School banning banter

[Citrusblast92u]

DS is in year 11. They had a whole school assembly yesterday's entitled 'banning bants', this includes banter between friends. One strike and they're in detention, 2 and they have to attend a workshop, 3 and parents have to attend the workshop, 4 and the police are called.

I asked him what they meant by bants and he said anything that anyone might find offensive. His mates have spent many hours at our house. They're a lovely bunch of lads, very polite and kind but their main form of communication with each other is piss taking.

Just after some opinions really rather than an AIBU.

Yabu-banter should be banned
Yanbu-they can't ban banter

@StarDolphins but a large part of male banter is being disrespectful against females, and if it is meant to be something that parents need to deal with, that might be problematic as quite a few mums on here don’t seem to have a problem with it, hence schools have to deal with it

I don’t have a problem with friendly banter, i do have a problem with misogyny. I haven’t seen anyone that’s said it’s no problem? But I would put this in the behaviour/bullying category rather than banter.

Why not target those that are disrespectful to females?

I think mostly YANBU but.... Something needs to be done as this excuse of "it's just bants innit" is a new excuse for bullying and I honestly think we've got to the stage of some kids fully believing that it's universally acceptable to bully someone as long as you label it as being 'bants'

I agree that SM/porn is definitely contributing towards the issue. This is why we are seeing a rise in toxic masculinity and why schools are trying to combat it. Perhaps the phrase “banning banter” is where the school have gone wrong. I know there is another campaign in schools where the phrase is “it is never just banter”. This targets the issue more as racial, homophobic or misogynistic slurs cannot be used under the guise of “banter”. However, the school in the OPs post have clearly just done blanket assemblies with “banning banter” as the title to catch the attention of students and make them listen - it has worked. I bet they gave examples of joking with friends in a way that isn’t offensive and “banter” that is. I am sure they will target specific groups once they have reports of this type of language being used but it relies on people reporting it which is why they have done the assemblies. It’s to empower students to speak up and report issues they previously may have put up with as “banter” when in reality it is bullying.

Language reflect societal attitudes and lots of the language used in schools is homophobic, racist, misogynistic and ableist. If schools are targeting that, even if it does only scratch the surface, it has to be a positive thing.

You should read the Casey Review. I am sure lots of the officers would have said their language and behaviour was just “banter” too or boys being boys.

We do not have free speech in the U.K.

We never have had.

Genuinely don't understand why people think this.

So this has recently become an issue because Ofsted are looking closely at it when they inspect schools.

However the rest of society chooses to define banter, many teenage boys use racist sexist and homophobic language and consider it banter.

A school recently was rated inadequate over this issue because it was felt that the school were not creating a safe environment and girls, non-whites and LGBTQ students were being bullied in the name of banter.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nngjd4zw0o.amp

Now you might think that the police would not be interested in "banter" but when it becomes racist hate speech they do have at the minimum a duty to record it.

There is also a big focus on peer-on-peer abuse. Again, it is not uncommon for teenage boys at secondary school to sexually assault girls. It is incredibly common to hear teenage boys making very sexist remarks and even threatening to rape/assault girls in their class or schools.

There has for a long time been a focus on preventing abuse in schools. There is now a recognition that a lot of the abuse is peer to peer and ofsted amongst other government agencies are trying to work to reduce sexual assaults, hate speech and racist incidents.

The majority of the perpetrators of these are teenage boys who when spoken to about any of these incidents (up to and including full on rape) say "it was just bantz".

No could only afford the CD lol she seems pretty sane as an adult though think she survived the trauma

Agree @Combattingthemoaners.

It is obvious those mocking do not work in schools especially - listen tit nose is us who do. “Banter” has been banned because so many students use the term to excuse offensive language. Ofsted have raised it. It’s in our safeguarding training. Banning banter will make my job easier as I can now just punish a student for calling another “gay” without being told “it was only banter”.

I'd not class any of those as either. Calling someone fatty or gay is insulting, if done multiple times could certainly be bullying.

Below is the definition of banter. As you can see the distinction is 'good-humoured'. If I had a friend who I knew well and she commented on my new haircut and called me gay, it would be banter. She know's I'm not gay, she would have said it in a jokey way.

banter /băn′tər/

noun
Good-humored, playful, or teasing conversation.
The act of bantering; joking or jesting; humorous or good-humored raillery; pleasantry.
Similar: pleasantry
Good humoured, playful, typically spontaneous conversation.

Completely agree. Unfortunately some of the posters don’t seem to understand the issue and are seeing it as school’s stopping humour or laughter in general. They are not seeing that “banter” is code name for offensive and derogatory language. They are probably the same people stating LTB when these boys grow into men who are abusive/unkind/offensive/lazy. But no, we are just easily offended! Boils my blood to be honest.

But if someone is offended by someone commenting on their new hair cut then it’s not banter.

People shouldn’t be able to use banter as an excuse to insult or bully. People shouldn’t throw around words like gay as a joke or an insult.

It is insulting to gay people though as your friend would be suggesting there is something wrong with looking gay but also how does someone look gay? It is based on stereotypes.

I am gay. I grew up hearing all of those kind of comments and was therefore terrified of being myself. Dyke cut etc. It may be “banter” to you because you’re a heterosexual. It isn’t banter to someone struggling with their sexuality who can hear it. You don’t need to put down other groups to make someone else laugh. It is very damaging in schools for teenage boys who may be struggling with their sexuality when the words puff or queer or gay are constantly used as negatives.

My children's high school banned it years ago but it's hard to police and of course still goes on. I think the main idea is to make kids think what about what they say and saying something as a joke isn't always harmless.

I suppose its the context of the banter being used. My son and his friends, all Deaf, when at school would be 'to an outsider' quite offensive and disabilist to each other using their Deafness . But if another person non deaf was to do the same, then that would be unacceptable.
Not sure if that makes sense or not?

It does yeah. They’re also doing it within their friendship group who all share the same humour. It is self deprecating humour, Brits are experts at it. This humour (I’m going to call it that instead of banter as that is what people are getting caught up on) used by some boys in schools is often directed at girls outside their friendship group and vulnerable students. It often goes unreported and therefore that’s why the school are highlighting it as an issue that won’t be tolerated.

Have they defined "banter", or does it rely on a teachers option/ prejudices?

@GrouachMacbeth I would assume they would be mainly targeting racist, homophobic, disablist and misogynistic banter. Would you call those a teacher’s prejudice?

Words such as retard, spastic, puff, gay, slut, slag, whore or racial slurs. Even behaviour such as wetting girls shirts so boys can see their bras - this happens. I don’t think my prejudice or opinion really comes into it. We all know it isn’t right. You wouldn’t get away with that in the workplace or in Asda or Morrisons. It should be no different in a school. We have a duty of care to teach children right from wrong and that also includes the language they use.

I guess one example would be the other day when a teenager who likes being centre of attention and a "lad" was being a little overly chatty, so I said that as he loves being the centre of attention, then he could use his voice to show how the pitch and volume of the sound changed and sing for us. Obviously he didn't want to so I asked was it because he had a voice like a toad being strangled. It was all light hearted and jokey and an opportunity to remind him that if he wasn't so keen to participate, perhaps he could stop interrupting.

The alternative would have been him having his name multiple times on the board for his interruptions and irrelevant comments and him being sent to the isolation room on the third interruption.

With some kids "banter" and keeping things light and jokey can be the difference in them remaining in the classroom and learning something rather than being removed and missing out on education.

I know the kids I teach well and use relevant strategies to get them to do the right thing.

The whole point of banter is it being light hearted and between people who know each other well so no offence is ever intended.

Banter would not happen between two people that don't know each other that well. It wouldn't be banter, rather bullying, and that's fair enough to stop and punish.

I can imagine that they mean the sort of ‘banter’ that verges on bullying and is defended as mere teasing, even though it can be fully intended to hurt.

In my day you were told to stop being so sensitive, you ‘need your corners knocked off’, - ‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, words can never hurt me’, etc.

I would hope that attitudes have changed.

@TwinklyAmberOrca I can see how that benefits the pupil in question, but does he get the message not to do it again? I feel for autistic kids like my son who are totally stressed out by low level disruption and poor behaviour and then have the excuse of 'bants' when they are bullied too. It's not banter if one person doesn't understand and is upset by it.

My son is not learning anything in some classes because of this disruptive behaviour.

I think it's difficult to be relaxed and jokey like this while giving pupils clear boundaries.

He was angelic for the rest of the lesson. He'll probably need prompting in the future, but he knows the boundaries of what is and what isn't acceptable.

I also have an autistic child and we work hard at him having to get used to "annoying" people in the classroom, as that's what real life is like and he needs to learn to tolerate it.

All kids are different and learn in different ways. An autistic child's silent lesson with hands raised and no background chatter is many kids idea of awful and would make them feel uncomfortable.

It's about trying to strike a balance between respect, fun, humour etc...

Some parts of my lessons are quiet and serious discussions with hands raised only, other parts we have a good laugh and it can be quite loud.

No, I'd call them hate speech and I would presume that a well run school identified them as such and dealt with them appropriately.

oh yes we do...its just that free speech, like every other freedom, has consequences.