iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us

by Jean M. Twenge

Taking steps to protect children from bullying by peers is, in my view, long overdue. On the other hand, I also agree with critics that such programs sometimes take things too far, teaching children that the normal ins and outs of childhood friendships are bullying or equating hurt feelings with physical harm. Many antibullying policies are so broad and vague that they may make students afraid of any interaction. Aiken Elementary School in West Hartford, Connecticut, defines bullying as any communication or physical act that “causes physical or emotional harm” to a student. The policy carefully defines everything from who is a school employee to which things are considered “mobile electronic devices” but does not define “emotional harm.” There is no denying that bullying causes emotional harm—but so do other, more ambiguous, childhood experiences, such as a friend deciding to play with someone else that day, common playground insults, or arguments over the rules of a game. The way the policy is written, any child who hurts another child’s feelings, unintentionally or not, is a bully. This may create a situation in which children are constantly aware of negative interactions, afraid they are the victim of this terrible thing they’ve heard about called bullying. Antibullying programs may, as a side effect, have shaped iGen children into kids who are constantly on the lookout for being harmed.