Geneviev wrote:Thermodolia wrote:Why does this sound oddly familiar? Ya know it kinda sounds like that guy who said that it was ok to abuse your wife but gently as if that changed anything
There is actually a difference between me and Amin.
Yes, you propose beating a small vulnerable human being who trusts you and call
that love.
The Free Joy State wrote:Corporal punishment never "showed me" anything, except that the people who hit me were -- in my five year old perception -- not nice to hit me just for being silly and I should make fun of them more.
Help them... what? Learn "might makes right"? Learn they can't trust those they should trust the most? Learn that you don't need an explanation if you have a fist?
Corporal punishment is not a teaching tool (it actually impairs moral internalisation), it's a tool to get immediate and temporary obedience without needing to say why. It's a lazy way to get your child to comply.
Help them be better people. You should tell the child why you're doing it and discuss it with them so they can learn. If it's lazy, then it's being done wrong.
Corporal punishment does not make children "better", and it actively inhibits learning (except how to hide their mistakes from you).
It is also an inherently lazy punishment. Rather than working to think of a personal punishment that would mean something to that child in the particular situation they're in and help them learn a genuine lesson and actually become a better person (write an apology to the person they insulted, fix something they broke, removing their gaming machine until they're caught up with their homework), just beat 'em.
Of course, they could suffer terrible effects down the line (in increased aggression, reduced mental wellbeing, and may abuse their spouse and children), but the parent gets to feel real good about "punishing them".