Slapping the Hands of Toddlers

[Guest NateC]

 

Let me ask you a question, since I've been fielding all of the questions so far. Why do you think parents ever started spanking their children in the first place?

 

Because the spaghetti monster in the sky told them to spank, and the parents feared the spaghetti monster more than they loved their child.

[J Ham]

 

 

 

If you slapped me, I'd kick your ass, but you aren't my parents. You don't have any bond with me, you don't pay for the clothes I wear, and you don't feed me, or put a roof over my head, throw me birthday parties, take me to school, care for me when I'm sick, take me for Icecream, and all of the other things my parents did. There is no understanding or relationship outside of this forum between you or I. You CANNOT take the parent out of the equation, and you can't put yourself in the role of a parent. You can't put me in the role of your child. These associasion games are stupid. If you can't understand why slapping wrists of your child, or spanking, is okay then don't spank. It's not abuse though. It's sick that you don't have an appreciation for what abuse, "really" is.  But don't put yourself between a family, because you're supposed to be an anarchist, not a statist, although in my family a statist has no authority to involve themself in how we do things in it, either. 

 

How is the argument that being the parent of the victim reverses morality when it comes to hitting children any different from the argument that putting on a blue costume reverses morality when it comes to kidnapping and assaulting innocent people?

Also why is it more ok for somebody whom you love and trust implicitly to hit you - somebody you would expect to be even more kind to you than most people - than somebody who you barely know?

 

Let me ask you a question, since I've been fielding all of the questions so far. Why do you think parents ever started spanking their children in the first place?

 

Same reason people mug people. Using force gets you what you want in the short term, without having to reason or negotiate. 

[Jose Perez]

Everyone here considers parents intelligent enough to process that spanking has bad effects, so obviously spaghetti monsters and other deities make no sense to them or produce fear in them either.

Parents don't spank because of a mere utilitarian "trying to get what they want" either.

Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are.

[Guest NateC]

 

Everyone here considers parents intelligent enough to process that spanking has bad effects, so obviously spaghetti monsters and other deities make no sense to them or produce fear in them either.

Parents don't spank because of a mere utilitarian "trying to get what they want" either.

Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are.

 

+1

[MysterionMuffles]

Yeah a hand slap does achieve shit in short term, but in long term kind of breaks the physical bond a little bit. For instance, my neice is usually peaceful and only gets violent if you pick her up while she's trying to play and you had interrupted her. She'll just kick and thrash if you're holding her too tight and even knows how to press her arm against your throat while she shakes out of your grip.

Otherwise, she would never initiate any violence on anyone. She runs up to you and to get your attention, she just pats you gently or makes a baby sound.

However, one time like I mentioned in the first page, my mom had slapped her on the hand for dropping food on the floor, and ever since then she has never been the same towards my mom again. She still loves her company as much as she used to, except now my neice feels like it's okay to smack my mom in the head with a VHS tape just for the hell of it. Thankfully that was one time, but in return my mom slapped her hand again, except lighter than before because I could tell she was wrestling with her conscience on how to react while rubbing her throbbing head.

I haven't seen my neice hurt her in any way just yet and I hope it stays that way, but man...the way she hurts her own mother makes me question what happens when she's not in my care BUT ANYWAY 

So the moment my mom slapped her hand for dropping the food, my neice DID stop dropping the food on the floor...FOR THAT DAY. She STILL does it on occasion because shit, she's just a baby and doesn't know how to communicate when she doesn't want the food anymore, or if she just takes pleasure in seeing things fall to this magical shiny thing low below her feet.

She also does this thing where her eyes are still hungrier than her stomach, so she tends to over feed her self to the point that she keeps biting and chewing, inevitably spitting the food out on the floor repeatedely. What I've done to correct this was simply notice when she's about to do it, rush over to her and let my palm underneath her mouth, and she quickly learned to just spit out the mushy morsels into my hand. It was hard the first few weeks, but more and more, she just lets the food stick out the edge of her lips until I go over to her and put my hand out, and THEN she spits it out. 

I don't know why my cousin has to freak out every time she spits food out onto the floor...like get a damn tissue, wipe it off and get on with your day instead of saying "you're giving me a hard time. Don't be like this! ONE!...TWO!!! HEY!!!" Like really? How demeaning is that shit? Cool your damn fuckhole, clean it up, and just deal with it when you can see it coming from a mile away.

 

 

[Arius]

I would say the answer is fear.  Parents are, like all adults, afraid of how liberated children are.

Rather than: "Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are."

I would say: "Parents spank because the child's freedom from society reveals them as weak and enslaved."

The child is, at least at first, invulnerable to all social pressure.  Think how it must feel to be an ordinary person with a sense of self-worth all wrapped-up the opinions of peers, and along comes this tiny guy who doesn't give a sh*t what other people think.  I mean, man, kids run around naked in public because they don't like the feel of clothes.  No shame, no fear.  I hope I can be that free someday.  And all that liberation reminds the parent of what a slave they are.  How bound by the absurdity of other people's opinions they really are.  But the parent has spent a lifetime internalizing social pressure as the moral good.  So they rob the child of that freedom because being invulnerable to social pressure seems wrong.  That's why parents spank.

[Rick Horton]

 

 

Everyone here considers parents intelligent enough to process that spanking has bad effects, so obviously spaghetti monsters and other deities make no sense to them or produce fear in them either.

Parents don't spank because of a mere utilitarian "trying to get what they want" either.

Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are.

 

+1

 

You aren't very grateful for the years of care they gave you, are you?  I guess other people offered to raise you and you were prevented by your parents? Either that or they raised you and you aren't grateful to be alive.  Did they rape you? Did they beat you up? Did they keep you in the basement? 

I guess they never showed any care and love for you. No birthday parties, Xmas, sports, outings, clothing, food, etc... I'm serious. If they beat you up all the time you have every right to feel so shitty about them, but if you just can't recognize any good that they've done for you, including you being alive, then you really have a problem with gratitude. 

[Rick Horton]

 

 

Everyone here considers parents intelligent enough to process that spanking has bad effects, so obviously spaghetti monsters and other deities make no sense to them or produce fear in them either.

Parents don't spank because of a mere utilitarian "trying to get what they want" either.

Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are.

 

+1

 

You aren't very grateful for the years of care they gave you, are you?  I guess other people offered to raise you and you were prevented by your parents? Either that or they raised you and you aren't grateful to be alive.  Did they rape you? Did they beat you up? Did they keep you in the basement? 

I guess they never showed any care and love for you. No birthday parties, Xmas, sports, outings, clothing, food, etc... I'm serious. If they beat you up all the time you have every right to feel so shitty about them, but if you just can't recognize any good that they've done for you, including you being alive, then you really have a problem with gratitude. 

[Rick Horton]

 

 

Everyone here considers parents intelligent enough to process that spanking has bad effects, so obviously spaghetti monsters and other deities make no sense to them or produce fear in them either.

Parents don't spank because of a mere utilitarian "trying to get what they want" either.

Parents spank because they fear THE CHILD and his ability to reveal them as the ASSHOLES that they are.

 

+1

 

You aren't very grateful for the years of care they gave you, are you?  I guess other people offered to raise you and you were prevented by your parents? Either that or they raised you and you aren't grateful to be alive.  Did they rape you? Did they beat you up? Did they keep you in the basement? 

I guess they never showed any care and love for you. No birthday parties, Xmas, sports, outings, clothing, food, etc... I'm serious. If they beat you up all the time you have every right to feel so shitty about them, but if you just can't recognize any good that they've done for you, including you being alive, then you really have a problem with gratitude. 

[MysterionMuffles]

He's speaking in a general sense in relevance to the topic. He didn't specifically say that his parents were horrible people...

[MysterionMuffles]

 

The child is, at least at first, invulnerable to all social pressure.  Think how it must feel to be an ordinary person with a sense of self-worth all wrapped-up the opinions of peers, and along comes this tiny guy who doesn't give a sh*t what other people think.  I mean, man, kids run around naked in public because they don't like the feel of clothes.  No shame, no fear.  I hope I can be that free someday.  And all that liberation reminds the parent of what a slave they are.  How bound by the absurdity of other people's opinions they really are.  But the parent has spent a lifetime internalizing social pressure as the moral good.  So they rob the child of that freedom because being invulnerable to social pressure seems wrong.  That's why parents spank.

 

That's kind of what I suspect too. Coming from the perspective that we are all ultimately ONE and cut from the same cloth, I guess some parents hate seeing a reflection of their own free selves in their children. So to punish them in any way they're actually punishing the lost part of themselves that they have to make an effort to bury beneath the core of their being. I suppose it's freedom envy because it is usually the most overly self conscious type of parents who are the most abusive. They were scrutunized for acting in such a free way, so they do all they know and punish individual free thought and action.

[masonman]

 

Let me ask you a question, since I've been fielding all of the questions so far. Why do you think parents ever started spanking their children in the first place?

 

I think its a combination of laziness and being taught by their family that this sort of violence is the right way to do things. If somebody here introduced these ideas to a spanking parent they would get frustrated and lash out, because we'd be telling them they are not in the moral high ground that they were convinced they were in. When it comes to something this big in somebody's life, losing the moral high ground is not something most people can handle rationally. Especially people who have convinced themselves that hitting people is a very very bad way to solve problems except when they are still small, young, and defenseless.

[MysterionMuffles]

 

 

Let me ask you a question, since I've been fielding all of the questions so far. Why do you think parents ever started spanking their children in the first place?

 

I think its a combination of laziness and being taught by their family that this sort of violence is the right way to do things. If somebody here introduced these ideas to a spanking parent they would get frustrated and lash out, because we'd be telling them they are not in the moral high ground that they were convinced they were in. When it comes to something this big in somebody's life, losing the moral high ground is not something most people can handle rationally. Especially people who have convinced themselves that hitting people is a very very bad way to solve problems except when they are still small, young, and defenseless.

 

wow when you put it that way, it sounds depressing and really fucked up...

VIOLENCE IS WRONG...unless you have a significant physical advantage

[Jose Perez]

 

He's speaking in a general sense in relevance to the topic. He didn't specifically say that his parents were horrible people...

 

I am, but I am also happy to include my own parents in there. They would certainly agree with Moncaloono that I am in debt to them for biologically producing me and not having left me to die; such is these people's degree of moral dignity.

[Rick Horton]

 

 

Let me ask you a question, since I've been fielding all of the questions so far. Why do you think parents ever started spanking their children in the first place?

 

I think its a combination of laziness and being taught by their family that this sort of violence is the right way to do things. If somebody here introduced these ideas to a spanking parent they would get frustrated and lash out, because we'd be telling them they are not in the moral high ground that they were convinced they were in. When it comes to something this big in somebody's life, losing the moral high ground is not something most people can handle rationally. Especially people who have convinced themselves that hitting people is a very very bad way to solve problems except when they are still small, young, and defenseless.

 

Do you have any evidence to back up this assesment?  It's strange that you say lazy people are violent by nature, and that human beings teach each other abuse for no other reason than laziness. I'd like to see science behind that claim. Of course, to me spankings aren't abuse, and I don't find any reason to think that spankings are done only by lazy people. And I also think spankings work in some situations better than a lecture, where a child's safety is concerned and they don't want to listen, or cant, to reason, and abstract ideas that one can only gain through years of experience.

[PatrickC]

Do you have any evidence to back up this assesment?  It's strange that you say lazy people are violent by nature, and that human beings teach each other abuse for no other reason than laziness. I'd like to see science behind that claim. Of course, to me spankings aren't abuse, and I don't find any reason to think that spankings are done only by lazy people. And I also think spankings work in some situations better than a lecture, where a child's safety is concerned and they don't want to listen, or cant, to reason, and abstract ideas that one can only gain through years of experience

The question that a parent needs to ask themselves when assessing their need for spanking. Have they used enough foresight prior to the incidence in which the child needed a sudden scolding. Take a hot stove or running into the road. What are the calculated risks that a child of a certain age may make a poor decision and either tip a pan of boiling water over themselves or run into a passing car on the road. Has the parent taken enough reasonable steps to avoid these dangerous situations?

I understand that you can never avoid risk entirely. My own brother lost his 3 year old son last year to a rickety iron fence that fell on him. He'd opened that gate a number of times previously without any problem, so on the surface it had seemed quite safe. However, whilst people can argue my brother could have done more and maybe he might have discovered the hinge was broken I can certainly understand that risk assessment can sometimes be an emergency situation which may require a sudden yanking or pushing of a child as a means to averting them from more danger.

However, Hot stoves are in kitchen’s with doors that can be blocked or locked. The risk is very obvious and real. Likewise with the road, we hold a child’s hand to in order that they don't just dart sideways into open traffic. These are preventative measures a parent can take to avoid any potential calamity. It's somewhat unjust that a child gets hit for not understanding the brevity of a situation they have been allowed into by their own parent. This would be what makes spanking about parental laziness. You don't need much scientific research to understand that prevention is the best way of averting danger. Children will probably experiment with hot water at some stage and recognise it as painful. They then don't require further pain in the form of a slap to work that out.

But your point was that you believe that you somehow deserved your spanking because you were deliberately annoying your parents. That they deserved more appreciation because they had brought life to you and taken care of you as a child. This is a whole different area to your argument regarding hot stoves and open traffic, which I think was a distraction on your part, because I think you understand the argument I have made above.

I say good for you if your parents were wonderful loving and kind people, that is a marvellous thing indeed. Parents like that are indeed worth cherishing. I disagree with their slapping, because I believe it's unnecessary and potentially harmful. But if you truly believe the wrist slapping you got was reasonable and rare enough that it didn't take much away from them as loving parents overall then I'm not going to argue with that. Unfortunately many of us received quite harsh beatings as children which were unjust and not born out of love. But I understand that the parent child relationship is often complex. That it is for each individual adult child to process and assess for themselves.

However, there is good evidence as Stefan has brought to bear many times on this board, that spanking lowers IQ, can leave the adult child at the risk of addictions and unhealthy behaviour. Examine the data yourself and you'll discover virtually no competent paediatrician agrees that spanking or even wrist slapping benefits the child. This doesn't mean that parents who have engaged in this sort of thing are stone cold evil. It just means that they were ignorant at best and some were lazy in their approach to prevention. I'd like to hope that parents confronted with this data might now change their minds and apologise for their previous infractions with their children. Especially if the overall parental experience had been a net postive for the child. There admission and apology could only improve and strengthen that relationship.

[MysterionMuffles]

Well it's really easy to react in the moment of frustration to react harshly towards the opposite party. It takes real courage and self control to quiet the mind and develop a better answer to conflict.

Let's take a look at road rage for instance. Any time a guy cuts you off, whether intentionally or not, anybody who's anybody would have the natural reaction to chase after that car and run them into the highway railings. But of course you wouldn't actually do that, instead you probably flip them off or honk your horn to communicate that they rubbed you the wrong way.

How about if you're walking down the street and your'e approaching a puddle. At the same time you try to walk around it, a jogger rushes past you and accidentally bumps into you. Not on purpose, but out of mere coincidence...do you chase after them and kick their ass? Even if they apologize?

How about this Moncaloono, assuming you still have a relationship with your parents. Say that they get really old and senile, and they start to lose their normal congnitive functions. They are under YOUR care when they are dependant on you to take care of them now with the whole role reversal. Mother of father, take your pick. One of them can't stand on their own without assistance, can't wipe their own ass after going to the washroom, or can't even prepare their own meals anymore. Would you hit THEM if they just so happened to call for your help while you were busy doing something else that you would prefer not to be halted from?

Let's get more specific, say this parent is dependant on using a walker to get around, but you see them letting it go, and risking a fall by barely supporting themselves by surrounding furniture to steady themselves as they walk over to something they dropped on the floor nearby. Would you hit them to teach them to keep from endangering themselves?

[Rick Horton]

 

Well it's really easy to react in the moment of frustration to react harshly towards the opposite party. It takes real courage and self control to quiet the mind and develop a better answer to conflict.

Let's take a look at road rage for instance. Any time a guy cuts you off, whether intentionally or not, anybody who's anybody would have the natural reaction to chase after that car and run them into the highway railings. But of course you wouldn't actually do that, instead you probably flip them off or honk your horn to communicate that they rubbed you the wrong way.

How about if you're walking down the street and your'e approaching a puddle. At the same time you try to walk around it, a jogger rushes past you and accidentally bumps into you. Not on purpose, but out of mere coincidence...do you chase after them and kick their ass? Even if they apologize?

How about this Moncaloono, assuming you still have a relationship with your parents. Say that they get really old and senile, and they start to lose their normal congnitive functions. They are under YOUR care when they are dependant on you to take care of them now with the whole role reversal. Mother of father, take your pick. One of them can't stand on their own without assistance, can't wipe their own ass after going to the washroom, or can't even prepare their own meals anymore. Would you hit THEM if they just so happened to call for your help while you were busy doing something else that you would prefer not to be halted from?

Let's get more specific, say this parent is dependant on using a walker to get around, but you see them letting it go, and risking a fall by barely supporting themselves by surrounding furniture to steady themselves as they walk over to something they dropped on the floor nearby. Would you hit them to teach them to keep from endangering themselves?

 

No. If an adult is senile to the point that they don't remember and cant retain information that they collected over 70 plus years, spanking isn't going to help teach them now. They're obviously just beyond that kind of training method. They already know what's dangerous. They've had the concepts taught, and they've lived a LONG time. If they have Alzheimers then why would you use spankings as a technique to help somebody who'll just forget in the next minute? Now, a little bit of senility doesn't take away an old persons right to be risky if they want. 

[Rick Horton]

 

Do you have any evidence to back up this assesment?  It's strange that you say lazy people are violent by nature, and that human beings teach each other abuse for no other reason than laziness. I'd like to see science behind that claim. Of course, to me spankings aren't abuse, and I don't find any reason to think that spankings are done only by lazy people. And I also think spankings work in some situations better than a lecture, where a child's safety is concerned and they don't want to listen, or cant, to reason, and abstract ideas that one can only gain through years of experience

The question that a parent needs to ask themselves when assessing their need for spanking. Have they used enough foresight prior to the incidence in which the child needed a sudden scolding. Take a hot stove or running into the road. What are the calculated risks that a child of a certain age may make a poor decision and either tip a pan of boiling water over themselves or run into a passing car on the road. Has the parent taken enough reasonable steps to avoid these dangerous situations?

I understand that you can never avoid risk entirely. My own brother lost his 3 year old son last year to a rickety iron fence that fell on him. He'd opened that gate a number of times previously without any problem, so on the surface it had seemed quite safe. However, whilst people can argue my brother could have done more and maybe he might have discovered the hinge was broken I can certainly understand that risk assessment can sometimes be an emergency situation which may require a sudden yanking or pushing of a child as a means to averting them from more danger.

However, Hot stoves are in kitchen’s with doors that can be blocked or locked. The risk is very obvious and real. Likewise with the road, we hold a child’s hand to in order that they don't just dart sideways into open traffic. These are preventative measures a parent can take to avoid any potential calamity. It's somewhat unjust that a child gets hit for not understanding the brevity of a situation they have been allowed into by their own parent. This would be what makes spanking about parental laziness. You don't need much scientific research to understand that prevention is the best way of averting danger. Children will probably experiment with hot water at some stage and recognise it as painful. They then don't require further pain in the form of a slap to work that out.

But your point was that you believe that you somehow deserved your spanking because you were deliberately annoying your parents. That they deserved more appreciation because they had brought life to you and taken care of you as a child. This is a whole different area to your argument regarding hot stoves and open traffic, which I think was a distraction on your part, because I think you understand the argument I have made above.

I say good for you if your parents were wonderful loving and kind people, that is a marvellous thing indeed. Parents like that are indeed worth cherishing. I disagree with their slapping, because I believe it's unnecessary and potentially harmful. But if you truly believe the wrist slapping you got was reasonable and rare enough that it didn't take much away from them as loving parents overall then I'm not going to argue with that. Unfortunately many of us received quite harsh beatings as children which were unjust and not born out of love. But I understand that the parent child relationship is often complex. That it is for each individual adult child to process and assess for themselves.

However, there is good evidence as Stefan has brought to bear many times on this board, that spanking lowers IQ, can leave the adult child at the risk of addictions and unhealthy behaviour. Examine the data yourself and you'll discover virtually no competent paediatrician agrees that spanking or even wrist slapping benefits the child. This doesn't mean that parents who have engaged in this sort of thing are stone cold evil. It just means that they were ignorant at best and some were lazy in their approach to prevention. I'd like to hope that parents confronted with this data might now change their minds and apologise for their previous infractions with their children. Especially if the overall parental experience had been a net postive for the child. There admission and apology could only improve and strengthen that relationship.

 

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

[Kevin Beal]

 

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

 

I'm not so sure the onus is on anyone to demonstrate that spanking is abuse, but I'm just curious. Is the onus that spanking "teaches" better behavior on you to demonstrate? I wonder how reciprocal this is.

Nospank.net has a lot of resources, studies and arguments demonstrating that spanking is abuse, but I'm wondering why that was ever in question. To me it seems obvious.

[MysterionMuffles]

 

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

 

http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

[Rick Horton]

 

 

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

 

http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

 

???????

[PatrickC]

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

Seriously Rick the onus is on you. The evidence is available all over this website if you care to look and examine. Otherwise I cannot take your grievience at all seriously.

[MysterionMuffles]

 

 

 

I've already stated my views on all of what you're saying. Spanking is not abuse. Hand slapping is not abuse. If you have evidence with links, footnotes, etc..., and not just an incomplete fact video by Stef, then why not make your case that it's abuse. The onus is on you, not me. This whole, spankings = abuse thing is the "new" concept. (which is rubbish)

 

http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

 

???????

 

You asked for links with evidence and footnotes, and although I'm not the one you asked, I still provided. You wanted a link that was a non Stef video and there you have it. Proof that spanking is abuse with charts and figures to substantiate their effects.

[masonman]

Moncaloono what is your dividing line between "parenting" and "abuse"? What is the threshold between the two? How hard does the parent have to hit for it to become abuse?

[Rick Horton]

 

Moncaloono what is your dividing line between "parenting" and "abuse"? What is the threshold between the two? How hard does the parent have to hit for it to become abuse?

 

 

My line is my line. I mean, this is a philosophically personal question. That's the whole point. And it's a good point. See, the parent has a real duty to be the best they can be, and just saying spankings is abuse is fraudulent. You cannot blindly call spankings abuse, and not know what a spanking really is. The question you asked illustrates the dillemna. If a parent hits a child and it leaves black and blue marks, draws blood, breaks bones, leaves a child in pain for more than a minute, and things like that there are probably some major health concerns to the child, but if the spanking is slight but strong enough to prevent the child from performing a dangerous act the next time, then it is a good spanking technique. Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child. And spanking really doesn't do anything healthy for a child after they are old enough to rationalize danger. At that point the technique is probably no use anymore. Also if your child doesn't respond to spankings at a safe level, it's a good idea to stop spanking because you could end up pushing the spanking too rough to try and get a response and it could hurt the child. Not all children respond to spankings, but a lot do respond to a well used spank. They shouldn't cause real pain, for more than a minute tops before the sensation is gone and no marks are left.  Before a certain age, and while children are too young to process danger, yet are walking around and touching everything they can REALLY put themselves in danger and lectures don't help. A quick and non angry spanking can save a childs life, or prevent scarring physical harm that far far far excedes the short lived shock of a little spanking that a lot of times keeps the child from doing that dangerous thing the next time. 

[Rob_Ilir]

 

 If a parent hits a child and it leaves black and blue marks, draws blood, breaks bones, leaves a child in pain for more than a minute, and things like that there are probably some major health concerns to the child, but if the spanking is slight but strong enough to prevent the child from performing a dangerous act the next time, then it is a good spanking technique.

 

 

Is that from personal experience, or you got a source? 

 

 

 

Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child. 

Loving your child, is teaching them a skill (spanking) that they only can use on other helpless kids in another generation. Is that what you really call "love"?

 

And spanking really doesn't do anything healthy for a child after they are old enough to rationalize danger.

 

This sounds like a projection, did you finally say no in your teen years?

 

 

 

At that point the technique is probably no use anymore.

 

 

Meybe becouse the kid grows up in their power, while the parent is loosing power, and beatings cant give the parants any more power?

 

 

 

Also if your child doesn't respond to spankings at a safe level, it's a good idea to stop spanking because you could end up pushing the spanking too rough to try and get a response and it could hurt the child.

How well do you respond to spanking, especially from people you did not chose to be around, who would be around 4 times bigger than you and had full authority over you?

 

   

 

Not all children respond to spankings, but a lot do respond to a well used spank.

 

Source?

 

   

They shouldn't cause real pain, for more than a minute tops before the sensation is gone and no marks are left.

 

Beat them over a phone book? What is real pain, and fake pain? Why would you want to teach a kid about 2 different punishment pains, and confuse them even more? 

 

 

 Before a certain age, and while children are too young to process danger, yet are walking around and touching everything they can REALLY put themselves in danger and lectures don't help.

So the spanking works on the youngest and weakest the most? In ther most delicate age?

 

A quick and non angry spanking can save a childs life, or prevent scarring physical harm that far far far excedes the short lived shock of a little spanking that a lot of times keeps the child from doing that dangerous thing the next time.

Assuming that you wanted to have the kid, and learned up upon it, there should be no surprise that it is your own fault in preparation that deserves the spanking, not the kid who gets spanked for your mistakes. 

In one way I really do feel for you, what you must have goten through to have those thoughts against the most helpless people. But on the other side, I know that people like you will try to screw the weaker people in a second, just as your false self is conditioned to do from your early spanking. Nothing changes, it is called the cycle of violence. 

[MysterionMuffles]

 

 

Moncaloono what is your dividing line between "parenting" and "abuse"? What is the threshold between the two? How hard does the parent have to hit for it to become abuse?

 

 

My line is my line. I mean, this is a philosophically personal question. That's the whole point. And it's a good point. See, the parent has a real duty to be the best they can be, and just saying spankings is abuse is fraudulent. You cannot blindly call spankings abuse, and not know what a spanking really is. The question you asked illustrates the dillemna. If a parent hits a child and it leaves black and blue marks, draws blood, breaks bones, leaves a child in pain for more than a minute, and things like that there are probably some major health concerns to the child, but if the spanking is slight but strong enough to prevent the child from performing a dangerous act the next time, then it is a good spanking technique. Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child. And spanking really doesn't do anything healthy for a child after they are old enough to rationalize danger. At that point the technique is probably no use anymore. Also if your child doesn't respond to spankings at a safe level, it's a good idea to stop spanking because you could end up pushing the spanking too rough to try and get a response and it could hurt the child. Not all children respond to spankings, but a lot do respond to a well used spank. They shouldn't cause real pain, for more than a minute tops before the sensation is gone and no marks are left.  Before a certain age, and while children are too young to process danger, yet are walking around and touching everything they can REALLY put themselves in danger and lectures don't help. A quick and non angry spanking can save a childs life, or prevent scarring physical harm that far far far excedes the short lived shock of a little spanking that a lot of times keeps the child from doing that dangerous thing the next time. 

 

 

To Moncaloono:

This is actually the most sense you made so far. Thank you for your input and for not resorting to any dismissive insults while you made your claim. It was well thought out, I must admit. You almost had me convinced that you can kind of blur the line between spanking and all out abuse, until of course you coined the term "non angry spank."Is it really possible to spank with a smile? Even with a cold neutral face, the slap is still agressive, just passive.

It's hard to tell what will hurt or not to the degree if it leaves a mark, and even if it doesn't leave a mark, the internal pain is not up to you to determine based on the severity you choose to strike with. Both physical and emotional.

And of course something I did not consider is the child's ability or inability to rationalize what just happened. Some children are born more sensitive than others and would internalize that spank and develop the habit of haboring internal resentment. And since they're confused about why someone who loves them is also hurting them, they get confused and may end up turning the hatred inward without any rational realization that that anger is meant to be towards their agressive parent. Whether the agression is passive or direct.

Then of course some other children can be born more thick skinned and can forgive and forget, so to speak, about the spanking. They will learn to think "oh I did this again, and it got me a slap in return AGAIN. I hate getting slapped, so maybe I shouldn't try to do that anymore." With this kind of child in question though, I still don't see how often a spanking would have to occur for this kind of child to eventually become a beckoning sadist to the point that they want to test not only their own boundaries, but the boundaries of their own parents acceptance and anger, so they could make a game out of what will warrant them a slap on the hand, wrist, or behind. FACE if you're willing to go that far.

That may be me speaking biasly about the thick skinned child, but it is the only rational way I can look at it. Even a kid who is more forgiving despite of slaps, perhaps, will learn to rationalize hypothetical situations and understand their parents enough to the point where they truly CAN think of many different boundaries they will innately know not to cross, due to the FEAR of possibly getting slapped. 

But that's the underlying and core basis of why most of us here are disputing the idea that a slap in any case is fundamentally wrong. The fact that obedience through spanking is driven by FEAR. I can agree that fear is a healthy feeling when it comes to knowing not to walk into traffic or jumping off a bridge. But fear in this case is pretty faulty and doesn't really garner true respect towards the parent. They just end up being seen as these bigger and almighty, infallible GODS who the children must bow dow to, lest they get the cold sting of their palm.

I digress though...I know we can go back and forth with this argument, but I would very much like to get back to the topic at hand here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Everyone Else:

I made the claim that my cousin and her husband had stopped spanking my neice. I regret to report that I was dead wrong. I'm not sure about the husband, he hasn't told me anything about what he's done and I haven't seen him treat her poorly since that night I made my idle threat over his daughter's future. Every time I've seen him with her, he has been playful and loving.

But I am absolutely certain my cousin is the one now inflicting the spankings. When she comes to visit us on days where I don't specifically have to babysit and she's just here to hang out, she makes a few unwarranted mentions of how things are at home. She says that my neice sometimes pisses her off to the point that she threatens to spank her "but I don't actually do it," yet right before my very eyes, she's getting irritated with her all the time. Counting to three, only staying on one when my neice does something as inconsequential as spitting out food on the floor. 

As a side note, it's too fucking bad that that's how my neice is around her mother. Meanwhile when it comes to me in her care, she lets food dangle off the edge of her mouth until I can get to her and let her spit it out into my hand. 

Back to my cousin...within the same 10 minutes I've seen her slap my neice's hand and as well her butt upon picking her up, which interrupted her innocent play where nothing of value was breaking or anything like that. My neice will always do something minor in annoyance, but nothing to really fuss about, and my cousin will always say to me, "and you tell me not to hit her when she makes me so angry."

I don't know how to explain to her that anger is never due to the cause of any external factor, it's just you failing to deal with your own emotional management. I don't know how to explain it to her because either a) her English sucks ass, so maybe her capacity to understand such a concept might be difficult  or b) she will dismiss it with a passive "mmhmm yeah exactly" that speaks of a tone that she really didn't listen to what I had just said. A few times this has happened and I'm pretty sure I didn't give her any parenting tips in a condascending way or when anything wrong was happening. Just examples out of my own experience with her very same daughter in which behaviours and tantrums were evened out peacefully. I dunno, maybe my cousin is that stubborn in being stuck in her ways.

ANYWAYS THIS POST IS LONG AS HELL, so I will finish off with this:

My sister is now starting to take a stand, where during a family party, everyone was asking why my neice was crying. My sister just said really out loud, "because her mom slapped her!" Which was true because they were all there to witness it while I was off somewhere else. It's just disheartening that everyone ignored her and tried to get back to their iPhones or idle conversation...

So thankfully I have an ally on this stand and my question is now this:

Do I deal with my cousin directly and approach her the way I intended her husband; with a bit of empathy as well as genuine curiousity as to why she spanks her daughter

or do I start educating the younger generation of my family that are close to my age and my sister's so that my cousin and her cousin begin to feel outnumbered when it comes to the twisted morality they use to justify treating their daughter in such a way?

 

[Jose Perez]

 

To Everyone Else:

I made the claim that my cousin and her husband had stopped spanking my neice. I regret to report that I was dead wrong. I'm not sure about the husband, he hasn't told me anything about what he's done and I haven't seen him treat her poorly since that night I made my idle threat over his daughter's future. Every time I've seen him with her, he has been playful and loving.

But I am absolutely certain my cousin is the one now inflicting the spankings(...)

 

I am sorry to put it this bluntly, but I think I have made my case sufficiently and this is very good evidence you provide:

- Stop thinking that discussing the effects of spanking will change anything. Abuse will get done anyway - as you can see - and not necessarily in the form of spanking. This is not just unique to your situation, and FDR does not do follow up studies on any of these cases - that I know of - buy merely publishes people's words about how good they are to their children.

- Start thinking from first principles about this - not just about god and the state - and having logical conversations with the people around you about the ways in which they justify their behaviour towards yourself and the children.

- Stop debating trolls.

I am available and willing to chat privately if you would like to. Good luck.

 

[Rick Horton]

 

 

 If a parent hits a child and it leaves black and blue marks, draws blood, breaks bones, leaves a child in pain for more than a minute, and things like that there are probably some major health concerns to the child, but if the spanking is slight but strong enough to prevent the child from performing a dangerous act the next time, then it is a good spanking technique.

 

 

Is that from personal experience, or you got a source? 

 

 

 

Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child. 

Loving your child, is teaching them a skill (spanking) that they only can use on other helpless kids in another generation. Is that what you really call "love"?

 

And spanking really doesn't do anything healthy for a child after they are old enough to rationalize danger.

 

This sounds like a projection, did you finally say no in your teen years?

 

 

 

At that point the technique is probably no use anymore.

 

 

Meybe becouse the kid grows up in their power, while the parent is loosing power, and beatings cant give the parants any more power?

 

 

 

Also if your child doesn't respond to spankings at a safe level, it's a good idea to stop spanking because you could end up pushing the spanking too rough to try and get a response and it could hurt the child.

How well do you respond to spanking, especially from people you did not chose to be around, who would be around 4 times bigger than you and had full authority over you?

 

   

 

Not all children respond to spankings, but a lot do respond to a well used spank.

 

Source?

 

   

They shouldn't cause real pain, for more than a minute tops before the sensation is gone and no marks are left.

 

Beat them over a phone book? What is real pain, and fake pain? Why would you want to teach a kid about 2 different punishment pains, and confuse them even more? 

 

 

 Before a certain age, and while children are too young to process danger, yet are walking around and touching everything they can REALLY put themselves in danger and lectures don't help.

So the spanking works on the youngest and weakest the most? In ther most delicate age?

 

A quick and non angry spanking can save a childs life, or prevent scarring physical harm that far far far excedes the short lived shock of a little spanking that a lot of times keeps the child from doing that dangerous thing the next time.

Assuming that you wanted to have the kid, and learned up upon it, there should be no surprise that it is your own fault in preparation that deserves the spanking, not the kid who gets spanked for your mistakes. 

In one way I really do feel for you, what you must have goten through to have those thoughts against the most helpless people. But on the other side, I know that people like you will try to screw the weaker people in a second, just as your false self is conditioned to do from your early spanking. Nothing changes, it is called the cycle of violence. 

 

This is from personal experience and the experience I've seen everywhere in life around me. Spankings are not abuse. I know not all children respond to spankings because I responded to them, and other kids I knew didn't respond to them. A spanking causes very momentary pain. Anything more than that gets into the grey areas and anything that leaves marks is getting closer to abuse. It's easy for me to draw personal distinctions because I myself know what levels of sensation leave long lasting pain, and what leave no lasting pain, and I also know which kinds of pain "feel" to painful. The idea isn't to beat a child. Spankings don't work on the youngest and weakest. Before a certain age there wouldn't be a reason to spank, since a baby can't walk his way into dangerous situations, or climb. A child isn't as delicate at the toddler age, as an infant, BUT they can get themselves into deadly situations which reason and lectures provid no results, or results that aren't as effective. 

   Again, spankings happen with children, by the Parents. Not out of anger, but to stop them from repeating dangerous things that they can't conceptualize. Don't have concern for me. I love my parents. Do you? I have a great bond with them and I'm grateful for all of the love, care, attention, time, money, shelter, food, clothing, outings, etc that they gave to me. They couldn't just walk away from this obligation. It's not a voluntary relationship from either perspective, the child OR the parents. It's not violence if neither myself or my parents call it violence, and I sure do NOT call anything they do or have done in my lifetime to be violent. They aren't violent people and they never abused me. You can yell from the outside looking in whatever you want, but as an anarchist you really can't make a moral claim that has any bearing on me or my family's desires.  We love each other. I can't account for other people's mindsets but as far as I'm concerned spanking is a solid tool to use in keeping toddlers safe, "by a parent".  There is no trust or bond strong enough between a stranger and a toddler to permit spanking in my view. That's "my" child is my answer. I only trust myself with my child's welfare. I cannot know the mechanisms of other people's motives. When a person tells me what to do with my children, they are barking up the wrong tree. I can and will keep my children safer than anybody else, and I will love them and care for them with more dedication and stick to it-ness than you. You are shouting at my family from your own roof-top, but we all know in my family that spankings aren't abuse. If you don't like spanking then don't do it. I "very, very" rarely ever had to, and now my children are all old enough to not ever need spankings to keep them out of danger.  But they will willingly decide at times to put themselves in danger, and that I have to respect.

[Rob_Ilir]

^ I "very, very" rarely ever had to,^


Ah, so this is what all this is was about.

You are the one who will fix the crack in the dam?

Anyway, I am done, as this is no discussion, just post actum justifications, and I feel as an accessory, instead of a part.

[masonman]

 

 

Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child

 

 

How would you respond to a parent that says "I love my child with all my heart, and the force I have deemed necessary to aid my childs mental growth is to spank them with a rod until blood is drawn."?

[Rick Horton]

 

 

 

Of course this is not all that hard to figure out for the parent if they love their child

 

 

How would you respond to a parent that says "I love my child with all my heart, and the force I have deemed necessary to aid my childs mental growth is to spank them with a rod until blood is drawn."?

 

I would say that is abuse. I'd call the police. 

[Rick Horton]

 

^ I "very, very" rarely ever had to,^


Ah, so this is what all this is was about.

You are the one who will fix the crack in the dam?

Anyway, I am done, as this is no discussion, just post actum justifications, and I feel as an accessory, instead of a part.

 

This is no discussion based on your involvement. Just self projections from bitterness, most probably caused by something outside of the conversation which I cannot effect. I don't think you and I discussing this has any benefit either. You resorted to the usual "shaming" technique that those not fond of rigor end up using to try and seem more righteous. Total bullcrap, and the sign of a controller. 

 

[masonman]

 

I would say that is abuse. I'd call the police. 

 

So you believe you would be justified in impeding upon that parent's right to teach their child as the parent sees fit?