a valuable lesson: you cannot trust those who are in power because they are not there for your benefit. They are there for a multitude of reasons, true, but fundamentally no one who wants to do good in society makes it to a position of power…
Pessimistic? You bet. Yet to be proven wrong? Well technically Jimmy Carter, but other than that not really.
I sometimes wonder just what could motivate people to support bullying. But there are cultural and institutional structures that support bullying. In practice, they may not support the bullies, but they certainly blame the victims/survivors. It’s not the beating that disrupts class, but the victim’s screams.
And it is often the same victims/survivors year after year.
The short kid one year is likely to be the short kid the next.
The autistic kid one year is likely to be the autistic kid the next.
The queer kid one year is likely to be the queer kid the next.
The somehow-seems-different kid one year is likely to be the somehow-seems-different kid the next.
And these kids are not necessarily going to learn social skills in school. Some of them won’t make it out alive. Some will make it out, but with severe post-traumatic stress. And if school sets the norms for later social interaction, and school-type-interactions are trauma triggers…
Toysolider: “Noah and Danny, I think the author’s points was a mix of both your interpretations of it. The guy seems to endorse it because he thinks it teaches boys to defend themselves. That is not an unsound position, but it is also is not a practical one. ”
I truly doubt the method of “standing up” that he thinks kids will learn is how you are supposed to do it in a functioning society. I’ll outline the adult responses to physical assault or harassment, and its easy to see.
If someone assaults you the correct response is 1) Retreat to a safe location, if one can do so safely. If you can’t do that use reasonable, legal force to defend yourself; note that enough force to stop someone who is bigger than you or more numerous that you is likely very nasty. 2) Once you can do so safely CALL THE POLICE. Have the person arrested.
If you are commonly being assaulted the correct response is to not go where your getting assaulted. If that isn’t possible one should get a weapon and take training in how to use it.
If someone is harassing you and for some reason you can’t leave (such as a job) the correct response is a lawsuit. Although first (if legal in your state) I recommend gathering evidence, such as recording so if they try and lie about it, you can get them for perjury. (Actually discovery or something might give them a heads up, I’m not a lawyer. But actual physical evidence is still good.)
I strongly suspect that this isn’t the response he is hoping for. In the case of physical acts, it is likely to result in jail time and/or permanent injuries, plus kids bringing guns to school. In the case of standard harassment it is likely to result in court ordered anti-bullying programs. (Or anti-bullying programs in an attempt to cover the school from lawsuits.) Furthermore, society in general seems strongly opposed to a normal adult response to bullies. If someone gets assaulted in school the normal response is not police, but “disciplinary action”. Ditto for normal harassment everyone is so anti-lawsuit. And getting a weapon to defend yourself at school causes SWAT teams to show up.
Finally this guy’s version of standing up isn’t what we want to teach adults to do anyway. He punched someone in the nose. Assuming he couldn’t actually retreat and was in danger, giving someone a bloody nose isn’t a particularly good way to stop an attacker.
Well high there! I’m said blogger, and I just happened to backtrack here. I’m very flattered that you’d link to my article – thanks 🙂
I didn’t link because Townhall didn’t need the traffic. I’ll do that from time to time, if the website is notorious enough.
My point was basically this: society can only work by having the tools in place to help people defend themselves. You won’t get anywhere if by defending yourself you put yourself into even more trouble because you’re a social minority. The thing that Adams’ kin repeatedly misunderstand (and it’s to be expected when you have privilege and you’re blind to it) is this: the system is on their side. They can stand up to the bullies because the system will back them. An openly gay young man? Well, Bachmann’s district has the highest rate of teen suicide over bullying, most of it homophobic related. The district has a policy on the books that they’re passive to it. And that’s just one district. They never have to experience that, because they have privilege, and thus, they can’t fathom why other people aren’t like them. “I did it, why can’t you do it?” is the hallmark of not only having but being oblivious to privilege. And that sums up the entirety of Adams’ article.
And then there’s the fact that standing up and violently defending yourself at all won’t work in the “real world” – as someone in my comments linked, work-place bullying is a problem. You obviously can’t KRUG SMASH when you’re an adult, so why should we expect children to do the same? No, Adams’ piece was just a testosterone-infused open sore that further displayed he, and others like him, have no idea how privileged they are to live in this society, while blaming the victim again and again.
@Enigma of Post-Modern Enlightenment
Therefore Mary Shelly is the problem? There are a lot of reasons to pick apart the essay in question, but a use of romanticism isn’t one of them. Without romanticism I’d have to buy in to the people who tell me that being queer is something we will one day cure (because why would anyone ‘choose’ to suffer prejudice?)
Your unambiguous anti-romanticism denies the beauty that is reclaimed from suffering, that says that suffering must in all cases be eliminated, as opposed to regarding the intentional infliction of suffering as a moral wrong. The two are not equivalent.
Anyway, I’m tired of this argument. I went round and round on this sort of thing with the ‘enlightened’ Foucaultians before I even accepted I was a girl. (One of whom told me I couldn’t like the Indigo Girls because I wasn’t a lesbian… imagine my surprise to realize I couldn’t like them because I’m a conscientious one.)
Re Valerie:
Impressive. You seem to think you know a lot about what I believe, in some extremely huge assumptions based off of the fact that I condemned Mike Adams for looking backwards and glorifying a by-gone era that probably never existed except in his own head, and called it a “romantic trait” – a trait of romantic philosophy. Therefore, I don’t think it’s morally wrong to inflict suffering. I just want to see it eliminated (because I’m what, four? I think that’s actually possible?)
“This is that Romantic influence showing; Romanticism was counter-Enlightenment in the way that it was focused backwards, on simpler times, where as Enlightenment had it’s head on right, and was looking forward into the future. The romantic roots of his argument are showing already.”
To reject the idea that there is any virtue is suffering is to reject progress? Ergo that which diminishes suffering is progress?
I don’t like the implications of your argument. And he’s throwing back to the Modernist Era, the fifties, not the romantic era of the 1800’s. If anyone produced a body of art that had a brilliant critique of the Romantic Era it was Modernists.
People like Mike Adams always makes me wonder. Would he be just as supportive of ‘fighting back’ when it turns out his beloved son has no problem perpetrating physical assault, and this ends with his son being on the wrong end of a shotgun, after his victims finaly had enough. Or what would he say when his son comes home crippled after he picked a fight with someone who took judo for five years.
@Danny
I have no support for the MRAs either, among my lack of support is their constant fixation with what ‘is natural’ and forcing people into their square world view. That doesn’t mean I support feminism in it’s current incarnation of ‘white middle classed woman telling everybody else about their privileges and how she herself has none’.
@ Dr. Anonymous
“I have no support for the MRAs either, among my lack of support is their constant fixation with what ‘is natural’ and forcing people into their square world view. ”
Interesting. I think you’re mixing up MRAs with conservatives here. IMHE MRAs are generally focused on disadvantages that men face, full stop. That’s about the only point of commonality there is between all the different subsets. (And then there are those who address men’s disadvantages in order to prosthelytize some philosophy of life or other.)
@tychonblue
Then the intersection between MRA and conservative seems to be rather large. How big is the group of non-conservative MRAs, and yes I have read on the spearhead and antimisandry.
Is it just me, or do most of these bullying apologists have no idea what bullying actually is? The original author claims to have been bullied at school, and then quotes one incident where he got into a fight with another boy. That’s not bullying. It’s a culture of violence, and it’s worth examining, but it has very little in common with the experiences of children who actually have endured serious bullying.
True bullying is characterised by a campaign of constant intimidation that wears down your spirit, that whittles away all self-esteem, that teaches you that whatever you do, you can’t escape the harassment and the insults. True bullying isn’t two kids on an equal footing establishing relative dominance. It’s one kid being picked on by some person or people (s)he has no chance of hitting back at. (Because of size, or numbers, or social prejudice.)
SpudTater,
“Is it just me, or do most of these bullying apologists have no idea what bullying actually is?”
Yeah, that jumped out at me in the linked column too. Adams makes it quite clear that, growing up, he had the confidence and self-esteem to vigorously stand up for himself, the physical power to repel and deter aggressors, and sufficient social standing that it was acceptable for him to actually do so. He was the polar opposite of the sort of kids most likely to be bullied in every respect.
I don’t think Adams actually wants kids who are frequently bullied to stand up for themselves, in any case. I think it’s important to teach kids to protect themselves from school bullies to the greatest extent possible- God knows the schools themselves can’t be trusted to protect them- and I’d be delighted if more attempts at bullying ended the way Adams’ Little League story did. But I doubt Adams would be, because that would mean the sort of kids he clearly favors WOULDN’T be running rampant over the sort of kids he despises.
@ En annan
A voice for men has come down rather firmly on a non-partisan, anti-conservative, anti-chivlary side.
Men’s Rights(large, non-partisan, progressive) on reddit has been targeted by the subreddit Rights4Men(small, conservative) because it was too LGBT inclusive.
Admittedly there is a huge push for conservative poseurs to pass off a superficially pro-mra stance in order to peddle their politics. But none of the big names(well maybe W.F.Price and Pierce Harlan however Pierce appears to keep his conservative politics relatively separate from his advocacy) are conservatives. Not Warren Farrel. Not Stephan Baskerville. Not Glenn Sacks. Not Robert Franklin. Not Paul Elam. Not John the Other. Not Kloo2yoo or ignatiusloyola(from men’s rights on reddit.) Not Dr. Evil on StandYourGround.
The commentators on these sites can tend towards conservative or just simply hateful, but it’s important to note that MRA sites tend to be very unmoderated and rarely censored. Whatever ends up on a feminist site is usually heavily vetted; not so for MRA sites.
Also manhood101(extreme retrogressive conservatives) appears to be almost universally loathed by MRAs.
SpudTater:
That was my thought as well. True bullying (whether by a single kid or a group) isn’t a one-off incident. It’s a campaign. How one handles a single bully or a one-off incident is bound to be different than how one attempts to handle gangs and repeated harrasment.
Dr. Anonymous:
I have no support for the MRAs either, among my lack of support is their constant fixation with what ‘is natural’ and forcing people into their square world view. That doesn’t mean I support feminism in it’s current incarnation of ‘white middle classed woman telling everybody else about their privileges and how she herself has none’.
Your exchange with TB aside how did you come up with this from what I’ve said on this thread, or did you mean to point that at someone else?