Is smacking a child ever acceptable? (2 Viewers)

[sydchick]

That is not an answer to what I said. I know kids do stupid things. It doesn't explain what was the point of brandishing the riding crop?

I'll answer because it is so fucking obvious that even I can see it. She is saying that the crop was always there as a THREAT. It was never used but just the thought of it was a deterent for bad behaviour. It is simple. It's the same just a different method of discipline. For example you swear at a teacher and you get a detention. If you swear again you'll get a weeks' worth and an afternoon one. The threat of the extra detentions are hanging over your head before you tell her to fuck off again.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I'll answer because it is so fucking obvious that even I can see it. She is saying that the crop was always there as a THREAT. It was never used but just the thought of it was a deterent for bad behaviour. It is simple. It's the same just a different method of discipline. For example you swear at a teacher and you get a detention. If you swear again you'll get a weeks' worth and an afternoon one. The threat of the extra detentions are hanging over your head before you tell her to fuck off again.

There's a huge difference. With afternoon detention, the threat is real and will be invoked if you do continue to misbehave.

This threat of beating the child with a riding crop was empty. Once a child (or indeed anyone) realizes that someone is making hollow threats whcih they won't follow through with, they loose respect for the person making the threats (the parent). This is not something worth risking imo.

 

[Kwayera]

What an absolutely ridiculous and fatuous claim for you to make, Cat. Clearly your parents methods of discipline didn't work in any way, shape or form, as you've proven time and time again you're unable to make a logical argument in NCAP. Anecdote is not the singular form of data and 'just because' doesn't constitute an argument. Using Ad-Homs as the basis for your ENTIRE argument, only garners similar treatment in response and proves that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

You were saying about straw men and ad hominems?

 

[Kwayera]

There's a huge difference. With afternoon detention, the threat is real and will be invoked if you do continue to misbehave.

This threat of beating the child with a riding crop was empty. Once a child (or indeed anyone) realizes that someone is making hollow threats whcih they won't follow through with, they loose respect for the person making the threats (the parent). This is not something worth risking imo.

Which only goes to show that my parents' structure of discipline was very effective, at least until I was old enough that smacking was a moot point anyway. I never realised it was an empty threat. Neither did my sister.

 

[Artist]

smacking a child is a pretty old technique and I'd argue to anyone who calls it a social justice issue that up until say, 20 years ago, a parent's (and even a non-parent's) right to use physical force on a child was a given. Now, i'm not saying there arent more intelligent alternatives and i'm not saying it's the "right" thing to do.

But please, there isnt anything inherently "wrong" about using physical force on someone so long as it has no permanent adverse effects. there's a line and i'm pretty sure anyone who has a sense of reason will be able to determine where that line falls on a case by case basis.

the problem we have today is that there's a political correctness about EVERYTHING. people are too concerned about whether things are right and wrong 'objectively'.

so if you have to write it in words, and even now this is the case, "physical force" can be used for the case of torture and a light slap on the wrist.

a parent should have the right to exercise a force necessary to get a point across to a human being who's understanding of respect is limited to fear of pain.

If the child is intelligent enough to have respect for the person in charge of keeping them alive then there's no need for that to happen.

i know it sounds bad but looking at it any other way is taking the matter out of context.

 

[murphyad]

In a word, yes.

http://www.jturkoski.com/Home Page/Beat-your-kid/image001.jpg

 

[dieburndie]

Zero respect for you at all, hey.

Hahaha, as if that means shit to anyone here.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Which only goes to show that my parents' structure of discipline was very effective, at least until I was old enough that smacking was a moot point anyway. I never realised it was an empty threat. Neither did my sister.

It happened to work out well. That does not mean for one moment that it was a good idea.

At the time, there was a risk that you would push the boundaries to such an extent that your parents would have had to actually beat you with the riding crop, or effectively admit that it was an empty threat.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

But please, there isnt anything inherently "wrong" about using physical force on someone so long as it has no permanent adverse effects. there's a line and i'm pretty sure anyone who has a sense of reason will be able to determine where that line falls on a case by case basis.

the problem we have today is that there's a political correctness about EVERYTHING. people are too concerned about whether things are right and wrong 'objectively'.

Awesome.

So if you do something that I judge subjectively to have "crossed the line", can I use physical force against you (as long as I don't leave any permanent adverse effects)?

 

[Venetiad]

So if smacking is wrong and we can't expect (lol) all parents to teach their children values, what do you expect those parents (lol) to do? What options are out there? Council the child at a young age? Call the coppahs? Also ITT: Liberty for those who don't understand the concept of it. (yes it rash and is flawed, but you see what I mean)

 

[will-anal]

Hahaha, as if that means shit to anyone here.

OH no!

 

[direct]

Isn't it also true that while a person who has experienced smacking may have a tendency to impose this learned method of discipline upon their own children, that there may also be a tendency for that very same person to think to themselves "I was smacked as a kid - I will never do the same to my own'?

Hence, is it really right to say that smacking undeniably leads to an increase in aggression and likelihood of smacking in future parenting?

Similarly, while it may be true that some of the worst criminals may have been raised with a background of smacking and/or physical abuse, is it also plausible to suggest that those who have not been raised by smacking will have a 100% rate of never partaking in the practice themselves? or worse, go on to commit crimes of a violent nature?

 

[Iron]

If you think assaulting a child is acceptable then you shouldn't have an issue with raping children. You've obviously paid no attention to the aspect of consent in this scenario.

This isn't a troll. You are effectively on the same level of rapists and you should be treated as such by society.

Lol that's pretty melodramatic even for you brau. I dont know how youre all defining 'smacking', but I certainly wouldnt view it as anything that would, for instance, break the skin or even leave bruising.

It's important to set boundaries for developing brains and to let them know that there can be bad consequences for certain actions/behaviour - just like when a child insists on touching a hot stove; instead of preventing this for arbitrary reasons, the child will find it more informative if the mother lets him/her touch it very briefly so that they can understand. It seems to me pretty fundamental for their own proper development that they do occasionally incur certain controlled 'bad consequences' for certain bad behaviours. This will ultimately protect them from potentially fatal errors of judgement and help them to understand the actual world (rather than an abstract one) in a safe way.

Also parents should retain the right to raise their family as they see fit, with a few extreme exceptions. My own view is similar to McCains, in that physical punishment can be more honest and ulimately more healthy than psychological manipulation. Hiding parental authority thru back-streets serves no one but a few sterile, pot-bellied left-wing homosexual 'academics', hungry for power and influence, casting out whirlwings of biased studies from their dark towers

 

[mcflystargirl]

Similarly, while it may be true that some of the worst criminals may have been raised with a background of smacking and/or physical abuse,

or they may of needed to be smacked and there parents failed to do so. Smacking is Fine provided it is done in a smart way Some kids today need a good smack on the bottom

 

[jotdan]

Ah, yes, sit down talk. Should have mentioned that eh, good one mcfly.

Smacking children has worked for thousands of years, I bet Mary smacked the crap out of Jesus when he came home drunk after turning water into wine, and now look where he has ended up; king of the universe btw i wasnt trying to introduce christianity into this convo i thought it was just a funny reference

 

[direct]

Technically this post has already been answered, the question being:

"Is smacking a child EVER acceptable?"

We have come to a conclusion that although it may be ethically wrong to use a physical form of discipline upon a child, that in some extreme circumstances eg. running onto the road, that this form of punishment is necessary. However the key thing here is what passes as “abuse”. It is definitely true that smacking should not be used as a first port of call, rather as a last resort. Obviously when reason and logic has gone out the door, a child will still respond to the primitive and basic smack on the bottom.

I don't feel that society as a whole celebrates the practice. and if we could avoid it, we most likely would. That's the normal people anyways.

Consider the metaphor of a doctor relocating a dislocated shoulder. Sure, it hurts like hell. Does the doctor take some form of sadistic pleasure in hurting you? or jiggle it in funny directions while asking you "that was stupid of you to jump off that ledge. Are you going to do that again? huh? huh?"? of course not. If the physical discomfort could be avoided it would.
In saying that, would you ever go and jump off that ledge again? Hell no. Not, unless you really liked seeing your doctor or really disliked your arm.

 

[Planck]

You were saying about straw men and ad hominems?

Like attracts like, dear.

 

[.N.]

Smacking children has worked for thousands of years, I bet Mary smacked the crap out of Jesus when he came home drunk after turning water into wine, and now look where he has ended up; king of the universe btw i wasnt trying to introduce christianity into this convo i thought it was just a funny reference

I'm not trying to be harsh, but that's just rude, disrespectful and not funny at all. You don't make reference to a religion when you weren't even there back in those days. Totally irrelevant. Back up your argument with an appropriate response.

 

[*TRUE*]

If you think assaulting a child is acceptable then you shouldn't have an issue with raping children. You've obviously paid no attention to the aspect of consent in this scenario.

This isn't a troll. You are effectively on the same level of rapists and you should be treated as such by society.

I do not think assaulting a child is acceptable, no. I hold that sparingly smacking a toddler for his well being is discipline and not violence.Stop using emotive language and ridiculous comparisons, you are obviously extremely foolish without the slightest grasp of reality.

 

[Hollowminds]

Just cutting in to say that i approve of children being 'smacked' to the point it isnt child abuse, as in serious child abuse. Not "baw i didnt get an iphone!" 'abuse'.