How do you equate what animals do with what humans do. We have a choice and I think not acting like an animal, who doesn't have a time out corner or an i-pod that can be taken away, is something we should strive for. Is it really that hard not to hit your kid? I think its just easy, so its where a lot of people go.
Dogs have different cognitive processes than humans and since there's no way we can expect them to adapt to ours, we have to learn to use theirs. One of the things I do with some of our dogs is ritual dominance behavior and it works perfectly. I roll one over on her back and bite her throat, just like another dog would do to show who's boss. You don't have to bite hard because it's just a ritual, and dogs have incredibly muscular necks so it would be pretty hard to hurt one that way by accident. You don't have to bite necks, but one way or another you simply have to establish yourself as the alpha of your pack. A lot of people are too wimpy to do that, and then they wonder why their dogs run the household. Duh. If you set yourself up as the beta, you have to accept whoever takes the alpha role. I've had two dogs who made it a little household tradition. When I get home from work my female jumps up on the bed, stands on her hind legs and bends her neck way back, offering it to me. She won't stop until I give it a little nibble and then she is just so happy. "Oh my poppa still loves me, my poppa still loves me!" Of course you have to be careful that you don't have a large dog who's a one-percenter with the alpha trait. He could wrestle his way out of it and bite you back. And he doesn't understand that your skin is much more delicate than his. I was bitten on the face by our Lhasa Apso stud once (Lhasas are unusual in that they're almost all alphas) and boy was that an embarrassing pattern of strange bruises to explain. Still, he carefully stopped short of drawing blood. Dogs have a remarkable ability to learn and adapt to the quirks of human behavior, but still it's better to use dog moves on them rather than human moves because they will be better understood. A fairly light slap on the butt simulates the feeling of when their moms nip at them to bring them in line. Actually hitting a dog is not a good idea because that's not an experience they're programmed to understand. Of course they'll learn but geeze can't you think of some nicer way to exploit their learning ability? Monkeys and apes can hit each other and would probably understand the gesture instinctively, but dogs don't have fists. As I have expounded on at great length many times, the history of civilization has been a 12,000-year exercise in learning to overcome things that come naturally to us. We're genetically programmed with the same pack-social instinct that dogs and chimpanzees have: to regard anyone outside the pack as an enemy, a competitor for scarce resources. We teach our children from birth not to behave that way. So we can also teach them to be a little more gentle in their ritual combat than their Stone Age ancestors were. I don't know what country you live in, but in mine we have the principle of "due process" written into our Constitution. In order to get somebody locked up: 1) Their transgression must be thoroughly investigated by people who have no emotional involvement in it. 2) An experienced official has to be convinced that there's enough evidence to charge them with a crime. 3) They get to confront their accusers and present their side of the story. 4) You have to convince twelve people who also have no emotional involvement in the case that they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's due process. Locking somebody up in your basement because you're pissed off at him is Stone Age behavior. Yes, a fair number of people get away with crimes this way. But a whole lot more people don't have to walk around worrying that every asshole they ever pissed off is going to sneak up behind them, kidnap them, and lock them in his basement. This is the first rule of civilization. We have to live in harmony and cooperation, even with people we don't like, and we have to follow the rules for problem resolution. Otherwise all of us would have to dissipate a significant portion of our time, energy and other resources on simply protecting ourselves from each other, and civilization would grind to a halt. Because the Sexual Revolution isn't quite over yet. We still have twelve thousand years of culture telling us that girls have to be treated differently (and behave differently too). If a woman hits a man and the man hits her back in self defense, I'd bet on 2:1 odds that it's the man who will spend the night in jail. And we have to be grateful for slow change, since the odds used to be 100%.
I can equate what animals do with what humans do because humans are animals. I was actually refering to your objections about hildren play-fighting when I used the animal example. Obviously, raising kids is much different, since animals face a lot more danger on a regular basis. What I don't understand in this thread is the idea that hitting in and of itself is wrong. I hit my 3-year-old brother all the time and he loves it. wrestling and punching and kneeing is his favorite game to play. I even let him and his little friends play with the boxing gloves when they want to. He's a boy, and he's going to be growing up poor(unless something changes drasticsally), so he needs to get used to taking a hit or else he'll be picked on a lot more than he would otherwise. However, he knows better than to hit someone he doesn't know wthout any reason, and I've never seen him do so. He knows also to take it easy on people weaker than him. Reagarding hitting as a punishment, I have three little step-brothers who are about as bad as kids get;they've been through all those behavioural programs around here to no avail. And yet when I watch them they listen to me perfectly because they know I don't play. They harbor no angst toward me, and in fact they've taken on some of my habits like reading and exercising. I have another brother just a few years younger than I amWhen he gets angry, he breaks shit and hits people. The boy is larger and heavier than I am. What would you suggest my 85lb. mother do when he hits her? Because what she does do is she hits him right back. As far as my four sisters, the only one who I've ever had any problems controlling is the oldest, and I don't feel comfortable telling someone damn near my age what to do anyway. I would never argue that spanking should be sed as a primary means of punishment, but when you have kids that you literally have to hold down in order to make them stand in the corner, some degree of physical force is needed, or else you'll have kids out doing whatever they want whenever they want. There's a huge difference between discipline and abuse, anyone with half a brain can distinguish between the two. When I was younger, I watche other kids aswell as myself be hit with nailly boards or tied to furniture and told to get themselves loose, and lots of other things. Obviously, this is not discipline, it's sadism. Smacking a child for putting a hole in your wall is not sadistic.
If I got 14 people with no emotional interest in your freedom or imprisonment and All 15 of use found your imprisonment to be in the best interest of society and locked you in my basement, I would still go to jail. The only reason is because none of us are qualified to do those things you've mentioned, and that is a double standard in asmuch as a parent hitting their children for misbehavious and a child not being allowed to hit another child is a double standard. If I have medical saavy and pretend to be a doctor, I could go to jail.The only difference between me and an actual doctor would be that I didn't go through the process one must go through to practice as a doctor. Therefore, following the same logic from the post that I quoted in the post that you quoted, it's a double standard that people who go to college and get all their apprentice time in are allowed to be doctors and some bum off of the street isn't.
I have often wondered whether it's not beneficial for a child to be hit physically a few times in his life. I don't think it's healthy to grow up believing that no matter how big an asshole you are and how bad you treat people, you can never make anybody angry enough to hit you. I really don't think that's a good lesson. I was spanked or slapped about five times that I can remember, and in each case I was being truly awful. I don't think that was bad parenting. What really pissed me off was a couple of teachers in junior high who paddled me on trumped-up excuses when their real gripe was that I was smarter than they were. This one idiot was trying to diagram a sentence and he couldn't get it half right so I pointed out his error. He never forgave me. I learned at a very young age to have absolutely no respect for authority figures, and so far nothing has happened to change my mind.
Fraggle: Which is rather ironic, given that you're an authority figure on this forum! bucky: A classic example of assault.
Parents need not be concerned. Other kids will teach them this. What you don't want to teach them is that reason and authority can be lazily replaced by violence.
WTH??? I would hope she would! That is beyond disrespectful. I used to get pretty mad at my mom, but I wouldn't have even thought about calling her such names. :bugeye: How old were you? What did she do that you felt she deserved being called that?
Classic example of assault? What do you think his mom should have done after he called her a Cunt? :bugeye:
Kids need to be disciplined. Imagine a child calling their parent a cunt. My brother has called my mom worse things than that, and she spanked him, as she should have. If kids dont learn respect, they'll never get anywhere.
Fuck the UN. They have no right to criminalize spanking worldwide. I don't have kids, but when I do, they're getting an ass-whooping if they step out of line. I treat my siblings the same way, because my parents have gone soft over the years. I was raised "by the belt", which is why I'm a respectful and principled person. My childhood has made me a disciplinary. Kadark
Words are words. It is utterly wrong to teach children that the way to respond to language is with physical violence. That's exactly how conflicts escalate and it's exactly what the human race has to stop doing before we can finally rise up out of our Stone Age heritage. Isn't that exactly what the Muslimentalists are doing that we all regard as barbaric? Somebody writes a book that they find offensive, and rather than arguing about it vehemently they race out into the streets and start killing people. Isn't this how bar fights start? "He called my mom white trash!" Do you really want to live in a world that runs this way? That's what you'll get by teaching this behavior to your children. If your child confronts you with language, respond with language. That's what civilized people do. Hmm. Perhaps I am. But everyone feels free to jump in and correct me when I'm wrong and I always do my best to be gracious about it. I don't sneak around looking for excuses to ban people who have criticized me. My junior high school teachers were unable to be so civilized about it, they resorted to paddling. People do have the right to define what is excessive violence within their own communities and even households. Some families just play rough, pounding each other on the shoulder, wrestling, etc. They may define slapping as occasionally okay, which after all is a ritual in many cultures. But this was clearly beyond that. You should not use your advantage of being much larger to wreak violence on a kid, particularly if his only transgression was language, unless you're foolishly trying to prove that the sword really is mightier than the pen. As I said, I knew a guy who bode his time until he was bigger than his father and then paid him back for all the times he was pounded. "Resolve all conflicts at the lowest level possible" is one of the principles of civilization. That means: do it with language, not physical force. Nonetheless, I still stand by my premise that children need to learn that it is possible to make someone so angry that they'll get irrational and hit them. You just don't want to teach them that more than a couple of times in their entire childhood. If you get that angry all the time then you need anger management. But as a man who makes a living by using words, I find it bizarre that people will escalate a verbal conflict to violence. I think they need to go back to school and master their own language. This sounds like something a drooling feeb like George Bush would do because he can't express himself clearly.
i was in my mid teens and im sure she was having her period and yeah she was relly being a ....c word. just as i would expect she smacked me good. as would a girl friend or wife. and i would deserve it. sometimes the mouth gets in the way of the brain. so if violent agression is bad... is there ever a place for it? i mean play fighting amoung boys... would that not be a good thing? its teaching them to defend each other, building strength and pain tollerances. it is hard to ague thousands of years of evolution. thousands of years of parent rearing techniques. should somethings be reinvented? could there be drawbacks in changing what natural selection has decided is best. really. if we see apes do it and man has also throughout his past.... im sure that if it was not done and it was best then those offspring would have a better chance at survival and therefore a better chance at reproducing and thousand of years ago homo sapiens would have stopped spanking. and we wouldnt be having this discussion.
brilliant parenting. see you are not following natures laws... you could more than likely create less than desirable offspring. so i would suggest that your lineage is short lived. child abuse is wrong.
It's one thing to argue that spanking has its merits, I see that as a reasonable position. It's another thing to argue that it is a "right," as in, "somethings parents can do that the state does not or should not have the power to regulate." You might as well posit that there's a right to eat cheeseburgers. Cheeseburgers are good and have their place too, but the rights protected from state intrusion tend to be more fundamental than that. In the U.S., the federal government may not have the power to regulate or ban spanking, but individual State power is more plenary.
Come on, give it up. You put a pin on his chair, didn't you? :mufc: It's interesting that would have had such a long lasting effect. But, it would appear to be the most likely result from paddling. More of a bruised ego than a bruised bottom?
