Slashdot Mirror
Bully Gets In Trouble With School
The Miami Dade school district is moving to pressure Rockstar games over its upcoming game Bully. From the Next Generation article: "Last Thursday, a board committee unanimously approved the resolution. A full board vote is expected this Wednesday. Rockstar issued a written statement to the Herald, which said, 'We all have different opinions about art and entertainment, but everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.'"
What will it take to make sure the First Amendment is no longer trampled here and there???? Here, the school district is acting like a bully...
I'm usually a pretty free mind when it comes to game or media content. I've played, but am not a huge fan of the GTA series. I think, like movies, these games should be rated (accurately, no hiding content!), and minors not allowed to buy M, or R, or whatever the rating is, games. However, I don't like the idea of this bully game at all. Maybe because I was bullied as a child, and the thought of kids playing as a bully really turns my stomach. In any case, I don't think children should be allowed to purchase this game without parental supervision. I would also wonder about the parenting technicques of anyone who bought this for their child.
So instead of fighting the bully problem within their own school district, they're fighting a video game company?
What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
Is it a good game? If it is then the content really shouldn't matter, if it isn't then all this hype is going to sell it even better.
A lot of slashdotters were probably bullied (I was) and although it may bring up some bad memories, we don't play GTA because we're secretly drug dealers, or black guys riding a bike through the street as we shoot people. We play them because they're fun, which is what games should be about.
People never complained Mario is full of drug refrences (You can't deny it, please don't try), or that killing aliens in Contra is too violent for children. Back when games were mostly aimed at kids (or geeks with an Amiga), we never heard any of this shit.. Makes me really wonder.
I'd love to meet these people complaining and go "Jump off a bridge" so they could tell me "no" and I could reply with "Well if I can't influence you in person how the hell are games ment to convince me when I have full control of them?
I like muppets.
'We all have different opinions about art and entertainment, but everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.'
So is war, but that hasn't stopped people from playing games based on war for at least thousands of years.
Chess, anyone?
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Again with the 'Rockstar Bully game will create bullies' meme.
For fucks sake; it is a game where you play a kid being bullied. If people play the game, they will understand what it's like to be bullied. If anything, that will reduce the number of bullies (and might even convert bullies who play the game and see what the're doing).
If I where Rockstar, I'd elevate the profile of that game by sueing legislators for defamation/slander/incorrect reporting/lying.
I'm just still amazed that newspapers and politicians can get away with not just distorting the truth but actively lying about something.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Who cares? I mean.. come on. When are people going to realize that games are just that.. games.. not real life. Who cares if you beat the crap out of some nerd on a video game. Unless that video game is controlling some robot on the other side of the earth that is really beating the crap out of some kid, it's harmless!
Although there is not legal grounds for the school board to do anything, there is a moral standpoint here.
Beating hookers in a game is ok, but this is where draw the line?
There is really no reason for a game like this.
Sure there is; i bet its a fun game to play. Personally I believe there's no reason for the Bible. It serves no real purpose (except to allow weakminded people to be controlled by those who 'spread the word'). Certainly its caused more problems than its solved.
I've got a big problem playing a game that puts me in the position of an antagonist like this (I know, and I don't plan on playing it).
Well, for one, you're not, you're the victim. Can't be bothered to do a little reading though I guess. Secondly, you mention GTA later in your post, what do you think you are there? The good guy?
They are acting upon thier surroundings and developing.
I guess kids just dont' have free will at all.
It is a pity that some turn out to be bullies.
No, its a pity parents are lazy and don't take the time to properly raise their kids. This also manfests itself in other places, such as movie theaters, where you have 13 yr old girls talking through the whole movie.
I'm not equating schoolyard violence to, say, rapists and murderers, but I am equating the exploition there of to be equal. Make a game about harnessing your ability to beat the tar out of (relatively innoccent) school kids, and, in my mind, you may as well be developing a game that lets you rape and murder kids. Developing a vice either way.
You start off saying you're not going to equate the two and finish your paragraph by equating the two. Nice work.
Like I said, one is definately worse than the other, but in my mind exploiting childhood violence, fear, and the feeling that you don't want to go to school because of what's happening to you is just wrong.
You don't even know anything about the game. Shut up already.
But I guess you won't, and you'll continue to just ignore that fact that millions of kids play all kinds of games with people like you deam inappropriate, but yet haven't turned into muggers, rapists and murderers. Just keep pointing to people that are already messed up in the head and say it was the games fault, not the person. Good plan.
Regardless of what descriptions claim, this game so far looks like GTA set in a school. It could be argued that the main character in San Andreas technically wasn't a bad guy, except that almost immediately he ends up committing some serious crimes. The few screenshots available show a kid who looks like a troublemaker and a group of kids beating the crap out of each other. Given Rockstar's consistency in developing violent games I would expect more of the same here.
I do think that these people are over-reacting. There's plenty of crap out there outside of games. This attention games are getting is pretty much a ploy by politicians to win votes. Parents dont seem to want the responsibility of raising their own kids anymore. If they're concerned about this game, don't let them play it. Don't expect the government to raise your kids for you.
On the other hand, I can't help but think Rockstar is simply looking to get a rise out of people. They're using controversey to sell their games. They certainly aren't creating art here, they just seem to be obsessed with excessive violence. So now they're developing a game which hits closer to home for many people and will be certain to grab plenty of attention.
There were plenty of games with questionable subject matter back in the early days of gaming. However, there's a big difference today. Those old games had crappy, blocky graphics and relatively simplistic gameplay. Games today look fairly realistic, and they provide gameplay that is a reasonable facsimile of real life. It's all polygons and textures, but the experience has a stronger impact than pixelated sprites.
At some point we're going to have games that look absolutely real and when we reach that point we're going to see some serious debates regarding what is permissible. Are we going to allow games where you can tear people to pieces and experience it in all its graphic detail? When will everyone agree that enough is enough? Certainly developers have to be responsible to some extent for the content they produce.
For the most part, such subject may not necessarily drive anyone to reproduce what they've seen. However, it certainly does desensitize people. It makes them indifferent to atrocities. That, I believe, is a greater danger than a bunch of kids suddenly turning into bullies or being inspired to run around carjacking.
School violence doesn't lack easy answers. The answers are very easy, they're just not good for the powers at the school.
If funds for the teachers union were tied to eliminating school violence, there would be no school violence. Those funds are what schools are about, and it's the only thing about them that matters.
If education were about the students rather than payroll, it would be very different than what happens at schools these days.
...in the real world, bullies NEVER gets in trouble with schools.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
May I suggest the following?
2) Enlist the violent and disruptive students.
In 7th grade I got a week's detention for punching a kid who had hit me all the way down the hall; I finally figured at the end of the hall I was at the end of my rope and hitting was the only option I had, but the principal gave us both the same amount of detention. I didn't get it then and I don't get it now.
I think we're in the state we're in for a whole bunch of reasons. I think integration has made it extremely difficult to expell students since school administrators always face the race card, and since they don't want to face reverse discrimination claims from more affluent (read better-lawyered)white students, they have to be equally tolerant with all the kids.
I also think that schools are literally drowning under their self-assigned social welfare burden. Even if they could kick kids out arbitrarily, they wouldn't, they're hooked on the idea that they have an "obligation" to help the worst off kids. It's a noble idea, but the school system doesn't do a very good job of supporting it's educational mission, let alone the added weight of the social welfare agenda -- even if the social welfare agenda was capable of solving the social welfare problems it tries to address.
I personally think that kids who are chronically disruptive to the learning environment should be expelled, period. Education should be a privilege, like driving.
I disagree wholeheartedly. My son (and other kids) were being bullied by a kid in his school. I tried talking to the teachers, but they said that their punishments weren't having much effect and the kid's parents weren't interested.
So, I taught my son three rules:
I also directly informed the teachers about our plan (their one-word reaction: "good!").
That was two months ago, and after two good smacks in the snout (and one miss - my son missed and nailed him in the eye), the bully is no more. My son wasn't the only one to benefit, either: the other kids realized that this worked pretty well.
I made it clear to my boy that I never, ever condone him starting fights. However, neither will I ever punish him for defending himself.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
How about paying attention to the problem? I only have my own school experiences to base this off of, but I can't imagine that mine were unique. Administrators and teachers seemed to go out of their way to ignore obvious harassment.
Luckily, this never resulted in anything Columbine-like in nature happening at my school. However I have no doubt at all that should that have happened, they would claim to have never saw it coming.
Blame is a very old thing, that works pretty good. It shifts the focus of attention, just like the parent said.
1 2
:)
I'm not a bible thumper by any stretch of the imagination, its just that I know the bible better than any other religious text (I grew up in a "Christian" environment, whatever that means).
The Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden story is excellent. Its very much worth a read, and much of what it says is still true to this day. Take a look at: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/3.html#
Where Adam blames Eve who blames the serpent for eating from the forbidden tree of knowledge.
Serpent gets punished. Eve gets "burdened"/punished, and Adam is stuck with them the rest of his time with no additional punishment
In fact, psychologists call the term for blame as "blame avoidance". I believe the term speaks for itself. If you come from an acronym or abbreviation background like computers or the military, you can call it BA, so that it sounds better, and confuses people with all of the other BA abbreviations in the world.
I was excited when I read the title of this story and thought it was about a school taking a stand against bullying. Sadly, it's about a school taking a stand against a game about bullying.
I'd be more impressed by the former.
You assume that schools obey the normal rules and traditions of general society. They don't.
Schools most closely resemble a military camp. Indeed, the earliest schools were modeled in this way. The pupils are subjected to a rather brutal reigime in an effort to maintain discipline.
However, unlike the army, where there is an aim to this dicipline, i.e. training to follow orders in combat, in schools the dicipline is in effect an end in itself, as a means of maintaining control. Thus schools may be liken to that other great institution of society; prision.
As in a prision, those tasked with watching their charges, tend to prefer absolute control over their situation. As in any great institution, control is not maintained through reason, logic and consent; but rather through fear, coercion and injustice. Students are made to understand that there is no recourse, no justice, no escape or respite from their current situation, except through iron adherance to the arbitrary, and frequently bizzare dogma laid out for them to follow.
Again, similarly to prision, the wardens are tasked only with maintaining a degree of order, and will allow "acceptable" infractions. And so, as long as the pupils do not inflict grevious physical harm on each other, or break disipline in public, their temporary guardians will not bother to intervene.
So, if a child who is being tormented tries to defend themselves, they will be punished. By their attempt to exercise their "rights", they have disrupted the normal running of an institution in which they essentially have none. Their tormentors, though they inflict great harm upon the victims, do not in the process disrupt the normal running of the institution, and are so tolerated. However, any attempt to resist the status quo is an grievious infraction, as it smacks of individuality and free will, which are an anethema to institution.
Klebold and Harris were not accidental byproducts of this system. Rather, they were the distillate, the very purest essence of the primary secretion of the institution; that is, damaged human beings. Few human beings can go through such a long peroid of time in such a damaging enviornment without bearing the scars, hidden or otherwise, of the wounds that have been inflicted on them.
In reparation for our torment, we are shown how to decipher and compose sets of symbols, to manipulate simple numbers, and how to apply these useful skills to tedious and vapid mockeries of tasks. When the ragged molt has finally been scaled, we rest easy in the satisfaction of finding ourselves "educated"
May the Maths Be with you!
First of all, I wouldn't say you did the wrong thing. It sounds to me like the right thing in this instance. You exhausted the preferable options, looked at what was left, and took a calculated risk. You were fortunate it worked out well. Even in benign conditions things could have been different.
I'm a martial artist. I help teach people how to fight. I'm aware that sometimes it's the best option, even if it is never a good option. I also know that that a lot of foolish people have a romantic notion of what fighting is like that makes them underestimate the downsides. They look at a story like yours, out of context, and say, "there, the solution to bullying is to pop the bully in the nose." They miss the fact that you tried your other options first. That you weighed the age and physical maturity of your son and the bully, and the probability that the bully would have friends who retaliated.
The notion that fighting is a sure-fire answer is attractive because righteous violence just feels good.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Your four steps are focussed on physical violence. To really deal with all bullying, any strategy has to include:
1. Stop ignoring non-physical violence. I was bullied all through junior high and into high school, but none of it was ever physical. I think if it had been, I would have been a lot better equipped to get some help. I was taught from a very young age that physical violence is not okay and that you should find an adult if someone hurts you, but no one ever really taught me what to do when someone was systematically tearing down my sense of self-worth.
2. Adults have to get involved. I've come to a place where I can forgive the kids who bullied me, even the chief bullier, but I'm still so angry at the teachers who saw some of the hurtful things happen and didn't do anything or the teachers who should have been paying attention to my (in retrospect, obvious) cries for help and tried to do something. It is absolutely the teacher's job to make school a safe space for learning.