CHAPTER 7 LEARNER- ON- LEARNER VIOLENCE
7.4 Verbal violence 180
7.4.4 Factors contributing to verbal violence 184
Several factors were identified by the participants as contributing to learner-to-learner verbal violence. TTurner 3 from THS noted that some learners verbally abused other learners due to various societal factors which included unemployment, rude parents, single parents, absent fathers and young parents:
The main problem of these learners to be so violent or verbally violent is something that happens in their households. It doesn’t begin in the school. It begins at home. You will find that a mother will just call her child a bitch. If the
girl, for example, arrives late at home the mother will just say ‘where do you come from bitch?’ Then the child takes whatever she learnt at home into the school. This whole vulgar language begins at home. The parents of some of these kids are young. Some of them do not know their fathers. Some of them are staying with their grandparents. Some of them do not have parents at all. So as much as there can be some sorts of counselling within the school, we will never end this verbal violence or vulgar language. It has to end at home. Some of these kids’
mothers are 27 years old while they are 14 years. They also have their own kids.
This child is staying in the two roomed house. So it is continuation of a generation. These learners come to school without any vision to learn. The mother is staying at home doing nothing. The father is not there.
TMediator3 from the same school believed that some learners verbally attacked others because they were teenagers trying to be mean or having fun:
Teasing and calling names are common among learners. You know with teenagers teasing is done just for being mean, sometimes they are just being malicious.
Sometimes they will say they do it just for the fun of doing it. They will say they did not mean it seriously.
Some learners experienced verbal abuse instigated against them by their peers due to the socio-economic status of their families. This was revealed by some of the participants in a separate discussion with two different focus groups at MHS:
Teasing may be as a result of your background and family. Maybe you are not rich and other learners are rich, so they tease you. For example, they will say you go for feeding scheme, why don’t you buy lunch. You are poor. Also the way you wear your uniform. Some learners have shoes which are opened and they are teased for their shoes. They are teased for wearing a yellow shirt which is not bright like other shirts (Focus MHS group boys).
Learners talk bad things about those who go for feeding scheme. They mock you.
They will say you are poor, you don’t have money, and you depend on feeding
scheme. But with me I don’t care whatever they say because I need food. I just go and eat (Focus group MHS boys and girls).
The findings illustrate that there was a causal relationship between home and school in terms of learner-to-learner verbal violence. Some of the learners were said to be using verbal violence against others because they imitated their parents who used vulgar language. In addition, it appeared that the nature of some family structures such as a single parent and young parent families crippled the capability of parents to supervise and guide children in acceptable behaviour.
The findings revealed that lesbian and gay learners in the two schools were subjected to verbal ridicule because of their sexual orientation which appeared to be defiance against what was generally considered as ‘normal.’ This homophobic attack against lesbians and gays was done through language with the aim of sending a strong message that some learners disliked, despised and/or hated lesbians and gays. At South African societal level there exists religious and cultural intolerance of relationships that defy normative gender standards (Stephens, 2011). Such intolerance was demonstrated through verbal expressions in the two schools by some learners against lesbian and gay learners. The macrosystem of Bronfenbrenner’s ecosystemic theory indicate that culture, beliefs and values which exist in the broader society indirectly affect individual members of the society (Santrock, 2008). The verbal attacks of gay and lesbian learners by some learners in the two participant schools may be regarded as an indirect influence that a broader South African society has on such learners. It was also apparent that some boys in the two schools directed gender based verbal violence against girls by labelling them derogatory names.
The socio-economic status of some parents seemed to have a bearing on violence which was perpetrated or experienced by some learners in the two schools. Factors such as poverty caused stress on parents and as a result they might be violent to their children (Burnett, 1998; Burton, 2008). Leaners that experienced verbal violence at home were likely to verbally abuse their fellow learners. Literature on social learning theory suggest that children whose parents use vulgar language or verbal violence were likely to imitate their parents by insulting their own peers (Slavin, 2009; Swartz et al., 2004).
At MHS some learners were verbally abused by their peers for eating food provided by
the government through a feeding scheme. In the eyes of instigators of verbal violence eating such food illustrated poverty. Another factor which seemed to indirectly contribute to learner on learner verbal violence was young and single parents who were unlikely to be mature enough to take care of their children and teach them acceptable societal norms, values and beliefs.