Cyberbullying

I felt like neither of the studies described in our textbook were sufficient enough to make a decision on this issue. On one hand, I would not be at all surprised if males were more likely to bully online as well as offline. This is the general impression I get from mean people online is that they're male. However, that may just be perception on my part due to the fact that males are shown to be more likely to bully offline. And on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if females used the internet to bully more often than offline because if the anonymity. I also wouldn't be surprised if both of those are true. If there are more male bullies overall (both on and offline), but more female bullies online than offline.

The real problem I had was that the studies in the book seemed to be too vague in their definition of cyberbullying. Especially the first one where an option was 1-3 times that they had been bullied. It is incredibly easy to offend someone online unintentionally. Once in late elementary school (6th grade I believe), I found what I thought was a funny cartoon face with crossed eyes, and the tongue sticking out, and sent it to my best friend with the joking caption "This looks like you!" Poor taste? Yeah, probably. But really, I was just being a goofy kid who didn't understand how easily an email could be misconstrued. I certainly didn't intend to "bully" her, or really to make fun of her looks. In fact, the reason I thought it was ironic and funny was because, in my opinion, she was quite pretty. She didn't talk to me for a week because she took it seriously and was hurt. But I certainly wouldn't say I was bullying, because that wasn't my intent at all. She, on the other hand, might have thought so. Especially if she hadn't been my best friend.

With definitions as vague as with that study, it's easy for things intended as jokes could be construed as "bullying." It's really hard to prove what the intent of the sender is, but really easy to ask the perceptions of the person on the receiving end. That in addition to the fact that the studied group was very small and localized, and really can't be safely generalized to all of Canada, let alone internationally.

I also had a problem with the phrasing of the issue in the first place, because it places more weight on the people who bully, rather than those who are bullied. Also, if guys are more likely to bully in general, then cyberbullying is influenced by gender because guys are more likely to bully both ways, which is qualified by their gender. If girls are more likely to bully online than offline, then that is also a difference qualified by gender. If girls are less likely to bully anywhere, than that affects cyberbullying on the basis of gender. The only way to say "no, cyberbullying isn't influenced by gender" is if both bullies and victims of cyberbullying are divided equally among genders. And that is shown to be false in both the "yes" and "no" position of the book.

Questions:

1) Have you ever unintentionally offended or insulted someone online?

2) How could a study more accurately reflect misunderstandings?

3) Would it be better if the book addressed victims of cyberbullying and cyberbullies (both in relation to gender) as separate issues?