In a bad mood? come here and rant till you feel better

[Shearaha]

Taliah

Strega Mama

Shearaha

What I was doing was comparing the gun to the spanking. I put a child in time out, letting them know that if the behavior continues they will get spanked. See the comparison now.

spanking a child is abuse. point blank. i dont care if it's culturally acceptable, it is abuse.

No. There's a line between a spanking and child abuse. Eventually when I have children, if primary disciplinary measures do not get the kid to behave, a spanking is in order. A spanking does not automatically mean I am inflicting pain because I want to, or that I will use full force - not in the slightest. But that child will understand they cannot get away with the inappropriate behavior, and if they push it then I will spank them. It's a last resort, because I will work hard to have primary discipline be emphasized and understood, and not just spank the kid stupid because I won't take the time to explain right and wrong.

Thank you.
I can count on 1 hand the number of times I was spanked and believe me I deserved them. The one in particular, I stole a toy from the house of a friend of my parents. When they found out I got spanked and then had to take the stolen item and tell the owners that I took it, and ask for forgiveness. I never took anything that belonged to someone else without asking again.
Not because I didn't want to be spanked, but because I didn't want to go through the embarrassment again.

Other then the above I don't want to get into the spanking discussion. I think that it is a disciplinary tool, that when used wisely can aid in teaching children right from wrong. It should not be the first punishment and should only be used sparingly and only on children who are old enough to connect the spanking to what they did wrong.

Esris. I will never treat my children like my mother treated me.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

Thank you.
I can count on 1 hand the number of times I was spanked and believe me I deserved them.

Being taught that you deserve physical violence in your life doesn't mean it's true.

Quote:

The one in particular, I stole a toy from the house of a friend of my parents. When they found out I got spanked and then had to take the stolen item and tell the owners that I took it, and ask for forgiveness. I never took anything that belonged to someone else without asking again.

Because the threat of pain is a strong motivator. In my first marriage, I was afraid of pain too. If it really wasn't about the pain, only the embarrassment- it pretty much proves that the violence was completely unnecessary. They hit you for no reason.

Quote:

Other then the above I don't want to get into the spanking discussion. I think that it is a disciplinary tool, that when used wisely can aid in teaching children right from wrong.

All it teaches is "be afraid of making other people mad- they'll hurt you." That's not right from wrong, that's "might makes right".

Quote:

Esris. I will never treat my children like my mother treated me.

Seems more like a matter of degrees than anything based on how you talk. I think it's all the same head space- teaching a child to be afraid of being hurt and controlling them through that fear.  

[Shearaha]

Esiris

Shearaha

Thank you.
I can count on 1 hand the number of times I was spanked and believe me I deserved them.

Being taught that you deserve physical violence in your life doesn't mean it's true.

I deserved to be punished.

Esiris

Shearaha

The one in particular, I stole a toy from the house of a friend of my parents. When they found out I got spanked and then had to take the stolen item and tell the owners that I took it, and ask for forgiveness. I never took anything that belonged to someone else without asking again.

Because the threat of pain is a strong motivator. In my first marriage, I was afraid of pain too. If it really wasn't about the pain, only the embarrassment- it pretty much proves that the violence was completely unnecessary. They hit you for no reason.

There are plenty of ways to cause pain without physically touching a person. I'm sorry for what your first husband did to you. But that doesn't change the fact that physical motivators do work and can be used without causing permanent harm.

Esiris

Shearaha

Other then the above I don't want to get into the spanking discussion. I think that it is a disciplinary tool, that when used wisely can aid in teaching children right from wrong.

All it teaches is "be afraid of making other people mad- they'll hurt you." That's not right from wrong, that's "might makes right".

No it's not. It's teaching that there are consequences to every action. If the rules are laid out, the child is aware of them and knows what the punishment is for disobedience and they still choose to misbehave they are choosing the consequences.
It's no different then the law system. The rules are there, individuals are made aware of them. If the individual chooses to break the law then they are choosing to deal with the consequences of their chosen actions.

Esiris

Shearaha

Esris. I will never treat my children like my mother treated me.

Seems more like a matter of degrees than anything based on how you talk. I think it's all the same head space- teaching a child to be afraid of being hurt and controlling them through that fear.

Again, not fear of being hurt. Learning to be mindful of the consequences of their actions. As a parent I would have to set up the rules and be capable of enforcing them. If the punishment for breaking the rules is known and they persist then I have to carry out the punishment. Otherwise the child never learns bounderies and never learns how to behave in social situations. They become the child that constantly disrupts class because they don't want to sit and listen to teacher. They become the teen that goes out and gets drunk and then drives because they don't think the rules apply to them.

The mollycoddling of the younger generation is creating a society where everyone thinks they get to do whatever they want because they're special. They were the apple of their parents eyes and could do no wrong. They never suffered any consequencce for their misbehavior, or at worst got a lecture that they had to sit through, not necessarily pay attention to. How is that better then raising a child to know that while they are special to their family, the rest of the world is not going to treat them that way. That they need to take responsibilty for their actions and that actions can and will have direct repercussions.

I don't like spanking and don't want to need to spank my children. But if time outs, having their toys taken away, or being sent to their rooms without dinner doesn't get that message across and they continue on the same misbehavior, then yes I will spank them. I would rather spank my child then allow them to disrespect their elders and run amok like a beast causing mischef and leaving distruction in their wake.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

I deserved to be punished.

Punishment doesn't have to be physically violent and emotionally damaging.

Quote:

There are plenty of ways to cause pain without physically touching a person. I'm sorry for what your first husband did to you. But that doesn't change the fact that physical motivators do work and can be used without causing permanent harm.

Permanent harm doesn't have to mean permanent physical damage. Emotional abuse and violence can leave scars that aren't on our skin.

Quote:

No it's not. It's teaching that there are consequences to every action. If the rules are laid out, the child is aware of them and knows what the punishment is for disobedience and they still choose to misbehave they are choosing the consequences.
It's no different then the law system. The rules are there, individuals are made aware of them. If the individual chooses to break the law then they are choosing to deal with the consequences of their chosen actions.

You do see the hypocrisy here?

First the argument is they can't understand so you have to hit them to get through to them, then the argument is that they can understand and are choosing to misbehave.

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too- either they don't understand in which case hitting them only teaches them fear, or they can understand and you don't need to hit them, only teach them.

Quote:

Again, not fear of being hurt. Learning to be mindful of the consequences of their actions.

If it's about being mindful, then you don't need pain as the consequence. Pain involves instinct more than mindfulness.

Quote:

As a parent I would have to set up the rules and be capable of enforcing them. If the punishment for breaking the rules is known and they persist then I have to carry out the punishment. Otherwise the child never learns bounderies and never learns how to behave in social situations. They become the child that constantly disrupts class because they don't want to sit and listen to teacher. They become the teen that goes out and gets drunk and then drives because they don't think the rules apply to them.

I have no problem with any of that, only the point where the recourse is to hit a kid so they're afraid to act up.

Quote:

The mollycoddling of the younger generation is creating a society where everyone thinks they get to do whatever they want because they're special.

I think if you look back, you'll see every generation says that- even the ones who used the "Spare the rod, spoil the child" approach.

I think that it isn't "mollycoddling", but crappy parenting. People are substituting hitting their kids for education. After all, teaching someone to fear you hurting them only takes a couple good smacks. Teaching them to have empathy means we'd actually have to sit down and talk to our kids like they're human beings.

Who has time for that?

Quote:

I don't like spanking and don't want to need to spank my children. But if time outs, having their toys taken away, or being sent to their rooms without dinner doesn't get that message across and they continue on the same misbehavior, then yes I will spank them.

No message about what they're actually supposed to be learning. No mention about education. Just "Bad! Punish!". It's no wonder they wouldn't learn. You're only reacting in those situations. There's no mindfulness.

Quote:

I would rather spank my child then allow them to disrespect their elders and run amok like a beast causing mischef and leaving distruction in their wake.

If you want to continue the cycle of violence, I can't stop you.  

[Shearaha]

I know the emotional scars that can be inflicted, I have plenty of them. And from what I know of you I'm sure you do too. In fact I'm sure everyone who uses this message board has some type of emotional scaring. My pain and my scars aren't much different from anyone elses, except that they are mine.

I would never hit a child who didn't understand that the spanking was in direct corelation to the misdeed.
Pain does teach though. How many times can you tell a child not to touch the stove it's hot and they will still touch it. After that they don't do it anymore.
Spanking is what happens after talking has failed. After toys, playtime and other fun things are taken away. Never a first action.

Your right about how ever generation views the next, but when sitting down and talking about things fails there needs to be a next step.

You are also assuming that I'm not going to tell my kids why they're being put in time out or having the things I provide for them taken away. It seems that you're taking what I say and missing things. I said get the message across. There's no message to get across if I don't tell them what they did wrong in the first place.  

[Taliah]

You seem to have a spanking be equal to a beating with yelling and cursing the child with your full force. That isn't a spanking, that's crossed the line.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

Pain does teach though. How many times can you tell a child not to touch the stove it's hot and they will still touch it. After that they don't do it anymore.

I know lots of children who never touched a hot stove.

I'm one of them.

Quote:

Spanking is what happens after talking has failed. After toys, playtime and other fun things are taken away. Never a first action.

It doesn't need to be an action at all. All spanking is is a violent lashing out. Pain teaches, but all it is teaching is "Mommy will hurt me!" That's not teaching as much as it's instinct and fear response. Psychological torment for a child who looks to parents to be protectors.

Quote:

Your right about how ever generation views the next, but when sitting down and talking about things fails there needs to be a next step.

Hitting a kid should never be that next step any more that hitting an adult should be.

Quote:

You are also assuming that I'm not going to tell my kids why they're being put in time out or having the things I provide for them taken away. It seems that you're taking what I say and missing things. I said get the message across. There's no message to get across if I don't tell them what they did wrong in the first place.

But for all your talk about consequences and how the real world works- bosses don't take away toys and send them to bed without dinner. There's nothing for the child to see as a consequence other than "Mommy hit me".  

[Shearaha]

Esiris

Shearaha

Pain does teach though. How many times can you tell a child not to touch the stove it's hot and they will still touch it. After that they don't do it anymore.

I know lots of children who never touched a hot stove.

I'm one of them.

I was. Took my brother 3 times before he figured it out.

Esiris

Shearaha

Spanking is what happens after talking has failed. After toys, playtime and other fun things are taken away. Never a first action.

It doesn't need to be an action at all. All spanking is is a violent lashing out. Pain teaches, but all it is teaching is "Mommy will hurt me!" That's not teaching as much as it's instinct and fear response. Psychological torment for a child who looks to parents to be protectors.

Quote:

Your right about how ever generation views the next, but when sitting down and talking about things fails there needs to be a next step.

Hitting a kid should never be that next step any more that hitting an adult should be.

Quote:

You are also assuming that I'm not going to tell my kids why they're being put in time out or having the things I provide for them taken away. It seems that you're taking what I say and missing things. I said get the message across. There's no message to get across if I don't tell them what they did wrong in the first place.

But for all your talk about consequences and how the real world works- bosses don't take away toys and send them to bed without dinner. There's nothing for the child to see as a consequence other than "Mommy hit me".

Your right. The consequence in the real world is that now you're fired. You don't have a job and you either need to find another one real quick, or loose your home or take a government subsidy until you can find a new one and still possibly loose your home.

You break a law in the real world and you get sent to prison. You break one bad enough you get to stay there until you die. Or you get to be like my cousin, who has been in and out more times then years I've been alive and is right back again for breaking parole.

I've hit other adults, usually they've hit me first. And every time I've hit another adult it's been in defence of myself or my home.
You can believe that if a burgler comes into my home, they aren't leaving without a few bruises. And that if someone tries to mug me, I'm going to throw the first punch.

Believe it or not sometimes violence is the right reaction.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

I was. Took my brother 3 times before he figured it out.

Seems to me like your parents failed you.

Quote:

Your right. The consequence in the real world is that now you're fired. You don't have a job and you either need to find another one real quick, or loose your home or take a government subsidy until you can find a new one and still possibly loose your home.

None of which means your boss gets to assault you. So why should you give your child an unrealistic consequence other than it's a short cut for not having to take the time to teach them?

Quote:

You break a law in the real world and you get sent to prison. You break one bad enough you get to stay there until you die. Or you get to be like my cousin, who has been in and out more times then years I've been alive and is right back again for breaking parole.

None of which justifies assault.

Quote:

I've hit other adults, usually they've hit me first.

If they hit you first, then they, like you, feel they were justified in hitting you. I'd ask what you did to deserve it- but that's misleading. You didn't deserve it any more than you child does.

Quote:

You can believe that if a burgler comes into my home, they aren't leaving without a few bruises. And that if someone tries to mug me, I'm going to throw the first punch.

Self defense isn't punishment. You're making a bad comparison to justify violence against a child.

Quote:

Believe it or not sometimes violence is the right reaction.

I think you're confusing what is right with what keeps someone alive. Self defense isn't abuse, but that doesn't justify hitting a child.

You haven't really addressed the fact that you've got a huge hole in your reasons though- if a child is capable of understanding them being hurt by their parents is a consequence, then they are capable of understanding another non-violent consequence. When someone is in pain, their ability to think gets turned off. You're not teaching them anything except "Be afraid of mommy! She'll hurt me!" Children understand aggression. They know what escalation looks like. They aren't thinking "Mommy's yelling because I am doing something wrong." They're thinking "Mommy will hit me if I don't stop! I don't want to be hurt! Mommy don't hurt me!" It isn't that you've taught them that what they were doing was bad, it was that they're avoiding pain. That's instinct, not reason.

Smacking someone around and controlling them through fear is easy- "Might Makes Right". But that's not teaching them right from wrong. If you want to hit your kids and teach them that being able to hurt someone means they have to do what their parent says, that's on you.  

[Shearaha]

Again. You are equating spanking with beating. They're different. A spanking is a single smak to the backside. A spanking is applied only after being warned that the next offence of the same type will result in a spanking. Simple as that.

Again spanking is what happens when the child ignores the non-violent consequences.
It's not "might makes right" it's "if you won't listen to reason I will apply force"  

[Esiris]

Taliah

You seem to have a spanking be equal to a beating with yelling and cursing the child with your full force. That isn't a spanking, that's crossed the line.

Shearaha

Again. You are equating spanking with beating. They're different. A spanking is a single smak to the backside. A spanking is applied only after being warned that the next offence of the same type will result in a spanking. Simple as that.

All of which undermines the sense of physical safety a parent is expected to provide for their child. I'm not confusing them- I'm just not minimizing the effects it has and the way it shapes their development. Like I said- if your answer is to hit a child when you don't get what you want, you'll teach them fear, but you won't teach them right from wrong.

Quote:

It's not "might makes right" it's "if you won't listen to reason I will apply force"

If you won't listen to reason I will apply force.
If you won't do what I tell you, I'll hurt you.
Might makes right- dressed up pretty so people can hurt others physically and sleep well at night- continuing the cycle of abuse.  

[Shearaha]

Esiris

Taliah

You seem to have a spanking be equal to a beating with yelling and cursing the child with your full force. That isn't a spanking, that's crossed the line.

Shearaha

Again. You are equating spanking with beating. They're different. A spanking is a single smak to the backside. A spanking is applied only after being warned that the next offence of the same type will result in a spanking. Simple as that.

All of which undermines the sense of physical safety a parent is expected to provide for their child. I'm not confusing them- I'm just not minimizing the effects it has and the way it shapes their development. Like I said- if your answer is to hit a child when you don't get what you want, you'll teach them fear, but you won't teach them right from wrong.

And I will provide that. I can tell that you've never had to hurt someone to keep them safe. Sometimes from themselves. I could go to my dad for anything, anything at all I still do. That doesn't change the fact that there were times that I didn't know what was best for me and had to be physically stopped from hurting myself. In the long run I think that the few spanking my father applied helped me keep from destroying myself when I might have otherwise.

Esiris

Shearaha

It's not "might makes right" it's "if you won't listen to reason I will apply force"

If you won't listen to reason I will apply force.
If you won't do what I tell you, I'll hurt you.
Might makes right- dressed up pretty so people can hurt others physically and sleep well at night- continuing the cycle of abuse.

There is still a difference. Reason is sitting down talking and letting the child know why you don't want them to do something. Reason means that they know why certian behaviors are expected, why those rules are in place.
Just telling someone to do something without telling them why is not reason.

Back to the stove example. If you just tell the child "don't touch that" their natural curiosity, if you have a curious child, will lead them to wonder why and then to touch the stove. If on the other hand you say "don't thouch that, it's very hot and you'll get hurt" they are less likely to touch it provided they already know what "hot" is, there is a big difference there. All my mother ever said was "don't touch that" is it any wonder why as a child I did? And my brother was just obstanate and would do the oppisite of whatever he was asked to do.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

And I will provide that. I can tell that you've never had to hurt someone to keep them safe. Sometimes from themselves. I could go to my dad for anything, anything at all I still do. That doesn't change the fact that there were times that I didn't know what was best for me and had to be physically stopped from hurting myself. In the long run I think that the few spanking my father applied helped me keep from destroying myself when I might have otherwise.

That's because I think there is always a better way, and I have yet to find a case where it wasn't true.

Quote:

There is still a difference. Reason is sitting down talking and letting the child know why you don't want them to do something. Reason means that they know why certian behaviors are expected, why those rules are in place.
Just telling someone to do something without telling them why is not reason.

But clearly if reason isn't working, there are other options besides violence. Like empathy. "Mommy has a headache, please stop banging on the pans" goes to *SPANK* isn't reasoning when you can build empathy- maybe verbal ques aren't doing the trick. Body language and other things could- but if you've already hit them, you've already lost the chance for them to learn. They won't learn the lesson, they just learn the violence.

Quote:

Back to the stove example. If you just tell the child "don't touch that" their natural curiosity, if you have a curious child, will lead them to wonder why and then to touch the stove. If on the other hand you say "don't thouch that, it's very hot and you'll get hurt" they are less likely to touch it provided they already know what "hot" is, there is a big difference there. All my mother ever said was "don't touch that" is it any wonder why as a child I did? And my brother was just obstanate and would do the oppisite of whatever he was asked to do.

It sounds like your mother, who you have already said was abusive, wasn't able to teach your bother very well. That doesn't mean he couldn't be taught. Children understand emotions and pain- you really don't have to remind them by hitting them.  

[Shearaha]

Esiris

Shearaha

And I will provide that. I can tell that you've never had to hurt someone to keep them safe. Sometimes from themselves. I could go to my dad for anything, anything at all I still do. That doesn't change the fact that there were times that I didn't know what was best for me and had to be physically stopped from hurting myself. In the long run I think that the few spanking my father applied helped me keep from destroying myself when I might have otherwise.

That's because I think there is always a better way, and I have yet to find a case where it wasn't true.

Quote:

There is still a difference. Reason is sitting down talking and letting the child know why you don't want them to do something. Reason means that they know why certian behaviors are expected, why those rules are in place.
Just telling someone to do something without telling them why is not reason.

But clearly if reason isn't working, there are other options besides violence. Like empathy. "Mommy has a headache, please stop banging on the pans" goes to *SPANK* isn't reasoning when you can build empathy- maybe verbal ques aren't doing the trick. Body language and other things could- but if you've already hit them, you've already lost the chance for them to learn. They won't learn the lesson, they just learn the violence.

Well, you are welcome to try that route. I would just take the pans away. It goes, "Stop banging on the pans, it's loud and it's giving mom a headach" banging continues. " I asked you to stop that because mom has a headach, since you didn't I'm taking them away" Mom takes away the pans and wooden spoons. Should they then continue to bang on other things, like cabnets and such it escilates to a time out. After time out if they continue it moves to having future fun taken away. If they then continue a single "last warning" before spanking.
There are other steps in there. But you still seem to think I'm going to go right to the spanking. I'm not. It's the diference between setting and enforcing bounderies and setting boundaries and then ignoring them.

Esiris

Shearaha

Back to the stove example. If you just tell the child "don't touch that" their natural curiosity, if you have a curious child, will lead them to wonder why and then to touch the stove. If on the other hand you say "don't thouch that, it's very hot and you'll get hurt" they are less likely to touch it provided they already know what "hot" is, there is a big difference there. All my mother ever said was "don't touch that" is it any wonder why as a child I did? And my brother was just obstanate and would do the oppisite of whatever he was asked to do.

It sounds like your mother, who you have already said was abusive, wasn't able to teach your bother very well. That doesn't mean he couldn't be taught. Children understand emotions and pain- you really don't have to remind them by hitting them.

My mother was, my father was a much better teacher and parent, but he kept himself away from us most of the time. He had a violently abusive father and didn't want to do the same to his childeren. He didn't, he left us with our emotionaly abusive mother and his mentally abusive mother. He did his best, and even when I was little if I could find him I knew I was safe there.
Note, my father is the one who applied every one of the spankings I recieved as a child.  

[Esiris]

Shearaha

Well, you are welcome to try that route. I would just take the pans away. It goes, "Stop banging on the pans, it's loud and it's giving mom a headach" banging continues. " I asked you to stop that because mom has a headach, since you didn't I'm taking them away" Mom takes away the pans and wooden spoons. Should they then continue to bang on other things, like cabnets and such it escilates to a time out. After time out if they continue it moves to having future fun taken away. If they then continue a single "last warning" before spanking.
There are other steps in there. But you still seem to think I'm going to go right to the spanking. I'm not. It's the diference between setting and enforcing bounderies and setting boundaries and then ignoring them.

Setting and enforcing boundaries is fine. I just don't think hitting a person is a good way to enforce them. All it does is undermine the trust in the relationship and make the child feel victimized.

You're justifying what would be considered assault on an adult, and the only reason it's "okay" is because they're your child.

I think that's bull. If it were an adult, you'd be tossed in jail, but because the person is smaller, weaker and dependent on you, it's okay? How messed up is that?

Quote:

My mother was, my father was a much better teacher and parent, but he kept himself away from us most of the time. He had a violently abusive father and didn't want to do the same to his childeren. He didn't, he left us with our emotionaly abusive mother and his mentally abusive mother. He did his best, and even when I was little if I could find him I knew I was safe there.
Note, my father is the one who applied every one of the spankings I recieved as a child.

If the cycle of violence and abuse doesn't end with you- I hope it ends with your grandchildren.