Forums → WEPR → The world has gotten wimpy!
| 64 | 18840 |
I remember the days when family, friends and neighbors used to stop by my house uninvited, and we'd let them in and we'd have a great time and stay up and party all night. Nowadays it's like: *Doorbell rings* "OMG! PANIC! HIDE UNDER THE COUCH AND BEHIND THE KITCHEN COUNTER! GET THE PHONE READY TO CALL 911! *Dad goes to look through the peep-hole and says:* "Oh, it's just the mailman with a package for us." Does that happen to anyone else?
-
I also remember the days when me and my neighborhood buddies (this was when I was like 10 years old or so) used to go all over the neighborhood with water-guns and squirt each other and have an awesome time independently. Then we'd go to the park and goof around and play tag, cops and robbers, and cowboys and indians. Nowadays... Kids put safety helmets on, and play on a swing-set in their fenced backyards with their siblings. Either that or they stay in their basements playing COD with their safety helmets still on.
-
So I work with these kids (6-10 years old) every other Tuesday, and to be honest, they are wimps. You know why? Because all these parents who fail at disciplining their kids. Nowadays it's "timeouts" and "ositive reinforcement" junk. Seriously, just watch supernanny, she never gives the kids spankings because that would be some kind of "child abuse." I remember whenever I did something bad, my parents immediately spanked me right on the butt. That's how discipline should be. Spankings have made me learn very well that what I did was wrong. And once I got spanked for doing something wrong, I never did that thing again because I didn't want to be spanked. Now about these kids I work with, they are a bunch of cry-babies. You know why? Because this is a generation of "timeouts." And the kids I work with are rude, disobedient and very rebellious. The little trolls are always untying my shoes, throwing crayons at me, stealing the snack food before it's snack time, flicking water at me when I take them to the bathroom. It's just ridiculous.
-
Bottom line: How and why did the world get so dangerous? And why are kids not being properly disciplined?
P.S. Even my little cousin (7 years old) screams his head off at the dentist's office because he's terrified of the tools. And he hardly ever brushes his teeth, so it's his own fault that he has to go to the dentist. I asked my parents if I was ever terrified of the dentist at that age, and they said that I wasn't... hmm... I wonder why...
- 64 Replies
I'm sorry, but anybody else notice the multitude of logical fallacies that were employed in afterburner's posts? I thought that it was so funny it made his entire argument almost similar to a juvenalian satire.
in seriousness, I can personally attest to how these fear punishments are a bad idea. my dad spanked me on occasion when I was younger, and I have more or less put up a wall between the two of us that prevents us from being able to talk to eachother. my mom decided to take away my privileidges away instead, and even though I can talk to her a little more easily than dad, I still have an emotional barrier that prevents me from being able to talk to my parents about a serious subject without me suddenly going into tears. this makes them unable to take me seriously, which makes us even farther apart emotionally than before. I'm constantly trying to go behind their backs, and doing whatever it takes for them to not find out I am doing anything wrong because I still fear them in the back of my mind, which makes me hate them just because they are close to me. it has also turned me into a bit of an introvert, which damages my ability to talk to anybody at school.
@afterburner-the capital punishment method is an out of date method. like many other out of date methods, it doesn't have as much important information as the more up-to-date methods that are used today. all it did for you was turn you into a seemingly sadistic zealot of religion (which, upon close inspection, also uses a form of capital punishment on its followers).
also, the kids are messing with you because they are kids! no ammount of punishment will change the fact that they don't know why what they are doing is wrong. all you will do is turn them into a miniature version of you, a punishment fearing conformist who will remain ignorant as long as a source of authority tells you to do so. that, or they will get their parents who know what they are doing to fire you.
your upbringing saddens me.
-Blade
False. They will want to know why they got spanked so that they can avoid it in the future. So they talk with their parents and ask questions about an issue. When you answer their questions calmly, they will see things your way. When they see things your way, they will stop doing bad things. And when they stop doing bad things, you can stop spanking them.
Really? That may have been the way it worked for you, but definitly not for many others. This is the first time I've heard it done this way. The way I know about is yell, hit, and child walks away crying.
If you spank a child for doing something wrong, they feel how the person they wronged feels. Thus they do not want others to feel that way. And they will not hit others because it they will feel bad. Hey presto, you have an ethical child and you can stop spanking them.
What child thinks this way after being hit? As far I know, all they really retain about the situation is that they did that action, and then their parent decided to hurt them afterwards.
Siblings are often and naturally competitive against each other. Usually fights stir among the siblings because they are rivals with each other. This shallow violence is not related to parents who spank as discipline. Parents spank their children not out of anger, but because it is tough love.
My parents only hit me in anger. And tough love doesn't transfer in the brain of a child.
They still push my patience to it's limits. But that could be due to the fact that I am not their parents.
Think of it this way. You're the subsitute teacher to them.
WHAT? If the child is raised properly then they will hit people? I thought you said children shouldn't be raised as fighting dogs? Are you saying kids should be raised to be violent? If that's what you meant, then YOU are the one who needs to seek professional help.
I think he was questioning why a child would hurt another child if they were raised properly.
And in a few years, that girl is going to realize that she gets no real punishment except for her dad being slightly disappointed in her.
So what exactly will you do as the child becomes older, like 14, 15, 16, or 17? Are you going to spank them? Because if you can't spank them, and you haven't made a strong bond with them, then you can't teach them anything anymore. If you can still hit them, then they won't just be sad and cry, they'll hate you, and become even more distant. At that point, spanking fails. But if you've developed a strong bond early and continue it, they'll trust you and respect you. Well, more than if you hit them.
See, I think the problem here is that you think hitting a child involves the parent being calm, and hitting the child with remorse. Then talking with their child about why they hurt them and why what they did was wrong. That is not the way it always works. In fact, this is the first time I've ever heard of it happening this way. In every other situation I've ever known, the parent doesn't like something the child did, got angry, and hit went up to their child, and hit the child. Often with yelling and a few curses. Then the child crys, and the parent walks away angrily. The child only knows that the parent wanted to hurt them for something they did. Often with no idea of why it was wrong. Sometimes they do talk afterwards, but the child is still distant because they can't trust the parent to not hurt them. I'm not saying that hitting a child will result in them being a bad kid. Often, when a parent does something to a child that the child doesn't like, the child later goes on to refrain from doing it themselves. Which is why your parents weren't as hard on you. But we should be constantly improving. I know that my grandfather hurt, and took advantage of my dad. My dad hated my grandfather, and still jumps when he hugs him. He through beatings, a permenant emotional mark was left on my dad, and I know that you're not suggesting something this extreme. But with spanking, theres little guarentee that people won't let their emotions get the better of them, or misunderstand the amount of pain their children feel, just not talk to their kids about it during or after. Physical punishment tends to be harmful to a child. Even at a much smaller scale then the one I mentioned.
For maximum quality in discipline, you must talk with the child after you spank them.
A HER DER HER DER.
So a child is incapable of learning right from wrong without being hurt first?
You spank the child so that they learn that there are consequences for their actions. Although it may temporarily harm the child, but it is for their own good in the long run. Because sometimes you have to scale a valley to climb a mountain.
And sometimes you must stab a goat for a bucket of frogs.
Spanking a child never helps him. It will get him to stop, but he literally doesn't learn from it. He learns that the consequence of his action is that he'll get spanked. He'll add two and two together and learn that consequences only happen when he gets caught, which is when he'll start doing things behind your back. A kid who does stop getting in trouble after being spanked could have reached the same conclusion without the spanking.
For maximum quality in discipline, you must talk with the child after you spank them. Because if I were to walk into my job and start spanking every kid in sight, that would do nothing but get me fired. If I were only to talk with the children, that does not work either. I repeatedly tell them to stop stealing my hat, but they just think it's funny and they don't stop. Thus, it is a combination of spanking and talking that works. But, I am not allowed to physically discipline the children I work with and that is why they are a bunch of rebellious rebels.
*head-desk*
You believe a child, who's just trying to have some fun, should be punished, for HAVING FUN?! You keep telling these kids to stop stealing your hat, and you believe they should be spanked for disobeying? Do you know why talking doesn't work for you? You're only saying "Don't do this". You can't just say "Don't take my hat" or "Don't hang on the basketball hoop or you'll get hurt".
Sometimes you have to be persistent when talking to children. Sometimes you have to take a different approach when they do something wrong. If a kid is trying to take your hat, he wants attention. Give him some attention, show him something cool that he'll like or play a game with him.
Timeouts and losing privileges is not much different from spanking if you're going to define it that way. They are immobilized until they bow down to your every whim and they don't get their things unless they obey your every command. So why show yourself to be bigger and stronger?
To put a child in time out or to take something away from the child should both be last resort. There is never any need to inflict pain on a child. The difference between taking something away and spanking a child is that the second one is actually causing the child to suffer physical pain.
I do have a problem when parents constantly put their children in time out or constantly take away their toys. There are a number of different ways in which a parent can react that is beneficial to the child when the child does something wrong.
Have you ever witnessed a child who wasn't getting along with another child? Do you spank him? Put him in time out? Why not pull him aside and talk to him, having him help you with a simple task as a way of allowing him to calm down? There isn't a one size fits all solution, so you have to be creative when handling children.
Talking never works for the kids I work with. They always just think it's funny to splash water on me in the bathroom no matter what I tell them. Talking may be ineffective for me because I am not their parents, but I can't be sure.
There is more to disciplining a child than merely reacting appropriately to certain situations. How you spend your time with the child while they aren't acting up is also important. If these kids aren't showing you respect, find a way in which you can earn their respect. Find out what interests them and try to be a friend to them. Obviously this is much harder to do when you're trying to take care of multiple children, and when the parents aren't doing their job, I'll admit that it's not something you'll be able to fix on your own.
False. They will want to know why they got spanked so that they can avoid it in the future.
This is true, but to a fault. When a child who is spanked frequently does something wrong, even if it's an accident, he'll often hide it from his parents because he's afraid that he'll get in trouble. Let's suppose a child was throwing the TV remote around and he broke it. He may be so afraid of getting in trouble that he hides the remote instead of taking it to his parents. This can happen no matter how a child was raised, but it's much more likely to happen when the child feels like he will be spanked.
So they talk with their parents and ask questions about an issue. When you answer their questions calmly, they will see things your way. When they see things your way, they will stop doing bad things. And when they stop doing bad things, you can stop spanking them.
Think carefully about what you're saying.
You're telling us that children don't listen unless they feel pain. If you tell a kid that swinging on a basketball hoop is dangerous, he'll ignore you. If you spank him, then tell him it's dangerous, for some reason he'll listen. How does pain make a child more likely to consider your words?
A child may want to know what it is he did wrong that resulted in him getting spanked, but he won't care about why the rule is in place as a result of being spanked.
What you described doesn't happen. I have never heard of a child who wanted to talk to their parents about a rule they broke after they have been spanked. Every incident I know of, the child has always wanted to avoid talking to their parent, whether it was because the child was afraid of their parent or embarrassed.
I'm skipping a chunk of your post for sake of convenience. If I missed something crucial let me know.
As for what the guy in the video said about not putting yourself in the situation where the child can possibly get to the boiling water... How will the child learn if he/she is never put in that situation.
You supervise them and you teach them.
Get ready for another big paragraph... ahem... My grandparents smoked, and none of their four children or grandchildren do. My other grandparents were divorced, and none of their 5 children grandchildren are. One of my aunts is alcoholic and neither of her two kids are. One of my friend's dad was an alcoholic and smoked weed regularly. Not only did that father turn his own life around but none of his three kids do drugs. My best friend's grandfather swears even worse than you do and none of his children or grandchildren do.... Well there are plenty of my real life examples that offspring are rarely effected by parents. Well there is one, one of my aunts is overweight and so is her child... But that's 1 out of... 6 examples I gave?
Why don't you understand the word "tends"? One case does not disprove it. However, a few thousand cases does prove it.
Now why don't you save us all a lot of time, and see things my way.
Because the only thing you've managed to prove in this thread is that you're a mean, abusive, horrible person who i would never trust around any human being.
Now on to why you are wrong through logic (which i hope you can understand)
1) "Special Pleading" fallacy - Not allowing any arguments that don't support your opinion. (this one is always kind of loosely defined)
2) "Correlation Does not Imply Causation" fallacy - I explained this on page 1 i believe.
3) "Causal Reductionism" fallacy - Trying to explain something as only having one cause, when it really had many.
4) "Argument From Small Numbers" (and a terrible general understanding of statistics) - I've explained this to you multiple times. It's when you use an inadequate sample pool in statistics to prove your point. Your argument is that something didn't happen to you, therefor it never happens. (while we have provided proof that uses legitimate statistics to prove us right)
5) "Argument By Pigheadedness" - Refusing to accept something even after everyone else believes it's true (not just people on this thread, pretty much everyone). This one is also usually, fairly hard to define, but I feel confident saying it here.
6) "Argument Ad Nauseam" - Thinking if you make the same argument over and over again, that it will work.
7) "Argument By Selective Observation" (or cherry picking) - Ignoring all the negatives of using your method
8) "Argument By Selective Reading" - You have successfully ignored 100% of my last few posts.
also, the kids are messing with you because they are kids!
Okay. Now the kids have an excuse to do absolutely anything they want until they are, what, 13? Remind me not to visit your kids.
no ammount of punishment will change the fact that they don't know why what they are doing is wrong.
Did you just judge all children as morons who are incapable of learning right from wrong?
-
As far I know, all they really retain about the situation is that they did that action, and then their parent decided to hurt them afterwards.
Yup. And the child will want to know why they got spanked and they will ask their parents. Or if you are a good parent, you will explain why the thing they did was wrong before they ask.
My parents only hit me in anger.
Then you have cruel parents.
Think of it this way. You're the subsitute teacher to them.
Ouch.
So what exactly will you do as the child becomes older, like 14, 15, 16, or 17? Are you going... ... ...trust you and respect you. Well, more than if you hit them.
(I shortened that quote for the sake of shortening the length of the post.) Well it's like this. If you wait until your car runs out of gas to fill it back up again, then you will have to walk all the way to the nearest station then walk all the way back. Maintaining a car is similar to maintaining a child. If you wait until your child grows up to discipline them (waiting until your car runs out of gas to fill it), then you will have much difficulty disciplining them in the future (walking all the way to the nearest station and all the way back). So it's best to fill up your car when needed rather than put it off. But that doesn't mean spank them often, that means spank them when necessary, such as when they misbehave.
In every other situation I've ever known, the parent doesn't like something the child did, got angry, and hit went up to their child, and hit the child. Often with yelling and a few curses. Then the child crys, and the parent walks away angrily. The child only knows that the parent wanted to hurt them for something they did. Often with no idea of why it was wrong.
Yup. Those are the sure signs of bad parents. No one wants to have a parent who is constantly angry, abusive, furious, cruel, and loud, or else the child will be mortally terrified of their own parents. It takes a calm parent who only spanks mildly, and does not shout at their kids.
-
So a child is incapable of learning right from wrong without being hurt first?
Basically, yes. But not excessive and abusive spanking. Just mild spanking to get the point across. And the fact that there is a consequence helps as well. Because if you just talk to them, they will learn that you don't really punish them.
Spanking a child never helps him. It will get him to stop, but he literally doesn't learn from it.
Unless you have that all-important follow-up talk.
He'll add two and two together and learn that consequences only happen when he gets caught,
He'll add two and two together and ask why he was spanked. That's when you have the follow-up talk... And as with most all of your arguments, it goes both ways. If a child is put in timeout or loses a privilege, he will learn that if he doesn't get caught next time, then he won't have that kind of punishment either.
Also I might add. What if a child steals my hat, I give him a consequence, and 'adds two and two together' and will try not to get caught the next time. But wait... It's an obvious wrong, like stealing my hat, so how will he add two and two together? He can't because there is no way that he can take my hat without me knowing.
You believe a child, who's just trying to have some fun, should be punished, for HAVING FUN?!
If that 'fun' is at the expense of someone else's well-being, then yes, the child should be punished.
If a kid is trying to take your hat, he wants attention. Give him some attention
By chasing him around while he has my property? What if one day he takes my shoes? What one day if he takes my wallet? What if one day he needs to be disciplined? Because if you give him that attention and just chase him around while he has your stuff he will just think it's funny. But it sure isn't funny to you. If you give him attention, then he knows what he can do to get it. You don't want him to constantly steal your things just because he wants attention do you? If you manage to get his attention in another way, such as playing a game with him, then you will end up neglecting the other kids. Then they will start stealing your things so that they can get attention.......
Why not pull him aside and talk to him, having him help you with a simple task as a way of allowing him to calm down?
When I talk to them, it rarely helps. Sometimes it does help though. Because if two of the kids are fighting over the basketball, I step in and make them take turns. Spanking is often a last resort.
There is more to disciplining a child than merely reacting appropriately to certain situations. How you spend your time with the child while they aren't acting up is also important.
I agree. Spanking children for the slightest misdeed is uncalled for. And if you can build that relationship with them when they aren't misbehaving, then they will respect and look up to you. Then when it comes time to discipline them, they heed your words more carefully.
Let's suppose a child was throwing the TV remote around and he broke it. He may be so afraid of getting in trouble that he hides the remote instead of taking it to his parents.
Spanking would not be necessary in that situation because it is not quite as bad. Because there is an excusable side and a faulty side to the situation. The excusable part is that the child broke it on accident. The faulty part is that the child was not handling the remote responsibly. All the parent would have to do is explain to the child how they would have to replace the remote, and how it would cost money and such. The parent should make the child apologize for the accident as well.
You're telling us that children don't listen unless they feel pain. If you tell a kid that swinging on a basketball hoop is dangerous, he'll ignore you. If you spank him, then tell him it's dangerous, for some reason he'll listen. How does pain make a child more likely to consider your words?
It is not the pain alone. It is the fact that there is a consequence. If the child realizes that you are going to do nothing but talk to them, they will just continue grabbing the net in spite of what you tell them. If there is an actual consequence they will understand that you mean business.
Every incident I know of, the child has always wanted to avoid talking to their parent, whether it was because the child was afraid of their parent or embarrassed.
Yes, why was the child afraid of their parent? Most likely, that parent was more angry and frustrated at their child rather than disciplinary and compassionate.
I'm skipping a chunk of your post for sake of convenience. If I missed something crucial let me know.
Heck yes I'll let you know if you missed anything crucial. Did you even read my response to the video other than those two lines? If you read the whole post and didn't respond to it, I will see it as you weaseling out of the debate. If you didn't read it, then I strongly suggest you do because I debunked just about everything in that video. And if you refuse to read the post I will take it as you weaseling out of the debate.
I would like you to reply to the following two quotes of mine and all five paragraphs against the "spanking versus permissiveness" video that you linked:
Let's say that "A" is the r-a-p-i-s-t and "B" is the victim. B does not want to be r-a-p-e-d and yet A fails to respect B's wishes. All A wants is personal pleasure. A doesn't care about the well-being of B, therefore it's not 'tough love.' Tough love, for example, may be something like telling your sister that she is dressed immodestly. Although she may be offended, you are telling her this for her own good. Because girls often want a guy who will respect them as a person and yet girls show too much skin thus causing the wrong guys to become attracted to her. So telling your sister that she is immodest is an example of tough love... Because you are hurting and helping her at the same time. R-a-p-e does not help anyone.
Spanking alone has a good chance of making the child think about why they got punished. If you got spanked wouldn't you like to know why? If you got thrown in jail, that would make you regret and think about what got you there. It's the same way with spanking. A child thinks about why they got punished. But having a follow-up talk is far more effective.
|
You supervise them and you teach them.
How can you teach them something they have never been around? It's like telling an Amish person how a computer works. If they have never been anywhere close to computers, they won't have a clue what you're talking about. If you teach a child about a situation they have never been in, they won't have a clue what you're talking about. I'm not saying let the child touch the boiling water. I'm saying to bring them near the boiling water and then explaining why they'll get hurt if they touch it.
-
Because the only thing you've managed to prove in this thread is that you're a mean, abusive, horrible person who i would never trust around any human being.
You are calling me abusive? Read over a few of my posts, specifically the examples I gave of how my parents were abused. I suggest not furious abuse, but rather mild spanking used as a disciplinary method when needed.
As for the 'fallacies' you stated...
1) ... uhhhh. What?
2) Do you know what a 'roof' is in geometry? It usually gives you a statement and tells you to get to a conclusion. For example: In triangle ABC, sides AB and AC are congruent. Prove that the triangle is isosceles. There are steps in between. So when you make a statement such as since sides AB and AC are congruent, triangle ABC is isosceles. It may seem like this fancy-named fallacy applies, but in reality, you are ignoring the steps in between.
3) Let's say that a basketball team lost a game. If one player would have made instead of missed another shot, the team would have won. So ultimately it was the fault of one cause.
4) Neither of us are right here. Because both of us are using inductive reasoning.
5) Frankly, I don't care whether 1 person disagrees with me or 100 people disagree with me. If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?
6) And yet you do the same thing.
7) There are no negatives to spanking (but a follow-up talk is highly encouraged or else spanking will not be nearly as effective). However there are negatives to excessive spanking, abusive spanking, and angry spanking. If you spank your child to often, then you are a bully. If you abuse your child by spanking them as hard as you can, then you are a bully. If you are spanking them just because you are fed up and angry with how they are misbehaving, then you are a bully.
8) This post took me 3 hours to write. And thanks to your additions to the discussion, 3 and a half hours. And frankly, I don't have 3 and a half hours to spare everyday. So sometimes, I have no choice but to avoid some posts.
Yup. And the child will want to know why they got spanked and they will ask their parents. Or if you are a good parent, you will explain why the thing they did was wrong before they ask.
Or you could just explain it first.
Because if you just talk to them, they will learn that you don't really punish them.
That would mean you don't know how to talk to them.
Because if you give him that attention and just chase him around while he has your stuff he will just think it's funny.
Thats not what they were saying. The child was showing they wanted attention by taking your hat, meaning BEFORE they took the hat you weren't paying enough attention.
If the child realizes that you are going to do nothing but talk to them, they will just continue grabbing the net in spite of what you tell them.
Once again this means you don't know how to talk to the kid.
I'm against spanking, I think it's just ridiculous that people see no problem with it for all the problems it can cause a child. Correct me if this logic is wrong, but you can't hit a stranger without consequence, you can't hit people in your family without consequence, and it's even frowned upon to hit your pets, so it certainly should be wrong to hit your child. We as a society are surely past the point of kids being considered a parent's property (therefore giving them the right to do near anything they want to their kid), aren't we?
How does it break trust?
What message does it send a kid when his parents, who're supposed to protect him from harm, are harming the kid themselves by spanking him? The fact that the kid can't trust his parents to protect him as they should will lead to a general lack of trust in all areas when it comes to his parents.
2) Do you know what a 'roof' is in geometry? It usually gives you a statement and tells you to get to a conclusion. For example: In triangle ABC, sides AB and AC are congruent. Prove that the triangle is isosceles. There are steps in between. So when you make a statement such as since sides AB and AC are congruent, triangle ABC is isosceles. It may seem like this fancy-named fallacy applies, but in reality, you are ignoring the steps in between.
Please enlighten me to what steps I'm ignoring.
3) Let's say that a basketball team lost a game. If one player would have made instead of missed another shot, the team would have won. So ultimately it was the fault of one cause.
Okay... so you just made another fallacy.
"Bad Analogy" fallacy - Stating two situations are similar when they aren't.
I don't see that analogy applies here. Think about the situation we're in and how this fallacy applies.
4) Neither of us are right here. Because both of us are using inductive reasoning.
What? I'm saying you keep making the claim that something is wrong because it didn't happen to you, and the fallacy is that one person doesn't disprove a statistic proved by thousands.
Think of a situation like this (not true facts used here)
A study of a group of 3000 people concluded that nine out of ten men who are 6 feet or taller like apples.
Then you can't say "I'm 6 feet or taller, and i don't like apples. Therefor this statistic is completely wrong".
Statistics are trends, a single outlier doesn't disprove anything.
What you are doing is like this.
You were to take 5 kids and find they all brush their teeth, you then conclude that every kid brushes their teeth since 100% of participants did. But if you were to take those 5 kids and 45 more, you may find that only 10 out these 50 brush their teeth, making your original conclusion off by 80%.
5) Frankly, I don't care whether 1 person disagrees with me or 100 people disagree with me. If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?
Maybe, I would be extremely depressed after that seeing as how all my friends are dead.
But anyways, i'm just going to point out this. If pretty much every expert in the world agrees that spanking is not a good way to discipline your child, who am I prone to believe? The one 16 year old with minimal experience and a sample pool of a few kids? Or the thousands of people who actually study this from psychological standpoints and collect sufficient data to prove that spanking is wrong.
The answer is pretty **** obvious.
You essentially have no backup to your claims, and no legitimate reason why anybody should listen to you.
6) And yet you do the same thing.
Well yes, when one party does this both parties tend to. It's not easy to define who started it, so let's just ignore this one.
7) There are no negatives to spanking (but a follow-up talk is highly encouraged or else spanking will not be nearly as effective). However there are negatives to excessive spanking, abusive spanking, and angry spanking. If you spank your child to often, then you are a bully. If you abuse your child by spanking them as hard as you can, then you are a bully. If you are spanking them just because you are fed up and angry with how they are misbehaving, then you are a bully.
So the article i linked a page ago that you never responded to doesn't prove a negative effect? They didn't describe the cases as being spanked excessively. Also, who decides how much is too much for a child? Each one is different and you may never know that your pushing your child too far.
8) This post took me 3 hours to write. And thanks to your additions to the discussion, 3 and a half hours. And frankly, I don't have 3 and a half hours to spare everyday. So sometimes, I have no choice but to avoid some posts.
Fine.
I'm going to link some more articles about proven negative effects of spanking.
No negative effects at all.
@afterburner- I'm going to say the same thing to you as I said in my analysis about rick santorum's campaign. ahem:
you must think your shoes are made of chocolate, because you keep putting your foot in your mouth.
...I'm being totally serious on that part.
Now the kids have an excuse to do absolutely anything they want until they are, what, 13? Remind me not to visit your kids.
if that is all that you got from my post (and skipped one of the very few times I actually opened up even a little) then you are a fool. kids will be kids, and no punishment will change the fact that it is better to learn by two ways: 1. experience, and 2. taking the time to properly explain to them why it is a bad idea to do something.
when you spank a child, he immediately puts up an emotional wall to whoever it was who spanked him (believe me, I know). if you decide to talk to him afterwards then he won't bother listening. he will either fantasize your brutal demise, or tune you out completely and nod their head whenever you are finished talking. what you are doing is both emotionally, and physically damaging to children.
also, how can you not understand logical fallacies? your attempts to respond to Master's list of logical fallacies was a logical fallacy in itself.
here is a list of logical fallacies, and how they work. don't reply until you have read all of these.
now then, I just remembered another reason why such oppressive punishment is a bad idea. I learned this by observing my brother and analyzing his habbits when he lived with me and our parents, and when he left for college.
after he left, he not only took up hard drinking, but he's actually smoke marijuana with his roommate almost 24/7 (originally he only did it once a week when he was at home).
multiple things contruibute to this: opportunity to do so, easy access to said items, and (most important of them) no leash to tie him down. with nobody there to punish him for his actions, he never learned for himself why doing such things was a bad idea, so he needs someone to punish him for doing these things constantly. with nobody to do it, he is basically running a rampage of self-destruction.
I'm guessing if he was properly taught the reasons not to do it, instead of just going straight to punishment, he wouldn't have started this new little problem of his.
that is another reason as to why I don't believe the capital punishment system is a good idea. you need to teach by experience, if lacking that, proper education.
one more thing:
6) And yet you do the same thing.
that is also a logical fallacy! jeez man, this is why I want you to look over the link I have posted here.
-Blade
Okay. Now the kids have an excuse to do absolutely anything they want until they are, what, 13? Remind me not to visit your kids.
I know from personal experience (yes I'm 14, but that pretty much makes me able to show some experties since I'm inside) that kids will be really bad in PS and IS, but once they hit the age that they could be arrested they either join a gang or stop being bad all together. I never see disrespecting of other people be kids unless they're under age or in a gang, but if the are in a gang then they got alot more things to worry about other than how they're appearing to the adults.
Yup. And the child will want to know why they got spanked and they will ask their parents. Or if you are a good parent, you will explain why the thing they did was wrong before they ask.
haha i remember all the times i was hit then told "go to the other room and think about what you've done" then what I usually do is relize that what I did wasn't anything, and if it was something then I carry it with me to this day so that I won't make the same mistake, so hitting works, but long term punishments usually make me get annoyed and will start doing even worse things than before (I wasn't rebelious and just defying my parents all the time, but I would start to work out systems on how to get around what my punishment was and that would result in me getting in trouble not just with my parents)
Basically, yes. But not excessive and abusive spanking. Just mild spanking to get the point across. And the fact that there is a consequence helps as well. Because if you just talk to them, they will learn that you don't really punish them.
It's also kindof like how you train your cat to not do something by spraying them with water everytime they do it, but instead of water it's a spank.
You don't want him to constantly steal your things just because he wants attention do you? If you manage to get his attention in another way, such as playing a game with him, then you will end up neglecting the other kids. Then they will start stealing your things so that they can get attention.......
I actually have a bit of a problem where if I'm bored I'll start to steal for entertainment (mostly pens and pencils, if I get a phone then I'll start using it infront of the person so they'l relize that I have it)
Yes, why was the child afraid of their parent? Most likely, that parent was more angry and frustrated at their child rather than disciplinary and compassionate.
No, in this case for me it's just because I've did something so unbelieveably stupid that I don't want my parents to know that I seriously did something that stupid. It's not because they're not compassionate, it's just because I relize how stupid it is and I don't want them to relize that I have that option of doing something that stupid.
What message does it send a kid when his parents, who're supposed to protect him from harm, are harming the kid themselves by spanking him? The fact that the kid can't trust his parents to protect him as they should will lead to a general lack of trust in all areas when it comes to his parents.
Truthfuly I could say that spanking was not even half as bad or scarring as being punished by getting something taken away or having an oppertunity immediatly shut out on you. Whenever I got grounded I usually started with confusion, then hate, then I would be back to normal for a day, then the next day the fact that that one option has been closed off makes me annoyed at how I just lost something and I will either spend all my energy comming up with a way to get around the punishment or will constantly have the fact that I couldn't do that one thing stuck in my mind until the bann is finaly lifted. With the spank it's just a quick thing that gets done in less than a minute and the you could go back to your normal life, no extra stuff.
So the article i linked a page ago that you never responded to doesn't prove a negative effect? They didn't describe the cases as being spanked excessively. Also, who decides how much is too much for a child? Each one is different and you may never know that your pushing your child too far.
Well I'll give reasons on why I find these to be worse than spanking (agian, I am just one kid, but here's my reasoning and mindset, but I could just be a freak of nature, also these opinion include interacting with many other children)
Remove Privileges- This is just my observation, and i stated why I really do not like this option above so just read that for this one.
Encourage & Reward Good Behavior- This one is like communism, looks good on paper but will never work. In a school enviroment it completly fails because you can't focus on so many kids at once and once you see a kid who used to be really bad getting a toy truck cause he was really good that day, you wonder why you don't get toy trucks, (my PS school was really weird) then you relize the reason why is because you aren't bad enough, so you become bad just to build you behavior back up and get some toys.
Now at home, this method does not work because a kid might start assuming that everytime he does something good that he'l get rewarded, but always after a while of this system the parent will stop the rewards. So it's quite dissapointing to find that that's not the case. so then he becomes bad agian, build behavior back up, gets more rewards.
Try a Time Out- Dosen't work at all, once you get enough time outs you will learn how to exploit it so it's a neutral effect of the kid. Also I'm assuming the kid is not wearing a "Dunce" hat while having that time out.
Be Patient- This really isn't a method, this is more another way of saying "THINK BEFORE YOU ACT!"
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-204_162-513469.html
Read it, can't really say much about it since agian I am just one person, I'm assuming those studies were at least 1000 persons.
I read all the articles, they all pretty much say the same thing (except for that really really short fox video) and I'm quite surprised that it has such an effect on a child since I found anoy other method of punishment (or rewards) much worse.
Yup. And the child will want to know why they got spanked and they will ask their parents.
NO. Nononono. We probably come from two entirly different backgrounds. Because I do not know how gentle you need to be whi;e hitting a kid that you feel like talking afterwards. Either the child crys and walks away, or the parent walks away angrily.
Or if you are a good parent, you will explain why the thing they did was wrong before they ask.
If you were a good parent, couldn't you have done that without hurting someone?
Yup. Those are the sure signs of bad parents. No one wants to have a parent who is constantly angry, abusive, furious, cruel, and loud, or else the child will be mortally terrified of their own parents. It takes a calm parent who only spanks mildly, and does not shout at their kids.
I seriously have never heard of this before. How many people hit their child mildly and calmly? I'm in no one denying this, I've just never heard it happen.
now then, I just remembered another reason why such oppressive punishment is a bad idea. I learned this by observing my brother and analyzing his habbits when he lived with me and our parents, and when he left for college.
after he left, he not only took up hard drinking, but he's actually smoke marijuana with his roommate almost 24/7 (originally he only did it once a week when he was at home).
Well now that we're bringing siblings into this, my sister got spanked, is going to college, studies hard, does well.
Btw: did not smoke marijuana at home, I think the smoking is a cause of the sudden easy access to it in college
if you decide to talk to him afterwards then he won't bother listening. he will either fantasize your brutal demise, or tune you out completely and nod their head whenever you are finished talking. what you are doing is both emotionally, and physically damaging to children.
Wow, I've never knew that a quick spanking could spark a vengence... I really don't understand that because here's my thought
Spanking: Less than a Minute, minimal pain
Grounding or something like that: at least a week, annoying as hell, ends with me being even worse than I was before.
I'm guessing if he was properly taught the reasons not to do it, instead of just going straight to punishment, he wouldn't have started this new little problem of his.
Reason why I will never abuse alcohol: my dad once told me about a lady who lived in his apartment complex who ruined her life by spending her money on alcohol, then she got so poor that she started to drink cleaning fluids because they contained alcohol in them. She killed herself on it.
So instead of the physical punishment, lets go back to those good ol' mentally scaring fairy tales like the red shoes to teach lessons.
It's also kindof like how you train your cat to not do something by spraying them with water everytime they do it, but instead of water it's a spank.
Spraying with water just displeases them. A good analogy would be hitting your pet every time.
Well I'll give reasons on why I find these to be worse than spanking (agian, I am just one kid, but here's my reasoning and mindset, but I could just be a freak of nature, also these opinion include interacting with many other children)
Remove Privileges- This is just my observation, and i stated why I really do not like this option above so just read that for this one.
Well, as said before with pretty much every single one of afterburner's arguments, this is just your personal experience with it. One case never justifies everything.
Encourage & Reward Good Behavior-
I don't think this one can stand alone either. It would need to be teamed up with another form of discipline, and even then it would need to be used in strict moderation.
I read all the articles, they all pretty much say the same thing (except for that really really short fox video) and I'm quite surprised that it has such an effect on a child since I found anoy other method of punishment (or rewards) much worse.
You're opinion doesn't seem to be that they're worse, it's that they are less effective, which you still can't argue without evidence. Wether they are actually less effective or not, they haven't been proven to emotionally and psychologically damage a kid so I would still prefer them.
Spraying with water just displeases them. A good analogy would be hitting your pet every time.
I but hitting could be physically damadging the pet, like I've once seen a dog walking by who looked like he had a red icecream or something on the white fur near his nose, then when I look agian I see the owner hitting the dog on the nose with the leash, that is bad.
But spanking is not near any organs (not counting skin) and will not be internally damadging.
Wether they are actually less effective or not, they haven't been proven to emotionally and psychologically damage a kid so I would still prefer them.
I might be the only one, but i found having privliges being taken away bad for mental health.
Also the reward system alone is counteractive to what is supposed to be done, and time out just doesn't work.
You must be logged in to post a reply!