Teacher orders kindergarteners to beat up class "bully"

Semitendon

New member
Aug 4, 2009
359
0
0
I get what the teacher was trying to do, but she failed massively. The method she hoped to employ doesn't help anyone.

Personally, I think other than the usual, sending the kid to principal, timeouts and the like she should have taught a class on bullying and shown the kids the video of the Zangeif Kid to emphasize her point. Then the kids being bullied are shown that they can stand up for themselves, the bully is shown that there can be reprocussions to actions, and the teacher is not actively encouraging violence.
 

Karathos

New member
May 10, 2009
282
0
0
hooksashands said:
The thing that sickens me is the mob justice mentality. Several people jump you like a pack of wolves while the teacher watches smugly: Where is the justice in that? It's not as if they rehabilitated him by punching him into the ground. Without any communication an act of pointless retaliation violence is just that.
"punched him into the ground"? You do realise they were STILL a bunch of 6 year olds who mostly didn't want to do it (IE: Wouldn't hit him, more along the lines of light touching. This is no doubt where the teacher's 'Hit harder' quote comes from). People keep making it sound like he was mugged, yet there's no proof of injury anywhere.

Just the bully's mother going "OMG MY POOR INNOCENT ANGEL SCHNOOKUMS :(((((("
 

hooksashands

New member
Apr 11, 2010
550
0
0
Karathos said:
hooksashands said:
The thing that sickens me is the mob justice mentality. Several people jump you like a pack of wolves while the teacher watches smugly: Where is the justice in that? It's not as if they rehabilitated him by punching him into the ground. Without any communication an act of pointless retaliation violence is just that.
"punched him into the ground"? You do realise they were STILL a bunch of 6 year olds who mostly didn't want to do it (IE: Wouldn't hit him, more along the lines of light touching. This is no doubt where the teacher's 'Hit harder' quote comes from). People keep making it sound like he was mugged, yet there's no proof of injury anywhere.

Just the bully's mother going "OMG MY POOR INNOCENT ANGEL SCHNOOKUMS :(((((("
Entirely beside the point. Because regardless of whether he received a couple chicken scratches or full-on broken ribs doesn't take away from the fact the adult in the situation handled it in a sadistic, irresponsible, "let's make an example out of you" way.
 

Karathos

New member
May 10, 2009
282
0
0
hooksashands said:
Karathos said:
hooksashands said:
The thing that sickens me is the mob justice mentality. Several people jump you like a pack of wolves while the teacher watches smugly: Where is the justice in that? It's not as if they rehabilitated him by punching him into the ground. Without any communication an act of pointless retaliation violence is just that.
"punched him into the ground"? You do realise they were STILL a bunch of 6 year olds who mostly didn't want to do it (IE: Wouldn't hit him, more along the lines of light touching. This is no doubt where the teacher's 'Hit harder' quote comes from). People keep making it sound like he was mugged, yet there's no proof of injury anywhere.

Just the bully's mother going "OMG MY POOR INNOCENT ANGEL SCHNOOKUMS :(((((("
Entirely beside the point. Because regardless of whether he received a couple chicken scratches or full-on broken ribs doesn't take away from the fact the adult in the situation handled it in a sadistic, irresponsible, "let's make an example out of you" way.
Except you're basing that on the absurd assumption she did it out of sadism. It isn't just a fancy word y'know, it's an actual serious mental disorder. Nothing in the story points to sadism on the part of the teacher.

As far as irresponsible goes, maybe - except she was there the entire time, supervising it, and told them to stop. Plus it wasn't going to be a secret anyway so I'm pretty sure the teacher had already accepted responsibility. And as for making an example of him, well uh... Yeah? That was the entire point. Make him feel what bullying is. And I'm okay with it.
 

Ryan Minns

New member
Mar 29, 2011
308
0
0
I used to ignore bullies a lot in school... I think it was the most fun they ever had. When I was three time their size in high-school did the bullying stop for not just me but all those I protected.

In an ideal world physical violence doesn't have to be met with physical violence but given this is the real world I find it strange people claim victims should just take the beating since ignoring a bulling 99% of the time leads to a fist in the back of your head and many boots into the stomach
 

hooksashands

New member
Apr 11, 2010
550
0
0
Karathos said:
Except you're basing that on the absurd assumption she did it out of sadism. It isn't just a fancy word y'know, it's an actual serious mental disorder. Nothing in the story points to sadism on the part of the teacher.
It was used in adjective form, which can describe something without it literally being that exact thing. For instance, someone can feel "murderous" without actually being a "murderer."

Karathos said:
As far as irresponsible goes, maybe - except she was there the entire time, supervising it, and told them to stop. Plus it wasn't going to be a secret anyway so I'm pretty sure the teacher had already accepted responsibility.
That's funny. The natural reluctance of the kids to torment their tormenter (which you yourself already pointed out) proves that on some basic gut level they knew it was moral hypocrisy. That all this was done in a controlled environment is even more fucked up.

Karathos said:
And as for making an example of him, well uh... Yeah? That was the entire point. Make him feel what bullying is. And I'm okay with it.
Cool. Then come here and let me kick the shit out of you to make my point, because apparently in your world violence produces happy endings.
 

Superlative

New member
May 14, 2012
265
0
0
the moral of the story here is simple: you can't force someone to grow a pair. especially if they are too young to know what balls are.
 

Karathos

New member
May 10, 2009
282
0
0
hooksashands said:
Karathos said:
Except you're basing that on the absurd assumption she did it out of sadism. It isn't just a fancy word y'know, it's an actual serious mental disorder. Nothing in the story points to sadism on the part of the teacher.
It was used in adjective form, which can describe something without it literally being that exact thing. For instance, someone can feel "murderous" without actually being a "murderer."

Karathos said:
As far as irresponsible goes, maybe - except she was there the entire time, supervising it, and told them to stop. Plus it wasn't going to be a secret anyway so I'm pretty sure the teacher had already accepted responsibility.
That's funny. The natural reluctance of the kids to torment their tormenter (which you yourself already pointed out) proves that on some basic gut level they knew it was moral hypocrisy. That all this was done in a controlled environment is even more fucked up.

Karathos said:
And as for making an example of him, well uh... Yeah? That was the entire point. Make him feel what bullying is. And I'm okay with it.
Cool. Then come here and let me kick the shit out of you to make my point, because apparently in your world violence produces happy endings.
Well, in a case like this you might want to be careful about what you use to describe someone, because saying she did it out of sadism would suggest her primary motive was purely to sit back and enjoy someone getting beaten.

I don't see how this second bit of yours diminishes her responsibility in any way.

And as for this third part of yours, oh brother please. First off you clearly need to calm down. At no point have I stated that I think violence for its own sake is any good, but visiting violence on people that visit it upon you is a perfectly viable option. Civilians tend to not want to accept it because it forces them to re-evaluate their own little worlds, hence the usual "violence never solves anything" rubbish. As military personnel I've thankfully dropped that silly notion.

So the correct version of your last sentence should be "Come here and let me push you around and bully you, and then you can punch me back." If you happen by Finland, we can test this theory since you seem eager. I'm pretty confident in the fact you would be unwilling fairly quickly. If someone physically or mentally assaults you over and over - especially physically, it's a perfectly viable option to fuck them up.

Sidenote: Why do people keep thinking there are huge long-term consequences to violence as a valid defence? It's still not some Disney movie where you turn into a monster if you shy away from the happy happy sunshine and rainbows path. This is mainly in relation to the "happy endings" comment.
 

hooksashands

New member
Apr 11, 2010
550
0
0
Karathos said:
Well, in a case like this you might want to be careful about what you use to describe someone, because saying she did it out of sadism would suggest her primary motive was purely to sit back and enjoy someone getting beaten.
I'll go even further and call her a sadistic asshole, since not only is her primary motive to stage a kid's crucible but feel like it was necessary.

Karathos said:
I don't see how this second bit of yours diminishes her responsibility in any way.
Because an adult telling children under her authority to hurt another child is fucking stupid and not justifiable. We've been over this.

Karathos said:
And as for this third part of yours, oh brother please. First off you clearly need to calm down. At no point have I stated that I think violence for its own sake is any good, but visiting violence on people that visit it upon you is a perfectly viable option.
Maybe if you're a mongoloid with zero conflict resolution skills. I love how your eye-for-an-eye bullshit suddenly falls apart when it's you facing retribution. This is exactly the kind of vicious cycle that breeds bullies.

Karathos said:
Civilians tend to not want to accept it because it forces them to re-evaluate their own little worlds, hence the usual "violence never solves anything" rubbish.
*makes jerking off gesture*
So I'm automatically a civvie simply because I don't share your belief that fists are the answer to a problem? At best, your beating me up or my beating you up just makes us avoid each other. That isn't a solution. That isn't closure. We'll probably meet up with guns and kill each other at a later date. I guess dying for your principles is noble? Seems pointless to me.

Karathos said:
As military personnel I've thankfully dropped that silly notion.
Too bad this discussion is about kindergarteners, not soldiers.

Karathos said:
Sidenote: Why do people keep thinking there are huge long-term consequences to violence as a valid defence? It's still not some Disney movie where you turn into a monster if you shy away from the happy happy sunshine and rainbows path. This is mainly in relation to the "happy endings" comment.
It's just funny how your military training has strengthened this notion inside you that sometimes hurting another is a rational response, whereas mine has taught me that force is a last resort, not a go-to tactic. The first thing a martial arts instructor teaches you is that you learn how to fight so you don't have to.
 

Karathos

New member
May 10, 2009
282
0
0
You seem very frustrated, even though I haven't said anything directly aimed at you personally during this entire conversation. Why are you being so confrontational? As I said, maybe you ought to calm down a bit.

I'm not a mongoloid, no, and these veiled personal attacks are pretty weak, mate. And there are multiple kinds of conflict resolution methods. When the other party is violent, the proper response is violence as self-defence. You may note at this time that at no point have I said that every situation calls for violence, and this convo is hardly about the 6-year olds anymore, but violence as a valid threat response in general. Do correct me if this wasn't the case, I thought we'd long since moved onto the subject as a whole. And what are you on about, "falls apart when it's me"? I just said violence for its own sake is pointless, but if you were to threaten or try to beat me then I would gladly return the favour in self-defence.

Violent self-defence doesn't breed bullies. I was perfectly able to resolve things by talking after standing up to mine. If the bully is violent and threatening however, I still don't see any reason why calling him on his threats isn't viable.

Like I said earlier, I'm not the one taking personal jabs here. At no point did I call you a civilian, not that that's an insult anyway. I said it's usually their view on the subject at large. Once again: if one person is ready to inflict pain, then returning the favour is fine. Can't for the life of me think of anyone so self-destructive that they wouldn't fight. As for the end-result, now you're just speculating. In a situation where you might get seriously injured, only thing that matters is -now-. Like I already said, I've long since moved onto the subject as a whole, but yes - if the other kid shoves you, shoving back is a perfectly good way of asserting yourself.

Military training is about killing people one way or another. It is systematic, refined and practiced killing. There's middle ground depending on the operation, but at the base it's killing the other guy, and in wartime I would gladly do it in defence of my homeland. Note that word again -DEFENCE. You say the first thing you learn is fighting so you don't have to? Krav Maga begs to differ. You learn how to fight so when you have to, you can and will. If, as a soldier, your go-to tactic is anything but taking out the other guy before he takes you out, then I'd hardly call that soldiering. Either that, or your assignments have been built around standing in the rear with the gear. Fucking POG.

-That- was a personal jab at you. Now how about you read one of my posts and actually comprehend what you read before you respond (that was two, in case you're a mong. Three), because it's getting old. I might just start capslocking "VIOLENCE IS ACCEPTABLE IN SELF. DEFENCE." and hope it sinks in.
 

Lionsfan

I miss my old avatar
Jan 29, 2010
2,842
0
0
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
The police report alleges that the teacher chose to show the child "why bullying is bad" by instructing his peers to "Hit him!" and "Hit him harder!" It also states that the second teacher intervened only after one of the children hit the boy hard on his upper back.
If she really wanted to teach the kids a lesson about bullying and how it's dealt with in the real world, she just would have ignored the kids and let the bully beat them up with no consequences.[footnote]/s but kinda not[/footnote]

But this is ridiculous, this was definitely the wrong way to do it. What's even worse is reading the comments:
I was the victim of many bullies as a Child and I can honestly say the scar's Never go away. We must do everything in our Power to stop Bullying. I applaud the actions of the school staff and Pray this Bully has learned his lesson !!! If not, There is a Whole lot of us that will be happy help next time !!!!
Yes, because a mob of kids beating one kid up with the permission of the teacher isn't going to leave scars for that kid
Why would it help if there were no consequences for the bully?
I'm not going to cry about having been bullied in the past, but I can't see how not punishing the bully helps the person being bullied.
I was only being half serious/half kidding about that. By ignoring the bully, she would be teaching them a lesson about what people actually do in "the real world"
 

Mr S

New member
Jul 13, 2010
347
0
0
Lionsfan said:
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
The police report alleges that the teacher chose to show the child "why bullying is bad" by instructing his peers to "Hit him!" and "Hit him harder!" It also states that the second teacher intervened only after one of the children hit the boy hard on his upper back.
If she really wanted to teach the kids a lesson about bullying and how it's dealt with in the real world, she just would have ignored the kids and let the bully beat them up with no consequences.[footnote]/s but kinda not[/footnote]

But this is ridiculous, this was definitely the wrong way to do it. What's even worse is reading the comments:
I was the victim of many bullies as a Child and I can honestly say the scar's Never go away. We must do everything in our Power to stop Bullying. I applaud the actions of the school staff and Pray this Bully has learned his lesson !!! If not, There is a Whole lot of us that will be happy help next time !!!!
Yes, because a mob of kids beating one kid up with the permission of the teacher isn't going to leave scars for that kid
Why would it help if there were no consequences for the bully?
I'm not going to cry about having been bullied in the past, but I can't see how not punishing the bully helps the person being bullied.
I was only being half serious/half kidding about that. By ignoring the bully, she would be teaching them a lesson about what people actually do in "the real world"
Still, what kind of example does that give any of those kids?
They learn that the world is a cruel place, where bullies can do whatever they please with no consequences whatsoever. Even if that picture is accurate on some fronts, do you really want to raise a kid with that image? How are things going to change when people have no hope to press on for more? That kid will just become miserable. While it's up to him to eventually stand up for himself and make his entry in this world, he's going to bear the scars of bullying for the rest of his life.

ps: Even if you are not entirely serious about this, it is a subject worth being serious about.
 

FoxKitsune

New member
Jun 23, 2012
60
0
0
I'm a 23 year old British guy, and I work with children in an early years setting (for you lot over the pond, thats 0-5) and I personally deal with the 3-5 year olds. Even at that age, hard as it is to admit, you see children that don't just tussle with one another, but I' have to call bullies. We've got boys whom always seem to get involved in hitting, shoving, name calling (which is hilarious, the 3 year old version of name calling is pretty much "My daddy" back and forth, becoming increasingly more agitated) and these particular boys always pick the same specific 'victim'

Now, obviously I don't agree with this. For one thing, its very illegal, and for another, anyone who cannot see the moral problems with a teacher condoning this action and encouraging it just seems heartless to me, I feel its wrong. However, heres the thing., Had the teacher had no part in this, and twenty-four children had just ambushed the child after school or some such, organized by those that felt what he was doing was wrong, I'd find it far harder to find fault.

Now, in an ideal world I don't believe violence should be used to solve problems, but unfortunately it is. I can't peak for America, but over her in Great Britain we start our 'justice' in schools as it means to go on. Short sentences (rarely carried out in favor of community service, generally lasting only a few days), and more of a focus on looking like we're solving problems than actually solving them (For those interested, look up the British polices system of using 'administrative detections' and be appalled. I think its been thrown out now, but until recently it was a sham, and probably still exists under different buzzwords)

So, our youth grow up in schools that teach them the strong, willful bullies and thugs will have their every whim answered to to help them fit into society, because they're not 'bad people' they're just 'challenged' or 'different'. While I think understanding is one of the best things we can do for these people, it should never come at the expense of justice.

Now, the teacher was wrong, thats simple to see, and so were the kids that went along with it because they were told too- but if this kid was generally bullying children in the class, then that hit they took at him was probably the closest thing they'll ever get to justice. Its wrong, and it shouldn't come to that and it's really damn sad.

Violence isn't the answer, not in the long term-its like treating the symptoms of broken society rather that the actual illness. What the 'Illness' needs is a massive overhaul, with new policy, harsher sentences, and a whole host of other things I could rant about which I know plague america as much as britain (Certain practice used by defense lawyers anyone?)but back at school, if a guy was making my life hell I couldn't effect any of those things. Hell, as an adult, I can't affect any of those things. What I can do if a guy antagonizes me or even openly attacks me is damn well give him a taste of his own medicine. I'd probably go TERRIBLY for me, what I know about fighting I learnt from super smash brothers brawl, but if it goes well, then he won't bother me again, perhaps. Its by no means assured, and its a big risk, but its all we have sometimes.

I never know how to wrap these rants up, so I guess I just summarize. That teacher should never work with children again, but a child bullying others, even at a young age, should be met with serious consequences early on regardless, handled with fair understanding (because sometimes its not as cut and dry as 'he's a bastard') but stern enough to dissuade other incidents, with wider society reflecting these values. Kids are smart, and pick up on a lot, and when we thing they're not watching, they always are.

Edit: I'd like to add, VERY long term lurker, first time poster. Thanks for giving me a reason to finally register, Escapist :)
 

Lionsfan

I miss my old avatar
Jan 29, 2010
2,842
0
0
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
The police report alleges that the teacher chose to show the child "why bullying is bad" by instructing his peers to "Hit him!" and "Hit him harder!" It also states that the second teacher intervened only after one of the children hit the boy hard on his upper back.
If she really wanted to teach the kids a lesson about bullying and how it's dealt with in the real world, she just would have ignored the kids and let the bully beat them up with no consequences.[footnote]/s but kinda not[/footnote]

But this is ridiculous, this was definitely the wrong way to do it. What's even worse is reading the comments:
I was the victim of many bullies as a Child and I can honestly say the scar's Never go away. We must do everything in our Power to stop Bullying. I applaud the actions of the school staff and Pray this Bully has learned his lesson !!! If not, There is a Whole lot of us that will be happy help next time !!!!
Yes, because a mob of kids beating one kid up with the permission of the teacher isn't going to leave scars for that kid
Why would it help if there were no consequences for the bully?
I'm not going to cry about having been bullied in the past, but I can't see how not punishing the bully helps the person being bullied.
I was only being half serious/half kidding about that. By ignoring the bully, she would be teaching them a lesson about what people actually do in "the real world"
Still, what kind of example does that give any of those kids?
They learn that the world is a cruel place, where bullies can do whatever they please with no consequences whatsoever. Even if that picture is accurate on some fronts, do you really want to raise a kid with that image? How are things going to change when people have no hope to press on for more? That kid will just become miserable. While it's up to him to eventually stand up for himself and make his entry in this world, he's going to bear the scars of bullying for the rest of his life.

ps: Even if you are not entirely serious about this, it is a subject worth being serious about.
I'm not being entirely serious on it. If I found out that teachers were just deliberately turning their backs on bullied kids I would be furious about it. This isn't the way to handle it either, but my joking suggestion would be even worse
 

Mr S

New member
Jul 13, 2010
347
0
0
Lionsfan said:
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
Mr S said:
Lionsfan said:
The police report alleges that the teacher chose to show the child "why bullying is bad" by instructing his peers to "Hit him!" and "Hit him harder!" It also states that the second teacher intervened only after one of the children hit the boy hard on his upper back.
If she really wanted to teach the kids a lesson about bullying and how it's dealt with in the real world, she just would have ignored the kids and let the bully beat them up with no consequences.[footnote]/s but kinda not[/footnote]

But this is ridiculous, this was definitely the wrong way to do it. What's even worse is reading the comments:
I was the victim of many bullies as a Child and I can honestly say the scar's Never go away. We must do everything in our Power to stop Bullying. I applaud the actions of the school staff and Pray this Bully has learned his lesson !!! If not, There is a Whole lot of us that will be happy help next time !!!!
Yes, because a mob of kids beating one kid up with the permission of the teacher isn't going to leave scars for that kid
Why would it help if there were no consequences for the bully?
I'm not going to cry about having been bullied in the past, but I can't see how not punishing the bully helps the person being bullied.
I was only being half serious/half kidding about that. By ignoring the bully, she would be teaching them a lesson about what people actually do in "the real world"
Still, what kind of example does that give any of those kids?
They learn that the world is a cruel place, where bullies can do whatever they please with no consequences whatsoever. Even if that picture is accurate on some fronts, do you really want to raise a kid with that image? How are things going to change when people have no hope to press on for more? That kid will just become miserable. While it's up to him to eventually stand up for himself and make his entry in this world, he's going to bear the scars of bullying for the rest of his life.

ps: Even if you are not entirely serious about this, it is a subject worth being serious about.
I'm not being entirely serious on it. If I found out that teachers were just deliberately turning their backs on bullied kids I would be furious about it. This isn't the way to handle it either, but my joking suggestion would be even worse
Okay, then we're cool ;)
 

auron200004

New member
Oct 12, 2010
90
0
0
For me, my opinion hinges heavily on one thing: the extent that this kid was a bully. As far as the article states, it seems that he was just called a bully by a couple of the kids, and the teacher went on with her little show because of it.

Although, even if he was a horrible bully who has personally put a couple of kids in the hospital, I do not think it was okay for the teacher to be the one who staged the beat-down. The kid was actually injured. 24 times. That's not an "Oh, he just learned his lesson to stop doing it hehehe," situation anymore. One kid hitting him back, maybe. 20 kids inflicting 24 injuries in one massive gang attack on him? That's scarring stuff. This is essentially facilitated intra-child abuse, and condoning it is simply mind-boggling.

Whether the kid deserved it or not, it's not the teacher's job to decide to have the shit beat out of him to set him straight. He's six years old. He probably didn't even know he was doing something wrong (if he even was doing anything at all). That requires punishment to teach him it's wrong, not 20 kids attacking him in a giant cluster. At the most, a smack might have set him straight and even that is too much for the teacher to do. I'm glad she got fired, and I do think that she shouldn't be hired again as a teacher if this is how she handles problems between kids.