Video: Daycare Worker Lindsay Cavallaro Taunts 3 Year Old "No Balls, Oh You’re a Tough Guy"

The only time when this lady really crosses the line in my opinion is when she says "no balls"

She did not bully him. She just refused to be bullied. There was no violence, no threat of violence, no picking on the kid.

When I was in elementary school a teacher lifted me up in the air by my tie choking me. THAT is bullying.

Calling a kid worthless because they can't run fast is bullying.

In the email I got from Opposing Views today, which email contained a link to this story on which I clicked to get here...

...said link was written thusly: "Daycare Teacher Bullies 3-Year-Old Boy - Shocking video featuring Lindsay Cavallaro, a Connecticut daycare teacher, taunting a 3-year-old boy has outraged parents all over America"

SEE: http://bit.ly/L5DQIH

However, given the direction that these comments beneath the story have now taken; and given what they now reveal is likely to be the actual truth of this sad matter, I wonder two things:

1) What was Michael Allen's motive in posting it, here? Or, rather, his motive in at least posting it in the WAY it was posted.

2) Who wrote the above-quoted incendiary link headline and body copy that showed-up in the email in my inbox, today; and on which I clicked to get to this page?

As I wrote in my email to the TV reporter who broke the story (a copy of which I've posted in these comments), daycare center abuse stories make great headlines...

...but they can also ruin lives. I have a lot of respect for the Opposing Views web site, but the language used in the email was both outrageous and uncalled for, given what are clearly the actual circumstances.

I want to bygod know who wrote it; and I want, even more, to know if the point was to crassly cash-in on the seeming tawdriness of it all, just to get people to click on the story's link...

...in much the same manner as I worry motivated the TV station in how it wrote the story.

This web site isn't a sensationalist tabloid such as found in racks in grocery store checkout lines. It shouldn't be engaging in tabloid-style headline writing just to get people interested in visiting the site. Such behavior is unconscionable, and the epitome of yellow journalism.

This whole thing is a tragedy.

A mother has secretly realized the error of her ways in how she has raised her son, so far, and is overreacting with defensive offense; and her embarrassing behavior will be part of the Google search results on her name for the rest of her life... long after she's come to her senses and wishes she'd kept her head about her.

That's tragic.

Her son will find the video of his bad behavior on the Internet until the day he dies; and it will somehow harm him, whether he eventually becomes a gang member (as some in these comments suggest will be the case), or president of the United States, as is equally possible. He's only three, for the loveofgod; either could happen.

That's tragic.

A daycare center's name has been unecessarily besmirched, and the dark cloud of that will remain online forever. It could even, mark my words, put it out of business... even though it has done not one single thing wrong. Not one.

That's tragic.

And a daycare center worker's name is now permanently associated with her seeming (though not actual) abuse of a child in Google searches on her for the rest of her days; and even beyond, after she's gone. And so repugnant to society is anyone's even appearance of impropriety toward a child that I fear this teacher's very life, now, may be all but ruined over it. It will now, in any case, trust me, somehow be part of her obituary whenever she finally passes, in however many years that is (may it be many, many).

That's the most tragic, of all.

This woman will now have to build a web site dedicated to her explanation of all this... her side of it; and then she will have to hope that it ranks more highly in search results than do the stories which castigate her. Moreover, now has been thrust upon her the unenviable task of doing something in life which somehow launches from all this in a way that makes people see her for who she really is, and these circumstances for what they really are. Were I advising her, I'd tell her to start with trying to get a law passed which prohibits news organizations from mentioning the names of the accused until the investigations are completed. It would likely never pass constitutional scrutiny, of course, on First Amendment freedom-of-speech grounds; but her having mounted the campaign will likely serve her well in life as she tries to live down all this awfulness.

Do not underestimate the power of what appears online about a person to manifestly harm him/her for years, and years, and years thereafter. It can be life-altering; life-damaging. Nothing like the Worldwide Web ever existed before 1994; and we are only now beginning to see just how permanently even only the slightest bad -- or even only seemingly bad -- things about a person are available for all to find in seconds; and to see, and judge, for time immemorial.

Yes, this is a tragedy. Shame, then, on whomever wrote the godawful headline and sensationalist headline which appeared in my inbox today, and on which I clicked to get here.

Shame on the kid's mom's friend who got her all riled-up; and shame on said mom who overreacted and has now left nothing but destruction in her wake.

Shame on the TV News reporter who put a sensationalistic slant on it all and from which has launched what, as of this writing, is nearly 2.7 million Google search results on Lindsay Cavallaro's name... most of them calling her everything but satan. I don't know this woman, but if she's reacting to it all as most any woman in her shoes would, I'd advise her family to put her on suicide watch. I've been squarely in the middle of a huge national news story before in my life. You cannot even BEGIN to know the pressure it puts on the subjects of it.

Shame, I predict, will eventually befall others in this tragic story, as well.

Mark my words.

This is not a case of realy bullying or taunting. When my children were small and mouthed off to me, I did basically the same thing. I guess she should have just taken it, like the bus monitor in New York State? Someone needs to teach this little boy that when you are in trouble for doing something wrong, doing something else wrong is not the way to go.

I am not saying she handled it well, I am saying this is not the abuse it headlines make it appear. As for pressing charges, WTF?

I cannot see anything wrong with the video. A cute kid who likes to argue with adults had lavished upon him the sort of attention that he relished, and looks like he enjoyed every minute of the encounter. Lovely child, great teacher, with a sense of humour.

The lad threatened verbally to do something naughty that his body language testifies he didn't really want to do in the first place, and the teacher, sensitive to his learning needs, called his bluff. Excellent!

Children are just small people who are still learning, not another species altogether from adults, who need to learn a whole different set of conversational skills to use on teachers in school, only to have to unlearn those rules when they are older, and to learn different rules for social interaction with adults when they become adults themselves.

Above all, the parties treated one another with respect. I couldn't see any necessary boundaries being crossed. School is supposed to be fun. On this occasion, it was, for both teacher and child. No wonder no charges are being brought.