A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore

A mixture between rich love and physical punishment changes behavior. I can personally attest to it. My parents allowed me to do whatever I wanted, essentially. And the reality is, it did no one any good. My sister shares my parents philosophy that if you spank your children, they will grow up hitting people, similar to what you espouse. You know what? Her children are unruly and she has no control over them. They already hit! That's because spanking has no correlation to violence if done properly. She always comments on how well behaved my kids are and how joy-filled they are. That's because they are showered with love, as are hers, but we add spanking as a consequence for certain actions.For instance, we follow a typical ladder of escalation. We do stern warnings, we do "time-out", and we do spanking. Spanking is not done when the parent is angry, because spanking is not a form of stress relief, its a form of re-directive punishment. Our rule is that you only give 3 swats to the upper thigh or buttocks. Never more than 3, never less. And its always followed up with a hug and a discussion as to why the spanking occurred, what we should learn from it, how to do better in the future, etc.Now, my sisters kids try to punch her in the face and no one has layed a hand on those kids. My kids don't do that. Know why? 'Cause we don't tolerate that kind of behavior in my house. My kids aren't violent, they are well behaved because of it. So, the California pop pyschology that spanking = violence isn't true but spare the rod, spoil the child, is still applicable today. You are right. There is no point in spanking infants because they would have no way of understanding the action. They could not gain anything from it. Obviously, every child develops differently, but as a general rule of thumb, spanking should not begin until about 1 to 2 years old when the child is able to reason with his/her own actions. But what do you mean by 'hit?' If you mean striking people across the face, there is never a time when that is acceptable. If you mean it that she was spanked as a child, I don't think that would bear a reflection as to how she would react to a violent boyfriend. This would be a purely circumstantial issue, though, since there is definitely an appropriate and inappropriate way and time to spank. Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : No reason given.

---

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

quote:

---

I mean where did she get the idea anyone else would have that ability, especially now that she's older and independent?

---

Oh, I don't know. Maybe from her parents?

quote:

---

I'm only pointing out that it has worked for people.

---

I never said it didn't work for people. It just doesn't work as well as other methods for a lot of reasons.I am just asking why people assume it's neccessary, and just as good or better than other techniques.

quote:

---

A mixture between rich love and physical punishment changes behavior.

---

Sure. So does a mixture of rich love and firm dicipline that does not include physical pain/punishment.

quote:

---

I can personally attest to it. My parents allowed me to do whatever I wanted, essentially. And the reality is, it did no one any good.

---

The two alternatives are NOT hitting your children or letting them do whatever they want.Can you seriously think of nothing else that might be effective other than hitting in teaching a child?

quote:

---

My sister shares my parents philosophy that if you spank your children, they will grow up hitting people, similar to what you espouse. You know what? Her children are unruly and she has no control over them.

---

Then she isn't doing what she needs to do to to teach them to behave.I have three siblings, all with children. The kids who are hit are the problem ones, and the ones who are not are the stars.

quote:

---

They already hit! That's because spanking has no correlation to violence if done properly.

---

That is silly.Spanking is violence. Using pain to control is using pain to control. Hitting is hitting.I was spanked a lot and believe you me, I always understood it to be painful and humiliating and violent.Lots of research shows that people who receive corporal punishment as children are more likely to use violence to solve problems as adults.

quote:

---

Our rule is that you only give 3 swats to the upper thigh or buttocks. Never more than 3, never less. And its always followed up with a hug and a discussion as to why the spanking occurred, what we should learn from it, how to do better in the future, etc.

---

So, what do you do if the older kid swats the younger kid on the thigh or buttocks?

quote:

---

Now, my sisters kids try to punch her in the face and no one has layed a hand on those kids.

---

Then she is too permissive with them and hasn't taught them not to do that.

quote:

---

My kids don't do that. Know why? 'Cause we don't tolerate that kind of behavior in my house. My kids aren't violent, they are well behaved because of it. So, the California pop pyschology that spanking = violence isn't true but spare the rod, spoil the child, is still applicable today.

---

Again, my experience is the opposite of yours. All the children who are spanked had/have behavior problems, and all of the children who were not are stars.Again, you are presenting a false dichotomy. There is a great deal of middle ground between hitting children to control and punish them on the one hand, and letting children do whatever they want and not teaching them to behave well towards others on the other hand.

quote:

---

But what do you mean by 'hit?' If you mean striking people across the face, there is never a time when that is acceptable.

---

Not neccessarily. What if he shoves her around a little bit, or grabs her arm a little hard, or maybe gives her a little tap on the back of the head with his hand? He's only trying to help her understand how upset he is with her and how much something she said or did hurt him. He loves her so much that sometimes he has to show her how much she's hurt or dissappointed him, just so she knows for the future what to do or not do to hurt or disappoint him again.It's not that different from your "spanking with love" justification.

quote:

---

You put up with a lot more than I think I would be capable of. (And thanks for all the interesting info about horses.)

---

Yeah, well, I'm having a good couple of days, and I'm pretty much done here, I think.I'll let the readers decide who did a better job presenting their evidence and who ran around changing the positions of all of those goalposts.(and you're welcome regarding the horse info)

And therein lies the strawman. Why would parents not have educated this girl that when she's in a relationship with someone that she is an equal and should not be getting disciplined by the other? Oh really? Prove it. Well I never said it was necessary, and I made it clear I said no such thing, so I'm not sure why you bring that up. The only time I assume someone would find it necessary is because they can't come up with anything else at that moment, for that scenario. Hence not apriori necessary, but in situ necessary.As for the rest, why would you assume it isn't as good or better than other techniques? Some people swear by it, some people swear at it. I have taken no position except to point this out and state I am in no place to judge. That is because I have known people who were raised that way and turned out just fine. On the flipside I have known products of nonphysical training who are totally undisciplined and/or scarred from nonphysical methods of gaining compliance.I must say I do enjoy how you berated me for not taking your horsetraining experience as a capper to my points, while deriding people that actually have experience being parents telling you it has worked for them.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Hey we can cash out now if you want. I mean exactly what goalposts did I change? And exactly what evidence did you offer? I'm confident in what I argued, if you are too, we can gladly leave it up to people to decide.But by all means resume your backslapping party, I see his contribution here was amazing.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

quote:

---

I must say I do enjoy how you berated me for not taking your horsetraining experience as a capper to my points, while deriding people that actually have experience being parents telling you it has worked for them.

---

A parent who tells me something about raising childen no more provides me educated, scholarly support for their parenting techniques than does somebody who has done nothing more than kick around on a pony when they were a kid and tries to tell me how to improve the expressiveness and engagement in a dressage horse's one-tempe changes.So, I'm pretty much done.

quote:

---

I mean exactly what goalposts did I change?

---

"Physical punishment" and it's effectiveness and justification in teaching children was the subject.You soon began to mention all sorts of things, including "nonphysical discomfort", "nonphysical upset" and "physical pressure" and asked me to address why I supported horses or children having to endure those things.I was baffled as to why you thought I ever suggested that children should be sheltered from all things they might find unpleasant. I was also baffled as to why you had gotten so far away from the subject, which was, '"Physical punishment" and it's effectiveness and justification in teaching children.'So, whatever holmes, you win, by reason of the "baffle them with bullshit" defense.Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

Oh well I'm quite impressed with the educated, scholarly support you have provided for your position on children. At the very least I'd take the comments of someone who has succeeded at raising a kid over someone who is theorizing, regardless of their scholastic ability.And by the way if that last portion was supposed to be an attempted slam at me, I never "kicked around on a pony". I was stating that I know people that raise and train horses (I also know dog trainers). There are moments where physical force may be used. Your entire case against people who use such techniques has been assertion they are entirely wrong. Okay.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

quote:

---

There are moments where physical force may be used.

---

"Physical force" and "physical punishment" are not the same thing.

Sometimes it does work. Alot of it is dependent on the parent/child relationship. And I dare say that spanking is the last option, but that doesn't negate its effectiveness. Let me ask you, then, how you can discipline your kids if they have no respect for you because they have no fear of reprisal? I don't know if you've ever seen that Nanny show, I think it might be on ABC, but the English Nanny comes to the home of parents of unruly children. The singular problem, every time without fail, is that the parents are push-overs. They don't know how to gain their children's respect. Did I say that? Didn't I offer other solutions prior to that option? Talking to kids and teaching them how to share and how to show respect to their peers is pinnacle. However, children, all children, will at some point try to test the boundary. Parents have to be consistent. Without consistency it confuses the child into thinking that rules are based on the 'mood' of the parents. That's neither fair to the child or the parent. Something like throwing an object at their sibling should always result in a form of punishment to solidify in the mind of the child that its always unacceptable to throw things.But if the kids have no respect for the parents, its because they weren't firm with them. Spanking is effective, and if done properly, will not effect the child in a damaging way.

quote:

---

They already hit! That's because spanking has no correlation to violence if done properly.

---

You are misusing it. That's like saying everyone that eats is gluttonous because one has to eat in order to be gluttonous. That's an unfair mischaracterization. Well, I don;t know how your parents used it. From what I can gather, it seems that you harbor some resentment over that. I can only surmise that your parents went overboard or used it inappropriately. You also mention humiliation. There is definitely a time when spanking needs to end. There is no definitive age because all kids are different. Spanking should be associated with violence. Usually, we see parents very angry when they spank their child. That's how it has come to this. Its parents not spanking correctly. That's all dependent on what constitutes 'corporal punishment.' Again, if you hit kids inappropriately, then sure, there is a high probability that they will become violent in the future. At the same time, if you don't establish a strong baseline from the beginning, that parents are the boss for a reason, I would dare say that they are even more likely to grow up as violent bullies because no one puts their butt in check. I've seen it a lot and there is no one else to blame other than the parent. Explain to them that they have no right to administer any kind of punishment on their sibling. My daughter tries to assert dominance over her little brother in many ways. She tries to boss him around, but she knows that its not her place. The one thing she doesn't do is try to spank him. We nipped that one in the bud along time ago.

quote:

---

Now, my sisters kids try to punch her in the face and no one has layed a hand on those kids.

---

It depends on the child. For instance, my nephew is very mild-mannered and is generally a very sweet kid. My niece is a little firecracker though. She is very strong willed and wants her way. So with my nephew, a stern talking to usually gets the job done. With my niece, she's already figured out that my sister doesn't follow through with her threats, because they're veiled. This puts my brother-in-law in the unfair position of being the sole disciplinarian. Because my sister can't handle her kids, she waits til her husband gets home so he can discipline them. That's a bunch of crap. First of all, the punishment should always fit the crime. Secondly, you don't delay punishment. It should be immediate. Thirdly, the one thing he wants to do when he comes home is to love on the kids, not discipline them for something he had nothing to do with. I'm not trying to present a false dichotomy here. I think the problem is there are so many variables we're dealing with. Not every child is the same. Some children are just naturally more assertive than others. Therefore, punishment should be tailored to each child and it should fit with whatever they did. For some kids, a stern talking to is enough to make a lasting impression that Mommy or Daddy is serious and that they love me and don't want to do that because I could hurt. Other kids want to push the limit. You have to push back or you will lose their respect. Kids want to respect their parents. I'm confident that they don't know that consciously, but its there. And some kids will push it until the edge. A good and proper spanking works. It may not work for all, it may be overkill for some, and I think everyone should be mindful of that. However, the blanket statement that spanking makes kids violent is left wanting. As a guideline, I'd say you don't administer any kind of corporal punishment to adults or teenagers. Its simply ineffective and demeaning. So if ever her boyfriend did any of those things, regardless of his plea, she should seriously consider getting out of that before she winds up as terrible statistic. We've all heard of or known women who allow their spouse or significant other to abuse them. She protects the dirtbag when what she needs to do is get out of that relationship. I don't see how that reflects spanking, though.

---

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. I used different terms for physical punishment and nonphysical punishment? Well that sure isn't accurate. I pointed out that physical punishment had been used in both. I didn't ask why you supported anything except in the fashion of showing that your argument could be flipped around for nonphysical methods. It was arbitrary to single out physical methods for question.And even if I did ask the above that would not be moving the goalposts. That would be adding subjects to discuss that were related. I didn't say that and I said I didn't say that. How did I get so far away from it? It has been found effective by people and so is found justified for use by those people. Nice try. Back to your "I can't give you an adequate response so I tell you that you are changing things so I don't have to answer" defense.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Perhaps you can read everything as "infliction of physical pain". I've just been trying to use different phrases rather than repeat the same one countless times. Sorry for the confusion.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

I'm going to use this comment by you in a post to Holmes to say my one last thing on our discussion, because I didn't see anything in your replies that made me feel I need to post again. I'm perfectly willing to let what I said stand against your replies.(added by edit: It's hard to tell how things sound in a purely written environment. The statement about not needing to answer your replies is not meant to be rude. I was just trying to say that if we continue, we'll likely just restate our cases repeatedly.)Here's the one thing I'd add.Apparently we live in two different worlds or something. The statement above matches nothing in my experience. I have six children, and I've dealt with all six by slapping their hands if they touched after being told no. The result was that after the first several times, I never had to slap their hands again. 100%. I could take my children to anyone's home. I didn't have to worry about childproofing their home or mine. Knick knacks could be left out without fear of breakage. It was 100% successful.All the non-spankers I met--not many, I admit, but 100% of the several I've known--could hardly hold a conversation unless they put their child in some safe, caged environment. They were constantly pulling something out of their child's hand, saying no, etc.If you live in a world where that doesn't happen, that's wonderful. I've lived on three continents and in five states as an adult, and I've interacted with parents from five or six different countries. I'm not making up what I've seen.If I lived in a world where physically punishing reaching behavior did not work, but scolding, saying no, or other such verbal statements did work, I'd go for the verbal, too, but since I've never seen that be the case even once in hundreds of examples in 27 years as an adult, I have to go with what works in the world I live in.Edited by truthlover, : added paragraph to ensure I wasn't rude

quote:

---

Let me ask you, then, how you can discipline your kids if they have no respect for you because they have no fear of reprisal?

---

There are many reprisals other than corporal punishment.

quote:

---

I don't know if you've ever seen that Nanny show, I think it might be on ABC, but the English Nanny comes to the home of parents of unruly children. The singular problem, every time without fail, is that the parents are push-overs. They don't know how to gain their children's respect.

---

I love the Nanny show and when I had TV I used to watch it all the time.However, the problems were not always that the parents were pushovers. I remember several episodes in which the parenting that was resulting in bad behaviors in the children were unrealistic expectations of the children, overly controlling parents who yelled and spanked a lot, or parents who were, frankly, lazy sexist men who couldn't be bothered to "help" their wives raise their children.Don't tell me that you watch that show and never noticed that she never, ever advocates spanking, and in fact, advises against it.She is able to turn frankly horrible little tyrants into much better-behaving kids without ever resorting to spanking, and instead using developmental stage-appropriate behavior modification and non violent discipline techniques that emphasize rewards for good behavior.

quote:

---

Something like throwing an object at their sibling should always result in a form of punishment to solidify in the mind of the child that its always unacceptable to throw things.

---

So, do you spank a child as a punishment for hitting another child?That seems rather hypocritical, don't you think?

quote:

---

At the same time, if you don't establish a strong baseline from the beginning, that parents are the boss for a reason, I would dare say that they are even more likely to grow up as violent bullies because no one puts their butt in check. I've seen it a lot and there is no one else to blame other than the parent.

---

Nobody is saying that one shouldn't establish a stong baseline from the beginning.I am saying that if you can't establish a strong baseline of respect in a much weaker, smaller, less sophisticated person without using pain or hitting, you aren't trying very hard.It is true that intsilling dicipline without hitting takes longer, with more repetition, which requires more consistency and patience than hitting and pain.

quote:

---

So with my nephew, a stern talking to usually gets the job done. With my niece, she's already figured out that my sister doesn't follow through with her threats, because they're veiled.

---

Then that's the problem. Unclear consequences.I agree that she is abdicating her role as parent and teacher by waiting until "dad gets home." That IS a bunch of crap.

quote:

---

Other kids want to push the limit. You have to push back or you will lose their respect.

---

No respect is gained by hitting. Only fear of being hit again.

quote:

---

As a guideline, I'd say you don't administer any kind of corporal punishment to adults or teenagers. Its simply ineffective and demeaning.

---

It's also demeaning to children.Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.