The True Meaning of The Golden Rule: Love Your Bullies

By Izzy Kalman

The Golden Rule: It's the ultimate, all-encompassing rule of morality, promoted by every religion and ethical system. Today, many anti-bullying organizations are touting the Golden Rule as the solution to bullying. However, as I will be explaining, very few people actually understand what it comes to teach us.

While the term the Golden Rule (I will refer to it as GR for the rest of the article) was coined only a couple of hundred years ago, the rule has been recognized for thousands of years. Its most familiar formulations are: Love your fellow/neighbor as yourself; Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; Whatever is hateful to yourself, do not do to others.

2400 years ago Aristotle made a logical proof that the best way to live our lives is the GR. He explained that if everyone lived by the GR, we wouldn't need government–we would all get along nicely without any human authority over us (according to Mortimer Adler in the book, Aristotle for Everyone). Two thousand years ago, the Jewish sage Hillel, when asked "to explain the Torah [the Jewish body of rules for life based on the Bible] while standing on one leg," said, "Whatever is hateful to yourself, do not do to others–all the rest is commentary."

It's obvious that if people lived by the Golden Rule life would be terrific. Relationships would be ideal. Bullying would cease to be a problem. If the entire world lived by the Golden Rule, there would be Peace on Earth. It's also obvious that it's impossible to be living ethically if we are violating the GR. So why don't the social sciences and the mental health professions teach the practice of the GR? Why is bullying an escalating problem? Why are we still afraid of World War III? Why has the GR failed to accomplish its purpose?

I believe it's because of two general reasons.

One reason the social sciences and mental health professions don't teach the practice of the GR is that the GR has become associated with religion, but psychology is science, and science is divorced from religion. So we don't even consider the GR.

But the GR is not a religious rule. It says absolutely nothing about a god or a higher power. You can be an atheist and still cherish the GR. As I will be explaining shortly, the GR is actually a scientific psychological rule. It is a simple formula for defusing aggression and creating harmony.

The other reason is that very few people understand what the GR is really about. Some people, including intelligent, educated ones, believe it means that we have to do to others exactly what we want for ourselves. For example, let's say I'm going to buy you a necktie as a gift. If I like red neckties, I should give you a red necktie even though you may prefer blue, because I like red. That is an infantile interpretation of the GR.

Many people believe the GR means that it is important to be nice to people.
But that's not its purpose. We do not need the GR to inform us that it is important to be nice to people. It is obvious that it is important to be nice. The problem is, What do we do when people aren't nice to us? Our entire lives we are being taught how important it is to be nice. So when someone is mean to us, how do we respond? My God! They're not allowed to treat me that way! I am always nice to everyone! How dare they be mean to me?! So we get angry. We want to get them punished. We want revenge.

What the GR really means is, We should be nice to people even when they are mean to us. Read the Sermon on the Mount, the compendium of Jesus' moral instructions for people. (When I refer to Jesus in this article, I am not talking about him religiously. It is up to you whether you believe he is divine or mortal or even existed. I am strictly talking about his wisdom, his philosophy, as presented in the teachings attributed to him.) He talks about the GR. He says it is not about being nice to people who are nice to us. Anyone can do that. That comes naturally to us. Jesus says that even the tax collectors can do that–and Jesus was not particularly fond of tax collectors. Jesus says it's about being nice to people even when they are mean to us, and he gives us many examples. He says, love your enemy; turn the other cheek; if someone asks you to carry something for a mile, carry it for two miles; if someone wants your coat, give them your jacket, too. He says, don't get angry. This means, of course, don't get angry at people when they are mean to us. (We don't get angry at people when they are nice to us.) Jesus understood this perfectly, but very few others do.

(The truth is that there are entire cultures that understand the true meaning of the GR, and they live in incredible harmony. One such people are the Ladakhis, who I wrote about in a recent blog entry. The book about them, Ancient Futures, never even mentions the words the Golden Rule, but the description of their way of life matches the GR precisely).

Allow me to explain how the GR works scientifically/psychologically.

We are biologically programmed for what I refer to as the Rule of Nature, or what many social scientists refer to as the Law of Reciprocity. This means that I will treat you the way you treat me. If you're nice to me, I'll be nice back, and if you're mean to me, I will be mean back.


In nature, if you are nice to me, you are probably my friend, so it is safe for me to be nice in return, and it will benefit both of us. If you are mean to me in nature, you are probably a real enemy trying to injure me or kill me. I had better not be nice to you when you are trying to injure or kill me or I'll make it even easier for you. In fact, I had better be even meaner to you than you are to me or I'm going to be a big loser!

If you think about it, you'll realize that we are all biologically programmed for reciprocity. When someone is being genuinely nice to you, do you feel like being mean back? Of course not. You feel like being nice back. And when someone is being mean to you, do you feel like being nice back? No. You feel like being mean back. We can control our responses, but this is what our guts tell us: to be nice to those who are nice to us and mean to those who are mean to us. With the exception of some people who have serious neurological or emotional disturbances, we are all like this. No one had to teach it to us or we wouldn't all be like this.

But even the Rule of Nature/Law of Reciprocity creates a fair amount of harmony. If you observe creatures living in nature–including humans–you will notice that they spend far more time being nice to members of their own group than they do being mean. That's because we discover that when we are nice to others, they tend to be nice back, and when we're mean to others, they tend to be mean back. So we figure out by ourselves that in general it pays to be nice to others.

The GR makes a higher level of harmony possible. It actually takes advantage of our programming for reciprocity. And this is how it works.

If I live by reciprocity, I have very little control of my relationships. If you are nice to me, I will be nice in return and we will be friends. However, if you are mean to me, I will be mean in return and we will be enemies. The GR puts me in control. I will be nice to you even when you are mean to me. Why? Because how long can you continue being mean to me when I am always nice to you? Before long, you are going to start being nice to me because you are biologically programmed to treat me the way I treat you.

The GR is the therefore the ultimate empowerment. It is the solution to being a victim. A victim reacts. A victim's behavior is therefore controlled by the bully. But in order to not be a victim, we must act independently of the bully's actions. we treat them like friends even when they treat us like enemies. And that way we end up controlling them.

Treating people like friends does not mean that we must give them everything they want. We can be hurting people by giving them everything they want. We can be spoiling them, enabling them or helping them become bad people. The GR requires us to say "no" to people sometimes, but we are to do it nicely, without anger. Nor does the GR mean that we must let people abuse us, injure us or kill us. We are required to protect ourselves and to stop others from hurting us. The GR even requires us to kill people if there is no other way to stop them from being murderous. But it is not because we hate them. It is because we love them and they give us no choice.

Anti-bully activists have been trying to promote the GR. They have adopted the GR as their motto, and they gets kids to wear rubber bracelets engraved with the GR. However, the activists don't truly understand the GR. They believe it means, Don't act like a bully. They are really promoting reciprocity: We will be nice to you if you are nice to us, but if you bully us, we will have no tolerance for you and we will get you punished ("administered consequences," in current jargon). What the anti-bully activists don't realize is that the GR really means, Don't act like a victim!

Someone once showed me a letter written by a school principal to the students of the school. It explained how important it is to live by the GR. The concluding paragraph said (the following are not the exact words, but they're pretty close): "So you have to live by the GR in school, and if you don't, we will have no choice but to punish you." Sorry, Mr. Principal, but that is a violation of the GR. How would you like it if some authority figure went around punishing you whenever they decided you didn't treat someone the way s/he wanted to be treated?

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says outright that the GR is a rejection of reciprocity:

You have heard that it has been said, You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matthew 5:43-44)

Loving our enemies is the true purpose of the GR.
We don't need to be instructed to love our friends because that comes naturally to us. When it comes to enemies, though, our natural instinct is to hate them. However, that only escalates their hatred for us in return. Now, how would you like it if your enemies loved you? Wouldn't it be terrific? They wouldn't be your enemies anymore! So just as we would like our enemies to love us, we need to love our enemies.

If we were to replace our zero-tolerance-for-bullying policies with this simple expression of the GR–Love your enemy (bully); be nice to people even when they are mean to you–bullying would disappear. And if we were to teach it on an international level, we might achieve peace on earth.

No other way is possible. We can't practice intolerance of bullying, hoping that it will lead to a society in which intolerance no longer exists. We can't conduct war against other countries hoping that it will lead to a world without war. The only way to lead to a world that lives by the GR is by living by the GR now.

Disclaimer: While I teach the meaning of the GR, I don't claim to be a model of it. There are people who live by the GR much better than I do without ever having been taught the rule. I often forget to apply it, and people who know me can attest to it. So if you wish to accuse me of being a hypocrite, I will be the first to agree!

***************** This article is republished with the expressed permission of Izzy Kalman, from his website: http://bullies2buddies.com. Izzy Kalman is a nationally certified school psychologist who has specialized in helping children cope with bullying for the last 15 years. He is well published, created many programs, and created the website bullies2buddies which is full of free online resources. Izzy's mission is not to stamp out bullying, which he feels is impossible, but give kids the proper tools to deal with it.


Do you believe Kalman is right about his interpretation and effect of the Golden Rule? Would applying it as he suggests stamp out bullying?

Anti-Bully Laws Don't Work

by Izzy Kalman

The Shocking Statistics about Anti-Bullying Programs

Almost a year has passed since the publication of a scientific report of such momentous importance that it should have caused an uproar in the Western world and made headlines in all newspapers. Instead, the information has fallen on deaf ears and one must play the detective to track it down.

The fourth quarter 2004 issue of the School Psychology Review, the research journal of the National Association of School Psychologists, published the findings of Canadian Psychologist, J. David Smith, PhD, of the University of Ottawa, in a paper entitled "The Effectiveness of Whole-School Anti-Bullying Programs: A Synthesis of Evaluation Research." He had conducted a meta analysis of all the research studies on the effectiveness of whole-school anti-bullying programs. Guess what he discovered. They don't work!

As Dr. Smith reports, "…86% of victimization outcomes [reports by victims of program benefits] were negligible or negative and the remaining 14% of reported effects were positive (albeit small). For self-reported bullying, 100% of the reported effects were negligible or negative."

Given the tendency of research to go in the direction researchers hope it will, the results may be even worse than what these studies indicate. And we can only imagine the terrible things we would discover if researchers actually set out to measure the harmful effects of anti-bullying programs, such as promotion of a victim-mentality, pushing "bullies" to become more anti-social, wrongful punishment, diverting precious class time from academics, turning students against each other, and creating family feuds.

When less damning results are found for a medication, it's immediately pulled off the shelves and the manufacturer faces law-suits in the billions of dollars.

In the six years since Columbine, the US has spent hundreds of millions of dollars while wasting countless hours of class time on anti-bullying programs that don't work and even cause harm. Meanwhile, State after State, at the urging of mental health organizations and parent lobbying associations, is passing anti-bullying laws making schools responsible for stopping students from bullying each other. They will have to depend on anti-bullying programs that don't work! Parents will become enriched by lawsuits against their schools for failing to stop their children from being bullied. But, amazingly, no one seems to care that these programs don't work. Why?

Why Does No One Care?

Because we don't want to. We have all experienced the misery of being a victim at one time or another, and our "inner-victim" wants revenge. How nice to finally have a scientist-blessed anti-bully movement that makes it legitimate to blame and hate others for our misery.

We adults haven't yet figured out how to protect ourselves from the bullies in our lives, and we sure wish that someone would do it for us. So we've decided to give our children the security we ourselves have never known. Oh, the excitement of playing knights in shining armor protecting virtuous victims from the evil bullies in school!

A researcher discovers that the programs don't work? They may even make matters worse? So what! We're not about to let our beloved anti-bully crusade (and the millions of "free" dollars) be threatened by facts. Fighting bullies is the moral thing to do no matter how much destruction we leave in our wake. We love our big white horses and gleaming armor, and no one's going to take them away!

What Aristotle Could Have Told Us

In case you are curious, would you like to know why anti-bully policies don't work? It's because they can't - never have, never will. Aristotle figured that out 2400 years ago.

Aristotle, the most influential thinker in the history of the Western world, advocated for good government and for providing maximum rights to people. Yet even he knew, "The one thing that no state or government can do, no matter how good it is, is to make its citizens morally virtuous." (Mortimer Adler, in "Aristotle for Everybody"; McMillan Publishing Company, 1978).

But this is precisely what the anti-bully movement is trying to do - guarantee our children a life surrounded by morally virtuous people. In other words - saints. Strange as this may sound, if you carefully inspect the academic definition of bullying, you'll realize that anyone who doesn't meet the criteria of sainthood is a "bully":

"Bullying may involve physical action, words, gestures, or social isolation. Although bullying may involve direct, relatively open attacks against a victim, bullying frequently is indirect, or subtle in nature (spreading rumors, enlisting a friend to assault a child)." (State Laws and Policies to Address Bullying in Schools, by Susan Limber and Mark Small, School Psychology Review, 2003, Volume 32).

In other words, whenever you treat someone in a way they don't like, you are a bully.

Who Started It?
Prof. Dan Olweus, the Norwegian psychologist who conducted research on bullying in the 1970's, is known as the "father" of the anti-bully movement, and all the popular programs are based on his guidelines. In his book, "Bullying at School" (Blackwell Publishing, 1993) he calls it a "fundamental democratic principle" that "every individual should have the right to be spared oppression and repeated, intentional humiliation, in school as in society at large."

By "oppression" Olweus is not talking about slavery or forced prostitution; he is talking about any action that bothers anyone else - things all of us do occasionally. Olweus apparently never studied government or philosophy, or he would have understood that this is not, and cannot be, a fundamental democratic principle. The place where no one does anything bad to anyone else is called Heaven, and you have to die to get in. Democracy, even at its best, is not Heaven on Earth.

Why can't a government (and this includes that of a school) "make its citizens morally virtuous", as the anti-bully policies are attempting? A little logical thinking will provide the answer.

Aristotle explains that moral behavior is a choice; it can't be forced on people. It sure would be terrific if a government could simply decree its citizens to be saints. If this were possible, world peace would have been achieved long ago.

But, as Aristotle knew, human beings aren't biologically programmed to be saints. Making it a crime to do anything that someone else doesn't like would lead to a totalitarian police state, with the government controlling every minute interaction between its citizens. Let's say we work together and for whatever reasons you can't stand my personality. You don't want to include me in your lunch group, so I get you arrested for "relational aggression." You think I rolled my eyes when you spoke at a meeting, so this time you get me arrested for "hostile gestures." You disagree with me at a meeting, so I get you arrested again because it really upsets me when people challenge my opinions in public.

A moral society, by definition, cannot be achieved through legislation. Instead of creating Heaven on Earth, anti-bullying laws would turn society into a Living Hell.

Expecting the Absurd

Let's look at the practical application of anti-bully policies in school. We're students and you pick on me. I tell the teacher. S/he says to you, "Bullying will not be tolerated. You have to be nice to people. Bully Izzy again and you'll be sent to the counselor. And if that doesn't help, you're going to be punished, even expelled." That's supposed to make you respect me and want to be nice? It will make you want to beat me up after school, or to look for an opportunity to get me in trouble with the teacher.

Or let's say that the program has taught student bystanders to stand up for victims. A kid sees you insulting me and says, "Hey, bullying isn't cool! You leave Izzy alone!" Are you going to say to me, "Gee whizz, I didn't realize I wasn't cool. Izzy, won't you please forgive me and be my friend?"

Only a fool would expect kids to react in this way, yet this is precisely what our mental health professionals and educators are hoping, and even expecting, will happen!

Do as I Say, Not as I Do

Anti-bully programs are based on the idea that bullying is a learned behavior. Just as kids have learned to be bullies, they now need to be taught how to be saints. Who, exactly, is going to teach our kids to be saints? You and I? Who do you think they could have learned bullying from in the first place?! Can we honestly tell our kids: "Learn from us how to treat people. Have you noticed how respectful we are to our spouses, and that we never get divorced? And of course we are never mean to our children. We would never say a bad word about our parents, siblings, in-laws, colleagues and bosses - not even behind their backs! We all attend the Non-Discriminatory Church of Universal Acceptance and live in peaceful, integrated neighborhoods."

Let's look at what my own research has been revealing about us. About one thousand mental health professionals and educators have filled out my Bullying Survey. 47% of them answered Yes to this item: "There is at least one person in my life that gets angry with me fairly regularly." This means that almost half of these professionals are currently bullying someone. (People don't get angry when you are treating them the way they want to be treated, i.e., respectfully, kindly.)

To the item, "There is at least one person in my life that I get angry with fairly regularly," 57% answered Yes. This means that more than half of mental health professionals and educators are currently feeling victimized and they don't know how to make the bullying stop. Furthermore, the academic bullying experts define anger as an act of bullying. So by getting angry, these same 57% are simultaneously being bullies. That's because when you get angry, you feel like a victim, but you look like a bully!

6% of respondents answered affirmatively to, "I have a child who gets hit by other kids in school at least once a day."

21% answered Yes to, "My children hit each other at least once a day."

This means that children of mental health professionals and educators are three-and-a-half times more likely to be hit by a sibling at home than by a kid in school. If experts at human relations do such a lousy job of protecting a couple of their own kids from each other at home, how in the world can they expect one teacher to protect thirty kids from each other in school? The answer is that they shouldn't expect it, but they do anyway.

The Only One Who Can Solve the Bullying Problem

As Aristotle understood so well, there are things a government can do for you and things it can't. Government can only give you things that money can buy. It can pay for teachers, but it can't make you learn. It can pay for health care, but it can't make you healthy. It can pay for police to protect you from crime, but it can't guarantee that you'll never be a victim of it.

And one thing it absolutely cannot do is provide you with a world of saints. It can, at best, punish people for not being nice to you. But then, one of the nastiest things you can do to a person is to get them punished by the authorities. So how can the government guarantee you a world of nice people when you're allowed to be so mean?

If we are to have any chance of achieving a meaningful reduction in bullying, there is one fact we all need to recognize: There is only one person in the world who can get people to treat you well. And that person is you.

*****************

This article is republished with the expressed permission of Izzy Kalman, from his website: http://bullies2buddies.com. Izzy Kalman is a nationally certified school psychologist who has specialized in helping children cope with bullying for the last 15 years. He is well published, created many programs, and created the website bullies2buddies which is full of free online resources. Izzy's mission is not to stamp out bullying, which he feels is impossible, but give kids the proper tools to deal with it.

Do you agree with Kalman that the current anti-bully laws and programs are doomed to fail?

Musing on Bullying

Submitted By Heather

Heather is an attached, SAHM of three little girls and a writer who blogs at Musing Mommy in between working on novels, nursing, chatting with friends and trying to lead her children to be happy, positive leaders some day.

**********************

Bullying. It's a loaded word and a hot topic across the globe in the last decade or so. A common theme in old television sitcoms and a major subplot in my favorite Christmas classic movie. Who among us didn't cheer, at least a little inside, when Ralph started whaling on his bully? TV has confronted this seriously, humorously and a little bit of everything in between.

The girl bully is typically portrayed humorously and leaves the main character in a bind. The male protagonist cannot admit that he is being bullied by a girl, lest he be seen as weak. He cannot fight her back, because he has been taught that 'there is no right way to hit a [girl].' This is the primary method of defense taught: fighting back. Does it work? Well, that depends entirely on the bully, but it is certainly not ideal.

Contrary to popular belief, not all bullies are cowards wagging their dominance for the playground to see. Some are children who are hit at home and do not know how to interact without violence. Some are simply very aggressive personalities that found the playground their own personal Skinner Box--only instead of hitting a button for a treat, they hit the other children to get their way. The classic examples, of course, also exist.

I wasn't the model of a bully, nor was I the model of someone to be bullied. I was typically pretty self-confident. I had a high IQ (a couple points shy of genius). I was incredibly social and outgoing. I was empathetic and optimistic. I was willing to befriend anyone, regardless of social status (this was actually to be to my detriment) and saw the value in all people.

I displayed some of the stereotypes: I was a tomboy. My home life was troubled and I fell into the category of not knowing how to interact without violence as well as having a strong, dominant personality. In my early years, that wasn't much of a problem. I did okay fitting in; I wasn't particularly violent in peer interactions and my biggest problem in school was talkativeness, especially when I was done with work and bored.

When I was six, I was sitting on the playground, on some surface or outcropping that had me higher than the kids walking by. I saw a little boy around my age with brown hair walking in a path that would take him in front of me, a big smile on his face. I smiled to see him smiling, he looked so happy. Then a bigger boy, whom I didn't have a clear view of because I was busy watching the younger, stuck out his leg and kicked the smaller boy's legs out from under him. I cried. I didn't understand why the older boy would want to take away the little boy's smile and I cried because he wasn't smiling anymore. He wasn't happy; he was hurt.

I was transferred to another school the next year due to my talkativeness and a (correct) diagnosis of ADHD. My mother had no idea that the school had no right to transfer me, so she did what was recommended, thinking it would be the best for me. I was taken out of mainstream classes and put in a 'B.D.' (behavioral disorder) class. Somehow, this was obvious to the other children (perhaps because I was not in any of their classes) and I was targeted.

One day, a large group encircled me and began chanting, "B.D. kid! B.D. kid!" I was angry, trapped and embarrassed. Then one of them picked up a rock. After it struck me, more flew. I flinched away, protecting myself for a moment before the anger took over and I started picking up their projectiles and throwing them back. I have dangerous aim and soon, I was in the principal's office--the other children being touted the victims.

Injustice was something I abhorred from a young age. Logic was important to me and when I realized that I would be punished regardless if I was the victim or the aggressor, I followed my own rules. My behaviors degraded as I imitated the children I was put in class with (who were primarily there for aggressive acts, not for talking, as I was). I started watching the playground for bullies. Many set their sights on me and I prided myself on my refusal to be baited. "I never throw the first punch, but I always finish it." That was my motto.

I started standing up for other kids being picked on. I knew the bullies would get to me eventually anyway, so I decided to cut them off. I became my own version of Batman. I would verbally confront the attacker or physically stand in their way of harming the other child. At almost any given time, I had a black eye or a fat lip. I was punished over and over and no one thanked me that I remember, but that didn't matter. What mattered was keeping the other kids from being hurt and giving back to the bullies what they dished out.

Eventually, I was transferred to a specialized school for children with behavioral issues. I was the only girl in the school. It became clear very quickly that it was not acceptable for me to be a girl and my tomboy nature grew even stronger. I pushed around my friends, controlling our friendships with rewards and negative consequences (if you don't do what I say/want, I won't do what you want--it usually wasn't through violence, but it was still bullying, as that was the only leadership form that I knew--respect of the strongest, most dominant in the group). As a girl, I had to fight even harder to prove myself hard as nails and the most dominant.

I was in fights on a near daily basis;I was assaulted physically and later, the threat and attempt of sexual assault from an older boy attempting to dominate me led to me being expelled when I fought back and seriously hurt the aggressor (for which I later broke his nose). I was volatile and full of rage (largely due to being severely overmedicated) and flew into fits very easily.

I was no longer only provoked for the purpose of defense of the weak, but by any small thing. The other children became intensely attached to me to the point that one of the younger ones went home and told his parents that he "only listen[ed] to [me], now." The bullying had turned around and now I was the bully. I hurt other kids (and my teachers, who hurt me as well) and had trouble sleeping at night over it, but it was the only way I knew.

I eventually was returned to mainstream schooling: a failure. I was so damaged at this point that I barely knew how to behave in socially appropriate ways. I had spent so long being told how bad I was that it became my identity. I counted detentions like merit badges. Suspensions were trophies. My best friend was a girl who felt similarly (her brother had been a classmate of mine in the B.D. school) and she died that year. A boy called her an inappropriate word at a table nearby at lunch after and I hauled him from his seat, threw him to the ground, then lifted him and pitched him in a garbage can.

I went off the medication, stopped it cold turkey and went into a severe depression. My weight doubled over the next year, from underweight to average and continued the next year (in high school) until I was overweight. I had become socially isolated and teased mercilessly by my 'peers.' I tried very hard to fit in. I tried to imitate the way they dressed, talked, behaved... but it wasn't enough.

At lunch, in 8th grade, I sat entirely alone at two full-sized cafeteria tables. Chairs were taken from them to provide more seating at the other tables assigned to our class, so that no one had to sit with me. A girl sat with me one day when she was angry at her friends and she made fast friends with me. One day, she came up to me and told me, "I can't be your friend anymore because it's ruining my reputation." It broke my heart, though I feigned indifference.

Another boy sat at our table because of her and he left with her. However, the damage was done and she was ostracised for her association with me. Eventually, she returned to my table (the boy in tow) and I forgave her completely. (After all, the year before, I had done the same to my boyfriend--dumped him because I was tired of being teased.) She would go on to be my best friend to this day, despite our many fights and disloyalties to each other over the years. She never completely socially recovered from her association with me.

By the start of high school, I had given up on integrating. The bullying was intense and while I tried to join social groups, I was met with great resistance. One day, I met a girl who became infatuated with my poetry and was, in essence, my first fan (which was very meaningful to me). She told me that when she came in as a freshman, she was specifically warned to stay away from me. I found out from others that virtually all freshmen were given this warning.

I ceased trying to fit in and pretending to be like everyone else and flaunted my individuality. I enjoyed the friends I gained even more, but my social 'cup' was never being filled. I took everything that was thrown at me to heart. I was worthless, a stain and everyone would be better off if I was dead; so, I tried to oblige them. The bullying had come full circle: I was the target again.

I spent most of my teenage years suicidal. I can't count the number of times or ways that I tried. The bullying completely destroyed me, who I was; it broke me. Eventually (with prodding from a friend, when I was 18), that strong personality of mine said that they had no right and I began rebuilding myself--as a pacifist. I swore off everything that had been done to me and vowed to protect against it in any way that I could.

In Biology class, I discovered the root of the severe bullying. My lab partner, after a time, recognized me as friends with a girl she hated. She told me about the false rumors she spread about me simply because of my friendship with the other girl and admitted to being the Source. She apologized and I forgave her. She told me that she had no idea who I was and she regretted it. I did not tell her what she had done to me with her rumors and I think she believed it ended after we came to High School. Unfortunately, I think my severe clinical depression and natural ‘otherness’ (I am, after all, a geek at heart) fed the fire she had begun.

I still fight my inner bully at times; I probably always will. Bullying isn't always just physical intimidation and name-calling, though. It happens in small ways, especially amongst girls. It isn't just a fight after school on the playground that you can avoid by taking the bus home. It's day after day of being told you are wrong. You don't fit in. You are not welcome. In a social species such as ours, instinctively, that is death. For me, it almost was. For far, far too many children, it actually is.

I feel bullying must end at home before it will end anywhere else. Parents must be teachers, leaders and guidance counselors--not simply mete out punishment and rewards like I did to train my friends to behave in ways that were pleasing to me. If that behavior is not acceptable in an eleven year-old girl, then it cannot be acceptable in a family dynamic.

Most bullies are imitators, as I was. Children like this could be natural leaders. Many are--they are merely cultivated in productive ways and perhaps it is also a large matter of personality. We must abandon the "If not love, fear will do," mentality of leadership if bullying is to end. And it needs to end.

My Son, The Bully

Submitted By: Anonymous

When Destany first began talking about wanting to write articles on bullying and asked me if I would like to contribute, I thought it sounded like a good idea. I know my middle child is on the sensitive side, I was sure that if I asked him, he would give me all sorts of material to write about. But what he told me came as a great shock. My son wasn't being bullied - he WAS the bully!

This revelation went like this:

Me: I'm wanting to write an article about bullying.

Son: Oh. Okay.

Me: I think it's really important to talk to kids about this stuff and find out what they think about it...      ...Bullying does a lot of harm. It makes kids feel really bad about themselves...   ...One of the things that Destany has been talking about, is that bullying is a normal human instinct that we all have...

*Each break in my dialogue represents stony silence from my son. And then, after a particularly long pause:

Son: I know some kids that get bullied a lot.

Me: Really? That's too bad. Why do you think they're getting bullied?

Son: Well... I don't want to say that they bring it on themselves... but...

Me: What?

Son: Well one kid, he is just soooooo annoying. If he would just leave everybody alone, no one would make fun of him. And this other kid, he lies all of the time. If he would just stop telling lies, people wouldn't get so mad at him.

Me (trying my best to keep my face impassive): Are you saying you think they deserve it?

Son: Well, no. But it just gets hard to be nice to them.

Me: Do you bully them?

Son: Wellllllll... define bully.

Me: Do you pick on them?

Son: Sometimes.

Me: And you feel like this is ok?

Son: I don't like that I do it, it's just, everybody else does.

Me: Ok. So you pick on them to fit in?

Son: Pretty much.

Me: Have you ever been picked on?

Son: All the time!

Me: And you know what it feels like.

Son: Yeah, which is why I do it to [those kids], so people won't pick on me.

Me: Do you really think your friends would notice if don't call someone a name? They might be doing it to fit in with you.

Son: Well, I feel really bad about it.

Me: I'm glad to hear that.

Son: I guess it just makes me feel powerful.

Me: I can see how that happens.

That wasn't nearly the end of our conversation, but it's how it got started. He told me he wanted to see the school councilor about it, then we talked a bit about finding out if he needed an appointment to see them. We talked about what might be causing him to feel angry. He is in puberty, and I do think most of his anger is hormonal and normal. And I also think his anger is a response of fear, fear that he will get made fun of if he doesn't buck up and assert his dominance over these other two boys. (Kill or be killed mentality)

I also talked to him about what might be causing these two boys to behave the way they do. It is likely a cry for attention, to compulsively lie, or to constantly be in peoples faces trying to get noticed. They are getting negative attention, which to them, is better than none at all. Sort of the way kids will act out to get attention from their parents. I suggested that they aren't trying to be outcast, but the opposite and they do not have his natural social skills. They would go about making friends the right way if they knew how, and that he should feel sorry for them. They must be pretty desperate if they're willing to face ridicule like that, just to try and get friends.

We decided that it would be best for him not to go to the school councillor at this time. We - his dad and I - are counselling him at home instead, because we don't want the school to label him as a bully at this point. I have shared Destany's story with him, and we are planning to go and see the new documentary "Bully" together. I showed him the trailer and he felt so low. I want to be nonjudgmental, because I want him to remain honest with me about this and feel that he can trust me. At the same time, I want him to know what bullying does to kids and how it makes them want to hurt themselves. We keep talking about it, and we keep working on it.

I think that we are making good strides. He says that he has not bullied any kids since our first conversation, and slowly, very slowly, he is beginning to stick up for other kids when he sees they are getting picked on. I believe it takes vigilant parents with good communication with their children, to stop and prevent bullying from happening. Parents have to ask their kids about this stuff, or it just goes on being ignored. If I had not asked him, I never would have known.

What should parents do if they find out their child is a bully? What would you say to your child if you found out they were picking on other kids? Would it surprise you to know that many parents condone and even encourage kids to bully because they feel if they don't, their child will be a victim instead?