spanking

O

otheadp

Banned
Banned
no, not the "smack my ass and call me daddy" kind...

should children get spanked? slapped? "wooped"? when they misbehave...
what role should the gov't play in telling the parents on how to educate their kids?

should kids be taken from their parents if they get spanked?

is it possible to raise a child without punishing him/her? without shouting or hitting when s/he misbehaves?

is "tough love" an oxymoron?

your takes on this...
 
Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. -an old proverb

I think that it is ok to "spank" your child, but I do not think you should spank when you are upset. I think that "spank" can turn into abuse really easily if you are angry at the child for something. Spank to correct, not to condemn.

Gov't...
In my opinion..
Kids shouldn't be taken from their parents if they are spanked. At the same right, I do not think parents should spank in public as this should be a private matter.
 
beating of any kind dammages the selfasteam of a child alot of them grow up to hit thier own children and it becomes a vicious circle.
 
There are calm ways to deal with a child. No shouting, no hitting. Anyway, if the kid is acting up it's your fault as a parent anyway. At least until he/she goes to preschool/kindergarden.
 
When a parents spank his/her child, its actually a shortcoming of the parental skills of the parent. A good parent shouldn't have to use that low a methode to teach his/her child an important lesson.
 
Spanking teaches kids important lessons about the way the world works. It shows kids that authority comes from physical strength, that might makes right. It also teaches them that it's not important that they understand values or morals, that's not a pre-requisite of following someone else’s moral code, all they have to know is that they'll get the living shit beat of 'em if they go against it. It's the only way they'll learn the one true rule, you can do anything that others can't stop you from doing, and if that happens to mean that exerting force and brutality over another individual is your means to whatever end, then so be it!

I'm sick of liberal pansies saying that it's "child abuse" or causes "Self esteem issues" or whatever, that's just a bunch of crybaby bullshit, and my assessment is that your daddies didn't wup you enough as a kid, and tell you that it's wrong to be a god damned sissy.
 
Excuse me Mystech? My father didn't abuse me enough when I was helpless and only doing the things he taught me to do? And how am I being a 'sissy'? I'm a fucking woman, and was a baby at that time.
 
I'm sorry if you were offended, Darkeyedbeauty, that wasn't really the intent. I suppose I don't post on the same forums that you do often enough, or maybe your reading comprehension is a little off, but if you give a read through my previous post again, I'm sure you'll see that despite sounding like an argument for spanking it's actually an argument against it. The tone is extremely sarcastic, and every point I mentioned is blatantly negative and against spanking, it's sort of like one of them their literary techniques, satirizing some sort of stereotypical right wing types approach to the issue. I’ve been known to post like that now and again.
 
I think it was a poor attempt at sarcasm. At first it did sound that way. But you carried it on a little too long, with no let up. It was in bad taste, regardless.
 
Oh cry me a river. If two paragraphs of sarcastic parody is too much for you, then I submit that you don't know how to live. Besides, attempting to present your point of view from a stance which, on the outside, seems to be it’s opposite is just good clean fun no matter how you look at it.
 
Who's crying?

I'm just telling you that it's stupid of you to be sarcastic entirely throughout that. It's also insensitive.
 
Originally posted by coluber
beating of any kind dammages the selfasteam of a child alot of them grow up to hit thier own children and it becomes a vicious circle.
Click to expand...

Can you back this up with any proof because i do not much agree with this.
 
spare the rod spare the child.
a kid needs to be taught a lesson, if it does something wrong what are you going to do write them a letter? the only issue i have with the firm hand is when it is not from the parents.
 
look... when a 5 yr old is throwing a tantrum, you don't sit down and explain to him while he's all psyched out "you shouldn't really act like that, sweetie".

like Chris Rock said. when his dad caught him smoking when he was a boy, he got his ass kicked.

and since then he never touched smokes. not because "they're bad for you... they're gonna kill you.... in 50 years" but because he was scared of his dad.

do u honestly think u're gonna prevent a teenager from smoking weed (or worse) buy "just talking about it" ?

if that concept would work, there would be no jails
 
Failure, Challenge

when a 5 yr old is throwing a tantrum, you don't sit down and explain to him while he's all psyched out "you shouldn't really act like that, sweetie"
Click to expand...
Well, that's part of the challenge of parenting. Children aren't exactly convenient.

To me, if I must eventually resort to violence to make the point, I will be admitting failure in my methods.

I expect to fail on a number of counts, but not that badly.

If the only reason to not do something, as Mr. Rock has it, is fear of reprisal, there's not much contribution to the child's decision-making capabilities.

Of course, I get to test such ideas soon enough. My daughter stunned the company at two separate Thanksgiving dinners with her pleasantly engaging behavior; the first year has been an astounding run. My own father is stunned, flabbergasted, befuddled. But he won't ask me how I do it because he knows as well as I do that I have no freaking idea. We haven't necessarily done things right, but rather we've avoided (perhaps accidentally) doing enough things wrongly that my daughter's an angel. I don't expect that to last a whole lot longer, but you never know.
 
Children aren't exactly convenient
they aren't exactly masters of logic and common sense, either.
that's why if you tell the child "don't touch the hot stove", he'll do it anyway. that's the nature of children - curiosity. if mama says "do'nt do it", naturaly, that's exactly what the child will do.


To me, if I must eventually resort to violence to make the point, I will be admitting failure in my methods.
and what's wrong with that? are you familiar with the term "escalation of commitment" ?

if one method doesn't work, you try something else.
if something fails that means either that you're not very good at applying that method, or the method itself is flawed.

if one expects common sense from a child, or quick obedience, there's something wrong with that person.

punishment in violence teaches the child humility, respect for authority, caution, and respect for their elders.
those children we see in sitcoms that say "yes mommy" are far far far from the way real children are. they are nothing but fictional TV characters.

if you raise children by letting them do anything they want without retaliation for misbehaving, they'll grow and be the same in the future. when they're teens they'll say "fuck you bitch" to their parents, respect no curfews, smoke cigarettes ..."what are you gonna do about it, huH? i got Child Services on my side!"....etc.
 
I personally believe it is an ethical absolute not to hit someone who can't fight back. And honestly, a child can't fight back. It seems to me, having made as many mistakes as I had over the course of my life, that everything you do should take into account the possibility that you might be wrong. And in the case of an adult physically confronting a child, the child has no recourse if the adult is wrong.

A parent has a great deal of control over a child anyway, without resorting to physical abuse. The child relies on the parent to fulfill their wants and needs. When natural consequences (i.e. when you don't eat your dinner you'll be hungry) aren't there or aren't effective, this dependence of the child on the parent gives you a good deal of diplomatic leverage.

By the time that they are old enough to be self-reliant, they are generally also too old to reasonably be spanked -- by that time all you can do is hope you instilled enough common sense and morality (I don't believe spanking really yields either) in them when they were little.
 
Last edited:
I personally believe it is an ethical absolute not to hit someone who can't fight back
but they can. and they often do. only, you're probably going to win the fight, if it does turn to a fight.

the child has no recourse if the adult is wrong
* the crazy assumption is that since the adult is the mature/experienced/wise/logical one, and the child is the young/inexperienced/foolish/illogical one (in one word - childish) -- at least when compared to eachother -- the adult will be right more often than the child.
* plenty of recourse available. one of them? change your behaviour patterns. now if it's a damn serious beating, tell Child Services.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top