"Dasha-pasha, fat Dasha" — and the crowd laughs. The parent of the child doing the name-calling is doubly ashamed: of the words, and of how pleased he is with himself. But teasing is not one thing but three: a game in which both laugh; a jab that buys the crowd's laughter at one child's expense; and systematic mockery of the same child, which has another name — bullying. Research shows that they are told apart not by the words but by who laughs and who walks away. Below is one scene taken apart: what to find out before acting, what to choose between, what each choice leads to, and what is known about it.
The scene
A courtyard, a crowd of children aged seven to nine. Your son, loud enough for everyone: "Dasha-pasha, fat Dasha!" The crowd laughs. Dasha says nothing and walks off to the bench. He is pleased: the laughter is his.
One and the same scene is several different situations. They differ not in the words but in whether both are laughing, who the audience is, and whether it keeps happening to the same child. The scene is an illustration, not a real family.
What to find out before acting
- A game or a jab? In a teasing game both laugh, the roles switch, and the one who is hurt can stop it with one word. In a jab one side laughs and the other falls silent and walks away — like Dasha. The study below defines teasing as playful provocation — and explains when it stops being play.
- About what? Teasing about nonsense ("Petya the turnip") and about the body, looks, family or poverty are different things. The second hurts always, whatever the tone.
- Who laughs? The audience is the fuel. If the crowd laughs, the word becomes a way of taking a place in it; without spectators most teasing is never said.
- How often, and at whom? One joke at anybody is an episode. Time after time at the same Dasha is a system, and it has a different name: bullying.
- Where do the words come from? "Fat" the child heard somewhere as a taunt: at home, from older children, from videos. If the family jokes about other people's looks, he does the same — only louder.
The forks: what you can do and what each one costs
If it is a mutual game — both laugh and the roles switch
Action. Do not step into the game, but state the rule in advance and once: you may tease someone who is willing, and never about the body, looks or family. Teach a stop-word — "enough" means enough, for everyone, adults included. At home, tease only the way you would want your own child teased.
Cost. Accepting that teasing is part of children's culture, not a vice, and not banning laughter.
What to watch. Whether he stops when the other child says "stop". That is the one test that separates a game from a jab.
If it is a jab in front of an audience — Dasha has walked off, the crowd laughs
Action. Stop it briefly and without a scene: call him aside, do not tell him off in front of the crowd — humiliation in public he will pass on to Dasha at the first opportunity. In private — not "aren't you ashamed" but a question about the other side: "Dasha went off to the bench; what is she feeling right now?" Repair by action, not by a formal "sorry": invite her into the game, share. And a conversation about the laughter: the crowd is laughing not at a joke but at Dasha — and that laughter costs the one who buys it dearly.
Cost. A spoiled walk and a conversation he does not enjoy. The temptation to wave it away — "kids tease" — is strong, but that is exactly how a jab becomes a habit.
What to watch. Whether it repeats at the same girl. Whether he finds another way to make the crowd laugh — without a victim.
If it is systematic, at the same child, about something painful — and with a crowd
Action. Call things by their name — to yourself, not to him in front of everyone: this is bullying, and he is in the ringleader's role. Do not excuse it ("she's odd herself", "he's only joking") and do not humiliate him in return. Work with the school or nursery, not against them. Find out what is behind it: status, fear of becoming a target himself, imitation. The study below shows that children who buy status with mockery are themselves more often rejected and lonely — not an excuse, but the key to the conversation. Check at home: are belittling jokes the norm there?
Cost. Admitting it in front of other parents and at school. Denial is the one thing guaranteed to make it worse.
What to watch. Repeats after you intervene. His reaction to a direct ban. Whether he has friends he does not humiliate.
There are no ready-made lines here on purpose: every family has its own words. All three forks mean the same thing: where a joke ends is decided by the one being teased — and the adult watches who laughs and who walks away.
What may be behind it
- Laughter as a reward. The crowd laughed — so I belong here. A taunt is the cheapest way to get that laughter.
- Testing the limits of words. What may be said and what may not, a child learns by experience — and by adults' reactions.
- Imitation. Jokes about "fat people" at home, older children calling names, a vlogger earning on mockery — the child takes what is ready-made.
- Fear of becoming the target. Whoever teases first is not teased — that is how it looks at seven.
- Envy and jealousy. Dasha reads better or is friends with the one he would like as a friend.
- Not knowing how to be funny otherwise. Humour is a skill; if the only genre available is at someone's expense, that is the one the child uses.
What research says
Teasing is playful provocation; it is most hostile from those higher in status
Who and on whom. Dacher Keltner and colleagues, 2001, Psychological Bulletin. A conceptual analysis and review of research on teasing.
What they found. The authors define teasing as playful provocation — a comment on something that matters to the target — and show how the same tease can lead to closeness or to hostility. Norm violations and conflict are the usual triggers. With age children tease more playfully, especially around 11–12, and understand teasing better. Teasing is more frequent and more hostile when it comes from people of higher status, from familiar others and from men; gender differences are smaller than assumed.
What it does not prove. A review, not a single study, and mostly about older children and adults. But for the scene above it gives the main criterion: whether it is a game or a jab is decided by the relationship between the two sides, not by the words.
Aggression through words and relationships is a distinct form — and it costs the aggressors dearly
Who and on whom. Nicki Crick and Jennifer Grotpeter, 1995, Child Development. 491 children from third to sixth grade; peer nominations.
What they found. Relational aggression — harm through relationships: exclusion, rumours, humiliation — proved to be a distinct form, different from fights and open insults; girls used it more than boys. Children prone to it were markedly more often rejected by peers and reported more loneliness, depression and isolation.
What it does not prove. One country, peer ratings, one point in time — an association, not a cause. But the conclusion for a parent is direct: a child who holds his place in the crowd with mockery pays for it with loneliness.
Mockery rests on those who laugh — bullying has roles
Who and on whom. Christina Salmivalli and colleagues, 1996, Aggressive Behavior. 573 Finnish sixth-graders aged 12–13.
What they found. Besides the victim and the ringleader, bullying has an assistant, a reinforcer — the one who laughs and eggs on — a defender and an outsider. The roles were related to the child's standing in the group.
What it does not prove. One country and one age group; a study of bullying, not of a one-off taunt. But the mechanism is the same in the courtyard: without the crowd's laughter a jab has no point — and the conversation with the ringleader child should be about the laughter.
For a parent the three studies point the same way: teasing becomes harm not through words but through relationships — when one side laughs and the other walks away; and the one who buys laughter at someone else's expense pays for it himself.
By age
| Age | What changes |
|---|---|
| 3–5 | Teasing is a game with sounds and forbidden words ("poo-poo head"), hardly about the person at all. One rule: nothing about the body or the family; the rest passes by itself. |
| 6–9 | The case above is about this age. Teasing about looks and for the crowd; it hurts for real. Teach the stop-word, tell a game from a jab, repair by action. |
| 10–12 | The peak of playful teasing: banter is the language of friendship, the child understands irony. But the same language becomes bullying when aimed at one person; watch the target, not the tone. |
| 13–14 | Sarcasm and put-downs as a style, partly online. A conversation about how a joke differs from humiliation — as equals and in private; on taunts aimed at him — in the case on bullying. |
Where culture comes in. In some families and countries banter is the normal way of talking even with toddlers; in others any mockery is rudeness. The forks above do not argue with that: where a joke ends is decided by the one being teased — and that rule works in any culture.
When to see a specialist
A taunt in the courtyard is part of growing up. Take notice if the child systematically humiliates the same person and does not stop after you intervene; if he has no friends, only people he mocks; if the mockery goes together with cruelty, damaging other people's things, lying — then it is a conversation with a child psychologist and with the school. And separately: if it is your child who is being teased and he withdraws, is afraid to go to school, "loses" his things — that is no longer about his character but about bullying.
What a child learns when a joke is stopped where it hurts
That laughter comes in kinds: the kind that brings people together and the kind that costs someone a place on the bench. That "stop" is a word that stops everyone, adults included. And that you can be funny without a victim — that is taught at home, by joking about situations rather than people. How a rule holds without shouting — in the case on boundaries; how to teach noticing other people's feelings — in the article on empathy.
Sources
- Keltner D., Capps L., Kring A. M., Young R. C., Heerey E. A. Just teasing: A conceptual analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 2001, 127(2), 229–248. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.229
- Crick N. R., Grotpeter J. K. Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 1995, 66(3), 710–722. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00900.x
- Salmivalli C., Lagerspetz K., Björkqvist K., Österman K., Kaukiainen A. Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 1996, 22(1), 1–15. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T
The scene is an illustration, not a real family. This material does not replace an in-person consultation with a specialist.