Michigan legislators, Washtenaw County supporters speak in favor of anti-bullying bill at Ypsilanti rally
As University of Michigan student body President Chris Armstrong was trying to weather the storm that came with the anti-gay attacks from then-state assistant attorney general Andrew Shirvell, he found solace in one place — the acceptance of the U-M community.
Armstrong is hoping more people who are being bullied will be able to find acceptance.
“The reason there’s so much bullying is members of the community turn a blind eye to it,” Armstrong told a crowd of about 50 people at the Ypsilanti District Library on Saturday morning. “No matter who you are, you are a member of us. We value you.”
Chris Armstrong, University of Michigan student body president, speaks at the Ypsilanti District Library as part of Saturday's anti-bullying rally led by the Michigan Democratic Party's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies Caucus.
Angela J. Cesere | AnnArbor.com
Armstrong was among a parade of speakers at an anti-bullying rally sponsored by the Michigan Democratic Party’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies Caucus.
The event is the launching point for a statewide campaign to get Senate Bill 45 of 2011, also known as Matt’s Safe School Bill, passed. The bill would require school districts to have an anti-bullying policy and to take specific steps to combat bullying.
“This is not just an LGBT issue,” said Phil Volk, chair of the LGBT Caucus. “This is a pro-family activity. It’s all about the kids.”
The legislation is named as a memorial to East Lansing student Matt Epling, who killed himself after being subjected to constant tormenting by older students while in middle school.
The law would require school districts to adopt anti-bullying policies.
Multiple speakers talked Saturday about being bullied as students and the impact it had on them. They also said adults need to do a better job at protecting students.
“As a community, we have to say everyone belongs,” said Debbie Dingell, the wife of U.S. Rep. John Dingell. “We have to be a community that blends together and protects everyone.”
Several speakers said bullying and youth violence is on the rise in Washtenaw County, pointing to recent suicides in Milan and an attack on a girl outside Ypsilanti High School.
Sheriff Jerry Clayton said that uptick is due in part to the behavior of adults, who seem to take “pride” in attacking people of differing views, especially in the political arena.
“Quite frankly, the younger folks are learning it from us,” he said. “It’s easy to say this stuff in the privacy of your home and not feel the impact it’s having on people’s lives.”
Clayton also urged action beyond just getting a bill passed.
“We can’t wait for that to come down,” he said. “We have to make it known to everyone what is acceptable behavior.”
The group said Saturday that it plans to hold similar rallies across the state and on university campuses, along with possible marches in support of the bill. The goal is to create a coalition of people pushing legislators to pass the bill
“Why is it we can’t get legislators to be brave enough to do the right thing?” said Washtenaw County Prosecutor Brian Mackie. “This legislation has kicked around for a long time. Let’s just get it done.”
David Jesse covers higher education for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at davidjesse@annarbor.com or at 734-623-2534.
Comments
Robert
Mon, Feb 21, 2011 : 12:28 p.m.
The behavior of children is not affected by legislation. They're children... what do they care about laws? I'm honestly tired of being made more 'aware' of bullying.... but I think awareness is about all you can do to stop bullying. Parents need to be aware so they can support their children who are bullied and/or punish their children who are bullying. Teachers and administrators need to be aware so they can support their students and promote an atmosphere that doesn't tolerate bullying. Children need to be aware so they can learn to let bullying roll off their shoulders and understand that every day no matter where they live or work someone will find a reason to demean them to build themselves up. All of these things need to happen voluntarily or they will not be effective. One size does not fit all and that's the only approach our legislators know.
say it plain
Mon, Feb 21, 2011 : 12:33 a.m.
I guess some people must have been the 'victim' of more lawsuits than I can imagine being brought lol. Because the difference between supporting schools in creating safe atmospheres wherein bullies do not dominate school cultures with the lowest forms of social interaction, and somehow setting up nanny states combined with endless litigation seems clear to me, but perhaps not to everyone. Must reflect fear on the part of some that their behavior might fall on the 'wrong side' of any consideration of harassment. And a concomitant redefining of that behavior as 'just how things must be'.
shepard145
Mon, Feb 21, 2011 : 12:14 a.m.
Boys will in deed be boys, even when increasing numbers wander the halls with mommy's attorney on speed-dial. And I only hope as that this nation finally evolves beyond the ignorance and divisiveness of victim brokering in the name of frivolous lawsuits, attorney wealth and cash grubbing parents. Your fundamental assumption appears deeply flawed - that if only enough new laws were passed, all emotional discomfort including "hurt feelings" would constitute actionable cause. On that day, with the help of legions of attorneys, school would become a utopia for all and simply being "offended" a crime. ...and some day, dare we to dream, the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS may obtain the holy grail of victimhood – the "protected class" of one flavor or another!
say it plain
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 9:30 p.m.
I can only hope that the ignorance and intolerance displayed in some of the 'boys will be boys' comments here be left behind us, and their continued expression points very clearly to the need for protections to be enacted. My guess is that apart from moaning about the loss of one's alleged 'right' to belittle, harrass, and otherwise entertain oneself at the expense of others' well-being, there won't be as much of such attitudes displayed in schools once official policies against it are required!
Dog Guy
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 8:18 p.m.
Using "for my children" in public discussion suggests the voice of a parent. Using "for our children" suggests the voice of a fraud attempting to gain special benefits.
Kristin Judge
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 6:47 p.m.
"Multiple speakers talked Saturday about being bullied as students and the impact it had on them. They also said adults need to do a better job at protecting students." Perhaps if this article had quoted the actual stories shared by students and the complete disregard by school personnel to address their concerns, the comments here would be different. Hearing their stories yesterday made a profound impact on me. Children are hurting every day in our schools because they are not "fitting in" with the norms of the group in charge. As adults, we need to take responsibility in any form we can be that legislation, policies, meeting with community groups, or just advocating for our children to be treated fairly and have a safe environment to spend 7 hours a day. The Washtenaw County Cyber Citizenship Coalition is inviting our teens to participate in our awareness and education groups to be sure we are addressing their concerns in our community. Want to be a part of the solution? <a href="http://www.washtenawcybercoalition.org" rel='nofollow'>www.washtenawcybercoalition.org</a>. Sign up for a workgroup and together we can help our community become a more accepting place for all the residents. Thank you to all the residents, youth, and elected officials who took time on a Saturday morning to come out and show support for our kids. We will make an impact working together!
shepard145
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 6:58 p.m.
Yea Kristin, Ann Arbor is well known for such events - they're called pity parties.
G. Orwell
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 3:50 p.m.
@eastsidemom, We are all GUARANTEED equal rights under the Constitution. Therefore, there is no need to pass new laws to protect any group or race of people. That is what is so great about our Constitution which both Bush and Obama want to destroy. I'd suggest you read it.
shepard145
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 3:30 p.m.
Bullying does not cause suicide – period. Children need to learn skills necessary to deal with personal conflict to be successful in life and passing more redundant nonsensical laws that do little then make lawyers wealthier is not the answer. Bullying will never have as much effect on a child's life as parents and family. If anything, I would expect bullying to be far more common between bothers and sisters – do you need a new law for that?? ….and many moms dominate their sons – should there be a law against that? Acceptable bullying is normal conflict between children that can be worked out between them using their social and/or physical skills. It is still normal when it becomes prolonged or difficult enough on the student that parents and schools need to get involved and resolve it without the story ending up on the front page or in court. There are always extremes to issues like this but new state laws are not the way to fix extremes. Like other conflicts, part of the rub here becomes today's "legal definition" of bullying and what happens when publicity seeking state lawmakers insert themselves into our schools. You can be sure that in the future, the same flawed logic will lead politicians to tighten the definition to something like a "pattern of using a single word or gesture" - then we can have a state police post in every high school. Look at the absurdity of the rape laws – going from a violent attack to now a single word spoken between two adults. This is really about a hysterical few trying to warp the legal system into automated control and retaliation so they can avoid doing the sometimes difficult, messy work of parenting and have lawyers and police do the talking.
momof2ina2
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:51 a.m.
I'm going to guess you've bullied many people in your life.
Robert
Mon, Feb 21, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
You're right but in a different way than you realize. Nothing causes suicide in a vacuum. Suicidal thinking is influenced by a multitude of factors. The act of suicide itself usually results from a period of suicidal thinking consummated by a specific catalyst... the proverbial straw on the camel's back. This catalyst is often schoolyard bullying or its 21st century souped-up counterpart, virtual bullying. To deny that bullying influences suicidal thinking is to deny reality.
eastsidemom
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 3 p.m.
Wow...when I read about not needing protected classes, I think about the Jews in Germany...slaves in the south...the innocently imprisoned, there are many classes some humans try to dominate. Laws are needed for protection. Read the proposed law.
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 5:31 p.m.
How did we get to legislating Bully laws to Death Camps?
G. Orwell
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 1:34 p.m.
@S.T. and Meg We do not need to pass laws that regulate every aspect of our lives and actions. When many of these laws are strung together, we won't have anymore rights and freedoms left. We are slowly building to a nanny/Orwellian state where people will have to be very cautious of what they say and do. Again, rather than passing laws that could potentially put people, particularly innocent people, in jail and/or a very expensive trial, we should look at common sense measure like education and counceling. Let's have preventative measures rather than punitive measures. We do not need new laws to accomplish this.
S. T.
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 3:15 p.m.
@ G. Orwell: BTW, I'm a huge fan of 1984, wrote papers on anti-utopian societies in H.S. and College. So, now that I've established myself as broad minded and literate, let me give my experience as a parent. My children have been racially bullied in their Ann Ann middle school. They've had their best friends turn on them, spreading vicious, untrue rumors. One has turned to cutting to try to deal with the pain. And, as it turns out, she isn't alone--many students are suffering silently because nothing can be done. Our "common sense measures are not enough. We do need broad anti-bullying legislation. No one is suggestion Orwellian measures. Take a look at "Jeff's Law" in the state of Florida. My friend worked closely with Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature. After her bullied son Jeff's suicide. I encourage you and those who don't see this as a serious problem to get to know a kid now whose life this is severely affecting. Unless you have experienced it, you are just talking theory.
Meg
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:12 p.m.
It's interesting to me how many posters are equating a rule against bullying with a loss of their personal freedoms. It does make me wonder what they like to do with their free time.
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 1:38 p.m.
I don't want legislators wasting their time when there is already so much to do. Existing tools already exist and are flexible enough to deal with these issues. Don't let kids pick on kids....
S. T.
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:05 p.m.
When I read this story, I expected the comments to be in support of anti-bullying legislation. Michigan is one of five states that do not protect our children. These comments are telling. "Boys will be boys," and "building character" by dealing with bullies shows how out of touch these readers are. Life has changed since we were in school. Bullying is no longer incident based--the bully steals someone's lunch money. End of story. Bad enough, yes. But technology has assisted in spreading information like wildfire. One incident is passed along. Pile on harsh comments, suggestions for escalating the bullying, and mass numbers of other kids being able to anonymously fuel the fury. Soon, everyone in the school "knows." School is no longer a safe place. This leads to suicide more often that folks realize. Check out the book "Bullycide in America." Anti-bullying legislation need not be a checklist of minutia as Braggslaw suggested. And no, braggslaw, all schools do not have policies that limit bullying. Anti-bullying legislation would empower school districts to take action against bullying, knowing that their efforts are supported by law. I applaud Sheriff Clayton in his comment that this stems from "...the behavior of adults, who seem to take "pride" in attacking people of differing views....Quite frankly, the younger folks are learning it from us," I'll take it further. When authorities (parents, teachers, school staff) report bullying to the offending student's parents, very often the parents become defensive. Their "little Johnny," would never do such things. Oh, and even if he did, "boys will be boys. It will build the victim's character." Adults do indeed, contribute heavily to the bullying epidemic. See the problem? If not, come spend a day at a school. Watch the interactions. Talk to students & staff. Ask them if they want anti-bullying legislation. Read their texts. Check Facebook. Are you feel
S. T.
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:08 p.m.
Continued..... Are you feeling brave enough to be a student again?
G. Orwell
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 5:19 a.m.
Bullying has been around ever since man walked the earth. It is part of human nature and dealing with it helps to build our character. Common sense measures and a little education should be more than enough to reduce bullying without passing draconian laws that force us to behave in a certain manner. This is probably another piece of legislation to suppress our freedom of speech and expression. Nanny state. What's next? To prevent child abuse, are we going to be required to put surveillance cameras in our houses? I sholdn't give them any ideas.
UtrespassM
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 4:35 a.m.
Work place bullying is much more scary. same as the work place violence and the sexual harassment.
John B.
Mon, Feb 21, 2011 : 1:02 a.m.
It just carries over from school. If no one told you it was wrong when you were in school (and there were no consequences to bullying in school) why not continue that right on into the workplace...?
David Briegel
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 4:09 a.m.
bragg, Not when their parents tell them it's ok to hate. You know, first Muslims, then gays, and then anyone else their parents approve of hating. And you want the teacher to fix that hate!! Good Luck, we'll ALL neeed it!!
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 1:36 p.m.
you made my point. There are plenty of reasons why kids pick on each other. I don't understand why we need legislation when all the tools a teacher or administrator needs already exist
say it plain
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 1:50 a.m.
Those people complaining that this is somehow about listing every possible 'little' group and that instead there should just be a general anti-bullying policy--have you actually read the proposed bill? Please tell me where it requires school systems to create littanies of 'protected classes'. It seems to me that all it asks is that school systems be actually required to create official anti-bullying policies (because some don't have them), and it seems to offer definitions of bullying that *include* but aren't limited to harassments based on someone's actual or perceived race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, physical characteristics, etc. Thus, it may preclude some district deciding that it refuses to prevent the queer kids from being harassed, and perhaps *that* is what people are getting all upset about. Then they liken any prohibition against sanctioning homophobia to overlawyering-based protection of ohmy *everyone* including those nobody could argue deserves to live free from the garbage hangups of other people, like, say, nerds geeks and kids who wear floods. It seems to me that districts would be free to decide how they wanted to write up their policies, but they *could not* treat harassment based on sexual orientation, actual or perceived, as somehow a little difference of opinion, just like harassment based on race or religion wouldn't be treated as such. How that harms the cause of anyone's equality is too subtle an argument for me to appreciate I guess.
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 2:08 a.m.
Why can't they just say nobody can harass anybody? The principle would be don't talk to or bother that kid again It seems to me teachers etc should be smart enough to figure it out
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:51 a.m.
I don't like it when kids/people etc. are nasty to each other. But I don't want laws tailored to fit every single possible permutation of nastiness. E.g 1. can't pick on fifth level half-even Magic Users. 2. Kids with flooders 3. Kids who forgot their socks 4. Kids with mental disabilities.. 5. Kids from poor families They are all wrong... They are all wrong. simply put tell kids they can't pick on kids.
David Briegel
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:10 a.m.
Ghost, as always, you are right on target. And poor Shep, can you imagine if there was any discrimination against white Christians? I wondered how long it would take for the pro bullying apologists to appear. The Christian "victim of the hour". Shep proved it didn't take long! Now, imagine if Armstrong had stalked Shervill. What do you imagine Shep's reaction would have been? And xmo, all the Gov had to do was bargain in good faith. Something TeaPublican seem incapable of!!!
shepard145
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 11:29 p.m.
Once again, the state is working to make "victim" of the hour, the most important class in Michigan. This is why Michigan needs a part time legislator. State reps are elected, go to Lansing and once there rather then getting down to the hard work of governing a failing state, they form drum circles and focus on how to cook up nonsensical legislation that will get their names in the paper. These people need to be forced into finding second jobs to keep them busy and US out of trouble. This is just more redundant legal gibberish to dump on our school administrators and make lawyers richer.
shepard145
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 11:20 p.m.
Some bullying is acceptable, perfectly normal and part of life. Boys will be boys so to speak. Those who start as victims have the opportunity to pull themselves up, get into shape or make other changes that help them overcome bullying on their own while building character and real self esteem. Such independence and fortitude is pathetically out of fashion these days - especially in Ann Arbor. Seems a far worse environment is one in which dorks and nerds wander the halls with their mommy's attorney's number on speed dial, the latest nanny state law written on their t-shirts and daring the normal kids to fight them.
Meg
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:10 p.m.
Violence and fear don't build character and "real self esteem". They create an environment where children see suicide as a reasonable alternative to continued torment. It's okay. No one will be required to grow a conscience, including so-called "adults". They just won't be permitted to make themselves feel bigger by hurting people they view as less powerful or worthy. It's a shame when those feelings of inferiority persist into adulthood, isn't it?
Macabre Sunset
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:30 a.m.
Bullies typically target kids they can physically dominate. But it's nice to know that they have the option to magically gain six inches and 50 pounds in the gym at a moment's notice. Can you explain, specifically, when bullying is acceptable? Should physically smaller boys (boys being boys) be allowed to carry knives to school to make a fight a little more equal? Guns, perhaps? Boys being boys, where should we draw the line?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 11:09 p.m.
xmo wrote: ". . . but when you see the Wisconsin teachers trying to Bully [sic] the Governor . . . " Yes, the people who are protesting that their collective bargaining rights are being taken away are the bullies, and the Republican governor and legislature, who picked this fight to begin with, are the poor victims. As is so typical of true bullies, the governor of Wisconsin expected his victim to roll over and play dead. And, like all true bullies, once confronted by their victim, the governor and his mewling sycophants are claiming that he's the victim. It's laughable. Good Night and Good Luck
Ellen
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 11:57 p.m.
Nicely done, ERMG!
Macabre Sunset
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 10:47 p.m.
I agree that anti-bullying policies need to be stronger. But by classifying victims, this is just a political move that actually weakens the cause. I fear that if Armstrong has his way, this policy will become as harmful to minorities as affirmative action. No bullying is acceptable, even if the "victim" is a straight white male student.
John B.
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 9:49 p.m.
Some people are part of the problem, some are part of the solution.
braggslaw
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 10:14 p.m.
Agreed
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 10:02 p.m.
Indeed. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 8:41 p.m.
Don't all schools already have a policy on violence or improper language? Don't schools already try to stop bullying? I am a bit confused, what would this new legislation add.
Meg
Sun, Feb 20, 2011 : 12:06 p.m.
It's impossible to force people to change their minds. It's very possible to make acting on that prejudice so unpleasant that they opt not to. Safe schools don't require people changing their minds about the hate they learned at home and some want so desperately to cling to, they require that people be held responsible for the actions that hate leads to.
braggslaw
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 10:45 p.m.
Interesting When I was picked on in school I would tell the teacher and then kid would have to shut his yap I do not remember all the insults but the usually involved race or sexual orientation Usuaaly the teacher would keep it under control at school but the after school fight was inevitable My. Point? It isl difficult to force people to be tolerant
Meg
Sat, Feb 19, 2011 : 10:12 p.m.
Bullying of LGBT students is not included as a class-based example of bullying in many districts, nor is it covered under state law. Without that distinction, the adverse behavior is assumed to be an interpersonal issue rather than an example of group-based oppression, and the victim is often assumed to be as much at fault as the perpetrator.