quote:Because I can't feel like even a slap on the butt is really for someone's own good when there's other ways.
There may be other ways. Sometimes a parent might decide that those other ways, for one reason or another, aren't optimal for a given situation. I know plenty of parents who choose to spank, and plenty who don't, and I'm not going to second-guess either of 'em.
quote:But I don't understand how being compassionate and gentle towards kids by not wanting to spank them suddenly became... a bad thing.
Rather, I think what's happened here is that some people are insisting that spanking a child is a monstrous thing, and others are disagreeing.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:But I don't understand how being compassionate and gentle towards kids by not wanting to spank them suddenly became... a bad thing.
Neither do I. Where are you getting this idea from?
I don't know. There's just this CULTURE. If folks have to spank, I feel like they should be reluctant about it. But sometimes there's just this whole, "This is my child and I'm gonna whup that ass" culture too. This could be due to being black, because you here that a lot being black... Folks are probably going to say, "You're acting white, not wanting to spank." but it's not as if it's only black people. I don't know. I can't call it evil. Folks love their kids, but it seems so... warped. Like where did this practice come from and why does it continue?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I think that there are times when spanking is appropriate.
You are wrong, excepting times in which a child is in immediate physical danger.
In your opinion.
I am not advocating abuse, but equating spanking a child to abuse in most cases is not accurate, nor is it useful. Children are not delicate flowers. They sometimes need a strong incentive to behave at times, and spanking is one way of providing that, particularly if you are short on time.
My opinion based on a large amount of experience in child care, as well as having been hit myself as a child. It didn't work for me, and it has never worked for any child I have ever known who has been hit. It makes things worse. It did for me, and it did for every other child I knew of who was hit.
And I am, for clarity's sake, talking more about parents who make a habit of it. Obviously those who do it less may get different results. Habitual physical intimidation of your child is not a good idea. Porter should grow a pair and learn to deal with his kids without hitting them, if that's what he's saying he does.
I didn't equate it to abuse. I don't think it's always abuse. I think there is only one situation in which it is "appropriate," and that is to stop a child from acting to harm his or herself. Only case. Blanket statement. No exceptions.
I have a large amount of experience in child care, including dealing with cases of abuse, and I find my experiences to be completely opposite of yours. As are the experiences of all of the parents from previous generations that I know. But YMMV.
I wasn't trying to say YOU claimed it was abuse to ever hit a child, but it is a common claim for people to make when discussing this topic, so I thought I'd head it off at the pass so to speak.
I'd say you don't know squat about this if you think that Porter is claiming any such thing, and quite frankly after that comment I am less likely to listen to you. Not a very effective technique for making a discussion point.
I'd say Porter not only has a pair, but that his children are far more likely to be well mannered, well adjusted and happy than yours would be. I know I doubt I'd like living in your house if you are half as judgmental at home as you come across here.
posted
Well, it seems that the hardcore anti-spankers here have equated spanking with torture, violence, intimidation, abuse, and beatings.
You're attacking strawmen. None of the people here defending spanking are saying any of the things you're arguing against.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: ...is it really necessary to spank for this? Especially that whole child challenging the parent's authority thing. What does that mean?
It means most of us have a defiant streak and at some point will tell our parents, "I don't wanna and you can't make me". And the parent's job with anyone under, I would say, 15 or so is to say, "Yes, I can".
Most of us do not want to be good for its own sake. Most of us have to learn to value treating others with respect and kindness. And for many of us, myself included, just seeing a good example was not enough.
I'm selfish by nature. I'd really rather keep all my money and spend all my time on me and not waste my energy on other people's problems. And I'm certainly not a fan of other people getting to make the rules. I want to do what I want when I want because I want to.
If my parents hadn't forced me to acknowledge their authority when I was little, I don't know where I'd be now. Probably not employed with any regualrity. I have enough trouble with rules even understanding that the boss gets to make them.
Did that have to include spanking? Heck if I know. I'm not having kids any time soon, so I can't say I've read up on it. But I certainly believe that children are under their parents' authority and need to be aware of that. The more hard-headed the kid, the bigger a struggle it'll be to make them understand it.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LargeTuna: When I was little my Dad would yell at me until I felt worthless when I made mistakes that put me in trouble (I always tried to be well behaved). I remember wishing he would just hit me and get it over with, then leave me alone. He never did. I guess looking back on it, it was probably a good thing.
Probably not. I think this quote posted early by Samp. is really very important.
quote:Aggressiveness in children has also been linked to maternal permissiveness and negative criticism, more closely than to physical discipline, but the fact that some negative factors are even more linked to aggressiveness doesn't constitute support of spanking, but it does show the similarities of result in different forms of parenting systems that have adverse effects.
Let's get some perspective here. Spanking probably isn't an effective parenting strategy, but permissiveness, criticism and yelling are even worse. That isn't a defense of spanking, but it really does indicate the issue of spanking gets far to much attention.
If its wrong to spank your child "even once", then wouldn't the studies suggest its even worse to criticize your child "even once", yell at your child "even once", be permissive "even once". Let's drop the hyperbole. There is no such thing as a perfect parent. And given that it is the nature of kids to test the boundaries and push their parents buttons, all parents are going to respond badly from time to time. One spanking isn't going to mar your kid for life any more than one negative comment said in an angry tone.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a bit skeptical of all these studies because there are so many confounding factors that can lead to correlations. As has been noted many times, correlation does not prove cause. Some kids are simply naturally more prone to aggressive behavior than others regardless of parenting style. Any parent with more than one child will tell you this. More aggressive kids are likely to receive more frequent and more severe discipline than kids that are less aggressive. This is a serious problem for any study of parenting styles and its very difficult to control for. This difficulty is further compounded by what has become a common bias against any type of physical discipline.
The correlation between spanking and aggressive behavior is statistically significant, but it is none the less a relatively weak correlation. Evidence that occasional spanking is harmful for all children is a best very weak.
Spanking isn't a generally effective parenting strategy in today's world but those who claim that spanking is always bad go far beyond what is supported by the data.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, quite of few of those studies have show NO correlation between spanking and future aggressive behavior, so even that weak correlation doesn't support most of these claims.
But I wish more people understood what correlation was, and how it differs from causation.
I am not saying hit your child all the time. Or most of the time. Or even often. I'm just saying that I get sick of people insisting they know how to raise other peoples children, and that spanking a child makes you a bad parent and a bad person.
If that is true, 99% of all parents before 20 years ago were horrible child abusers. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know. I'm not saying that spanking makes a person a bad parent or something. I'm just thinking about how much I hated being hit. I hate getting hit. Spanking does equal hitting and it's just too harsh and it's too easy to get out of control. Especially after talking to my mother about this. She insists if you don't hit kids they'll turn out bad, but she grew up before they had child abuse lines and stuff, so I've got to question the way folks did things before 20 years ago and even now. There's all sorts of things people did without questioning it. (Circumcision comes to mind) But there's always new discoveries and new things to learn about the human mind and how it works.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I'd say Porter not only has a pair, but that his children are far more likely to be well mannered, well adjusted and happy than yours would be. I know I doubt I'd like living in your house if you are half as judgmental at home as you come across here.
I know you are but what am I?? That's very nice talk for someone trying to come off so high and mighty. As if I would give to sh**s about your parenting philosophies. I don't.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I said my piece on this topic a couple months ago in a different thread.
With all the talk of "another way" though, I feel compelled to reiterate that I have seen several kids who are the way they are simply because it's illegal to punch them in the face and no one feels dealing with them is worth paying a fine. I know for a fact that a pair of these kids (they are brothers) have a mother who refused to spank them. The level of spoiledness in the others pretty much leads me to believe the other parents don't either (One parent called my principal simply because I tossed her daughter's test paper on her desk rather than handing it to her-- no, that's not an exaggeration, that was really her issue).
Yeah... you call it "anecdotal evidence". I call it "experience". Potato-PoTAHto
In other words, there are some people who have come to believe they are immune to physical reprisal and do not fear or respond to any other form of discipline. They are not many, but the number is non-zero. I strongly suspect (but have no evidence) that these are the people who end up dead outside of bars at 3am because they are around drunk people with weapons.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, those are the people who were hit, and who learned from their parents how to channel their aggression and frustrations into violence. Your folkish wisdom is a bunch of stupid tripe. And I say that in the nicest way possible.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may not be reading this thread closely enough since it is going pretty quickly, but most of the anti-spankers here (myself included) are not equating spanking to abuse. The way I see it, we're talking about the consequences of a specific parenting choice.
For my part, I believe that it is an ineffective parenting style that risks negative long-term consequences.
Here's how it was presented to me in my behavior psychology class:
Spanking is effective at getting an immediate, short-term response, but has shown to be an ineffective strategy for shaping long-term behavior. This is why moderates recognize its usefulness in situations in which a child is in immediate danger. (I still wouldn't do it then, but I recognize it.)
As far as long-term negative consequences, studies have not shown that children always become aggressive, which is why there are weak correlations. In fact, all children are different and respond differently to the technique. Some children have increased aggressiveness or bullying behavior but others go the opposite direction and draw in upon themselves. (I was in the latter category.)
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I know you are but what am I?? That's very nice talk for someone trying to come off so high and mighty. As if I would give to sh**s about your parenting philosophies. I don't.
And in one blow, we've met our irony quota for the day.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Just ignore the personal criticism and move forward.
I'd really like someone to answer my question about how they might track the modeling example Samprimary gave on the last page.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christine: I may not be reading this thread closely enough since it is going pretty quickly, but most of the anti-spankers here (myself included) are not equating spanking to abuse. The way I see it, we're talking about the consequences of a specific parenting choice.
For my part, I believe that it is an ineffective parenting style that risks negative long-term consequences.
Here's how it was presented to me in my behavior psychology class:
Spanking is effective at getting an immediate, short-term response, but has shown to be an ineffective strategy for shaping long-term behavior. This is why moderates recognize its usefulness in situations in which a child is in immediate danger. (I still wouldn't do it then, but I recognize it.)
As far as long-term negative consequences, studies have not shown that children always become aggressive, which is why there are weak correlations. In fact, all children are different and respond differently to the technique. Some children have increased aggressiveness or bullying behavior but others go the opposite direction and draw in upon themselves. (I was in the latter category.)
That's my concern with it. Will it be good in the long term? Will the child only be "good" to avoid being hit or because it's the right thing? Would I be doing this for the right reason? My mother would hit me repeatedly with a belt over things like leaving out ketchup or a tuna or crying for McDonalds. Was that really necessisary? Is this kid being bad or being a kid or making a mistake that doesn't need to be punished?
It involves a lot of thought and soul searching. I think all the times my motehr used a belt on me was out of anger and not really for my own good. My uncle when I lived with my mother's mother would explain before hitting me with a belt why I was getting hit. Still, even with explanations and hugs afterwards, I can't help but feel a bit uneasy about it. Especially if the hitting is mixed with talks of love. It may work on the short term, but I'm wondering about the long term affects and everyone is so different that they will react differently to the same stimuli. I think it's better NOT to do it in the first place. I also wonder about the use of terms like "brat" and bad, like I said above. Does that help the parent-child relationship or hurt it? A child that is crying is not crying because they are a brat, there could be a lot of other reasons. The women at Gentle Christian Mothers do a brilliant job with this sort of thing. Especially Crystal Lutton who has literally wrote the book on this kind of parenting. Many of them are conservatives who politely question things like GKGW or Dobson. I love it.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, those are the people who were hit, and who learned from their parents how to channel their aggression and frustrations into violence. Your folkish wisdom is a bunch of stupid tripe. And I say that in the nicest way possible.
Everyone who ends up dead in bar fights was taught violence by their parents through torturous, cowardly corporal punishment?
Have you ever even seen a bar fight? Both participants are not always violent. Sometimes one is just a real schmuck, and the other is drunk and capable of violence. I'm virtually certain that's the sort of thing Jim-Me was talking about, but it's pretty obvious this is not a topic you're prepared to discuss reasonably or civilly, for whatever reason.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thread isn't devolving. It is to be expected in threads like this that some people are going to take some of the things said personally. After all, we're talking about how to raise children, something that is near and dear to all of us and I am certain it is something we all are trying our best at, whatever strategies we choose. The trick is to understand that and not to take it personally.
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I also wonder about the use of terms like "brat" and bad, like I said above. Does that help the parent-child relationship or hurt it? A child that is crying is not crying because they are a brat, there could be a lot of other reasons.
Actually, I think this sort of thing can be worse than whether or not a parent chooses to spank (within certain boundaries). We internalize the things our parents say to us, and for some reason we internalize the bad more than the good. For every bad thing we say to a child, we need to say about 100 good things.
This is why my favorite parenting strategy is positive reinforcement. Obviously, it isn't always going to work. You have to do something about unacceptable behaviors, but even then, it is important to distinguish between bad BEHAVIOR and a bad CHILD. You aren't being put in the corner because you're being bad, but because it's not ok to _____.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The APA has a pretty straightforward declaration on the matter, if only I could find it.
found it. lolwikipedialol.
quote:The American Psychological Association summarizes the issue as "Psychological research confirms that violent video games can increase children's aggression, but that parents moderate the negative effects."[33] Craig A. Anderson has testified before the U.S. Senate on the issue, and his meta-analysis of these studies has shown five consistent effects: "increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased pro-social (helping) behavior".[34]
Definitely not a conclusive thing by any means. But we have ample reason to suspect and are acting on current knowledge while it gets updated and refined.
I think it massively sucks that they're finding any such results and that the 'video games make you violent!' idea seems to have any validity at all, and moreso hate watching someone like jack thompson get in any small way validated (not much of an issue now that he seems to have gone literally insane), but there it is, soooo
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: No, those are the people who were hit, and who learned from their parents how to channel their aggression and frustrations into violence. Your folkish wisdom is a bunch of stupid tripe. And I say that in the nicest way possible.
And your comments show that you have no idea what I am talking about, which may, of course, be my fault.
These kids are not violent at all. They are experts at non-violence. They know precisely how to aggravate, taunt, and goad people without ever crossing that line that says "you are legally ok to hit this person". They spend their lives doing it and would probably make outstanding trial lawyers if they gave themselves a chance because they know both exactly what all the rules are and also precisely how to push people's buttons within those rules, and they take great pride in so doing.
And anyone who feels my "folksy wisdom" to be "stupid tripe", feel free to ignore my parenting experiences and thoughts. I certainly have not been up to the task I set myself with mine and I'm sure I am worthy of criticism galore, in the abstract. I'd wager that very few, however, would acquit themselves as well as I have.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh:. Sometimes one is just a real schmuck, and the other is drunk and capable of violence.
That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about. I've seen it happen first hand, though fortunately not with fatal results. Add a weapon into the situations I've seen and there certainly would have been, though.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The APA has a pretty straightforward declaration on the matter, if only I could find it.
found it. lolwikipedialol.
quote:The American Psychological Association summarizes the issue as "Psychological research confirms that violent video games can increase children's aggression, but that parents moderate the negative effects."[33] Craig A. Anderson has testified before the U.S. Senate on the issue, and his meta-analysis of these studies has shown five consistent effects: "increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased pro-social (helping) behavior".[34]
Definitely not a conclusive thing by any means. But we have ample reason to suspect and are acting on current knowledge while it gets updated and refined.
I think it massively sucks that they're finding any such results and that the 'video games make you violent!' idea seems to have any validity at all, and moreso hate watching someone like jack thompson get in any small way validated (not much of an issue now that he seems to have gone literally insane), but there it is, soooo
Am I personally attacking people? I hope I'm not, I don't like to, but I really strongly disagree with the concept of hitting kids if there are other gentler methods that could be used. Our culture is kind of violent though. I'd say that violent video games are caused by a violent culture. i can get sweary as hell when sitting around playing Final Fantasy or Persona 3 oir 4 and those aren't even FPS which make me motion sick. I don't know, I'd worry about what sort of message a kid getting spanked is getting vs what the parent is trying to tell them.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, those are the people who were hit, and who learned from their parents how to channel their aggression and frustrations into violence. Your folkish wisdom is a bunch of stupid tripe. And I say that in the nicest way possible.
Everyone who ends up dead in bar fights was taught violence by their parents through torturous, cowardly corporal punishment?
Yes. What I said is exactly equivalent to what you said. I ought to have just written what you said exactly. How foolish of me, not to have known exactly how you would have interpreted whatever statement I was making, and simply written down exactly what you would have said to paraphrase what I said, because clearly you know exactly what I meant, and I didn't. Kudos to you sir. You are indeed a scholar. You are indeed a worthy interpreter of everything I say. You indeed, above all others, understand exactly what I mean to say, but am to cowardly and wishy-washy to ever actually write down. I thank you sir. I truly thank you for what you have done. The valuable service you have provided to this board today is inestimable. Truly. Bravo sir. Bravo.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I know you are but what am I?? That's very nice talk for someone trying to come off so high and mighty. As if I would give to sh**s about your parenting philosophies. I don't.
And in one blow, we've met our irony quota for the day.
Eat me. Or just go and spank your kids over it. Sometimes that's just the thing to do, apparently.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The thread isn't devolving. It is to be expected in threads like this that some people are going to take some of the things said personally.
Especially when some of them are personal attacks.
"I think there are times" when personal attacks "are appropriate." Certainly, if you can get your ire up to smack your kids around, you can call someone a jackass on the internet. Unless that's just *too* uncivilized for you. I understand you have your standards.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now you've got it. Spank your kids, don't let them spank you. Thank god, we finally understand each other. Rejoice!
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I can't blame Orinoco for being a bit angry. Spanking is a sore subject for me because I hate being labeled as naive because I don't want to spank.
I can't really separate it from hitting because it's sort of... the same thing. Only in degrees.
Whenever the experts write about spanking, even their ritualized version sounds a bit too harsh. I've read Dare to Disipline and I thought, is this REALLY totally necessary? Hitting a child for not staying in bed? Hitting them again if they don't stop crying?
Why?
Then he talks about how nothing brings a parent and child closer than the child crumbling into their parents arm after being wailed on. It makes me think, doesn't he seem something kind of wrong in that? Traumatic bonding isn't the same as a relationship built on love and trust.
I couldn't take advice from Dobson anyway. Why was it necessary to hit that little dog with a belt when he could have just picked up the dog and put it in the dog bed. Dude would not have tried that with a Rottweiler.
Same with squeezing some painful nerve on that kid's neck. All of the examples Dobson provided made me think, I do not want to spank a child over something like that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Orincoro, I think you would have been wise to have taken your own advice earlier. Stop attacking people in this thread, regardless of the point you are trying to make by doing so, or step away. There are not times at this forum when personal attacks are appropriate.
Posts: 441 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
To spank means to strike. Why is it spanking just because it's done to a child? As many times as I'd like to whack people for popping gum around me (it's a seriously annoying NOISE that goes all through me and everyone makes it!) I'd get arrested, and I should be as it's really rude to wap random people no matter how much they are driving me crazy.
But mostly, if kids can grow up to be polite and well adjusted without spanking then is there really a need for it?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Now you've got it. Spank your kids, don't let them spank you. Thank god, we finally understand each other. Rejoice!
I do not understand what you're saying here.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Why is it spanking just because it's done to a child?
Not just then. It's just more common. And lacking in naughty connotations.
quote:But mostly, if kids can grow up to be polite and well adjusted without spanking then is there really a need for it?
That's kind of the question I've been asking. Is it possible for certain personality types that they just don't respond well to anything less than superior force? And if so, does that make it ok if they eventaully internalize appropriate behavior thanks in part to it?
Because I don't think spanking will ever work on its own. It can only stop a negative behavior, and probably only occasionally. You've still got to replace that with a positive or you're not making any progress - you're just running in place.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Explain? Are you saying that if kids can grow up to be polite and good without spanking that there really is NOT a need for it at all?
Because that's what I think. I kind of think it's one of those old skool things we're a bit better off without. Like whalebone corsets, strict cultural standards that cage people. Especially considering how far we've gone in terms of child psychology.
Like crying it out can be damaging to a child's developing brain for example.
I believe firmly in positive re enforcement over negative. I will always question conventional wisdom and strive to improve on it.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are you saying that if kids can grow up to be polite and good without spanking that there really is NOT a need for it at all?
Yes.
I'm also saying that there may be times and children for when spanking is the only option left to a parent.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are you saying that if kids can grow up to be polite and good without spanking that there really is NOT a need for it at all?
Yes.
I'm also saying that there may be times and children for when spanking is the only option left to a parent.
But when though? And why?
No one here has been very clear on the specifics. And when pro spanking experts give advice about that, I think, you hit them over that? Why?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: And you think this has thus far been the sort of thread that would encourage someone to feel safe sharing something like that?
posted
I'll note again that I DON'T consider myself an expert by any means, but I'd consider spanking as an alternative in the following cases IF other techniques have already been tried, and the behavior continues over an extended period.
- hitting/bullying other children (or adults for that matter) - continuous destruction of property - doing something physically dangerous. I do not think it needs to be "immediately" harmful to qualify; there are a lot of things that are dangerous in the long term that a child lacks the abstract reasoning to connect actions to consequences.
No one really responded to my dad's post, and it hit a lot of points that I hadn't mentioned but were fairly influential in my beliefs here:
quote: Of the people that I know personally who I have watched raising their children, there are three that I know of that said that under no circumstances would they ever strike a child. I watched two of them slap their children across the face, in anger, because they were beyond frustration and they lost control. In both cases, the looks on the childrens' faces were ones of victory. They had succeeded in pushing their parents' buttons. And I know they hit their kids at other times as well, I just happened to be there for those events. So just 'cause you say it don't make it so.
The third told me that he never spanked his first daughter, and had criticized other parents who couldn't keep their children in control... until his second daughter came along, and all bets were off. He doesn't criticize people's parenting anymore. Some kids are easy, and others are difficult. You can't always blame the parent, and some kids just keep testing the limits.
This argument seems very similar to me as the police argument over choke-holds. There was a time when the news seemed full of people who died in police custody because an illegal choke hold was administered. Turns out that because the hold was illegal, they didn't train the officers to administer it correctly, the result being that in an extreme situation, the officer found themselves wrestling with someone and without being able to think of an alternative, they administered a choke-hold that they hadn't been trained to control, maybe even without realizing they were doing it, and the person died. I'm pretty sure that nowadays most police officers are trained in the choke hold, even though it is still illegal to use.
So for people who say they will never spank their children: OK, maybe. But you should still have a plan in mind for that moment when you reach your limit and your hand starts moving.
posted
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm curious about the subject from a social evolution standpoint. Is it possible that in earlier times, in more tribal societies, spanking (or probably beating at the time -- corporal punishment anyway) developed characteristics in children that allowed them to survive to adulthood, and that those characteristics are not in fact necessary (or one might argue beneficial) in our current society?
It often makes me think of boot camp. All I know of boot camp is from books/movies/etc. -- I have no personal experience (aside from a drill instructor yelling at his recruits because my (at the time 9-year-old) sister could climb the ropes at the confidence course with ease, and some of the recruits couldn't (this was a cub scout outing, but my dad was the cubmaster and my mom was a den leader so my sister always ended up attending). And I don't remember it that well -- I remember my dad recounting it. What I remember is the challenge from a marine that I couldn't drink 15 glasses of chocolate milk. That bet I won. [/tangentially related but non-topical aside]
There seems to be a lot of yelling, and hazing, and ridiculously unnecessary stuff like shining shoes and cleaning floors with toothbrushes and all that. From the outside it seems ridiculous. But are these actually necessary to building the unit cohesion required in the military, and the unquestioning following of orders which may sometimes be required on the battlefield?
And wasn't more of life a battlefield back then? Wild animals attacked flocks, and there weren't the same kinds of weapons to fend them off. Marauders (if stories be believed) were much more common. Civilizations were scattered, and there was much more no-man's-land (and no-law-land) in between.
To be clear, I'm not arguing for this concept. I'm asking about it -- if anyone's thought of it before (here, that is -- I'm sure someone somewhere has). And if there's any basis to it, then is it possible that the time/need for corporal punishment may be passing (or already have passed, some would argue) away? Or that it may return in the case of societal collapse?
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I'd say Porter not only has a pair, but that his children are far more likely to be well mannered, well adjusted and happy than yours would be. I know I doubt I'd like living in your house if you are half as judgmental at home as you come across here.
I know you are but what am I?? That's very nice talk for someone trying to come off so high and mighty. As if I would give to sh**s about your parenting philosophies. I don't.
Good. I'd worry a lot more if you approved of me. Thank you for proving my point better than I ever could have alone.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: But when though? And why?
No one here has been very clear on the specifics. And when pro spanking experts give advice about that, I think, you hit them over that? Why?
Syne, the pro-spanking "experts" that you've been reading (and why you insist on reading that crap I do not understand) are not representative of anyone here. No one here is defending looking for excuses to hit your kid, and it's not fair to conflate what people are saying here with the extremes you're venting about.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
