Theory: corporal punishment during childhood creates and solidifies psychological fear and respect of authority. Proponents and defenders of corporal punishment are nearly always victims of it.
As the years progress and more early-childhood development research is done to prove the long-lasting harm of corporal punishment aka child abuse, can we agree that a communist society today would outlaw this form of abuse?
On second thought it could go either way. The child could develop a hatred of authority instead. However I still believe that the practice is outdated and defined abuse.
There's no excuse to hit a child and I think you guys can agree with me here.
what if the child consents tho?
You wouldn't want to violate the NAP.
...
It's pretty easy to say we probably shouldn't beat children
Children are property
Psychoanalysis is not research.
Proponents and defenders of weed are also nearly always victims of it.
Nope, stop being a faggot and smack the little shit when he acts up and knows he's acting up.
If you can't discipline a shitty child like that, how are you ever going to discipline porky adults who don't play by socialist rules? Are you just going to constantly be sending them to the wall? How do you justify taking a life of someone with an opposing ideology if you can't justify smacking the ass of a snotty brat?
...
we will take your children and your tooth brushes
...
I was hit sometimes.
Really I can understand it if you hit a child if he knows he's acting up. But he never really knows.
Kids are very underdeveloped, they are incredibly bad at dealing with people often. Boys generally a lot more than girls, I imagine.
So they will scream and shout if the thing they're currently playing with is taken away. Simply because they do not understand how serious it seems to scream and shout over those things.
Best thing to do is to not reward that kind of behaviour. If the kid learns crying works…
Usually, beating a kid means you did things wrong earlier and just lost your patience. My dad didn't really have a lot of patience, usually he keeps his emotions to himself, but if he got mad, he really gets mad. He was also bad at communicating, so that could also be a reason his irritation is only kept inside of him to grow.
Anyways, I'm rambling.
Corporeal punishments doesn't work, but it shouldn't be illegal, bar injuries. Raising children is frustrating, you will be tempted to end the argument with a slap early and often, and having the government intrude into families because one of the parents flew of the handle is a case of "cure worse than disease".
It's okay buddy
If you hit your kid you're failing as a parent. Idk if I'd ban it but really if you resort to violence on a child you gotta question what you're doing.
If you can't solve a problem without resorting to violence with a child then you really should be punched in the face, honestly.
Sometimes the little bastards deserve it
If you're not a parent already, you're going to make a shit one. They're children.
Breaking up families because the parent uses corporal punishment is probably a bad idea, but using corporal punishment is especially heinous and shouldn't be tolerated in any circumstances. Possibly mandatory classes should be given to such parents.
And?
Speaking as someone who was unnecessarily hit by a grandmother going through problems herself it was pretty traumatic, honestly.
That nigga want the product of your labor he gonna do what you say
If a parent hits their children they should be sterilized.
Pretty much. So much for the rational left!
You expect children to behave and understand the world the same way an adult would? How old are you?
I suspect rabid opposition to corporeal punishment has an elitist aspect to it. It's the smart, educated, sophisticated opinion to hold. Hitting kids is what the brutes in the bad part of town do, not us college educated coastal elites who had the time and background to read ten books on pedagogy before even deciding whether or not to have children.
They'll be made to understand. That's the point. They can either stop crying and use reason or be given something to cry about.
There needs to be laws that limit harm to a child, but im not convinced a solid beating is what some kids need to mature and stop acting like little shits.
If you're going to be a fucking breeder and create another human and have complete and total control over its life for close to two decades then you should learn how to fucking raise children. There's rapid opposition to it because there's a huge amount of evidence that shows it severely affects the child in numerous areas and there are still very many people who believe its an acceptable way to raise children.
Don't fucking have kids. The world doesn't need another shitty parent and another shitty person created by them.
Then do some fucking research on it. Don't advocate for assaulting people based upon a feeling.
Really activated my almonds, thanks dude
Look, you can be as buttblistered as you like, but the fact is that kids are feral little half beasts, and if they can't discipline themselves then they have to be disciplined. You aren't going to be doing them any favors by mollycoddling them or indulging their tantrums. Sure, try reasoning first, inform them that their behavior isn't too be tolerated, and then if they persist, tan their ass.
There is no scientific evidence that this promotes healthy growth. There is scientific evidence that it causes a lot of damage and can hinder growth. I think this would be outlawed, yes. Children are not the property of a parent, they are not things. Exact same reason infant male circumcision must be outlawed.
Grew up with a psycho which involved a lot of domestic violence. My sisters took the worst of the beatings because they were older than me. Man, bad vibes. I used to support authority when I was youngin. Now I'm repping that communalist set.
No, fucking stop talking like you know anything about raising children. Spanking is worse than useless, it's actively harmful. Obviously reasoning doesn't always work for a little kid, that's why you figure out other way to deal with them. Kids are shitty and I don't like them, but that doesn't mean I'm stupid, ignorant, or ethically bankrupt enough to support beating them until they become compliant.
Raising human beings shouldn't involve the same factors as creating obedient soldiers.
Check out this idiot
Maybe they should have slapped you around a bit, teach you not to use anecdotal evidence.
Giving your children PTSD is not a joke, fucker.
Wew
Alright cool. Let me know what alternative methods you develop when your kid starts breaking shit because you won't indulge his petty whims.
You're in a grocery store and he throws a tantrum. Oh, there he goes pushing a whole shelf of pickle jars onto the floor because you wouldn't buy the sugar cereal he wanted. What's your alternative to that, hotshot?
People with nothing have only their discipline. Maybe I'm anarkiddie fairyland there's no use for self control but in the real world actions have consequences and children have to be made to understand that. You're failing them if you don't.
Yup.
edition.cnn.com
You guys are fucking stupid probably because you got hit as kids.
You sound like you are from Holla Forums. You are a fiction novelist writing these fantastical scenarios that never happen. Screaming child is one thing, and it's something you can fucking deal with when you go to the grocery store and there's one nearby. The scenario you present is more like a psychotic drug addict mental breakdown. See, I know more about this than you because I work in the scenario you are describing, and that shit only happens with the heroin addicts out front.
I don't know, I've barely done any research on how to raise kids because I don't plan on having any. I have seen plenty of research saying how negative spanking is, along with it violating my own principles to not fucking attack people when they don't do what, alongside me actually witnessing peaceful parenting that's more effective than just hitting your kids because you haven't bothered to do any research into how to actually raise them.
>The sad irony is that the more you physically punish your kids for their lack of self-control, the less they have. They learn how to be controlled by external forces (parents, teachers, bosses), but when the boss isn't looking, then what?
wew
The problem is that people act like BEATING a child and one (1) slap to the face/ass per misbehaviour (and obviously we are not talking about little stuff like crackhead parents would do or something) are the same thing. And they're not.
Obviously I'm against beating children but a string or even moderate force is not required or neccesary to make a child listen, it's not like most people actually punch their children like they would some asshole outside the bar at 2am
Tbh I wanna say don't ever smack a kid BUT everyone I know who was never ever smacked as a child is an asshole alotta the time that doesn't know where the line is as far as respect for others. So I'm kinda on the fence I guess.
Smacking children is bad. Smacking children in front of other people and humiliating them is disgusting. Whoever those people are, you are right, they are absolutely assholes.
Haha I remember overhearing two mothers at the school my little sister goes to talking proudly about how scared of them their children are, no joke.
Yeah, I'm sure you're a real Doctor Spock. You've never seen a kid break his things or other's because he wasn't getting his way? It's great that you're committed to such an egalitarian fantasy of never having to punish a child, but when you haven't got Mexican nannies to take care of your kids and you have to do the work yourself, sometimes that means you have to have out a spanking or two.
Maybe when Star Trek gets here and you don't have to worry about your kid fucking around and damaging himself or other people or their things which you're then liable for we can all live in harmony in the land of milk and honey and so forth, but until then, kids gotta learn.
...
SPANKING DOESN'T
I REPEAT DOESN'T
FUCKING WORK
IT IS ACTIVELY HARMFUL AND ABSOLUTELY NO ONE EDUCATED IN THE SUBJECT ADVOCATES IT
epic
Yeah, it's bad, sure, but necessary. Unfortunate, but true.
And if they don't want to be humiliated publicly they shouldn't act up publicly.
they're children m8
and you're an adult, act like one
I can't tell if the sociopaths ITT are being facetious or not
If you can't actually raise your kid or afford a halfway decent substitute then don't fucking have them. People born into this world have to deal with enough shit, they don't need a shitty childhood with neglecting or abusive parents also.
It's not fucking necessary you thick fuck.
What the fuck is wrong with you that you think publicly humiliating and shaming a fucking kid is an acceptable way to teach them right and wrong? What the fuck are you even doing here?
You are the one living in an idealistic fantasy world. I'm not saying what you said literally never happens. It's just not a thing. What you are saying is a fantasy where hurting your child is good for them and that it just works, when nothing indicates that that is the case. Kids are not dogs (and you shouldn't hit dogs either, fuck you if you do), so don't hit them to teach them lessons.
You know, I'm for ADHD medication being given to kids. It helped me when I was in elementary school because I had bad ADHD. But I'm also for letting children act like children when they are not at school. If you don't want your rambunctious child to make a scene at the opera, don't take your child to the opera.
Maybe the problem was the school and not you.
Yeah, see, you're just proving my point.
And how do you think they become adults? By learning what behavior is acceptable and what isn't.
Yeah, I'm a real monster for teaching my kids how to behave like adults. Why do people that don't have kids try to lecture those that do?
Uh oh, little Billy was horsing around in the store and knocked over a lamp or something. Now you can't afford rent because you have this surprise expense. But at least when you're living in a tent you won't have to worry about getting flooded out from up there on the moral high ground.
So smacking children in front of everyone is acceptable behavior?
i love the "don't tell me how to raise my children" meme
Fuck no, dude. I loved my elementary school. The teachers loved me too. I've never felt more like the faculty at a school was my family.
You should write a fiction novel. You are excellent at making up fantasy scenarios where things that are not actual things that happen consistently or often in real life, happen. Hitting children is not how you teach them what behavior is acceptable. You can accomplish that by sitting down and talking to them respectfully. I hope you can handle teaching them about sex…
You'd seriously hit a child over that? Sounds like you've got emotional issues, my man.
I'm not throwing a tantrum, I'm trying to get through your thick mind.
You're a real monster for psychologically abusing a fucking child. It'd be heinous to do it to anyone, but it's especially when it's a kid and you're supposed to be the person they trust and love the most.
Oh fucking God. I hope when the revolution comes you learn how to be a better parent so the kids aren't taken from their parents. How about you do some fucking research into raising children so your kids turn out halfway decently and you don't just repeat the mistakes your parents did.
Sure, because children aren't real people and they don't deserve to be treated as such.
Their property their rules :^)
What if the child consents tho
That's right. If the child doesn't like its treatment then it's perfectly free to walk out the door and find new parents.
Manipulative psychopath detected.
Basically this. It's not a bad thing for a child to learn that other people can be brought to use physical violence against them if they antagonize them enough. It just can't be done to them systematically or overly severely.
They is plural and it is singular, and since we aren't talking about an actual child but a hypothetical one, the idea of a child, there is no 'they' to speak of.
"They" is the proper pronoun for any person whose gender you do not know.
...
Actually in the singular it's 'he.'
Surprised nobody pointed out this yet.
they
[th ey]
3. (used with a singular indefinite pronoun or singular noun antecedent in place of the definite masculine he or the definite feminine she):
/Whoever is of voting age, whether they are interested in politics or not, should vote. A person may apply only if they are over 21.
/They have been an actor since childhood.
Hitting an adult is illegal in 99% of situations. Why doesn't the same extend to children?
Christianity. Religion in general says hitting children is okay. I think Buddhism is the only one that forbids it.
Yeah, corporal punishment accomplishes nothing other than immediate compliance and typically inflicts trauma. There have been studies of parents who regularly use corporal punishment and claim to do the "soft" version or only use it when a kid is being really shitty, but per observation they're either lying or delusional. It seems whenever they feel the option is open, parents will use it. Not really surprising considering that raising a kid is extremely stressful for 1 or 2 people.
That said, there are many fucked up things parents do to kids that probably have more profound effects. I think the big one isn't corporal punishment but genital mutilation, given that it usually amounts to torturing somebody in the range of newborn to adolescent. The places that practice it are some of the worst places in the world. Consider for instance that about 75% of American males have gone through this experience (Warning - torture/mutilation of infant) youtube.com
The anesthetic administered for these procedures (often it isn't) doesn't usually block the right nerve. Anesthetic for this procedure was almost unheard of until around the turn of the 21st century. And this is in the 1st world, poorer places are more brutal.
And it was originally done to non-Jewish or Muslim boys in England to stop them from masturbating. How about that.
web.cn.edu
>Everybody took his book to class with him
...
Man, is there anything buddhism has done wrong?
Well, what if you need just that?
l M A O
I get this response all the time.
But user, didn't you know? That kind of thing just doesn't happen. It's a fantasy, you child abuser.
🤔
I've never found anything negative about it. It's one of the few religions that doesn't encourage living for your life after death and being obedient to authority, just the acceptance that death is something that will happen at some point and there is a preparation one should take, but the point of preparing is not to experience anything afterwards, and all the preparation entails is being a decent person.
KEK he literally posted a staged photography you fucking imbecile
It was popularized in the States for this purpose as well, primarily by a man named Harvey Kellogg also known for corn flakes. They also practiced clitorectomy but that's fallen out of practice a while ago. Nowadays though you can buy facial cream made from baby foreskin. archive.is
Kids will be shitters sometimes but it's not hard to get them to stop. They want to learn social rules, and pushing boundaries is part of the learning process. Full-on destructive tantrums generally stem from some other problem that the kid doesn't know how to handle. Kids are not much different from adults in that respect.
no need to post twice hon
I only see one post 😉
totally real bro
No kidding. I've seen adults who hang around my workplace throw worse tantrums than any kid. They're degenerate heroin addict homeless people and they're supremely unintelligent too, so when a situation arises that they can't handle, they just scream racial slurs and other obscenities at each other for the whole day.
It's almost like handling stress and problem solving are important skills that few bother to teach new generations or something.
Products of Gen X parents in rural California. They're mostly young folks in their late 20s.
Sure, no question. Look, I agree fully that systematic violence should have no place in raising children - it doesn't work, causes trauma, etc. But I do think that, on the one hand we should not punish parents for incidental violence that does not cause injury, because parents are only human and I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to be perfectly restrained. And on the other hand, violence might be needed in exceptional circumstances. When I was younger, I once went into the water where there were dangerous currents in a fit of exuberance, after being told not to, and was duly yanked out and slapped hard. The violence was appropriate to ensure my safety in that regard, by impressing the gravity of the situation and precluding playful disobedience later on that could well have killed me.
Damn…
I don't have a response for posts this retarded
At least one person being replied to is taking that image seriously.
t. pot
An adult hitting another adult is bad but an adult hitting their own children is okay? Why?
Using force to keep a kid out of danger is very different from popping off because a kid doesn't do what you want. And I never suggested punishing parents. I'm strongly against the nuclear family in the first place. Kids do best when raised communally.
There are circumstances where a motherfucker needs to get slapped/punched and that includes circumstances where they're putting themselves or others in danger.
So you're fine with adults hitting other adults in these "special circumstances"?
Does one of the people being replied to really believe that a staged picture of a public tantrum means that actual tantrums just don't happen?
Corporal punishment is shit. It teaches that things not going your way can be answered with force and violence. If you give spanky, you get a tankie.
By motherfucker I'm not referring to kids by the way, but grown-ass adults doing shit that will get people hurt.
Have I gone too far?
It might sometimes be necessary though.
Yes!
They are not a chronic disease afflicting society. That is just how some children behave. And it's usually a lack of positive coping skills, something we should be teaching in schools.
You're a fucking retard, lad.
You pick one and only fucking one.
I want the outcome that results in least suffering and sometimes that involves violence. You know, including revolution? There are times when people get stuck in a headspace where they don't know what they're doing and disabling them is the only way to stop it (or snapping them out of it with a smack if that will do the job). How often have you dealt with belligerent drunk people fam?
I'm sure in the spur of the moment almost all adults can't control their own strength when hitting a children so no, it's never acceptable.
This is a very good point, and it's also quite difficult to gauge relative strength with such a gulf in size.
Give a fascist the option of being violent or behaving and they'll pick being violent. Forced labor it is.
…what? We aren't talking about fascism here
I just don't get why you'd post police brutality when telling me adults hitting adults can be a good thing.
Authoritarian discipline of children is linked to a Christofascistic strain of American, the kind who says "small government" and then wants the government to ban gay marriage and teach creationism in schools.
What a weird post. First,
>adults hitting adults can be a good thing.
You know that this means "there are times where it's a good things and times when it's not" right? That's how "can" works. Just because they're approving of some violence doesn't mean they approve of all violence. As for using police brutality as justification, I dunno, maybe on a leftist board people are trying to demonstrate that the enforcers of the ruling class are savages and their brutalizing of poor people may call for violent self-defense.
Oh, I see. It is often pushed by other reactionary shitbags as well who instantly shut down the moment you argue against them and go into berserk mode.
Yeah, that's them.
Sure, but how are you going to teach the child that in the middle of that sort of tantrum? Is the answer just to let him run wild? I would guess you just wait for him to wear himself out and then make him clean up his mess, but how are you going to make a child that isn't obeying start obeying you?
You kind of answered your own question with the answer I would have provided right there.
Reminds me of children accidentally getting broken ribs when being performed resuscitation after drowning.
Every time an adult feels they need to smack a children they do it because they're angry and out of patience, so it's almost impossible for them to control their own strength like you said and will inevitably end up hitting a children too hard. I'd say a light slap or something would be enough but if they were calmed enough for that they probably wouldn't resort to physical violence in first place.
Most often they do this because parents fail to set boundaries and engage properly with their child. Set rules and rigorously enforce them, talk with said child and find out what their problems are and try to solve them. You can solve this issue without laying a finger on them.
Additionally, what do you do if he's not being violent toward things and is being violent toward people? He doesn't get his way on the playground and starts being on other kids or something. Deprivation? A lecture? Retraction of muh privileges?
That is literally the best option. When kids start fucking things up it's important to hammer home the cost of their actions. Of course, working parents don't usually have the time to stand and watch the kid clean up a grocery store they ransacked per
It's like capitalism encourages badly raising kids or something, hmmm.
Violence+violence=violence
That's not really very helpful. Are you g going to be giving him a talking to about boundaries while he's screaming and throwing things? He's breaking things that you might be liable for, so what is a regular, imperfect parent supposed to do then?
Omg so deep
It's not hard to grab a goddamned child and take him away and apply a proper punishment later.
You already answered yourself and said this should be done once he stops, stop being a disingenuous fuck.
In childhood and in life when someone is violent toward you, you should answer with enough force to stop them. Sometimes people are going to overshoot and that's also a valuable lesson. It's really shitty that people sometimes don't learn this lesson until accidentally overshooting means hospitalization which is why if you see your kid physically assaulting another person the proper thing to do is to make eye contact with the target and mime shoving the kid off or slapping them. It's best to give the thumbs-up and nod as well. Then after the kid inevitably starts crying and runs over to you (parent) wanting you to beat up their "assailant" you tell them you saw the whole thing and let the kid see you tell them they were right. If they use disproportionate force then of course you've got another matter, but most people aren't gonna do that. A parent should attempt to anticipate this, e.g. if the kid is hassling some fat neckbeard they should pull the kid away before he whips out his pocket knife.
If it's in public, you take him aside, and let him wear himself out. Requires patience, and then you figure out what the root of the problem is.
Can you contain your autism for a second? Adults are trying to talk here.
Again, stop being a disingenuous fuck, or maybe you're legitimately stupid.
'make eye contact with the target?' what to fuck is that? Where do you think a kid is going to be looking when he's getting bullied or fighting with another kid? How do you figure a kid in the middle of a fight or some other altercation is going to look at you, a stranger, and then be able to interpret your pantomimes? And why is child on child violence okay now while corporal punishment is the devil's curriculum?
I just don't get how you can't take a joke.
Grabbing a child or taking them aside are already violent acts if you do so against their will and they resist you. That's the point, sometimes you need to resort to violent acts to control an acute crisis.
So using physical force to arrest a child is okay, but spanking isn't? The root of the problem is that he wants a toy or candy or something and you aren't giving it to him. How is him explaining that going to help anything?
Because children are easily distracted by shiny things, keep them close to you so you can turn their attention away from things that are going to cause problems.
There's a difference between beating the shit out of them and leading them by the arm
Beating them up was never up for debate. It's about a proportionate use of force in a situation of crisis.
There's proportionate use of force and then there's hitting a child
We're talking open handed slaps on the hinder here, not beating up a child
I was talking about if they're going after adults, who will look for the parent. If they're going after another kid then let the other kid handle it. Parents are ridiculous with intervening in social interaction between kids. Let the other kid fight them off. If they can't (physically or mentally not strong enough), then pull your kid away and do to them what they were doing to the other kid and tell them "This is how it feels." Then hug tell them doing that kind of shit can get them seriously hurt if they keep it up. And then hug them and tell them you're trying to show them the danger they're putting themselves in. Afterward give them a very serious talk about violence. I get this shit isn't immediately obvious to people, which is why letting just anybody have kids (and cloister them away to inflict their deeply personal biases) is going to fuck up the kids.
You are inflicting pain and injury on them, that is the very definition of beating up
Hitting a child without causing injury can be an appropriate reaction in a crisis. Example from my own experience here:
Oh. I see, I misunderstood. I just don't understand why now you're saying to 'do to them what they were doing to the other kid.' Is violence not the problem then per se, but contextless physical force? If you explain to a child what they did wrong before or after spanking them, is that fine?
And for completeness, this doesn't just go for kids. Adults being endangering idiots warrant the same treatment. The difference is you're much more likely to be able to physically control a kid than an adult.
Empathy is a skill that you have to develop. Even psychopaths can be trained to empathize. If a kid has failed to develop to the point that they will hurt other people maliciously, they need to be brought back to reality. I'm not saying "If the kid is punching another kid with their full strength, punch them with your full strength," just "show them how it feels to get punched by a little fucker. In some cases it might be more appropriate to hold your kid still and tell the one they were fucking with to get a couple good hits in.
Spanking is about as contextless physical violence as you can get. Violence really should never be abstracted that way because its cost is always so concrete and personal. The point of showing a kid what violence is like is so they gain some understanding of what other kids experience when they do violence to them.
Hmm, I'm not sure I agree, but you seem more read than me on the subject. Thanks for answering my questions.
Nice oxymoron. You can't hit them repeatedly and not cause some kind of injury
It's less reading than it is experience with kids (and adults) though reading supplements it. It's really common for kids to have very little concept of how their actions affect other people, and the "natural" state of things would be that if they fuck with someone they get fucked with back. "Think of the children" attitudes have changed culture a lot so that people hesitate to show kids that force isn't a fucking game. That's isn't to say though that knocking kids (or adults) around is remotely acceptable.
Depends what you consider an injury. If you allow kids to be kids and learn by experience they will collect a lot of bruises and that's a good thing. Someone who grows up without understanding the fragility (and durability) of their body is very vulnerable.
corporal punishment is not enough
Capital punishment is the only option for rising kids
...
…have you ever been around kids? They fall down a lot.
If you are not supposed to beat your kids then how else you should discipline them?
Discipline isn't (shouldn't be) a verb. It's a thing that you develop over the course of your life. You can't make someone be self-controlled, just help them develop self-control. All you can impose on people is obedience.
You've basically let slip that you're a sadist. I make a point of not prodding the mentally ill. Good day, sir.
This is one of those threads that make me want to be a posadist.
Simple, when physical violence is outlawed, you resort to verbal.
So call the kid a fucking idiot.
Or go all passive agressive on to the kid.
You might even try guilt-tripping by bursting into tears.
Or exploit his fears "I'll tell the monster under your bed you weren't nice, and I won't come to your room when he comes for you…"
Ha, just kidding, I know nothing of raising kids. But they seem extremely easy to manipulate if you know how. And there really is no law against being devious towards them.
Psychological harm is much worse than physical
If you just give a kid a few slaps he will understand that he did something wrong and shouldn't be doing it
He'll then realise that things you disagree with can be answered with violence, and he grows up fucked in the head.
They can
I agree
Hey, leave comrade strawman out of this!
Even I know it doesn't work like that.
If you want him to understand, you need to talk to him in a fair manner where you attempt to understand the viewpoint of the other while the child is in some way made to listen.
But apparently, proper communication is not something done people.
And isn't Santa Claus not bringing you presents a similar thing? With our cultural variety of him, you even get threatened to be put in a sack and smuggled to Spain if you weren't a good kid that year.
🎵De zak van Sinterklaas, Sinterklaas, Sinterklaas…🎵
There's nothing sadistic about not being a helicopter parent.
wew
There IS sadism involved in saying wounded children is a good thing
Passive aggression is extremely shitty and should be replaced with open verbal conflict. Physical conflict is sometimes preferable, e.g. when violence has become embedded in culture.
Bruises are not fucking wounds. If you equate any degree of physical damage to wounding then better not let kids do anything at all because in order to build muscles yo need to make micro-tears in the fibers so they'll rebuild. And you better not let kids get anywhere near germs, because your immune system needs to fight off diseases to get strong and that's violence too.
Sure talking works, sometimes, but not always, kids can have spergouts when they just dont listen and dont want to calm down and no argument will get trough their heads
I know this by my younger brother example, my father and his concubine decided to rise him without violence and with dialog, it turns out that reading books about rising kids sometimes can do more harm then good because he is spoiled and refuses to do what he is told often, like stop sperging out in kids store or punching other kids
Its not psychological harm, its learning if the kid burns his hand by touching something hot he will learn that he shouldn't touch this, if he gets punished for doing something he shouldn't then he will learn that his actions have consequences and that he shouldn't do it
It occurs to me that maybe you just read the OP and then my post. I'm not saying "bruise yo kids, it's awwright." I'm saying kids are going to get hurt. They fall down, run into things, hit each other. Little kids are really fucking good at finding creative ways to hurt themselves. This is a part of the learning process embedded into our instincts. Kids are driven to push boundaries as a way to find where boundaries are. This gets them hurt, but as long as you keep them from really actual dangerous shit, they will end up better for it.
Fundamentally I don't disagree, but there are plenty of specific scenarios where this argument gets used as an excuse to beat up a kid for very innocuous behavior.
I also agree, there is too much pathology and beating kids is not alright, but using corporal punishment as a final say in specific scenarios can do more good than harm
Yeah, it's almost as if context is the key here and the problem is people are bad with context. Evaluating a scenario and doing risk assessment is something most people are really fucking bad at though. Inability to deal with complex and high-stress situation tends to get passed down each generation, too.
I was agreeing with you up until here lol - there's a distinction between a light tap and assaulting someone you mong. Not that I really condone smacking children - it doesn't solve the root of the issue
epigenetics bro
They try this no hitting "positive reinforcement / negative reinforcement" in China. Have anons here been to China? It's a fucking disaster, that has to be the country with the rudest most out of control kids in the entire world. They laugh in their parents' faces.
As soon as these beatings involve "a light tap" be sure to inform me
They also have the one child policy, parents giving all their attention to one child end up more more often than not spoiling him.
all the responses to this thus far have been pretty snooty and elitist LOL
The weak should fear the strong.
Half this conversation is about how acceptable violence is in general and it's hilarious
pacifism is apathy and you'll never overthrow anyone without killing a few cops or porkys
This is literally the usual mainstream-conservative talking point that anyone disagreeing with them can't possibly be sincere and just must be a virtue-signalling, elitist librul. Just get out of here.
Mischaracterizing light taps as beatings does not make light taps beatings you retard. Using emotionally charged arguments is dumb.
I'm all for restraining until something can be worked out - usually a heart to heart, but sometimes that's not appropriate.
It's always appropriate, and it's a hell of a lot better than inflicting pain on a child because you're too stupid to figure something out.
What a solipsistic view. Maybe I should give you a light tap to break you out of it ;)
...
It's always appropriate in the aftermath, but sometimes a kid lacks the sophistication to understand a lesson except through experience. In this case you need to let them run into trouble on their own or provide experience yourself. I'm not advocating for corporal punishment; I think that's abhorrent. I'm advocating letting kids run into trouble on their own and roleplaying a power reversal in situations where they're the ones being abusive.
Proverbs 23:13
You faggots need to turn or burn.
I agree, it should be illegal.
I was beaten as a kid, as well as a couple of my friends, and while I'm against it, most everyone I know who was subjected to it supports it.
One of them even admitted he'd never lay a hand on his dog, but he'd beat his kids. Surprise: He's a closet lolbert bootlicker
There's a difference between being a shitty parent who doesn't set boundaries or raise kids and being a parent who doesn't use violence to raise their children.
You're conflating natural and artificial consequences. Artificial consequences are inherently arbitrary and solely teach the kid that people with power get to control people without.
Simply untrue. Do the research and stop depending on feels.
Are you high?
Violence is acceptable when it's needed. It's never needed to attack kids.