Study Shows Standing Up To Bullies Is Good For You

It will come as no surprise to anyone who's ever talked to my grandpa, but a recent study has shown that standing up to a bully is good for you. Although being bullied can be stressful and lead to depression, children who returned hostility were found more likely to develop healthy social and emotional skills. From the article: "In a study of American children aged 11 and 12, researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, compared those who stood up to aggressors with those who did not. Children who returned hostility with hostility appeared to be the most mature, the researchers found. Boys who stood up to bullies and schoolyard enemies were judged more socially competent by their teachers. Girls who did the same were more popular and more admired by teachers and peers, the researchers found."

Comments

No

[Anonymous Coward]

Some children that have no deficit of mental or emotional strength are taught by their parents that retaliation is wrong, that the meek are blessed, and that they should "turn the other cheek" as Jesus taught. This is reinforced by teachers who punish both students involved in a fight if either one defends himself against the other.

It is a testament to the children's stoicism that they can accomplish this. Unfortunately for them, it looks like doing so may negatively impact their mental and emotional development (yeah correlation is not causation and all that...that's why I said "MAY").

This happened to me. My parents were evangelical nuts. They set me up to go be a victim in public schools, which I was. I have no idea what psychological ramifications that may have for me today...but I DO know that when I started training in martial arts in high school, the bullying stopped, and I never had to hit anyone (which actually kind of disappointed me, because I had a lot of anger I wanted to unleash on the next unsuspecting bully).

Re:No

[Stargoat]

I had this problem. I was on the wrestling team at a heavier but very fit weight, being a state wrestler. I was also a nerd who greatly enjoyed his computers and D&D. Being a nerd, it was of course appropriate to gleek (spit) me, push, tease mercilessly, and otherwise inflict cruelty.

One day in the 8th grade, a thug hit me on the back of the head. I turned around, headlocked him to the ground, and punched him until he was unconscious. He was an untrained baboon who didn't stand a chance. A teacher came over and broke up the fight.

Like something out of a lame Hughes movie, I was applauded when I entered the cafeteria that day. I was exceedingly popular for the next two weeks - everyone likes seeing a thug get what they deserve. I never had to fight again either, as everyone who laid a finger on me knew what would happen.

Unfortunately, I received the same punishment as the thug who hit me. This is not right. There is distinct disconnect in administration perception and the reality of the situation of what happens to the various social pariahs. The social pariahs are punished for fighting back and therefore the bullies are encouraged. Let me say this more clearly. Zero tolerance policies lead to bullying.

It is my belief that the support of bullying leads directly to situations such as those boys in Columbine. If you cannot fight back, then you must either totally submit to all indignities or rebel against hopeless odds.

There should be a physical violence outlet for the social pariahs against bullies. Bullies need to be confronted, physically, by the social pariahs. It is in the natural order of things that a whipped dog bites back eventually. It is natural and beneficial for the social pariah (and probably for the bully as well) that bullies be beaten in fights.

Re:No

[Anubis IV]

I couldn't disagree more about the need to fight. Everyone seems to be going on about how you have to fight back, but it's not about that at all; it's about doing the right things in the right time.

Speaking personally, I had an issue with a bully in junior high once (understand that this guy was one of those monsters...back when the rest of us were benching 120 lbs. maybe, this guy and one other were already benching well over 200), when he decided to make the rather asinine demand that no one could use the showers next to him in the locker room. Being as I was not inclined to inconvenience myself by kowtowing to ridiculous demands, I used a neighboring shower and was struck by the bully hard enough that folks out in the main locker room heard it. I didn't give him the reaction he was expecting, however, and instead just turned to him and asked if he was done. He was a bit taken aback at how I handled myself, and let me go on my way after that. From then on, both he and everyone else gave me a lot more respect since they knew that if I hadn't flinched when facing him, I wouldn't flinch in lesser situations that were common every day. I never had to face a bully again, and actually became friends with him over time, strangely enough.

I never had to hit him, but I was never a victim either. He and I both knew that. I would say that I responded meekly (though not by your definition), since being meek doesn't mean being a simpering fool or someone without strength. It's about having the strength but demonstrating the self-control to not use it unnecessarily. It's a measure of applied wisdom and humility or a quiet confidence. You can be hit without being a victim, just as you can never be hit and yet still be a victim. There definitely are times and places where hitting back is the appropriate response, I won't deny that. But to suggest that it's the only appropriate response is entirely incorrect. It's a last resort that is rarely necessary, and I hold that kids who learn to make the alternatives work are the better for it, since they learn confidence and self-assurance, rather than learning merely how to retaliate when pushed too hard.

Prisoner's Dilemma

[dtmos]

I always felt that bullying was an iterated prisoner's dilemma situation. It's well-known that the optimum strategy for the iterated prisoner's dilemma is cooperate first, then tit-for-tat thereafter. In this context, "tit-for-tat" would mean fighting back.

Re:Or could it be

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

run a marathon . . . get[] nothing in return

In typical Slashdot fashion, anti-exercise trolls come out of the woodworks!

I did plenty of physical activities that damaged my body growing up and even I recognize the difference. Being opposed to getting kids to run marathons or compete in sports that are damaging is not anti-exercise. Marathons are pretty hard on the body, high impact on the joints. My cousins played basketball and several other sports and now they hobble around barely able to walk properly while not even middle aged yet. Calling opposition to marathons anti-exercise is like calling people who don't like poison ivy anti-plant people. A lot of us encourage healthy exercise while still not encouraging kids to exercise in ways that likely damage them permanently.

only fight back if you can survive

[waambulance]

in my highschool, bullies had knives or pistols. if they didnt have those, they had friends who did not hesistate to jump in afterwards. you should run away, unless you think you can survive the immediate conflict or - more importantly - its escalation later. thats just frikkin reality. ~~~ now, at work: i DO NOT suffer bullies gladly. i dont care if they are on the executive team or not. they get what they get. if im fired, or let go - im okay with that. its never happened so far...

Re:Stand up, or get beaten down

[Just Some Guy]

A bully used to pick on my son. I got tired of him coming home from school with bruises and scratches, so I taught him how to punch. At random times, I'd hold up my open hand and yell "hit me" and he'd smack my hand as hard as he could. He thought that was pretty fun, but we stopped once he good good enough that it started to hurt.

Then, I told him that if the kid ever touched him again, my son was to punch him as hard as he could in the nose. I told him not to talk, not to negotiate, not to try to come up with some witty comeback, but to smack him in the snout. Next, I told his teacher about the plan, and she hinted that it was about time someone did it.

The boy slapped my son. My son put the boy on the ground. Since that day, the bully never picked on my son or any other kid, and no one else has ever messed with my boy.

It would be great if everyone could just play nicely, but since some people won't do it voluntarily, we have to be prepared to make them if need be.