rant..moan..school..bullying.

Lotus-eater

moomoomama27 wrote: »

Do you think violence would have solved it? What's to say violence wouldn't have made the situation escalate.

I just feel it's very shaky ground to teach a child to deal with anything through voilence. Especially as a first course of action.

I know violence would have solved it.

And as for the 2nd point, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

moomoomama27

fedupnow wrote: »

Yes I do.

I do hope your method works for your kid - truly. But I want no kid getting bullied and teaching our own to fight meaner and punch harder is not the way.

So right!

To use it as a first course of action is wrong, Surely it should be teaching them that they can and should approach someone in authority, sorting it out verbally?

My worry would be a child of 5 being taught to use fists will think that's the only way to deal with things, will get a name for themselves, and that's not the way society works.

Lotus-eater

fedupnow wrote: »

Yes I do.

I do hope your method works for your kid - truly. But I want no kid getting bullied and teaching our own to fight meaner and punch harder is not the way.

No you don't, unless it has been you, you know nothing.

Lotus-eater

moomoomama27 wrote: »

My worry would be a child of 5 being taught to use fists will think that's the only way to deal with things, will get a name for themselves, and that's not the way society works.

Well it didn't, she's the sweetest thing ever and she only had to do it once and it stopped it dead.

moomoomama27

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Well it didn't, she's the sweetest thing ever and she only had to do it once and it stopped it dead.

But it is something she has been taught to do to deal with a situation. Should it arise then she'd do it again, and again. It's irrelevant it's only happened once, it's irrelevant she's sweet.

Just curious why you would encourage her to use this as a first course of action?

fedupnow

Lotus-eater wrote: »

No you don't, unless it has been you, you know nothing.

We could spend all evening in a yes I do/no you don't tennis match. The point is - by teaching our kids to fight we are sending them the message that it's okay for them, but not the other guy.

It also puts them in danger as there is always going to be somebody bigger and harder who they might not be able to fight off.

Lastly, and for me the most important, it's letting the schools off the hook. Kids should not have to sort these things out for themselves. They have a duty of care and they should make sure every child is safe in their school. They are paid to do a job. If they are failing, then sack them.

EDIT: Obviously you can't sack them - you know what I mean, complain, moan, shout do whatever it takes to ensure they take the job seriously.

Sambucus_Nigra

fedupnow wrote: »

But you think thumping somebody IS genius, right?

Let me refresh your browser....Some little thug whacked her on purpose, so she punched him straight back on the nose

That means that a lad whacked a girl - and the girl punched back. That does not mean that the girl was going round thumping people willy nilly. And good on her - perhaps if more little girls stood up for themselves we wouldn't have men still whacking women at their pleasure for their whole lives.

Plans_all_plans

Some children are just downright naughty and no amount of adult intervention is going to get through to them in my opinion. A child in my daughter's class last year kept on hitting her and I told her to tell the teacher etc. But no amount of telling off was stopping it. In the end, I felt awful about her being smacked about in school and said "hit back and see what happens". She wasn't hit since.

I'm not going to sit back and see my child hurt, just in case the bullies might move onto someone else's child. Why should my child continue to be hit? This is what I don't get. Bullying is an age old problem. You have to stand up for yourself: that's a life lesson and it should be learned early.

I can see where you're coming from, but I must disagree.

fedupnow

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Let me refresh your browser....Some little thug whacked her on purpose, so she punched him straight back on the nose

That means that a lad whacked a girl - and the girl punched back. That does not mean that the girl was going round thumping people willy nilly. And good on her - perhaps if more little girls stood up for themselves we wouldn't have men still whacking women at their pleasure for their whole lives.

Perhaps he'll just find a smaller one. But that's okay, because we're only worrying about our own, right?

hat little boy may have felt justified, maybe he didn't. BUT, you can be pretty sure the little boys' mum heard a different story. She may think he's a sweet little boy - maybe she's wrong.

I wasn't there - I've no idea what happened.

moomoomama27

Plans_all_plans wrote: »

Some children are just downright naughty and no amount of adult intervention is going to get through to them in my opinion. A child in my daughter's class last year kept on hitting her and I told her to tell the teacher etc. But no amount of telling off was stopping it.

The teacher just kept letting it happen? No removal from the classroom of child that was hitting, Sounds like it was handled very poorly, did you not go further with it?