Houellebecq - I will not claim say 'blame the victim'. Instead I will simply inform you of my own situation.

Firstly I did nothing to attract the attention of the bullies, yet I was constantly - and I am not exaggerating here - constantly assaulted in the school yard. If the same incidents had occurred today the assailant would be arrested and charged. How do you justify the fact that these same children who are experimenting with 'power' are not being shown the real world consequences of their actions?

Secondly, not only was I physically assaulted but also verbally taunted - a lame attempt to goad me into a fight - yet in the real world if someone continues to push until you snap you can claim provocation. How do you explain away the fact that in schools both the taunter and taunted are punished?

Finally, I was subjected to extortion attempts, sexual assault from other older students (yes, it does happen), attempted physiological manipulation, property destruction and many other things. Yet the students involved, and their parents, refused any responsibility in these matters. Yet if these things happened later in life those involved would be convicted of multiple offences in short order. So can you please explain how these individuals can learn a code of ethics if no one teaches what is required by society?

I find that you know nothing of the reality. Please crawl back into your hole and stay there!

The author recommends sending bullies to to a tough boot camp. That might result in them simply learning new techniques of bullying. I have never been in a civilian boot camp, but I have been in a military one. Nobody bullied me, but I saw many others bullied there. Sometimes those set in authority were bullies. It is legitimate to send people to boot camps to toughen them up for combat. It does that.

However, I don't think sending people to boot camp makes them more considerate of others and probably makes them more likely to bully.

Oh Auther! Time to get over it already.

'Firstly I did nothing to attract the attention of the bullies'
Yes you did. You allowed them to treat you in a certain way.

'If the same incidents had occurred today the assailant would be arrested and charged.'
No doubt. Proof that bullying is being handled well enough, and that the current flavour of the month status it has in the outrage industry is all media driven. It's no big problem.

'How do you justify the fact that these same children who are experimenting with 'power' are not being shown the real world consequences? '

I don't have to justify it. I'm not against general school discipline. Just as I'm against terrorism laws but for general policing of the existing laws. No 'special programs' or initiatives are needed. General discipline is all that's required. Bullying isn't something special. Besides, the police aren't everywhere.

'How do you explain away the fact that in schools both the taunter and taunted are punished? '
The law never encourages vigilantism. Parents punish both children in a fight as it is mostly impossible to ascertain who is in the wrong, and it encourages the children to sort out their squabbles independently.

'I was subjected to extortion attempts, sexual assault from other older students (yes, it does happen), attempted physiological manipulation, property destruction and many other things.'

You sound like one of life's natural victims. Build a bridge, it was years ago. You're older and wiser now.

Every kid has been bullied at some stage, most get over it and learn to use humour, violence, avoidance, and acquire strategic relationships that will protect them (I used a combination of these). I don't think we should encourage a society where everyone is encouraged to dob each other in and disempower themselves to a third party that cant possibly protect them.

Teaches cant be everywhere, and bullying is something you will never stamp out. General discipline against violence is necessary but at some point kids need to learn to find their own coping mechanisms and learn the necessary social skills.

On one hand we see increased 'pussification' of youngsters with parents, schools, civil authorities and legislators obsessed with 'safety' - a phenomenom that's largely replaced Common Sense. Not saying this is a bad thing - just it's been overdone.

On the other hand we have a culture of violence expressed predominately through visual media. Recall 'experimenting' as a child aged about 8, using Grandfathers huge umbrella to 'parachute' off the shed roof. A cousin and friend were co-conspirators. Can't remember the exact movie or cartoon that inspired this idiocy but that's where the idea came from. My cousin, having 'borrowed' the umbrella, insisted he be first which saved me the visit to hospital with a fractured ankle ... (Got my bum tanned instead.) The point being kids do not always have the skills to separate fact & fantasy. Video games with extremely realistic depictions of violence and the dedication to playing them concerns. Apart from 'glorifying' violence these games trivialise the effects. Could this partly explain the seemingly increased incidence of high level violence amongst kids? They have unrealistic ideas about the consequences of violent acts?

I agree that it's good for kids to sort out their own squabbles - within boundaries. Kids need sorting out when they go over the top and those who have 'victim' written across their foreheads need protecting. 'Victims' sometimes encourage negative attention but more often are shy, awkward or slow and easy pickings for bullies. BTW I was small and sometimes seen as an easy target but when picked turned mad-dog which tended to discourage further torment.

However - get caught fighting, get 6 of the best and then probably worse from your folks if they thought you were at fault. Unfortunately that don't happen any more because Social Engineers don't believe parents, schools or law enforcement should wield authority over children - precious little innocents they are with all rights and little responsibility ...

Unless there is a pendulum swing back to more balanced approachs to discipline in the home and schools and social values, don't expect improvement.

I would agree with Curmudgeon

It is unlikely the bullying has increased over the years, if the murder rate is an indicator of less serious crimes.

The murder rate has actually decreased.

But the so-called disruptive students and bullies are very easy to sort out.

Simply ask them a question.

EG “What do you hope to gain by calling Tommy a gay”

Or “What do you hope to gain by calling Mary a fat pig”

Bullies usually don’t like answering questions, and quickly lose their incentive to bully others if they know that they will be asked questions later on.

How teachers have not leant this simple and highly effective strategy is difficult to understand.

But then, the most constant and damaging bullying I have seen in schools actually came from the teachers.

And I know that many of them do not like being asked too many questions, or having to show any accountability.

I am a teacher, as many of you will know. I'm lucky enough to teach in a school in which bullying is only a very minor problem. Perhaps lucky isn't the right word - we work very hard to keep a handle on bullying.

One of the problems is, I think, the special status given to bullying. As Houellebecq says (correct me if I'm wrong here), rather than policing 'bullying', schools need to police the individual acts that, once they become systematic, earn the label of 'bullying'. That's what my school does well. A punch is a punch, whether it is a one-off or part of a pattern of behaviour. A punch earns the kid a week off classes, sitting outside the deputy's office and doing work in isolation. It's not a holiday, but isolation with regular harsh lectures. It's not pleasant. An insult is an insult, a shove is a shove and a rumour is a rumour. They are dealt with harshly from the outset, rather than waiting for a pattern to emerge. While we have an anti-bullying policy, it is rarely implemented because we don't allow things to escalate to the point where they are called 'bullying'.

If I was an administrator, I would like to take things further. A punch is a punch, and a punch is a criminal offence. If punching somebody led to a trip to the police station, I think fewer students would be brave enough to do it. Perhaps it's time we enforced that at school, rather than allowing criminal activities to be dealt with locally. It would send a strong message. The same applies on the football field, the netball court, the cricket pitch ... if the behaviour would lead to an arrest in the street, why is it dealt with informally when 'role models' carry it out in front of live audiences of 40,000 and TV audiences of an even greater size?