Smacking children sounds religious to me.
3/28/2009 11:34:10 AM
I can't reason with my dogs, I never will be able to.
I don't beat them though. Grow a fucking brain and use it.
3/28/2009 1:41:12 PM
oop: "hitting isn't used to train animals. Wonder why?"
This is an extremely good point. My pets (the ones I claim are mainly cats) only get a swat when they're in a dangerous situation. I want them to fear things like the stove, and that's what swatting/spanking does -- instills fear (prefer the spray bottle if it's at hand though; they don't like it but it's not painful). This is why even after having her for seven years our 10-year-old rescue has to be told we're about to pet her on her head or she recoils in fear when we touch her, and she still runs from the broom despite our never having even poked at her with it in play. This is why it took me 2 to 3 months of concerted effort to convince her I'm nice, 6 months to teach her my family is nice (and the strangers on TV stay in that funny box and don't mess with her), and 6 years to sort of teach her our friends who visit occasionally are nice.
The keys to training animals in general come down to just a few things:
::: ignoring "bad" behavior if it's inconsequential (my dad yelled at my kitten for playing with a thread bobbin that fell on the floor. . . I figure it's fair game since what else is on the floor? her toys and playmates. Just pick the damn thing up if you don't want her to have it.)
::: figuring out and fixing the -cause- of bad behavior if it is consequential (lots of things we think are bad are due to physical problems, or violating the animal's psychological needs/expectations)
::: removing temptations (my parents were fussing at the kitten sometime last week, I go to find out why, she was trying to get at the "strings" in the flower arrangement they put on the low table within her reach -- I moved it and solved the problem [although she did climb on the desk while everyone was out the next day to get the "strings", fortunately it was the vase that was wanted, not the arrangement])
::: interrupting/distracting from bad behavior (kitten only scratches the sisal rug instead of the couch, despite that the oldest cat already did a number on the corner of it, because of a sharp NO, snapping fingers, or most often just calling her name and asking what she's doing when she scratches furniture, but not the rug)
::: rewarding behavior you want to see more often (my kitten gets a "snack" when my lunch contains some meat IF she waits nicely for me to offer it)
::: not letting the animal always dictate what happens (like the savanna monitor at the zoo had to learn that projectile defecation did not get her put back in her enclosure, so she quit doing it unless she actually needs to go)
::: realizing that animals won't associate a punishment or reward with an action unless the former immediately follows the latter
Approaches differ with the type of animal of course; snakes don't seem to understand any sort of negative reinforcement, for example.
To claim that a human child, even a small one, can ONLY be taught ONE way is to demonstrate that you don't understand, at all, how the human mind (or any other mind, though that's a little more forgivable) works. Extremely young children are a lot like other animals (yes, OTHER animals), and children who are slightly older (1 1/2 in my experience) understand much more than you realize, Gary.
3/28/2009 7:46:24 PM
You know what else is mentioned favourably in "God's Word"?
Children who mock bald men being EATEN BY FUCKING BEARS.
3/28/2009 7:46:43 PM
It doesn't have to be violent to be abuse -- it can be verbal abuse, emotional abuse...
As a survivor of abuse, I can only say that any "God" that would approve of abuse is an asshole. "Super Nanny" -- much as I hate to admit it -- is right on the money here: Spanking IS abusive.
3/28/2009 8:05:38 PM
Every time I see "parents" like this mentioning spanking, I see people from all sides defending it as "having its uses". The thing is, not only is it inconsistent with children's rights but it's also ineffective. The use of violence to teach children /anything/, is consistently linked in developmental psych research with increased disciplinary problems and a child's tendency to use violence as a problem solver. Furthermore, research on what encourages people to use spanking as a disciplinary method has always turned up a TON of responses along the line of "Well, that's just how you teach children not to do really bad things when they're too young to understand..." often without defining when they are too old to understand. Others more blatantly say "It was done to me and I turned out fine", which is flatly contradicted by the research in the majority of cases.
The problem is, as long as our society incorporates elements of permissiveness without setting firm boundaries, an individual will be free to overstep the rights of their children and abuse them under the disguise of "discipline". Separating "spanking" from "abuse" is similar to the imaginary line we have which separates "bullying" from "criminal assault and harassment". When it happens to children, it's okay. But doing it to an adult would be wrong, of course. Because adults are better? Because children can't be taught using words and example? None of the excuses bear out under the research.
Spanking is not necessary, not even as a last resort. It's consistently been shown in the aforementioned developmental research that authoritative (not authoritarian) and nonviolent parenting, in countries where all forms of corporal punishment are flat-out illegal, produces children who know the difference between right and wrong, and are no more prone to dangerous behavior than any other children.
If your child is too young to understand why they should not perform a dangerous action when you explain it with words, the solution is not to beat them until they are scared of performing the action. Pain as a motivator for behavior encourages pain as a problem solver by showing children that the way to make people do what you think they should be doing (for good or for ill) is to hurt them. It's been shown that consistent spanking (not abuse, just spanking as a punishment for wrongs committed by children) has a strong link to adult spousal abuse, criminal problems, and violence in general. The research literature can mostly be found in the journal of american psych, but if you want to get some really in depth information on why spanking children is a flat-out bad idea, it may be worth checking out the work that's come out of the United Nations Council on the Convention for Children's Rights.
Further work has recently been compiled in books by writers like Howe and Covell. For one book which points to and summarizes much research, Howe and Covell's "Children Violence and Families" which was published earlier this year does a great job of visiting the spanking issue.
Just felt it was useful to mention because I saw lots of people defending spanking.
3/28/2009 9:35:08 PM
I'd be a bad parent because I don't have patience. I'd probably end up hitting them at some point. So I don't have any, because I think it's best... and not only for me.
3/28/2009 10:50:58 PM
"it is mentioned favorably in God's Word"
Then again, so is murder and genocide.
But unlike murder, spanking is a proven disclipine method that seems to have worked out pretty well for me and my brother. I wouldn't call it abuse at all.
edit: To the guy two posts up, I find this interesting. The problem with prohibiting spanking is the number of people who would say, "argh you're liberal pussies" or "we've always done this" or something silly like that.
3/29/2009 5:55:39 PM
Thy kids are now ours.
3/29/2009 10:44:53 PM
I did see a woman with two children, one a baby on her lap, chatting to her friend with cigarette in hand. Baby, possibly because she was being ignored, reached out for ciggie and got slapped for it. Hmmm. Didn't occur to keep it away from the child, did it?
Another parent I saw on a tv show said how she had to slap (sorry, in the uk spank has other connotations) her child because she kept going for the hot hair tongs. Again, why keep the things out of reach when you can tease the children with them and hit them if they succumb to the temptation? Perverse or what?
3/30/2009 7:18:55 AM
I'll take Super Nanny over the Buy-Bull any day.
'Spanking isn't violent'.
Wrong, shitbag Gary! All it does is teach 'I can be violent because I'm bigger than you'. Or in your case, 'I can be violent, because my KJV Buy-Bull says so, and you are nothing more than property'. Fuck you & the horse you rode in on, Gary!
3/30/2009 3:20:47 PM
While I don't think spanking should be used as a general punishment, I do think there are some situations in which it can be called for.
Intense personal danger is one.
Another is obviously premeditated flouting of discipline.
For example: When I was a child, my father was the general manager of a hotel. While I didn't 'act out' often, the times I did, my parents discussed the situation, and gave me time outs, or deprived me of a favourite activity for a set period of time.
It was understood, though, that if I ever really crossed the line, my father would give me a swat.
One day, I got 'grounded' and thinking it unjust, I thought 'I'll show you!', and went around his four star hotel, deliberately clogging -every- public toilet on the premises with rolls upon rolls of toilet paper.
He caught me, and gave me three sharp swats.
To this day, I think I deserved them--and so, can't be totally down on spanking. Some situations just call for a fair and judicial swat.
ETA: I was seven or so at the time, certainly old enough to know that what I was doing was a)wrong, b)provocative and c)my way of telling my dad where to stuff it.
3/31/2009 12:13:09 AM
But...but...we know "super nanny" exists, and we can see that her techniques work - it's right there, on the TV. We cannot, however, see the benefits from spanking/smacking/swatting/insert synonym of choice on the TV - in fact, most shows that deal with parenting issues seem to advice against spanking. Oh, and the bible clearly states that unruly children should be stoned, so then I suppose you pelt rocks after your kids if they give you a hard time? People like you shouldn't be allowed to breed!
3/31/2009 5:29:39 AM
To weigh in on this topic, I first want to say that (a) I have no kids of my own, (b) I have never physically punished any child, and (c) I was never spanked myself.
Spanking is wrong unless and until every other method has been tried. Most children should NOT be spanked, but a few kids just keep pushing the limits and seem to have no fear at all.
Spanking is always the LAST resort. While I deplore it, there are some kids and some situations where no other method will work. But that certainly doesn't mean it should become a habit!
And justifying it with the babble is a worthless excuse for any parent.
3/31/2009 7:06:09 PM
Almost right. Strike the last sentence, and go a bit lighter on it.
I mean, my mom broke 3 wood spoons over me and my brothers, and bent a metal one (over about 15 years total). All in all, it turned out all right. At least we don't fuck with other people's lives due to a lack of discipline.
11/13/2009 1:06:54 AM
No, it's violent. Now, I'm not necessarily anti-spanking in all circumstances but at least have the balls to acknowledge what it is.
9/10/2012 6:23:33 PM
you are supposed to use a rod of iron.
9/10/2012 8:21:49 PM