It’s All About Relationships
Early in my teaching career, I, like most teachers, experienced moments that showed me education is about much more than instruction. Certainly, the latter sentiment is familiar enough—a cliché or at least idealistic platitude regarding the many roles teachers play in students’ lives, both in class and beyond. But the realities of daily instruction constantly challenge and expand how we understand teaching—not only as a profession, but as a vocation, a calling that demands we meet the needs of others in often unexpected ways.
Navigating the Complexities of Classroom Dynamics
My first full-time teaching position was at Georgia Tech. I was in my early 20s—only a couple years older than my students. At that point in my career, I found myself navigating not only the complexities of academia but also the unpredictable dynamics of human relationships in the classroom. One day, in the middle of a discussion on the role of rhetoric in argument—a very real argument erupted between two football players in class. I had always assumed my classroom to be a safe space, and while I knew very well that I played the central role in cultivating that sense of safety, I had not anticipated needing to defend it in the face of physical conflict. And, also, did I mention they were football players? NCAA Division 1 football players? Somehow, I managed to diffuse the situation with humor and the relationships I’d built. I even brought the moment back to our discussion of rhetoric—I told the class that if a fight broke out, I would start crying. Everyone laughed—luckily, but not all such moments end so peacefully.
Education as Humanization
The experience I had with the football players in my classroom highlights a deeper truth about education: it’s not just about the curriculum, but about managing human relationships. Some argue that education is fundamentally about how we relate to others and recognize our shared humanity (Bingham and Siordkin). Paulo Freire views education as an ongoing process of humanization, countering the dehumanizing forces in society. For Freire, dehumanization occurs when relationships break down and become struggles for control, reducing individuals to objects of dominance. In contrast, humanization emerges through authentic dialogue, where mutual recognition and cooperation replace hierarchical dynamics.
In that moment, humor became a tool of humanization, transforming a tense situation into one focused on connection and mutual understanding. Rather than allowing the interaction to escalate into conflict, humor disrupted the power dynamics, reorienting the classroom toward dialogue and empathy. This reflects Freire’s idea that humanization happens when interactions move away from dominance and toward mutual recognition. Psychologically, humor fosters shared experiences and reduces perceived threats (Martin and Ford), which helps restore relationships. In this sense, humor preserved the classroom’s relational fabric, aligning with Freire’s vision of education as a space where dialogue fosters humanization and prevents dehumanization.
From Dehumanization to Bullying
Freire’s work emphasizes the critical role that humanizing relationships play in education. For him, dehumanization is not only the act of stripping others of their humanity but also the process of reducing one’s own humanity in the act of oppressing others. When individuals engage in acts of domination—whether in personal conflicts or institutional structures—they themselves become distanced from their own humanity.
For me, these dynamics have also informed how I see bullying, whether in school, online, or in the various iterations continue into adult life. Yet, for me, Freire’s work makes the relation between bullying and education particularly critical. If Freire sees education as a process of humanization through relationships, then bullying is not merely an impediment or distraction from learning. Rather, bullying is antithetical to the very essence of education itself.
Freire’s Insights on Dehumanization
For my part, Freire has the most insightful take on bullying—not specifically on bullying but on the broader topic of oppression. Here’s how he puts it in class Pedagogy of the Oppressed:
Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it, is a distortion of the vocation of becoming more fully human. (Freire 44)
Freire’s work emerges from his deep concern with the conditions of the marginalized and oppressed in colonized nations, where systemic inequalities were perpetuated through discrimination, poverty, and authoritarianism. Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed calls for a radical rethinking of education, proposing that traditional models of teaching reinforce oppression by treating students as passive recipients of knowledge. Instead, Freire argues for a dialogical model in which students and teachers learn together, in relationships and discussions, in a process of mutual humanization. This framework emphasizes that liberation from oppression requires not only material changes but also a transformation in how we understand and enact our humanity.
The Distortion of Humanity in Bullying
Freire’s claim that “dehumanization… marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it” (Freire 44) can be interpreted in this broader context. For Freire, oppression is a process that strips individuals of their humanity, and dehumanization is its inevitable result. Traditionally, this passage has been read as evidence of Freire’s belief that oppression harms both the oppressed and the oppressor: the oppressed are denied their right to fully realize their humanity, while the oppressor, by acting as a dehumanizing force, becomes alienated from their own humanity. This alienation occurs because oppression involves a fundamental distortion of the relationship between people, replacing solidarity with domination. This interpretation emphasizes Freire’s larger project: that true liberation requires the recognition of shared humanity, which cannot be achieved through systems that rely on control and subjugation.
While this interpretation is insightful, I see the passage as offering a deeper, more direct commentary on the nature of bullying and its roots in dehumanization. As I see it, Freire centers on the idea that dehumanization stems from a distorted view of humanity itself, in which the capacity to assert one’s humanity is redefined as the capacity to dehumanize others. Those who engage in acts of oppression or bullying—whether in person or online—believe, on some level, that their own dignity or worth is contingent upon taking it away from someone else. This perverse view of what it means to be human lies at the heart of why bullying is so damaging, especially in the context of education.
Cyberbullying and the Digital Interface
Freire’s broader critique of systems of oppression speaks directly to the dynamics of bullying because both involve unequal power relations and a failure to recognize the full humanity of the other. The bully, like the oppressor, engages in a dehumanizing act that not only harms the victim but also distorts their own sense of self. In the classroom, where education should serve as a means of fostering growth, empathy, and humanization, bullying creates an environment where these aims are inverted. By attacking others, the bully attempts to validate their own self-worth in a system that inherently dehumanizes both parties. In this sense, Freire’s insight into dehumanization provides a powerful lens through which we can understand the dynamics of bullying as a failure to recognize the full humanity of oneself and others.
This dynamic becomes even more complex in online environments, where relationships with others are mediated through the distance of a digital interface. In cyberspace, the other is often reduced to a disembodied presence—a profile, a username, an avatar—composed of fragments of information rather than the full reality of a person. This mediation fosters a kind of dehumanization that is unique to the digital world, where the physical cues of empathy, like facial expressions or tone of voice, are absent (Turkle 1-2). Instead, interactions become filtered through screens, where it is easier to abstract the other as an object of aggression rather than a fellow human being (Baym 122). The distance created by the interface encourages an anonymity that often amplifies the cruelty of bullying, transforming it into what we now refer to as cyberbullying.
The Viral-Cultural Nature of Dehumanization
Moreover, there is a viral-cultural dimension at play in my reading of Freire, where acts of bullying spread like a contagion by reshaping how both the bully and the victim understand their own humanity. By “cultural-viral,” I mean the way dehumanizing behaviors, such as bullying, propagate within a culture, much like a virus. These behaviors spread not only through direct interactions but also by shaping cultural norms and values, influencing how individuals perceive their own humanity and that of others.
The “cultural-viral” phenomenon emphasizes that these acts don’t remain isolated; instead, they establish patterns of dehumanization that others may adopt, thus perpetuating a cycle of harm and reinforcing a distorted view of what it means to be human as a cultural norm. Consequently, dehumanizing acts like bullying not only damage the immediate relationship between bully and victim, but also create a model of humanity as the capacity to dehumanize others (Freire 44). In this way, the victim may internalize this distorted view and potentially become a bully themselves, seeking to reassert their humanity by dehumanizing someone else. Freire argues that the oppressor is dehumanized in the act of dehumanizing others, and this dynamic becomes even more pervasive in a culture where bullying is not only normalized but internalized. When individuals adopt a distorted view of humanity—one where their own dignity is dependent on diminishing someone else—they carry this view into all their relationships. In this way, dehumanization becomes self-perpetuating, passed on in social interactions, much like a contagion.
In the digital world, where interactions often lack the personal immediacy of face-to-face encounters, this viral dimension of dehumanization is amplified. Cyberbullying thrives in part because the online environment facilitates a rapid spread of behaviors and ideas—acts of cruelty can be witnessed, mimicked, and shared in real-time, amplifying their reach (Boyd 114). Once a dehumanizing act is observed, especially in the form of online shaming or harassment, it can be internalized by others, who may then replicate it, spreading the distorted view of humanity further. In this sense, bullying is not just an isolated act between individuals; it is embedded in a broader cultural dynamic where the dehumanization of others becomes a defining feature of how people interact in online spaces (Turkle 90).
Designing for Humanization in Digital Spaces
This viral spread of dehumanization, reinforced by the distance of digital interfaces, makes it even more essential that we address these issues at more fundamental levels, including how we design educational technologies. Educational environments must be designed not only to curb the immediate effects of cyberbullying but to interrupt this cycle of dehumanization. By fostering ethical relationships and encouraging students to recognize the full humanity of others—even when mediated through digital platforms—we can begin to counteract the cultural forces that normalize bullying. In this context, Freire’s call for humanization in the struggle against oppression thus takes on new urgency in the context of online education, where the challenge is not only to teach academic skills but to cultivate the ability to engage ethically with others in a digital environment.
Looking Forward: Designing for Humanization
In my next article, I’ll delve deeper into how human-centered design plays an equally important role in combating cyberbullying. We’ll look at how thoughtful design in educational technologies can shape the very relationships that foster empathy, accountability, and mutual respect.
Stay tuned for our exploration into how design can help create spaces where students not only learn, but grow together—academically, socially, and ethically.
Works Cited
Baym, Nancy K. Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Polity, 2010. ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239787960_Personal_Connections_in_the_Digital_Age_by_Baym_N_K.
Bingham, Charles, and Alexandre Sidorkin, editors. No Education Without Relation. Peter Lang, 2004. ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280572727_No_Education_without_Relation.
Boyd, Danah. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press, 2014. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vm5gk.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 30th Anniversary ed., translated by Myra Bergman Ramos, Bloomsbury, 2000. Google Books, https://books.google.com/books/about/Pedagogy_of_the_Oppressed.html?id=v6IMBAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y.
Martin, Rod A., and Thomas E. Ford. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Academic Press, 2018. Elsevier, https://shop.elsevier.com/books/the-psychology-of-humor/martin/978-0-12-812143-6.
Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books, 2011. Academia, https://www.academia.edu/3129910/Alone_together_Why_we_expect_more_from_technology_and_less_from_each_other.
Owen Matson, Ph.D., combines 17 years of ELA teaching with expertise in educational research and digital pedagogy. A Princeton alumnus and published scholar with a Whiting Fellowship, he’s influenced EdTech at ViewSonic and Shmoop, consulted for the MLA, and led content initiatives, focusing on enhancing education through strategic partnerships and innovative content tailored to diverse learners.