Sunday, September 29, 2013

9:33 AM I didn't read my library book very much yesterday. I read articles about bullying on the Internet. There is a lot of material, but as with other Internet subjects, only a few are written by trained psychologists and professionals. Blogs can be good sources of information, but they are likely to be the work of a concerned or biased individual who may or may not bother to write up a list of their sources and cover all aspects of the subject. Actually, it would take a book to cover all the subjects related to bullying, and months to research it. Some things I saw were more interesting to me than others, though. In my thinking about it, I started with my young years – my experiences and the overall attitude of the school officials at the time.

I came along in the late 1950's and early 1960's in a fairly small high school, where I knew nearly everyone by name and face and generally something about their reputation. The teachers and administration were definitely geared to the “popular” kids who were active in lots of clubs and activities, especially sports, and to the wealthy parents. They did stress academic achievement, though, so a good student from an underprivileged home could still gain some recognition, and there were a number of activities available other than football or cheer leading. I felt it was a fair and open environment overall.

Thomasville, North Carolina was at that time a small industrial city with one main industry, the manufacturing of furniture. The population was 10,000. We had about 15% of blacks in the population and virtually no other minorities. Our school was segregated. I used to say the town was an uncomfortable size – it was too large for you to know everyone and be a part of a homogeneous mix of people, like Andy Griffith's Mayberry, and it was too small to have a touch of the cosmopolitan about it. There were few restaurants and entertainment sources, so when we dated we usually drove to High Point or even Greensboro a few miles away, which were larger. It was also in a dry county, so there was no alcohol to be had in Thomasville. At that time I had never had a drink of alcohol anyway, so that wasn't much of a loss for me, but the availability of alcohol does tend to relax the overall atmosphere and social climate.

Southern culture was also mainly conservative at that time, and it was easy to cause a scandal. There was little place for an openly rebellious or non-conformist person, and the “tough kids” were not treated with leniency by the school administration. The tough kids were mainly poor and into drag racing, smoking and drinking. Some of them, but not all, were playground bullies. Some of them were just on a track to failure, doing poorly in school and likely to drop out rather than graduate.

The football players and cheerleaders were definitely treated better than other clubs, or other students who didn't join any groups. The football team was fairly good, and the players tended to be heroes in the town as well as in the school. As with most privileged groups, they were more “popular.” They were also more likely to drink, be involved in sex, and have wild parties. Some of them were bullies. So much of bullying involves the physical size and aggressiveness of the student, and the prevalent “group-think” of team sports. I would like to see school sports emphasized less, and academic achievement more.

I was not in the popular group, but more of an individualistic person by nature and a fairly feisty one, with my main group of friends being the Girl Scouts and the band. I wasn't attacked, as I would verbally defend myself. I was also fairly conformist, with nothing like the gay issue or a reputation for being “fast” attached to my name. The Girl Scout relationships were respectable and we were all good students, so we didn't stand out negatively in the social sense. Also it gave me a social group of people I knew well to bond with and meet my companionship needs. I learned to form deep friendships. As I went away to college I became more of a non-conformist, joining a women's liberation group, plus I was married by the time I was nineteen, so I wasn't in any college social groups. I mainly studied and had friends among the graduate students in the Zoology Department who were my husband's fellow scholars. I also had a friend who was my college roommate in my freshman year, and we were in NOW (National Organization for Women) together.

While I wasn't bullied, I always felt sorry for those who were and was prone to befriending people who were underdogs. I made relationships with other individualistic people who stood out from the status seekers and thought their own thoughts. I don't think bullying was as prevalent in my high school as it is in some larger or rougher schools, in general. It is a real problem nowadays, though, especially with the Internet, and among the gays and other non-conformists.

One of the most interesting things that I found on the Net was the fact that as early as 9 months old, babies can begin to be aggressive against others, stealing their toys, biting or hitting them. Around the age of 18 months or two years, babies begin to develop a sense of autonomy, which is natural and necessary, but the parent needs to intervene and train them away from being self-centered and violent. A “spoiled” two year old can become a bully by the time they are in kindergarten. Several examples of that were given on the Internet. I have even seen two year olds hit or bite their own parents, and receive no negative reinforcement. Some parents are so afraid of intimidating their children that they let them get away with misbehavior. I think children need to see their parents as authority figures, and need to adapt to their status as the child and become more or less controlled, though for the parents to talk to them about it most of the time is probably best, rather than hitting them. I think hitting children (and dogs) in trying to train them, tends to make them angry and fearful, either of which can cause them to attack.

One thing that I think would be true in a perfect world is that people would choose the positive aspects of cooperation – achieving group goals within the framework of fair play, seeing themselves as part of a benign larger whole, and following ethical and moral rules intelligently and without rigidity – while maintaining self-assertiveness and individual autonomy so their voice will be heard. A citizen of a free democracy needs to operate as a thinking, voting, socially active and creative member for the society to be strong. Group-think promotes the development of evil and abuse, and makes us a culture of thoughtless robots. One thing these articles stressed is that schoolyard bullies become workplace bullies, so it isn't just something that threatens a minority of the population at an early stage in their life. It is everybody's problem and it has lasting effects.

I looked for articles on the Internet about the psychological types that often become bullies. The following information was copied from those articles.

Understanding Bullying
Bullying is a distinctive pattern of deliberately harming and humiliating others. It's a very durable behavioral style, largely because bullies get what they want—at least at first. Bullies are made, not born, and it happens at an early age, if the normal aggression of two-year-olds isn't handled well.
Bullies couldn't exist without victims, and they don't pick on just anyone; those singled out lack assertiveness and radiate fear long before they ever encounter a bully. No one likes a bully, but no one likes a victim either. Grown-up bullies wreak havoc in their relationships and in the workplace.
Myths and facts about bullying
Many beliefs about school bullying are not supported by current research. Among the most common myths that even some teachers have been known to endorse are the following:
Myth #1: Bullies are rejected by their peers and have no friends
Many people believe that everybody dislikes the class bully. But in truth, research shows that many bullies have high status in the classroom and lots of friends (e.g., Cairns & Cairns, 1994; Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl, & Van Acker, 2000). Particularly during the middle school years, some bullies are actually popular among classmates who perceive them as “cool” (Juvonen et al., 2003).  Many classmates admire their toughness and may even try to imitate them.
Myth #2: Bullies have low self-esteem
Just as it has been incorrectly assumed that bullies are rejected by peers and have no friends, there is a general belief that such youths have low self-esteem. That myth has its roots in the widely accepted view that people who bully others must act that way because they think poorly of themselves. Some readers may remember the self-esteem movement of the 1980s when many people argued that raising self-esteem was the key to improving the outcomes of children with academic and social problems (Baumeister, 1996). But, there is little evidence that bullies suffer from low self-esteem. (Baumeister, Smart & Boden, 1996). To the contrary, many studies report that bullies perceive themselves in a positive light, perhaps sometimes displaying inflated self-views (Zariski & Coie, 1996). Therefore, just focusing on self-esteem enhancement will probably not improve the outcomes of youths who pick on others.
Myth #3: Being a victim builds character
Another misconception is that bullying is a normal part of the childhood and adolescence experience, and that surviving peer harassment builds character. In contrast to this view, research findings clearly show that being bullied increases the vulnerabilities of bullied children. For example, we know that children who are passive and socially withdrawn are at a heightened risk of getting bullied and these children become even more withdrawn after incidents of harassment (Schwartz, Dodge & Coie, 1993).
Myth #4: Many childhood victims of harassment become violent as teens
The portrayal of bullying victims lashing out in anger at their tormentors in school shooting incidents has been reinforced by the media over the past few years. However, most victims of bullying are more likely to suffer in silence than to retaliate. As indicated above, many victims experience psychological adjustment problems like depression and low self-esteem that encourage them to turn their anger inward rather than outward.
Myth #5: Bullying involves only perpetrators and victims
Many parents, teachers and students view bullying as a problem that is limited to bullies and victims. Yet, bullying involves more than the bully-victim dyad (Salmivalli, 2001). Studies based on playground observations found that in 75 percent  of bullying incidents, at least four other peers were present as either witnesses, bystanders, assistants to bullies, reinforcers or defenders of victims (O’Connel, Pepler, & Craig, 1999). Assistants to bullies take part in ridiculing or intimidating a schoolmate. Reinforcers, in turn, encourage the bully by showing signs of approval (e.g., smiling when someone is bullied). In contrast to the pro-bully participants, those who defend victims are rare. One observation study found that in more than 50 percent  of observed incidents of bullying, peers reinforced bullies by passively watching. In only about 25 percent  of the incidents did witnesses support the victim by directly intervening, distracting or discouraging the bully (O’Connel et al., 1999).
Understanding facts versus myths about bullies and victims is important for intervention. The problems of victims and bullies are not the same. (Profiles of Early Adolescents). Victims of harassment need interventions that help them develop more positive self-views and learn not to blame themselves for their experiences with harassment (Graham et al., 2006). Bullies need to acquire strategies that help them control their anger and their tendency to blame other people for their problems. And peers need to learn that bullying is a whole school problem for which everyone is responsible.
What about bullies? Compared to victims and the well-adjusted “normal” group, bullies appear to have healthy mental lives. They are no more depressed, anxious, or lonely than the well-adjusted group and they have high self-esteem. These findings are at odds with the widely held belief in our society that people who aggress against others must act that way because they think poorly of themselves. But in fact, there is very little indication in the research literature that aggressive youths suffer from low self-esteem (Baumeister, Smart, & Boden, 1996). Also, bullies are least likely to blame themselves for any conflicts they have with their peers. That finding is consistent with the large body of literature in developmental psychology that reports it is common for aggressive youths to blame the hostile intentions of others for their difficulties with peers rather than blame their own characteristics or behaviors (see Coie & Dodge, 1998). And consistent with this low self-blame, bullies are more likely to believe that the school environment is safe, but teachers and administrators treat them unfairly.
Another noteworthy finding reported in Table 1 is that bullies, compared to victims, enjoy high social status. This may help to explain their positive self-views. Bullies are often perceived as especially “cool,” where coolness captures both popularity and possession of traits that are admired by early adolescents. As early adolescents exercise their need for autonomy and independence, it seems that bullies enjoy popularity as their better-adjusted peers attempt to imitate their anti-social tendencies.
In the third column you will see the profiles for youths with reputations as both victims and bullies. Are they more similar to victims, to bullies, or to a distinct subgroup with its own unique characteristics?
In comparing columns 1 and 3, it seems that bully-victims are somewhat unique and they exhibit the worst characteristics of both categories. They report psychological maladjustment as high as that of victims, yet they do not enjoy any of the social benefits of bullies because their peers overwhelmingly reject them. In some cases, bully-victims turn inward and feel bad about themselves; in other cases, they turn outward and aggress against perpetrators. But with few friends, bully-victims have little social support to help them ward off potential retaliation. Like victims, bully-victims feel unsafe at school; but like bullies, they judge the school rules as unfair.
 
This suggests that bully-victims suffer from multiple risks. They also do more poorly in school than any of the other groups.
Considering all of the adjustment outcomes examined here, bully-victims may be the most troubled and vulnerable of the behavioral subgroups (Unnever, 2005).

Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal, and physical. It typically involves subtle methods of coercion such as intimidation. Bullying behavior may include name calling, verbal or written abuse, exclusion from activities, exclusion from social situations, physical abuse, or coercion.[13][19]
U.S. National Center for Education Statistics suggests in 2001 that bullying can be classified into two categories:
1. direct bullying, and
2. indirect bullying (which is also known as social aggression).[1]
Ross states that direct bullying involves a great deal of physical aggression, such as shoving and poking, throwing things, slapping, choking, punching and kicking, beating, stabbing, pulling hair, scratching, biting, scraping, and pinching.[20]
He also suggests that social aggression or indirect bullying is characterized by attempting to socially isolate the victim. This isolation is achieved through a wide variety of techniques, including spreading gossip, refusing to socialize with the victim, bullying other people who wish to socialize with the victim, and criticizing the victim's manner of dress and other socially-significant markers (including the victim's race, religion, disability, sex, or sexual preference, etc.). Ross[20] outlines an array of nonviolent behavior which can be considered "indirect bullying", at least in some instances, such as name calling, the silent treatment, arguing others into submission, manipulation, gossip/false gossip, lies, rumors/false rumors, staring, giggling, laughing at the victim, saying certain words that trigger a reaction from a past event, and mocking. The UK based children's charity, Act Against Bullying, was set up in 2003 to help children who were victims of this type of bullying by researching and publishing coping skills.
It has been noted that there tend to be differences in how bullying manifests itself between the sexes. Males tend to be more likely to be physically aggressive whereas females tend to favour exclusion and mockery, though it has been noticed that females are becoming more physical in their bullying.[10] There can be a tendency in both sexes to opt for exclusion and mockery rather than physical aggression when the victim is perceived to be too strong to attack without risk, or the use of violence would otherwise cause problems for the bullies such as criminal liability, or the bullies see physical aggression as immature (particularly when bullying occurs among adults).[citation needed]
Clayton R. Cook and co-authors from the University of California at Riverside examined 153 studies from the last 30 years. They found that boys bully more than girls, and bullies and victims both have poor social problem-solving skills. More than anything else, poor academic performance predicts those who will bully.[21]
Of bullies and bully accomplices
Studies have shown that envy and resentment may be motives for bullying.[22] Research on the self-esteem of bullies has produced equivocal results.[23][24] While some bullies are arrogant and narcissistic,[25] bullies can also use bullying as a tool to conceal shame or anxiety or to boost self-esteem: by demeaning others, the abuser feels empowered.[26] Bullies may bully out of jealousy or because they themselves are bullied.[27] Some have argued that a bully reflects the environment of his home, repeating the model he learned from his parents.[28]
Researchers have identified other risk factors such as depression[29] and personality disorders,[30] as well as quickness to anger and use of force, addiction to aggressive behaviors, mistaking others' actions as hostile, concern with preserving self image, and engaging in obsessive or rigid actions.[31] A combination of these factors may also be causes of this behavior.[32] In one recent study of youth, a combination of antisocial traits and depression was found to be the best predictor of youth violence, whereas video game violence and television violence exposure were not predictive of these behaviors.[33]
According to some researchers, bullies may be inclined toward negativity and perform poorly academically. Dr. Cook says that "a typical bully has trouble resolving problems with others and also has trouble academically. He or she usually has negative attitudes and beliefs about others, feels negatively toward himself/herself, comes from a family environment characterized by conflict and poor parenting, perceives school as negative and is negatively influenced by peers".[21]
Contrarily, some researchers have suggested that some bullies are "psychologically strongest" and have "high social standing" among their peers, while their victims are "emotionally distressed" and "socially marginalized".[34] Other researchers also argued that a minority of the bullies, those who are not in turn bullied, "enjoy going to school, and are least likely to take days off sick".[35]
It is often suggested that bullying behavior has its origin in childhood. As a child who is inclined to act as a bully ages, his or her related behavior patterns may also become more sophisticated. Schoolyard pranks and "rough-housing" may develop into more subtle activities such as administrative end-runs, planned and orchestrated attempts at character assassination, or other less obvious, yet equally forceful forms of coercion.[citation

12:34 Lunch time. 1:55 I went to the drugstore and got a prescription. I'm reading the Zora Neale Hurston book now.