Standing up to a school bully

[POJIUJH]

According to what you have said, if that was the exact circumstance it could well be legitimate. Everyone knows that verbally abusing anybody carries with it the possibility of a punch, so it isn’t something I would imagine the bully would be surprised about.

We were told, if someone hits you in school, you hit them back. Your son didn’t resort to violence from verbal abuse, which could have been problematic, but after the bully hit him he challenged him to a fight instead of outright socking him. That would be the honorable way to do it.

Presumably the bully took him up on the offer and got it handed to him. All three of these points would rest more on the bullys poor choice of actions rather than your sons.

Rarely are these sorts of things as straightforward as them seem by the time they get to mammy. But according to what you have told us, if that is exactly accurate I wouldn’t worry too much. Some Saints have been good brawlers!

But you are asking a moral question, something that is answerable with Catholicism. To defend any action moral or immoral from the philosophies of atheism would have a much different result.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

According to comments made by the OP, the boy tried less violent methods of relating to the bully before resorting to violence. I quite agree with you that parents should help their children become adept at using diplomacy, humor or even an appeal to his faith as ways to stop the bully before even considering violence. Fighting should be a last resort, but it should never be removed as an option.

Now, we weren’t there to see exactly how well this young man performed these tactics, but for the sake of discussion, let’s say he did do them as well as he could given his age and lack of experience. Will you then concede that perhaps taking the matter to the parking lot would be a justifiable form of self defense from emotional abuse and trauma.

Not trying to get overly dramatic here, but bullying has really gotten out of hand and the victims and their families really suffer because of it. Child and adolescent psychology clinics and hospitals are busting at the seam. We do our kids a great disservice when we prevent them from defending themselves.

I will respond to this since you asked me direct questions.

According to comments made by the OP, the boy tried less violent methods of relating to the bully before resorting to violence. I quite agree with you that parents should help their children become adept at using diplomacy, humor or even an appeal to his faith as ways to stop the bully before even considering violence. Fighting should be a last resort, but it should never be removed as an option.

This is the truest thing you wrote. And we agree 100 percent on every word of it.

Now, we weren’t there to see exactly how well this young man performed these tactics, but for the sake of discussion, let’s say he did do them as well as he could given his age and lack of experience. Will you then concede that perhaps taking the matter to the parking lot would be a justifiable form of self defense from emotional abuse and trauma.

No, if we concede that he was a skilled diffuser of the situation and failed, authority figures should have handled it. School, parents, and if need be, law enforcement. If THAT has failed then the OP’s son should only use force in a force situation. A challenge at a later time does not satisfy Christian morality. This is backed up by the legal system which argues that the OP’s son would be liable and the aggressor in the situation. Legally, the OP’s son is the “bully” in the nose breaking incident. Here is what we can agree on. If all non-violent options have been satisfied, then force may Morally be used to protect oneself from aggression. The aggression needs to be immediate. This is quite evident in self defense law, protections laws, and even the same principles are applied in “just war theory” which we all should agree on as Catholics.

Not trying to get overly dramatic here, but bullying has really gotten out of hand and the victims and their families really suffer because of it. Child and adolescent psychology clinics and hospitals are busting at the seam. We do our kids a great disservice when we prevent them from defending themselves

Yes, and I am not quite sure you understand how out of hand it has gotten. In this case, it was the “bully” who was in the hospital. But to your point, and not trying to be overly dramatic either, we live in a sad world that is our reality. And that is different than the “Norman Rockwellian” view you seem to have of the situation. Bullying has gotten so out of hand that weapons and gangs can be involved. I think it is dangerous to arm our students and children with this type of violent training and response without the protection of the reality of escalation. These things are escalated regularly nowadays. I would be concerned if my boxer son had sent another kid to the hospital. retaliation be it legal or physical is a danger. We should be arming our children with the Armour of God. If you wish for a Catholic resolution, a St. John Bosco Resolution, the OP’s son should evangelize this Bully. Like I said before, imagine the outcome if the OP’s parents insisted that the “bully” kneel before our Lord and spend an Hour in prayer WITH the OP’s son. I’ll bet this story could have a Holy ending instead. But since we are talking about an atheist here that is probably not likely. But it should be our “Catholic” response.
But with the OPs response, I am sorry but if this is the response we are supposed to have, the schools will be bloodier and bloodier.

The moral thing to do is to exhaust all other avenues and then only use force when force is being used.
The safe thing to do is to get all parties involved even the police.
The secular thing to do is to punch a nose and hospitalize as kid.

But woe to those who have bullies that are better boxers than themselves.

There are bullies in the office and there are bullies in the Mcdonalds drive through. Successful educated civilized people do not respond with violence in these situations. I have never had to punch a coworker. I have had to fight a drunk jerk at a bar or a kid at school.

 

[mommamaree]

OP,
In my opinion, your son offered a gentleman’s challenge to the bully to settle their conflict man to man. It was his only option since teachers were ignoring the situation. The bully himself chose to accept the challenge. It was not a planned attack. It was a young man standing up for himself in the best way he knew how, at the same time as he offered an out for the bully if the bully would rather withdraw.
I think it is far better for your son to name a place and time to stand up for himself, than to fight back after being slammed against the locker in the middle of the school. In the world today, people often frown upon the use of violence under almost all circumstances, and refuse to allow people to lift a finger to defend themselves. There is an unrealistic expectation that other duly-appointed authority figures are and should be able to police everybody and prevent bullying and violence. And people who are being bullied are then ignored. People really often prefer the victim to just go away, so they can pretend the bullying problem doesn’t exist. Victims of bullying are mostly on their own.
No matter how your son chose to defend himself, he was likely going to be penalized anyway. But he chose to do it in a restrained fashion, offering a challenge that could be refused by the bully, and conducting the business in the presence of witnesses. I think he did the best he could do. While we should never celebrate the necessary use of force, we can be proud when our children show the strength of character to stand up for oneself.

 

[cargau]

I will respond to this since you asked me direct questions.

This is the truest thing you wrote. And we agree 100 percent on every word of it.

No, if we concede that he was a skilled diffuser of the situation and failed, authority figures should have handled it. School, parents, and if need be, law enforcement. If THAT has failed then the OP’s son should only use force in a force situation. A challenge at a later time does not satisfy Christian morality. This is backed up by the legal system which argues that the OP’s son would be liable and the aggressor in the situation. Legally, the OP’s son is the “bully” in the nose breaking incident. Here is what we can agree on. If all non-violent options have been satisfied, then force may Morally be used to protect oneself from aggression. The aggression needs to be immediate. This is quite evident in self defense law, protections laws, and even the same principles are applied in “just war theory” which we all should agree on as Catholics.

Yes, and I am not quite sure you understand how out of hand it has gotten. In this case, it was the “bully” who was in the hospital. But to your point, and not trying to be overly dramatic either, we live in a sad world that is our reality. And that is different than the “Norman Rockwellian” view you seem to have of the situation. Bullying has gotten so out of hand that weapons and gangs can be involved. I think it is dangerous to arm our students and children with this type of violent training and response without the protection of the reality of escalation. These things are escalated regularly nowadays. I would be concerned if my boxer son had sent another kid to the hospital. retaliation be it legal or physical is a danger. We should be arming our children with the Armour of God. If you wish for a Catholic resolution, a St. John Bosco Resolution, the OP’s son should evangelize this Bully. Like I said before, imagine the outcome if the OP’s parents insisted that the “bully” kneel before our Lord and spend an Hour in prayer WITH the OP’s son. I’ll bet this story could have a Holy ending instead. But since we are talking about an atheist here that is probably not likely. But it should be our “Catholic” response.
But with the OPs response, I am sorry but if this is the response we are supposed to have, the schools will be bloodier and bloodier.

The moral thing to do is to exhaust all other avenues and then only use force when force is being used.
The safe thing to do is to get all parties involved even the police.
The secular thing to do is to punch a nose and hospitalize as kid.

But woe to those who have bullies that are better boxers than themselves.

There are bullies in the office and there are bullies in the Mcdonalds drive through. Successful educated civilized people do not respond with violence in these situations. I have never had to punch a coworker. I have had to fight a drunk jerk at a bar or a kid at school.

We are not talking about an adult working in an office. Young people need to have the experiences life offers in order to master the skills needed to effectively offer and respond to reasonable overtures.

As far as the police are concerned, they are way too involved settling disputes that can be handled by individuals. I recently heard that a kindergartener was arrested for kissing a girl in class and charged with some kind of abuse. If adults can’t or won’t control the environment that kids are obligated to attend, then kids should be able to defend themselves. I do not entirely blame teachers and schools because social media has allowed bullying to expand well beyond the schoolyard.

So, morally, he should make every reasonable effort to resolve the conflict without resorting to violence. If he was unable to stop the bullying, he should be able to defend himself in whatever way he can including fighting. The fight should be fair.

bear in mind, its not always about winning and losing a fight. Often, its about willing to take a stand.

 

[cargau]

OP,
In my opinion, your son offered a gentleman’s challenge to the bully to settle their conflict man to man. It was his only option since teachers were ignoring the situation. The bully himself chose to accept the challenge. It was not a planned attack. It was a young man standing up for himself in the best way he knew how, at the same time as he offered an out for the bully if the bully would rather withdraw.
I think it is far better for your son to name a place and time to stand up for himself, than to fight back after being slammed against the locker in the middle of the school. In the world today, people often frown upon the use of violence under almost all circumstances, and refuse to allow people to lift a finger to defend themselves. There is an unrealistic expectation that other duly-appointed authority figures are and should be able to police everybody and prevent bullying and violence. And people who are being bullied are then ignored. People really often prefer the victim to just go away, so they can pretend the bullying problem doesn’t exist. Victims of bullying are mostly on their own.
No matter how your son chose to defend himself, he was likely going to be penalized anyway. But he chose to do it in a restrained fashion, offering a challenge that could be refused by the bully, and conducting the business in the presence of witnesses. I think he did the best he could do. While we should never celebrate the necessary use of force, we can be proud when our children show the strength of character to stand up for oneself.

Well stated…

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

\

So, morally, he should make every reasonable effort to resolve the conflict without resorting to violence. If he was unable to stop the bullying, he should be able to defend himself in whatever way he can including fighting. The fight should be fair.

If you strip away all of the arguments we have engaged in in this thread. This paragraph is something both you and I can agree on.

 

[cargau]

I will respond to this since you asked me direct questions.

This is the truest thing you wrote. And we agree 100 percent on every word of it.

Like I said before, imagine the outcome if the OP’s parents insisted that the “bully” kneel before our Lord and spend an Hour in prayer WITH the OP’s son. I’ll bet this story could have a Holy ending instead. But since we are talking about an atheist here that is probably not likely. But it should be our “Catholic” response.
But with the OPs response, I am sorry but if this is the response we are supposed to have, the schools will be bloodier and bloodier.

The moral thing to do is to exhaust all other avenues and then only use force when force is being used.
The safe thing to do is to get all parties involved even the police.
The secular thing to do is to punch a nose and hospitalize as kid.

But woe to those who have bullies that are better boxers than themselves.

There are bullies in the office and there are bullies in the Mcdonalds drive through. Successful educated civilized people do not respond with violence in these situations. I have never had to punch a coworker. I have had to fight a drunk jerk at a bar or a kid at school.

I think most if not everything I have written is true.

OK, let me get this straight… You want the parents of the bullied boy to make both boys go to adoration? And, exactly how will that not escalate the bullying?

I think it would be useful for the OP to sit down with his son and discuss possible non- violent strategies and try to implement them. But, the boy needs to figure out how to solve his crisis on his own. If Mom and Dad get involved. it will make the boy look weak in the eyes of his peers and add to the probability that he will be bullied in the future.

I sense from your comment regarding Norman Rockwell, that I am not viewing this matter in a modern, progressive manner. Where is it written that just because a thought is new that it must be better than any that came before it. All those Rockwell pictures in the Saturday Evening Post captured a generation that was arguably the greatest in history.

He even did one of a girl sitting outside the principal’s office with a black eye.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I sense from your comment regarding Norman Rockwell, that I am not viewing this matter in a modern, progressive manner. Where is it written that just because a thought is new that it must be better than any that came before it. All those Rockwell pictures in the Saturday Evening Post captured a generation that was arguably the greatest in history.

He even did one of a girl sitting outside the principal’s office with a black eye.

I never said it was better now! Perhaps the greatest generation in history is pushing it historically. Perhaps in America, but even then you have the early patriots, and the civil war generation… Was 1940s America better than early christianity? doubtful. But that is truly splitting hairs.

No doubt though I agree with you that we both pine for a day past. But that is it. It is past. And we must raise our children in the reality of today which includes protecting them from bullies and the violence that is no longer just a couple of kids duking it out, but ends too often with a more drastic outcome.

 

[on_the_hill]

I won’t condone violence. But sometimes a good sock in the nose is what it takes.

If anything, the bullied kid learned a valuable lesson: stand up for yourself. Now that he’s done it and survived it, he won’t be afraid to do it again. And now maybe he can focus on non-violent responses. But at least he will be making that choice. A non-violent response won’t be his only avenue, he won’t be cowed into it out of fear.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I won’t condone violence. But sometimes a good sock in the nose is what it takes.

If anything, the bullied kid learned a valuable lesson: stand up for yourself. Now that he’s done it and survived it, he won’t be afraid to do it again. And now maybe he can focus on non-violent responses. But at least he will be making that choice. A non-violent response won’t be his only avenue, he won’t be cowed into it out of fear.

You think the bullied kid, a trained boxer, was scared to stand up for himself? I did not get that from the story at all!

But it would be interesting if the OP would address two points. What did the OP’s son try before it came to assault. And was his son scared?

 

[on_the_hill]

You think the bullied kid, a trained boxer, was scared to stand up for himself? I did not get that from the story at all!

But it would be interesting if the OP would address two points. What did the OP’s son try before it came to assault. And was his son scared?

No, I don’t know. But I’ve known kids who were big, strong, athletic, etc., and were afraid to do anything more than ‘take it’ when they were put on the spot by a bully.

 

[josh987654321]

G’day. I have a teenage son who was bullied in school for a month. One day, he challenged this other boy to a fight after school (he trained in boxing) and he ended up breaking this bully’s nose. I was called up to the principal’s office along with the boy’s parents and both of them got suspended. I ended paying for that boy’s fractured nose. I didn’t scold my son (in fact I felt proud) about that incident and was I quietly applauding him for standing up for himself. Since then, he was left alone and no one bothered him since then. Was I right in condoning his behaviour? When I was growing up in grade school and high school, school bullying was something that happened in the shadows and which the school authorities refused to acknowledge. It was only when young kids started taking their lives (due to being bullied - even online) did education authorities had a wake-up call.

I would ask you son how he feels about what he did before you start patting him on the back for it. I would ask him “Did it make you feel good to break that guys nose?” or “Did it make you feel good to get that bully back, to give him a taste of his own medicine?” and if he responds with “Yes” than I believe what he did was wrong! and that you shouldn’t be patting him on the back for it.

“Do not commit the crime for which you now serve the sentance, God said ‘Vengance is mine’”

If your son acted out of hatred in his heart toward this bully, than what he did was wrong!

A Man never takes any kind of pleasure in violance! A Man never acts out of hatred. Violance is his last resort and he does it in self defense, out of love, he never asks for it nor challenges anyone to it. He does not harbour any hatred. He loves the bully but hates the bullying, he loves the person but hates what they have become, he is merciful to the bully but never the bullying.
Extract from Bishop Fulton J. Sheen:

5 “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Matthew 5:5

Violence says meekness is weakness. But that is because it does not understand the meaning of Christian meekness. Meekness is not cowardice; meekness is not an easy-going temperament, sluggish, and hard to arouse; meekness is not a spineless passivity that allows everyone to walk over us. No! Meekness is self-possesion. That is why the reward of meekness is possession [of the earth].

A weak person can never be meek, because he is never self-possessed; meekness is the virtue that controls the combative, violent, and pugnacious powers of our nature, and is therefore the best and noblest to self-realisation.

The meek person is not one who refuses to fight, nor someone who will never become angry. A meek person is someone who will never do one thing: he will never fight when his conceit is attacked, but only when a principal is at stake. And that is the keynote to the difference of the anger of the violent and the anger of the meek person.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[adawgj]

I’d say well done to your son.

I’ve been “bullied” and teased during school for a while and I would never have the guts to do this even though I would be able to.

 

[josh987654321]

I’d say well done to your son.

I wouldn’t, come 18, if he does what he did in the playground here in Australia he will end up in the back of a police car. And if he kills the person (Which can easily happen with one punch) than he ends up in Jail regardless of whatever justification he has for it because he was the one who challanged the guy to fight.

I’ve been “bullied” and teased during school for a while and I would never have the guts to do this even though I would be able to.

I believe having the courage or guts to fight may be virtuous/praiseworthy, however desiring to fight I believe is certainly not virtuous/praiseworthy.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[josh987654321]

I believe a man always has the courage to stand up for himself and loved ones, to fight if need be, but he never has the desire to, he never asks for it nor challanges anyone to it.

Thank you for reading
Josh