That's idiotic. You can choose to be whatever you want to.
you act like there's some sort of switch that kicks in and takes over for making decisions, and discounts anything that happened in early childhood. sure, the specifics of childhood are exactly carried onwards (unless especially traumatic or repetitive), but in broad strokes, good children, by-and-large, become good people who want to do good things (or at least what they have learned to be good, which is a completely different thread altogether). it's a "social language" you learn, just like small children who take language immersion classes during their formative language building years are EONS ahead of others in terms of multi-lingualism and other multi-faceted thinking skills. they don't know why they are more adept at such things, they just ARE, and the same holds true for social interaction. there are stories of the random samplings, though, of people coming out of terrible circumstances to become ideal citizens, and ideal families creating horrible adults later in life. but we usually catch these stories in the media -- becoming a world or industry leader, or, by contrast, a serial killer -- so we see one instance, and think it's more widespread than it actually is.
my only personal experience to all this is that my dad spanked me... i never knew such pain, and he only ever used his hand, but i was terrified of it. i turned out okay, yet when i recently saw a woman whacking the hell out of her son's behind the other day at the mall for some transgression, it just seemed brutal and unnecessary from the other side of the looking glass.
I have an interesting take on the subject. Recently, our culture has made physical confrontation the most taboo interaction between people.
While fighting and physical violence is generally not desireable, it seems to have been overly demonized. People no longer even entertain the possibility that it might be the lesser of two evils.
For instance, physical bullying is considered the epitomy of evil. Yet verbal and coercive bullying is almost encouraged.
This phenomenon is also observable in our attitude toward the spanking of children. This is unfortunate because verbally and physically enforced punishment are equally traumatizing to a child. Physical abuse is normally accompanied by emotional/verbal abuse, and that, in my opinion, is what ends up leading to serious problems later in life.
A child can emotionally recover from clear-cut and consistently applied corporal punishment. Inconsistent verbal intimidation / behavior modification can take decades to come back from.
I'm not backing one over the other. Rather, I'm pointing out that we've overly demonized physical confrontation when compared to verbal confrontation. Both can be traumatizing and both can be affective in raising a child.
physical punishment is, hands-down, disgusting. To resort to corporal punishment is the mark of a failed parent.
This may make some of you angry - that's fine.
Further, the use of *any* object (hair brush, belt, etc) when punishing a child is considered --child abuse-- & I wouldn't hesitate to call Child Protective Services on anyone I saw doing this.
I can assure parents, as a parent, that if you "need" to spank your child, you simply aren't educated enough on how to be a parent..and how to be a good person in general. There are many, many ways of negotiating and there is a wealth of information "out there" which can help any parent raise a child minus the violence.
My god - if you were out in the world and your wife/husband did something you didn't like, would you paddle them until they relented to your point of view? Of course not - and, technically, if you did...and it was non-consensual...you would go to jail on domestic abuse chareges. So, may I ask, where the hell did people get the idea it's OK to committ violence against a defenseless child?
physical punishment is, hands-down, disgusting. To resort to corporal punishment is the mark of a failed parent.
That is correct. Spanking however, is not a punishment, but an educational tool.
Quote:
Further, the use of *any* object (hair brush, belt, etc) when punishing a child is considered --child abuse-- & I wouldn't hesitate to call Child Protective Services on anyone I saw doing this.
Do you also call highway patrol everytime you see someone speeding?
Again, we're not talking about punishment... rather education.
Quote:
I can assure parents, as a parent, that if you "need" to spank your child, you simply aren't educated enough on how to be a parent..
And you know this how? Do you have any data to support that?
Quote:
My god
Who/ what is your god?
Did you have an abusive father or something? You seem to be stuck on violence, child abuse, domestic abuse, and all of that other shit.
Violence, punishment, abuse has nothing to do with spaking (beating a child is something very different) a child. Education does.
skatman, the research does not support what you posted. The use of corporal punishment is negatively associated with internalization (i.e., education) and positively associated with physical abuse. That's not true for every single parent and every single child, 100% of the time (what is?), but those are the associations that the research on spanking shows.
"The research" of course refering to a select batch of studies from a particular culture/mindset/time-in-history. There is certainly not a scientific consensus on this topic.
"The research" of course refering to a select batch of studies from a particular culture/mindset/time-in-history. There is certainly not a scientific consensus on this topic.
You can discount any science with that kind of comment, but the fact is, a great deal of research does exist on this topic. And it's not "research" in quotes. It's research: It's what we've found to be true, in comparison to people just making stuff up. At the very least, one should provide a specific criticism of why this research could be wrong or misleading, rather than just this kind of vague "no research is ever valid" comment.
You can discount any science with that kind of comment, but the fact is, a great deal of research does exist on this topic. And it's not "research" in quotes. It's research: It's what we've found to be true, in comparison to people just making stuff up. At the very least, one should provide a specific criticism of why this research could be wrong or misleading, rather than just this kind of vague "no research is ever valid" comment.
Easy there, science isn't being discounted. Rather, it's being asserted that there isn't scientific consensus on the subject of corporal punishment.
When analyzing the results of a behavioral modification technique, defining "net good" is difficult. This is why there isn't a consensus. It isn't like we're talking about an empirical measurement here.
Easy there, science isn't being discounted. Rather, it's being asserted that there isn't scientific consensus on the subject of corporal punishment.
The comment that it's from "a particular culture/mindset/time-in-history" sounded to me like you were discounting science. But in my judgment there is a scientific consensus about it. The only debate about it is whether it is genuinely harmful or just not helpful. You can look at some of the comments from many of the experts in that area in the APA link I provided above.
Quote:
When analyzing the results of a behavioral modification technique, defining "net good" is difficult. This is why there isn't a consensus. It isn't like we're talking about an empirical measurement here.
I don't know what you mean here. If we're not talking empirical measurement, what is it exactly? The studies reviewed in that paper I linked aren't philosophical pieces. It's a meta-analysis of empirical studies. Sure, things like compiance and internalization and aggressiveness are difficult to measure, but just about everything is difficult to measure. That doesn't make it any less empirical.
Take a step back and look at what you're trying to prove. The achievement of "net good" when choosing how to raise a child.
For people less absolutely fixated on physical aggression, scientific studies focus on completely different measures for determining if a particular behavior modification technique is "good".
It is easy to get lost in one's culture and not even realize one's own bias. Empirical measures aren't what is being argued here. Its the relative relevance of said measures that are in question.
It's exhausting and you have no credibility to be making those arguments.
If you find research to support that, great.
Edit: Ah, jeez. Sorry I was in a really bad mood. No girlfriend for spanking related activities Kidding, I'm not a fan of that type.
Hey, no problem. But I try not to make conclusions on things I don't know much about. I try to frame it as a hypothesis, which may get lost in the manifesto-like nature of typical message board discussion. Part of the reason in may seem exhausting is because I spend too much time trying to cover my tracks. (Or at least I hope I do.)
Comments
Originally posted by Placebo
That's idiotic. You can choose to be whatever you want to.
you act like there's some sort of switch that kicks in and takes over for making decisions, and discounts anything that happened in early childhood. sure, the specifics of childhood are exactly carried onwards (unless especially traumatic or repetitive), but in broad strokes, good children, by-and-large, become good people who want to do good things (or at least what they have learned to be good, which is a completely different thread altogether). it's a "social language" you learn, just like small children who take language immersion classes during their formative language building years are EONS ahead of others in terms of multi-lingualism and other multi-faceted thinking skills. they don't know why they are more adept at such things, they just ARE, and the same holds true for social interaction. there are stories of the random samplings, though, of people coming out of terrible circumstances to become ideal citizens, and ideal families creating horrible adults later in life. but we usually catch these stories in the media -- becoming a world or industry leader, or, by contrast, a serial killer -- so we see one instance, and think it's more widespread than it actually is.
my only personal experience to all this is that my dad spanked me... i never knew such pain, and he only ever used his hand, but i was terrified of it. i turned out okay, yet when i recently saw a woman whacking the hell out of her son's behind the other day at the mall for some transgression, it just seemed brutal and unnecessary from the other side of the looking glass.
While fighting and physical violence is generally not desireable, it seems to have been overly demonized. People no longer even entertain the possibility that it might be the lesser of two evils.
For instance, physical bullying is considered the epitomy of evil. Yet verbal and coercive bullying is almost encouraged.
This phenomenon is also observable in our attitude toward the spanking of children. This is unfortunate because verbally and physically enforced punishment are equally traumatizing to a child. Physical abuse is normally accompanied by emotional/verbal abuse, and that, in my opinion, is what ends up leading to serious problems later in life.
A child can emotionally recover from clear-cut and consistently applied corporal punishment. Inconsistent verbal intimidation / behavior modification can take decades to come back from.
I'm not backing one over the other. Rather, I'm pointing out that we've overly demonized physical confrontation when compared to verbal confrontation. Both can be traumatizing and both can be affective in raising a child.
This may make some of you angry - that's fine.
Further, the use of *any* object (hair brush, belt, etc) when punishing a child is considered --child abuse-- & I wouldn't hesitate to call Child Protective Services on anyone I saw doing this.
I can assure parents, as a parent, that if you "need" to spank your child, you simply aren't educated enough on how to be a parent..and how to be a good person in general. There are many, many ways of negotiating and there is a wealth of information "out there" which can help any parent raise a child minus the violence.
My god - if you were out in the world and your wife/husband did something you didn't like, would you paddle them until they relented to your point of view? Of course not - and, technically, if you did...and it was non-consensual...you would go to jail on domestic abuse chareges. So, may I ask, where the hell did people get the idea it's OK to committ violence against a defenseless child?
Originally posted by Placebo
That's idiotic. You can choose to be whatever you want to.
And family life has nothing to do with it?
physical punishment is, hands-down, disgusting. To resort to corporal punishment is the mark of a failed parent.
That is correct. Spanking however, is not a punishment, but an educational tool.
Further, the use of *any* object (hair brush, belt, etc) when punishing a child is considered --child abuse-- & I wouldn't hesitate to call Child Protective Services on anyone I saw doing this.
Do you also call highway patrol everytime you see someone speeding?
Again, we're not talking about punishment... rather education.
I can assure parents, as a parent, that if you "need" to spank your child, you simply aren't educated enough on how to be a parent..
And you know this how? Do you have any data to support that?
My god
Who/ what is your god?
Did you have an abusive father or something? You seem to be stuck on violence, child abuse, domestic abuse, and all of that other shit.
Violence, punishment, abuse has nothing to do with spaking (beating a child is something very different) a child. Education does.
Originally posted by dfiler
"The research" of course refering to a select batch of studies from a particular culture/mindset/time-in-history. There is certainly not a scientific consensus on this topic.
You can discount any science with that kind of comment, but the fact is, a great deal of research does exist on this topic. And it's not "research" in quotes. It's research: It's what we've found to be true, in comparison to people just making stuff up. At the very least, one should provide a specific criticism of why this research could be wrong or misleading, rather than just this kind of vague "no research is ever valid" comment.
Originally posted by BRussell
You can discount any science with that kind of comment, but the fact is, a great deal of research does exist on this topic. And it's not "research" in quotes. It's research: It's what we've found to be true, in comparison to people just making stuff up. At the very least, one should provide a specific criticism of why this research could be wrong or misleading, rather than just this kind of vague "no research is ever valid" comment.
Easy there, science isn't being discounted. Rather, it's being asserted that there isn't scientific consensus on the subject of corporal punishment.
When analyzing the results of a behavioral modification technique, defining "net good" is difficult. This is why there isn't a consensus. It isn't like we're talking about an empirical measurement here.
Originally posted by dfiler
Easy there, science isn't being discounted. Rather, it's being asserted that there isn't scientific consensus on the subject of corporal punishment.
The comment that it's from "a particular culture/mindset/time-in-history" sounded to me like you were discounting science. But in my judgment there is a scientific consensus about it. The only debate about it is whether it is genuinely harmful or just not helpful. You can look at some of the comments from many of the experts in that area in the APA link I provided above.
When analyzing the results of a behavioral modification technique, defining "net good" is difficult. This is why there isn't a consensus. It isn't like we're talking about an empirical measurement here.
I don't know what you mean here. If we're not talking empirical measurement, what is it exactly? The studies reviewed in that paper I linked aren't philosophical pieces. It's a meta-analysis of empirical studies. Sure, things like compiance and internalization and aggressiveness are difficult to measure, but just about everything is difficult to measure. That doesn't make it any less empirical.
For people less absolutely fixated on physical aggression, scientific studies focus on completely different measures for determining if a particular behavior modification technique is "good".
It is easy to get lost in one's culture and not even realize one's own bias. Empirical measures aren't what is being argued here. Its the relative relevance of said measures that are in question.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Spline, put away the armchair psychology.
It's exhausting and you have no credibility to be making those arguments.
If you find research to support that, great.
Edit: Ah, jeez. Sorry I was in a really bad mood. No girlfriend for spanking related activities
Hey, no problem. But I try not to make conclusions on things I don't know much about. I try to frame it as a hypothesis, which may get lost in the manifesto-like nature of typical message board discussion. Part of the reason in may seem exhausting is because I spend too much time trying to cover my tracks. (Or at least I hope I do.)
indeed.
I've got an 8 year old.
Statistics (sorry i don't have them available in English)
regarding this subject tell me, that almost every
one who spanks his/her child, has been spanked
in his/her own childhood previously. Think about that.
As someone else mentioned above, parents are in
charge of their children and not vice versa. Spanking
the children is always a sign of losing self control.
Think about yourself first, who is in charge, YOU.
The bottom line is:
Do not spank, find other ways to communicate.
Communication is good, Spanking is not a part
of that what i call successful Communication
and partnership.
my 2 cents
Originally posted by BRussell
So now I use cigarette burns on their underarms. It's not debilitating in any way, it just teaches them morals.
You realize that you just openly admitted to child abuse . . .
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
I've got an 8 year old.
Congratulations.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Statistics (sorry i don't have them available in English)
regarding this subject tell me, that almost every
one who spanks his/her child, has been spanked
in his/her own childhood previously. Think about that.
So?
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Spanking the children is always a sign of losing self control.
Of course that is not universally (or even predominently) true.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Do not spank, find other ways to communicate.
Of course spanking isn't the only "tool" in (healthy) parental "tool box".
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Communication is good, Spanking is not a part
of that what i call successful Communication
It certainly can be.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
and partnership.
If parents are "in charge" and children are not. How is there a "partnership"?
Parents and their children are not "partners" in the child rearing.
Originally posted by Lust
You realize that you just openly admitted to child abuse . . .
You realize that you just openly admitted to having a broken sarcasm detector . . .
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
...
If parents are "in charge" and children are not. How is there a "partnership"?
...
I don't see any contradiction so far.
...
Parents and their children are not "partners" in the child rearing.
Child rearing?
as "partners" in the sense that parents and their children have an
informal, say, (hidden) family contract, to achieve a common goal.
Common Goals are in the first place: values regarding social behaviour
(which is a matter to be hammered out later
While growing up children are coming closer and closer
to the goals parents have proposed firstly. Parents are responsible
for the Goals, but parents and their children try to achieve the
goals as "partners".
I know i've put it pretty simple, maybe you've got the pic.
cheers
Originally posted by BRussell
You realize that you just openly admitted to having a broken sarcasm detector . . .
You realize that your sarcasm is not that funny and plain unintelligent.