Child Abuse/Corporal Punishment Discussion

[Thermodolia]

Not exactly as spanking an adult is not technically illegal it's the reason why your spanking that's illegal.

Nope. If I did it to an adult for exactly the same reasons that you are proposing doing it to children, then I would rightly be arrested for assault.

If your spanking your buddies after a game or you and your partner are having sex and you spank them that's not illegal.

[Great Feng]

Only a naive, inexperienced fool would think that's it's always possible to reason with kids or teenagers.

Or, you know, someone who has spent a huge amount of time working with some of the most "troubled" kids going, and has never once found a single one that can't be reasoned with. The problem isn't that the kid can't be reasoned with: it's that you don't know how to reason with them.

^This. I have argued so many times and she has resorted to the "authority" position which makes me disobey her even more because I don't believe in the parent's divine right to govern the child.
On the other hand my fostermom who I live with outwits me and is able to reason with me and after I am outwitted, I easily though reluctantly and with a bit of bitterness for losing, submit and follows orders.

[Thermodolia]

It doesn't always have to hurt to qualify as spanking.

If one is not actually causing any pain then how is that corporal punishment at all?

I guess it's not then.

[Ifreann]

Nope. If I did it to an adult for exactly the same reasons that you are proposing doing it to children, then I would rightly be arrested for assault.

If your spanking your buddies after a game or you and your partner are having sex and you spank them that's not illegal.

It rather is if the other party does not allow your to spank them.

[Salandriagado]

Nope. If I did it to an adult for exactly the same reasons that you are proposing doing it to children, then I would rightly be arrested for assault.

If your spanking your buddies after a game or you and your partner are having sex and you spank them that's not illegal.

Neither of those are the reasons that you are proposing hitting children. The reason that you are proposing hitting children is because you have decided that you don't like their behaviour.

[Thermodolia]

If your spanking your buddies after a game or you and your partner are having sex and you spank them that's not illegal.

Neither of those are the reasons that you are proposing hitting children. The reason that you are proposing hitting children is because you have decided that you don't like their behaviour.

True, I'll give you that. In all fairness I'm just playing the devils advocate. I really don't think it's right for a parent to use physical force on their kids.

[Kyrusia]

Only a naive, inexperienced fool would think that's it's always possible to reason with kids or teenagers.

DBJ-II: This? This is flaming. Consider this an unofficial warning for flaming. Knock it off and review the rules; you can argue your side of a debate without resorting to this.

[Great Feng]

Neither of those are the reasons that you are proposing hitting children. The reason that you are proposing hitting children is because you have decided that you don't like their behaviour.

True, I'll give you that. In all fairness I'm just playing the devils advocate. I really don't think it's right for a parent to use physical force on their kids.

Arguing for an opinion you don't agree with?
Just like me 25% the time!

[Thermodolia]

True, I'll give you that. In all fairness I'm just playing the devils advocate. I really don't think it's right for a parent to use physical force on their kids.

Arguing for an opinion you don't agree with?
Just like me 25% the time!

I do it way more than I should. I just love to debate in a civil manner.

[DBJ-II]

I absolutely support smacking a child/teenager when the situation requires it, especially in school. Obviously it shouldn't be done often and only if it's impossible to reason with them.

If it's impossible to reason with them then what will hurting them achieve? They'll just fight back, or try to run away, and can't possibly understand that you're trying to get them to stop doing something.

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

[Salandriagado]

If it's impossible to reason with them then what will hurting them achieve? They'll just fight back, or try to run away, and can't possibly understand that you're trying to get them to stop doing something.

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

And hitting them doesn't solve any of these problems.

[Thermodolia]

If it's impossible to reason with them then what will hurting them achieve? They'll just fight back, or try to run away, and can't possibly understand that you're trying to get them to stop doing something.

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

You can still punish someone without automatically resorting to physical violence. You can revoke privileges.

[Great Feng]

If it's impossible to reason with them then what will hurting them achieve? They'll just fight back, or try to run away, and can't possibly understand that you're trying to get them to stop doing something.

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

Hitting them only hurts them, causes them to feel abused, angers them, makes them more aggressive, and causes them to be more likely to hit others.
If anything at most we should send them to personal prison with crappy food and nothing to do but watch Justin Bieber or Donald Trump.

[Thermodolia]

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

Hitting them only hurts them, causes them to feel abused, angers them, makes them more aggressive, and causes them to be more likely to hit others.
If anything at most we should send them to personal prison with crappy food and nothing to do but watch Justin Bieber or Donald Trump.

That alone should banned by the Geneva conventions

[Great Feng]

Hitting them only hurts them, causes them to feel abused, angers them, makes them more aggressive, and causes them to be more likely to hit others.
If anything at most we should send them to personal prison with crappy food and nothing to do but watch Justin Bieber or Donald Trump.

That alone should banned by the Geneva conventions

True.
Teletubbies?

[Ashmoria]

I don't know anyone who wasn't spanked at least a couple of times as a kid, and all of them have turned out just fine as adults. Don't see what the big fuss about physical punishment is, because as another poster here already stated, there's a very big difference between disciplining and abusing a kid.

If anything, a lot of kids these days could use more strap rather than less, being the spoiled disrespectful brats who always know their rights and never their duties. Some of the shit you get to see at schools these days would be unthinkable back when I was a kid.

its not the strap they need but consistent parental discipline (without striking them). if parents followed through every time their kids would know they cant push the limit very far.

[DBJ-II]

Too often they're fully aware that they're causing trouble, in crappy "ghetto" schools there are plenty kids who act like retards just in order to cause trouble and disrupt the class. They also know that there are no consequences for their actions.

You can still punish someone without automatically resorting to physical violence. You can revoke privileges.

Like what? What privileges are you going to revoke? It's useless. If you'd smack him around a little and embarrass him infront of all the other kids, that'll work.

[Ashmoria]

when the article says "tree branch" do they really mean a switch? there is a big difference between a switch and a tree branch.

I hope nobody is spanking their kids or anyone else for that matter with a tree branch!

me too!

I don't like the idea of the switch either but "tree branch" cant be used without a huge likelihood of permanent damage to the child.

[Thermodolia]

That alone should banned by the Geneva conventions

True.
Teletubbies?

That's fine.

[The East Marches]

Excerpt from a previous post I made

....

My Mom was a bit more practically minded than my Dad was.

For instance: "Little East Marches wanted to go grab his ball in the busy street like a dumbass"
Mom's Solution: She threw a soccer ball at the back of my head before I cross the street to grab the basketball like a retard. Granted, I did fall down and it hurt. It was certainly better than being run over by a car.

Another classic was I didn't understand that the stove and the curling iron was hot. My Mom tried explaining it to me, she tried whacking me when I would grab at it. Eventually, she left the stove on and then let cool a little bit so it wouldn't give me horrible burns when I grabbed it. I grabbed that fucking stove once and only once. Never again did I do that as a kid....

The moral of this story is that sometimes force is indeed needed. Not everybody is raised or can be raised in the same manner. It's best to leave those things to the parents.

[Thermodolia]

You can still punish someone without automatically resorting to physical violence. You can revoke privileges.

Like what? What privileges are you going to revoke? It's useless. If you'd smack him around a little and embarrass him infront of all the other kids, that'll work.

All that's going to do is cause resentment towards you. You could have those kids eat alone during lunch for bad behavior, removing their phones, and many other things.

[Giovenith]

Spanking should never happen in schools and if you are mad and can't reason with your child you shouldn't be allowed to spank them.

Only a naive, inexperienced fool would think that's it's always possible to reason with kids or teenagers.

Or someone who is not shit with kids.

[Thermodolia]

Excerpt from a previous post I made

....

My Mom was a bit more practically minded than my Dad was.

For instance: "Little East Marches wanted to go grab his ball in the busy street like a dumbass"
Mom's Solution: She threw a soccer ball at the back of my head before I cross the street to grab the basketball like a retard. Granted, I did fall down and it hurt. It was certainly better than being run over by a car.

Another classic was I didn't understand that the stove and the curling iron was hot. My Mom tried explaining it to me, she tried whacking me when I would grab at it. Eventually, she left the stove on and then let cool a little bit so it wouldn't give me horrible burns when I grabbed it. I grabbed that fucking stove once and only once. Never again did I do that as a kid....

The moral of this story is that sometimes force is indeed needed. Not everybody is raised or can be raised in the same manner. It's best to leave those things to the parents.

I'm not even sure if the parents should do that, however the schools should definitely not do such things.

[Salandriagado]

You can still punish someone without automatically resorting to physical violence. You can revoke privileges.

Like what? What privileges are you going to revoke? It's useless. If you'd smack him around a little and embarrass him infront of all the other kids, that'll work.

Except that it factually doesn't.

[Giovenith]

You can still punish someone without automatically resorting to physical violence. You can revoke privileges.

Like what? What privileges are you going to revoke? It's useless. If you'd smack him around a little and embarrass him infront of all the other kids, that'll work.

- Use of iPad
- Use of television
- Use of PS3
- Ability to play with friends
- Ability to go to bed at a later hour
- Ability to go outside and have fun
- Acquisition of allowance
- Former promise to buy an item for them
- Former promise to take them someplace special

Also:
- Appealing to their sense of self-image and empathy in order to make them feel shame about the consequences of their actions. "Wow Timmy, you just go around and hit people? How would you feel if I took you... *grab wrist* ... and just went WHAP! *make hand motion* Would you like it? No? Then what makes you think Jenny likes it? Do you want to be a mean person that nobody likes? No? Then don't do things to others if you wouldn't like it."
- Just yelling at them. Seriously, most kids are scared shitless enough of a larger person expressing rage that that in itself is a punishment.

All of these things and more have worked for children as young as 4 in my experience and the experience of every single adult around me, some of whom includes people who work with children for a living. Again, just because you are bad at reasoning with and punishing children without violence doesn't mean it's impossible, it means just that: You are bad at it. It's not the fault of the kids, they're not as stupid, resilient, or cold-blooded as you seem to believe.