Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Corporal Punishment RematchFollow

#52 Oct 01 2014 at 6:32 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
Sure. Find me a single study that has examined the effectiveness (both long and short term) of spanking used in precisely the manner I described earlier in this thread. Can't do it, right?

You didn't describe a spanking.

This is your description:
Quote:
Then, he would deliver the spanking.


How hard should one hit when spanking?

Where should you spank a child?

If you spank them in the head should you first make them put their bike helmet on?

Can a male spanker spank a female child on the behind or is that 'sexual'?

Can a priest spank a male child on the behind or is that 'sexual'.

Should a 50 pound 6 year old child receive the same spanking as a 50 pound 4 year old child?

How many hits - one for each year? (oh wait that's birthday party shenanigans).

You're not talking a scientific method of punishment, you've merely gone off on some idealized fantasy story of growing up in suburbia USA during the 'golden years'.

edit: FYI, cant write, 'butt

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 2:34pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#53 Oct 01 2014 at 7:33 AM Rating: Good
I think my parents had a kind of formalized ritual around it, to make the idea of getting spanked more terrifying than the actual smack on the bottom.

It was never spontaneous. It was deliberate, and designed as the consequence of an action on my part that was a clear violation. (Like lying about cleaning my room.) I think my dad only followed through twice on the threat, because the threat itself was terrifying enough to correct my behavior in most cases.
#54 Oct 01 2014 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
We had a paddle that hung on the side of the cupboard. However, the one time I remember my dad spanking me he used his hand.

The babysitter always got the paddle down and kept it within reach...as protection i guess.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#55 Oct 01 2014 at 10:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Elinda wrote:
Can a male spanker spank a female child on the behind or is that 'sexual'?

Can a priest spank a male child on the behind or is that 'sexual'.
If you (well anyone really) find a way to think about anything remotely related to sex while your kid is screaming and throwing a tantrum and you're trying to carry them to 'time out' without getting a bloody nose from the flailing limbs, let me know, because that's some seriously powerful stuff.

Priest thing is always evil though, that's a given.


Edit: *sigh* filters...

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 9:43am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#56 Oct 01 2014 at 10:42 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Catwho wrote:
Like lying about cleaning my room.

You were spanked for not cleaning your room? Or even lying about it? That seems excessive.

I was spanked 3 times as a kid. Once by my mother and twice by my father.

First time for peeing on my brother when I was 4 or 5. ( don't ask why, I couldn't tell you. )

The two times from my father were when I got caught burning things inside the house while my parents were gone. They also sent me to the fire department each time to be lectured on the dangers of fire and watch movies of burn victims. To try to stop me from liking to play with fire.

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 12:44pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#57 Oct 01 2014 at 10:43 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Funny. Sexual isn't filtered, but it's root word is.

I'm gonna crack this code!!
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#58 Oct 01 2014 at 10:44 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Catwho wrote:
Like lying about cleaning my room.

You were spanked for not cleaning your room? Or even lying about it? That seems excessive.

I was spanked 3 times as a kid. Once by my mother and twice by my father.

First time for peeing on my brother when I was 4 or 5. ( don't ask why, I couldn't tell you. )

The two times from my father were when I got caught burning things inside the house while my parents were gone. They also sent me to the fire department each time to be lectured on the dangers of fire and watch movies of burn victims. To try and stop me from liking to play with fire.

Are you a pyro?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#59 Oct 01 2014 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
As a kid it was a problem. As an adult I'm just a red blooded American male.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#60 Oct 01 2014 at 11:17 AM Rating: Good
It was for lying about it. Whole thing went like this....

Dad: Clean your room, we have company coming over tomorrow.
Me: Okay.
Dad, several hours later: Have you cleaned your room?
Me: I will. Let me finish my homework.
Dad, seeing me done with homework: Why aren't you cleaning your room? It's almost bedtime.
Me: I will go do that now.
Dad, the next morning: Did you clean your room?
Me: .I'll do it right after school.
Dad: You need to have that room cleaned before the game tonight. (Parents played pinochle and were hosting...)
Me: I promise.
Dad, after school: Go clean your room.
Me, later: I did.

And I hadn't, not the serious cleaning my dad wanted. I'd been playing Nintendo instead. I think I was eight or so when this happened.

So the spanking was for procrastination, for lying, shirking chores, yadda yadda. I don't even remember the spanking itself, just how upset my dad was that his youngest thought she could get away with playing video games instead of doing housework like asked.

...... 26 years later not a whole lot has changed, come to think of it. At least I don't lie about it any more! Smiley: lol
#61 Oct 01 2014 at 5:43 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Sure. Find me a single study that has examined the effectiveness (both long and short term) of spanking used in precisely the manner I described earlier in this thread. Can't do it, right?

You didn't describe a spanking.


I described when and why a spanking could be delivered in a manner which is both effective and does not result in any long term negative psychological effects to the child. I did so in specific response to accounts of spankings involving an angry parent hitting a child in the heat of the moment when the child is doing something wrong. That's specifically how *not* to do it because it mostly just reinforces the idea that hitting people when they make you upset is acceptable.

We can assume that the physical spanking involves force sufficient to be painful, but not harmful. Given that no one else talked about the specifics you're asking for, I kinda have to question why you singled me out for this though. Seems more like you're fishing for objections than assessing what I actually talked about (which, again, was about when and why you spank, not so much the specific method of spanking). If this is your only objection, then I'll call that a victory. Smiley: smile
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#62 Oct 01 2014 at 5:56 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Spanking at the best of times, still ultimately teaches a child that there are circumstances where it completely acceptable to enforce your will on someone else through force and the threat of pain. Even if it's just a threat most of the time, the fact that the threat is there still enforces that lesson.

Obviously as a society we accept this view in terms of force, hence police, but even so I would not want to teach this as a root level belief as anything ingrained from a young age would be. I want it to be undesirable and unfortunate, not normal. We do not as a society view it as acceptable to enforce our will through pain, pain is not the goal ever, but a potential unfortunate consequence of using force. With a spanking the purpose is pain.

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 6:58pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#63 Oct 01 2014 at 7:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Spanking at the best of times, still ultimately teaches a child that there are circumstances where it completely acceptable to enforce your will on someone else through force and the threat of pain. Even if it's just a threat most of the time, the fact that the threat is there still enforces that lesson.

Obviously as a society we accept this view in terms of force, hence police, but even so I would not want to teach this as a root level belief as anything ingrained from a young age would be. I want it to be undesirable and unfortunate, not normal. We do not as a society view it as acceptable to enforce our will through pain, pain is not the goal ever, but a potential unfortunate consequence of using force. With a spanking the purpose is pain.


I think that sheltering children from the realities of a world where real consequences for our actions exist is far more harmful though. We're raising kids who assume that no one would ever use physical force on them, no matter how much they escalate their own actions. And they usually learn this lesson as late teens or early 20s when they get tased or maced (if they're lucky) by police officers who aren't just going to endlessly give them warnings and then finally resort to a "time out" for their behavior. If being spanked a few times teaches them to avoid escalating their behavior to the point of physical consequences, that is going to help them navigate a real world where such escalations will result in far worse than a spanking. And that's a good thing.


I agree completely with your assessment of what it teaches the child. However, I happen to think that this is a good lesson to teach that child. Because that's how the real world actually works. Ultimately, all laws are about enforcing a (collective) will on the people, and ultimately all laws are enforced with physical pain (or at least discomfort). If you refuse to comply with an LEO, he will eventually have to do something to you that will be painful. At the end of all requests are demands, at at the end of all demands are threats, and at the end of all threats are physical force. That may not sound warm and fuzzy to our modern sensibilities, but that's how things actually work. It's not a bad idea to teach kids this reality rather than lie to them about it. Because eventually, they will learn, and it'll be a rude awakening when it happens.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#64 Oct 01 2014 at 8:24 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
The problem with your assessment is that spanking is about pain, while pain is not the goal of law enforcement. The world does not work that way. The world has rules, and consequences, and that is something you should teach children. However teaching them that there are proper ways of doing things and rules and that breaking them has unpleasant consequences is different then teaching them that causing other pain is how we force others to our will.

you say this is the way the world works, but it isn't. Unpleasant consequences, loosing privileges, etc are very different than the lesson that will is enforced by causing pain which is ultimately all that spanking teaches. The purpose of tazing someone isn't to cause them pain. Teaching a kid that there are consequences to their actions doesn't need to involve spanking, that's an absurd position to take. If you confine a child to their room, that's clearly using force to confine them, and teaches them that lesson, and is again not about pain.

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 9:27pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#65 Oct 01 2014 at 9:14 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
The problem with your assessment is that spanking is about pain, while pain is not the goal of law enforcement.


And spanking is not the goal of disciplining your child. See the parallel?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#66 Oct 01 2014 at 9:56 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
The problem with your assessment is that spanking is about pain, while pain is not the goal of law enforcement.
And spanking is not the goal of disciplining your child. See the parallel?
You're right; spanking would be the method, not the goal. Fudge, you're getting dumber by the day hour!!
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#67 Oct 01 2014 at 10:20 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
within the method, the purpose of spanking is to cause pain, for a larger goal sure, but in that moment it's about pain. The idea is to use pain as a deterrent.

Edited, Oct 1st 2014 11:21pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#68 Oct 02 2014 at 5:51 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
I think that sheltering children from the realities of a world where real consequences for our actions exist is far more harmful though. We're raising kids who assume that no one would ever use physical force on them, no matter how much they escalate their own actions. And they usually learn this lesson as late teens or early 20s when they get tased or maced (if they're lucky) by police officers who aren't just going to endlessly give them warnings and then finally resort to a "time out" for their behavior.

Sure. Children grow up and have no physical altercation with one another until they are tased by police.

Plausible. I'm at a playground in wealthy upper class town pretty much daily. I've never been there and not seen a kid hit or punch or bite another kid.

Teaching children that you use force when you don't get what you want isn't a great precedent for a myriad of reasons. Teaching them to use power over others to get what they want is completely different and a normal part of growing up. This "generation of children who grew up with no consequences" thing is entirely make believe. 20 year olds who are beaten daily are also naive. It's part of being 20.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#69 Oct 02 2014 at 6:20 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:

I think that sheltering children from the realities of a world where real consequences for our actions exist is far more harmful though. We're raising kids who assume that no one would ever use physical force on them, no matter how much they escalate their own actions.

How about we teach kids what we strive for - a world free of physical alteration?

Teach by example...etc...etc.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#70 Oct 02 2014 at 6:27 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
How about we teach kids what we strive for - a world free of physical alteration?

That's all well and good until someone who was smacked around a little beheads them. We don't want to raise a generation of children who don't have deep seeded inadequacies trying to live up to an ideal of masculinity that has never existed. Where would we get infantry soldiers and NFL players?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#71 Oct 06 2014 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Elinda wrote:
How about we teach kids what we strive for - a world free of physical alteration?
A world free of reality?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#72 Oct 06 2014 at 7:48 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
A world free of reality?

If there is someone who needs to be explained the brutality of real life in no uncertain terms, it's *absolutely* 5 year olds.

"Can I tell Santa what I want for Christmas?"

"Santa is an old drunk who likes the feel of children's soft buttocks on his lap. Pray you aren't dead like the thousands of poor children who will starve between now and Christmas. That's your gift, you ungrateful fuck. If you make it. If you are alive on Christmas day, I want you to go downstairs and make your mother and I bloody marys. Then wait for us to wake around noon and throw yourself on the ground at our feet shouting 'thank you! Oh thank you, I only want to live another day in your magical grace!' Merry Christmas."
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#73 Oct 06 2014 at 7:51 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
My five year old knows exactly why there's a rifle trained on the fireplace in December.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#74 Oct 06 2014 at 8:06 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
My five year old knows exactly why there's a rifle trained on the fireplace in December.
He sees you when you're sleeping.
#75 Oct 06 2014 at 8:23 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Elinda wrote:
How about we teach kids what we strive for - a world free of physical alteration?
A world free of reality?

Care Bears > My Little Pony.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#76 Oct 06 2014 at 8:57 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
I don't know, that Care Bear Stare seems pretty physically aggressive to me.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 344 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (344)