This kind of thing sounds wildly inappropriate

[WhyNot]

@ZipperJJ

Hmm, I saw this game “Cross The Line” on a documentary about anti-bullying campaigns at schools. I thought maybe on MTV but I’m having a hard time finding it.

I escaped school before bullying was The Thing - back then, it was Drugs. There was a program for drug and alcohol prevention called Operation Snowball. I think it was a weekend thing, held outside of regular school hours, and not everyone did it - you had to sign up. I can’t recall if there was a fee or not. We did a lot of stuff like this. I don’t recall this exercise in particular, but many very similar ones.

I thought it was great. It really worked to bond the participants and taught empathy and sympathy and compassion, and everyone who I know that was in it did Just Say No for many years. (Not forever, but it at least delayed our experimentation until our brains were a little more developed.)

So I’m not anti-touchy-feeling-soul-baring activities. I’m an oxytocin junkie, I actually love that shit. But I think the difference between what I did and what (allegedly) happened here is that it really honestly was optional. It took extra effort to do it, in fact. Since it was a self selected group, no one felt disempowered or threatened when it started getting invasive.

As a parent, I would be okay with this if it was truly optional. But the person who determines if something is optional is the participant, not the facilitator (or principal). I don’t care if the facilitator says, “you don’t have to do this” a thousand times - if their demeanor, their language or the way they’ve set up the exercise leaves the participants feeling pressured to participate, then that itself is bullying, and unacceptable, particularly in the context of an anti-bullying program.

So, uh, I guess the anti-bullying program was in fact a little *too *effective, since it’s caused those children who felt bullied by the program to speak up and make their concerns heard.

[Eonwe]

I have participated in and lead the sort of exercise ZipperJJ describes, but only in “safe spaces,” with buy-in from all participating. If any participants were afraid of others, or of being judged, then the effectiveness is greatly diminished, and the exercise becomes dangerous.

[nearwildheaven]

@Shodan

I got this kind of thing once in a while. Dare I confess it after so many years - I just lied about it and made something up. I don’t think I would expect students who are really vulnerable to do that, however.

My daughter had this kind of thing in school, although I don’t know if she played the Cross the Line thing. She came home from school all bent out of shape and upset because she never had anything good to share - all the other students had divorced parents or siblings who did drugs or horrible family secrets.

I offered to get drunk and beat up her mother if it would help her grade in class, but she said No. It’s important to support your kids in their school work.

All this touchy-feely stuff about bullying and self-esteem reminds me in a way of abstinence education. I’d like to see some hard evidence that it works, and until then, concentrate on reading and math and history and things like that. Of course, anyone who tried to bully my daughter or son would not have a great deal of success.

Regards,
Shodan

In the comic strip “Hi and Lois”, about a very loving family with 4 children, the oldest, an adolescent named Chip, is in a garage band called Noyz, and he once asked his parents if they could have some dysfunction in their family so he and his friends would have something to sing about.

As for my views on abstinence-only education, my biggest problem with it is that it seems to assume that all teenagers have crowds of people following them around wanting to have sex with them, and I can assure you that’s not usually the case.

[monstro]

I remember being invited to a talk promoting abstinence as a freshman in college. I don’t remember why I went besides the fact that all the other girls in the dorm were going.

After about five minutes of listening to the speaker, it seemed like every girl in the room was crying. Except for me. I had an intellectual understanding of what was being discussed, but I totally didn’t get any of the emotions behind it. I remember feeling quite pissed off. Kind of like how I used to feel going to church and being the only one who didn’t catch the Holy Ghost.

After that, I stopped going to “raise awareness” meetings.

[the_diego]

That kind of public survey should be voluntary. The worse I ever experienced was during MBA class. We were asked to list down who in class you’d want to date, marry, be in jail with, etc. And then we were made to read our answers allowed. When I got the chance to teach, I tried it with sophomore students. I was not notified by school officials of any negative reaction but I wouldn’t have been surprised if I was. :smack:

[Idle_Thoughts]

@Drunky_Smurf

Yet you and bozuit can be bothered to come in and bitch about this thread multiple time through out the day.

Take it to the Pit and out of this thread, Drunky Smurf.

[BigT]

@Bozuit

I knew someone would be unable to resist saying this.

It’s simply good practice on a forum to make it clear what your thread is about. Yes, I’ve had time to just read the thread and work it all out instead of “bitching”. But time spent on one activity is not equal to time spent on another. I’m willing to spend 5 minutes explaining this, especially when I’m probably saving others the bother of doing the same, but not 5 minutes just trying to work out what a thread is about. Maybe the time spent doing so will be repaid in future threads that are a little more descriptive.

It’s in the interests of the OP to make the thread clearer too. Perhaps there are many people interested in the topic who ignore the thread because they have no idea what it’s about.

First off, why do both of you guys refuse to spell out why you can’t figure out what the thread is about? You refuse to click on a link. That is your own choice, and not something that people are required to help you with. It doesn’t behoove anyone to help you with your idiosyncrasy. It’s something they would do out of kindness, not necessity.

Second, you are supposed to read the entire thread before you comment, and if you had read the thread, you’d know what the topic was, due to having read ZipperJJ’s post. There’s no extra time commitment required for you.

Third, you don’t know what’s in the best interest of the OP, because you are not the OP. He may have wanted a generic title to avoid biasing the opinions. He may have only wanted people interested enough in his description in the OP to click on the link.

Fourth, it’s relatively clear from even the OP what is going on. You just don’t know the specifics. The same thing would happen if the OP had quoted the first few bits. It’s normal procedure that, if you want to know more about the topic, you click the link in the post.

Fifth, you came in on the tail of someone being particularly annoying about the subject, repeating himself rather than spelling out what his problem was. People were already annoyed about the subject, and you came in and fanned the flames.

Heck, I had a completely different response all typed up, thinking you guys were the same person. It’s a silly complaint. No one else in the thread was having problems figuring things out. And you made us do exactly what you are complaining and made us guess why you couldn’t figure things out.

How hard is it to say “I didn’t want to click on the link. Can you summarize the contents for me?” Why beat around the bush or do what you did and set up a comment so that you would get to give a lecture? Why make it so complicated and annoying?

Why be all condescending about it instead of just politely asking? Why intentionally make a comment hoping that someone would argue with you?

[48Willys]

I also did/do not like to share my emotions with random folks. I made up stuff and purposely disrupted these kinds of activities. Bad me!

When my HS English teacher asked us to write about, being embarrassed, what a perfect date was, or how we spent our free time, I did not write about that. I just treated the assignment as if it was supposed to be about a fictional experience or desire.

For example, the perfect date, I wrote that I had had the perfect date with Karon Carpenter! We went sailing on the local lake. After that we cooked and ate the fish that we had caught. I then took her home, It was an early date, as I had to get to my night job.

When confronted about not taking her assignments seriously, I asked her “Why should I share something with you that I do not share with my brother?”, she did not like that answer. I passed the class though, so as far as I was concerned, all was well.

[gracer]

(Hamsters ate my post! GRRR)

I think they could at the very least adjust the line assignment so that they just list lots of things (“ever had a pimple?”) and then ask everyone who struggles with any of those things to cross the line, finishing with the observation that everyone has problems, everyone struggles with something. Or just have an entirely different exercise to show how everyone has their own struggles.

Very often with this stuff you find that it wasn’t designed by professionals at all, just by people trying to sell something. My experiences with TIE and worse, theatre in war zones, are the same: they’re programmes designed by theatre professionals, not psychologists or even educators.
I had kind of a fight with a professor in theatre in war zones at university. I asked him about the basis for what he was doing, and basically there was none, he just made that shit up. I told him that I wouldn’t have let him anywhere near the kids I have worked with. He doesn’t know them, he doesn’t know what they’ve been through, he can’t just waltz in and start stirring that shit up! Pisses me off.

[Bozuit]

@BigT

First off, why do both of you guys refuse to spell out why you can’t figure out what the thread is about? You refuse to click on a link. That is your own choice, and not something that people are required to help you with. It doesn’t behoove anyone to help you with your idiosyncrasy. It’s something they would do out of kindness, not necessity.

Second, you are supposed to read the entire thread before you comment, and if you had read the thread, you’d know what the topic was, due to having read ZipperJJ’s post. There’s no extra time commitment required for you.

Third, you don’t know what’s in the best interest of the OP, because you are not the OP. He may have wanted a generic title to avoid biasing the opinions. He may have only wanted people interested enough in his description in the OP to click on the link.

Fourth, it’s relatively clear from even the OP what is going on. You just don’t know the specifics. The same thing would happen if the OP had quoted the first few bits. It’s normal procedure that, if you want to know more about the topic, you click the link in the post.

Fifth, you came in on the tail of someone being particularly annoying about the subject, repeating himself rather than spelling out what his problem was. People were already annoyed about the subject, and you came in and fanned the flames.

Heck, I had a completely different response all typed up, thinking you guys were the same person. It’s a silly complaint. No one else in the thread was having problems figuring things out. And you made us do exactly what you are complaining and made us guess why you couldn’t figure things out.

How hard is it to say “I didn’t want to click on the link. Can you summarize the contents for me?” Why beat around the bush or do what you did and set up a comment so that you would get to give a lecture? Why make it so complicated and annoying?

Why be all condescending about it instead of just politely asking? Why intentionally make a comment hoping that someone would argue with you?

As I said, it’s not a big deal. I’m not sure if I should even say any more. Since you didn’t think I was being clear, I’ll do so, and probably shut up after that.

1. Because it seemed fairly obvious. It’s not in the title of the thread or the OP, unless you click the link. I’m used to descriptive thread titles and a couple of paragraphs or a summary of what the link is about in the OP. Maybe those expectations are too high, though.

2. Disagree. It’s possible I missed this rule/guideline somewhere, and in most cases it would be helpful if people read everything before replying, but I’m not supposed to. However, there is a guideline to use descriptive thread titles.

3. Maybe. But it seems a little unlikely, don’t you think? I’m not sure how it could bias opinions if people get to know what the link is about before clicking it.

4. I don’t get how you can say it’s relatively clear from the OP what is going on. The first sentence is about comments and homeschooling. Next there’s something about school staff divulging information students might prefer to keep to themselves, and bullying. The only time the game is mentioned, it’s referred to as “this kind of thing” or “things like this”. Based on the OP, I’d guess it’s something to do with teachers giving out info or bullying, not students being asked to give out info.

5. Not much to say here except that I wasn’t trying to “fan flames”, and you seem to simultaneously take exception to me agreeing with DrDeth and criticize us for having a problem with the thread that “no one else” has. So are there too many of us complaining for it to be legitimate, or too few?