|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted September 01, 2011 01:56 AM |
|
|
A parent who refuses to ever spank his kid in order to discipline it,should search for other parents for his kid because he is for sure NOT able to raise children! Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent. Liberals often fall into this catagory.
Quote:
You seem to have a very narrow-minded view of what discipline is, and I don't think you really got the point of what I was trying to say.
It is your viewpoint that seems to be rather narrow-minded since you rule out corporal punishment altogether. I have mentioned other ways to discipline children such as grounding them or taking away video games. A child certainly does not have to be spanked for every infraction of the rules but spanking is a useful tool in properly rearing children.
Quote:
Most here seem to be living in a different world that where I've tred. I guess there are zero kids that exist anywhere, that will not give a flip about your nice, civilized methods?
Liberals live in a fantasy world of lollypops and gumdrops where if you hug a thug he transforms into a saint. They simply can't understand the real world it seems.
Failure to spank kids when they need it helps turn them into social miscreants who will most likely never be anything but a burden to society.
Clicky
Quote:
Two recent analyses – one psychological, the other legal – may debunk lenient modern parenting the way the Climategate e-mail scandal has short circuited global warming alarmism.
A study entailing 2,600 interviews pertaining to corporal punishment, including the questioning of 179 teenagers about getting spanked and smacked by their parents, was conducted by Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Gunnoe’s findings, announced this week: “The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data.”
Those who were physically disciplined performed better than those who weren’t in a whole series of categories, including school grades, an optimistic outlook on life, the willingness to perform volunteer work, and the ambition to attend college, Gunnoe found. And they performed no worse than those who weren’t spanked in areas like early sexual activity, getting into fights, and becoming depressed. She found little difference between the sexes or races.
Another study published in the Akron Law Review last year examined criminal records and found that children raised where a legal ban on parental corporal punishment is in effect are much more likely to be involved in crime.
A key focus of the work of Jason M. Fuller of the University of Akron Law School was Sweden, which 30 years ago became the first nation to impose a complete ban on physical discipline and is in many respects “an ideal laboratory to study spanking bans,” according to Fuller.
Since the spanking ban, child abuse rates in Sweden have exploded over 500 percent, according to police reports. Even just one year after the ban took effect, and after a massive government public education campaign, Fuller found that “not only were Swedish parents resorting to pushing, grabbing, and shoving more than U.S. parents, but they were also beating their children twice as often.”
After a decade of the ban, “rates of physical child abuse in Sweden had risen to three times the U.S. rate” and “from 1979 to 1994, Swedish children under seven endured an almost six-fold increase in physical abuse,” Fuller’s analysis revealed.
“Enlightened” parenting also seems to have produced increased violence later. “Swedish teen violence skyrocketed in the early 1990s, when children that had grown up entirely under the spanking ban first became teenagers,” Fuller noted. “Preadolescents and teenagers under fifteen started becoming even more violent toward their peers. By 1994, the number of youth criminal assaults had increased by six times the 1984 rate.”
.......................................
Gunnoe’s findings are being largely ignored by the U.S. media, but made a splash in British newspapers. It is not the first time her work has been bypassed by the press. Her 1997 work showing that customary spanking reduced aggression also went largely unreported.
Nor is she alone in her conclusions. Dr. Diana Baumrind of the University of California, Berkeley and her teams of professional researchers over a decade conducted what is considered the most extensive and methodologically thorough child development study yet done. They examined 164 families, tracking their children from age four to 14. Baumrind found that spanking can be helpful in certain contexts and discovered “no evidence for unique detrimental effects of normative physical punishment.”
She also found that children who were never spanked tended to have behavioral problems, and were not more competent than their peers.
As in climate change, politicians all over the world seem out of touch with the most rigorous science regarding parental discipline. The newest research could constitute powerful ammunition to parents rights activists seeking to reverse the global trend of intrusive governments muscling themselves between the rod and the child.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 03:05 AM |
|
Edited by Vlaad at 04:31, 01 Sep 2011.
|
Quote:
Another study published in the Akron Law Review last year examined criminal records and found that children raised where a legal ban on parental corporal punishment is in effect are much more likely to be involved in crime.
A key focus of the work of Jason M. Fuller of the University of Akron Law School was Sweden, which 30 years ago became the first nation to impose a complete ban on physical discipline and is in many respects “an ideal laboratory to study spanking bans,” according to Fuller.
Since the spanking ban, child abuse rates in Sweden have exploded over 500 percent, according to police reports. Even just one year after the ban took effect, and after a massive government public education campaign, Fuller found that “not only were Swedish parents resorting to pushing, grabbing, and shoving more than U.S. parents, but they were also beating their children twice as often.”
After a decade of the ban, “rates of physical child abuse in Sweden had risen to three times the U.S. rate” and “from 1979 to 1994, Swedish children under seven endured an almost six-fold increase in physical abuse,” Fuller’s analysis revealed.
“Enlightened” parenting also seems to have produced increased violence later. “Swedish teen violence skyrocketed in the early 1990s, when children that had grown up entirely under the spanking ban first became teenagers,” Fuller noted. “Preadolescents and teenagers under fifteen started becoming even more violent toward their peers. By 1994, the number of youth criminal assaults had increased by six times the 1984 rate.”
Perhaps I got it wrong, but I understand parents did beat their children in spite of the ban.
Also, Quote:
these statistics suggest that making spanking illegal contributes to making it less prevalent and also to making kids safer. On the other hand, reports to police of child abuse soared in the decades after the spanking ban, as did the incidence of juvenile violence. Did reports rise because frustrated, spanking-barred parents lashed out against their kids in other ways, or because the law made people more aware of child abuse?
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 04:05 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent.
Or love. It does not take any neuron or creativity to brutalize a kid, but it takes a lot to raise him without, and succeed.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 04:23 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent. Liberals often fall into this catagory.
Now, now. I see two different sides here exaggerating the opposing views.
I know plenty of Liberals, Conservatives and people of all walks of life that are strong, creative and or intelligent (though most people usually only have 2 of the three). People of the opposing viewpoint are not (all) unintelligent, lazy, weak an uncreative. That's more of the minority of parents that let their kids grow up without proper discipline.
Quote:
It does not take any neuron or creativity to brutalize a kid, but it takes a lot to raise him without, and succeed.
And that's the argument I get from the other side. I do not abuse my children, it takes a fairly balanced person to apply only a modicum of force when needed and if parenting is one properly, (and the kid's inbuilt personality permit,) it should not be needed often or at all. Heck, my brother was pretty crazy despite being whipped with a bamboo stick when he was bad and he admits he would have done a lot worse if it wasn't for that. (Actually in recent years he's turned his life around, lucky snow worked his way up in manufacturing and got a free college diploma in a course for maintaining the machines at the plant he works in. Makes more than the educated people in the family.) But still, the argument that all uses of force are "brutalizing" is a gross exaggeration. I use much less force than my parents do, it's barely more than a tap or a playful pat on the bum. Just enough to get the message across. It's probably been done less times than I have fingers on one hand.
I forget who first made that comparison in this thread but I assure you, it's a false equivalency.
So please let's all stop thinly veiling insults at stereotypes we believe represent the person on the other side of the argument and be a bit more constructive.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 05:04 AM |
|
|
Shyranis, as one who passed by that as a kid, I can tell you that the limit between spank and brutality is very fragile and directly dependent of the parent self control ability. And self control is a rare quality.
I don't say "spanking is bad", but I support all parents efforts to avoid that and use other solutions. Kids have a lot of addictions and they may be influenced easily in a way or another, if you take the time. There is no "don't spank" or "spank" but "think again and take a step back" before acting.
My guess is that the modern society leaves too little time to parents, so they can preserve and construct a privileged relationship with their kids. Often, the lack of time leads to fast choices, not always best.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
TheBaron
Promising
Known Hero
dreamer of dreams
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 06:12 AM |
|
Edited by TheBaron at 06:15, 01 Sep 2011.
|
Elodin, the way you speak about liberals... well, it's just not cool
or logically sound.
Your argument for my view being narrow minded is absurd. Firstly, if I was shown that it worked, I wouldn't be against it. Secondly, rather than choosing one particular brand of discipline and subscribing to it, I am choosing to consider the myriad of effective and alternative methods that exist, in addition to being suspect of those that have been shown as "iffy".
My opinion is formed from over 80 peer-reviewed journals, theses and studies on the subject that I have critically analyzed as part of my training to become both a youth worker and a teacher. Marjorie Gunnoe's work has been misquoted repeatedly by pro-corporal punishment groups and the media for a "spare the rod..." attitude. As someone who has both access to - and the inclination to read - newer and more thorough studies on the subject, I can safely say that: The relationship between corporal punishment and antisocial behavior persists even when accounting for unmeasured time invariant characteristics of children and families. The findings of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth were analyzed using hierarchical linear models (surveying 6,912 children) and suggest that corporal punishment is not a preferable technique for disciplining children.
Naturally, the broader context of a child's family has a considerable effect on the behavioural development of a child. However, spanking and its variants are still considered risk factors by both the wider academic community and youth professionals.
I would like to add that the Gunnoe study had many shortcomings, such as:
(1) The release of the findings through the general media, prior to any journal acceptance suggests the author has a more political than scientific intent.
(2) Beware 'outlier' studies. Almost all studies done by researchers in multiple higher learning settings find that corporal punishment of children is harmful. Studies that go against current scientific findings are often picked up by the media. That should be a warning to the public to look at reports and positions on such issues from major medical, educational, and psychological organizations.
(3) The Gunnoe report is a small study. Studies with large numbers of participants have a higher degree of scientific accuracy than studies with only a small number. News reports for which Dr. Gunnoe was interviewed said there were 2,600 participants in her study. In actuality, her conclusions were based on reports of only slightly more than 70 participants, a subset of participants in the larger study.
(4) I have taken the time to read Gunnoe's report. In fact (and counter to what many suspect media outlets have said) her findings actually show a link between corporal punishment and anti-social behaviour NOT the lack thereof or evidence to the contrary. You can look it up yourself:
Gunnoe, Marjorie L., and Carrie L. Mariner. 7997. "Toward a developmental-contextual model of the effects of parental spanking on children's aggression." Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 151,:768-775.
One of the major cases for banning smacking is based on human rights - children's right to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law ... We do not look for research to justify full protection for women, elderly people or any other population group from being hit.
----------------
I get the feeling that some of you may be taking my argument against spanking to heart, or as some affront to your method of parenting. I am not saying that anyone here is an awful parent. All I would like to suggest is that you read some literature on alternative methods of discipline, because corporal punishment is no longer considered effective.
If we, as role models, can't take or even listen to advice on how to behave to our fellow human beings, how can we expect our kids to?
____________
"My favorite" - Jean-
Baptiste Emmanuel Zorg.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 07:26 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 07:28, 01 Sep 2011.
|
Regarding the use of scientific studies:
Unfortunately, what laypeople usually take from scientific (natural and social) studies are merely one sentence summaries which rarely do justice to the work being summarized and which are proffered by the media - a media populated by people who have little if any scientific training and who have a wide variety of undisclosed agendas, biases and goals. Studies are rarely if ever put into context, because customers don't want to buy complexities. People would rather have simple and inaccurate anwers than complex and accurate ones, and the media gives them what they want.
But even if the media could and did report truthfully and accurately on scientific studies, people would still filter information through their own belief systems, and as such they often take what reinforces those beliefs and discard the rest. People love to quote studies that (they think) support what they believe, and then invent excuses to dismiss out of hand studies which (they think) don't support what they believe.
So someone like Elodin does a quick google search and picks up a single study that "the media" (supposing for a moment it's a monolith) says supports his position, and voila - his position, he believes, is secure and he feels vindicated. But did he do a real, proper meta analysis of ALL the work that has been done on the topic? Seriously doubtful. For that matter, did he read the primary source material and investigate what the study's weaknesses and strengths are - starting with sample size? Also seriously doubtful. Perhaps he could find 50 studies that support his position, but does he also cite the 50 studies that support the opposite? More to the point, he's perfectly happy to cite scientific studies when it suits his purpose, but he'll turn around and blast the peer-review process and the "liberal scientific establishment" when scientific studies are used against him. I'd wager dimes to dollars that in an argument over global warming he'd find a myriad of reasons to reject any of the thousands of studies which support anthroprogenic climate change - not the least of which would be a very vocal attack of the professional integrity of climate scientists - and yet if a study came out that allegedly supported his position on the subject, he'd be cutting and pasting every link to Fox News coverage that he could. That's selective hearing at its finest.
Point being: when a person points to a study - any study - and says that it proves he or she is universally right on any side of any issue, it just shows that the person doing the pointing doesn't really understand the complexity of scientific research or how to put scientific studies in proper perspective. And it's a sad fact that a whole lot of people fall into this category. The truth is that NO study is perfect. NO study ends discussion.
In the end, information is only useful if you understand its limitations. The media needs to do a better job of stating up front what those limitations are when it comes to scientific reporting. But people who consume information need to take responsibility, too. If you turn a blind eye to where information comes from - or you don't put information into proper context - you cannot expect to gain real knowledge from it. All you end up doing is reinforcing opinions that are already largely buttressed by nothing but wishes, hopes, beliefs and dreams. That's all fine and good until your world comes crashing down around you when you err out of ignorance.
What does all that have to do with truancy? Well nothing at all, of course! It's just that TheBaron really hit the nail on the head with his thoughful highlighting of the strengths and shortcomings of a small-scale scientific study that was being put forward as the final word on a complex social issue, and I decided to wax a little philosophical on the painful reality of the way science is used - and abused - by the media and a public that largely doesn't understand what it is eating when it consumes the news.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 08:04 AM |
|
|
Quote:
A parent who refuses to ever spank his kid in order to discipline it,should search for other parents for his kid because he is for sure NOT able to raise children! Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent. Liberals often fall into this catagory.
Spank me
On the other hand:
Whack me
But that's of course nothing to do with:
Kiss me
But back to the issue. It's 2011 now and still:
Sing me
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 08:26 AM |
|
|
|
JJ, this isn't the VW. Please cut it out with the links to unrelated music videos.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 09:00 AM |
|
|
Quote:
JJ, this isn't the VW. Please cut it out with the links to unrelated music videos.
This is NOT the VW???
You will allow me to differ with statements like, "A parent who refuses to ever spank his kid in order to discipline it,should search for other parents for his kid because he is for sure NOT able to raise children! Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent. Liberals often fall into this catagory.", because if it's not wasteland, then what?
Are you saying that you see a reasonable way to argue with this disgusting display of... well, see, that's what I want to avoid.
In any case, I didn't spank my child - so allow me a non-offensive way to express my opinion in a more enjoyable way than a worded answer, because, believe me, you do not want to read that one!
Anything else you want to know?
|
|
TheBaron
Promising
Known Hero
dreamer of dreams
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 09:23 AM |
|
|
|
I got distracted too, let's talk about truancy.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 09:31 AM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 09:34, 01 Sep 2011.
|
on the other hand, when I was in school, I did my best to be disciplined and be a "good boy" by fear that I could get punished (I mean, not necessarily physically) and I quickly became very introvert. (actually I suddenly went from one the most extrovert puppils of the school to one of the most introvert)
so that's not a good thing either. you want to avoid breeding wolves and you end up breeding sheeps instead.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 10:15 AM |
|
|
@Corribus.
[quote}Hmmm, sounds like you're saying what I did?
Not exactly. You were referring to the fact that different children are different, and therefore different strategies may be called for. I'm saying that even for a single child, there's likely no "one right way".
I won't argue this point but there are kids that one way is all that is needed. My Son was one. But, my Daughter was a whole different ballgame. To me that is the biggest difference, when it comes to discipline; same parents but siblings are often very different little people.
@all
This truancy issue is about discipline. Well, it's reversed in this case, by rewarding bad behavior instead of being held accountable. How anyone can think that is a good idea is beyond me.
But, we live in an age where it seems our parents had it all wrong. Modern parents have so many more resources to read and studies to follow. Right, schools are such palaces of courtesy and respect these days. I've known several teachers, and things don't sound like they are getter better, despite all of the enlightment...classrooms sound much worse.
|
|
TheBaron
Promising
Known Hero
dreamer of dreams
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 10:29 AM |
|
Edited by TheBaron at 10:49, 01 Sep 2011.
|
I suppose that we're all interested in how discipline is related to the truancy issue, does everyone agree that a lack of the former leads to a growth in the latter? IMO truancy is about school not being attractive, not that penalties aren't strict enough. Take a look at our criminal justice system and the state of prisons. Is this the kind of institution we want our schools to be modeled on?
Fauch I think you're right, it's not that punishment doesn't motivate, it's more that it motivates people in the wrong way.
I for one do not favour a behaviourist approach (which you can read about here). I think that many of our attitudes towards discipline come from the popularity and prevalence of behaviourist concepts amongst parents and educators over the last couple of generations, and that we should consider the idea that they might be antiquated.
Just trying to link our spanking tangent back to the truancy topic -
* Corporal punishment is a form of Behaviourist Discipline.
* BD has an effect (+/-) on delinquency.
* Truancy is an expression of delinquency.
@Everyone. What other ideas do people have for combating truancy?
EDIT: @Markkur just saw your post! In some ways I totally agree with you. I suppose it has to do with the school and the teachers that work there, or the system/curriculum that they're forced to work under. Which I guess links into the public/private debate.
I asked my kids if they think school should be free for all. I got some interesting answers...
____________
"My favorite" - Jean-
Baptiste Emmanuel Zorg.
|
|
Jabanoss
Promising
Legendary Hero
Property of Nightterror™
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 10:43 AM |
|
|
If Corporal Punishment is such an effective way of disciplining youngsters then couldn't we apply the same method to deal with misbehaving adults?
That might set them straight again.
____________
"You turn me on Jaba"
- Meroe
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 12:12 PM |
|
|
Someone like Corribus generally neglects to do any research and states his personal opinions based on the liberal hive mind as fact. Has he stated a single study in the discussion? No. Has he read any studies? Doubtful. He has faith in his position, is secure and he feels vindicated. He'll turn around and blast the "delusional religionists" who love their children enough to spank them when scientific studies are used against him. He seems to follow the Saul Alinski model of debate--attack your opponent rather than his points.
Quote:
You will allow me to differ with statements like, "A parent who refuses to ever spank his kid in order to discipline it,should search for other parents for his kid because he is for sure NOT able to raise children! Refusing to spank your child is usually the mark of a weak, unintelligent or uncreative parent. Liberals often fall into this catagory.", because if it's not wasteland, then what?
You did not object to the two moderators making those statements about people who spank their children. Just an observation.
@Markkur
Quote:
This truancy issue is about discipline. Well, it's reversed in this case, by rewarding bad behavior instead of being held accountable. How anyone can think that is a good idea is beyond me.
But, we live in an age where it seems our parents had it all wrong. Modern parents have so many more resources to read and studies to follow. Right, schools are such palaces of courtesy and respect these days. I've known several teachers, and things don't sound like they are getter better, despite all of the enlightment...classrooms sound much worse.
Exactly. I've seen in my lifetime how the biggest problems in public schools went from being talking in class and an occasional spit-ball to murders, rapes, and domination of schools by gangs where teachers are afraid to teach and the "good" students live in fear.
Spare the rod and spoil the child is a time proven proverb. The permissive liberal model of parenting is a dismal failure.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 12:29 PM |
|
|
Elly, isn't "Liberal" a rather political term? At least in the US meaning? Politics and rising children aren't related... Unless you imply a communist automatically never beats their children or something like that 
I have met a fair share of kids that were just... impossible. Talking to them was to no avail. The parents were actually terrorized by their own kids. It's not nice to see a parent actually insulted by a 5yo kid in public. I think a good beating can do miracles. Lol. No, they weren't ADHD - they were spoiled.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
TheBaron
Promising
Known Hero
dreamer of dreams
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 12:56 PM |
|
Edited by TheBaron at 13:14, 01 Sep 2011.
|
Quote:
@Markkur
Quote:
This truancy issue is about discipline. Well, it's reversed in this case, by rewarding bad behavior instead of being held accountable. How anyone can think that is a good idea is beyond me.
But, we live in an age where it seems our parents had it all wrong. Modern parents have so many more resources to read and studies to follow. Right, schools are such palaces of courtesy and respect these days. I've known several teachers, and things don't sound like they are getter better, despite all of the enlightment...classrooms sound much worse.
Exactly. I've seen in my lifetime how the biggest problems in public schools went from being talking in class and an occasional spit-ball to murders, rapes, and domination of schools by gangs where teachers are afraid to teach and the "good" students live in fear.
Spare the rod and spoil the child is a time proven proverb. The permissive liberal model of parenting is a dismal failure.
I'm going have to go ahead and disagree with almost everything you've said there. Those last two paragraphs are especially indicative of an ignorance in the subjects you're talking about. This kind of outlook is often parroted by people who are out of touch and don't understand, appreciate or care to investigate the social issues they are commenting on. Presenting a hackneyed line and some misquoted information from a politically biased media outlet is not good arguing. You've also made a stab at 'liberals' by saying that they are failures as parents, which you have presented no evidence for.
The movement towards permissive parenting came from the realisation that authoritative parenting was completely unsatisfactory and inappropriate for a new age, and that generations of strict parents were producing generations of emotionally crippled children. Neither permissive parenting nor authoritarian parenting styles are considered as good as the democratic assertive parenting method, and in recent years there has been vast quantities of research on effective parenting and teaching, offering even more models to suit different styles. I don't know if I can be bothered mentioning any of it though, as you will probably brush it off as leftist-hippy propaganda.
It would just make me smile if you considered the possibility that beating our children might not be the best way of making them feel like school is a good idea.
Just go out and talk to a young person about their worries and their dreams and you might get more of a feeling about why they feel especially connected, or disconnected, from the society they live in. While you're at it, ask them if they think being smacked about is a positive form of social bonding.
____________
"My favorite" - Jean-
Baptiste Emmanuel Zorg.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 01:12 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 13:27, 01 Sep 2011.
|
Quote:
Someone like Corribus generally neglects to do any research and states his personal opinions based on the liberal hive mind as fact. ...
Geez.
And someone would think you'd be at least a little thankful towards a guy who doesn't penalize your every post like most people on the board would.
Also, screw you, Gootch, and your witty puns. Now that Elodin liked and stole it, we're going to hear that regurgitated "hivemind" crap for the next ten months or so.
Also also, there can be two reasons for a parent to beat a child.
The first is that the parent could accomplish the same or better without the beating, yet chooses to beat the kid because he believes that's the best thing to do at that point, and that everyone did it since the dawn of time for a reason, and doesn't want to put much thought into it. That's a mark of the parent being unintelligent - or, well, really bad at parenting - and furthermore shows a heavy lack of belief in their children's intelligence.
The second is that there is really no other way to explain to the kid what it did wrong or why they shouldn't do what they've done, and that nothing but physical punishment could prevent it from happening again. That's a mark of the child being unintelligent - or, well, a golden retriever.
Either way, beating a child tends to stem from stupidity.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2011 01:47 PM |
bonus applied by Corribus on 01 Sep 2011. |
|
There really seem to be people out there who think that there is no middle ground between spanking and spoiling - that you will spoil your brats when you don't use the rod.
On the other hand there seem to be people out there who think that the problem is school - if school only was more interesting, then everything would be fine.
While it IS true that we do not spend enough money on education - school cannot compete with computer gaming, the same way than work cannot compete with holiday, no matter the amount of money put into it.
There is no excuse for not going to school, and if children are not going, then either their parents did something wrong or the school is dangerous in some way, but in that case children would complain about it and not just not go.
Humans are born as completely dependent beings and experience a time of complete pampering - everything is done for them in some way or another, and education has the purpose to make these beings step by step INdependent.
That means, the big chunk of parental education is to give their children continually more responsibility, which in turn means that many things are quid pro quo. Children must learn that nothing comes from nothing, and it is important to not GIVE children what they desire, demand, want or request, but let them EARN it, because that's how society works.
Parents, on tbhe other hand, must learn that as well, since as a parent you fall into a habit of doing all kinds of things and have to let go as well. Also, most of the time it's simpler and more effective when you do things yourself as a parent, instead of taking the time, hand over responsibility to your children, watch them do it, help them, correct them and so on.
You spoil a child by treating them like kings and queens, while mom and dad are the servants.
You do NOT need any spanking when you do a good job there.
Going to school is something that's not up to debate - it's the prerequisite for everything else, a duty that HAS to be fulfilled, even if it's boring: that's life - you can't only pick what you like, and that's the lesson that is to be learned: some things are inescapable, and it's unimportant whether you like it or not - there is just no other option.
There also is no other way to teach this. It's nothing that has to be sweetened with rewards or whatever - you don't get a reward from breathing either, except that you do not die from choking..
Educating your children to develop a sense of duty and discipline is important - but again, you don't need a rod.
Calling people who don't spank their children weak, unintelligent and uncreative sounds somewhat like the cigarette advertisement in the 60s: if you don't smoke, you are a sissy, and everyone who smokes, is way more creative, intelligent and a lot happier than everyone else, and I suppose you would say the same thing about people who are against the death penalty: piss-weak, uncreative, unintelligent and goddam liberals.
In plain words: It's complete and utter turd.
That said, I do recognize that education today is a complete and total mess - but it won't get by better by "correcting" educational mistakes and neglect with the rod.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
