Smack my kids up?Follow

I guess I and all of my friends must have been crazy genius children or something, because I certainly never felt that way, and I can tell you my friends didn't either. If I was punished I knew damn sure that it was because I had crossed the line. I don't think spanking should be a first path, but you're assertion that kids can't tell the difference is completely untrue.

Now unpredictable hitting without knowing why, sure.

Whether or not I would smack anyone in either of those situations is hardly the final answer to whether or not it's ever appropriate.

This is really one of those debates where the two sides aren't evenly matched. Not because one lacks evidence, truth, or whatever but because there isn't really a "You must spank!" side. Rather, one side says "Hey, do it either way (within reason). Cool by me." and the other side is filled with righteous fury that their way is the only way and anyone disagreeing is wrong! The second side is vested in making the first side see things exactly as they do (no spanking allowed!) whereas the first side thinks it's totally okay for the second side to not spank anyone.

There's really no way for the first side to win that fight because they'll stop caring about it long before the second side will give up the fight. They just don't have as much emotion invested in it.

Hey.

I'm not 'righteously furious'.

I'm expressing my beliefs and questioning the beliefs of others.

I knew when i initiated this thread that I would be in the minority. The belief that using physical violence against children is endemic around the world and it would seem the US where most of you live is no different.

I think its wrong, always , and I've come to that conclusion because I have seen how it is possible to raise children spectacularly well without violence, and have come to believe that it is essential to not use violence. Using violence against children teaches a them to believe that violence is OK. That violence is normal. That violence = love.

None of those things are correct and none of those things are conducive to happy peaceful societies.

Perhaps the perpetual passing on of violence as a useful 'tool' to be used from one generation to the next is one of the reasons that our world is such a violent place to live. the early normalisation of violence in our children is what allows us to see violent acts committed against others by our governments for example, as being done in the greater good.

I don't know for sure, but I do know that I will NEVER hit my child.

Maybe my trying to have a meaningful debate about violence and its uses against children in particular, and people in general was doomed to failure from the get go on a US based board.

After all America has not been famous for its reluctance in the dispensing of violence as a 'solution' to its problems, either socially, nationally or internationally.

I wonder if there's any connection?

Peace

I think the main difference is in the absolute nature of rejecting all violence. Most people here think that the level of violence matters as much as whether there is violence or not. And I think you and them disagree on the fact that a kid can make this distinction himself.

On this particular point, I agree. I was "smacked" once in my whole life, a short slap on the *** from my mum, in the middle of the street. I remember it, but no more than other times when I did bad things and got told off. I think psychologically, I was more scarred by her coming home late from work at night than I was by this slap. So while mild "violence" might have a damaging effect, everything that happens to a child has an effect. I don't think mild violence necessarily has more of an effect than a lot of other things. Not saying it's "good", just that it happening on some very rare occasions is not necessarily that bad in the grand scheme of things.



Not if violence is used in exceptional circumstances. Doesn't it then teach them that proportional violence is sometimes the least worst solution in some exceptional circumstances? Cos that's a good lesson too, especially if explained properly.



No, probably not.



How was it doomed? You had a debate about violence. I'd say mission accomplished. You put your point of view forward, they put theirs, and you disagree. That's a debate. If you all agree on each point, it's not a debate. It's a mental orgy.



Meh, not much more so that most of the world. All the debate you had here could easily have been had on a French/German/Indian/Chinese message board.

Also, if it's any comfort, I'm pretty sure Smash agrees with you. And, when you take away all the frivolities, isn't that all that really matters?

Its true. thanx Frenchy!

Its been quite a good exercise for me. A few hours of productive thinking and clarifying in my own mind, what it is i actually believe when it comes to a very emotive subject.

And as you say, if I'm on the same side of an arguement as Smash (to be confirmed) then its been a damn good day.

I really like how you put that.

You know I got called 'Captain Obvious' once. I now pass my captaincy to you.

We're not having an argument sunshine. If you're going to criticize someone for a flippant comment, ensure your own house is in order first.