Details
Watch as Pennsylvania Post contributors Emma McClure and Thomas Sharrock debate about their diverging opinions regarding bullying in a discussion moderated by Nicolas Scola and Anjali Jathavedam!
Comment
Details
Watch as Pennsylvania Post contributors Emma McClure and Thomas Sharrock debate about their diverging opinions regarding bullying in a discussion moderated by Nicolas Scola and Anjali Jathavedam!
Comment
Watch as Pennsylvania Post contributors Emma McClure and Thomas Sharrock debate about their diverging opinions regarding bullying in a discussion moderated by Nicolas Scola and Anjali Jathavedam!
Listen to Ben's Bifocals: Episode 1 by The Pennsylvania Post MP3 song. Ben's Bifocals: Episode 1 song from The Pennsylvania Post is available on Audio.com. The duration of song is 43:05. This high-quality MP3 track has 619.964 kbps bitrate and was uploaded on 7 Apr 2024. Stream and download Ben's Bifocals: Episode 1 by The Pennsylvania Post for free on Audio.com – your ultimate destination for MP3 music.
Comment
Loading comments...
Emma McClure and Thomas Jarek, two editorial writers for the Pennsylvania Post, discussed modern bullying on the podcast. Emma's article explored the idea of "bringing back bullying" and how the definition of bullying has expanded to include any judgmental or insensitive behavior. She argued that children's socially deviant behaviors should be corrected by their peers to teach them social norms. On the other hand, Thomas disagreed with the concept of social correction and believed that building people up instead of breaking them down was the key to developing strong character and social behavior. They also discussed the definition of bullying, which they agreed should involve targeted and repetitive negative behavior with a power imbalance. Hello and welcome to Bends by Vocals, the Pennsylvania Post's very own podcast platform. I am your host, Nicholas Skola. And I'm Anjali. Today, we're going to kick off our podcast with a discussion between two of our editorial writers, Emma McClure and Thomas Jarek. Emma is a freshman in the college studying criminology from Columbus, Georgia. Emma is also the social IV editor here at the Pennsylvania Post. Thomas is a sophomore in the college studying international relations and francophone, Italian, and German studies from Winchester in the United Kingdom, and he is also the arts and cultures editor for the Pennsylvania Post. Welcome to the podcast, Emma and Thomas. We are very happy to have you here for the first episode. Thank you for having us. Thank you so much for having me. Of course. So you guys both recently wrote articles about modern bullying, and whether or not the stronger response we have to bullying today, as opposed to, say, our parents' generation, is beneficial to younger generations. So Emma, could you start us off by telling us a little bit about what your article was about and your take on the issue? Yeah, absolutely. So my article was about the call to, quote-unquote, bring back bullying, which is mostly kind of like a colloquialism and a joke, but there is a more serious backing behind it in that we've really expanded what we mean when we say bullying. Historically, bullying has always referred to a power dynamic and oftentimes the threat of physical harm and severe emotional harassment, and I want it to be extremely clear that that is not at all what my article is promoting, but rather the fact that we've expanded the idea of what bullying is so far beyond this to where anything that might sound remotely judgmental, mean, or insensitive, we now are very ready to deem bullying, when in reality it is more of a social correction. Children are not always the most articulate, and a lot of the things that they say can come across as very mean or insensitive simply because they don't have the ability to eloquently and sensitively word everything. So we might think that they're being mean when they say, that's so weird, but really they're correcting behaviors that they are able to recognize as deviant from the social norms and the standards for how children in their own age group should behave, and when we tell people that it's not okay to correct socially deviant behaviors, it leads to more deviant behaviors down the road and ultimately to an inability to recognize social norms, which is something that's very important for future success. Awesome. And Tom, can you share a little bit about your piece? Yeah, I'd love to. So, I mean, the first thing I want to say is just to really pick up on the prompt, which was that these are pieces about modern bullying, and I think while the piece that I've written addresses the world today and where bullying sits in society, I think that the definition of bullying is fairly stable and has been for a long period. So I would define bullying as something that is targeted and repetitive. So I really took my article and took it as a response to what Emma wrote. I felt that the term of social correction felt warringly fascist, social Darwinistic, because I really think that the way that we help people develop successful, strong bases of character and of social behavior is by building them up instead of breaking them down. So that's kind of where I took my piece from to begin with. I mean, if you all want to go read it again, then that would also be very highly encouraged. Thank you. Yeah, thank you both for sharing. We also have some specific questions that we'll get into later, but before we do that, we want to hear a little bit about your writing process. So Emma, if you wouldn't mind sharing first what were your motivations behind writing the article and what were some challenges you encountered during the process? Yeah, actually I think it's a really funny story how Thomas and I wound up writing against one another for the side-by-sides, because I actually did not propose the Bring Back Bullying piece. It was an anonymous pitch, and Thomas saw the pitch in our tracking sheet and sent out a message to all the editors asking what it was about, and we got into just a casual conversation about it and somehow wound up writing pieces against one another. And I thought that we both had really interesting kind of ideas about it, both of us ourselves having been the victims of some kind of modern bullying in our childhood, if I'm not mistaken. I think we talked about that. So for me, the main challenge was kind of coming up with where to get started on it since I wasn't the one who proposed it, but once I got started, I felt like there was a really interesting idea to discuss with the idea of social correction and how we have changed our definition of bullying over time when I started looking at definitions of bullying in different sources like family blog posts versus what is defined as in laws and on government websites. So there's a very interesting divergence that's only occurred very recently, and that's where I got started with it. Very cool. Thomas touched on it a little bit, but could you both provide us with a definition or your definition of what bullying constitutes? Sure. Do you want to go first, Thomas? Yeah, I can take that. So yeah, like I said earlier, bullying for me is something that's targeted and repetitive. And kind of encompassed within that is the idea that this is negative behavior perpetrated against someone. Okay. Yeah. I don't disagree with either of your points. The definition that I use in my piece is from stopbullying.gov, which of course is a government website. And the definitions they provide is unwanted aggressive behavior among school-age children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. The behavior is repeated or has the potential to be repeated over time. And I think most legal definitions, including the various state laws and county school district statements on the issue, also similarly emphasize power imbalances and physical harm or the threat thereof as the key characteristics of bullying. And I think that's really important to emphasize when you're talking about it. Okay. So now we're going to get into some specific questions. We have some questions tailored to both of your pieces. So those are with Thomas. Yeah. Do you think that all criticism by peers should be considered bullying? Absolutely not. I think this is like, I think I came out quite strongly in a kind of opinion which might seem to support that idea. I definitely think that criticism is something that we should like, not that we should welcome, but people should be able to receive criticism. I think that criticism, successful criticism, comes from a place of support, a place of wanting to make sure that other people are like being their best selves. And that comes best from friends, not from people who may be like, we don't know so well, or just like people who happen to share space with us and don't like the way that we act. So that's where really I find criticism has its place in a kind of like positive reinforcing action, not in something that's kind of like negative and perpetrated by people that we don't necessarily feel very close to. As a follow-up to that, let me ask you, do you feel that negative criticism can be channeled by an authority figure, perhaps, maybe a teacher or a parent, and in that fashion it can be beneficial? I think, I mean, listen, I think there's negative criticism and there's negative criticism, right? So I think if the way that we should approach this is trying, instead of framing criticism in a negative light, trying to put it in a positive light. So for example, I'm trying to think of an example where it might come from an authority figure, but like, let's say someone is acting up in class, someone's being like particularly loud and it's unwanted. The way that you might want to deal with that as a teacher is instead of like shouting at the child or like trying to exclude them, you might take them aside and try to like ask them how you might best support them and try to just explain calmly why the situation isn't tenable as it currently is. That's not to say that there isn't a place also for some sort of discipline, that there isn't a place for discipline in schools, but I think that the way in which it's handed out is different. I think bullying also, at least from the perspective I'm coming at it, is perpetrated by peers, people like your own age, not necessarily just in schools, but yeah. I had a similar question for you, Emma. Do you feel that socially acceptable behavior can be learned from other people aside from peers, from teachers or parents perhaps? Yeah, I absolutely do think so and I agree with Thomas' sentiment that it should be in a kind way and in a way that's directed at supporting people whenever they're deviating from what would be considered a socially acceptable behavior as often times this can be a way of acknowledging some kind of emotional distress or difficulty socializing with other peers in what would be considered a normative way. I do think that that should be approached in a very kind and supportive manner, but I also think that there's importance in recognizing that peers are the ones who set the normative standards for your age group. While authority figures play a really important role in providing guidance towards those norms, peers are the ones who most are familiar with those norms, who are living them out in that moment, who are the most familiar as society changes, those norms are changing as well. Your peers within your own age group are the ones who are experiencing those changes in real time. I think there's something really important there because those are the people that are experiencing those changes in real time and they're also the people that you're around the most. So Emma, as a follow-up question, what happens when peers are giving criticism to another peer that isn't necessarily doing something behavioral, for instance, they bring food to school that their peers aren't familiar with? I don't consider that bullying if it's a one-off thing and that's something that both Thomas and I touched on, is that it's bullying definitionally is repeated action and like I said, children often aren't really able to articulate a lot of things in a way that we would like them to. Ideally, everybody would be sensitive and kind all of the time, but children don't always have malicious intentions just because they say it doesn't sound nice to us being older and wiser in a lot of instances. So if you bring a food that's popular in your family or in your culture that somebody else isn't familiar with and they might be weirded out or sound like it, I don't think that's bullying if it's a one-off thing. Even if it happens a couple of times, kids are curious, but they're also not able to articulate everything very kindly. If it's repeated and it's harassing students, if it's ostracizing them and making them feel otherized, that's not good. I think everybody here can agree with that and that's not a social correction either. What I'm talking about is very specifically children who are behaving in ways that are very abnormal against the grain of how you're expected to behave. I'm also not saying that everybody needs to conform to every single norm all of the time. Individualism is a very important part of our culture and it's what creates a lot of social progress. So I don't think that everybody needs to conform all of the time, but I do think it's important to recognize that there are certain instances. So I kind of had a question for you off the back of that, and this is just a question that was raised when I read your post and kind of like one of the things that I was trying to grapple with. So I found my experience with bullying back home, a lot of it was circled around homophobia. And so that was really coming from a place where I felt like the community I was in had decided that being gay or not being straight was something that wasn't socially normal. So how do we decide who gets to decide the social norms in a space? And therefore, what is, I guess, in air quotes, acceptable or unacceptable bullying? Yeah. Well, like I said before, I don't think that it really falls under the umbrella of bullying. So I do think that's an important distinction, but I understand your question isn't really about that. And first of all, I want to say I'm very sorry, because I know that that's not a pleasant experience. There's no need for you to apologize. I apologize when I was a kid as well, and it's not a fun time. I think that something I've touched on before is that social norms change over time. Definitionally, they're decided by society, and society is ever-changing. We continue to normalize things that at one point or another were not considered a typical normative part of society. And I do think that we can all agree that what you experienced and what a lot of students experience is not a good thing, and I would consider that a part of bullying. But I think as society continues to change and move towards accepting people, the idea there of social correction will also continue to change with it. So again, I think it's more of a behavioral issue, like if you're behaving in ways that are very deviant, kind of indicative of difficulties becoming accustomed with social norms, then there's something that students can do there as far as saying that's not normal. And I think that's really the extent of where I'm going with it. With regard to social norms, you obviously said that social norms change over time. What do you think are the most important social norms that Gen Z should be inculcated with? Oh my goodness, the most important social norms that Gen Z should be inculcated with. Okay. I think a lot of it ties directly back into socialization, like learning how to have conversations and act kind of in a very rudimentary way, just how people are expected to behave. Some of the examples that I mentioned in my article are, and these are not at all to call any individuals out as these are the only examples, but two of the ideas that I put out there in my article were like warrior cat kids and wolf kids, because those are two of the very common examples that I hear in day-to-day life when people talk about the idea of bringing back bullying as just like a colloquialism, because these are groups that when you talk about them, you're talking about people who are not acting as humans are expected to act, that are trying to emulate like animalistic behaviors, who are, you know, when you're hissing at other kids in class, that's very much not socialized behavior. And if that behavior isn't corrected, you're going to have a very hard time adapting to the workforce, which very much does not care about how you individually feel. It cares about how you work. And when you go into things like networking, which is very prominent here, you need to be able to know that things like hissing at people is not a normative behavior. And I think any kind of typical social interaction like that is what's really important to be inculcated, especially since these are the kinds of trends that have been more prominent in our generation. So for the behaviors that you mentioned, do you think that what you're calling social correction is more, would like sort of expedite the process of the correction rather than just time? Because it's not something that we necessarily see for many years after I was at elementary school, but even if it does happen, do you think that like social correction through bullying in this way is necessary for it to change? Well, I think the main reason that we don't see it very often past elementary school is because by the time you reach fifth grade, most people are corrected in those kinds of behaviors. The examples that I've given are more prominent in younger children, but then as you continue to grow and mature, and the majority of your age group ages out of those kinds of behaviors and is able to look back and say, that's not normal for this group. This is against our norms. And they correct it. That's why we don't see it continuing on. But, and of course, I have to admit that this is anecdotal evidence. There's not a whole lot of very strong research into these kinds of trends, especially considering how current they are. So this is all anecdotal, but I think as we've moved to become like a lot more accepting of this, and we've started telling teachers and peers or students that they need to accept everything, we're seeing it progress more and more and more. And I have seen a lot of examples of this very recently of students as far up as eighth grade who think that they're cats and their teachers have been told, you know, you can't correct this behavior. You have to accept it. And so they're sitting on the floor of their classroom rolling around balls of yarn. And I've seen kids have breakdowns because there were, quote unquote, too many humans around. These are human children who haven't been corrected, haven't ever been told, you know, you're a human too. These are the norms that you are going to abide by to be accepted. And as a result, these beliefs and these behaviors persist. And then when people start having breakdowns because nobody has corrected it by that age, you're seeing real emotional damage. And that's only going to worsen. And if you are having breakdowns because there are too many people around simply because you haven't been told you're a human, these are your norms, you're not going to find success or it's going to be much harder for you to find success when you get out into the working world. Because the working world is significantly less accepting than a very controlled environment like school, where your administration, your school district can say this is no longer acceptable for you to correct. You have to be accepting of everything. The working world is not like that. And these are going to be issues that continue to pop up if people don't start to say, okay, we have to have some level of norms for people to abide by. To switch over to Thomas, in light of the fact that roughly 20% of children report being bullied sometime during their school years, how can young people learn to accept differences better? Yeah, I think that's a great question. I think accepting differences firstly comes from a place in which we find ourselves in environments where there are lots of differences. So that really, I feel like, goes in a very different direction for me, which is to talk about diversity and inclusion, which is maybe not the central topic of these two papers. But it's an idea which I feel very strongly about. I think that it's very important to have diverse communities, especially where children are being brought up, because that's what allows people to understand and engage with different cultures. So that would be the first thing that I would try to perpetuate or bring to young people. Secondly, I think in order to be accepting of differences, you have to be able to understand, firstly, the idea of individualism, which Emma's kind of touched upon a little bit, and to be able to accept that you also might be different from other people. So that means not trying to decide, here are social norms which have been prescribed. We must abide by these. But trying to develop behaviors perhaps in line with those around you, in line with maybe the culture which you come from, and developing those with yourself. And I think, really, it's something that's taught by engaging with people from different cultures, from people who have different backgrounds. And that's how you accept differences. What is one critique that both of you have for each other's pieces? I'm happy to jump in with one first. Go for it. So the one that I struggle with is really the premise of Emma's argument, which is that there are social norms which we can prescribe. And the problem I have with that is someone has to prescribe those social norms. Someone has to say, here is what's normal. And I feel like there inherently is a power dynamic that I'm personally not very comfortable with, where someone is instilled with the power to say, this is what's normal. And to kind of add to that, I feel like this is where bullying has its stronghold, is where different groups of people decide something is normal and something is not normal. And that might, firstly, that might not resonate with everyone. For example, often there are, I'm just drawing on my own experience, in communities there's often a minority of LGBTQ plus people. And so therefore, the majority of people might decide that that kind of thing is normal. That that kind of behavior, quote unquote, is not natural. So I'm kind of uncomfortable with the fact that someone is given the power to decide what social norms are. Yeah. Can I respond to that? Of course. Awesome. I think you draw upon a really interesting idea. But I have to say that I disagree with you about there being something inherently wrong with the idea of a power dynamic. Because the person who's prescribing these social norms is not a person, but society as a whole. And society is continuing to change all the time. And I think what you're drawing upon is really the role that activism plays. And over time, we've seen the way society has changed to accept different norms, different values. And we see that reflected in our laws and in how the Constitution has been amended and reinterpreted over time. This is something that's ever changing and ongoing. And I think that over time, you'll find that the same people who were once considered against the social norm now no longer are. And what you're moving towards is just activism and promoting individualism, promoting differences. And we've seen that all throughout history. I think no matter what, there's always going to be a power difference between an individual and society as a whole. But when enough individuals can stand up and say, this is bad. We need to change this. I'm a person, too, which is true. You are a person, too. Everybody is. When enough individuals stand up and say that, you see change. And those social norms are going to continue to change because they're not prescribed by one individual. They're prescribed by society. And so to respond to that briefly, I feel like the way that that argument sits with me is it says that 200 years ago, when being gay was wrong, it was wrong in that time. And we just accept that. And I feel like there's a problem with that because, at least from my perspective, I would say there is homophobia is always wrong throughout all of time, no matter what. And I feel like the idea that social norms can develop in such a way and be prescribed in absolute terms means that something that one of my beliefs is that that is OK can be not OK in one time and OK in another. And I don't really agree with that. And I think also, to add to that, there are some of the behaviors which were touched on in your article. I feel like, for some people, those of us who might identify as introverts and struggle to be around lots of humans, that's something which I would say is I would definitely accept that behavior. I feel like that's something that a lot of people struggle with. And it's just to kind of expect that to develop over time when maybe a minority of people struggle with that instead of trying to understand what they're going through and kind of support them in that. I find that difficult to understand. But I appreciate that. I appreciate it. Thank you. I also want to clarify, the person who broke down about being around too many humans, not an introvert, didn't believe they were a human. I think that's an important distinction. As an introvert myself, I get not wanting to be around people all the time. Yeah. And I mean, I see that. And I still believe that there's more value in trying to understand what that person was going through and trying to learn more about where these feelings come from than just deciding that they're wrong point blank. Well, I agree with you entirely that we should be focusing on that because there's clearly something going on there that needs to be addressed. But at the same time, there's also some value in saying, to some degree, you're a human. These are norms. I also think that there should have been some kind of parent intervention, teacher intervention, somebody there caring for that person and working with them through that because clearly that's an issue that needs some help. Yeah. Yeah. I think we can both agree on that. All right. I think if I had to choose one critique for Thomas's piece, it would probably be the idea that victims of bullying have been told that what they've experienced is character building. I don't necessarily think that's true. And I don't think that when you see something like what I've been writing about with social corrections, I don't really think that that is something people are told is character building. I think for most of time, that wouldn't have ever been deemed bullying. The root of what I'm writing about is that this wasn't considered bullying. It doesn't really fit into the legal definitions of bullying that we've always seen throughout time. It's been kind of a weakening of the definition. Colloquially, we've expanded it to include more things. The people who experience this kind of quote unquote bullying or social correction aren't really told that it's character building because it's not something that you're going to continue to push against. The entire idea is to socialize people and just bring them back to norms to help them catch up with the rest of their group. Usually, that isn't really considered character building. I wouldn't say that that's very accurate to this kind of thing that I was writing about. Yeah. Okay. I am to respond briefly to that. I think at least for me, bullying has always been associated with character building. I think the idea of curtailing the definition of bullying and trying to decide where there's a point where here's where bullying ends and here's where it's acceptable to perpetrate that sort of behavior to people, I think it's just difficult to try and find that line. I personally am more in favor of expanding that definition to include more of the negative behaviors which hurt people on the day to day, even if they're struggling with things which we might not be able to understand immediately. I feel like I always come from a place where support is better than trying to take ... I'm not saying that you're trying to take people down, but coming at people front on. Yeah. I completely agree with you also that support is always the better answer. I don't think that being mean is ever the right answer. I just think that sometimes we are quick to deem things as mean that aren't maliciously intended, but rather just aren't eloquently articulated. Can I jump in really quick? Yeah. From research that I've done, roughly 11.5% of kids start school without proper behavioral skills. With that information, do you think that maybe this problem can be solved by having mandatory classes for younger students in order to inculcate some of those social skills? Mandatory classes to inculcate social skills, to me, sounds a little bit extreme because socialization is an extremely normal process that we all go through, and just being around your peers is very important for that. Of course, a lot of students are going to start school without all of the social skills already there, because for the most part, people just aren't around other people in their own age group as much outside of school. School-age children get the majority of their socialization with their peers during school hours, so I think a lot of that is really taken care of during school, especially because your earliest years in school, while they, of course, are very formative to basic building block skills, you're learning the very beginnings of math and how to read and write, you're also learning all of the very beginnings of how to interact with other people in your own age group, and those are also skills that continue to build upon one another, and I think that's a big reason that we emphasize so much things like recess and getting to talk at lunch. That's why, like, silent lunch is a big punishment, is something that we all need. We need to socialize with other individuals, and that is something that comes with going to school, so I don't really think that classes are necessary for that, just because being in school in general gets you there. I think, like, I'd also like to touch on it. I think that that statistic comes from a place where there is a much larger societal problem, so, for example, I spend about four hours a week volunteering at an elementary school down the road, and the further you go into West Philadelphia, the more likely you are to see children who come from slightly difficult backgrounds, parents who maybe have been involved with crime, parents who, like, have to work 24 hours a day somehow to, like, earn income, which then doesn't pay for all of their food, so I think, like, some of the, quote, unquote, socializing that we're talking about, which might normally happen in families, can't happen because governments don't support families well enough, be that people who are struggling to find jobs. That could be people who are, like, coming out of being in prison and need help finding their feet, and so I think, like, we need to approach that question specifically from a much broader context of trying to support parents in bringing up children and making sure that there are, for example, much better paid teachers throughout all of the countries in the world who can provide and are incentivized to provide that extra care to students as well as supporting parents as much as we can. Would you say that the standard of what constitutes bullying should be different for younger children who might not be aware that their criticisms are indeed bullying? No, I definitely don't. I think, like, in the same way that Ella is saying that we should have these social norms and they should be given to children from a very young age, I conversely believe that the definition of bullying is constant. There's no change depending on how old you are and that we should immediately instill children with an understanding of what bullying is and why it's such a negative behavior. So I don't think that it changes depending on what age you are. Thomas, I think you hit on something really interesting there that I think we should have these social norms. And I think you make a really interesting case saying that social norms are bad, but we can both agree that social norms exist, right? Right, right, right, right. That's the basis of my argument. It's not simply that social norms should exist, but rather they do exist and they're extremely important and they've been identified as a key player in future success. The Harvard Business Review put out something a little while ago that I read about, and I referenced in my article, I think they said 80% of employers use social norms as an extremely important skill for success in the workplace. We can't deny that these social norms exist. And the argument that you're making against social norms, while I think it's an interesting one, I also think it's completely unachievable. Yeah, in today's society, social norms have always been a part of society, and I don't really think that there's a way to get rid of them unless we just blow up the world and start from scratch. I don't think that it's really a feasible idea to get rid of the social norms, and that's why I think it's really important that we continue to emphasize individuality and diversity, and we continue to emphasize activism and moving towards a more accepting society while also recognizing that social norms are important today. So I think that's a really interesting point. And one of the things that I like to pick up on there is that I think that social norms exist differently in different spaces and in different cultures. So I feel like one of the premises for your argument, which I think is works within the space that you're trying to articulate it, that we are all destined to go into business, and this is like, we're all destined to go into the workspace, and there are norms which are expected of us in the workspace. I feel like this comes from a place where, obviously, we're a pen. A lot of us, 95% of us, want to go on to work at Bain or BCG or whatever it happens to be. But that's definitely not everyone's dream. And I feel like these, quote, unquote, social deviants, I feel like the way that they behave is valuable, but maybe not in the space that we are ourselves trying to get into. So I feel like that's why I believe that understanding them and trying to find out where their skills and their positive attributes fit best is more important. Yeah, you're completely right. That's one of the reasons that I do agree with you that individualism is such an important part of our society. It's not everybody's going to go into consulting and finance. And I recognize that I did write my article in a very pen-centric kind of way. I referenced networking and the Harvard Business Review. But outside of what we are thinking of when we say, like, the workplace with, like, consulting and that kind of field, social norms are important in our everyday interactions with other individuals. They kind of just give us a baseline of how you treat other people. And that is something that expands so far beyond just, like, typical Wharton graduate business and consulting and finance and law and all of those kinds of fields. But if you're going to work in the restaurant industry, in any kind of customer service, if you're going to work in sales or you want to run a small business or marketing or literally anything under the sun, you're bound to some degree by social norms. And of course, it's important that we let people be individuals. I don't think that everybody needs to be exactly the same. We should absolutely be promoting people going into fields where their individual characteristics and interests are going to be best suited, where they're able to shine. But we also still need to be able to interact with other people because we live in a society. I agree. And I would say that, like, just to, like, tackle to that, that, like, some people maybe when their, like, style of interaction doesn't work with how we interact with other people doesn't necessarily mean that they can't interact well with other humans or other people who, like, share the same identity that they do. And so, like, I feel the social correction that is, like, being advertised, which I think comes from, like, I think you're coming at it from, like, definitely a place of well-meaning, is something that, like, if you're, if you have behaviors which are inappropriate for working in a restaurant, then you won't be hired by the restaurant manager. And so I feel like that's their decision to deal with that when it gets to that stage and not the peers' responsibility to decide which social norms should be corrected and at which point for people who are in that class, for example. But on the alternative side of that, do you think that the peers have a responsibility to always accept behaviors no matter how deviant they might be from the norms? Do you think peers should always, no matter what, accept behaviors that are off-putting to them or so far against the grain that they don't strike them as befitting to be friends? Like, going back to just the ideas that I put forth in my article of, like, if you're howling, do you think that peers have a responsibility to be friends with the student that's howling on the playground? Yeah, I mean, I definitely don't think that anyone has to be friends with anyone else. That is never something that I would advertise. I think, like, we choose our own friends. I do think that behavior which, like, someone might personally decide doesn't fit, like, their values, their social norms, is something that they should try to accept in this phase and let, if it's a classroom, the teacher deal with in the way that they see fit, the way that they've been trained to deal with that instead of fixing it themselves and trying to take it upon them to do that. And, like I said, I think, like, no one's forcing you to be friends with the person that you don't share the same ideas with, but I definitely think that accepting them in that phase as who they are is important. Let me echo something that Emma said and just ask you a little bit differently. Do you feel if someone, let's say, age five is hissing and another five-year-old goes up to them and criticizes them for that, would that constitute bullying? I think it would constitute bullying if it was repeated and targeted. So that's how I define the term. I think if this person is hissing at someone in a malicious way, then that behavior itself could also constitute some form of bullying or harassment. I also feel like if you're in a classroom, it's not your responsibility to deal with that. You go to the authority figure and the authority figure will deal with it in the way that they've been trained to do so. Got it. And a question for both of you. What do you think is the role of the authority figure, of the teacher, to police what constitutes bullying? I definitely am not, like, an expert in education policy, but I have no doubt that teachers receive at least some form of training in how to deal with such situations, and so I think their responsibility really aligns with what training they've received and the remit that they've been given by their culture or their managing teacher or head teacher. I think that students are, in some senses, a more valuable manner of immediate social correction because, like I said, they're more engaged with one another for longer periods of time in a more one-on-one social setting than teachers, and because they're of the same age group, so they're more able to very distinctly recognize what is or is not part of kind of the norms and standards for that age group. I think that teachers can play a really important role, especially whenever behaviors are, like, very serious, repeated or indicative of some kind of emotional distress or maybe a difficulty at home. I think that teachers absolutely have a role to play there in addressing those issues, but I don't think that teachers should be the primary method of that because education policy does change a lot, and something that I touched on before is that a lot of teachers now are being told, you have to accept this behavior. You cannot correct this, and that's something that's very unique and individual to different states, to different counties, to different schools even. I think there's so much difference that in a lot of ways students are more capable of recognizing and appropriately addressing those, and ideally that would be in a kind manner. Got it. Thank you. Shifting from critiques that you guys both have for each other's pieces, what's something that you appreciate about each other's work? Yeah, I can definitely dive into that. I really appreciate the fact that Emma has come at this from, like, definitely there's a place of kindness, so I think that you clearly value finding yourself in a successful society, and you definitely value being supported by your peers, and I think that though I disagree with your take, you're coming at this from the perspective that people should all be able to support each other and help each other reach success, so I appreciate that value even if I don't agree with the method that you're doing that in. Thank you. Very similarly, I really appreciate the emphasis that Thomas puts on kindness and acceptance. I think that's very important, and I love the emphasis that you have on it there, that it's not simply just, like, all bullying is bad, like, very baseline argument, but I really appreciate how much empathy you come at it with. I think it's very important that everybody encourage kindness and respect above all else, and I completely agree with you in that kindness should be the way that everything is handled ideally, and I agree that there should never be any malicious intent behind social correction. Thank you. Got it. Thank you, guys. Thank you for coming on the podcast. Thank you for having us. Thank you for tuning in to Ben's Bifocals. I am your host, Nicholas Skola. Catch us weekly on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or wherever you like to get your podcasts. And remember, if you disagree with us, join us.
There are no comments yet.
Be the first! Share your thoughts.
