Anti-Bullying Programs Don’t Work, Teach Bullies to Bully Better

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


BULLYING_logo

Last year, the moral panic of the moment was bullying. Bullying was destroying America. Every school was expected to introduce anti-bullying programs… which worked about as well as expected.

For the bullies.

University of Texas at Arlington criminologist Seokjin Jeong analyzed data collected from 7,000 students from all 50 states.

He thought the results would be predictable and would show that anti-bullying programs curb bullying. Instead — he found the opposite.

Jeong said it was, “A very disappointing and a very surprising thing. Our anti-bullying programs, either intervention or prevention does not work.”

Of course they don’t work. Why would they work? Bullying is part of a social dynamic between children and teenagers. The only way to push back against it would be to promote character and values.

Anti-bullying programs just pile on the usual politically correct nonsense and throw in some zero tolerance for good measure. Let’s look at New York State’s model for anti-bullying.

Educators need to work diligently to create school environments that value and teach respect for all. The most positive school climates are culturally sensitive and model positive behavioral interactions that clearly show that no tolerance exists for certain types of behaviors, including, but not limited to, bullying.

How can culturally sensitive intolerance not work? The obvious thing is that this is just Sensitivity Training for the most insensitive group around.

The study concluded that students at schools with anti-bullying programs might actually be more likely to become a victim of bullying. It also found that students at schools with no bullying programs were less likely to become victims.

The results were stunning for Jeong. “Usually people expect an anti-bullying program to have some impact — some positive impact.”

The student videos used in many campaigns show examples of bullying and how to intervene. But Jeong says they may actually teach students different bullying techniques — and even educate about new ways to bully through social media and texting.

Jeong said students with ill intentions “…are able to learn, there are new techniques [and gain] new skills.”

This is entirely surprising to someone who was born yesterday. A lot of the programming meant to scare students away from driving dangerously, smoking and any other range of ‘wrong’ behaviors had the same effect of telling students what they might enjoy doing.

This is behavior control. It doesn’t come with a value system. It doesn’t teach character. And that means it will work about as well as any political code does.

Badly.

Anti-bullying programs though were not about fighting bullying. They were about…

1. Promoting gay rights

2. Promoting political correctness

And they accomplished that mission. Fighting actual bullying was never part of the equation.

  • cacslewisfan

    Of course it didn’t work! How could people who actually like bullies, and are themselves bullies do anything BUT promote bullying? They are violently opposed to objective standards of right and wrong. “Evil” is an archaic term from the Dark Ages to describe something that really doesn’t exist, like “alchemy.” Besides, when people tell you they want to kill you, and you are afraid of them, you must understand that you are being intolerant, racist, and really, you made them do it.

    • Moa

      The thing is, bully works for the individual – it gets them what they want: power, results and a degree of fear/respect. It just doesn’t work for society overall.

      The way to defeat a bully is to be a bigger bully. They must fear the consequences of their actions from a greater power (eg. those in authority). The problem with bullies progressing to crime is that they don’t fear the consequences, since they’ve never been truly stopped in their tracks before (excuses have been made for them by the ‘do-gooders’ that actually do harm to society rather than good).

    • A Z

      There was an article in discover 3 years ago on how the systematic and disciplined approach of alchemy lead to chemistry.

      Many of the 1st chemists were also alchemists.

      “Isaac Newton, World’s Most Famous Alchemist”

      http://discovermagazine.com/2010/jul-aug/05-isaac-newton-worlds-most-famous-alchemist#.UlmYTUCXwrY

      Discover magazine
      FROM THE JULY-AUGUST 2010 ISSUE
      By Jane Bosveld|Tuesday, December 28, 2010

      • cacslewisfan

        Yes Chemistry links to alchemy, but we don’t call Chemistry “alchemy” because alchemy included magic, spirit, religion, and superstition. I think many Lefty “intellectuals” treat the term “evil” the same way a Chemist views the term “alchemy.” A long past way of thinking, holding a kernel of truth, but primitive, tainted by superstition, and “unscientific”

        • A Z

          Alchemists always tried to replicate their experiments, they were methodical.

          Also after beating their head against the wall they dropped the superstition and kept the rest.

          The stuff in the bible still works. I do not when the 10 commandments for example went out of style.

          • cacslewisfan

            I agree.

    • A Z

      Chemistry was built on the foundation of alchemy.

      Likewise any long lasting morale system will be built on the best practices of previous ages or it will not last.

      To exclude it from the start is to never find a good moral system. but this the left has done.

  • Cathy Richardson

    This is so true, it’s sensitivity training to normalize homosexuality and condemn those who believe otherwise. I’ve recently felt bullied at work by a gay advocate superior. This superior knows full well that I am a Christian and a conservative activist but blasted me with gay information that I had no alternative but to remain silent and smile, or lose my job or at least lose a cohesive workplace environment. And, now, this Thursday, we all are encouraged to wear purple. If you forget, they will have purple wrist bands you can wear. It’s not mandatory . . . yet, but it is a way to see who’s on board or who’s not and to force people to promote gay rights and political correctness. They want to lead the sheep because they want to control the people and they know better after all. Leftists . . . a bunch of bullies with contradictory intelligence they can’t see. I won’t be wearing purple, that’s for sure! Oh, and by the way, I don’t hate gays or this superior. I just wish they would honor my first amendment rights like I’m being forced to honor theirs.

    • Moa

      Yep, they don’t actually believe in Free Speech.

      I’m an atheist and I agree with your stance. You have the right to practice what I see as superstition. We can debate about it, but in the end you must be able to practice what you see as the truth.

      I also believe gays should not be discriminated against – but now they are discriminating against anyone who doesn’t promote their agenda. That’s just wrong.

      Good luck Cathy.

    • Jim Twotoes

      Oh, you have my sympathy. I think the politicization of the workplace in the manner you describe is insidious and sinister. Just as there should be no overlap between church and state, so too there should be no room for political campaigns in a person’s place of work. There is so much wrong with this, yet it is so utterly typical of the leftists.

    • laura

      the gay fashion will pass. everything that goes around comes around. then the masses will be on to the next big thing, what ever that is. believe me it will be so perverse, that you will want the good old days of purple to return. stay tune, watch oprah.

      • ziggy zoggy

        Don’t be so sure. Female supremacism and Affirmative Action are stronger than ever. Once a phony victim class is created, it tends to stay.

        • laura

          then the PR dies down. the next thing pops up. before you know it, there will be dozens of new weird PC fashions. people have nothing better to do.

  • A Z

    With a name like Seokjin JeongI suspect he is Koran or possibly Chinese.

    I also bet he is a little bit slow in the head.

    To with he learned the scientific tools of statistics and psychology or sociology. He then applied said tools to a problem and scrupulously worked out the results QUANTITATIVELY.

    All for naught.

    If he would have been in sync with his white liberal peers, he would have known that this was not the result they wanted and that he could have spared himself the brainsweat of all those calculations. He could have fudged them instead, wrote the desired conclusion to the study and been lionized by his peers.

    This is why we should put caps in college admission on Asians and restrict immigration from countries like South Korea. Too many competent and honest people will upset the liberal apple cart.

  • A Z

    They have not found a gay gene yet. So I’ll just go out on a limb and say bullying causes people to be gay. It is not a necessary or sufficient factor, but it is a cause. All bullied people do not become gay and all gay people are not gay because they were bullied. But it is one of the several contributing factors.

    • ziggy zoggy

      Heteros switch teams because they’re bullied? Negro, please.

      • A Z

        “Negro, please.”

        What does that mean?

        Economists have already statistically proven that “on the margins” homosexual act increase when the cost of women go up. Which means we are talking about more than the imprisoned population.

        I was careful in my words. I said it was one cause not the sole cause or even the biggest cause.

        The study is at Marginalrevolutions.com

  • JemStone

    There are so many different things wrong with this stuff that it is hard to know where to start. I will settle for a single model, the medical one.

    Start with the belief that people are basically nice. (At best a half truth.) That makes any not nice behavior an illness displayed by somebody who needs to be cured. So, instead of punishing, they attempt to cure. Done with true wishful thinking it is ineffectual. But not too infrequently the cure is a covert punishment, the model a hypocrisy. Unfortunately this method is seldom as effective as a straightforward, admitted, punishment.

    Another common model is to simply not know or not apply the simple idea that people respond to rewards and punishments. Misbehavior is then seen as arising out of false doctrine or faulty training. The misbehavior is reduced to being such a robotic ottoman that nobody can imagine that they might be responding to rewards or punishments that arise out of circumstance.

    And on and on. Anything but admit to the old age method of punishment of misdeeds. Oh no, we are not punishing, we are curing or helping or something. We are just such nice people.

    Yeah, sure.

  • Drakken

    These idiots in charge of the multicultural diversity sensitivity garbage forgot the rules of the play ground, to stop a bully, it takes a fist to the face to stop it. No wonder why males are being pussified to the point that being a man’s man is considered a bad thing,but nature abhors a vacuum and the strong will surface in the face of aggression as nature has always intended.

    • ziggy zoggy

      Win or lose, fighting back usually earns a bully’s respect, but not always. Not all bullies are pu$$ies. Of course, with these P.C. reeducation programs disguised as anti-bullying programs, even pu$$ies will learn to be bullies. While the other kids are celebrating diversity and singing show tunes, the devious ones will learn how easy it is to bully kids who have been sensitivity trained.

  • motherofbeaver

    When I was in public school, many moons ago, there was an anti-bullying program. It was called getting “the slugs”. The offender went to the Principal’s office where he was duly punished by getting a couple of wacks on his upturned palms. This was recorded in a special ledger to which a leather strap was attached. If this was not enough to stop the behaviour then he, (I never heard of a girl getting the strap) was thrown out of school. It must have worked because I recall very few instances of bullying. And as far as I know there were no complaints from parents.

  • Anton

    I love this line in the article:

    Of course they don’t work. Why would they work? Bullying is part of a
    social dynamic between children and teenagers. The only way to push back
    against it would be to promote character and values.

    When someone who obviously does not have a clue, decides to write articles about a subject they define in such narrow terms, they are setting up a straw man. The way conservatives always talk about “The Bully”, you’d think they were bullied as a kid. But the truth is, THEY were the bully. They talk about the bully in the middle east, in asia, on and on and on. “We know how to deal with a bully” they proudly proclaim. Well of course they do, who better knows how a bully thinks, what he fears, and what actions he will respond to, THAN A BULLY?

    So let’s take the conservative approach to controlling Bullys in the world scene and apply it to the playground. Oh no they pine, it doesnt work!

    • ziggy zoggy

      A leftist who disdains character and values. A leftist who thinks America is a bully and islamopithecines have legitimate grievances against the West. Typical. Why teach kids to protect the weak when you can teach them to be weaklings?

  • ziggy zoggy

    Hilarious. “Educators” use bullying tactics to stop kids from bullying,but end up creating bullies instead.

    Just when you thought leftism couldn’t be any more of a failure.

  • Hard Little Machine

    Just grab one of them, have a school assembly and lop off the little reprobate’s head with a sword.

  • Roadmaster

    The same thing happened over 20-30 years ago when the U. S. Army embarked on a crusade against sexual harassment in the ranks. What they ended up with was MORE, instead of less. The perps (almost always a superior) escalated their threat to destroy careers and reputations, causing the victims keep their mouths shut, try to change duty assignments or baring that simply get out of the service. I saw it happen again and again, even reporting incidences myself but the higher ups generally protect each other. I lost some very good female soldiers because they couldn’t take the harassment.

    I been retired for 15 years, so I can’t say what the situation is today, but human nature is what it is – bullies bully, and sexual predators prey. It’s all about power. Being small for my age most of my childhood, more than a few thought I’d be an easy mark but a good shot to the snot locker always worked for me. Very few people tried to pick on me again – they might have been able to “whip” me, but at a high price.

  • LawReader

    A bit on the late side – but this article wound up linked via a series of commentaries stemming from this last week’s ‘Duck Dynasty’ bro-hah, and the supposed ‘anti-gay’ statements made by the show’s patriarch…

    This brought out (predictably) the attack dogs from GLAAD – parroting their nonsensical mantras – including of course the ‘Gay is Normal and Healthy!’ sales pitch. This article touching on ‘school bullying’ leaves a huge door open to note the following ‘not normal and not healthy’ benefits of gay advocacy…

    For the last dozen years or more – the gay faction – in it’s incarnation as ‘GLSEN’ (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) has *saturated* the public school systems to the point it’s now a requirement for public schools to parrot the ‘Gay is Normal and Healthy!’ sales pitch – ostensibly in the name of ‘fighting bullying’. The results of this *forced indoctrination*???

    The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) have noted for several years now – the ONLY demographic in the US where HIV is STILL INCREASING – is boys in the 12 to 22 year age group – or the exact target of this school indoctrination (or recruitment) propaganda.

    Why this information isn’t on the front of every newspaper in the nation is rather an interesting question – as the *primary* argument gays field continuously regarding speech they don’t like – is that it ‘presents a danger to gays’.

    It would appear NOBODY presents a greater danger to ‘gays’ – than it’s advocacy groups.

    Nobody cares what two adults do in private – but quit marketing this garbage TO CHILDREN.