Seeing as how the other thread has nothing to do with this deviation but I still would like to respond, I moved it. I hope no one minds but a few people are still trying to carry on a semi coherent health debate in the other thread. :)
Again, I never said spanking or hitting, I said violence. I have seen many acts which most people without knowledge of the circumstances would probably scream child abuse and would most definiately call violent. I have seen developly disabled children with bloody noses and even broken arms resulting from the restraint that a parent had to invoke. I think it is very easy for those without children, or even people with healthy children to ignorrantly say such things that violence is never acceptable.

Some spanking I wouldn't classify as violent. When my parents gave me a "spanking", it was little more than a pat on my butt. (I pat my dogs harder on there chests when they do something good.) However, the little pat I received was very effective. It made me well aware of my parents displeasure with me.

So, how is spanking that causes no physical injury violent, yet physical restraint that causes bloody noses and broken arms non-violent? Both result out of an act of kindness and love.

So you would only classify "some" spankings as violent but all restraint as violent? That's a bit odd if you beg my pardon.
I would see physical restraint for the purpose of stopping one from harming himself as only falling under one narrow definition of the word violent which is to cause by force, not natural. Under that narrow view, however, changing a diaper which is a very benign act, is also violent. No, violent in this context has a deeper meaning. it's an act intended to cause physical pain on another. Restraining a child who is freaking out is the opposite of that, you're trying to minimize damage, not cause it. Injuries may occur but they weren't meant to occur, the person restraining the child wasn't trying to harm them only to prevent harm. That's not really a violent act, no more so than the aforementioned diaper changing. In order to be what most reasonable people would consider violent the parent would have to intend to cause physical harm.
Which brings us to spanking. The whole purpose behind spanking is to cause physical pain. Whatever bogus reasons people back that up with don't negate the fact that they are trying to cause some amount of physical discomfort. That would be what most reasonable people would consider violent. An act of force against another that was meant to cause pain or injury. When a parent chooses to lay a physical blow on a child they have either lost control or they are so poor a parent that they know no other way to regain calm without hitting the child into submission. I'm not speaking about beating, one smack is all it takes to land there. Spanking is not an act of kindness, even when done by parents who truly love their children, it's loss of self control and a failure of parenting. You do not hit those you love.
Since you like comparison questions I'll give one to you, why is it wrong to treat animals with disrespect but hit human children simply because they are little. Would you respect someone who repeatedly hit their dog for wrongdoing or would you think there are much better ways to train an animal then by force?
Furthermore, if it's ok to hit a child when they do something wrong why not an adult? If I cheat on my husband why wouldn't it be ok for him to smack me so I learn my lesson? I mean as long as he did it because he loved me and wanted me to do better next time?
Mary

My girlfriend loves to get spanked, but only when she's been really naughty.

Oh, gee. Another thread where some people can get on their collective soapbox to call me a lazy, unenlightened, ignorant parent. Damn, it's like dinner at the in-laws.

And just like at the in-laws, my response is...blow me.

And if some of you holier-than-thou types really want to play this game, I can let y'all know what I think about your parenting.

Oh, gee. Another thread where some people can get on their collective soapbox to call me a lazy, unenlightened, ignorant parent. Damn, it's like dinner at the in-laws.

And just like at the in-laws, my response is...blow me.

And if some of you holier-than-thou types really want to play this game, I can let y'all know what I think about your parenting.
I'll pass, thanks. :)

But I'm actually curious... Did the in-laws spank their kids? If not, and their child grew up to be the kind of person you wanted to marry and raise your own children with, why wouldn't you consider their opinions to have merit? (Their opinions on child-rearing and spanking that is; not on you being lazy, unenlightened and/or ignorant of course.)

Seeing as how the other thread has nothing to do with this deviation but I still would like to respond, I moved it. I hope no one minds but a few people are still trying to carry on a semi coherent health debate in the other thread. :)


So you would only classify "some" spankings as violent but all restraint as violent? That's a bit odd if you beg my pardon.
I would see physical restraint for the purpose of stopping one from harming himself as only falling under one narrow definition of the word violent which is to cause by force, not natural. Under that narrow view, however, changing a diaper which is a very benign act, is also violent. No, violent in this context has a deeper meaning. it's an act intended to cause physical pain on another. Restraining a child who is freaking out is the opposite of that, you're trying to minimize damage, not cause it. Injuries may occur but they weren't meant to occur, the person restraining the child wasn't trying to harm them only to prevent harm. That's not really a violent act, no more so than the aforementioned diaper changing. In order to be what most reasonable people would consider violent the parent would have to intend to cause physical harm.
Which brings us to spanking. The whole purpose behind spanking is to cause physical pain. Whatever bogus reasons people back that up with don't negate the fact that they are trying to cause some amount of physical discomfort. That would be what most reasonable people would consider violent. An act of force against another that was meant to cause pain or injury. When a parent chooses to lay a physical blow on a child they have either lost control or they are so poor a parent that they know no other way to regain calm without hitting the child into submission. I'm not speaking about beating, one smack is all it takes to land there. Spanking is not an act of kindness, even when done by parents who truly love their children, it's loss of self control and a failure of parenting. You do not hit those you love.
Since you like comparison questions I'll give one to you, why is it wrong to treat animals with disrespect but hit human children simply because they are little. Would you respect someone who repeatedly hit their dog for wrongdoing or would you think there are much better ways to train an animal then by force?
Furthermore, if it's ok to hit a child when they do something wrong why not an adult? If I cheat on my husband why wouldn't it be ok for him to smack me so I learn my lesson? I mean as long as he did it because he loved me and wanted me to do better next time?
Mary

You have a very interesting way of distorting peoples words. Either that, or you read too fast and don't take in what someone is actually saying.

Which thread is this split from?


ETA: S'ok , found it.

You have a very interesting way of distorting peoples words. Either that, or you read too fast and don't take in what someone is actually saying.

How so? I quoted exactly what I was responding to from you. If I didn't "get" what you were saying perhaps you'd like to clarify it for me?
Mary

Oh, gee. Another thread where some people can get on their collective soapbox to call me a lazy, unenlightened, ignorant parent. Damn, it's like dinner at the in-laws.

And just like at the in-laws, my response is...blow me.

And if some of you holier-than-thou types really want to play this game, I can let y'all know what I think about your parenting.

Tame, this was actually a discussion split from another thread. I wasn't getting on my soapbox, at least not anymore than I had already been on it, I was simply continuing the discussion somewhere that was less disruptive to the other topic.
On that note, however, I really don't care what anyone thinks of my parenting. What little they know of it. Nor do I spend a whole lot of energy trying to figure out what kind of parent anyone else is. My opinion is based on one act, not a whole. I don't think parents who spank are lazy or ignorant, I think the act of spanking is.
This isn't personal towards anyone.
Mary

I have a feeling soapboxes will be brought out nevertheless. I've been told outright by people on this forum that my parents are child abusers because they spank.

In my opinion, spanking is wrong and is abusive. Not all parents that spank their kids are child abusers in the way I'd define a child abuser however, spanking is an abusive form of punishment. I don't know how anyone could say it's not. If it isn't then please tell me, what is it? Postive reinforcement? Is it supportive to the child in any way? What benifit does the child (not the parent) get from spanking? Honestly, I want to know from a parent that regularly spanks their kids.

BTW, here's the thread it was split from. The conversation on spanking starts at around page 9 or 10 I believe.http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?p=1257670#post1257670

<----was spanked and lived to tell about it :sweat:
I feel it instilled manners in my brother and I that you don't see much of these days. We never misbehaved in public and adults actually enjoyed being around us. No tantrums, no "I want I want gimme"

If we were out of line, there was not time out...no sitting in the corner...no "ha ha ha...I know other people have paid good money for a quiet meal but isn't my little suzy precious?"

I am fairly proud of the people my brother and I have become and I thank my parents for excellent parenting.

Cool. Were you fearful to a point of your parents? If so, do you think its the fear that kept you and your bother in line? How did the spanking make you feel? Think back to when you were a kid. I'm genuinely interested.

ETA: Are you intimidated now by authority figures or people who are significantly older than you to the point you'll comply even though you may not wish to?

<----was spanked and lived to tell about it :sweat:
I feel it instilled manners in my brother and I that you don't see much of these days. We never misbehaved in public and adults actually enjoyed being around us. No tantrums, no "I want I want gimme"

If we were out of line, there was not time out...no sitting in the corner...no "ha ha ha...I know other people have paid good money for a quiet meal but isn't my little suzy precious?"

I am fairly proud of the people my brother and I have become and I thank my parents for excellent parenting.

My mom spanked me too, twice in fact and I remember both times, and I dont think she was abusive. AFAIK, my inlaws spanked my husband once or twice and I don't think they're terrible parents at all.
However, I am raising three boys, two of which have been complimented repeatedly by people for their manners and politeness (the other is only 2 and known to have a little bit of toddler tantrum in him) all without spanking. I think far too many people do let their children get away with horrible behavior out in public but that's not the fault of not spanking, it's the fault of permissive parenting. Those aren't the same thing. I'm far from permissive, I just recognize that I don't need to scare my kids into acting properly. To clarify, I don't think kids are scared of their parents, just scared of the spanking. When my sons were little, I had to leave a public place a few times because they acted up. When this happened I would take the offending child out to the car while everyone else enjoyed their dinner. My husband took the dinners to go for those in the car and the child who acted up got to spend a bit in that car, followed by a boring dinner by himself at the table while everyone else played a game at home. It took exactly twice for this to work. Once in a restaurant and a little bit in the car while my husband finished grocery shopping. Sitting in a car seat is absolutely no fun and my boys quickly realized that acting up got them a trip to the car, not a treat or an audience. I also realize, even now, that kids act up more when they are tired or hungry or bored and I headed those things off at the pass. We eat before we leave, I avoid taking them out when they're obviously tired and we bring things to occupy their time while waiting for food in restaurants.
We have rules and strict consequences but the consequences are directly tied to the rules that are broken. Don't pick up your toys, lose your toys. Playing at the dinner table, lose your dinner. Act up in a public place, sit in the car. I can't directly tie spanking a child to any action they do, other than make mom or dad angry, get hit.
Like I said, though, I don't think parents who spank are abusive or bad parents, I think spanking is merely a bad choice. We all make choices and one choice does not define who we are as a person, sibling, parent or spouse. By being as close to vegan as I can get I've tried to make a choice to live my life causing the least bit of suffering to others that I can, that extends to my children. If I can find a choice that causes less suffering with the same outcome, I'm going to take it.
Mary

The purpose of spanking is not to cause harm. If it is taken to the extent of harm, then that is abuse. The purpose of spanking is to let a child know they have displeased their parents by breaking their rules. It can be a very benign act physically, but have a very large psychological impact. It is not to invoke fear, but rather encourage actions, which garner approval from a parent.

If all children without a disability can be reasoned with, then if they commit a crime, they should be treated as an adult. Luckily, I don't believe all children can be reasoned with. That’s what makes them children. They lack ability to reason. That is why they are not allowed to buy alcohol, drive, own weapons, go certain places alone, etc.

Children have been killed going to school. We need to ban all education because it gets children killed. How is that for a completely ridiculous over generalized statement?

Oh, gee. Another thread where some people can get on their collective soapbox to call me a lazy, unenlightened, ignorant parent. Damn, it's like dinner at the in-laws.

And just like at the in-laws, my response is...blow me.



All I have to do is criticize your parenting and you'll let me blow you?

mary,
in the other thread, you said "Frankly anyone who resorts to hitting their child is doing so because they can't be bothered to parent correctly. "...in this thread, you said "I don't think parents who spank are lazy or ignorant, I think the act of spanking is. This isn't personal towards anyone."...sounds like your contradicting yourself...and i don't think you can talk about the way a person parents without being personal...
btw, i am a parent and i don't spank...
also, the word "ignorant" is not a bad thing--does not equal dumb or stupid...saying someone "can't be bothered to parent correctly" is a lot more offensive than saying someone is "ignorant"...

All I have to do is criticize your parenting and you'll let me blow you?
OMG!!!! funny funny---now i know the key to getting in on that!:naughty:

i think i remember being spanked about twice as a kid, i must have been about 5. i wasn't spanked hard enough to really hurt, or bruise, or anything, just put over my mothers knee and left with a very warm tingling ass.
i'm sure i must have been being a real pain in the bottom, and behaving very inappropriately with plenty of warning given, for this to happen. my mum used to give about 3 very clear warnings, hold out her hand, then count very calmly and clearly upto 10, and you knew what would happen if she got to 10 and you were still misbehaving, lol.

my main memory of her spanking me- one spank per word as she said very loudly and clearly 'i- will- not- tollerate- this- behavior- from- you', is my crying hysterically throughout the whole spanking incident. i remember being sent to my room afterwards, and pretty much hyperventilating and crying for what felt like 10 minutes, until i gave myself a headache and was exhausted and calmed down, and of feeling very very p1ssed off by the whole experience.

i don't think it taught me anything about how to behave more appropriately, it taught me that my mum was bigger than me and could hurt me or push me around, if she wanted to, and to be angry about the unfairness of that. i think i learned a lot quicker when there was a clear loss as a result of my behaviour than a physical reaction- eg: 'don't behave in a suitable manner around other people= spend a very boring time thinking about it on the stairs, and then explaining to my mum what i did wrong later on, when i'd calmed down, and calmly discussing it and feeling quite embarressed by my poor behaviour'.

my mother was in control of her actions when she spanked me, it was purposely and calmy done, not with the intent of hurting me, more of 'grounding me by using firm physical stimulation to the @ss' (lol) and served as a 'final straw' reaction to my misbehaving- but i think if i was a parent, i wouldnt be able to trust myself to not 'loose it' a bit once i started spanking a kid- if i was very angry, tired, and frustrated. kids do have short fuses, they get tired and cranky or bored, and react to it, thats just what they do until they learn impulse control, whats appropriate behaviour, and the consequences of their actions. whether or not parents choose to smack their kids- i think there is always another option, and one that doesnt make the child feel physically assaulted, like i did.

a friend of mine and her bf dealt with an incident of their child having a screaming tantrum on the floor in the supermarket, by calmly laying down on the floor and joining in. their 3 year old daughter was so shocked and ashamed by this inapproproiate behaviour from her parents, that she got up with a look of horror on her face, and walked away, with an 'i'm not with them' look on her face, and her hand to the side of her face so she couldnt see them. she never did it again. brave parents though, they got a LOT of funny looks!

I have seen developly disabled children with bloody noses and even broken arms resulting from the restraint that a parent had to invoke.

when you restrain someone (be they a child or adult, developmentally delayed or not) you are (hopefully) doing it to prevent the person from causing harm to themselves or another. i'd say that an injury that occurs to the person being restrained, is a generally caused by the restrainee- and is a result of their continuing to flail about and cause injury to themselves, whether they understand, or do this on purpose, or not. holding someone still is not the same as hitting someone.

when you restrain someone (be they a child or adult, developmentally delayed or not) you are (hopefully) doing it to prevent the person from causing harm to themselves or another. i'd say that an injury that occurs to the person being restrained, is a generally caused by the restrainee- and is a result of their continuing to flail about and cause injury to themselves, whether they understand, or do this on purpose, or not. holding someone still is not the same as hitting someone.


Did I ever use the word hitting?

Did I ever use the word hitting?
didn't this conversation start because someone posted about being wapped with wooden spoons or something? i think that's where the idea of hitting came in.

didn't this conversation start because someone posted about being wapped with wooden spoons or something? i think that's where the idea of hitting came in.

I never used that word. My point was that phrase "violence towards children is never justified", is idealistic and not realistic. Some violence is necassary to protect the child and others. I was also stating that spanking does not need to be violent or any more harmful than a stern word.

didn't this conversation start because someone posted about being wapped with wooden spoons or something? i think that's where the idea of hitting came in.


Yeah, it was this post in the other thread.

During my childhood my mom was earning her PhD so she didn't have much time or money and made that very clear to us. I don't ever remember any of us ever begging her for anything. I'm sure we did, but she beat it out of us at a very young age. She has numerous stories of dragging one of us to the kitchen section to find a wooden spoon adjust our attitudes (and old grannies applauding her for it). I guess my point is parents with little hellion bratlings for children have no one to blame but themselves.

I responded and it just blossomed from there.

And I still stand by what I say. Violence against children and for that matter, any other living being that is weaker and in a vulnerable position is wrong. Argue it all day until you are blue in the face Ducati. Doesn't matter to me. I won't change my mind. Beat whatever you'd like.

I never used that word. My point was that phrase "violence towards children is never justified", is idealistic and not realistic. Some violence is necassary to protect the child and others. I was also stating that spanking does not need to be violent or any more harmful than a stern word.
Yea, as ST pointed out, it was that post that concerned some of us, not extreme measures to protect children like in your case.

Ducati - Sure, to the adult it may not feel spanking is violent, but the child may disagree. I don't give a crap how the parent feels, rather how the parents actions are affecting the child.

ETA: What Gaya said.