Mark Vander Ley urges kids to discern the opinions and beliefs of others. Following them blindly can lead to bullying.
—-
I took my son to the public pool last week. We had a wonderful time and learned a lesson to last a lifetime. He was standing in line at the diving board as I was watching from a few feet away. I noticed that he was talking with a slightly older boy and it appeared the conversation was becoming quite animated. I resisted my desire to intervene and waited to see what would happen. After a few more moments my son turned to me and said, “dad he says that I cannot wear a swim shirt on the diving board.” In uncharacteristic fashion I quickly shot back my response, “it doesn’t matter what he says, it matters what the lifeguard says!” Just at that moment a lifeguard walked by and I boldly asked, “Is it ok if he wears a swim shirt on the diving board?” The lifeguard said, “yes!” and walked on without giving it a second thought. The boys accepted the lifeguard’s answer and continued practicing their cannon balls.
As I reflected on this very brief interaction I began to wonder what it was about this lifeguard (a teenager) that caused the boys to move on so quickly from their disagreement. Was it his confidence or age? Maybe it was his gender or personality? I don’t think so! I think they accepted his answer because he was viewed as an expert on this topic. He knows this pool, he is there everyday, he is in charge of safety, and it is his responsibility to enforce the posted rules.
The boys knew that this person’s opinion was important. It did not matter what anyone else had to say on the subject. This guy in the red swim trunks and way too dark tan was the final authority.
♦◊♦
I am afraid that the art of discerning whose opinion matters has been stripped away from our school age children. I wonder if in our rush to teach tolerance and acceptance we have inadvertently made our children targets for loud-mouthed bullies?
The Cambridge online dictionary defines tolerance as “willingness to accept behavior and beliefs that are different from your own, even if you disagree with or disapprove of them.” It also lists acceptance as a synonym for tolerance.
Please do not get me wrong, I strongly believe in the inherent value of all people. Each person is wonderfully valuable and deserves to be treated with the utmost respect. I do suggest however that not all opinions or beliefs are of equal value. The opinion of the young boy trying to tell my son what he could and could not wear was of very little value. He was wrong, misguided, and unreliable. This is not to say that the boy himself was of little value just his opinion.
I wonder if in our rush to teach tolerance and acceptance we have inadvertently made our children targets for loud-mouthed bullies?
|
What does this have to do with bullying? Well in my experience as a school counselor and therapist I find that those children that are most susceptible to verbal and emotional bullying are those who accept all opinions equally. Somehow they have learned to accept all opinions and beliefs as truth no matter the source. Unfortunately, many times this includes all opinions and beliefs that others have about them. So, It appears that they accept the opinion of the kid who calls them stupid, weak, or ugly as equally valid to the adult who refers to them as kind, intelligent, or strong. This in my opinion is a horrible mistake and we as parents make an even bigger mistake when we teach our kids that all opinions and beliefs are to be equally accepted.
Simply, it is not true. My opinion regarding politics for instance is of significantly less value than that of the President of the United States. It does not mean that I cannot express my opinion loudly and vehemently, but loud and passionate does not make true and accurate. In the same way a fellow classmates opinion about my child’s level of strength, intelligence, or athletic ability is of much less value than my child’s opinions about himself.
I am regularly asked to referee disagreements about the value of playground opinions. I have come up with a standard response that I find pretty effective. When Jimmy runs up to me and says, “Mr. Vander Ley Billy called me a douche bag!” (or some other derogatory name) Jimmy expects that I will get upset with Billy. He anticipates consequences and passionate pleas for Billy to be kind and friendly. I take Jimmy off guard however, when I ask a simple and pointed question. “Are you a douche bag Jimmy?” “Uh, no” Is the usual response. “Good, I didn’t think you were, it doesn’t matter what Billy says.” Off they run to complete their game of girls chase boys (if it hasn’t been banned at their school)
Rather than teaching our children to value all opinions and beliefs equally let’s teach them to discern opinions and beliefs based on sources. Who are the experts in the field? Who has put in the time to know this topic? Who is safe and who is reliable? If we teach our children to be discerning about truth I think they will come to realize that they are the experts in the field of me. Their parents and trusted teachers hold reliable information about who they are and what they are good at. The verbally aggressive playground bully does not know them and is not a trusted source of information. More importantly this playground bully’s opinion does not create truth regarding their person. The truth about a child is based in their inherent personal value. They can sense this value from loving adults who are passionately engaged in the wonder of becoming an expert in the field of them. Go now you passionate parents and uncover the infinite mystery that is your child!
More from Mark Vander Ley:
I Hope My Sons Don’t Go To High School
Daddy Will You Hold Me: Containing Feelings
Holding: The Day My Son Thought He Had Died
—photo by Au Kirk/Flickr
“To disagree is to be intolerant.” I disagree. I disagree that it is, and I disagree that our society (by and large) perceives it as such. “My problem is with the more recent meaning of tolerance which is to agree with the others opinion.” Again, I would disagree here. The ‘recent meaning’ is a fallacy. No one’s entitled to unconditional approbation of their ideas, opinions, ideology, or religion (whether mislabeled as ‘tolerance’ or ‘intolerance’ or not is beside the point). Tolerance also means at fair, objective, with an undogmatic viewpoint, and interest & concern for ideas, opinions & practices foreign… Read more »
Interesting viewpoint Mark, “My opinion regarding politics for instance is of significantly less value than that of the President of the United States. It does not mean that I cannot express my opinion loudly and vehemently, but loud and passionate does not make true and accurate.” I would be inclined to point out that that’s a subjective opinion, based on subjective criteria, subjective presumptions, and subjective observations. Not to get too existentialist here, but even the things we know (or assume) to be ‘objectively’ true, accurate, & sound, are founded (on some degree) of subjectivity, relativity, fallibility and convention. Take the example… Read more »
Forcing blind tolerance definitely leads to more bullying. The tolerance being advocated today hasn’t been the tolerance that is listed in the definition you listed, instead it’s a blind tolerance that you have to accept and agree with everything on one point of view and if you happen to disagree, even if you can accept, you’re bullied. Everyone’s seen dating sites where someone says they only want to date someone of a specific race. Sure, there could be some that have a racist reason, but the majority simply have a preference. Is that any different than those that only date… Read more »
John, this is one of my big concerns. There seems to be no room for disagreement in our society and I am fearful we are passing this on to our children. There is intense pressure to join with the prevailing opinion on many issues. To disagree is to be intolerant. An older meaning of tolerance implies that in order to exercise tolerance there must be some sort of disagreement. We tolerate that which we disagree with by allowing it to be verbalized or held and engaging in rational debate. My problem is with the more recent meaning of tolerance which… Read more »
“I do suggest however that not all opinions or beliefs are of equal value.” Mark, I can’t really say I disagree there; but I would be hard pressed to find any examples or advocates of the opposite view, as you have worded it. There’s a nuance that’s missing there. Value to whom? My beliefs are as valuable to me, and by me, as yours are to you- they might even be the same. But that still does not make them of equal value- because the ‘value’ is derived from the individual; it’s internal, not external. There’s a difference between saying &… Read more »
“If someone disagrees with the lifestyle of homosexuals or muslims or some other issue that is the hot topic of the day, yet is accepting and of them as people…”
Not to be a devil’s advocate here, but how do you divorce the lifestyle from the life?
That’s a good question and one that many fail to understand. I can be friends with people I disagree with. Just because I disagree with one aspect of their life doesn’t mean I dislike them. It’s not an all-inclusive decision. If we all were only friends with people that we 100% agreed on everything about, we’d have very few friends. Even if the disagreeable aspect of their life is what they define themselves by, it doesn’t have to define our friendship. I can enjoy watching John Cusack movies, even though I disagree with his politics. I can and have been… Read more »
You can also be intolerant without being rude or a jerk. For instance: there is no one “homosexual lifestyle” for you to disagree with, and for you to dismiss the experience of sexual minorities in that way is indeed intolerant.
How is disagreeing with something dismissing it? As for lifestyle, I’m not breaking it down into types. If you’re heterosexual, you live a heterosexual lifestyle. I use lifestyle in the most general sense. I know there are different types within that. That wasn’t my argument. And no, I’m not intolerant. I accept it. I don’t try to minimize people or tell them they’re wrong. So where is my disagreement being rude or being a jerk? But do you now understand how by you calling my view intolerant, you now have a right (in your eyes) to refer to me as… Read more »
In fact, I didn’t say you were rude or a jerk. I said you don’t have to be to be inolerant. Look again. What that means is that “I have gay friends” is meaningless. Sexual orientation is not a “lifestyle.” It’s a crucial component of one’s identity. In saying you disagree with “the homosexual lifestyle,” you’re actually saying people shouldn’t accept themselves for who they are. The backpedaling about a “heterosexual lifestyle” just makes it all the more inane. But nice attempt to deflect my actual point by complaining about name-calling. Disagreement may not be inherently derogatory, but disagreeing with… Read more »
I wasn’t complaining, and apologize if you thought that I was. You just presented the opportunity to show an example of the problems. And I wasn’t backpedaling. I was again using it as an example. Swap heterosexual and homosexual and it’s the same thing. I didn’t focus in on one thing in my initial example for a reason and I tried to show a wide focus again. And if I disagree, I’m not trying to make them change. So where you get me saying people shouldn’t accept themselves is beyond me. Everyone should accept themselves. It’s a shame so many… Read more »
“You just presented the opportunity to show an example of the problems.” You mean except for the part where you had to twist my words to the opposite of what I actually said? “I’m not going to nitpick what you view the word lifestyle means to you vs what it means to you.” Seems you don’t know what it means at all. Race is not a lifestyle. Gender is not a lifestyle. Hair color is not a lifestyle. Sexual orientation is not a lifestyle. “And I will wholeheartedly disagree that I can’t disagree with a part of someone without being… Read more »
You’re 100% correct in my misreading what you wrote. For that I apologize. I read tolerant instead of intolerant, so that was completely my mistake. I needed a nap and a reread 🙂 I know exactly what lifestyle means. And of course race, gender and hair color isn’t a lifestyle, because they are self evident. I don’t introduce myself “I’m John, I’m white.” And I wouldn’t introduce myself “I’m John, I’m straight” either. It’s a private piece of their identity. I’m also not saying that they should keep it secret either. They have every right to be proud of who… Read more »
Is it tolerant, intolerant or ambivalent? Does ‘accepting’ mean accepting all on one’s own terms, or accepting on another’s? Both are highly subjective. Is tolerance total unconditional acceptance, defined externally? Is it in the eye of the beholder, the beheld, or both, or neither? Sorry – more questions than answers there.
No, good questions and I think that’s why it’s being tossed around in so many ways. It’s being used (at least in the media) in whichever way benefits them most, while giving them the leeway to get away with as much as they can in retort. How you described it above is how it should be, but definitely not the way it’s being used unfortunately.
I agree with Megan that the causal relationship you’re suggesting doesn’t seem plausible. Instead, consider that both bullies and their victims share similar psychological profiles, and are usually abused at home. They’ve learned that their parents, who others tell them should be authorities, are abusive and teach them that they’re no good. Rather than giving similar weight to your assessment of the young man as intelligent or strong, his behavior suggests that he believes what the bully tells him because it synchs up with what else he’s been told by supposed authorities. There is a definitive answer to whether you… Read more »
Justin, thanks for reading and crafting a very thoughtful comment. I agree with your profile of both parties. I work primarily with students who have been abused or neglected and definitely see students as you have described. They have internal working models of themselves as bad, weak, or undesirable. My hope is to change this internal working model to I am good, I am strong, and I am desirable. I believe this inner strength will make them less of a target and is the thing that empowers them to ultimately discern the difference between valid and invalid opinions. I agree… Read more »
For tolerance to lead to more bullying implies that tolerant kids are more likely to bully others, not more likely to take bullying to heart. I don’t believe that’s the case.
You make a good point that we need to teach kids to be discerning as well as tolerant, but tolerance itself is not the problem here.
Megan,
thanks for reading and commenting. I am not suggesting that tolerant kids are the ones doing the bullying. I think that the most tolerant kids are the ones most targeted by bully’s thus increasing the amount of bullying. In my opinion it is their acceptance of all opinions as equal that can make them more of a target. The ability to discern the important voices from the unimportant ones as well as the ability to respond effectively can help to make them less of a target. would you agree with this assertion?
Yes, I get all that. But your title asked if tolerance leads to more bullying. “More” means “increased.” I think that’s obviously not the case.
Teaching kids to discern authority is an entriely different issue.
Megan,
Please know that I am not trying to be argumentative. Part of my thinking however is that the current popular definition of tolerance requires kids (and adults) to view everyone as an authority on everything. If we verbalize a view that calls someone’s opinion wrong or less valuable we are labeled as intolerant.
I get that, but you’re not hearing me. Even if we do teach kids to be more discriminating in granting authority, that won’t lead to less bullying. It won’t because it only affects the recipient of the bullying. Tolerance, otoh, will lessen bullying by teaching people not to bully in the first place.
Also, I entirely reject your understanding of tolerance. To be tolerant is not to be gullible. If someone seriously claims the earth is flat, it is not intolerant to laugh them off.
Megan,
I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on whether tolerance can cause more bullying. I did pose the question so I appreciate your earnest responses and discussion.
I did want to clarify that I also reject what seems to be the prevailing view of tolerance as accepting all opinions as true. I don’t like it but I do think in our society however that if we openly disagree with someones viewpoint we run the risk of being labeled intolerant. Johns comment below speaks a little bit to this idea
“I don’t like it but I do think in our society however that if we openly disagree with someones viewpoint we run the risk of being labeled intolerant.”
Fine. I’m sure you’re not the only one here who disdains political correctness. But really, if the purpose of the article is to attack political correctness head on, go for the jugular. I think there’s a big difference between tolerance and political correctness.
Is disagreeing considered politically incorrect now? Openly disagreeing should be encouraged, not discouraged. Political Correctness is more based around the manner in which you express your ideas. Not what you express. The manner in which tolerance can increase bullying is simple. If I say “I’m a conservative,” you’d be surprised the amount of directed comments or tweets I’ll get that start bashing me about women’s reproductive rights, homosexuality, race, etc.. without me even mentioning them. I am actually very socially liberal in my views but due to “tolerance” some feel they have an open invitation to attack me based on… Read more »
My point there was that when openly disagreeing with someone is mislabeled as ‘intolerance’ (particularly for shaming or rhetorical motives) then yeah, I would disparage that as political correctness and not ‘disagreeing’ at all.
“To be tolerant is not to be gullible.”
Very much agree there. Right to the point.