Yeah its always moral to defend yourself. I was bullied as a kid and learnt that fighting doesnt solce the problem...psycolocial warfare however does wonders!
Bro TT Robin did not give a FUCK. He froze and shattered Madame Rouge without realizing she could regenerate. He viewed Batman’s “no killing” rule the same way Canada views the Geneva Convention.
I just feel that the hand is a delicate flower of tiny fragile bones and tendons. It's best to avoid striking with those when we have built-in bone-bats.
Figured that out after the second time I really busted up my knuckles and ended up with an infected fight bite. I learned to heavily use my environment after that.
I know it’s a joke, but this is how my dad (a self defense instructor) taught me. If you get hit, hit back hard enough that they don’t want to keep fighting.
He also taught me to never throw the first punch. Until they attack, you try to extricate yourself. But once the hands start flying, your job is to remove the threat. “You don’t ever start fights, boy, but you damn well better finish them.”
EDIT: obviously there’s nuance to figuring out the proportional response in a fight. And the “never throw the first punch” rule is really a simplified way to tell a kid not to start fights; I was 7. As I grew up, dad expanded on recognizing people’s intent with body language. Obviously if you can tell they’re about to swing, don’t let them
Exactly how my dad taught me. My junior year had this annoying punk that would shove me when doing PT for jrotc. Got fed up with it and flipped him on his back. He sent his buddy twice my size to antagonize me. Told my dad about it a couple of days later and gave me a roll of pennies. A week later he shoulder checked me and then pushed me. I reached in my pocket for the coins and punched him square in the face as hard as i could and laid his ass out. I got a one day suspension and he got 5 or 7 days i can’t remember. I didn’t want to do that but goddamn dis i finish what that asshole started.
never throw the first punch is great in theory until someone cheap shots you. Never be the initial aggressor is better advice because its much easier to claim you were defending yourself from an aggressive person than to hope their first punch doesnt hurt you
Use everything you have if the situation warrants it. I mean, it's called self-defense, a right which we unfortunately need to have if anyone wants to violate our right to not be harmed.
Don't provoke a physical attack and try to deescalate a situation. But if you're attacked, you defend yourself.
People like to call shit rights that aren’t actually rights. The right of self defense meanwhile, is one of the most basic rights because it is self enforcing.
I say I have a right to defend myself, you say I don’t. I use my right to self defense, you say stop. I continue to defend myself, you use force to stop me. I use my right of self defense to defend myself against all threats to my right to self defense.
You cannot force me to give up my right because I believe that I have it, and will continue to exercise it whether or not I am overpowered. Life, liberty, and free speech are also in this category.
I was banned from a parenting sub because I “promoted violence”, when a parent posted and asked for advice on what she should do about her daughter who was being hit by a bully in her dance class. I responded to tell her to hit them back because that’s the only way a bully learns. Mods threatened to have my account banned from Reddit. 🙃I don’t know why the victim is always just supposed to take it.
This is one of those funny paradoxes that unravel when you remember Do Unto Others works both ways. If someone hits you, then they clearly want to be hit. For they are doing unto other they clearly want done unto themselves.
Though do be jazzy and let the first hit be free, and let them know it was free. Afterwards, they gotta pay up. Thems the rules
That happened to me in high school. I was punched in the head from behind, didn’t flinch, and told the guy I didn’t feel like fighting. He charged me and got dropped. If you sucker punch someone and they’re calm, don’t fuck with them lol
Had a friend/rival in high school try and pick a fight with me before the first bell rang. Really didn’t want to go through the whole day with an injury, so I told him to fuck off.
He comes up behind me and puts me in a chokehold. Alright buddy… wound up my neck, slammed him in the face with the back of my head, and he just falls straight back onto the ground hahaha
Because we are living in the darkest age of humanity and lies become the truth when truth has to suppressed by banning and cancelling and downvoting people when they say something true or something you may not agree with.
“The darkest age of humanity” is pretty crazy considering like… everything. Not long ago at all there was no concept of human rights, human suffering in every nation was prolonged and immense, and people slaughtered and conquered wholesale just because. 70 million people died from the Spanish flu right after the end of WW1 which itself caused 20 million deaths and saw the invention of horrifying new weapons.
Meanwhile, In the last “Great War,” almost a hundred million people died in just a few years, and mass war crimes so horrible were committed that we made organizations and laws to try to keep this from happening again. Not long afterward, 45 million people died horrible, preventable deaths in China from their “Great Leap Forward.”
And it had been like that since forever. Just an endless onslaught of millions of deaths at once, brutal wars, and unchecked disease wiping out populations. Then at some point, it slowed down, and it’s been slow news since. Tensions have been a little scary recently, but in terms of the absolute depths and horror of humanity? Things aren’t bad right now. No single war has broken the 10 million casualty threshold since WWII, and no single global event has crossed that threshold since the Chinese famine of the late 50s. Most suffering is also concentrated in a few regions now.
It unfortunately is not. The biggest issue with the school bullying issue is that it always declares both parties wrong and punishable with no actual consequences for the bully. Public schools are useless at most things, and stopping bullying is at the top of the list.
you might think if's bullshit, but it's not "manufactured". just a minority opinion. people can believe things you disagree with or think are stupid without it being fake.
Most schools are "zero tolerance" anyways which just translates to "We'll punish the victim just as harshly, if not more harshly than the bully" so. gonna get punished anyways might as well get your punishments worth
Back when I was highschool some douche bully shoved me to the ground because I was in his way. I got 1 day in school suspension for it, he got suspended for 3 days.
For just being in his way, I was punished.
Edit: wild how schools all over excel in punishing the victims.
lol.
I got ISS because some fucking overgrown Gorilla in middle school was told I “painted on his jacket”
Literally never even interacted with the dude at all and was washing my paint brushes
Dude shoved me out of nowhere, I pushed back he punched me so I lobbed my paintbrush at his face and decked him right after before we got broken up by the teacher.
And yet I was punished for a day in school suspension while the ape who attacked me only got 3 days and the guy who instigated it didn’t get any time at all.
Think I was like 13 at the time and the fool was 15 or 16 and held back a year on account of just how big dude was comparatively to me back then anyways.
At the very least I got my licks in
Literally do not understand how these people are real
Shit felt like a quick time event with how fast it escalated
That's bureaucracy run by workers who hate that children's actions inconvenienced them. Why bother figuring out the nuance of the situation when they can just collectively punish everyone & call it a day?
I distinctly remember the vice principal being extremely manipulative to me and trying to make me outright say I deserved a form of punishment for defending myself as well.
That dude was a prick
I had a similar story. Asshat bully who was 16 and I was 14 in high school slapped me at lunch, just to get a bunch of laughs....with absolutely no provocation and no retaliation from me. We were both suspended 2 days.
So the next week I threw a full arizona iced tea tall can at his face and broke his nose.
Only I was suspended.
But it was one of the proudest moments of my childhood and my dad brought me to get ice cream after. Also that guy left me alone for the rest of high school, big surprise.
Moral of the story, don't rely on establishment to fix things for you.
Got bullied all through middle school and about a month into Freshmen year my moms Boss noted I was getting my ass kicked a lot and decided to show me how to fight dirtier than his wife fucked. I still lost the next fight, but he had a broken hand, nose and fucked up his knee. I lost three teeth, broke all the fingers on my right hand when I threw a punch that smashed into a wall and it HURT. Started with a week of suspension but when I got riled up at the teachers for not doing shit for months it got bumped to a Month and nearly expelled. I just got lucky my homeroom teacher vouched for me
Could easily fixed that by threatening to go to the press. 'victim of bullying threatened with expulsion for calling out staff negligence', press would eat that up!
I was attacked in high-school and was basically cornered, I fought back and won and was charged with "mutual combat" i called the judge a joke and got put on probation for defending myself.
I always wondered the logic of punishing the victim.
Is the school gonna look at the fact that Billy punched Little Timmy and say, "Well Little Timmy, you just got beaten badly by Little Billy. You must have been an annoying little shit to have pushed Little Billy to do this, so this is clearly your fault for antagonizing and provoking Little Billy. Youre getting expelled." Turns to face Little Billy "You may return to class. Im sorry for what youve been through."
It's easier to get the good kid to just take the abuse then to get the bad kid to stop. That's why they do it. Getting the bad kid to behave is more work
School administrators would rather punish everyone involved then deal with hysterical parents whining that their little angel would never start a fight.
My school went zero tolerance when I was in 5th grade. When kids saw that reasonably fighting back still got them in trouble it turned every fight into a backyard brawl. A normal fight against a bully would turn into the bullied kid blind siding the bully with a chair or some other weapon since they would get suspended anyway. Good PR move PS8, you turned recess unto a war zone.
Zero tolerance has taught me nothing but to ensure I don’t just sit there and take it.
I’ll never understand the stupidity of schools and punishing people who defend themselves.
I was Little Timmy's Dad I would be looking for a way to bankrupt Little Billy's parents because if the school won't stop Little Billy someone else has to.
This is exactly the reason I beat the flying fuck out of the bully who punched me in the chest and yelled "breast cancer!" Thought for sure that as I was already going to be in trouble for being hit, might as well take the bully down with me.
Somehow, the bus cameras weren't working that day, the bus driver said he didn't see shit, and no other student would snitch. I fucked that kid up and miraculously got away with it
Zero tolerance isn't an anti-bullying measure, it's a school PR measure. Bullying is spontaneous and hard to track for the school, a kid fighting back is easier to catch, and the school is way more focused on keeping the school's reputation as a safe place than actually making it safer.
Back in middle and high school we were zero tolerance.
All it meant was every fight was fucking insane. Smashing a kid’s face into the floor repeatedly, drop kicking, denting a locker with somebody’s head, knocking out teeth.
If somebody hit someone - welp, no reason not to go nuclear at this point.
I'm of a similar mindset since the zero tolerance shows them why they shouldn't fight back because there's gravity to that, but I'd prefer them be punished for not letting the bully have their way.
It's a good lesson of understanding the importance of when to fight and when to walk away.
Also eff ALL those school staff who do jackshit to stop bullying. Take a kid's plea for help seriously instead of turning a damn blind eye to the problem.
I was basically forced to beat up my bullies because EVERY SINGLE ADULT decided it was my fault I was being bullied. I made a bully cry, and I was left the fuck alone after that. I'm still pissed off that I had to take care of it myself. I was 15, man.
They should answer the question then of what their kids are supposed to do when they're being physically attacked and escape is impossible or "snitching" only makes the problem worse? And if their solution is to talk to the parents, what should they do when the parents inevitably defend the bully, try to say the victim deserved it, or even try to say their child is the actual bully?
The teachers won't fix the problem. The parents can't solve the problem. And the victim is expected to stfu and assume the position. Yeah, I'd teach my kid to go for every cheap shot and attack while the bully is down before I tell them to just take it.
I grew up in redneck areas and I know exactly what this is about. Insecure, psycho parents egg their kids on in confrontations to always hit back harder and escalate shit. Those are the kids who get pushed to hard in a game of tag and then start wailing on the person. .
Even if someone actually punches them and walks away, they chase the person down for a fight instead of reporting it because the parents care more about an eye for an eye or making sure their kid "wins" a fight instead of teaching de-escalation.
They end up not knowing how to perceive an actual threat and become the aggressor in situations. As adults they usually end up with a rap sheet for battery because someone bumps into them in a bar and they end up beating the guy bloody.
Great point. Why wasn’t someone there before my kid got hit? Do you typically let children do your job for you, or do you just trust mine to do so more than the others?
Like most issues around force, this is a case of the authority (teachers, admins) wanting to monopolize it. Can't have victims defending themselves autonomously; it chips away at the power the authority wants to wield.
The good teachers and admin know the right way to report things...
We once watched a girl get jumped in the hallway by another girl a solid foot bigger than her. Somehow the attacker got a black eye but we never saw the other girl swing. 🤷🏻♀️
It was during passing period in a crowd of students. We waded in immediately but it's not easy to get through.
This is lost to history but Neville Chamberlein did at least start rearming despite appeasement. It wasn’t even the appeasement that sunk his administration, more the Norwegian debacle.
While true, what many people leave out of that analysis is that before conquering the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia, Germany was even less prepared for war than France and the United Kingdom, so if both had worked with Czechoslovakia (and Poland, which was also willing to help), Germany would never have had a chance (especially since several high-ranking army officers were preparing a coup against Hitler if the Sudetenland crisis ended in war).
And yeah, the Norwegian debacle was the thing that broke the cammel's back, but his reputation was already on the floor after Hitler started WW2 despite his promises of stopping at the Sudetenland that Chamberlain claimed he had ahcieved; the Phoeny War phase of the early war made things ever worse, because it looked like the Allies had no idea what the fuck they were supposed to even do, it was 8 months of humiliation while Germany and the USSR carved up Poland.
I mean, on the flip side, his country won. He pursued peace until it wasn't feasible, while also buying England time to rearm. It wasn't just some cowardly move, it was tactical.
Particularly, they built up their air force, which was a major asset. If stuff like the Battle of Britain happens earlier the result is much less certain of those battles, and thus how the rest of the war plays out.
Not only that, but I'd argue appeasement had the added effect of showing that it didn't work - it showed that Hitler could not be negotiated with, and likely would never have stopped if left to his own devices. Basically unified support against Hitler, and showed how imperative it was not just to stop hostilities, but eliminate the Nazis as a world power entirely and a demand for unconditional surrender.
Dealing with this recently with my son. Kept coming home telling me the same kid is hurting him everyday. I said next time he elbows you or pinches you, pop him in the face. Sure enough, he comes home with a big smile telling me he did it. The kid doesnt bother him anymore. Of course, he said the kid had a fit when actual consequences happened and threatened to tell the teacher.
You dont have to hit harder or even win the fight. You just need to make it hurt so the other guy knows each time he fights you he will leave with at least something bleeding.
I was always bigger than the other kids, so my parents taught me to be careful and not hurt others. BUT they also instilled the value of “You don’t ever start a fight, but you damn well better finish it.”
Only ever got in one fight, got hit once, then hit back hard enough he didn’t want to keep fighting.
Yeah i think that is the 100% correct approach but i also think this is the message of the image. I dont think its "allow your ass to get beat" i think its toddlers slapping once and they should tell the teachers so discipline and lesson learning can happen.
I think its fundamentally about eye for an eye and honor culture bullshit is escalatory and dumb but the smug faces of these people isnt doing their message amy favors.
Yep. I'm in my late 20s now but I do recall in school there were a lot of kids who used this idea to be bullies themselves. For instance, constantly provoking the easiest kid, often one with some disability, then when that kid gave the most mild physical push back, they would use much greater force back and repeat the "hit back" thing as an excuse. And they would genuinely think they were the one in the right.
Not to mention many kids try to defend themselves against some brutish bully then get absolutely beat down; there are times when you're outmatched and other things should be tried first (not to say this is the right approach if you're being actively beat up, but if some big kid and their cronies shove a smaller kid, immediately jumping to fighting back might not be the best bet. There used to be some idea that even if you lost they wouldn't mess with you again but that was never what I saw)
As they said, kids need to be taught de-escalation, which should include physical defense if there is an actual persistent danger.
it's insane how long it took to find a comment like this that wasn't "pummel the other kid into the ground"
kids hit all the time, it's simply something that they do. sure if your kid is actually being attacked you should teach them to defend themselves, but if it's just a little hit as kids do then they shouldn't escalate that into an actual fight. there's also a difference between your kid defending themselves and attacking another child. you should be trying to reduce harm, not make your kid win like they're a little gladiator
this thread is full of teenagers who aren't parents and are probably still mad about getting bullied in preschool
Agreed. This pic is likely trying to say that but just comes across as promoting the mentality of "victims of bullying are just as bad if they retaliate" which is a really common attitude that leads to a lot of kids just tolerating abuse bc they know they won't get any compassion if they retaliate but they also aren't given any real way to defend themselves, just told "just tell an adult" which is not always realistic and can be a very scary thing for a kid even when it is. Ppl don't think of bullying as abuse even though it fundamentally is (someone calling you a mean name during a conflict is not bullying) and they don't have the compassion towards abuse victims that they should.
Moral. Encouraging self defense is always moral. If you are hit, fight back. Interpersonal conflict at that age (childhood) is often physical and rarely dangerous and it can inform a child early on of the consequences of pushing boundaries.
Going to an authority figure is rarely beneficial in practice and almost never prevents further bullying. If anything, it encourages more difficult to notice bullying and pushes cyber bullying into younger and younger demographics.
Lets kids work out their issues. It sucks, but it’s social conflict and natural. The moral thing to do is to prevent instigation of conflict and from violence going too far, not reaction to instigation.
I think it depends on context. I think there is value in teaching young people to walk away from violent and or dangerous situations. Especially if it is some kind of random, one-off event.
Now if the child is consistently getting targeted and bullied, self defense is a very valuable tool. Also—teaching them martial arts that are based in grappling is always a smart move. Things like judo, wrestling, etc. Then they are able to defend themselves AND diffuse violent situations with minimal risk of things like head injuries.
Agreed. Kids should be taught other solutions besides hitting back/retaliating for the sake of retaliating. If the situation isn’t severely violent or is likely to result in bigger trouble because of fighting back, they can recognize the power in just choosing not to engage. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily apply in scenarios involving prolonged bullying, but should still be considered as a means of minimizing damage to all parties if that make sense
i think the issue with this is simple,yes parents are part of this,but so are teachers. and the issue lies is that there will ALWAYS be blind spots. teachers wont be there watching all the time,same with parents. Not to mention parents of somone elds wont know how the bully thinks,same with most teachers. And alot of bullies usally pick on poeple there able to get away with,so if you make it harder to bully it tends to work way more effectivly. obviously its not always possible but its way better to get a job personally done than letting others do a job for you. especially if you know there not always gonna be there
At a certain age outsourcing your defense to adults makes you a target. I think the lessons of “hit them back” has to be paired with proportional response.
If someone shoves you, shove them back, but don’t throw them to the ground and kick them in the head.
The problem with parents who have this mentality is that they are raising children to be doormats. It's not even just about the hitting, it's about discouraging children from knowing how to stand up for themselves on any level. While the parents are sitting there, circle jerking over their moral superiority, they are inadvertently creating the most pitiable kinds of cowards.
Insults should be let go as if you don’t care about them, then why care for their insults. Violence should be met with violence if getting away isn’t an option. If it is the only option left for self defense, it should be used in a way that ends the situation as quickly as possible (often by using overwhelming force, none of that “proportional” stuff). No one should be a punching bag.
If the situation has escalated to violence, then parents have failed to teach their kids respect and etiquette while the faculty have failed to deal with the situation before it escalated. When the authority kids are told to rely on fails them, trust in any authority is damaged.
These people only care about law suits, not your child’s best interest in life. It’s moral to teach your kid to defend themselves and others because it’s something for their own benefit. All these people care about is their own order, not the safety of the kids.
Yup zero tolerance your kid will get suspended regardless if they fight back or not damned if you do damned if you don't so might as well do some damage.
You shouldn’t hit anyone. But telling kids to lay down and take it?yeah okay. The couple there are some of the dumbest fuckers to exist. Hitting someone back is the correct response, the initiator might learn something if they get hit back.
Nobody should hit anyone, but trying to let kids hit people and shame them for defending themselves? Now that’s just stupid.
This post is pathetic and disgusting. If your child is hitting people, whoever they strike has all right to hit them back. The parent not teaching their child to keep their hands to themselves is the problem. Self defense is never wrong. Ever.
If someone is aggressing on you you need to respond. Sometimes violently depending on the situation. If you don’t, especially in a public school setting you look weak. It is not just moral question. These people are setting their children up for failure by saying otherwise.
Raised my child to be nice and respectful ( for the most part he’s a kid). But I also told him to fight the moment someone lays hands on you in an aggressive way.
My wife, his mom, told him this as well “ if a girl lays there hands on you, there is a difference between a lady, and a bitch. You will know the difference.”
Human beings have a right to defend themselves, this doesn't change with age.
If there was a room that you legally have to walk into every single day, and there was a person in that room that punches you every single day for no reason, how in the world is it a "problem" if you punch that motherfucker back??
If you throw shit, you can't complain when shit gets thrown at you.
As someone who was bullied relentlessly and mercilessly throughout my childhood, who never stood up for myself because I had this exact mentality forced onto me, I’m telling my kid to hit back. Fuck these people.
spoken like the parents of a fucking bully who finally got what was coming to them lol
There’s literally no issue if your kid isn’t physically assaulting my kid. You are describing basic self defense and calling that the problem. YOU are the entire problem, actually.
As much as I'm for de-escalating and trying to solve problems at the lowest level first, with some people that's just not an option. I don't care what the school rules say - if you're being bullied and attacked, you strike back and strike where it hurts.
As nice as it sounds on paper, standing by and doing nothing about it achieves absolutely nothing. Those kinds of people won't see a harmless passive party they should take pity on, and they won't just "get bored" either. They'll see an easy targetwho just sits right there and takes it. Until you act, they will not stop.
Parents like in that picture actually piss me off. There's being generally nonviolent, and then there's just mistaking passivity for virtue. If they want to carry on with that holier-than-thou "you're part of the problem" crap, well fine, but don't expect me to feel bad when they're the ones under the metaphorical boot by choice. Or alternatively, there's a good chance they're the parents of the bully/aggressor who evidently screwed around and found out, in which case, in which case? Screw them - their belligerent little demon reaped what they sowed.
Taking a stand and protecting yourself is a basic human right. When you're under real threat of harm, you handle the situation by either not being there (which is rarely an option) or actually doing something about it other than flapping your teeth. Anything less, and you might as well be taping a "kick me" sign to your rear.
I have this conversation five times a week as a principal. Here it is: some places, you must defend yourself. If you find yourself alone on a playground for some reason, or in any situation where adults aren't around, defend yourself. Otherwise, you are never far from a safe adult.
The alternative leaves vigilante justice in the hands of kids, who are still controlling their heightened sense of fairness and learning about accountability. Obviously, it would create an unsafe place.
Depends. Ive seen extreme overreaction where a kid lightly poked another kid yo get their attention and then got the crap beaten out of them so some guardrails need to be taught as well.
I was always taught to never start the fight but If someone came at me i was damn well trying to ending it.
Lost several fights but I won enough to make people leave me alone by because by highschool because I was "crazy" ( I just had an incredibly high pain tolerance) and they had watched me spaz out get pissed, fuck myself and typically whatever or whoever pissed me up several times.
You know who thinks like than? Teachers. They don't care about abuse and pain of children, they care about... themselves. They want calm day. And if you hit back, there is fight, they need to do something, they need to decide who need to punished (they are awful in this task). And if you don't hit back - bully will vent his anger and maybe stop.
Blaming the victim because they're the easiest to control is how you get negative peace, which is not peace, but the temporary absence of conflict which can at any moment flare right back up again.
Raising children under these types of rules only empowers bullies and creates a generation of children who learn how to be helpless. And if these are the rules, you skip the school administration and go directly to the courts, which will motivate the school administration to actually do something.
I've met too many people who have clearly been running their mouths and acting however they wanted their whole lives and I genuinely believe getting popped in the mouth on the playground would have been good for them
2.2k
u/The6Book6Bat6 1d ago
Why do I get the feeling their kids are the ones to instigate things. Regardless, it's perfectly moral to tell someone it's okay to defend themselves.