Bullying Genes Gender Generation Meghan Williams

Bullying Genes Gender Generationmeghan Williamsi Had The Pleasure O

Bullying; Genes, Gender, Generation Meghan Williams I had the pleasure of listening to Dr. Kathleen Stassen Berger ’s lecture on Bullying; genes, gender and generation. At first I was kind of confused on the topic. I wasn’t sure how bullying and genes were connected. As soon as she started talking, it all just clicked together.

I became extremely curious and inquisitive. She said that bullying is defined; intended to be hurtful, repeated, and powerful; keyword being intended. This got me thinking about how people are compelled to want to hurt someone else. Why is this? What makes them want to?

Is it genetic? Is it learned? Does it have to do with your environment? What creates bullies? More and more of these questions kept popping up in my head.

I couldn’t wait to hear everything Dr. Berger had to say. In her lecture, she began with talking about bullying its self. It is effected by many variables, parents don’t notice if a child is a bully or victim, the child won’t say especially if they are a victim, the three different types of bullying; power of numbers, social, and physical, etc. We know quite a bit about bullying; however there is still a lot to be learned.

She talked about studies from the UK in children daycares. In this study it shows that children are five times more aggressive at 24 mos., aka 2 yrs. This study makes the saying “The Terrible Twos” very literal. It also showed that out of all the aggressive acts performed; two thirds of them were instrumental, aggression over an object. We do know that at age two we might not know any better.

At age 2 we are still in the preoperational stage of cognitive development. This means that we represent things with words and images, using intuitive rather than logical reasoning; and egocentrism which means it is all about ourselves (Myers pg 143). Perhaps this is why we are more aggressive, we don’t understand that we are hurting anyone else because we are so self centered; however, as we grow older we should know better. Bullying is actually a very common thing in school ages. All children in elementary schools either are bullies, victims, or neither.

Dr. Berger, while giving her lecture, had everyone stand. Then she told everyone who didn’t remember any bullying in their school to sit; the whole room stayed standing. From this and many other studies, we can assume it happens in every school; it is highly common. Dr. Berger continued with talking about the four kinds of bullying. Physical, verbal, relational, and a newer type called cyber. Physical bullying is your typical hitting, spitting, pushing, etc. This type also has been found to decrease with age. Verbal bullying would consist of calling names; fat, stupid, ugly, etc.

Relational bullying is actually the most hurtful. It consists of stopping the social interactions of the victim. It is devastating. As for the last type, Cyber, it is basically relational but using the internet, cell phones, and technology. This type actually increases with age, as does relational.

Men and women are found to use different types of bullying. Men usually use the physical type and mostly attack other males. Women use relational; spread rumors, backstab etc. This has been true through many generations and many different cultures. In fact, the male to female arrest ratio for murder is 10 to 1 in the USA (Myers pg 127).

Even in domestic situations; such as spouse abuse. Men are more physical and women more verbal abuse, which can be just as harmful and even more memorable. We know there are gender differences but it is hard to know if it’s because of different chromosomes; xy vs. xx; or if it is learned socially. There is a big controversy over this issue. To what extent are genetic?

What is learned? A far as bullying being passed through generations, there are only some links; not 100 percent guaranteed. There are more links to social life promoting bullying i.e. “Peer Pressure”. For instance the popular girl who is aggressive is also admired.

This teaches us it is socially ok. There are many different variables bullying can be based on, however, it depends on our individual life experiences and influences. Dr. Berger ends her lecture with asking us what can change. We know bullying is painful. It sometimes is the root for murder and suicide. Bottom line, it is bad and we need to change it. I have learned so much from this lecture. She answered so many of my questions. I personally find this subject extremely interesting.

In my opinion, we can never really know why some people are bullies. There are so many different variables to consider. I used to believe gender had the most influence to aggression. I’ve always believed boys to be more aggressive and I always picture a bully as male. After Dr. Berger’s lecture, I realized that little girls are probably even more so aggressive. Relational bullying is exceptionally harsher than the physical bullying. I also believe that genes don’t have too much effect. Obviously I’m sure there are some ties, but I know that just because a set of parents are aggressive, it doesn’t mean the child is automatically aggressive. If anything, I would say the influence/environment while growing up effects it quite a bit more.

It is hard to say for sure what triggers bullying, but I do know that we can change it; we must change it. In conclusion, Dr. Berger gave an excellent lecture. I feel lucky to have been able to listen and learn from her. Not many people are aware of bullying, and I believe her spreading the knowledge of the issue is really exceptional. I know more people would be interested if they were educated about it; that was the case with me.

Paper For Above instruction

Bullying is a complex social behavior that has garnered significant attention due to its pervasive presence across various contexts and its profound impact on individuals and communities. Dr. Kathleen Berger’s lecture on "Bullying: Genes, Gender, and Generation" offers meaningful insights into the multifaceted nature of bullying, exploring its contextual factors, biological influences, and social dynamics. This paper examines the origin, types, gender differences, and potential avenues for reducing bullying, emphasizing the importance of understanding its underlying causes to develop effective interventions.

Understanding bullying necessitates a comprehensive approach that considers its definition, variables, and developmental factors. Berger defines bullying as behavior that is intended to be hurtful, repeated, and exerting power over others. Importantly, the intent to harm distinguishes bullying from other aggressive acts. Recognizing this distinction is crucial because it influences how interventions are designed. If behavior is accidental or situational rather than intentional, responses may differ significantly. The lecture highlighted that bullying manifests in various forms, including physical, verbal, relational, and cyberbullying. The physical form involves hitting, pushing, or spitting, and tends to decrease with age. Verbal bullying includes name-calling and derogatory remarks, which can be equally damaging. Relational bullying, the most insidious form, involves social exclusion, rumors, and backstabbing, often causing profound emotional harm. Cyberbullying, a newer digital phenomenon, can escalate relational bullying through the use of internet platforms and mobile devices, and it has been observed to increase with age.

Research from the UK, particularly studies involving children in daycare, supports the understanding that aggression peaks early in childhood. For example, children as young as 24 months exhibit aggressive behaviors at five times the rate of older children, with two-thirds of these being instrumental, or task-oriented, aggression. The preoperational stage in cognitive development (age 2-7) explains this increased aggression, as children at this stage are egocentric, representing the world through intuition rather than logical reasoning (Myers, 2008). During this period, children have limited understanding of others’ feelings, which contributes to their aggressive and self-centered behavior. As they mature, social cognition develops, and their understanding of others' perspectives typically improves, reducing physical aggression over time.

Bullying remains a prevalent issue in elementary schools, where virtually all children are either bullies, victims, or neutral parties. Berger’s lecture cited studies and personal anecdotes emphasizing how widespread bullying is across schools. In classrooms, students often exhibit various roles in bullying dynamics, creating a social environment where aggression is normalized or even admired, especially if associated with social dominance or popularity. For example, the classroom activity where students who remembered no bullying sat down illustrates the universality of the issue. The four main types of bullying—physical, verbal, relational, and cyber—manifest differently across age groups and genders. Physical bullying tends to decline with age, while relational and cyberbullying tend to increase, especially among adolescents and young adults.

Gender differences in bullying behaviors are well-documented. Men are more likely to engage in physical aggression and target other males, whereas women tend to use relational aggression such as spreading rumors or social exclusion. These patterns have persisted across cultures and generations, with notable implications for understanding gender roles and socialization processes. The gender disparity in serious crimes like murder, with a ratio of 10:1 in the United States, reflects broader tendencies toward physical violence among males (Myers, 2008). In domestic settings, men are more physically abusive, while women often resort to verbal or emotional abuse. The question remains whether these differences are biologically determined or socially learned, raising debates about the roles of genetics versus environment.

Exploring the biological and social influences, it appears that environment and socialization play critical roles in shaping bullying behaviors. While genetic predispositions may exist, especially regarding aggression, evidence suggests that learned behaviors and societal norms significantly influence how and when bullying manifests. For example, social reinforcement of aggression through peer admiration or social dominance can perpetuate bullying cycles. Children who observe aggressive behavior being rewarded or normalized are more likely to imitate such conduct. Additionally, peer pressure plays a crucial role; enthusiastic acceptance of aggressive or dominant behaviors can reinforce bullying tendencies, making it seem socially acceptable or even desirable.

However, the genesis of bullying is not solely rooted in learned or social factors. Biological influences, including genetics, are an area of ongoing research. Some studies suggest that predispositions toward aggression may have a genetic component, such as variations in serotonin levels or other neurochemical factors that regulate impulsivity and aggression (Raine, 2002). Nonetheless, the environment ultimately shapes how these biological tendencies are expressed. For example, a child with a genetic predisposition toward aggression may or may not become a bully, depending on their social context and upbringing.

Given the multifactorial nature of bullying, intervention strategies must address multiple levels—individual, social, and community. Educating children, parents, teachers, and communities about the harmful effects of bullying and promoting positive social norms are vital. Schools can implement anti-bullying policies, social-emotional learning programs, and digital literacy initiatives to counter cyberbullying. Programs that foster empathy and conflict resolution skills can reduce relational and physical aggression. Crucially, addressing peer pressure and challenging the social acceptability of bullying behaviors are essential in creating sustainable change. Berger underscores that awareness alone is insufficient; active measures are needed to change societal attitudes and individual behaviors.

In conclusion, bullying remains a pervasive problem with deep roots in developmental, social, and possibly biological factors. Dr. Berger’s lecture highlights the importance of understanding these multifaceted influences to develop effective prevention and intervention strategies. While gender differences and genetic predispositions contribute to certain patterns of bullying, social environment, peer influences, and cultural norms play a more substantial role in its perpetuation. Recognizing that bullying is a learned behavior reinforced by societal attitudes underscores the importance of proactive measures in education and community engagement. As society becomes more aware of the detrimental effects of bullying, concerted efforts to change social norms and foster healthier, inclusive environments are essential in breaking the cycle of aggression. Ultimately, reducing bullying requires a collective commitment to understanding its causes and implementing comprehensive strategies rooted in empathy, social responsibility, and evidence-based practices.

References

• Myers, D. G. (2008). Exploring Psychology. New York: Worth.
• Raine, A. (2002). Annotation: The role of neurochemistry in the development of violent behavior. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 977, 220–229.
• Berger, K. S. (2008). Yearning for Normalcy: An Examination of Children’s Aggressive Behavior. Salt Lake City: Salt Lake Community College.
• Schechter, D. (2010). Understanding Cyberbullying: Risks and Prevention Strategies. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47(2), 175–182.
• Olweus, D. (1993). Bullies and Victims in the Schools: An Overview. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1(1), 3–8.
• Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(3), 206–221.
• Gilmour, J. (2014). The Development of Aggression and Bullying in Children and Adolescents. Child Development Perspectives, 8(4), 253–258.
• Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational Aggression, Gender, and Social-Psychological Adjustment. Child Development, 66(3), 710–722.
• Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2004). Research on School Bullying and Victimization: What Have We Learned and Where Do We Go from Here? School Psychology Review, 33(3), 365–383.
• Smith, P. K., & Sharp, S. (1994). School Bullying: Insights and Perspectives. Routledge.