Spanking - abuse or effective

Post Reply New Topic

He has a conflict with a child. And there is no need to beat someone as long as I have arguments to explain. So if I cant find logic argumenting against a 3-year old child response, because of being dumber then a 3 year old, I call myself the youth officers to help me.

And not its not about winning or loosing. Arguments are arguments. You dont win or loose with an argument, you simply explain it. The rules that are given to a child are not based on "I want it." but there are logic causes behind them, we experienced over centuries. So whatever argument a child can give you for not doing something it should, you should easily be able to tell him, that he has forgotten something, or dont know yet about facts that are important for the desicion. A normal person should be able to explain a child why something is necessary. And if he is not, then maybe he should think about WHY he cant find an explanation for it. And not smack his child because of being to dumb therefore.

Actually none of the option applied to me so I didn't vote.

Reminder: this thread is a discussion about the corporal punishment of children, not a fetish discussion.
Several off-topic posts and videos have been removed.

That doesn't really answer my question. The assertion that "Anyone who smacks a child is mentally weak" is a non sequitur.


If it is necessary for a child to engage in a particular constructive activity or disengage from a destructive activity and the child simply wishes to continue the undesired activity, then it ceases to be a battle of explanations and becomes a battle of wills. No amount of explaining is going to convince that child in that type of situation that compliance is in everyone's best interests. In fact, if the child is genuinely mentally superior to the adult, the child can easily figure out that if he can trap the parent into giving endless explanations, he can run up enough time to get out of doing what he doesn't want to do anyway.

I'm afraid you're confusing issues of intellect versus willpower. Children generally do not care about how smart you think you are. They see themselves as the center of the universe unless they are taught otherwise. Use of force is occasionally necessary in breaking a standoff in such battles of wills. Not ALWAYS necessary. Hopefully not even OFTEN necessary. It is unpleasant, at least for me, just as it is for the child. It's mentally and emotionally frustrating, not to mention physically uncomfortable, for me when a child takes defiance to that level, but I believe that excellent behavior is worth whatever price a parent has to pay. And sometimes behavior modification requires that the consequences of misbehavior be more unpleasant than the perceived rewards of misbehavior.

And it's all about communication, as well. Most of us, if we cause people pain in some way, feel guilty about it and will seek to correct whatever wrong we did, whether intentionally or unintentionally. I remember a time with my oldest son when we would explain why what he did was wrong and follow up with verbal correction every time he repeated the behavior. We'd take away toys, etc., and it was like he felt no remorse at all. The only way he'd feel sorry for something he did was if he was MADE to feel sorry, even if remorse came in the form of physical pain. That started, I think, two or three years ago. And in the last year and a half, his sense of justice has really kicked in, so the biggest deterrent from misbehavior is his developing sense of "wrongness" about certain things. THAT is what we want to see as parents, because if he feels something is intrinsically wrong about something and that is the driving force behind his motivations, we don't need harsh consequences. And in a few short years he'll be too old for that, anyway.


???

First of all, what kind of example are you setting for a willful 3-year old by openly acknowledging his intellectual superiority over you? That's nonsense. Unless you're grossly mentally incapacitated somehow, there is no reason why anyone should assume that a 3-year old is smarter than an adult! And it's pure foolishness to give a 3-year old the upper hand in anything having to do with authority issues. If I were prone to smacking a child for every wrong he does, the best way he could demonstrate his intellectual superiority over me is through compliance in order to avoid known unpleasant consequences. Smart people manipulate the system they're in to achieve personal objectives. I don't feel the need to intellectually lock horns with a child when the only problem the child has with me is she wanted ice cream after school and didn't get it.

Second, you would rather call the youth officers than deal with a 3-year old yourself? Surely you can see why I find this alarming! We're not talking about a 16-year old throwing a drug-induced tantrum, driving the family car through the living room, and setting the place on fire. We're talking about a 3-year old. That's YOUR responsibility and not the responsibility of the state. And things often do not go well once the authorities get involved.

I don't know what it's like where you are, but DHS/CPS where I live is pretty dismal. Let's suppose I have an out-of-control 3-year old among other otherwise well-behaved kids and I call a social worker to help because nothing I do works. If I have to admit that I'm incapable of effectively parenting that one child, the social worker is going to call my parenting abilities into question for ALL my kids. If I start down the path of putting my 3-year old in foster care, the social worker will evaluate me as an unfit parent and start the process of putting ALL my children in foster care as well.

Once the kids are "in the system," they will very likely be exposed to neglect, sexual abuse (usually at the hands of older foster children), criminal activity, truancy, and homelessness once they "age out."

If you don't love your children or care about their well-being in the least, fine. Put them with relatives or in foster care. However, it is not the place of the state to love and care for you children for you. That's your job as a parent. And if you can't handle a 3-year old better than that, you're better off just not having children at all, especially if your answer is to call the authorities. I'd rather have never even been born than to suffer through what foster children go through, and I'd do whatever it took to keep my kids from ever knowing what that's like.


It IS about winning/losing. Winning an argument in this context means that you effectively convinced a child that you are right. That is not an easy task with a small child. If you're my child, I don't feel the need to convince you that I'm right, especially if you're not apt to see anything except your own way or your own opinion. Unfortunately for you, my opinion is the only one that ultimately matters, and I'm not going to waste valuable time "explaining" the same thing multiple times in multiple ways just because you disagree.

Comprehension should never be treated as a requirement for compliance.

And, by the way, this all presupposes that the parents in question are caring, capable parents at least on a basic level. There is a time and a place for respectfully questioning authority. Crossing a busy intersection and unwilling to hold hands with dad because he won't give you a piece of candy is not a good time or place!


Right. But how would you deal with emergencies?

Sure, you deal with emergency situations before they happen. But an actual emergency is not the time to question the emergency plan. If we arrive home at dark and the electricity is out, the plan is find the couch, sit quietly, and be still until I can get a flashlight and/or candles. Why? So we don't bump into each other in the dark and risk injury--not to mention that the adults involved are preoccupied enough as it is. The best practice is to find a safe place, be still, and wait for a parent to call for you when you're needed.

I should not feel that I have to explain myself to a child when the actual emergency happens, so, yes, I feel perfectly justified severely punishing a child for disobeying in those types of situations. I need strict obedience without question until the emergency has either passed or temporary measures have been put in place. Once we get there, the kids are free to do as they want just as they normally would. But they will do everything I say immediately without question UNTIL we can verify the home is secure enough for them to do something else.


I actually agree with you on this point.

But that raises other issues as well. I'm not sure I see why it is that an adult somehow ALWAYS owes a child an explanation or why a child somehow ALWAYS deserves it. If I perceive that a child can comprehend an explanation and move on to synthesis based on that information, then, sure, I have all day to explain things to a child. But I'm not going to waste time on a child who doesn't really want the information but is setting the parent up in order to delay or derail compliance with a directive. Emergency situations do not leave time for anything other than rapid response and therefore do not present the luxury of explanation. That should be done in PLANNING for emergencies, or if it is something unforeseen, an explanation can follow an unquestionable response after the emergency situation has passed. But it can't be done during the emergency itself. Some issues in which delays of action are presented can severely impact the well-being of the child or even be matters of life and death.

And, too, as a parent you're confronted with this whole "what's in it for me" attitude that many children exhibit. Exactly what is "logical" about having respect for adults? Or what is "logical" about each individual in the family seeing himself as a representative of the household? Not really much, because these are things that do not normally directly or immediately impact the child. If either of my children misbehave at school, they will likely be severely punished at home. Why? Because how they act in front of others is a reflection on how things are at home. We want other people to see the best we have to offer, not the worst, and when people judge our children for how they act away from us, they will automatically tend to make the same judgements on us as parents. And if I need help from someone who has observed my children, I'm more likely to get help from someone who has a high opinion of me than someone with a low opinion of me. I can't maintain my reputation and the reputation of the family if my children lead other people to believe that the way we are on the outside is not the way we are on the inside. You don't like to think that what a 5-year old says could really impact your livelihood, but it happens. That 5-year-old isn't going to look far enough ahead to think, "hmm, my dad could lose his job if I act that way. And if that happens, I'll starve to death." In the mind of a 5-year-old, it all boils down to instant gratification. "I don't like spankings, therefore I'll behave in school." Only in retrospect is a child going to see how much respect the community has for dad and why that's important to our ability to generate income. Anything that threatens the family is verboten, and I don't feel guilty at all for spanking a child for that.

Open, willful defiance is always unacceptable because it disrupts the stability of the family unit. There's no excuse for it. There is zero tolerance for it. And punishment will come swiftly for that kind of behavior every single time it happens. You might begin that conversation through disobedience, yelling, and insults, but you will end it in tears and remorse. You can be a happy, loving, respectful child any time you want and be greatly rewarded. If your words and actions threaten to disrupt the corporate solidarity of the family unit, they are best left unsaid and undone and otherwise kept private. Likewise, if you have a problem with me, we can handle it together privately. Do NOT call me out in front of other family members or friends--it will not go well for you if you do.

At any rate, none of that has anything to do with "mental superiority." I mean, whether I'm mentally superior to my children (and I am) or not is irrelevant. I'm the one in a position of authority. Like it or not, the big decisions are all up to me and I'm the one who has to pay for them if they're the wrong decisions. I shouldn't have to feel that my decision-making is contingent on the approval of a child! The real issue is behavior modification. When words fail, other forms of communication are sometimes necessary, and that can include physical punishment.

I knew a family that always called the cops on their kids because they didn't want to be the bad guys. It's amazing how much people can get away with because their kids were sure never taken because they were wasting the police's time and showing how they can't even do their job as a parent.

And this wasn't over violence and destruction or drugs or fire, this was over normal kid stuff that is something for parents to deal with it themselves. Yet no one called social services on these parents to have them evaluate their parenting. I am even surprised the cops would always show up and social services were never involved.

/\ /\
Reminds me of the story of the kid that got smacked and told his dad that he was going to call the cops on him for child abuse.
Dad: While your on the phone you'd better ask for an ambulance, too.
Kid: What for? You didn't hurt me that much.
Dad: No, but you'll need one for the beating I'm going to give you while the cops are on the way. If I'm going to jail I'm going to earn it.

In for a penny in for a pound.

That made me laugh because it sounded like a joke. But I wonder if the kid really followed through or did he really get beaten up and ended up in the hospital. Or was it just a manipulation tactic the dad used because sometimes parents will say things to their kids and not mean it but sometimes it backfires. Like a parent may say say back to their child they hate them too after their kid tells them they hate them. The kid takes it literal thinking their mother really does hate them. Kids will try and manipulate their parents so the parents will try and turn it around on them and it can backfire if they are not careful.

I've heard it a few times as sort of a dark humor joke (I like dark humor ) but it probably does happen from time to time.

Because its simply sick to beat someone else without cause. I dont no why you want to talk about that endlessly. Most people all around the planet simply have agreed with each other that it is cruel and criminal to beat someone else without cause. If someone in the world would die, if you dont beat your child, I excuse myself for not thinking of that opportunity.

But everything else you mentioned is no cause to beat another person. "To avoid arguing..." - Oh my god, thank you that you prevent us by beating your child of the terribles riscs of arguing. Because a child that is arguing is ... nothing more then an arguing child. And nothing terrible thats worth beating someone else. Its a person as everyone else, and lots of people are arguing with each others, and nothing is happening because of them arguing with each other instead of beating themselfs.

So what terrible things that are worse then beating another person do you think to prevent, so that beating a human person is the better alternative?




Oh no, a terrible battle of wills with a child. You are right, this is such a terrible danger that we must prevent this to happen by beating others by all means. Do you never leave your door? Out there are thousend of peoples and you will have to face yourself with people that are willing to argue with you and do "battles of wills". So either you are a zombie capable of writing, or you have not been damaged by this normal interactions with other people. So absolutely nothing happened to you until now. So because of something that havened you damaged in any way, you are beating your child? In fact for things that are important, consequnces come from itself. Thats what I already talked about, so most "rules" we have are based on experience not on "Because I am your parent and I want you to do that, and if not I beat you." If you invent yourself a rule, and not behaving after that rule has the only consequence of arguing with you, the rule simply is dumb. If a child dont want to eat, it will naturally feel the consequence of hunger. If a child isnt doing his part of the family work, it will also not get his part of the family income. If a child doesnt sort his cloths propper for washing, then he will go to school with stinking cloths. If your child does something you dont allow, and it has no consequence beside you getting mad and beating your child, then its simply nonsense.




Do you even think one second about what you write? Do you really believe these hypocraty nonsense stuff with "Oh yes, beating is so unpleasant for me as it is for my child." So how do you manage that? Do you ask your husband, whenever you have beaten your child, do beat you as well in the same way? You are NOT feeling as unpleasant as your child feels when it is beating, when you are not beaten yourself. How should that function? Do you feel like having sex on your own, when watching a porno? Please explain to me, how on earth you feel like being beaten, when you are not being beaten. And "whatever price a parent have to pay..." Your child gets beaten, your child pays the price, you are the one who is beating, not the one who pays. Try to imagine someone would beat you out of fun in the subway, and then at the police the one who was beating you is telling the police that your purse was worth the price a robber has to pay by being forced to beaten others. Thats exactly this creating of a weird fantasyworld I was talking about. YOU are beating your child and in response: You are talking of the price YOU have to pay and how much it hurts YOU. Maybe we should create a donate account for you, so you can go to a therapists that can help you to overcome your suffering, while we point on your child you have beaten and talk about what a terrible child it is, that is doing so horribles things to you.

I remember a time with my father, when he explained that nothing he would do had any sense, and that normal correction wouldnt work and only physical abuse had any sense. Funny thing: I entered border school as a problem child and never had any problem, because instead of insane people pitying themself for having such horrible childs they are forced to beat "what hurts them soooooooooooooooo much" (Want some cheese to your whine?) there were normal persons, normal talking to you, and written rules that had a sense, so there was no cause to argue about them. Not if you dont want to argue about insanity itself. There were no explanations needed to the rules to argue about them, and there was no educator needed to "torture himself" by beating the childs.

Because of icecream you are beating your child? O_o Do you listen to yourself? Icecream? So tell me, what terrible things have you prevented, by beating your child because of icecream? What could have happened that would have been worse then beating a child?

You are loosing temper because of your child demanding icecream, and are beating it because of such a sh***y nonsense, and then you are really asking why I think that people beating their childs are ... weird? Sorry, I was just kidding. Excuse me for a moment, I must go and beat my coworker because of him taking my pencil. This pencil is much more important then not beating other people.

Yop. Because its their job to help people, that cant handle their kids. So they offer you information, advices and so on, how to handle situations and educate your child when you cant handle the situation propper. But me beating another person is the states responsibility, because thanks god its illegal in my country. Yes, if I see that I fail by educating my child, I think its an absolute responsible action to seek help, to be able to educate my child in the future. Yes sure, if I have beaten my child until it bleeds and teeth are loosen they will take it from me. Simply because I am an idiot unable to educate a child. But simply because of being unable for normal educating a child, and sometimes loosing temper and smacking or spanking, they dont take your child, they simply try to help you, offer you specialists you can talk about why this is happening, or why you thought it would be right to do so and so on.

As I already wrote, in my country people normally try to help the families. So all members, mean helping a family to find ways to work with each other without violance. Also children are not compared. If you have a problem with one child, they will have contact to you, and because of this also to your other children. But if you only have a problem with one child, you only have a problem with one child. If you dont have problems with the other childs and are not beating them, why should they take them from you? Its less about fault but simply about facts: Fact is that you are whyever not capable of educating your child in a normal way. That doesnt mean that they automatically blame the mother, they are simply looking for solutions. So the kid can have yet undiscovered special needs, and the youth officers can help you with the right diagnosing and getting therapies for your child as example. If you have problems with your child because of special needs, all the spanking in the world wont help you to change the problem itself, professional diagnosis and therapy can. Or you are simply burnt out, so husband is in the hospital, you have to work 14 hours a day, your mom dies suddenly, additional you must face yourself with the grieving and the organisation of the funeral .... its normal that every person has its limit. So icecream is a really low limit from my oppinion, but if its simply obvious too much they can send you a helper for an certain amount of time. This helpers are simply to aid you, they are no punishment. If you are a singlemum and suddenly have to go to hospital for some days, you can call the youth officers for a family helper as well. So these helpers really are no punishment, but they simply help you with your housework, see that the children are doing the homework and do not burn the house on acident. There is nothing bad about them. And yes, if nothing works and it simply seems that you are still incapable of educating your child without beating, then there will be the risc of them taking your child, because of you being incapable of effectively parenting. You wont believe it, but if I am driving to fast, I surprisingly sometimes get judged for driving to fast.


Ok. So if I act responsible and realize that I am unable to raise my child wihtout harming it, and try to seek help, then I am not loving my child. But if I beat it because of icedream and refuse to seek help, so I will be beatint it on, I love my child. I cant follow your thouhgts, but no problem, I am official diagnosed as being mentally ill, so the problem will be on my side, and not that its weird to see beating a child as a true sign of love.

My mother never argued with me, about eating or whatever. I didnt need to be convinced, that I will be hungry if I dont eat a middaymeal, I simply experienced it.

I dont know what you need to explain or argue multiple times. If I dont sort my cloths propperly for the washing, my mom wont wash them, and I wont have clean cloths. What do you need to argue about that? If I wanted my cloths washed as a smaller child, there is an easy communication with my mom - I simply take my cloths, care for them as it is needed (no stuff in the trouser bags, turning T-Shirts that have prints, sorting it from normal stuff and hot washed stuff) and if I dont do so, my mom wont know that I want that cloths washed, because of them not being prepared for washing. And if I dislike what she has cooked, then I dislike it and will get hungry. What do you need to argue about that? And if I dont do my homework its ok for her, but as long it isnt done I am not allowed to watch television or meet with friends, because I am not allowed to do so until the homework isnt done because homework was important for her. There is no need to argue about it. As long as there is still work to do, you cant have freetime. If I want to expend my working until the evening, then I will have very less free time. Dont know what you want to talk about that endlessly.

Because of this you are beating your child? O_o Are you enabled in your spiral column, or how about showing your child that you want argue with it about handholding at crossing by simply taking him and carry him across the crossing instead of beating? Yes, sure you are physical advanced. But this no cause for beating, this is something that helps you that you simply dont need to beat. If you dont argue about it, but simply lift it up and cross the street, do you think the child will think that arguing had a sense?

How can you call such nonsense an emergency. Its simply a electricity burnout. As long as you dont have any relatives at home that are linked to medical machines that need electricity, this is no emergency. If the nonexistence of electricity was an emergency we would call the aeon before the invention of electricity the aeon of emergency. Now we know, why beating your children was accepted in earlier days. Because the poor parents had the emergency of missing electricity 24 hours a day.

Simply imagine your kids getting older and stronger then you one day. One day you will become old and become depending on your children. Maybe you will get mentally ill, this typical kind of old a bit weird person that simply needs help from now and then, and that cant live anymore on his own because of doing weird things sometimes. Do you think that your children should beat you then, if the water wont work for some hours, and you not being able to understand the situation anymore? So your son wants to see how he can repair the water, he cant have an eye on you, and you are trying to get into the bath every 15 minutes to take a bath, because you simply dont understand the situation. Do you really think, that it was right of your son if he beated you out of this? Or because of demanding some sort of cookies, that maybe arent produced anymore since 15 years? Or because you refuse do give him your hand when crossing the street? Do you think, that simply because you are no longer to understand this situations, that you deserve being beaten by him? I mean goddamn, when my grandaunt got old, she definitily costes you lots of energy and it wasnt easy. But never would I have thought on beating her, simply to avoid arguing with her. Sometimes you had to force on her something by physical advantage and this was really hard (Going out to care for her garden at freezing temperature with her nightskirt or so, so sure you had to force her to go back into the house to get more cloths.), but never have I tried to do so by beating her. Yep, definitely it sucks, buts that simply the way it is. And when we didnt manage to care for her anylonger, we asked for help. And didnt tell us: "Oh no, if we really love her, we dont call for help but wait until she hurts herself. Because the terribble nurses could decide that she needs more attention then we can give her at home."


Because having a child is nowaday an active desicion. A child needs to learn about the world, and YOU are the one who decided about the existence of the child, so its your responsibility. Its as if you would aks me: "I am not sure I see why it is me as an owner that always have to feed my pet." You are an grown up adult and so it is up to you to think if you truly want a child including showing him the world (which means explaining) or not. Thousend of questions are part of having a child. About beaturiful things as the clouds or about the stars and about such normal, boring things as "Why it isnt supposed to eat sweeties before midmeal."

Are you a fire fighter? Or a specialised heart doctor? If not, about what emergencies are you speaking? Icecream? Not wanting to give you the hand? I agree with you with the life and death situations. I am the last person, that will judge someone on a playgarden for giving a child a clap that tried to beat another child with a stone or bumped at the climbing tower other children, riscing other childs to be seriousliy hurted. This are emergencies, there are lifes depending on it. But a child demanding icecream you can easily ignore or a child not wanting to give you the hand before a crossing, you can easily lift up and carry, so he sees as well that there are times, where arguing will not help him, are simply no emergencies for me.

There is family income, and there is family work. If the work is shared the income is shared. If the child doesnt do his work it is supposed to do (As example for a 8 year old child, helping with the breakfast table, cleaning up her own room, helping with the dishes after midday meal and homework and learning were her work. So it depends on the age.) you dont get your part of the income. If I did additional stuff like ironing for my mom or cleaning windows, that werent my work yet, I got a bonus from my mom. (Nothing great, so ironing a hankie was about 1 cent, up to ironing office shirts 10 cents, cleaning the windows were 20 cents and so on...) I dont need to discuss with her, that if I dont have cleaned a window, I wont get my bonus 20 cents. ^^

Nothing, as long as you include yourself. Do you think that your family can be proud when you representative your family by beating your child because of icecream? Do you think people will them themselfs: "Oh this woman is behaving in a way that we wished our family would be as hers?" You as parents are representing your family as well. My father beated my out of the same thing you declare here: "Because of me not behaving in front of others, so because of my behaving people will thin bad about our family." So first: Do you really think, that people think that much about little children? I dont know, if there is a kid in the supermarket, smacking himself on the floor crying, I dont think anything about the family if I dont know them. How shall I know if the child simply couldnt sleep that night and is cranky because of it, if he acts in this way the first time and needs to be discouraged by his mom by ignoring his behavement, so he sees that it doesnt help him get attention, if he does this everytime? While I definitely think bad about a woman smacking a child. Because as a grown up, you dont get "cranky" excuses anymore. Childs are sometimes cranky, they are yet not in 100% control of their feelings. I dont demand that from a child, and I dont think bad about a child if it doenst work. But you are no child, if you behave incorrect it works. When one of our neighbors told my father that I didnt recognize and greet him, when I passed him on the street, he beated me because of "What could the neighbors think." Do you know what the neighbor thought? He was shocked by ma fathers behavement, he tried to comfort me, excused himself that he only wanted to joke with my father about it and never thought of me doing this on purpose, he simply thought it was funny that I didnt recognize them at a distance of 1 meter and thought my father would laugh about it with him. He never had the idea that he would have the idea to beat me because of this nonsense, that was only a joke for him. After this noone, who knew of this event, ever talked to him again about something I did, because they were afraid he would get nuts again, instead to talked to my mother. THIS is what people thought. That it is sick to beat his children out of "But what will the neighbors think." and "Oh.... my reputation as a childbeater!"


You are talking about that you beat your children because you want others to have a good opinion on you. I mean goddamn, do you listen to yourself? "Anything that threatens the family is verboten, and I don't feel guilty at all for spanking a child for that." - Ok, and who is spanking you for threatening your family by behaving in that way? If you were my neighbor and I would see, that you are unable to educate your child propper, I´d offer you my help a few times, but if you seriously told me your oppinions right to the face I would stop talking to you. I mean you are beating your child. Even the idiot neighbar that wanted to sue my parents because of our sprinkler ruining his plastic fence could not have such a bad reputation.

Ok, so as long as your children only think what they think, and dont talk what they think, and to their work as happy television family members, so you can live on in your dreamworld telling yourself that everyone is happy, does not disrupt the stability of the family unit. And beating also forges the family unit. There is no better way to forge the family unit by beating them if they dare to defy you verbally. I mean verbally defying is such an giant threat that the lesser threat of beating someone is fully acceptable.

At least we agree on some words, even if we talk about other topics.

Are you sure you dont mistake your children with hired clowns? I mean if you hire a clown its their job to entertain you and if they do you pay them and if they dont.... Ok, yes I agree...you threat your children far worse then normal people would treat a hired birthday clown, so its a bad comparison.

This sounds so much of my father... so maybe it helps you to avoid unnecessary diagnosis costs, so both the therapist of my sister and the one I needed after a childhood with such a highly responsible person as you are, thought independent of them that his problems were about narcisstic personality disorder.

People with this dissorder start to create a fantasy world around them, such as "the emergency icecream", with themself in the center as people do that talk about "their sufferings after beating a child", and are highly insecure about their self esteem, so many of there thoughts are focused on things like "my reputation", "others opposing them" and ensuring themselves ever and ever again that the must be important because if someone would dare not to entertain them and so ensure them as the important persons they are, they can threaten them to do so. So you are better then them, because they are irrelevant. You are in authority...dont forget to beat your children if they forget to ensure you of being important and in authority. Because it would mean that you dont love them, if you would go to seek yourself a therapist that could help you to find importancy and authority within yourself, so you dont need to threaten your children anymore to feel your authortiy.

Little advice: Authority is nothing a child can take from you in the real world.

I would print that on a picture, so your children dont forget before you get old and weird and need physical punishment yourself.

What does this have to do with spanking? Spanking is with cause, and is not beating.


If I have a child, and he's being willful, and he wants to run with scissors, should I just try to reason with him? He doesn't want to listen to reason. If I sit on my hands and do nothing but attempt to reason with him, he's going to run with scissors. If he does that, he could stab himself in the eye, or the gut, or the face, or the leg, or the chest. Or maybe trip while running past his sister and stab her. All of these things are worse than an actual beating, and what's being suggested isn't an actual beating, it's just a spanking.


I see. So if we let our children eat only candy and never nutritious food, despite knowing how bad an idea that is, we have done our job as parents, and we shouldn't mind that they get a bunch of cavities or get sick. If we see them playing with a knife, we shouldn't stop them, just let them feel the natural consequence of slicing open their finger or stabbing their leg. If we see them playing with matches, we should just let nature take its course. After all, the danger of being badly burned is nothing compared to the mild and temporary pain of a swat on the butt.

And, of course, if the rule doesn't have natural consequenses for the child itself, it must be wrong, right? So if he pulls his sister's hair until she cries, it doesn't hurt him, so he's not doing anything wrong. She is, since she's letting him pull her hair. If this happens, we can leave them to it, not worry about the emotional damage done to the sister or the moral problems the brother may face in the future because of the habits he formed as a kid, and feel good about ourselves, since at least we aren't like those horrible people who spank their children.


Why wouldn't he believe it? Why do you call it hypocrisy?


What does losing your temper have to do with spanking a child? Spanking is done to correct the child, not to make you feel better.



We are talking about spanking here, not punching people in the face. You do know what the word spanking means, right?

Spanking only works if the child accepts it as punishment. If it is the parent lashing out in anger or being a brutish bully I say as soon as the "child" is bigger and stronger than the parent they should beat them right back.

I've yet to see a case in which spanking the child resulted in a more positive outcome for the child than no spanking.

Spanking makes the child either afraid of the parent spanking it or become a very rebellious kid.

When I was a little kid, I used to be afraid of my mother when she got angry (as she was good at giving me and my brother a smack), and we used to have a lot of arguments when I was a teenager. Nowadays, even though I love her and am protective of her (and she's very loving and sacrificial towards me), I have a very hard time communicating with her in a friendly manner the way I do with my siblings. And this is despite no enmity or hatred between us, just a lack of comfort. When I think about why, I get the feeling that the old childhood spanking moments have a lot to do with it.

Either way, moral of the day:

If you care for your child, don't spank him. There are other more effective ways to discipline.

I was spanked as a kid, and neither of those things happened to me.


I think you may be on to something here, but it really depends on what you mean by "accept it". If you mean a saintly resignation which fully accepts that they did wrong and deserve to be punished, that's pretty much never going to happen, especially if spanking is a last resort which isn't used unless saying "don't do that" didn't work. If you mean something more like an understanding that this is a punishment being given out for a specific bad behavior, then I think you're probably right.

Half of the time, I didn't even know what I was being spanked for. I'm still uncomfortable around authority figures.

What the hell; I vote that we make April 24th National Spanking Day and it will be a federal holiday that we get off every year.
We'll hang decorative wooden paddles on our front doors in recognition.