There is a difference in choices between the two, and I'm surprised you don't think regular bullying is "relentless". If you are being cyber-bullied, you can literally just walk away. You have the choice of leaving Facebook, turning off your phone, etc. If someone is bullying you at school, you are required to return the next day and there is little to nothing you can do about it.
And there is absolutely no difference in psychological effect. Getting punched in the face and laughed at by other kids on a school bus (where I can't move), was not less psychologically damaging than if I got a hundred texts calling me names. Cyber-bullying can caused kids to kill themselves. Physical bullying can cause kids to shoot up schools.
Again, cyber-bullying becomes an issue when the kid feels he can't leave, which is similar to regular bullying. But the only reason they think they can't is because their lives revolve around it.
On a side note, I was told that the main reason for public schooling was so I could develop good social skills. I guess now it's just to get more Contacts.
I think the idea that it's"inescapable" is more to do with physically present bullying (verbal or physical in its nature) is able to be "escaped" when the victim goes home. Whereas cyber bullying is an extension of that and the child is now also harrassed in their hone. There is no "safe place" other than isolation - which is what telling them to just "turn the computer/phone/whatever" off.
And yes, both types of bullying are psychologically damaging. That's why it's a problem. To say one or the other is more damaging is ridiculous. There is no absolute.
The kids still go to school, so I would hesitate to equate turning a device off with "isolation". Turning off Facebook isn't the same as turning off your friends, and blacklisting is a better alternative to constantly reading everything everyone says about you until you get clinical depression.
And that idea of there being no options in the cyber-bullying situation is exactly where this problem comes from. There IS a safe place, it's just that no one goes there.
The only reason I'm not saying one or the other is more damaging is because I'm censoring myself.
So what exactly gives them any place to belong if all avenues are closed? What do you suggest they do? Sit in their rooms alone until they reach adulthood?
There are more avenues than just school and social media. Go outside and talk to people around the neighborhood, make friends on other websites, have fun with relatives, etc. If they don't know anybody, they aren't receiving any texts and Facebook is useless.
People who think cyberbullying is actually serious.
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
There is a difference in choices between the two, and I'm surprised you don't think regular bullying is "relentless". If you are being cyber-bullied, you can literally just walk away. You have the choice of leaving Facebook, turning off your phone, etc. If someone is bullying you at school, you are required to return the next day and there is little to nothing you can do about it.
And there is absolutely no difference in psychological effect. Getting punched in the face and laughed at by other kids on a school bus (where I can't move), was not less psychologically damaging than if I got a hundred texts calling me names. Cyber-bullying can caused kids to kill themselves. Physical bullying can cause kids to shoot up schools.
Again, cyber-bullying becomes an issue when the kid feels he can't leave, which is similar to regular bullying. But the only reason they think they can't is because their lives revolve around it.
On a side note, I was told that the main reason for public schooling was so I could develop good social skills. I guess now it's just to get more Contacts.
--
charli.m
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I think the idea that it's"inescapable" is more to do with physically present bullying (verbal or physical in its nature) is able to be "escaped" when the victim goes home. Whereas cyber bullying is an extension of that and the child is now also harrassed in their hone. There is no "safe place" other than isolation - which is what telling them to just "turn the computer/phone/whatever" off.
And yes, both types of bullying are psychologically damaging. That's why it's a problem. To say one or the other is more damaging is ridiculous. There is no absolute.
--
Anonnet
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
The kids still go to school, so I would hesitate to equate turning a device off with "isolation". Turning off Facebook isn't the same as turning off your friends, and blacklisting is a better alternative to constantly reading everything everyone says about you until you get clinical depression.
And that idea of there being no options in the cyber-bullying situation is exactly where this problem comes from. There IS a safe place, it's just that no one goes there.
The only reason I'm not saying one or the other is more damaging is because I'm censoring myself.
--
charli.m
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yes, they still go to school. Where they are bullied. And isolated. Did you forget that minor detail?
--
Anonnet
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Stop throwing around the word "isolated" haphazardly. If they're isolated at school, then where is the harm is disabling their social media?
--
charli.m
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
So what exactly gives them any place to belong if all avenues are closed? What do you suggest they do? Sit in their rooms alone until they reach adulthood?
--
Anonnet
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
There are more avenues than just school and social media. Go outside and talk to people around the neighborhood, make friends on other websites, have fun with relatives, etc. If they don't know anybody, they aren't receiving any texts and Facebook is useless.