Or, what other people think of you doesn’t matter?
As the article points out it can be damaging at any age. Maybe a better approach is to tell them, yes it can hurt, but here are some ways to process that and work on resilience.
That phrase's famous usage is as a way to portray self-respect and non-violent defense of oneself after being verbally attacked.
In that context, it still has value and is not disingenuous to provide to children.
The fact that some bullies seeking a response may eventually stop is incidental.
"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me"
Harm from knives is physical and objective. Words can only hurt to the degree you care about them. You could call me a nasty name right now, and it would not hurt my feelings because I am not invested in your opinion of me. I have an independent sense of self worth. Understanding that you can change the level that you care about the opinions of others is a basic human skill.
The second is an error in generalization that may very well apply to people who do have this skill, but has disastrous consequences for those that don't. The people who experience live this way would do well to understand the type of person they are giving such advice to before they assume that everyone experiences the world as they do.
As someone at the receiving end of advice like this. It doesn't help. What ends up ensuing follows a similar pattern to all patterns based on individuating ideologies - the person isn't doing it right, or didn't try hard enough. People learn to not express their feelings instead.
Lastly, making a distinction between objective and subjective pain is trying to carve out phenomenological categories that simply don't exist.
Sticks and stones is not a full instruction set, but an introduction to the concept and a reminder. It is not, and should not be considered "one simple trick" to deal with hurtful words. This doesn't mean that it is useless or detrimental.
It is a reminder that self-esteem should not be based on the opinions of others. More clearly needs to be done to instill baseline self-esteem. That doesn't mean it's not a helpful reminder of the concept when one encounters derogatory feedback.
It is like saying:
"When someone says something that makes you feel bad, remember the conversations we had about how just because someone says something, it doesn't mean it is true. People will say things to try to hurt you, but they are just being mean and it isn't true. It reflects on them as a person, not you as a person. However, if someone physically hurts you, this is different."
In my mind, "sticks & stones" is the same thing, but shorter and more memorable.
If the former, It is an interesting thought. In many ways children can be seen as very similar neurodivergent adults.
In some cases this is because they simply lack basic information adults take for granted. In others, they simply don't have the "software" to process it yet.
If the latter, that's a bit rude.
I agree that my perspective isn't Universal and therefore doesn't apply to everyone, but I don't think that is a prerequisite for being good advice in the general sense.
The concept of understanding and preempting emotional responses is a fundamental Concept in cognitive behavioral therapy and typical emotional growth.
Typical individuals have the ability to modify their emotional response with training and practice . The idea is not to suppress an emotion but not have the reaction in the first place.
For example, anger management might teach someone not to feel so angry when they encounter traffic. Instead of entering a escalating feedback loop of anger, they might rationalize it as impersonal and continue their Drive without the unpleasant emotions.
I understood the lesson to mean "Dont let bullies control you with words". As in, be wary of people trying to manipulate you with hurtful words. The point is to not give your bully information on how they are hurting you because they can leverage it against you
Of course words can hurt. the saying wouldnt exist if that wasnt true. We dont go around saying "sticks and stones can break my bones but giving me thoughtful gifts will never hurt me". There is an understanding the bully is trying to hurt with words, because words can hurt, and the response is meant to deny them the emotional reaction they are looking for from you
Good luck as a 7-year-old trying to “truthfully talk about” the harm you feel when other kids call you mean names.
But also, I really dont think this phrase works as mocking refutation. First, it is not mocking at all. Second, unless kid is super good confident actor, it will be clear the kid is uncomfortable and hurt.
And third, why do you see passivity as preferable over "responding in kind" in case of verbal abuse? Kids who react passively get mocked again and again and again. How exactly respond greatly depends on situation (that is why truthful discussion is necessary), but kids who dont listen to "be passive and polite" advice get verbally abused less often.
You are justified in needing to use violence to stop someone from attacking you with sticks and stones because those cannot be mentally shrugged off, but it is better to walk away from words being said to you, since you can mentally shrug them off.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160307005615/http://dharmagate...
People often underestimate how much constant mobbing can hurt. Ignore? It gets worse. Fight back verbally? Usually doesn't work, since verbal harassers are much more versed at insulting and hurting mentally. You just can't be so good as someone who practices insults and mockery day in day out.
What choice do you have? Move the battle to the playground where, even if you can't win, you at least may have a chance to cause some harm to the enemy.
Kick the bastard with the fist? In most of the cases it works[1]. If the bully is physically weaker, he won't bully your child again. If the bully is stronger, he kicks too, there's a fight, but still, next time bully will think about consequences of insulting again.
[1] of course, physical force only in a very limited way. Overuse of physical force to actually injure someone, or use weapons and tools, is of course not a way to go.
EDIT: Physical violence doesn't always work. Frequently is not even a good, let alone the best option. But still, there are situations when it can be an adequate response, and this option shouldn't be a priori dismissed.
If you have a group of bullies, you're sunk. You can't fight everyone, they are going to maintain their "superiority" via unfair tactics if they can. You beat one of them in a fight, the rest are going to jump in and beat you down to maintain the status quo.
Going to administration is the best path. Document your complaints, establish a pattern of behavior. Find sympathetic adults and confide in them.
What's funny is, my experience has been that bullying is a phenomenon of smaller school size. Once I got to junior high, my grade school bullies all of a sudden just weren't interested anymore. Bullying in high school was almost unheard of. We had something like 2500 students in my high school.
I look at these teen dramas with high school bullies, and those schools look tiny, just a few hundred students. If anyone knows research into this area which explains the correlation, I'd love to read about it.
But for a children calling each other a mean name on the playground, or acute instances of verbal insult such as words exchange in a bar, the cost benefit analysis of the saying is accurate.
Repeated instances of bullying or communal insults and humiliation cross into the abuse realm, and are not addressed by the saying.
It's better to instill high self-esteem in a kid through positive reenforcement. When the kid is called stupid at school, the words don't hurt them because the kid knows they are, in fact, not stupid.
Would you take the same concerns about telling a child:
"When someone says something that makes you feel bad, remember the conversations we about how just because someone says something, it doesn't mean it is true. People will say things to try to hurt you, but they are just being mean and it isn't true. It reflects on them as a person, not you as a person. However, if someone physically hurts you, this is different."
In my mind, "sticks & stones" is the same thing, but shorter and more memorable.
>what is the difference between a reminder and an instruction set?
Completeness.
Question: How to find the direction of magnetic field induced by a current.
Reminder: Use the right hand rule
Instruction: Detail on how to use the right hand rule and what it means.
That is why I say it is a reminder. Reminders, mantras, and catch phrases are useful to help internalize behavior.
The above phrase is told to bullied kids so that they shut up and so that adults don't have to deal with situation. Teaching the kid how to defend from bullies, how to avoid them or addressing bullies themselves is much harder. If the kid is not pickes on but kid complains for wrong reasons, then explaining the situation to the kid is also harder.