The "That's Unrealistic!" Retort Compendium


log in or register to remove this ad

As someone who was once routinely bullied in school by people I gave up at least a foot in height to, I strongly identify with Dwarves...because I figured out how to fight back well enough to either kick their asses or at least hurt them enough that they stopped messing with me.

And for me, at least, "moving around" wasn't the best option; closing was. I'd get within their reach and tear them up at a range where I still had the full leverage of my strikes, or even grapple/throw them. Or use the environment against them.

Bull rush or grab a big bully by the arm and swing his face into the lockers or the metal post between two storm doors and he never bothers you again.
 




As someone who was once routinely bullied in school by people I gave up at least a foot in height to, I strongly identify with Dwarves...because I figured out how to fight back well enough to either kick their asses or at least hurt them enough that they stopped messing with me.

And for me, at least, "moving around" wasn't the best option; closing was. I'd get within their reach and tear them up at a range where I still had the full leverage of my strikes, or even grapple/throw them. Or use the environment against them.

Bull rush or grab a big bully by the arm and swing his face into the lockers or the metal post between two storm doors and he never bothers you again.

disregarding the legal ramifications, particularly post-Columbine*, this is more supporting evidence that the best method to school bullying is direct and physical retaliation, rather than non-violence.

And tactically, closing in on your opponent is a valid tactic, at least based on the training I had.

*In the 80's and earlier, it seems that non-lethal children fighting, while discouraged, was not punished with legal action. From the 90's on up, attitudes changed, lawsuits became prevalent, legal charges filed, and children expelled, even if they were legally justified in the use of force as recognized by the adult legal system. This seems to have sprung up from the highly public school shootings, and led to "Zero Tolerance" policies, which are enforced as "Zero Justice" rather than "Zero Attackers."
 

*In the 80's and earlier, it seems that non-lethal children fighting, while discouraged, was not punished with legal action. From the 90's on up, attitudes changed, lawsuits became prevalent, legal charges filed, and children expelled, even if they were legally justified in the use of force as recognized by the adult legal system. This seems to have sprung up from the highly public school shootings, and led to "Zero Tolerance" policies, which are enforced as "Zero Justice" rather than "Zero Attackers."

On the flipside, a friend of mine in college told me a tale of one of her classmates being bullied. The bully assaulted him, and he just covered up and tried to protect himself from really painful hits, but did NOT fight back. Guess what happened? They BOTH got suspensions for "fighting." Why? Because that school's zero tolerance policy for fighting said that just being involved in a fight meant you were "fighting," even if all you did in the fight was get assaulted.

Seriously, my biggest regret from being bullied myself in school was not fighting back more. The few times I did fight back basically without fail made things better or got the bullies to stop completely. And it sure as hell is therapeutic, totally worth whatever punishment you get. Enjoy being classified as a juvenile and stand up for yourself is my view. If I ever have children, I'm going to make sure they learn how to fight, learn the difference between responsible self-defense usages and assaults and bullying, and make sure they know to protect themselves. As the legal bs piles on, and schools become more and more afraid to actually do something about bullying for fear of the wrath of the bullies' angry parents, I think this approach actually becomes increasingly practical, counter to your own view. Never once did reporting bullying help me out, and in some of the most egregious cases, it was carried out right in front of a teacher and still nothing was done.

/threadjack
 


"No, you can't tie a rope to that outcropping while you're climbing: you don't have your hands free to tie a knot"

General climb-related craziness:

[sblock]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm91hh9SqXs]YouTube - Monkey man[/ame]

Similar footage, but with interview/commentary:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWFRGZB3_Sk&feature=related]YouTube - The Monkey Human[/ame]
[/sblock]
 

disregarding the legal ramifications, particularly post-Columbine*, this is more supporting evidence that the best method to school bullying is direct and physical retaliation, rather than non-violence.
Personally, violence is my last resort. In that case, I was surrounded.

I was, AFAIK, the only freshman not used to polish the "M" in front of the gym that year...and didn't have much trouble from the bullies that year.

That said, with the prevalence of kids being able to obtain weapons these days and the uptick in violence being perpetrated by groups, I espouse non-violence to he point of no choice even more than ever.

Actually, I also have a buddy who is a very highly trained mental health care professional...and he happened to work Columbine. You've prompted me to ask his opinion about how to combat bullying...
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top