School bully gets what he deserves

[jimmy olsen]

Annonymous has hacked the school website for suspending Casey.


http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2011/03/17/hacktivist-group-takes-down-school-web-site-of-bullied-australian-kid/

[Martinus]

I have this crazy mindset that stuff that I wouldn't accept at a workplace shouldn't be OK in school. I am prepared to cut kids some slack because kids will be kids etc, but not a lot.

But as a workplace bully you probably don't understand what the hell I'm talking about.

You mean your workplace does not tolerate if you do not want to share a dinner table with a colleague you dislike? Wow, do you work at Einsetzkommando Carebear?

And I guess your workplace tolerates finger painting, people being absent from work if they bring a note from their parents, and people getting up from their desks and mulling around corridors of the office every hour or so when the bell rings - since such things are tolerated at schools, and if they weren't tolerated at your work, they wouldn't at schools either.

In short: you = idiot.

[The Brain]

I have this crazy mindset that stuff that I wouldn't accept at a workplace shouldn't be OK in school. I am prepared to cut kids some slack because kids will be kids etc, but not a lot.

But as a workplace bully you probably don't understand what the hell I'm talking about.

You mean your workplace does not tolerate if you do not want to share a dinner table with a colleague you dislike? Wow, do you work at Einsetzkommando Carebear?

You think that'll make me cry? Try harder, I'm not one of your regular victims.

[Martinus]

I have this crazy mindset that stuff that I wouldn't accept at a workplace shouldn't be OK in school. I am prepared to cut kids some slack because kids will be kids etc, but not a lot.

But as a workplace bully you probably don't understand what the hell I'm talking about.

You mean your workplace does not tolerate if you do not want to share a dinner table with a colleague you dislike? Wow, do you work at Einsetzkommando Carebear?

You think that'll make me cry? Try harder, I'm not one of your regular victims.

I elaborated why you are an idiot after you quoted that.

[The Brain]

I have this crazy mindset that stuff that I wouldn't accept at a workplace shouldn't be OK in school. I am prepared to cut kids some slack because kids will be kids etc, but not a lot.

But as a workplace bully you probably don't understand what the hell I'm talking about.

You mean your workplace does not tolerate if you do not want to share a dinner table with a colleague you dislike? Wow, do you work at Einsetzkommando Carebear?

You think that'll make me cry? Try harder, I'm not one of your regular victims.

I elaborated why you are an idiot after you quoted that.

Amazingly your post makes LESS sense after the edit.

[Martinus]

I will put it in simple terms for you: work environment != school environment. Things tolerated in one are not tolerated in the other, and vice-versa. Only a retard like you would expect kids in grad school to behave in the same way as adult employees in a corporation.

[The Brain]

I will put it in simple terms for you: work environment != school environment. Things tolerated in one are not tolerated in the other, and vice-versa. Only a retard like you would expect kids in grad school to behave in the same way as adult employees in a corporation.

I'm a retard now? That hurts man. Still no tears though.

[Martinus]

The problem is, with bullying defined as such as you get into the ridiculous area we got over the years with "fascism" and "genocide" - people stop taking these terms seriously anymore, because everything is dubbed thus.

Sometimes it's hard to say where your schtick ends and your stupid begins.

When a fag is beaten to death by a mob of skinheads, should we perhaps treat every blow individually and determine that they really aren't that serious and that the death was an accident given that the fag was already in a weakened state when the last blow landed?

I mean, painting the individual blows like they were part of a determined beating is really going to weaken the definition of a determined beating since people just won't take it seriously any more.

Actually, that's quite an ignorant analogy, because in criminal prosecution this is exactly what would be analyzed. Depending on context, intent, outcome or even individual qualities of the perps (e.g. a perp who is a professional fighter can be treated as using his fists as a "dangerous weapon") etc. people could be charged with everything ranging from "participation in a fight" (with or without a dangerous weapon), battery, battery resulting in death, attempted murder or actual murder, and individual skinheads may actually end up being charged with different crimes, even though they beat up the same fag.

As to the point at hand, I am just wondering how all the "zero tolerance policy" idiots would treat what you say.

For example, if that meant the school tries to make the singled out girl not to feel shitty and try to integrate her somehow then it's fine. But if it meant that the school would tell the other girls that they have to sit with the singled out girl at a lunch table or they would be punished, then it would be pretty fucked up.

[Martinus]

And for the record, I would wager that in 9 cases out of 10, there is a "personal background" element to bullying that should also be addressed and not ignored. This is not to say that the victim is to blame, but usually there are some conditions from that person's background (usually some failure on behalf of the parents) that make someone a victim.

Whether these are:

- crazy fundie parents who would kick their son out of their home for being gay and/or make him go to a fire and brimstone church that would tell him that being gay is a horrible sin for which he would burn for all eternity - which make him commit suicide if someone calls him a faggot or posts his gay profile online, or
- "busy" parents who move around a lot without taking time to help the kid integrate in new environment (it's not just the school's job!) - not to mention without much consideration for their kid's wellbeing and how frequent moves are going to affect him, or
- a girl who is laughed at because she smells funny and dresses in lousy clothes - because her alcoholic parents fail to take care of her properly and spend all the money on booze, or
- simply some moronic "helicopter parents" who think it's better to send the kid to piano, French, mandarin, swimming and astrophysics lessons from early age, rather than letting him or her have fun in the playground and learn to interact with other kids - effectively creating a conceited nerd with no social skills

there is very often some element that can be traced to parents.

It's very easy to blame stupid kid "bullies" in such a case but kids are stupid and they can't always process all the background stuff - the school should first and foremost address the background situation.

Edit: So I guess I can see now why I instinctively oppose the "zero tolerance policy" in its extreme form - because it's another of these examples where there is a pressure for other people to take responsibility for raising someone else's kids. Parents should have more obligations (and if they fail to perform them, e.g. by instilling their kid with some idiotic bronze age religious mania, they should have the kids taken away from them) and less rights, not vice versa.

Any society that freaks out if a teacher gives a kid a light smack on the ear for misbehaving in class, yet is fine with parents sending their kid to deeply psychologically damaging "Jesus camp" to "pray the gay away" is a fucked up one.

[Slargos]

I think I have it.

Martinus is actually not a gay lawyer, but in fact an agent provocateur from the catholic church deep under cover with the express purpose of ensuring that the level of animosity towards polish faggots does not decrease further.

I'm a bit perturbed I didn't see it earlier.

Good job.

[dps]

The problem is, with bullying defined as such as you get into the ridiculous area we got over the years with "fascism" and "genocide" - people stop taking these terms seriously anymore, because everything is dubbed thus.

Sometimes it's hard to say where your schtick ends and your stupid begins.

When a fag is beaten to death by a mob of skinheads, should we perhaps treat every blow individually and determine that they really aren't that serious and that the death was an accident given that the fag was already in a weakened state when the last blow landed?

I mean, painting the individual blows like they were part of a determined beating is really going to weaken the definition of a determined beating since people just won't take it seriously any more.

Actually, that's quite an ignorant analogy, because in criminal prosecution this is exactly what would be analyzed. Depending on context, intent, outcome or even individual qualities of the perps (e.g. a perp who is a professional fighter can be treated as using his fists as a "dangerous weapon") etc. people could be charged with everything ranging from "participation in a fight" (with or without a dangerous weapon), battery, battery resulting in death, attempted murder or actual murder, and individual skinheads may actually end up being charged with different crimes, even though they beat up the same fag.

As to the point at hand, I am just wondering how all the "zero tolerance policy" idiots would treat what you say.

Actually, you have a decent point here, in that the trial of the police officers for beating Rodney King largely revolved around issues similar to this.  In the original trial, there wasn't much dispute that King's behavior justified some use of force against him;  the question was at what point, if any, individual blows amounted to excessive force.

And for the record, I would wager that in 9 cases out of 10, there is a "personal background" element to bullying that should also be addressed and not ignored. This is not to say that the victim is to blame, but usually there are some conditions from that person's background (usually some failure on behalf of the parents) that make someone a victim.

OTOH, this post is mostly nonsense.  Are there "personal background" elements that lead to some kids being bullied?  Yeah, but not the stuff in your post.  The stuff that gets a kid targetted for bullying tends to be factors such as:

* wearing glasses

* liking to read

* not being very athletic

* actually doing well in class

* having different tastes in music and entertainment that the "popular" kids.

None of that really has much to do with the kid's parents, for the most part.

[Valmy]

Any society that freaks out if a teacher gives a kid a light smack on the ear for misbehaving in class, yet is fine with parents sending their kid to deeply psychologically damaging "Jesus camp" to "pray the gay away" is a fucked up one.

Teachers are employees of the state and people are compelled by law to put their kids into that teachers care.  If you are required to send your kid someplace I can see you not wanting your kid to not be abused either by other kids or teachers.

Parents sending their own kids to religious activities, on the other hand, is something most people do not care about.  It is not their kids.  But as you know there are people who DO have a large problem with kids being indoctrinated into their parents religion or suffer abuse for coming out as gay.  After all you yourself seem to have a large problem with it.  Which makes your contempt for people who care about the treatment their own children have in schools really bizarre...

But having said that I do not really get the zero tolerance policy but generally when you start throwing around terms like that the policy is probably idiotic.

[Valmy]

OTOH, this post is mostly nonsense.  Are there "personal background" elements that lead to some kids being bullied?  Yeah, but not the stuff in your post.  The stuff that gets a kid targetted for bullying tends to be factors such as:

* wearing glasses

* liking to read

* not being very athletic

* actually doing well in class

* having different tastes in music and entertainment that the "popular" kids.

None of that really has much to do with the kid's parents, for the most part.

Nonsense kids are entirely shaped by their parents and any issues the kid has are created by their parents.  After all kids are not people with their own independent ideas and personalities but robots to be programed by parents.

[Jacob]

Mother of the bully demands an apology. I'd tell her to fuck off if I was that kid's parents.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/17/mother-australian-bully-body-slammed-video-demands-apology-victim/

I guess that's why you shouldn't trust Fox News.  The actual exchange went like this:

Interviewer: Are you gonna get your son to apologise?
Bully's Mother: I would like him to apologise yes.

Also:

Interviewer: So what did you say to your son?
Bully's Mother: I had a lot to say to my son yesterday. I said he was wrong for what he'd done.

The actual interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76bj74rlo5E

What's next? Are you going to post articles on how salt is going protect us against nuclear fallout from Japan?

[Jacob]

Only a retard like you would expect kids in grad school to behave in the same way as adult employees in a corporation.

I don't think there are any kids in grad school, Marty. Grad students are usually in their mid 20s at their youngest, barring the occasional prodigy.