Since you pinged me to your post, I’ll reply but I have to tell you that the race baiting comment is a huge turn-off.
“Isn’t it bad enough, without boys and men making it even more difficult for each other by bullying each other?”
Define “bullying” because what I see is a word that has been used to define a slew of behavior that isn’t even remotely close to what the original definition of the word meant. Same with a few other words that are now so broadly defined as to mean anything the accusing person wants the word to mean.
“You mean the white maleness of the first half of the last century that lynched others for the crime of dark maleness or stuffed people into the oven for not having the correct type of white maleness? If that’s been lost, then good riddance.”
Race baiting.
” And I know that all white men are not like this, and there are plenty of examples from other groups. The point is if boys are allowed to bully each other when they’re young, where are they going to draw the line when they get older? It’s not stopping it, but failing to stop it, that has resulted in the widespread disfunction of many of today’s boys and young men”
I’m thrilled you know that all white men are not like this. Yay for you. RME
Failing to stop “bullying” (in quotes because I’m not sure what definition we’re using) is what’s caused the widespread dysfunction in many of today’s boys and young men? And here I thought it was the lack of parenting, intrusive liberal policies that have been placed in our schools, the entertainment industry’s successful campaign to slant public opinion to their bias with the help of the MSM and our government.
“To me bullying is always bad and in many cases acts committed during bullying are crimes.”
Why am I not surprised by this statement? Have you read the anti-bullying law that’s now being enforced in our schools? And those acts are criminal. Yay, our kids are now criminals if they violate this new law and even the kids who defend themselves from these so called bullies are criminals.
“I have no problem with teaching boys to defend themselves, but teaching boys not to bully each other is NOT in conflict with teaching them self defense and will NOT stop them from growing up to be real men.”
See, this is where you are wrong again. The whole point of the “anti-bullying” campaign and the new anti-bullying law is to prevent any kind of self defense (zero tolerance and all). So, there is a conflict. Only “minorities” are excluded from hate crime or criminal charges for defending themselves. White males aren’t allowed to defend themselves.
“Isn’t that another way of saying it’s a bad thing that men are so physical.”
No, I think it’s another way of saying females are more vicious and there would be more blood if they were more physical. Sorta like what wardaddy said.
“Did you and Squantos commit violent crimes against other kids, such as assault?”
I can’t answer that question since I’m not either of them. But, I think you have to define “assault” because it’s definition is another one that has expanded. It now includes defending oneself.
“How is trying to stop boys from bullying each other the cause of more serious problems?”
Check out the anti-bullying law. I think you may find the answer to your question.
I pinged you because you were pinged on the post I was replying to, so I figured you were interested in this topic. Judging from your response, it appears that was correct.
I’ll reply but I have to tell you that the race baiting comment is a huge turn-off.
Since you quoted such comments of mine as "And I know that all white men are not like this, and there are plenty of examples from other groups" and "The point is if boys are allowed to bully each other when they’re young, where are they going to draw the line when they get older?", it should have been obvious to you that I wasn't race baiting, but trying to set up a point, that being if we allow boys to bully each other, where will they draw the line?
Define “bullying” because what I see is a word that has been used to define a slew of behavior that isn’t even remotely close to what the original definition of the word meant.
I'll define bullying as committing a violent crime against someone else, or using the threat of such to intimidate another.
I'll also define it as doing something to someone else that you know they don't want you to do, and that you wouldn't want someone to do to you.
Failing to stop “bullying” (in quotes because I’m not sure what definition we’re using)
I just described it for you.
And here I thought it was the lack of parenting, intrusive liberal policies that have been placed in our schools, the entertainment industry’s successful campaign to slant public opinion to their bias with the help of the MSM and our government.
This has a lot to do with why bullying occurs.
Why am I not surprised by this statement? Have you read the anti-bullying law that’s now being enforced in our schools? And those acts are criminal. Yay, our kids are now criminals if they violate this new law and even the kids who defend themselves from these so called bullies are criminals.
It would help if you posted reference to the law, but I've seen enough of this liberal nonsense to accept your comments at face value. No doubt that if one child pretends to arrest another child while playing cops and robbers, that would count as bullying.
And self defense is a right, not a crime. If new anti-bullying laws list that as bullying, then I agree with you on this point.
See, this is where you are wrong again. The whole point of the “anti-bullying” campaign and the new anti-bullying law is to prevent any kind of self defense (zero tolerance and all).
Assuming the law as you describe it was even passed, do you need this law revoked to start telling your sons that it's wrong to attack other boys for no reason other than to beat them up?
So, there is a conflict. Only “minorities” are excluded from hate crime or criminal charges for defending themselves. White males aren’t allowed to defend themselves.
Correction, white males (with few exceptions) DON'T unite and defend themselves against these stupid laws and biased interpretations in the form of class action lawsuits, which is why it keeps happening.
BTW, in case you haven't noticed, it's white males who are passing a lot of these laws.
No, I think it’s another way of saying females are more vicious and there would be more blood if they were more physical. Sorta like what wardaddy said.
Talk about baiting.
I can’t answer that question since I’m not either of them. But, I think you have to define “assault” because it’s definition is another one that has expanded. It now includes defending oneself.
Reference, please.
(My original) How is trying to stop boys from bullying each other the cause of more serious problems?
Check out the anti-bullying law. I think you may find the answer to your question.
Reference, please. And even if this law has been passed and is as bad as you say it is, how is teaching boys not to attack each other or commit other REAL acts of bullying going to lead to more serious problems? Can you answer that without hiding behind some liberal law that both of us would likely disagree with anyway?