Sal9000 Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 In a call in show Stef responds to a listener question (http://www.fdrpodcasts.com/#/2897/hogwarts-wizards-of-human-manipulation-wednesday-call-in-show-january-28th-2015 around 1:25 in) on the effects of laws that prohibit attacking your kids physically. He presented a theory that the state did not need any more aggresive people since the need for soldiers shrank. However, upon reading on the topic I found that these laws were instituted by Sweden and Finland in the late 70s / early 80s, other Western European countries instituted them much later (late 80s to late 90s) if at all (UK or France). Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_in_the_home#Table_notesDoesn't this invalidate both the listener's question and Stef's answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuzzums Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 If an action is frowned upon by society then it's only a matter of time until it's gonna be passed as a law. Few people know the laws, I myself have no idea if it's legal or not in my country to hit kids but people don't (or at the very least avoid) to "discipline" their children in public spaces. Furthermore, a law against jaywalking does not mean there's no more jaywalking. A country's laws aren't always reflective of its people, thus it's hard to determine exactly when people stopped abusing their kids in those countries only by looking at the legislature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts