You know, some nations, such as Germany, Cyprus, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Austria have outlawed phsyical punishment. I don’t think that is necessary at all.
I am surprised no one has offered up any personal experiences of themselves being beaten as a child, and the effects it had on them. So let me do just that.
I am 18, and my dad still gets very violent if I do anything out-of-line in respect to his laws of the household. I have long since explained to him that beating me no longer teaches me any lessons, because I am too confident in my ability to reason, so whenever I am accused of doing something wrong, I am convinced im not really doing anything wrong, and even if I am, the only way my dad would be able to get results is by explaining what I am doing wrong in terms of his rules. He doesn’t even need to use physical punishment, because I rely on him for my college tuition, I dare not upset him too much. And I have said this to him, that in the end, he is always the boss, because he pays the bills voluntarily. Before I was 18 though, he is legally obligated to take care of me, so he cannot really throw me out of the house, or stop feeding me. Now he can, so now he has more control then ever. Though he admits that now, he just beats me for sentimental value. And I must admit, getting chased around the house by my 50 year old father brings back some quality memories.
Anyways, he has been beating me since I can remember. And this aint no light spankings on the buttocks im talking about, this is hard core, punches to the gut (though never to the face) type of beating. Now, do I think that at a younger age, I was a brat? No, not at all. Compared to the American kids I see now adays, I was a saint. But theres a reason I was a saint. Because I was beat, and I knew my place. Now anyone that says that resorting to beating a child is the fault of the parents, because they did not communicate effectivly with their children, well, that person is just not being realistic. Im sure some children can be convinced and communicated with such that they do as the parent wishes. But I am also 100% sure that the alternative exists as well. Children are YOUNG and not fully developed. Their ability to reason and figure things out completely is totally limited. The cognative abilities of children vary greatly, and this I can say from experience, so dealing with them is highly dependent on that factor. And parenting is not the only variable. Social circumstances, genetics are among many of the variables that influence a childs ability to reason.
Now, from my experience and just common sense, I think I can give a decent analysis of how to raise a child well, or at least an obedient child. NEVER let the child get the upper hand. EVER! I do not remember a single moment with my father where I felt like I was in control. And yet so many of my friends treat their parents like shit. I want to mention, the great majority of my Russian friends are much more obedient than the majority of the American kids I know. And the majority of my Russian friends get beaten, as is a Russian tradition, to be excesivly harsh with your children. Most of my American friends do not get beat, because they know how to dial child services, as is seemingly the American tradition. Back to my point. If a child is given the upper hand at any time in the relationship, the consequences for the parrent become quite bad. One rule that was set for me right from the start by my dad was that his word is law. Thats the simplest rule there is, and its the most important one. He made it clear to me, that I do as he wishes. If this one rule is established, then the rest of the child rearing process is simplified. The question becomes, what is the best way to enforce this. Well, that depends on the child’s interests. I didnt have many friends as a child, so I lived in front of the tv and computer. So my father would punish me by taking away the things I loved most. And sometimes that wouldn’t work. So he resorts to the universal consequence, physical pain. And when I was beat, there was no anger, there was simple neccesity, and he made that clear. He said, well, I told you this would happen if you did X, and you did X, what do you expect? I quickly learned my place.
Now I must make a distinction. Most parents use morality to teach their kids. They say “this is wrong” and “this is right”. And whats wrong and right get stuck as absolutes within the child. Yea I know, same old Russiantank. But, I guess by forcing these concepts upon young minds, the common result is that they follow the system of morality you set for them without having to be beaten. My father did no such thing. He never set right and wrong for me. And I am so thankfull for that. All he did was, “my rules, and the consequences of breaking my rules”. Not right and wrong. Never, I dont believe I ever heard him utter those words to me. Whenever I did anything “wrong” he would only say, I told you not to do that, so now you face punishment. And what was the reason I was always given for his rules. I am too young, and he knows better. Is that right? YES! Though now I can question some of his rules, and I do believe some of his rules are absurd, as a child, I was of no mental capacity to do such a thing. He was indeed smarter than me, in every respect. I could not argue logicly with him to disprove why his rules were illogical, because I didn’t even know what logic was back then. And by the time I could question, I already was in the habit of doing as he told me, so the only problem my dad had to deal with was my incescent badgering that his rules are unfair, not a completely disobedient child. I still broke some rules, and I still got beaten, so it didnt happen often.
So I guess a problem arises for those people that are not smarter than their young children. But I dont think we should worry about those peaple.
Magius,
“Just as in fighting between adults, especially physical fights, is a sign not of trying to make the other understand something, but rather, it is a sign of last resort where the person lacks any intelligence in rationally making the other understand.”
Most fights happen because of conflict, rarely some happen because of confusion. Heres an example of confusion, My friend is told I slept with his GF, so he comes to fight me. In fact, I did not sleep with his GF. I am unable to persuade or convince him in any way that he is wrong. A fight breaks out. Heres an example of conflict. I did sleep with my friends GF. He comes over to fight. I try to convince him that just because he is going out with her, doesn’t mean I am not allowed to sleep with her, he is telling me Im not allowed to sleep with her, and I have to be punished for it. A fight breaks out. In the first example, if I was better at presenting facts, I might have been able to avoid the fight. In the second example, nothing can be done. It is a conflict of opinions, neither is wrong or right, both are what each individual believes for themselves. They both have the same facts, but they interpret the facts diffirently. Maybe if I am good at convincing people to think my way, I can do that, but in no way does that make my opinion any more right than his. Hitler convinced alot of people. Does that validate his beliefs?
“The concept of ‘Evil begets evil’ may be important here.”
Bad concept in my opinion. My dad always taught me to stand up for myself. The one time I got susspended from school for fighting, my dad asked who started the fight. I said it was the other kid. My dad said “Did you get him good?” He was not upset in the least. And everytime he would say if anyone ever even said anything disrespectfull or intending to be hurtfull, that he gave me permission to smack them upside the head. And I will teach this to my children as well. You later mentioned an infinate regress. If A kills B, C kills A, D kills C, so on so forth. I disagree. Theres a big diffirence between A kills B for no legitimate reason. And C kills A because A killed B. What you seam to be suggesting is that there should never be any punishment. If someone commits a crime, they should not be sent to jail, because then someone is going to send the government to jail. No, because the government has a legitimate reason for punishing the criminal, and the criminal has no legimate reason for commiting the crime. Whats legitimate? That which is legal… This is all very much dependent on the legal system ofcourse. Some legal systems are screwed up, and surely no one is perfect. But for any legal system to work, it has to enforce its laws with punishment.
“The important principle here is that you are replacing fear with logic/understanding/rationality and you are doing it in a peaceful manner that your child may one day come to respect.”
Is fear not logical and rational? I am very logicly afraid of jumping off a building without a parashoot. So when you hit a kid, they have a very rational, logical reason not to do whatever they got hit for. As a matter of fact I would say the most logical and rational reason, physical pain. Ofcourse you believe in morals, and that some things are innately wrong and right, but I dont. It will be very hard to have an argument untill this diffirence is resolved, but I do not feal this is the place to reconcile this diffirence.
““no matter what you do I want you to know you can come to me and tell me, although what may ensue will not be to your liking, I guarantee you it will be less than what you will get if I find out you haven’t told me, or worse, that you lied to me.”. Needless to say, as a kid I always came home and told either my mother or my father what I had done.”
Um, my dad said the same thing. Only there were plenty of times when I didnt tell him and when I lied. And most of those lies paid off. I didnt get any negatives. Yes, occasionally I would get cought in a lie, and regret it, but mostly I regreted my inability to make up good lies… Does that mean I didnt have a trusting relationship with my parents? Maybe, but we still have a very good relationship. And it means I know how to take advantage of my circumstances. Why suffer more unpleasentness when you can significantly limit it with little risk and no one the wiser? I know why. Because its wrong to lie? Thats not good enough for me.
“When your child really annoys or frustrates you, hug them. Kiss them. Smile at them. Laugh. Anything, just to get yourself out of the habit of reacting negatively to things they do wrong. Children have been doing wrong things since the beginning of humankind, they will continue to do wrong in the future. One system that has been tried for thousands of years is yelling, beating, punishing, threatening, etc - what hasn’t been done yet, or atleast seldom, is that a parent should approach their child as an equal, as an intellectual, as someone who is worthy of knowing and whom holds rational reasonings for what they do. I’m sure we can all relate to scenarios where we have done something wrong, but the situation called for it, or the facts that were presented to us lead us to believe something that any normal human being would believe in the same situation, well children work in the same way. Respect your child, love your child.”
I agree with this on some levels. I have been in situations when I did something my dad didn’t like, and he didnt bother to ask me why I did it, even though I had a good reason for it. And he got angry right away. But, much more often in my experience, I see kids do something their parents dont like, for no other reason then that they like doing whatever it is they are doing, and the parents provide no consequence… This is far worse then the first scenario. In the first scenario, the situation is quickly resolved when I provide my information, and then my father apologizes. But with the second scenario, I fail to see how hugging and kissing kids will get them to stop doing what they are doing, if it is indeed annoying and frustrating. If anything, it should encourage them, no?
“If you can realize how psychologically damaging bully’s can be, I don’t understand how you can’t follow the same logic to parents.”
Consider this. If I call a kid in school names, and just plain annoy him, even get violent with him, and hes the bully, in that he is the bigger kid, and then because I annoy him, he kicks my ass. Is that called bullying on his part? Or is that called a forseeable consequence to my actions. The reason for getting my ass kicked becomes more legitimate the worse I treat the other kid. But a bully just picking on me for reasons that I cannot avoid, such as, I am little and puny, and he likes beating up little puny kids, then this reason to get my ass kicked is far less legitimate, and this is indeed what bullies do. Now follow this logic to parents. Beating your kids for no legitmate reason is bullying, and that could easily cause serious damage. Beating your kids when they are breaking rules you have set and have laid out the consequences for, well, thats a forseeable consequence to the kids actions. A much more legitimate reason to beat them, and though the possibility for damage still exists, it is much less significant.
“You have failed to illustrate or explain even one situation in which physical abuse of your child will bring about more happiness for the most people rather than some other system.”
The other systems are less effective at producing obedient children. Non-obedient children cause significant pain to the parents and other people in contact with these kids who are not old enough to fully think their actions through, and who are not under the firm control of their parents. Why do I say that the other systems are less effective? My experiences. Not fact or scientific research, but in my experience, the average Russian kids are far more obedient and thus less likely to cause trouble and pain, than the average American kids. And in my experience, Russian families in general have a propensity to keep a very tight reign on their children, usually through force. And Americans, on the contrary, are very loose and lax. Another form of experience is from comparing two families, 1 with a traditional Russian form of child rearing, ie: beat them till they listen. And the other with a very lax, american style of child bearing, consisting mainly of negotiating and bargaining, and well, generally being on the same level with the child, as you mentioned. The result? The traditional family had very refined, curtious children, the other family had a little demon that obtained pleasure in doing the opposite of what you asked him to do. And I must comment, it is a trully frightening scene, this second family. They are close to me, my aunt and uncle, and I can see the utter agony on their face as their 11 or 12 year is in full control. They say to do something, and the kid, my cousin, blatanly says no. And the mother just slumps her shoulders and can do nothing. Now, if it was me that said that to my parents, I would be dead. My father has put the fear of, well, god in me, I guess I can use that saying. I can never raise a finger against him. So when he threatens, I must comply. And its not that he is stronger than me, I bet if I tried I could take him in a fight, though I must admit it wouldnt be easy. But even my brother, who would eat my dad alive, still is in the same position as me, and when threatend, complies. So heres a track record for you, my dad made two of the most obedient kids I know, me and my brother. How? With force. Am I scarred for life? Not in the least. Is my brother? Hes even better than me. And tell you the truth, I would much rather take the risk of damaging my kids psychologicly, which is a relatively low risk in my experience, then take the much higher risk of losing the upper hand in a relationship with my future kids. Brats are much more common than psychologicly damaged kids in my understanding.
“what is the point of punishing a child before five, when apparently they wouldn’t even understand what they have done wrong or why they are being punished.”
Im pretty sure my dad didnt hit me until I was around 7. Hitting 5 year olds does seem sort of pointless. They will be more confused than anything.
" A child who knows not what they have done or why it is wrong, proceeds to get punished, and then enters into a state of uncertainty around that individual."
Well, all they need to be able to understand is, “your rules, your consequences.” If they are not old enough to get that, dont hit them. If they do understand that, then there shouldnt be any uncertainty. I am the boss, do what I tell you. Simple. At a young age, they are not able to rationalize any complex logical explenations you may be able to offer them. So I dont see how you can teach them anything other than misguided, oversimplified reasons such as morals. Killing is wrong, bottom line. Lying is wrong, bottom line. Stealing is wrong, bottom line. If your morals are more complex than that, than the kid wont understand it anyways, unless they are a unusually smart. And personally, I think instilling those moral absolutes is far worse than taking the slight risk of causing damage with physical punishment.
“Because they don’t know why they were punished, they come to believe that such a punishment can come at any time for any reason. Often we can see this on the childs face when their parent gets a certain tone or moves in a demeanor that resembles them in the memory of the child when they are being punished. Luckily, as children we are much more adaptable and easily change modes from stressed to happy. But as time goes on and life gets harder, these modes of stress become harder and harder to overcome.”
Funny you should say this, because everytime my dad makes a sudden gesture, I tend to duck real quick. And if anything, thats a good thing. Better reflexes 
“You see, too often, parents and people in general justify their quick responses to violence through it being needed, as though they acted rationally and by choice instead of by instinct and anger. I think parents often don’t take the time to teach, educate, and explain things to their children. Instead, they become short with them, they have tempers, and often parents lose patiance with their child because they think other things are more important. Though, what they did, actually harmed you instead of helping you.”
Well, I remember many a case when my dad told me not to do something, and explained perfectly the reasons why he wanted me not to do this. I did it anyways. Several times. So he was perfectly reasonable, and I understood his reasons, I just decided to do it anyways. What is my father to do then? He punished me in material ways, took away tv, computer, didnt give me money. I still did it. So he beat me. I didnt do it again. He taught, educated, explained everything he could. I just disagreed, so he prety much forced me to agree, by introducing consequence. He felt he was right, I felt I should do it anyways. So he wanted to maintain the upper hand in the relationship, and he beat me. It worked. It sure did harm me, litterally. It hurt. But I was not upset at all by it. I was quite aware that I broke his rule, and I was going to get punished, oops, wont do it again.
“Children defend their abuses by thinking that way so that they can be okay with themselves, their life, and their parents.”
Sure, you could always say that… But I would always say the opposite. It was always clear to me the consequences of my actions. My father never beat me without fair warning. He made it clear many times that it was a tool he used and would use when I would not listen to him. I was well aware of the consequence at all times, and was never surprised or overly upset about the whole thing. Neither was my brother, and he recieved the same treatment.
“Through violence one is afraid and in constant fear, always thinking about every move they make and how it might lead to violence. That takes up most of the minds time and capacity. Without violence a child is left to think about joyous and creative things. In fact, I don’t ever recall having a creative moment in the context of violence, except maybe how to stop the violence or get the hell out of there.”
I get the feeling that you are only considering random, sadistic acts of violence, and not structured physical pain as punishment. I have had oh so many creative moments in my household. Some while getting beaten by my father im sure. It was nothing scarry, nothing but pain. I remember that everytime he started threatening, I would immedietly bolt, or cover up and start saying everything I could think of not to get hit. He would always call me a chicken, and say its just pain, be a man, take it. And he was right, and as a matter of fact, throughout all the beatings, I built up quite the pain tolerance which I am proud of. But pain is pain, and I dont like pain, so whatever I can ever do to reduce it, I will try to do.
““It’s wrong to hit people” the parent says while hitting their child. I am amazed human kind has gotten as far as it has.”
My point exactly. Its a contradiction. So either the parent shouldnt be hitting his child as you say, or its not wrong to hit people. I say the latter is true. Its not wrong to hit people. Thats one of those pesky absolutes ive been talking about. My dad would never have said anything like that if he would beat me for a reason like that. I dont remember being in such a situation, but I can imagine him saying “I dont want you hitting other people” While hitting me. Is that a contradiction? No. He really doesnt want me hitting other people. It makes him look bad… And if I were to ask, “why do you not like when I hit people” then if I was old enough to understand, he would try to explain it to me. Im not sure if his reasons are good ones, but thats beside the point. The point is, Im aware its HIS reasons, and not some moral absolute. And considering the age diffirence, I would say his reasons are at least better than mine.
Pureasonist:
"As far as I’m concerned, the following kinds of people actually hit their children:
1 emotionally unstable
2 poorly educated
3 less humane
To hit is to love? Come on, there’s got be better ways. When there is no other way, that means your children are already hopelessly brought up."
Um, well, I guess your concerns dont concern me, because as far as Im concerned, my father is perfectly stable, hes the most stable person I know. He berrates me when I dont present definitive reasons for every action. Hes the epitomy of stable. He is very well educated. Second smartest person I know. Went to a good Russian college, worked for very good money here in the US, now started his own buisness. Very humane. Loves animals, loves people, loves me and the rest of his family.
Arendt:
“I never understood spanking children either. (Maybe spanking grown ups would be more rewarding, ) What were they thinking? Why resort to physical punishment when it is the mind they are tying to change or train. Words are better–that’s what language is for, to train, explain, etc.”
How do you train dogs? As far as I know, you smack them atop the head lightly, cause them a little pain, some discomfert when they do something you dont want them to do. Does the mind of the dog change? I think so, becuase it stops shitting on your carpet. If even a dog understands the simple language of pain, I would say that at a young age, when the child cannot handle much complexity, pain is more effective than language, because words dont hurt, and pain does, so its incentive to do as told. As they grow up, I agree, more can be explained with words.
Jaimeshows19:
“A teacher would not hit a student if he did not understand the material that was presented.Why should a parent?”
My dad did not hit me when I did not understand something. He hit me when we understood each other perfectly well, but we had conflict. I chose to go against his rules. Diffirence of opinion, or I just thought whatever I was doing was worth the risk. You mention you were abused. I was wondering, if you are willing, if you could say in what form that abuse took place. I think again, there is a diffirence between saddistic, abusive violence, and structured physical punishment.
I believe that it is never right to hit a child. There is no need to hit a child. Hitting them does not make them learn there lesson for the right reason. So, hitting child is wrong but if it happens it is not a big deal because children can drive you insane!!! But if you just beat the crap out your child then you have a much bigger problem than you child acting up.
Well, I believe you are wrong… Hitting children teaches them a very simple, imortant lesson. Do as I say, or I will hit you. Thats a very important lesson for a parents to teach their child.
There are numerous financial options available for you to escape this violent abuse. If you have descent grades, there is the Pell Grant. You could move out and work part-time while attending college. There are many work-study programs. There are also many scholarships. check and see what your community can offer you.
The abuse you are currently suffering from this tyrant is not only physically harmfuls, but will leave huge emotional scars on you for the rest of your life.
Good luck.
Thank you, RussianTank. It’s hard to sound off about how we think other people should be raising their kids in the face of actual facts and explanations.
Oh aspacia, how funny. Havnt I made it clear that I am perfectly normal, and feel perfectly fine about how I am and was treated. Nowadays, when my dad gets violent, its more of a game, I say “Lets see what you got old man” and he puts a big smile on his face (as do I) and I try my best to avoid his blows. So right now, I would say there actually is none of the violence from before. My dad realizes that pain no longer affects me as it once did, and that, like I said, im too proud to be controlled in that manner. I am no longer a child. I find the form of vilence I felt was very structured, and logical, and was used to achieve a goal, and that goal was achieved. This same form of violence is used throughout my Russian extended family, (other than my aunt and unlce, and I told you what happend to them) and every person I know is prefectly healthy, etremely intelligent, and has a very good relationship with their parents. The same applies to the majority of my Russian friends. Again, this is not, “Grrrr, Im feeling upset over some work related issue, let me go beat my son.” Not at all, this is the same causal principle that applies to, well anything that causes pain in the real world. Just like cutting yourself with a knife causes pain, and should be avoided, I quickly learned that disobeying my dad caused pain, and should be avoided. And the fact that my dad never tried to reconcile his causing the pain by using right and wrong, is what makes me the completely open minded, relative, a-moral human being I am today. And I am so happy I am what I am, because I see all over the world what unfounded morals and absolutes can do not only in there extreme forms, but even in every day life, it astounds me what people can accept without reason.
So given that my dad did not mold my mind, and force how I should think using these absolutes, some other form of incentive must be applied in order to keep control of me. And that form is quite simply physical punishment. I dont see any alternatives, other than morals, which I hate, so Im never going to use those when I teach my children. Thus, just like my dad, I will have to resort to physical pain as incentive to keep my children under control.
Aspacie, you could say that I am just saying all this to make myself feel better, and that in truth, Im scarred and dont even know it. Well, if I dont know it, I guess I cant disprove it. But from what I do know, I get the feeling that I am extremely happy and glad that I was brought up the way I was, and that there is not a single ounce of ill will or resentment, or any negative thoughts dirrected at my father. Not one. I guess such a situation as I portrayed must seem foreign, and thus you cant understand it. But please do trust me on this one, the system works.
Uccisore, did you not read the two HUGE posts I put up? If you did, then you should realize that I have many more “actual facts” than anybody else, because as far as I can tell, I have had the most physical violence done to me by my parents, and I can actually speak from that perspective. And did you not see all the logical arguments I brought against every single point in this thread made against beating children. So, let me reverse your own statement, because it seems you are the one sounding off in the face of actual facts and explanations…
Maybe you didnt see the two huge posts, and only saw that little one I put up in response to easymoney. But if thats the case, then I see a hypocritical bias in you Uccisore. Because, the way I responded to easymoney was specificly designed to be simmilar to the way he responded to me. He basicly just did as you accused me of doing, just stated a belief without even any attempt to back it up. So I did the same back to him. And along comes Ussicore, and notes that I commited some philosophical crime, and doesnt say a word about easymoney. I could be wrong, but I get the feeling you did this because you share his beliefs. In that case, it is you commiting the philosophical crime here Uccisore.
If germany, cyprus, iceland, sweden, norwaym denmark and austria dont have a swat team, then there just messed up.
Sorry, but in my book this is not a “normal” father son relationship. This is abuse. Yes, I am being judgemental, and my father had a big black belt that he frequently used. To me this is abuse, pure and simple.
Thankfully, I have been in a nonabuse relationship for 18+ years. My first husband was a walking nightmre, though not physically abusive he was verbally abusive. I just hope you do not treat your children in a similar manner.
You, at least I think it was you, made the analogy of a dog misbehaving and smacking it. Okay, with a rouded up newspaper or magazine, as the sound shocks them more than the pain. I have adopted numerous pets (cats and large dogs) from the animal shelter and this does work. A similar smack with a newpaper or a magazine will work with a child, but the behavior you discuss is violent, and will probably be perpetrated if you have children without some sort of counseling.
When my son was 10, and taller than me, he thought he was the man of the house as I was a single, frequently stalked mom. We went to counseling, and he was easily manipulated with the “Home Token Economy.” It worked for him, but does not always work with all children. I worked hard, and carefully monitored all his positive and negative behaviors. This is difficult and time consuming, but I simply take the position that he did not ask to be born and it is my job to discipline and try and created a socially responsible human being. IT WORKED. He is 26, has been to Vancouver, Panama, Paris, London, Madrid, etc. He is doing well and appears to be well adjusted and we currently frequenly see each other since his girlfriend of 6 years and him recently broke up. We use to see each other or talk to each other at least weekly, unless he was out of the country.
What you describe to me is violence and expected violence. For example, if a husband earns all the money, and a wife or child does not always comply with the husband’s demand, it sounds to me as if you are justifying this.
A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties … Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward.
- Einstein
Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding.
- Einstein
Pacifists ignore hitler.
Er, RussianTank, I was agreeing with you: My comment was in regards to how most people got real quiet once someone with personal experience came on. Sorry if I didn’t word my statement very well. Like you, I believe that most talk about spanking is a bunch of hand-wringing over nothing. The discipline you describe in your family sounds excessive by the standards that I’m used to (being an American), but it’s your business, and if as an adult, you don’t think you were abused, then you probably weren’t. At the very least, it’s beyond the capacity of any of us total strangers to argue otherwise!
Is there any possible use for violence besides promoting obedience?
To teach a person, you have to tell them something new. Violence doesnt actually teach.
To understand, you have to see cause and effect. The effect of hitting a person is not a natural effect, it is man-made, artificial.
Everyone is so interested in teaching their kids obedience. But if EVERYONE is taught to be obedient then who is everyone actually OBEYING?
A world of obedient people does not think. And if there is no thought in the world there is no direction for the obedience.
If a few people think in a world of obedience, then they have control. What will stop them when THEY are wrong?
Obedient kids dont all grow up to be thinking adults. Look around you, this is evident. Nothing magical happens when they turn 18.
I think its a necessity to give people everything they need to think things through for themselves rationally. This has to be priority number one, not spankings, and not obedience.
If the kids dont listen to you when there is something dangerous youre warning them about, maybe you cried wolf too many times, while trying to scare them into being obedient. Obedience training, although it doesnt cripple a person to surviving in this particular society (America) does have its faults, and I think its mediocre compared to what we could be doing. Behaviorism (IE: Jail, whipping, buring at the stake, crosses, reward and punishment) has been around for thousands of years - yet we still have crime. It is evident that this is not a true solution. Why? Because changing a behavior does not change a person. Where there is a will there is a way. If the will to comitt crimes survives the spankings, the person will become a criminal. The only thing that will prevent this is the kind of superior learning that makes crime look inferior.
If a person doesnt do what you think they should, then maybe its because they werent designed to want what you think they should do. Why teach anyone to do anything besides pursue happiness intelligently and considerately? This civilization isnt particularly conductive to self-motivated original thinkers, who follow their OWN heart and no one elses - but unless everyone, parents included, does something about this, the world will remain as a machine that eats up and spits out human life. It will never change.
Lets not be trapped by this mass ignorance generator any longer.
True, but this argument revolves around beating children. Also, I am totally opposed to appeasing tyrants.
So, feeling pain when you touch a hot stove doesn’t ‘teach’ a child anything?
Who cares? The effect of going to jail is man-made too. Also, you contradict yourself here. Doing something bad, and getting a swat in the rump is much more cause/effect than doing something bad, and recieving verbal instruction on why it’s a bad idea. A seven year old isn’t likely percieve or care about the cause and effect between “eating nothing but junk food now” and “being obese when you’re 16”.
Authority.
Can there be any doubt that nearly everybody who amounts to anything in this world was taught obedience as a child, either through physical punishment or otherwise? You seem to be having a knee jerk “intelligence = rebelliousness” reaction. It’s popular to think that way among teenagers and such, but I see no merit in it.
Uccisore, yes, whip them into submission, into being robots, instead of critically thinking human beings.
You’re missing the point. Every critically thinking human being you care to name over the age of 25 was almost certainly spanked as a child. You’re approaching this issue as though ‘spanking children’ was some new phenomenon that’s never really been tested, and you have the freedom to speculate (read: make stuff up) about what the results will be if it’s implemented.
I disagree, its violence in general. I dont see how you can back up that you can hurt adults under SOME circumstances but under no circumstance can you hurt a child. If im being challanged to i will come up with a situation where it might seem nessicary. Its going to be a very extreme example, but it is a possible situation. Im not saying that hitting your child is the right thing to do most of the time, im just saying that there does exist situations where it would be justified, given the right circumstances. I fear the tyrant-child :evilfun:
Just to clarify a couple of points.
Although I am speaking only for myself, I’m sure those who oppose spanking children as a means of disciplining would agree that:
“Not spanking children” does not equate to “Not disciplining children”. I notice that this seems to be the assumption here. I am for disciplining children, but not for spanking. I know people my age and older who were never spanked as children and turned out to be successful, mature, responsible adults. If you want material proof, I’ll tell you: one in Harvard, one in MIT, the others…I should stop. I mention material success since there also seems to be a belief here that the measure of success of spanking is how materially successful they are as adults.
The truth is, I don’t think there is a conclusive evidence that spanking is needed at all, since there are also evidence, lots of them, that those who were not spanked as children turn out to be productive citizens as well.