A disgusting video on Youtube titled "How to discipline our child"

[DanielR]

http://youtu.be/V_4BNzaVgjgI'm so infuriated by this video...the smiles and light-hearted tone and the comments of support and admiration are just too much. I just wanted to post this here to get your reactions.

[Devon Gibbons]

"She's just learning that she's smart and that she can get away with certain things and we just have to learn how to let her know that she can't"

 

 

Yeah, learn they must.

[Wiltin]

The problem with any kind of argument against spanking, is that spanking works. If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option. It has empirical results that people can see right away. That, along with the religious element in this case, makes it an impossible argument.

[JamesP]

The problem with any kind of argument against spanking, is that spanking works. If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option. It has empirical results that people can see right away. That, along with the religious element in this case, makes it an impossible argument.

 

Except that it does not "work," at least not for what people says it does. It does not create obedient, well-mannered, nor easily controlled children. A recent study showed that it didn't even work in the short term with many children who re-committed the same "offense" within minutes after being spanked.

 

What "works" about spanking is that you break your bond with your child, cause him to fear you, and induce Stockholm syndrome.

[RyanT]

The problem with any kind of argument against spanking, is that spanking works. If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option. It has empirical results that people can see right away. That, along with the religious element in this case, makes it an impossible argument.

 

[Wiltin]

Except that it does not "work," at least not for what people says it does. It does not create obedient, well-mannered, nor easily controlled children. A recent study showed that it didn't even work in the short term with many children who re-committed the same "offense" within minutes after being spanked.What "works" about spanking is that you break your bond with your child, cause him to fear you, and induce Stockholm syndrome.

Just speaking from my own experience, spanking worked for my parents. I have 3 brothers all close in age, we were spanked. The method my parents used was to provide a warning first, if the 'bad behaviour' continued I would be told how many belts I was getting and sent to my room. After 5 minutes one of my parents would come in and dish out the pain, I was allowed out once I had stopped crying. The 5 minute delay was for psychological torment and also to ensure the belting wasn't done in anger.This method 'worked' in that we were very obedient children. I recall my parents always getting compliments on how well behaved we were. There was never any physical conflict between me and my brothers which I've since learned is extraordinary for a family if 4 boys.I think spanking is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond I could have had with my parents and crushed my spirit as a child. It did work though. Ignoring the fact that it can work if done in a consistent and controlled manner I think damages your credibility when arguing the point with spankers.

[Wuzzums]

I think spanking is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond I could have had with my parents and crushed my spirit as a child. It did work though.

You lost me.

[dsayers]

The 5 minute delay was for psychological torment and also to ensure the belting wasn't done in anger.

 

I think being assaulted out of anger would be better than being assaulted out of a sadistic need to dominate defenseless, dependent prisoners.

 

This method 'worked' in that we were very obedient children.

 

You're making the objective claim that spanking works as a result of anecdotal evidence that you were "obedient." However, obedient is not an objective measure. You could obey a command to not hit your sibling and you could obey a command to hit your sibling. In both cases, you'd be obedient, but the behavior would be opposite.

 

Grooming somebody you have a power disparity over to avoid consequences in the moment isn't at all the same as getting the desired behavior from them. Assuming the goal of parenting is to nurture a baby to the point of being able to survive entirely on their own, spanking is antithetical and could not be described as working.

[RyanT]

I think spanking is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond I could have had with my parents and crushed my spirit as a child. It did work though. Ignoring the fact that it can work if done in a consistent and controlled manner I think damages your credibility when arguing the point with spankers.

 

I think rape is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond she could have had with her attacker and made her feel like shit. It did work though, he got the pussy. Ignoring the fact that it can work I think damages your credibility when arguing the point with rapists.....

[Wiltin]

Ok, hot topic, I get it.

 

There is a reason taskmasters used whips and sticks, not negotiation, to get slaves working. Violence causes people to do what you want. This is all I'm saying.

 

Try to be a little more objective?

 

 

I think being assaulted out of anger would be better than being assaulted out of a sadistic need to dominate defenseless, dependent prisoners.

 

 

You're making the objective claim that spanking works as a result of anecdotal evidence that you were "obedient." However, obedient is not an objective measure. You could obey a command to not hit your sibling and you could obey a command to hit your sibling. In both cases, you'd be obedient, but the behavior would be opposite.

 

Grooming somebody you have a power disparity over to avoid consequences in the moment isn't at all the same as getting the desired behavior from them. Assuming the goal of parenting is to nurture a baby to the point of being able to survive entirely on their own, spanking is antithetical and could not be described as working.

 

 

I said, "If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option."

 

All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

 

 

 

I think rape is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond she could have had with her attacker and made her feel like shit. It did work though, he got the pussy. Ignoring the fact that it can work I think damages your credibility when arguing the point with rapists.....

 

 

If a man just wants the pussy, then rape is a viable option. All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

[RyanT]

Ok, hot topic, I get it.

 

There is a reason taskmasters used whips and sticks, not negotiation, to get slaves working. Violence causes people to do what you want. This is all I'm saying.

 

Try to be a little more objective?

 

 

 

If a man just wants the pussy, then rape is a viable option. All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

 

and there's a reason slavery is such a grossly inefficient system....

 

African Americans are the group people usually (but quite erroneously) associate with slavery, 

they're also today a community where beating kids is most prevalent

 

so all the stereotypes about them are of an hard working, industrious people?  

 

Now, If a man just wants the pussy, and rape is a viable option....where does virtue and morality come into it?

 

You might as well go try reason with a crocodile or other predator?

 

So perhaps you're original post that 'it an impossible argument' to have with these people, is quite valid,

 

In which case don't have it with them but the decent element in society, to convince them of the need to ostracize these cretins, they'd soon get the message that way....  

[Brentb]

Looks like somebody pooped in the punch bowl.

 

Wilton said that spanking works. Which raises the question: "To what end does spanking work?"

 

Parents can avoid reason, thinking, and communicating by spanking their kids. That is a big positive for stupid people. Sure, the costs far outweigh the benefits in the long run, but most people don't think about the long term and stupid people definitely don't.

 

If spanking were all cost and no benefit, then it wouldn't occur.

[JamesP]

For something to be considered as having "worked," the end results must be positive and beneficial. The short term results of "obedient, well-mannered, and easily controlled" are grossly outweighed by the lack of empathy as an adult:

 

Ok, hot topic, I get it.

 

There is a reason taskmasters used whips and sticks, not negotiation, to get slaves working. Violence causes people to do what you want. This is all I'm saying.

 

Try to be a little more objective?

 

 

 

 

I said, "If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option."

 

All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

 

 

 

 

If a man just wants the pussy, then rape is a viable option. All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

[Brentb]

For something to be considered as having "worked," the end results must be positive and beneficial. The short term results of "obedient, well-mannered, and easily controlled" are grossly outweighed by the lack of empathy as an adult:

 

I don't agree. "Work" is a morally neutral term. If you drop a bomb on a city and it blows up, it's considered to have worked. If you drop a bomb and it doesn't blow up, then it would be said that it didn't work.

 

I think you're assuming benevolent intentions on the part of the aggressors. 

[endostate]

Perhaps applied to a wife instead of a child will expand understanding:

The problem with any kind of argument against wife beating, is that wife beating works. If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled wife, physical discipline is a viable option. It has empirical results that people can see right away. That, along with the religious element in this case, makes it an impossible argument.

 

Just speaking from my own experience, wife beating worked for my husband. I have 3 bff's all close in age, we were beat. The method my husband used was to provide a warning first, if the 'bad behaviour' continued I would be told how many belts I was getting and sent to the bedroom. After 5 minutes, my husband would come in and dish out the pain, I was allowed out once I had stopped crying. The 5 minute delay was for psychological torment and also to ensure the belting wasn't done in anger.This method 'worked' in that we were very obedient wives. I recall my husband always getting compliments on how well behaved I was. There was never any physical conflict between me and my bff's which I've since learned is extraordinary for a group of 4 bff's.I think wife beating is stone evil, don't get me wrong, it killed any potential bond I could have had with my husband and crushed my spirit as a wife. It did work though. Ignoring the fact that it can work if done in a consistent and controlled manner I think damages your credibility when arguing the point with wife beaters.

 At one time a non violent marriage may have been an impossible argument, what about nowadays?I don't think ignoring the 'fact' that assault can work if done in a 'consistent and controlled manner' damages your credibility when arguing the point with assaulters.

[MMX2010]

 

 

I think you're assuming benevolent intentions on the part of the aggressors. 

 

I think JamesP's assumption of benevolent intentions is warranted, because spanking is always justified using moral terms. 

 

No spanking parent says, "I spank my kid to shut him up, and it works."  They instead say, "I spank my kid to turn him into a disciplined, responsible adult." 

[JamesP]

Who are these nameless people with whom credibility is lacking? Are there any examples? Any actual arguments?

 

Is a lack of credibility in their eyes something that matters?

[dsayers]

I said, "If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option."

 

All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

 

Absolutely. 100%. Obedience denotes choice while coercion removes choice. Manners involve the consideration of others while consequence avoidance considers only the self. Finally, nothing could be described as easily controlled if it first requires violence and second requires increasing amounts of violence.

 

Not to mention all three of your claims beg the question by presuming the value of obedience, manners, and control-ability.

[Brentb]

I think JamesP's assumption of benevolent intentions is warranted, because spanking is always justified using moral terms. 

 

No spanking parent says, "I spank my kid to shut him up, and it works."  They instead say, "I spank my kid to turn him into a disciplined, responsible adult." 

 

(The reasons for actions that people tell themselves and others) != (The reasons for peoples' actions)

[Wiltin]

Who are these nameless people with whom credibility is lacking? Are there any examples? Any actual arguments?

 

Is a lack of credibility in their eyes something that matters?

 

The woman in the video above would be an example, my parents would be another. If you were to tell her that spanking doesn't work, you'd lose credibility with her. She knows it works and she describes how it works for her in the video. You can make a moral argument, you can talk about long term harm, you can provide evidence from various fields of research on spanking, but you can't say it doesn't work whatsoever.

 

Absolutely. 100%. Obedience denotes choice while coercion removes choice. Manners involve the consideration of others while consequence avoidance considers only the self. Finally, nothing could be described as easily controlled if it first requires violence and second requires increasing amounts of violence.

 

Not to mention all three of your claims beg the question by presuming the value of obedience, manners, and control-ability.

 

o·bey  [oh-bey] 

verb (used with object)

1.

to comply with or follow the commands, restrictions, wishes, or instructions of

 

Spanking can be used to make a child comply with or follow the commands, restrictions, wishes or instructions of a parent. Coercion or not, it works, obedience is precisely the right word.

 

"Finally, nothing could be described as easily controlled if it first requires violence and second requires increasing amounts of violence."

 

What is easier than violence? What does history teach us? How do social animals resolve their disputes? Violence requires no wit, no conversation, no patience, no virtue, its the easiest method BAR NONE.

 

There is an unpleasant reality about violence that I think a lot of you are ignoring, and you're down-voting me for pointing it out. I'm not endorsing spanking, I'm not suggesting it has any benefit to the victim. Spanking wouldn't be so heavily ingrained in culture if it didn't provide some benefit to those practicing it. Please stop demonizing me.

[JamesP]

I'm not concerned with having credibility with people who assault children.

[Wiltin]

I'm not concerned with having credibility with people who assault children.

 

How do you hope to change their minds?

[dsayers]

Spanking can be used to make a child comply with or follow the commands, restrictions, wishes or instructions of a parent.

 

While mechanically identical, what you're seeing is not compliance.

 

What is easier than violence? What does history teach us? How do social animals resolve their disputes?

 

How not humans interact has little bearing on how humans interact. Violence is only easy for psychopaths. Without reason, they're not different from the beasts you reference. Even still, if you can develop trust, confidence, rationale, etc, you will achieve the desired results with little to no further input. Compared to constantly trying to manage another human being, it is almost infinitely more easy.

[MysterionMuffles]

let's go on a thumbs downing spree....

and post the hell out of the Facts About Spanking on the comments section.

 

Nah just kidding. I dunno what good that'll do. The fact that she said "let me read the scriptures that taught us--" EWW fuck off with that shit! 

 

ACTUALLY it was already bad that she talked about COMPLIMENTS given to her daughter about her well mannered behaviour instead of talking about her personal bond. TOTALLY AND UTTERLY DISGUSTING! at this moment I am okay with the fact that my internet sucks and won't let me watch further than the scriptures comment. I could already feel rage boiling within me based on how brain dead this woman was speaking. She was hot the first second I saw her then she got uglier and uglier the stupider and stupider she spoke.

[cynicist]

I said, "If your only objective is to have an obedient, well mannered and easily controlled child, physical discipline is a viable option."

 

All other considerations aside, do you disagree?

 

Yeah I think it comes down to how you define work/success. If your goal is immediate compliance it will work but outside of that I'd have to disagree with you. Just look at the stereotypical example of a rebellious teenager. Even as a child, recurrence is common as James pointed out above. If what you said were true, (that it caused you to be well mannered and obedient) then you would never be spanked more than once for each rule you broke, since the spanking should have 'corrected' the behavior. You could even argue that you should never have been spanked more than once, since if breaking one of your parent's rules caused the spanking then you should have learned quickly afterwards what the consequences would be if you did it again.

 

So given that parents spank their children on average somewhere around 18 times a week, they can't use the justification that they are teaching their children obedience since the evidence demonstrates the contrary.

[corpus mentium]

I started watching this video yesterday and only made it about 30 seconds in before I started reacting to it and had to shut it off. I had a pretty good idea where it was going to go. After watching it today I found that my initial assumption was correct: All-u-can-eat cliché pro-spanking parroting. I plan to draft a response to the video after I calm down a bit. The combination of happy-clappy Christianity, spanking, and refusal to negotiate with her children was just too much for me to bear. 

 

I am curious about others' perceptions and reactions to this video (and the family) in addition to what has already been discussed in this thread. Has anyone here made a triage assessment? Do you think they are beyond hope? Has anyone responded in the comments at all? 

 

If there is even a shred of hope in getting this woman (or some of her subscribers) to think about the damage being done, I don't think it would be beneficial to charge in pissed off, guns a blazin'. Considering the large number of subscribers she has, some of them may be receptive to information on peaceful parenting so long as the presentation method doesn't set off their counterwill. 

[MMX2010]

How do you hope to change their minds?

 

People don't change their minds because they perceive "credibility" to exist in someone else. 

 

They change their minds either: (1, in rare cases) because the counter-arguments are more rational or (2, in much more frequent cases) because they know they'll be made fun of / suffer status loss for retaining their current positions. 

[DanielR]

This comment was left by the original video poster in reply to a user questioning her:

 

Sam and Nia

 

2 days ago

 

 

Thank you for sharing your opinion. I do not "hit" my children. I give warnings, I take the time to explain and ask questions, and I follow up with hugs, kisses, and I love you's. Symphony does not get spanked often....i would say maybe 1-2 times a week, and some weeks she doesn't get any. We utilize time out, grounding her from other toys, etc...but we do not shy away from spanking her if her behavior is deserving of it. She is a well behaved girl...she also knows when its coming...i don't surprise her with it as you mentioned your sister and the wooden spoon. I tell her "if you do that again, I will have to get my paddle"..sometimes she obeys, sometimes not. It's all a matter of what works for each household. What's REALLY important is that we are raising our kids for the Lord. I'm proud of that, and proud of my girl! God bless you, thanks for sharing your experiences and questions.

 

I emphasized the part in bold to show that she knows what she needs to say to confuse people into appearing reasonable. She specifically said in the video that she does NOT negotiate or try to listen to any explanation the child might have. This was the most infuriating thing to me because it demonstrates the extent of her self indulgence. She has no problem contradicting herself and expects people to be fine with it. She is so self indulgent that she just expects people to agree with her because she's cute, she smiles and acts confidently, and she speaks in pleasantries and cutesy phrasing.

 

I'm really starting to almost categorically assume that people have significant dysfunction and potential for harm the more physically attractive they are. By the way these people actually have a video titled "Good Looking Parents Sing Disney's Frozen that has over 13 million views

 

[RyanT]

Yeah, that video actually got me thinking the other night,They roll out all these platitudes like 'we never spank in anger'Or how they 'explain' it to her as if this mitigates it,But in many ways that's got to make the experience all the more harmfulto the child?

[Fast and steady]

"now that she's a little older, she'll try to reason with us, 'but I did this because...' or blah blah blah. There's no negotiating..." @ ~4:56

 

Oh. My. God.

 

Have a little fucking empathy!

[MysterionMuffles]

Give up. These are brain dead Christians who are in such denial of their true anger so it comes out in passive ways in their dishonest way of speaking, and their true frustrations get unloaded on their daughter. Anybody think we should tell them about the Facts About Spanking? Or do you think they are too brain dead to consider any new information? They seem too...fake happy.

[RyanT]

You nailed it Jamz,Maybe if they were atheists and didn't have the whole sex guilt complex they'd use that paddle on eachother instead?....everyone's happier, especially their poor little daughter.Quite tempted to post that in the comments section for what good it would do.Seriously though I think it's quite worthwhile that people who want to, leave comments,Of course it won't change her tiny mind, but at least to show others there's opposition?

[corpus mentium]

I guess commenting on that particular video is no longer in the LORD's plan... It has been made private. I wonder what His message is. Praisefully, He hasn't led them to close their general discussion page. The target audience may be a bit smaller, but there is still a place available to those who wish to leave these parents a public comment. Be sure to exercise caution. You never know if there could be smite mines or something.

 

 

On a more serious note:

 

Give up. These are brain dead Christians who are in such denial of their true anger so it comes out in passive ways in their dishonest way of speaking, and their true frustrations get unloaded on their daughter. Anybody think we should tell them about the Facts About Spanking? Or do you think they are too brain dead to consider any new information? They seem too...fake happy.

 

 

As a former super-duper happy-clappy, praise-band performing, severely pro-spanking Christian who could have very easily once fit your criteria for being brain dead, I have to respectfully disagree with you about giving up. While it may be the case that this family is beyond any hope of reasonable discourse and change, I still have to ask: How can you know that for sure? How do you know that presenting the information today won't have an effect on them later, or that it won't cause someone else in the comments section to finally change their mind and ways? 

 

Now that they have taken the video down, I wonder what their reasons were for doing so. Have they received a strong enough backlash from the the small percentage of anti-spanking advocates that they are thinking about it now more seriously? Maybe someone shared something like this with her.

 

It could very well be that if this family changes at all, it could come around a little too late for their children (as appears to have been the case for Robbyn Peters Bennett in this TEDx video), and that would be a tragic situation. But what if, like Robbyn, they end up becoming anti-spanking advocates? With the number of subscribers that they have, isn't it worth the long shot?

 

Are we not in the early stages of effecting a change in the general public to more peaceful styles of parenting? Is it not to be expected that we would encounter a very high percentage of resistance or outright dismissal? If such resistance and dismissal is reason enough to just give up, then what hope is there of achieving a society that doesn't assault children?

 

It is true that I may be an exception to a general rule, but exceptions to the rule are the best we can hope for at the moment, aren't they?

[MysterionMuffles]

Nah I'm sick and tired of online debates. It's not my place to change the minds of Keyboard Warriors. The only way to win that war is to not fight it. The best we can do is share the content that resonates with us with the people in our lives and see who is open to new ideas or at least curious. I am not prepared to get a ton of religious backlash for speaking my mind. I'm not gonna recreate my Catholic school upbringing for the sake of internet self righteousness.

As a former super-duper happy-clappy, praise-band performing, severely pro-spanking Christian who could have very easily once fit your criteria for being brain dead, I have to respectfully disagree with you about giving up. While it may be the case that this family is beyond any hope of reasonable discourse and change, I still have to ask: How can you know that for sure? How do you know that presenting the information today won't have an effect on them later, or that it won't cause someone else in the comments section to finally change their mind and ways? 

 

If you wanna give it a shot, I can't stop you. I've felt similar feelings as you corpus. I was once a pro-violence, rudeness, close my heart before I let anyone kind of douchebag for most of my life--then I processed my history. Who I am today is vastly different from who I was a decade ago and I know that feeling of "if I can change, so can others." But you got to consider the unique thought patterns that allowed you to change in the first place and what influenced you to change. In my experience, it has never been the persuasion of internet strangers. The most I've ever gotten was someone on Xboxlive bragging to me about the Brony fandom and how great My Little Pony is. That was the one and only time I considered somebody's ridiculousness online and it changed my life forever lol. However, for things as fundamental parenting practices, you already know how abusive parents are. They shut down and say "don't tell me how to raise my kid" because their defenses will rise right up after any hint of criticism.

Whatever their reasons for taking down the video, unless they make another one saying that they've decided against spanking with a paddle, then to me they are brain dead. It's not that the resistance and dismissal is what is causing me to give up, rather the frustration of trying to change other people. Lord knows I'm nowhere close to completely living my values and I'd much rather focus on me for now. Maybe there are more self knowledgable people out there who CAN handle ongoing online debates and be effective because they don't get emotional from it. But I do. After a run in with a troll who comes here often under a new username, I've decided to completely stop trying to argue with online strangers.

[MMX2010]

 

As a former super-duper happy-clappy, praise-band performing, severely pro-spanking Christian who could have very easily once fit your criteria for being brain dead, I have to respectfully disagree with you about giving up.

 

What were the three factors that you think most strongly produced your change-of-mind?