# Spanking vs. violence.



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

I need to ask a serious question, because it seems I keep putting my foot in my mouth when discussing alternatives to spanking. Sometimes people ask why I am against spanking, etc., and I tend to say something along the lines of, "I am non-violent" or "against violence of all kinds," etc. This upsets people who are pro-spanking. It seems to be my use of the word "violence" when describing spanking.

And I just plain don't get it.

Whatever side you fall on in this debate, how can you not see hitting as violence? Even if you find it acceptable, isn't spanking, by definition, violence? Striking another human, with whatever amount of force or for whatever reason, seems un-arguably violent to me.

Am I wrong? I am trying to approach this from a non-judgmental place, because I don't want to shut down conversations with people about this, but what gives? I am so careful not to use the word "abuse," but perhaps people associate the two and assume I am accusing them of being abusive? I know that has happened on at least one occasion.

I feel like I am just being dumb about this...


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

In my recent readings I came across the term "cognitive dissonance." I think that is what is happening here. In order to hit their children, people need to make sure their own brains don't "know" it is violent. That's because it would conflict with their other beliefs, like that they are good people, or that they are non-violent.

Before I became vegan I had to maintain the same mental split regarding animals.

Here is the wikipedia explanation of the term:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

I don't think you are putting your foot in your mouth. There are some things you can't sugar-coat, and the fact that hitting is violent is one of them. Maybe, if you don't like to upset people, you can say "I have some very firm beliefs about spanking and they usually make people mad. Still want to hear them?" 

Or maybe you could try answering with a question. People feel less threatened when it is THEY who reach the conclusion, and don't feel judged. So when they say "why don't you spank?" you could try asking them something instead. Something that might help lead them to see the connection that you have made between spanking and violence. But I don't think you should expect to have these conversations comfortably, no matter how you handle it, because it is....how did Al Gore put it....an "inconvenient truth"?

You're doing a valuable and brave thing when you enlighten people on this. It may ruffle some feathers at first, but it may put a bee in their bonnet that they will think about long after the conversation with you is over. Usually when people get mad, it's because they know full well that they have sort of a conflict between belief and practice, and you just called them on it. You held a mirror up. And if that happens, they might change their ways, and that can only be good for the kids.

There was a lady on a parenting forum who sort of set me straight once. My post had some title like "what do you think of spanking when it comes to disciplining your children" and she called me on it. She said "why do people call it 'spanking' when what it really is, is hitting?" And I realized when she said that, that 'spanking' really is a euphemism, and I hadn't even realized I was guilty of perpetuating that euphemism! And I was already against the practice, yet still using the sugar-coated word. Her words stuck with me; they made a strong impression. It's kind of like when the guy on the TV commercial I saw today boasted of the sausages with "natural casing." I talked back to the TV..."natural casing? It's the g.d. intestines. Why don't you say THAT?" Well obviously if they had said "natural sausages packed in intestines," it probably would hurt their sales just a bit. And the same goes for spanking. It sounds like a discipline tool when you say it like that. But when your hand strikes your child's smooth skin and it hurts.....you can call it spanking, you can call it "rose petals" if you want. It's still hitting and it still hurts.

Best of luck.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

I agree with Nellie Katz. I generally I don't talk in terms of violence beause people who have convinced themselves that this is a good way to instill obedience have already framed it in their minds as tough love. An unplesant but necessary part of establishing order and control.

I would use their terminology and then I would, rather than arguing against spanking, merely talk about the the possibilities and the benefits of NOT spanking, explain that you have found spanking not a necessary element of the discipline tool kit and as a result feel like a better person and better role model for your child.

Rather than put down spanking, make it seem a silly choice in comparison to the order and SELF CONTROL you can establish with your children when you use respect, empathy and kindness instead. Rather than belittle their choice (and ergo them by association) build up your own choices as better choices. At the end of the day I do not belive that any parent genuinely WANTS to hit their child, they merely feel out of options. They sound like they want you to debate them, but in reality I think they are asking you help them find a better tool, and when you engage in the arguments against spanking, and address their deepest fears in a non-chalant way, it's only natural for them to get defensive and deny accusations of violence, oppression, dominance, etc.

Try to keep it positive and disengage from stating the obvious.

ETA: it's important to remember that when you engage in arguments against spanking what you are doing inadvertantly, is saying it is a better way to gain control, but I don't think I have the stomach for it (which gives them proof that they are the better parent because they are willing to use tough love for the benefit of their child despite how hard it is for them and you are a weak person who is not willing to sacrifice her friendship for discipline and giving your child a stronger sense of right and wrong). When you say, I have a BETTER way and that is why I choose it...it is not because of the damage I may or may not do to my kids, it is because this way teaches them better, and more consistently, and has not just proven to be AS effective, but much much MORE effective is raising responsible, caring citizens of the world. I choose it because it is better, not because your way is worse (which may just be semantics, but gets the point across more inoffensively.)


----------



## hildare (Jul 6, 2009)

nope.. i just don't think there's a real "positive" way to talk about hitting children. I also don't think we're going to change anybody's mind by being nice about it.


----------



## McGucks (Nov 27, 2010)

I always thought a great example of cognitive dissonance when folks justified spanking by saying "it's only on his bottom." When we teach kids about "good" or "bad" touching (to teach about molestation), the areas that are usually said to be "off-limits" are those that are covered by a bathing suit. But, I've known a lot of folks that think the bottom is a place to hit. That's some cognitive dissonance for you.


----------



## Agatha_Ann (Apr 5, 2009)

Makes me think of this...

a story told by Astrid Lindgren
[Author of Pippi Longstocking]

"Above all, I believe that there should never be any violence." In 1978, Astrid Lindgren received the German Book Trade Peace Prize for her literary contributions. In acceptance, she told the following story.

"When I was about 20 years old, I met an old pastor's wife who told me that when she was young and had her first child, she didn't believe in striking children, although spanking kids with a switch pulled from a tree was standard punishment at the time. But one day when her son was four or five, he did something that she felt warranted a spanking--the first of his life. And she told him that he would have to go outside and find a switch for her to hit him with. The boy was gone a long time. And when he came back in, he was crying. He said to her, "Mama, I couldn't find a switch, but here's a rock that you can throw at me."

All of a sudden the mother understood how the situation felt from the child's point of view: that if my mother wants to hurt me, then it makes no difference what she does it with; she might as well do it with a stone. And the mother took the boy onto her lap and they both cried. Then she laid the rock on a shelf in the kitchen to remind herself forever: never violence. And that is something I think everyone should keep in mind. Because violence begins in the nursery--one can raise children into violence."

I think that too often we fail to feel situations "from the child's point of view," and that failure leads us to teach our children other than what we think we're teaching them.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

I have definitely been guilty of shaming spankers, of telling them they are just plain stupid, of getting into horrible arguments that are not constructive in the least. This actually caused me to lose one of my best friends a couple of years ago (though I am glad that it did--looking back we had no business being friends regardless), and since then I have tried to work on being more careful with the way I approach such differences, attempting to come from a compassionate, teaching place.

The bottom line is that I do believe it is wrong -- not in the judgy, "I feed my baby only organic foods flown directly to my house from France, one in each color of the rainbow, on a plate made from the recycled fibers of discarded Hummers, and if you don't you are a bad person" wrong, but in the kicking puppies and stealing car stereos sense of the word -- and I am not afraid to say that. I think violence is wrong across the board, with the exception of extreme cases of self-defense. And I think hitting is violence.

You guys are right, it must be cognitive dissonance. If someone tells me that they hit their wife, but only on her bottom and only when she really needs it, I would be outraged--that's domestic violence. If a stranger heard me, say, cursing in public, and came up and smacked me, I would file assault charges--AND WIN. So why isn't it domestic violence or assault when you strike a minor child? It's pretty strange, to me at least. I did enjoy the Lindgren anecdote, and will remember it.

Thanks for the responses.


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

Oh my god that quote from the child brings tears to my eyes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agatha_Ann*
> 
> Makes me think of this...
> 
> ...


----------



## Agatha_Ann (Apr 5, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NellieKatz*
> 
> Oh my god that quote from the child brings tears to my eyes.


Me too. It is the most simple interpretation that makes the most profound impact.

I wanted to clarify as well that I copied and pasted that entire story, I thought I put it in a quote box, but I guess I didn't! I just don't want to take credit for any of that


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> Whatever side you fall on in this debate, how can you not see hitting as violence? Even if you find it acceptable, isn't spanking, by definition, violence? Striking another human, with whatever amount of force or for whatever reason, seems un-arguably violent to me.


It gets worse- spankers get mad at me when I say that spanking is hitting. They argue that spanking is NOT the same thing as hitting. I seriously don't think one could possibly define spanking without using the word hitting or a synonym.

eta- I deleted some, because I looked up the definition of violence, and it does seem to include punitive spanking. hmmm. you learn something new every day


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


Not the recommended mode of getting the point across, but I got into a "is spanking hitting?" debate with a friend once. When he told me I didn't know what I was talking about I reached over and smacked him. He told me not to hit, I told him "I didn't hit you, I spanked you". He got the point. Anyway, it was sort of an extreme situation, and he was a friend (and I made sure not to hurt him)...


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I need to ask a serious question, because it seems I keep putting my foot in my mouth when discussing alternatives to spanking. Sometimes people ask why I am against spanking, etc., and I tend to say something along the lines of, "I am non-violent" or "against violence of all kinds," etc. This upsets people who are pro-spanking. It seems to be my use of the word "violence" when describing spanking.


I am very honest and say, "I grew up in an abusive home, and because I have different instincts and it's too easy for me to give in to real violence if I react in anger, I've chosen to not put myself in that situation. It's hard sometimes, but it's helped me be a better parent and *I* feel safer not even going there."

For me personally, that is a more true response than 'I am non-violent." I am not non-violent. If I felt my children were in imminent danger, I honor and celebrate the instincts that would allow me to protect them. I have been emotionally and verbally violent in my life (not towards my children) and have to fight against those urges and instincts. While I have learned a new way of being (most of the time), the truth is that it will be something I will have to be conscious and deliberate about for the rest of my life. So for me, "I try to avoid physical punishment because it feels violent to me" is not PC, but truly a more accurate statement than "I am non-violent" because I am not and will never be, this will be something I will have to be mindful of until I die.

I don't know if people respond to my genuine humility when I talk about this (which is only if I am asked a question), or what--but aside from (ironically) family members, I've never had anyone be mortally offended or upset by my non-spanking; probably because I present it very individually (which probably gives them an out of "well, I wasn't abused so it's okay) and because I am not saying that because I don't spank, I'm somehow less violent or peaceful than other people. For some people that may be true, but it's totally not for me, so perhaps people do not assume that I think they are horrible minions of evil because they spank.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama (Sep 23, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MusicianDad*
> 
> Not the recommended mode of getting the point across, but I got into a "is spanking hitting?" debate with a friend once. When he told me I didn't know what I was talking about I reached over and smacked him. He told me not to hit, I told him "I didn't hit you, I spanked you". He got the point. Anyway, it was sort of an extreme situation, and he was a friend (and I made sure not to hurt him)...


I always look forward to your posts. This was a very interesting way of handling that argument!


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I need to ask a serious question, because it seems I keep putting my foot in my mouth when discussing alternatives to spanking. Sometimes people ask why I am against spanking, etc., and I tend to say something along the lines of, "I am non-violent" or "against violence of all kinds," etc. This upsets people who are pro-spanking. It seems to be my use of the word "violence" when describing spanking.
> 
> ...


I can't say that "you're wrong!" because I don't know for sure. I can tell you that, in my own opinion, linking any and all forms of corporal punishment as being "violent" is remarkably close-minded. Someone slugging someone else in anger is violent. There are also people who, when they hear "spanking", think of all kinds of sadistic forms of abuse and being beaten with belts and whatnot. That would be violent. Making a child go pick a switch so you can beat 'em with it is, IMO, pretty sadistic. A quick slap on the hand or the behind to get a small child's attention for a serious infraction or to prevent a dangerous situation (done, btw, out of love) is simply, IMO, not violence. There is a difference there. If violence = ANY kind of "hitting" then how come books and movies are often called violent, language is FREQUENTLY called violent, etc. There's not just the one definition of what "violence" is. The way I described what *I* think of as spanking (above) is not, IMO, violent. To think so would be, in my mind, willfully close-minded. That's just my take and I'm not making any judgements on you or on your friends there. Some of your friends who spank may indeed be violent people, but there's no one-size-fits all answer to this.


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I always look forward to your posts. This was a very interesting way of handling that argument!


Well....he wasn't his friend's parent, and it wasn't done as a means of loving discipline. However, he was trying to make a point so it wasn't technically violent, either. IMO.


----------



## beccamama31 (Oct 5, 2010)

Recently I started to read a book that a friend had given me a long time ago, which I had never gotten around to reading.

It is written by Dr.Ray Guarendi ,a father of 10!, and is called "Dicipline That Lasts A Lifetime"...

I too wanted to see what he had to say about spanking because my son has been exhibiting some really hard to deal with behavior lately and I have been feeling at my wits end.

Well I really liked his take on the whole spanking situation,, and thought I'd share a bit of it here;

"Spanking isn't child abuse. Spanking and child abuse are not even on the same continuum.

True, abuse often includes hitting. But it's not spanking ; it's an attack. It's no attempt to deter trouble or teach. It's a lashing out with a vengeance.

Abuse is cruelty. Spanking is legitimate dicipline.It is moderation tempered by good judgement. To equate spanking with child abuse is to heap guilt of the worst kind on loving parents.

All this is not my attempt to promote spanking as a means of discipline in your home. To spank or not must be your decision. If you choose not to spank, plenty of other alternatives are available.

My argument is against those who flat out indict spanking as child rearing sin and parents who spank as guilty and incompetent. Spanking, I believe, deserves to be judged as all discipline is judged:How well is this working, for you, your child, and within the values and behaviors you are trying to instill".


----------



## mommy212 (Mar 2, 2010)

I was spanked a few times as a child, and I would never, ever describe my home as violent. I had a loving family and I was not terrified of being struck or making a mistake. I wa sonly ever spanked for direct disobedience. I am not pro-spanking but I don't consider spanking to make a violent home.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *beccamama31*
> 
> "Spanking, I believe, deserves to be judged as all discipline is judged:How well is this working, for you, your child, and within the values and behaviors you are trying to instill".


I 100% disagree with this statement. Spanking, even occasionally, which is what people often seem to be talking about when they are saying it isn't abuse, has been linked to an increase in domestic violence, non-consensual sex, bullying, and lower IQs. These factors should be on that list. If we all disciplined based *solely* on what "works," we would likely all tape our children's mouths shut when we need a little quiet time. The long-term effects on my child are a vital part of every parenting decision I make.


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

I agree that there is a distinction between angry and abusive hitting, and a more cool, calm, matter-of-fact consequence-type spanking, but I don't think that the distinction makes either one of them acceptable. Here's why. With the latter, there are still messages being communicated nonverbally. Unspoken lessons learned. Something along the lines of might-makes-right. I'm bigger than you and can administer physical pain in order to affect your behavior and bring it more in line with what I want it to be. Or teach something I want you to learn. And I don't trust you to learn it any other way, so I will use the pain of this socially-sanctioned hitting to change your behavior or teach you. There's still that violation of the child's personal bodily integrity.....I guess it depends on the kind of relationship you want to have with the child throughout the course of your lives, not just in these early and often-difficult years. For us, it is of ultimate importance that we are THE safe-haven for our child; we are to be trusted, not feared. We want to be respected, but want to earn it with authority that does not use hitting.

I wasn't raised that way. I was raised in OH so different a way. My parents actually wanted to put fear into us. "Wait until your father gets home" was a common statement.

But I understand how you'd say you didn't view your home as violent. I don't think that's what people are saying here, anyway....I mean, spanking is hitting and hitting is violent, but the occasional violent act wouldn't necessary make "a violent home." That feels like a leap, although I can't say why exactly.

Anyway, I'm tempted to say "to each his own," but I can't really. That wouldn't be fair to the very small and dependent people on the receiving end of the spanks. Those little folks can interpret hits from their big giant all-powerful parents in so many ways, from "but I deserved it" to "I'll get THEM back, just you wait..." "but she's supposed to protect me, not hurt me" to "I can endure the pain; call it the cost of doing business" to "I must lie to get out of being spanked...." You get my drift. It's just too risky. Why even go there.

That's my opinion. I didn't always hold it. Like I might have said before, we spanked our son one day, several years ago. One day he was "so impossible" we resorted to spanking. And that was the very same day we stopped, once we realized that (a) it made the "misbehavior" worse [we learned later it was SO NOT misbehavior at all; we had just been so very clueless and out-of-tune with HIS needs that day] and (b) it was just so very very profoundly sad to think of hurting that sweet little boy's body, even if it was "just his bottom." That child who I brought into this world and am devoted to protecting. I am so thankful that we were quick learners on that day, rather than repeating the practice over and over.

Thanks for listening. Sometimes I write and write on these posts, because not only am I answering the discussion but it's helping me to clarify and understand my own opinions and actions better.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommy212*
> 
> I was spanked a few times as a child, and I would never, ever describe my home as violent. I had a loving family and I was not terrified of being struck or making a mistake. I wa sonly ever spanked for direct disobedience. I am not pro-spanking but I don't consider spanking to make a violent home.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NellieKatz*
> 
> I agree that there is a distinction between angry and abusive hitting, and a more cool, calm, matter-of-fact consequence-type spanking, but I don't think that the distinction makes either one of them acceptable. ... my own opinions and actions better.


I think you expertly summed up how I feel, much better than even I could.

My parents spanked me when I was little. They were both extremely savagely abused by their parents, and they were lucky to have any semblance of sense at all when they got out of those homes. Eventually they learned to use other methods, but I don't hold it against them that they started out with a physical discipline, as it was all they were ever taught. (I am also ridiculously close with them now, and they have been "THE safe-haven for" me for my whole life.) I didn't see my home as a violent home, but my parents were acting violently when they were *hitting* me.

I have a different perspective from that upbringing. I have the Internet and work in a library, I have endless resources to determine what is not only subjectively best for my child, but also what is objectively the least detrimental to children overall.

I am so usually very much "to each his own" about parenting (at least out loud). If you breastfeed or formula feed, I am unconcerned. Cloth diaper, disposable, cosleep, crib-sleep, babywearing, strollers, TV or no TV...I'm pretty apathetic, respectful. I have opinions, but not passions. Spanking is my soap-box issue, which is probably why I tend to get dragged into these discussions...and why they often turn into arguments. It is one of the subjects I have the most difficulty with when it comes to tact and knowing when to leave well enough alone.

I. just. don't. get. it.


----------



## Callimom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I think you expertly summed up how I feel, much better than even I could.
> 
> ...


I guess it depends on what you are trying to achieve. The use of the term "violent" is the context of spanking is provocative and it will put people on the defensive in much the same ways as telling parents who send their kids to school rather than homeschool are "institutionalizing" their children, or parents who don't feed their children a completely organic unprocessed diet are "poisoning" their children. You can make a case for the technical correctness of that particular kind of word usage but it is pretty much guaranteed to shut down real communication with anyone who doesn't completely agree with you.

Why not approach it in the same way as you approach your understanding of your parents wrt this issue - as they learned more they did better. You can use what you know to plant a seed for a better way, or you can beat people over the head with it and turn them away from your ideas.


----------



## new2this (Feb 11, 2010)

I think the reason people react to the non violent aspect of it is because when people think violence they think a lot worse using objects all out abuse type thing. There is a very think line between spanking and abuse. I was spanked as a child but I can only recall maybe a small handful of times and even that is stretching it. I just wasn't spanked compared to my brother. People who were never spanked can have lower IQs, be very aggressive and so on. So most of those studies I do not hold to be all that accurate. You can skew the results however you want them to be. I wrote a paper for one of my classes last summer on spanking but its on my old computer so I can't pull up my references that I used for the paper but I found out a lot of stuff on both sides. It was really interesting to me. Because I was pregnant at the time with DD and I was wondering where we would fall on the debate some of it I questioned on both sides.

For me I do say do what works for your family as well as the child. Because well IMO if a person has to keep spanking for the same thing over and over well spanking isn't working try something else. Same goes if a person just uses time outs or whatever else. If you have to keep repeating it well its not working so try something else.


----------



## Mittsy (Dec 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *beccamama31*
> 
> "Spanking isn't child abuse. Spanking and child abuse are not even on the same continuum.
> 
> ...


I 100% disagree with the above. The definition of child abuse, from wikipedia is:

*Child abuse* is the physical, sexual, emotional mistreatment, or neglect of children.

IMO hitting/smacking/spanking... of ANY kind constitutes physical mistreatment of a child, therefore making it child abuse. I admit hitting a child once on the buttocks does not equal a full fledged beating, it is still cruel especially for the child, and it is still abuse. If it's illegal for a adult to hit another adult, it should definitely be illegal for a adult to hit a child. This is one issue I can't say "You do it your way, and I'll do it mine and we'll both be fine", because we're talking about the physical wellbeing of a child.


----------



## umsami (Dec 1, 2003)

I love this story. Thank you for sharing it.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agatha_Ann*
> 
> Makes me think of this...
> 
> ...


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Well, not so long ago, a legitimate way to resolve a dispute was to dual to the death. Not so long ago, it was perfectly acceptable for a man to strike his wife. I imagine that there are a whole lot of things that were acceptable and legitimate in the not to distant past, so why has the idea that spanking is a legitimate form of discipline survived?

Not because parents are bad or violent or whatever. Spanking is still around because people still hold to the idea that somehow it is effective and for the greater good. Well, that's what they used to say about stuff that is no longer legal. "It's for your own good." "This is how civilized men settle disputes." (as in the case of duals).

Until we move from the general acknowledgment that spanking is a legitimate form of punishment, there's always going to be someone, somewhere, justifying the need for it or its effectiveness.

For adults, any form of unwanted touching (note the word "touching") is considered assault under U.S. law. I still can't wrap my head around the concept that if I slap or push an adult, my bottom can be hauled off to court (for a criminal offense or tort) but I have an unlimited right as a parent to spank/strike my child. That's messed up. I don't care who says it is legitimate, warranted or effective. It is assault in my book, if it is unwanted touching. Old habits die hard but I hope that one day this subject will not be part of any discussion except in an historical context.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I can't say that "you're wrong!" because I don't know for sure. I can tell you that, in my own opinion, linking any and all forms of corporal punishment as being "violent" is remarkably close-minded. Someone slugging someone else in anger is violent. There are also people who, when they hear "spanking", think of all kinds of sadistic forms of abuse and being beaten with belts and whatnot. That would be violent. Making a child go pick a switch so you can beat 'em with it is, IMO, pretty sadistic. A quick slap on the hand or the behind to get a small child's attention for a serious infraction or to prevent a dangerous situation (done, btw, out of love) is simply, IMO, not violence. There is a difference there. If violence = ANY kind of "hitting" then how come books and movies are often called violent, language is FREQUENTLY called violent, etc.


While I do agree that the intention behind one's actions is important, striking another human being is still an act of violence. To address why the word "violent" is used to describe media: when a book, movie, or other media is described as violent it is generally because it contains descriptions or depictions of violence (i.e. hitting etc...). On a practical note, slapping a child's hand or bottom to get their attention seems like an incredibly inefficient method to me. If your intention is truly to get their attention before they touch a hot stove or run into traffic why not whistle loudly, pick them up, or take their hand in yours? If you just need to distract them long enough from their intended danger or destruction to keep them safe, walking over to them and hitting them is an incredibly illogical way to accomplish that. Hitting a child to prevent them from hurting themselves is simply ridiculous. All of the physical forms of discipline I have ever witnessed or experienced were due to a lack of ideas and patience on the part of the parent. Hitting a child to quickly stop them from doing something is reactionary any way you slice it.


----------



## Agatha_Ann (Apr 5, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> While I do agree that the intention behind one's actions is important, striking another human being is still an act of violence. To address why the word "violent" is used to describe media: when a book, movie, or other media is described as violent it is generally because it contains descriptions or depictions of violence (i.e. hitting etc...). On a practical note, slapping a child's hand or bottom to get their attention seems like an incredibly inefficient method to me. If your intention is truly to get their attention before they touch a hot stove or run into traffic why not whistle loudly, pick them up, or take their hand in yours? If you just need to distract them long enough from their intended danger or destruction to keep them safe, walking over to them and hitting them is an incredibly illogical way to accomplish that. Hitting a child to prevent them from hurting themselves is simply ridiculous. All of the physical forms of discipline I have ever witnessed or experienced were due to a lack of ideas and patience on the part of the parent. Hitting a child to quickly stop them from doing something is reactionary any way you slice it.


I've always thought this too. It seems like if you are close enough to hit the child aren't you close enough to stop them from doing whatever they are doing?


----------



## Agatha_Ann (Apr 5, 2009)

I know moderation has relaxed, but isn't it still against the forum guidelines to advocate hitting/spanking in any way?


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> Hitting a child to prevent them from hurting themselves is simply ridiculous.


I never understood this line of thinking, either. To me it is as if the parent is saying, "I would never want you to get hurt! So let me hurt you instead!"


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agatha_Ann*
> 
> I know moderation has relaxed, but isn't it still against the forum guidelines to advocate hitting/spanking in any way?


I don't think anyone here has recommended spanking. A few people have merely said they don't think it's abusive.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

If your objective is to get people to stop spanking and start treating their kids with respect, then you need to give over feeling vindicated or right and put the big picture first. People who spank care for, love, and want to do right by their kids. If you carry on with a holier than thou attitude, you will get nowhere. If you take a deep breath and forget about why you don't spank and focus instead on why you DO practice gentler forms of discipline, you might actually get converts instead of brickwalls. Spanking is violent anyway you cut it, but more importantly, it is UNNECESSARY.

THAT is your key to persuasion on this issue, not the evils of a practice that too many people think is valid.


----------



## umsami (Dec 1, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> If your objective is to get people to stop spanking and start treating their kids with respect, then you need to give over feeling vindicated or right and put the big picture first. People who spank care for, love,and they want to do right by their kids. If you carry on with an holier than thou attitude, you will get nowhere. If you take a deep breath and forget about why you don't spank and focus instead on why you DO practice gentler forms of discipline, you might actually get converts instead of brickwalls. Spanking is violents, but more importantly, it is UNNECESSARY.
> 
> THAT is your key to persuasion on this issue, not the evils of a practice that too many people think is valid.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I need to ask a serious question, because it seems I keep putting my foot in my mouth when discussing alternatives to spanking. Sometimes people ask why I am against spanking, etc., and I tend to say something along the lines of, "I am non-violent" or "against violence of all kinds," etc. This upsets people who are pro-spanking. It seems to be my use of the word "violence" when describing spanking.
> 
> ...


I absolutely agree with you that spanking is violence. But I don't know that actually labeling someone's actions as 'violent' will have any effect beyond making them feel angry/defensive.

No one has ever asked me why I'm against spanking... it's not really something that comes up I guess. But I guess it depends who is asking you & why they are asking. Are they just asking in passing, making conversation? Are they trying to defend their own 'discipline methods'? Are they genuinely interested in the merits of not spanking? My response would differ quite a bit depending on the answer there.

But yeah, for someone to use spanking as discipline, they would pretty much HAVE to reframe it in their minds as something other than violence to be able to continue doing it.

The thing is, spanking tends to happen when the parent is angry, frustrated, losing patience -- just like other forms of violence. It's hard for me to imagine a situation where spanking would be justifiable. If it's to prevent injury, if you are close enough to spank, you are close enough to swoop the child up and 'rescue' them from the danger. If it's to teach a lesson, there are many other ways to do that without even touching the child. I do not understand the phrase "spanking out of love" because love shouldn't hurt... and I would imagine that when someone spanks, it is when they are feeling the least loving toward their child.

I don't know, I feel like we could phrase things 100000 different ways, and offer up a million studies and explanations, but some people will still feel like spanking is a valid -- even the best! -- option. It doesn't make any sense to me. I understand being THAT frustrated/angry/etc. I get that. I don't get how hitting solves anything. It's hard for me to even really write about this here because I feel so emotional about it and can't write coherently about it. I was spanked as a kid. I was hit as an adult. I don't feel that any human, regardless of age, should be hit.


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Once i came into a toddler group with a then 2yo crying DD1 and a woman who was also GD (they are sooooo rare in this group) asked me what was wrong. I said that DD had tried to run into the road and i had yanked her back by her shoulder/jacket/hair (i grabbed at her and yanked on everything that was caught in my grab, she had long hair, loose that day - as i grabbed her i pulled her back into my arms and we BOTH sobbed and hugged while i apologised for hurting her and tried to explain why i had done it - FWIW i had let go of her hand for a second because she'd dropped her lovie and was simultaneously trying to pick it up and standing on it and was getting very frustrated, i let go to kneel and help her and she darted away and i grabbed her again in that second). The woman looked at me with utter disgust and DD with teary eyed empathy and said "i would cry if i were assaulted too," to her and "i am a non-violent parent" to me and stalked away.

Now, i am ready NOW to hear that it was a violent way of pulling her out of the path of the car which screeched to a halt 2 yards further down the street (and thus would have hit her if i hadn't done the grab), but at the time i was ready to throw up that my precious baby had nearly been flattened, that in saving her i had hurt and scared her, and that our fragility had just been demonstrated so thoroughly to us. I did not need to hear that the only takeaway is that i am a violent mother or that i assaulted my child. It did not endear me to that mother, who seemed more concerned that my DD had her personal space impinged upon roughly by her mother than that she could have DIED under the car. In fact it just felt like a lot of salt in the wound and i have avoided her ever since.

The reason that "unwanted touching" is sometimes appropriate with kids is that sometimes kids really DO need intervention to save them from greater harm. Not for one SECOND do i believe smacking can do that, but i don't smack/spank and would not honestly identify myself as a violent parent. But clearly when the life of my child is endangered i will call upon any resource, up to and including violence. And i believe i would call upon violence again in that same situation because i love my DD, i don't want her to be hurt/killed and i think it will be effective. The parents who spank for discipline, rightly or wrongly (and i agree, IMO it is wrongly) do so for the same reasons. They do it to protect the child from the greater harm they perceive will come of the child not being taught NOT to do the specific naughty thing again. They believe the spank/smack/hit (whatever you want to call it) will ultimately prevent a greater consequence next time.

I am not endorsing their actions, but i can understand the thought process.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> Once i came into a toddler group with a then 2yo crying DD1 and a woman who was also GD (they are sooooo rare in this group) asked me what was wrong. I said that DD had tried to run into the road and i had yanked her back by her shoulder/jacket/hair (i grabbed at her and yanked on everything that was caught in my grab, she had long hair, loose that day - as i grabbed her i pulled her back into my arms and we BOTH sobbed and hugged while i apologised for hurting her and tried to explain why i had done it - FWIW i had let go of her hand for a second because she'd dropped her lovie and was simultaneously trying to pick it up and standing on it and was getting very frustrated, i let go to kneel and help her and she darted away and i grabbed her again in that second). The woman looked at me with utter disgust and DD with teary eyed empathy and said "i would cry if i were assaulted too," to her and "i am a non-violent parent" to me and stalked away.


That woman was an extremist. Sorry, but being rescued from death is not likely to be gentle. Even CPR is physically violent. It can cause bruising, cracked ribs, and vomiting.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> That woman was an extremist. Sorry, but being rescued from death is not likely to be gentle. Even CPR is physically violent. It can cause bruising, cracked ribs, and vomiting.


I agree. Discipline and rescue are not the same thing. Apples and oranges. I don't find that woman's attitude any different than the people who promote corporal punishment as effective.


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> I agree. Discipline and rescue are not the same thing. Apples and oranges. I don't find that woman's attitude any different than the people who promote corporal punishment as effective.


But you feel this way because this is the way you feel. SHE feels that what i did was excessively violent. The majority might not agree with her, but say the car had not been so close? Say the road had been clear but i couldn't see that and just panicked? There have been plenty of threads here on MDC about people yanking their kids about and how deplorable/understandable that might be. My point is that things are acceptable because the majority thinks so, not necessarily because of facts. I don't think what i did was non-violent, but i don't class it as the same kind of violence as smacking because a child lied (for example). But what if you really believe lying is as dangerous long term as being hit by a car? What if you REALLY believe that? So when you smack you do it out of that belief.


----------



## hildare (Jul 6, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> If your objective is to get people to stop spanking and start treating their kids with respect, then you need to give over feeling vindicated or right and put the big picture first. People who spank care for, love, and want to do right by their kids. If you carry on with a holier than thou attitude, you will get nowhere. If you take a deep breath and forget about why you don't spank and focus instead on why you DO practice gentler forms of discipline, you might actually get converts instead of brickwalls. Spanking is violent anyway you cut it, but more importantly, it is UNNECESSARY.
> 
> THAT is your key to persuasion on this issue, not the evils of a practice that too many people think is valid.


i totally disagree. we are enabling people to continue hitting their children by this. i am not trying to 'convert' anyone. i figure people have enough sense to access the same information i can. they just choose to beat/hit their defenseless children. i don't even continue talking to people like that. yes, if you hit your kids, i DO judge you. i feel sorry for your children and if you dare hit them in front of me, you will get a huge earfull. there's NO EXCUSE. none.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> But you feel this way because this is the way you feel. SHE feels that what i did was excessively violent. The majority might not agree with her, but say the car had not been so close? Say the road had been clear but i couldn't see that and just panicked? There have been plenty of threads here on MDC about people yanking their kids about and how deplorable/understandable that might be. My point is that things are acceptable because the majority thinks so, not necessarily because of facts. I don't think what i did was non-violent, but i don't class it as the same kind of violence as smacking because a child lied (for example). But what if you really believe lying is as dangerous long term as being hit by a car? What if you REALLY believe that? So when you smack you do it out of that belief.


I think that if someone's views are that warped, getting a spanking is the least of her kid's worries.


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> I think that if someone's views are that warped, getting a spanking is the least of her kid's worries.


But in that case MY views are warped to the mother who thinks i assaulted DD, right? And she is thinking the same about my kid - it would be better to have the car hit her than be stuck with a violent assaulting mama. Who knows why she had that view - we all have different experiences. Say a mama leaves an abusive partner who lied all the time and twisted her into an emotional wreck (i know someone this happened to), she might well feel she would do anything including spanking to prevent her son becoming the lying abuser he ex was - rightly or wrongly, peoples motivations are muddy. Views are dictated by experiences, and lots of people have extreme experiences which explain their extreme views. We don't always agree but we can usually see why they feel as they do.

What if the road HAD been clear? How does my violence stack up then? If it had been a quiet road, or in a car park, or only a cycle path... The dangers are shaded, i did not consciously see that car before i yanked, the road might well have turned out to be clear. There are lots of parents on here who feel it is critical that their child is vegetarian/polite/homeschooled. They go to fairly extraordinary lengths to help that to happen. They might not smack but they probably do things other people might not to stand by their beliefs. In that context can't you see why someone might smack? If they feel it is VERY important, of CRITICAL importance to instill a certain value or behaviour, and smacking is not beyond the pale for them why would they NOT smack?


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Wow, this is amazing, thanks for sharing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agatha_Ann*
> 
> Makes me think of this...
> 
> ...


----------



## Agatha_Ann (Apr 5, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> Once i came into a toddler group with a then 2yo crying DD1 and a woman who was also GD (they are sooooo rare in this group) asked me what was wrong. I said that DD had tried to run into the road and i had yanked her back by her shoulder/jacket/hair (i grabbed at her and yanked on everything that was caught in my grab, she had long hair, loose that day - as i grabbed her i pulled her back into my arms and we BOTH sobbed and hugged while i apologised for hurting her and tried to explain why i had done it - FWIW i had let go of her hand for a second because she'd dropped her lovie and was simultaneously trying to pick it up and standing on it and was getting very frustrated, i let go to kneel and help her and she darted away and i grabbed her again in that second). The woman looked at me with utter disgust and DD with teary eyed empathy and said "i would cry if i were assaulted too," to her and "i am a non-violent parent" to me and stalked away.
> 
> ...


That woman is a wackadoodle







The difference to me is that you reacted and saved your daughter from great harm in a manner that happened to hurt her. You didn't yank her arm as a way to "get her attention" or "teach her a lesson", you did it out of instinct to protect your child.

My 2 year old has two cuts on his arm from this weekend when I caught him midair off the top of a slide at the park. I must have panicked and got him with my fingernails. I feel horrible and I have been kissing his owie all the time. I don't regret not letting him fall 8 feet, and I don't think this changes my "nonviolent parent" status. I also don't view the cuts as the way I taught him not to get so close to the edge next time. It was just the best option I had in the position I was in at the time.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> But in that case MY views are warped to the mother who thinks i assaulted DD, right? And she is thinking the same about my kid - it would be better to have the car hit her than be stuck with a violent assaulting mama. Who knows why she had that view - we all have different experiences. Say a mama leaves an abusive partner who lied all the time and twisted her into an emotional wreck (i know someone this happened to), she might well feel she would do anything including spanking to prevent her son becoming the lying abuser he ex was - rightly or wrongly, peoples motivations are muddy. Views are dictated by experiences, and lots of people have extreme experiences which explain their extreme views. We don't always agree but we can usually see why they feel as they do.
> 
> What if the road HAD been clear? How does my violence stack up then? If it had been a quiet road, or in a car park, or only a cycle path... The dangers are shaded, i did not consciously see that car before i yanked, the road might well have turned out to be clear.


I stated in a previous post that intent is an important part of this debate. Let's be logical about this and think about what we hope certain actions will accomplish vs. what they will actually accomplish. Physical harm or pain is not always the result of violence. Surgery, an accident, and childbirth are all examples of times when we may feel pain or be harmed by a set of non-violent circumstances. If you grab your child to prevent them from being hit by a car that is an immediate response (not a predetermined action) that is designed to AT THAT MOMENT save them from harm. You are not intentionally causing them pain and in fact your actions are motivated by the desire to protect them. If you grab your child after the fact simply because you are frustrated that is poor parenting. Hitting someone because you hope that it will help them not grow up to be a liar is based on faulty reasoning. When you weigh the pros and cons physical punishment is simply ridiculous. When a child misbehaves and we talk to them there is no guarantee that they are going to listen or respond. If we take a timeout to collect ourselves there is no guarantee that either of us will actually be able to calm down. However, if you hit your child there is a guarantee that you will hurt them. No discipline method is 100% effective 100% of the time, but deciding to use the one that hurts 100% of the time is both illogical and immoral. Period.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hildare*
> 
> i totally disagree. we are enabling people to continue hitting their children by this. i am not trying to 'convert' anyone. i figure people have enough sense to access the same information i can. they just choose to beat/hit their defenseless children. i don't even continue talking to people like that. yes, if you hit your kids, i DO judge you. i feel sorry for your children and if you dare hit them in front of me, you will get a huge earfull. there's NO EXCUSE. none.


ahhhh but then your objective is clearly not to win converts, or persuade, but rather to publically humilate, berate and condemn.

I personally feel it is more important to educate than it is to condemn others. Because I disagree that all adults have access to the same information, experiences, and concepts as I have. I grew up with hippies, and my mother is a NVC trainer. I was trained in mediation as a highschool student and worked with conflict resolution experts through university and in my teaching career. I have been exposed to much more in the way of gentle discipline myself (despite having been spanked as small child myself) and I am building on those skills with my own children. I have sought out this way of life for myself and my family and sought out a partner who believed in the same principles as myself before embarking on parenthood. I continue to seek advice and counselling on how to be a better more gentle disciplinarian, and I CAN do so because I have a partner who support this with time and energy and equal partnership and because I have been afforded the privilege of opportunity and choice.

Not everyone has access to these things. Not everyone has a life that sets them up for those things. Many many people are surrounded by extreme poverty, violence, and FEAR and these shape the boundaries of what they see as possiblities. They also define the degrees of patience and the limits of time one has to get the discipline right. For example: if my 18 month old drops food on the ground or dumps a 50 cent yogurt on her head I can brush it off without much fuss. In some families, if a child does that that's all the food they are getting that day, so parents need to be a bit firmer and given the variables of ignorance, illiteracy, poverty, time constraints etc, it is not surprising that they might resort to physical violence against their children, as after all a smacked bottom will smart much less than the ache of an empty belly (or so goes the logic there).

I think it is easy to judge someone. It is far more difficult to lay aside our judgements and offer solutions.

GoBecGo has a valid point. Before we judge something as wrong we might consider that the other side may see it as MORE wrong to let their child lie/dump yogurt on thier head/steal/be cheeky than it is for them to smack their bottom. I know that there are better ways to teach a child than through a less painful consequence, but I am not going to see my child working on the street before the age of 21. I have 6+ hours day with my child to discuss the issues that arise. I have a full belly and full fridge and a community that supports my goals as a parent. I have a husband who loves me and supports a loving home. I have a post-graduate education and ample time in my schedule for further learning and personal development. I have time and hardware and knowledge of how to discuss these issues with like minded parents and discover new techniques every day. These small details make all the difference.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> Once i came into a toddler group with a then 2yo crying DD1 and a woman who was also GD (they are sooooo rare in this group) asked me what was wrong. I said that DD had tried to run into the road and i had yanked her back by her shoulder/jacket/hair (i grabbed at her and yanked on everything that was caught in my grab, she had long hair, loose that day - as i grabbed her i pulled her back into my arms and we BOTH sobbed and hugged while i apologised for hurting her and tried to explain why i had done it - FWIW i had let go of her hand for a second because she'd dropped her lovie and was simultaneously trying to pick it up and standing on it and was getting very frustrated, i let go to kneel and help her and she darted away and i grabbed her again in that second). The woman looked at me with utter disgust and DD with teary eyed empathy and said "i would cry if i were assaulted too," to her and "i am a non-violent parent" to me and stalked away.


What a...UAV!

I see your point, here. The truth is violence is almost always the result of fear. You were afraid. As it happens you saved her life, and many parents see spanking/slapping/shouting/grabbing/shaking as a preemptive rescue. They might be wrong (just as you might have been wrong that the car was going to hit her), but it is what they believe to their core, because if they didn't believe that they couldn't do it (just as a murderer cannot act in violence without believing they have no other choice.)

ETA: They also must be convinced that their children do not know what is best for them, cannot be reasoned with like a human being, and are not yet fully developed as individuals. And this is easy to be convinced of given the media we are surrounded by that is stacked with ageist attitudes against children.

However, a very small minority are sadistic A-holes who just get off on hurting and oppressing their loved ones.

In this respect I do think lumping them in together is dangerous, the former group being those who wish they had a better way (ie teachable and looking for solutions even if only deep down) and the latter being a group of people who wish they had more people to hurt (ie sociopaths in need of institutional intervention and therapy).


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NellieKatz*
> 
> I agree that there is a distinction between angry and abusive hitting, and a more cool, calm, matter-of-fact consequence-type spanking, but I don't think that the distinction makes either one of them acceptable. Here's why. With the latter, there are still messages being communicated nonverbally. Unspoken lessons learned. Something along the lines of might-makes-right. I'm bigger than you and can administer physical pain in order to affect your behavior and bring it more in line with what I want it to be.


I am not against spanking (I follow Dr.Ray Guarendi's philosophy on the subject, which another poster already mentioned). I don't see it as a subtext of "I'm bigger than you so I can discipline you this way" but rather, "as your parent, I have the authority to discipline you this way". We're talking (in my point of view) about natural authority and not brute power. Children do recognize this authority....I believe that it comes naturally to them. And I also believe that it's how we help teach them to respect the authority of God. In order to do that, they have to first understand and not have issues with the concept of authority.

Also, I'm personally not all about the calm, matter of fact-type spanking. I think it should be done in the heat of the moment, not with anger but very clearly related to and in response to whatever the infraction or danger is.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I am not against spanking (I follow Dr.Ray Guarendi's philosophy on the subject, which another poster already mentioned). I don't see it as a subtext of "I'm bigger than you so I can discipline you this way" but rather, "as your parent, I have the authority to discipline you this way". We're talking (in my point of view) about natural authority and not brute power. Children do recognize this authority....I believe that it comes naturally to them. And I also believe that it's how we help teach them to respect the authority of God. In order to do that, they have to first understand and not have issues with the concept of authority.
> 
> Also, I'm personally not all about the calm, matter of fact-type spanking. I think it should be done in the heat of the moment, not with anger but very clearly related to and in response to whatever the infraction or danger is.


This is a pretty clear example of the type of situation I am asking for help dealing with. When someone says something like this--that we should spank in the heat of the moment to illustrate our authority over children--it is very difficult for me to keep my cool. And it easily turns into an argument and me telling someone they are being violent or abusive...


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> While I do agree that the intention behind one's actions is important, striking another human being is still an act of violence. To address why the word "violent" is used to describe media: when a book, movie, or other media is described as violent it is generally because it contains descriptions or depictions of violence (i.e. hitting etc...). On a practical note, slapping a child's hand or bottom to get their attention seems like an incredibly inefficient method to me. If your intention is truly to get their attention before they touch a hot stove or run into traffic why not whistle loudly, pick them up, or take their hand in yours? If you just need to distract them long enough from their intended danger or destruction to keep them safe, walking over to them and hitting them is an incredibly illogical way to accomplish that. Hitting a child to prevent them from hurting themselves is simply ridiculous. All of the physical forms of discipline I have ever witnessed or experienced were due to a lack of ideas and patience on the part of the parent. Hitting a child to quickly stop them from doing something is reactionary any way you slice it.


A spanking (as I define it, it my other post) also has the advantage of being memorable. If I've told my child repeatedly to not touch the stove, ever, because she can't ever know if it's on or off (for instance....this hasn't happened, but I'm just thinking on the fly here) and she keeps doing it, then a whistle or something isn't going to really stick with her, you know? A smack on the behind probably would, if my own childhood is any indication.

Also, and using another line of thought....if you say that ALL hitting = violence, then are you saying if you jump into the street and shove a person out of the way of a moving vehicle, was that violent? It's technically putting your hands on a person and probably causing them some amount of pain, but it's not violent (IMO) because it's done instinctively out of love and/or concern, and not out of an intention to be violent. If you slap your friend's arm because there's a mosquito nano-seconds away from putting their stinger in their skin and you don't have time to say, "hey, there's a mosquito on you!", is that violent?

What if you accfidentally hit or kick someone....is that violent? Once when I was a teenager I was in line at the store and I turned around really fast when I heard someone calling my name....so fast, in fact, that my purse whipped around and smacked the kid beind me upside the head. Wow, was that mortifying lol. But was it violent? Or was it an accident? My daughter has just learned to crawl and is constantly underfoot. There have been a couple times where my husbamd or I have inadvertently kicked her while tripping and throwing ourselves in the other direction so we don't fall on and crush her. Is that violent?

I really think that the intent needs to be to do violence in order for the act to be violent.


----------



## goinggreengirl (Nov 7, 2009)

Agatha_Ann, that was a great quote. I shared it in a note on Facebook last night and had two long comments this morning. One was from a friend with a 1 1/2 year old who is getting pressure from family to spank but is looking for other alternatives. I was able to share about gentle discipline and making sure she understands where her child is developmentally before punishing him for something that is normal.

The other comment was from a relative who has several step children (who are out of control, she says) and she is pregnant. She said she plans on spanking the unborn child to keep it from turning out like the step children. I was able to share some perspective on that and I REALLY hope it keeps the door open for me to share more. She was raised in a truly messed up (think Pearls) home and I hope she will see that before her baby is born! I was very careful to not tell her how awful she was for planning on hitting her child, merely gave information about GD and explained what is wrong with hitting. And invited her to ask more questions and get more information.








for sharing good information without drama (so far) on Facebook!


----------



## goinggreengirl (Nov 7, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I really think that the intent needs to be to do violence in order for the act to be violent.


But, I think that's the point, that hitting to punish your child is violent. And the intent is violent because you want them to remember that pain.

Also, about spanking being how you teach God's authority- I would rather teach my children about the love and forgiveness of God. I want them to know that they can go to Him and me and DH with any problem and we will help them with it, not punish them for making a mistake.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> If your objective is to get people to stop spanking and start treating their kids with respect, then you need to give over feeling vindicated or right and put the big picture first. People who spank care for, love, and want to do right by their kids. If you carry on with a holier than thou attitude, you will get nowhere. If you take a deep breath and forget about why you don't spank and focus instead on why you DO practice gentler forms of discipline, you might actually get converts instead of brickwalls. Spanking is violent anyway you cut it, but more importantly, it is UNNECESSARY.
> 
> THAT is your key to persuasion on this issue, not the evils of a practice that too many people think is valid.


Yep. Also, some people just need to know that they don't HAVE to spank. Exdp (totally anti spanking- he thinks it's the most ridiculous thing, and can't believe that any remotely intelligent adult would think it was actually a good idea to hit their child) recently talked to a then aquaintance at school. His "angle" was basically- Why in the world would you spank? He wouldn't have said anything inflammatory- he never would have said it was mean, violent, abuse, etc etc. That's not his style. I imagine that would immediately throw up a wall in anybody.

I don't think she ever actually felt like it was an option to not spank. She didn't want to, but felt like she had to. So...she stopped. Both exdp and I are now pretty good friends with her.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> Once i came into a toddler group with a then 2yo crying DD1 and a woman who was also GD (they are sooooo rare in this group) asked me what was wrong. I said that DD had tried to run into the road and i had yanked her back by her shoulder/jacket/hair (i grabbed at her and yanked on everything that was caught in my grab, she had long hair, loose that day - as i grabbed her i pulled her back into my arms and we BOTH sobbed and hugged while i apologised for hurting her and tried to explain why i had done it - FWIW i had let go of her hand for a second because she'd dropped her lovie and was simultaneously trying to pick it up and standing on it and was getting very frustrated, i let go to kneel and help her and she darted away and i grabbed her again in that second). The woman looked at me with utter disgust and DD with teary eyed empathy and said "i would cry if i were assaulted too," to her and "i am a non-violent parent" to me and stalked away.
> 
> ...


That's a good illustration of the differences in viewpoints. You (not you specifically) can be 100% certain that your views are right. Another person, with the opposite views, can be 100% certain their views are right. What I get from your story is that, even though the lady was right, and you believe that she was right, her attitude in talking to you made you close down to anything else she might tell you. Luckily, you already were gd, so it's almost a non-issue in this situation. But in another situation, she might have closed down communication with a spanker who MIGHT have been willing to listen and change.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> A spanking (as I define it, it my other post) also has the advantage of being memorable. If I've told my child repeatedly to not touch the stove, ever, because she can't ever know if it's on or off (for instance....this hasn't happened, but I'm just thinking on the fly here) and she keeps doing it, then a whistle or something isn't going to really stick with her, you know? A smack on the behind probably would, if my own childhood is any indication.
> 
> ...


Yeesh....

No, rescuing someone from immediate harm is NOT violence.

Accidentally kicking someone is NOT violence.

Intentionally hitting someone for the purpose of inflicting pain IS violent. If you push someone out of harm's way, violence is a side effect. If you spank to cause pain to theoretically prevent future harm, your purpose is inflicting pain, and possibly preventing future harm is a side effect.

As a side note... I do remember being spanked. Yup, it was memorable. I do remember the pain, the fear, and the shame. I have absolutely no idea WHY I was spanked or what it was supposed to teach me or what it was supposed to get me to do/not do.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


I do...it was to get me to listen to the word NO and obey the rules...all rules, no matter how arbitrary. I actually have struggled through most of my recent adulthood to fight the urge to accept no as an answer even when it is not fair or right and to question when people say no, to go back for the yes. I was a very obedient child...I also learned not to get caught breaking the rules, which taught me to be very sneaky, and a rather adept liar, which is also something I struggle with. Despite my parents being the minister and sunday school teacher of our church it also taught me to e mistrusting of the church and authority and is a big part of why I am dubious about the whole God thing.

Coffeegirl, this thread has been sort of interesting and it will probably get closed down if there is anything that can be miscontrued as support or advocacy of spanking. You might consider editting for clarity, That being said, while I agree that intent is important when determining the sort of violence (intentional and sadistic, versus fear based, versus accidental), I do not agree that the intention behind spanking makes it a better form of teaching my children the values I want them to learn. I think though therein lies the rub. A sense of authority (of god or man) and knowing their place is not a value I want to instill in my children or any child in my classroom either. I want them to feel at all times empowered by their own agency, empowered to question me, or any figure of power in their lives, and to obey community rules out of respect and a desire to belong in positive ways, not fear. If authority and heirarchy are important values for your family, then there is precious little you can use to instill that other than spanking/shouting/threats/and other forms of passive and physical violence, but I do not believe that is a value I want to pass along to my children, nor would you find me advocating for it. Children seek boundaries and social acceptance yes, I do not believe any human spirit naturally seeks to be oppressed.

ETA: here are some things that I have found are better than spanking a child...I put a sheild up around the oven door, so that cannot touch it. My SIL puts a heat proof blanket thing up over the door, so if anyone touches it they will be safe. You can remove or distract until the child is old enough to reason with. IME, if the child is too young to reason with, they probably won't understand the spanking thing, either. I guess the main question is; do you want them to respect YOU or your authority? I always respected my Dad's authority. I didn't grow up to really respect him until I had my own children and realized how hard a gig this parenting thing really is, and he asked for my forgiveness for being so harsh with us.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I am not against spanking (I follow Dr.Ray Guarendi's philosophy on the subject, which another poster already mentioned). I don't see it as a subtext of "I'm bigger than you so I can discipline you this way" but rather, "as your parent, I have the authority to discipline you this way". We're talking (in my point of view) about natural authority and not brute power. Children do recognize this authority....I believe that it comes naturally to them. And I also believe that it's how we help teach them to respect the authority of God. In order to do that, they have to first understand and not have issues with the concept of authority.


I think that parents are in a natural position of authority, and I think that position is strengthened by attachment. Spanking undermines a parents natural authority. If you have to hit to enforce your authority, then it's a sign that something needs to change.

I taught ds1 not to touch the stove without ever hitting or punishing. You can convey the seriousness of a situation without being physical. Ds2 is not quite 2, but he's definitely getting the idea that he may not touch the stove/oven. It's definitely doable- and trust me, ds2 is NOT the compliant type of kid. Until he gets it, if the stove is on, I am always aware of where he is, and if he goes into the kitchen, so do I.


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

This is wonderfully-put. Especially the last two sentences. I'm there. My dad died before we could work it out, but I have forgiven both him and my mother because boy it is so true, you just never know how hard it is to be a parent. (and they were so much younger than I am when they were doing it) And neither one of my parents ever rose above their upbringings, to break the negative cycles in their families. But that is what I'm intending to do, and what I *am* doing, to the extent that I am able at this time.

I love what you say here about authority.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> A sense of authority (of god or man) and knowing their place is not a value I want to instill in my children or any child in my classroom either. I want them to feel at all times empowered by their own agency, empowered to question me, or any figure of power in their lives, and to obey community rules out of respect and a desire to belong in positive ways, not fear. If authority and heirarchy are important values for your family, then there is precious little you can use to instill that other than spanking/shouting/threats/and other forms of passive and physical violence, but I do not believe that is a value I want to pass along to my children, nor would you find me advocating for it. Children seek boundaries and social acceptance yes, I do not believe any human spirit naturally seeks to be oppressed.
> 
> ETA: here are some things that I have found are better than spanking a child...I put a sheild up around the oven door, so that cannot touch it. My SIL puts a heat proof blanket thing up over the door, so if anyone touches it they will be safe. You can remove or distract until the child is old enough to reason with. IME, if the child is too young to reason with, they probably won't understand the spanking thing, either. I guess the main question is; do you want them to respect YOU or your authority? I always respected my Dad's authority. I didn't grow up to really respect him until I had my own children and realized how hard a gig this parenting thing really is, and he asked for my forgiveness for being so harsh with us.


----------



## azgirl (Nov 27, 2006)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I am not against spanking (I follow Dr.Ray Guarendi's philosophy on the subject, which another poster already mentioned). I don't see it as a subtext of "I'm bigger than you so I can discipline you this way" but rather, "as your parent, I have the authority to discipline you this way". We're talking (in my point of view) about natural authority and not brute power. Children do recognize this authority....I believe that it comes naturally to them. And I also believe that it's how we help teach them to respect the authority of God. In order to do that, they have to first understand and not have issues with the concept of authority.
> 
> Also, I'm personally not all about the calm, matter of fact-type spanking. I think it should be done in the heat of the moment, not with anger but very clearly related to and in response to whatever the infraction or danger is.


Thanks for posting this. I have super close (as in we end up sharing homes on vacation close) friends that subscribe to this idea of discipline/spanking. They do, however do the whole calm, matter of fact-type spanking and they have well-reasoned (to them) reasons for doing it that way. Anyway, your post reminded me of why I have been struggling to talk with them about this topic again. We have such a good relationship. We can disagree on things and we actually learn from each other. We have been able to discuss the fact that they spank and why. I have been able to talk about why I don't spank and what issues I have with it, but since I don't have the same religious convictions and I do not need/want my child to be accepting of authority this discussion ends up leading into areas that really have to be off-limits between individuals who don't share the same basic philosophy/ideology/theology. Your post sort of clarified some of this for me. Sometimes we have knee-jerk ideas (in my case, "I am not spanking") and only later realize that we do indeed have philosophical underpinnings to those ideas.

I hope it is okay to ask: where does "shaming" fit into the parenting philosophy you follow? Is there any theological basis for the practice of shaming as far as you know?

I am glad we can now have different viewpoints expressed here. I might at some point feel comfortable discussing this further with my friend, but for now this works better


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

I just did a search on Dr Ray...so far I am frightened, not only by his facial hair (Hi, Dr. Ray, 1978 called. It wants its soup strainer back.) but also his rather non-chalant attitude towards being ignorant of one's children and their motivations, curiosities and desires and most importantly general childhood development. (" Sometimes we're better off in the dark, because our kids' motives might scare us, confuse us further, or really make us mad. As my mom used to warn me, "Don't tell me why. I'm upset enough already!"".) It almost seems from one of his "tips" as though parents should wear their ignorance as a badge of honor.

Childhood development is KEY to understanding both age appropriate behavior and how to guide children effectively towards better learning.

Authority is not a dirty word, but it is a gift and should not be abused or warded over another person without extreme responsibility. I am my son's authority (the person he goes to for troubles, advice and fears) because I have proven myself to be caring, knowledgable, and FAIR, not because I am authoritarian. It is through our dialogues and discussions and at times even standoffs that I have earned my role as someone he can trust and respect. I understand that many practicing christians in the US are not into the Darwinistic version of evolution, but does that mean any all evolution is off the table? Shouldn't there at least be room for social evolution?

His blog reminds me though that there are worse things than being spanked...I'd take a smacked bum any day over the silent treatment, or as he calls it, the Ghost treatment.

That's just mean spirited, man!

Those of you here who follow his philosophy...can you explain why? I don't understand why one needs to resort to draconian, alienating, and violent (in a more ghandian sense of the word than a webster merrian spirit) techniques to give children a sense of your authority. I find it FAR FAR more effective to figure out the need and FILL it or give my child the tools to fill it themselves, rather than demand obedience first above all else, and meet only the needs that I deem worthy of my attention. It is the difference between a boss you respect for their superior field knowledge and ability to mentor you versus the boss who has arbitrarily risen above you and whom you must treat with respect lest they dump all over you to teach you respect...ya know?

If you like this guy, have you read any of the CNVC stuff (I promise, no psycho babble stuff there)? You might find these communicative tools meet your desire to be in control of your home and your family without resorting to any form of punishment that is counter-intuitive. We have also found logical and natural consequences to be far more effective than physical or punitive consequences...so for example: DS left his school bag at home. There was a time DH and I would have grounded him in the afternoon for such an oversight. But we didn't because he didn't have his bag which meant he didn't have his homework which meant the teacher probably spent the day embarassing him (shaming...yeah....not -- luckily we have trained DS not to take such things seriously) and then he had no snack or drink for recess, which already bites the big one...how is grounding him to his room going to be any more effective than that? I doubt it would be. So natural consequences win. If he is acting all hyper and weird about a TV show...logical consequence...no TV show until he is older and proves he is able to handle it maturely. Bouncing on my couch....grrrr...logical consequence...no sitting on my couch until you can learn respect for my things, not a punitive consequence, just a stepping stone to being a part of social unit.

I'm really concerned how anyone can be so la-dee-dah about not understanding your kids' needs. Our need for order authority does not trump their need for connection and being understood, does it?


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> I think it is easy to judge someone. It is far more difficult to lay aside our judgements and offer solutions.
> 
> GoBecGo has a valid point. Before we judge something as wrong we might consider that the other side may see it as MORE wrong to let their child lie/dump yogurt on thier head/steal/be cheeky than it is for them to smack their bottom. I know that there are better ways to teach a child than through a less painful consequence, but I am not going to see my child working on the street before the age of 21. I have 6+ hours day with my child to discuss the issues that arise. I have a full belly and full fridge and a community that supports my goals as a parent. I have a husband who loves me and supports a loving home. I have a post-graduate education and ample time in my schedule for further learning and personal development. I have time and hardware and knowledge of how to discuss these issues with like minded parents and discover new techniques every day. These small details make all the difference.


While I can appreciate the sentiment behind your statements here, I am going to call foul on moral relativism. At the root of nearly every act of violence is a sad story by way of explanation. The man who beats his wife because he is a depressed alcoholic, the pedophile who was molested as a child. On an intellectual level I feel compassion for the life that brings a person to this point, however the explanation is not synonymous with justification. I was raised in a poor environment and exposed to physical violence and substance abuse as a child. I have CHOSEN a different path for myself as a parent. Funny enough, the reason I will not be striking my daughter has nothing to do with my college education or conversations with like minded friends. My resolve comes from the same place inside me that could enable me to lift a car off of my baby if she was trapped. I have been entrusted with the awe inspiring task of keeping a tiny being safe and I can imagine no greater breech of trust as her protector than to hit her.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> A spanking (as I define it, it my other post) also has the advantage of being memorable. If I've told my child repeatedly to not touch the stove, ever, because she can't ever know if it's on or off (for instance....this hasn't happened, but I'm just thinking on the fly here) and she keeps doing it, then a whistle or something isn't going to really stick with her, you know? A smack on the behind probably would, if my own childhood is any indication.
> 
> ...


You're right, intention is a key factor. When you hit your child in order to discipline them, your intent IS violent. You intend to inflict pain. What you hope for that pain to accomplish (obedience) does not negate the fact that YOUR INTENTION IS TO INFLICT PAIN. If you did not intend to inflict pain on your child when hitting them, you would be using another form of discipline. When you save a person from getting hit by a car and push them or fall on them in the process, your intention is to save them from getting hit by a car.

The reasoning behind hitting a child to teach them a lesson is faulty. Children are unpredictable. Sometimes a timeout works great, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes you sit them down to have a heart to heart and you really get through to them, and sometimes you don't. However, in the process you have not assaulted them or broken any trust. When you hit a child to teach them a lesson just as with any form of gentle discipline you may not get through to them. However, unlike gentle discipline techniques, if you hit your child you will definitely cause them physical pain. This means that on a day where nothing is getting through to them (which happens to the best of us) pain is all they will be left with.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> While I can appreciate the sentiment behind your statements here, I am going to call foul on moral relativism. At the root of nearly every act of violence is a sad story by way of explanation. The man who beats his wife because he is a depressed alcoholic, the pedophile who was molested as a child. On an intellectual level I feel compassion for the life that brings a person to this point, however the explanation is not synonymous with justification. I was raised in a poor environment and exposed to physical violence and substance abuse as a child. I have CHOSEN a different path for myself as a parent. Funny enough, the reason I will not be striking my daughter has nothing to do with my college education or conversations with like minded friends. My resolve comes from the same place inside me that could enable me to lift a car off of my baby if she was trapped. I have been entrusted with the awe inspiring task of keeping a tiny being safe and I can imagine no greater breech of trust as her protector than to hit her.


To be clear I never said one's background JUSTIFIES their choices or actions. I am merely saying that if we can come from a place of understanding and from the big picture, we can lead people to a better set of choices and allow them to see the awe inspiring side of the task rather than the soul crushingly terrifyingly overwhelming fear of the task of keeping a tiny being safe. Have you ever seen a child hold a pet so tightly in the hopes of keeping it safe they squish it? Do you blame the child for being too frightened about keeping it safe that they squished the tiny being? Some people, due to their circumstances and the opportunities afforded them do not realize they are squishing the tiny being to death (not literally, but spiritually), they believe they are keeping it safe.

You THINK it has nothing to do with a college education or your friends here...but if you did not have the life you have, if you worked 18 hour shifts at less than minimum wage and came home to an alcoholic abusive husband and you knew your children would be working on the streets by the age of 8...things might be different. If you grew up to believe in the authority of god and the need to instill that in your children by any means necessary or were surrounded by a community and a church and leaders of your society who told you that it was your duty as a loving parent to keep your child in line and afraid of god and authority and consequences, could we rise above the hardships that in reality we do not have to face and make the same choices we make each day now? How can we say? We choose alternatives because we SEE them. If we do not see them it takes an incredible (one in a million, and you may be that one, far be it from me to say you were not, Gucci) spirit to create the alternative for themselves.

Again this is not moral relativism. No one is saying it morally correct for people to hit their child (okay someone is, just not me :-D). All I am saying is that if we condemn first, there is no room for growth or education. And there IS room for growth and education and helping people find better alternatives, around the world that is true and I witness it happening every day. There is room for social evolution. But like with all evolution, it is a process. There are still parts of the world where young women are tied down and their privates are mutilated and their vaginas sewn shut by their own mothers, sisters and aunts (who believe they are protecting them and keeping them safe, BTW). There are still parts of the world where women have their necks stretched with metal rings and faces and bodies scarred and mutilated from very young ages to protect them from brutalities of other tribes. There are still parts of the world where rape is considered a valid tool of war. There are parts of the world where child abuse (not just spanking, whipping, torturous abuse) is a normalized part of everyday life seen on TV as just one of those things that loving albeit scary parents do for the ones they love. There is no time for comdemnation and agression if we want to change things in this life time or our children's life time and lead people to the decisions we have come to in our lives. There is only room for acceptance of undesirable circumstances being what they are and helping people find a better way.

Not everyone is cut out for that, I know that, but if you were empowered to make that choice, despite your upbringing, it is worth considering that you are in a unique position to guide others towards your decision, and condemning them will only embitter them to your point of view before you have even had the chance to explain the virtues. It's like an ex-fat person punching me on the shoulder saying "You can do it! I did it! Just stop eating all that crap and get to the gym, you lazy greedy cow!" I'm hardly going to listen to them, am I? On the other hand if they say "hey, I know where you're coming from, but you are going to feel SO much better when you try this way of life instead...trust me!" I might at least be willing to listen, ya know?

But it seems you don't really care if they listen, and that's okay. if you come a place of abuse in your life, you may just need to be angry at those people who have not made the choices you made. It's okay to be angry, it is righteous anger; as long as you understand that it's not going to effect change.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> You're right, intention is a key factor. When you hit your child in order to discipline them, your intent IS violent. You intend to inflict pain. What you hope for that pain to accomplish (obedience) does not negate the fact that YOUR INTENTION IS TO INFLICT PAIN. If you did not intend to inflict pain on your child when hitting them, you would be using another form of discipline.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> You're right, intention is a key factor. When you hit your child in order to discipline them, your intent IS violent. You intend to inflict pain. *What you hope for that pain to accomplish (obedience) does not negate the fact that YOUR INTENTION IS TO INFLICT PAIN. *


ITA. It's a very good point.

Does anyone else sort have a physical reaction to these sort of threads? I have to say I do. My mom's teaching tool of choice was a wooden spoon with a sadistic smile burned into it with her hipster 70s woodburning pen. That little impish grin would always haunt me from the utensil jar, mocking me through meal times...

There is more than pain that is intended. There is a desire to instill a memory of the experience, too. A physical Pavlovian memory.

The question is what sort of memories do we want to fill our children's lives with? Memories of finger painting, hugs, time-ins, learning, and emotional vulnerability and acceptance, or irrational phobias of wooden cooking utensils?

ETA: obviously you can have both. All the spankings my mom ever doled out did not negate the loving memories we share, but ultimately, the violence contributed equally to my childhood, especially my early childhood. And I was probably, by my mother's reckoning *only spanked a handful of times*, but I *remember* them more vividly (and isn't that the whole point afterall to inflict a memory to avoid future misbehavior?) than I do all the events of the photo albums put together. At the end of the day I would still describe my mother as loving, kind and generous, but also unpredictable and a little bit scary. I don't think I want to be that person to my children.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> I do...it was to get me to listen to the word NO and obey the rules...all rules, no matter how arbitrary. I actually have struggled through most of my recent adulthood to fight the urge to accept no as an answer even when it is not fair or right and to question when people say no, to go back for the yes. I was a very obedient child...I also learned not to get caught breaking the rules, which taught me to be very sneaky, and a rather adept liar, which is also something I struggle with. Despite my parents being the minister and sunday school teacher of our church it also taught me to e mistrusting of the church and authority and is a big part of why I am dubious about the whole God thing.
> 
> ...


Wow, you eloquently said everything that I have ever felt about the issue. I am 47 years old and I have an underlying bitterness toward my parents that I've never been able to lay to rest. I love them, but I despise their actions and have very, very little respect for their methods or beliefs. I know this sounds harsh, but one of the reasons that I am cynical, agnostic person - with respect to G-d, is that my parents justified their actions through their G-d given authority to do so. To me, spanking is not about learning or discipline or respect. It is about humiliation and control. I spent a good portion of my life rebelling because I felt so oppressed as a child. Fortunately I found my way but I had to take the long way around to reconcile with everything.

Also, I think it is a red herring / strawman argument to keep bringing up the subject of the "pulling the kid out of the way of the speeding car." That's not about discipline people, and it's laughable that it is even an argument to be made. (Not directing this to anyone specifically here but there has been a theme in this thread about violence and I think that we first need to define violence before we apply it.) Someone upthread mentioned the concept that if you had pulled the kid "violently" out of the way of the speeding car and then smacked the kid as a type of discipline for doing the act, it would be a different issue. I agree. Someone also mentioned upthread that there is an element of intent to violence, and I also agree. Generally, a violent act is an act coupled with an intent to harm, whether physical or emotional. If you intend to inflict pain (whether it be the opposite extremes of sadism vs. teaching a lesson) there is an intent to harm. I still stand by my previous position that if corporal punishment is used to teach a lesson or discipline, it is a method of inducing fear. Humans recoil from pain. That's why people claim that torture works (even though it has shown over and over that it doesn't). Humans and animals will do anything to avoid pain. I personally don't want my child to develop morals and values based on fear of pain. I want her to do what is right because it is right, not because she will be punished or experience pain. It is a harder road to take but I'm willing to go there. I'm sorry, I have very strong opinions about this.


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> This is a pretty clear example of the type of situation I am asking for help dealing with. When someone says something like this--that we should spank in the heat of the moment to illustrate our authority over children--it is very difficult for me to keep my cool. And it easily turns into an argument and me telling someone they are being violent or abusive...


Wow, thaks for both moving my words around to TOTALLY twist my meanings and also for addressing my point of view with absolutely no respect whatsoever. lol. I'm starting to see why you get such strong negative reactions to the way you communicate things IRL.

I went back to read your OP and I'm not really understanding what this "situation" is that you need help in dealing with? You need help in understanding why some of your friends react negatively to your insistance that any kind of spanking = violence? If I may be so bold, I think they might be reacting to the lack of respect in how you're saying it. It could be that your tone, IRL, is somewhat dismissive. It might be that you don't listen. I could imagine being upset with someone IRL for any of those reasons. I would not be actively upset with someone just because they believe that any and all corporal punishment = violence. We may disagree, but that alone isn't going to make me angry or make me not like a person. Does that make sense?


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I am not against spanking ... "as your parent, I have the authority to discipline you this way"...I think it should be done in the heat of the moment...


I did not realize that re-wording this to say "that we should spank in the heat of the moment to illustrate our authority over children" was such a stretch. "" w

What I was looking for was help in having conversations with people about spanking (which are usually provoked by my southern relatives trying to convince me that spanking is necessary). I do listen, as I obviously read over everything you said, though you clearly advocate spanking. What I am trying to do is understand. And to be honest, the first poster answered my question, and then a conversation evolved from there. I understand now that people who spank must be convincing themselves that it is not violent, although it is hitting and hitting is violent. So in order to have conversations with these people, I should refrain from using indendiary words such as "violent" or "hitting" because it challenges that belief and makes them throw up walls. This is the one area in which I don't particularly have any respect for the decision, as I mention upthread. So I am sure that comes out in discussions, and that may also be a factor. I don't usually get upset when people disagree with me, and I usually don't dismiss their opinions. It is only when people advocate striking a child (which, by the way, I was pretty certain was *prohibited* in this forum, and if it's not, I don't belong here) that I tend to get kind of pissy. Perhaps I should take a breather. *shrug*


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

FWIW, Coffee, I was still unsure where I stood on the whole corporal punishment thing myself when my first was under 1, too, despite all my training. I thought "I was spanked in moderation, and I turned out okay." (not to make any mention in my mind of all those kids I knew who were spanked and did NOT turn out okay, so maybe the spanking was not really a factor in how I turned out, ya know?). It took me a while to reach the conclusion that my gut instinct was right...spanking is really just so far down on the list of viable options it's not viable.

I'm a teacher. If I had to resort to physical or emotional violence against my students to get them to respect me as an authority figure I'd consider myself a HUGE failure. How can I consider myself a decent parent if I have to resort to violence? Ya know? (that is not to say I have never made mistakes, but I own up to them, and I ask forgiveness) I think when we first start out as parents it is easy to think of ourselves as authoritarians, but as our kids get older and we see them becoming teeny tiny mirrors of ourselves we start to recognize the true power we have. It is utterly TERRIFYING by the way! But with that power comes responsibility, and you can choose so many better options. We are not painted into the boxes created by our communities, our families, our faith systems...we can make up the rules as wel go along and do right by our children without the guidance of psycho-therapists or experts. Only you are the expert of your child...as your LO grows into a toddler, and child you may find it harder than you think to use spanking even sparingly as method of teaching and guidance. You may find it a larger priority to protect her spirit than you do protecting your control over her.

Just a thought. Give it time before you form any solid opinions, or latch on to any one guru.

editted because the following post clarifies the question I had.


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *goinggreengirl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


I respect your first point....it makes sense. Our disagreement is only that I, personally, don't see it as being as cut and dried as that. We can split hairs over specific words in the various dictionary definitions of "violence" all night, but I still don't believe that the intent of all spanking is violent. I don't believe that something can be loving and violent all at the same time. I've already said probably more than I should have, and I'm not going to defend spanking anymore because it keeps slipping into almost "advocating" territory, which is against forum rules. If anyone wants to say anything more about it in a way that would require an answer from me re: any kind of defense of spanking, you're welcome to PM or e-mail me. I just don't wanna get banned over this. 

For your second point....I never said that I would spank a child to teach them about God's authority. I said that I was not against certain kinds of spanking under certain circumstances. And that this does not come from me thinking that I'm bigger than my child so might = right, but rather that I am the parent and thus have the authority and responisbility to discipline in a way that I (we, my husband and I) think is best; a way that works. And then I added (speaking of authority...not speaking of spanking) that I believe that a child recognizing their parents' authority is essential in helping them learn how to recognize and respect the authority of God. And IMO, all legitimate authority in the world. (The law, employers, etc.)

I also never said that I spank my child or will spank my child. I said that I am not against it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry that you had those experiences growing up. I really am, I hate thinking of a child being made to feel that way. I was spanked, at times, when I was a child and I DO remember why and I don't remember feeling any lingering shame, anger, resentment, fear, etc., etc. A few others have said the same thing earlier in the thread. I think it's just how it is.....our experiences are different, our families are different and how we use our experiences to help shape what we believe is different.


----------



## coffeegirl (Jan 1, 2008)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *hakeber* 

FWIW, Coffee, I was still unsure where I stood on the whole corporal punishment thing myself when my first was under 1, too, despite all my training. I thought "I was spanked in moderation, and I turned out okay." (not to make any mention in my mind of all those kids I knew who were spanked and did NOT turn out okay, so maybe the spanking was not really a factor in how I turned out, ya know?). It took me a while to reach the conclusion that my gut instinct was right...spanking is really just so far down on the list of viable options it's not viable.

I'm a teacher. If I had to resort to physical or emotional violence against my students to get them to respect me as an authority figure I'd consider myself a HUGE failure. How can I consider myself a decent parent if I have to resort to violence? Ya know? (that is not to say I have never made mistakes, but I own up to them, and I ask forgiveness) I think when we first start out as parents it is easy to think of ourselves as authoritarians, but as our kids get older and we see them becoming teeny tiny mirrors of ourselves we start to recognize the true power we have. It is utterly TERRIFYING by the way! But with that power comes responsibility, and you can choose so many better options. We are not painted into the boxes created by our communities, our families, our faith systems...we can make up the rules as wel go along and do right by our children without the guidance of psycho-therapists or experts. Only you are the expert of your child...as your LO grows into a toddler, and child you may find it harder than you think to use spanking even sparingly as method of teaching and guidance. You may find it a larger priority to protect her spirit than you do protecting your control over her.

Just a thought. Give it time before you form any solid opinions, or latch on to any one guru.

Can I just clarify one thing:

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> A spanking (as I define it, it my other post) also has the advantage of being memorable. If I've told my child repeatedly to not touch the stove, ever, because she can't ever know if it's on or off (for instance....this hasn't happened, but I'm just thinking on the fly here) and she keeps doing it, then a whistle or something isn't going to really stick with her, you know? A smack on the behind probably would, *if my own childhood is any indication.*
> 
> Your own child is less than 10 months old according to your siggie...no? Can you clarify what you meant by this, I am sure it's not sounding like what you meant...right?


Thanks for your post. FWIW I like reading your posts....I tend to agree with you on most threads. 

That last part, I'm not sure what you thought I meant when I said "my own childhood"? I was talking about my personal childhood....ie: when *I* was a child; how I was raised. Not about my daughter.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> Thanks for your post. FWIW I like reading your posts....I tend to agree with you on most threads.
> 
> That last part, I'm not sure what you thought I meant when I said "my own childhood"? I was talking about my personal childhood....ie: when *I* was a child; how I was raised. Not about my daughter.


My own screen exhaustion dyslexia rears it's ugly head. Nevermind.,.I editted to delete that part.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I was spanked, at times, when I was a child and I DO remember why and I don't remember feeling any lingering shame, anger, resentment, fear, etc., etc. A few others have said the same thing earlier in the thread. I think it's just how it is.....our experiences are different, our families are different and how we use our experiences to help shape what we believe is different.


Same here. I wasn't spanked often, which is probably why I remember what the spankings were for.

I was grounded a couple of times as a teenager and I was way angrier about that than about being spanked.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I'm sorry that you had those experiences growing up. I really am, I hate thinking of a child being made to feel that way. I was spanked, at times, when I was a child and I DO remember why and I don't remember feeling any lingering shame, anger, resentment, fear, etc., etc. A few others have said the same thing earlier in the thread. I think it's just how it is.....our experiences are different, our families are different and how we use our experiences to help shape what we believe is different.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> Same here. I wasn't spanked often, which is probably why I remember what the spankings were for.
> 
> I was grounded a couple of times as a teenager and I was way angrier about that than about being spanked.


Sure, I am sure there are plenty of people for whom spanking was just a part of childhood and no more or less scarring than any other element of childhood. I am not sure though that this line of reasoning is valid. I know a lot of people who have tried crack cocaine and not turned out to be raving junkies in the street, but just tried it and had their fun and it served its purpose and they went on with life.

Doesn't mean I'd be okay with my kids trying it in moderation though, ya know? My point is the results of spanking are so vastly different for each person it is hard to justify the use of it. Case in point, my sister and I were hit the same growing up. I remember it as sort of a kind of scary thing that might happen if I misbehaved. My sister has memories of being beaten. She recalls that she was shamed and scared and abused. My parents will swear to the day they die that we got the SAME sort of spankings, for the same reasons, and it was done with love and the willingness to guide us towards the right. It was never meant in hurtful ways and my mother will even attest to the fact that she cried each abnd every time she "had to" spank us.

Why does my sister remember it so differently? I don't know. But I know my parents wish they could take it back to have a relationship with her.

I think that for some people spanking works out fine, but is that a risk you want to take? Knowing how different and unique each child's spirit is, would you be willing to risk the negative? I don't think I would. IME those kids for whom spankings work probably could have been spoken to sternly and firmly and they still would have complied (kids like me, and DS) and those for whom it wouldn't work (for whom it would feel shameful and abusive like my sister, my DH and I am starting to think my DD) ...well why bother? You'd be far better off with prevention and a careful eye and gradual trust building that escalating techniques of authoritarianism. If you start with spanking and other forms of violence (again, the Ghandian definition of the word) before they can fully verbalize their needs and motivations, how can you tell which kind of kid you have? KWIM?

ETA: FWIW, 2xy, groundings are, by Ghandi's definition, passive violence and perhaps even more insidious than physical violence. I would say they are just the teenaged version fo spankings, when you can no longer control your charges with physical violence, you resort to controlling through restricted freedom. It's a page out of any despotic ruler's handbook.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Doesn't mean I'd be okay with my kids trying it in moderation though, ya know? My point is the results of spanking are so vastly different for each person it is hard to justify the use of it. Case in point, my sister and I were hit the same growing up. I remember it sort of a kind of scary thing that might happen if I misbehaved. My sister has memories of being beaten. She recalls that she was shamed and scared and abused. My parents will swear to the day they die that we got the SAME sort of spankings, for the same reasons, and it was done with love and the willingness to guide us towards the right. It was never meant in hurtful ways and my mother will even attest to the fact that she cried each abnd every time she "had to" spank us.
> 
> Why does my sister remember it so differently? I don't know. But I know my parents to this day wish they could take it back to have a relationship with her.


What's really bizarre -- my parents claim I was never spanked. I know we were, I have vivid memories and my sister does too. And they truly seem to believe it...

The other point is -- regardless of whether the child remembers the spankings or the reasons they were spanked or nothing at all, I really believe it has deeper, less visible effects, either on the child, on their relationship with their parents, how they relate to other people, etc... in ways that may not even be fully quantifiable. It's just my belief, I haven't researched it because nothing I read will change the fact that I do not want my child being spanked.


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

I think you're onto something here. I was recently reading a book called The World Peace Diet which is about veganism, and they talk about how one thing (in this case the practice of dominating and eating other creatures) has far-reaching effects on EVERYTHING else we do. Most importantly how we treat each other (i.e. human beings). So that makes sense that the spanking doesn't only affect the one being spanked. The spank-er also is affected....their self-image, their view of themselves in relation to others, how they feel problems should be/can be solved, etc. And another good point that was raised by another book I'm reading which comes to mind in this argument....(In this case it was a book about history & slavery) they said that when we treat others in a certain demeaning way for our own benefit (again, the particular argument was about slavery and oppression, but I'm drawing an analogy), we then sort of "have to" (for our own sanity) think less of that person or group of people, to justify our actions. It's to relieve the pain and stress caused by the cognitive dissonance, if I'm using the term right.

I totally believe that's true. In order to treat someone badly we HAVE to think of them as less-than or "other" (slavery was one situation, wartime is another example...you can think of more) because if we were to think of them as equal to us, WE would then be the bad-guys. So in order to continue to think well of ourselves, we have to adjust how we see the situation. And so I think this applies to the spanking argument too. In order to spank, you have to hold a certain idea about children.....and other power relationships.

Once I started to change my attitude as a parent, it changed my attitude toward other people. Same with becoming vegan. It is all inter-connected.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> The other point is -- regardless of whether the child remembers the spankings or the reasons they were spanked or nothing at all, I really believe it has deeper, less visible effects, either on the child, on their relationship with their parents, how they relate to other people, etc... in ways that may not even be fully quantifiable. It's just my belief, I haven't researched it because nothing I read will change the fact that I do not want my child being spanked.


----------



## hildare (Jul 6, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Coffeegirl, this thread has been sort of interesting and it will probably get closed down if there is anything that can be miscontrued as support or advocacy of spanking.
> 
> ...


you're also correct in that not everyone is able to access information re: spanking. i had a privilege check, yes. primarily, though, i meant the people here on mdc. it just totally blows my mind that there are parents on mdc now who are advocating spanking as a method of discipline. it's just wrong, so wrong that it makes me irrationally angry. i mean, even if you're pro-violence or whatever, hello ..evidence-based parenting.

spankers fooling around on mdc KNOW it's wrong. i KNOW they KNOW it's wrong and every single bit of research points to that.

if people want to cling to imaginary books or whatever that support their poor parenting skills (and to me that's what spanking is) then, whatever. aren't there OTHER forums for you guys? sheesh.

i guess that's what i mean by not caring about converting people. if someone is on the intraweb, on this particular website, then they obviously have access to the info about why they shouldn't spank. society in general is a whole different ballgame, and i do absolutely agree with your analysis.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Responses in quote:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> To be clear I never said one's background JUSTIFIES their choices or actions. I am merely saying that if we can come from a place of understanding and from the big picture, we can lead people to a better set of choices and allow them to see the awe inspiring side of the task rather than the soul crushingly terrifyingly overwhelming fear of the task of keeping a tiny being safe. Have you ever seen a child hold a pet so tightly in the hopes of keeping it safe they squish it? Do you blame the child for being too frightened about keeping it safe that they squished the tiny being? Some people, due to their circumstances and the opportunities afforded them do not realize they are squishing the tiny being to death (not literally, but spiritually), they believe they are keeping it safe.
> 
> ...


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hildare*
> 
> *not anymore, welcome to the new mdc. *


Wait....what? Do forum guidelines even no longer apply? when did that happen?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> *I do believe that people's experiences shape their decisions, and I have compassion for those whose lives lead them to violence. However, after growing up relatively poor (on welfare in government subsidized housing) I will take issue with comparing grown adults/parents to a child with a small animal. There is a reason juveniles are prosecuted differently within the legal framework of many countries.* *Let's not do the liberal overreach and infantilize the disadvantaged. *


Fair point, I was being a little condescending...I even knew that when I typed it, but I couldn't think of a better analogy. I see that fear in my MIL's eyes when she strikes her granddaughters, or feel she is going to have to (because I won't let her do it in front of me and she is like a caged animal...it's really bizarre), and the only thing I can compare it to is a terrified child. I didn't mean to infantalize people, but to draw a comparison between degrees of fear that can rule a person.



*Quote:*


> *Yes, once again, everyone is a product of their upbringing. However, even within a single family a pair of siblings may choose very different paths as adults in reaction to the same childhood home and parents. Assigning excuses for every poor decision robs us of the credit for every good decision as well. If we were all merely at the mercy of our pasts and environments nothing would ever change. Where would the breaking point be?*


 

Well that's what I was trying to say...we aren't ALL at the mercy, some of us are stronger than others, some of us have more wisdom and insight than others, some of us are just plain smarter than others and see better ways of doing things. But SOME people are not born smart or capable or willing or interested in changing the status quo and I feel like if you CAN see a better way, why not help people who aren't as clever as you were get there, too?

*Quote:*


> *I do agree that empathy is an important skill to utilize when communicating with perpetrators of violence. When confronted with violence in my own life, I have found forgiveness and compassion to be essential. On the other hand, the less experience one has with a particular form of violence or bigotry the easier it is to theorize about it. As a woman of color, I cannot tell you how many times racism has been justified to me as the result of upbringing or lack of education. If people were not capable of distinguishing right from wrong without a model of courage and morality right in front of them there would still be slavery in America.*


Well except that there have been models of courage and morality throughout history, people who were orn smarter and more capable or who dreamed of a better world and made it happen, but they are hardly the fabric of the masses. It from these sorts of leaders where organizations like the Quakers drew their inspiration and guidance from. You only need one strong, brave, courageous soul to start a revolution and a few inspired people to follow their lead. If everyone chose to harbor bitterness against the ignorant and unenlightened masses for not seeing that light that they could not ignore instead of sharing their insights, THEN we would still be living in the dark ages in many ways.

*Quote:*


> *You are correct that a person catches more flies with honey than vinegar. In my daily life I do not yell at strangers who disagree with my point of view. I do not feel anger in any visceral way towards those who choose violence but rather a deep and profound sadness. There are so many things that were never modeled for me in my own life that I have chosen as an adult. I know that change is a choice. The reason that I may have less patience for poor behavior in adults is because I know that ultimately (at least in most western countries) our lives are happening because of us, not to us.*


Mostly I agree that this last part is true...well about 50% true depending on your socio-economic background, and many many other factors...but I do wholly agree that it is sad that not everyone can see the light. I think back to grandma who at the age of 15 went on an exchange student program to Germany where she stayed with Nazi family (not too long before WWII). I read her journal once from that time and the family she stayed with were so matter of fact about their hatred it was hard for her to understand how anyone couldn't see how wrong and unchristian they were behaving. But they didn't see their nationalism or their bigottry as wrong. In fact quite the opposite. It was the definition of being good Germans. I find patience through understanding. It helps me to to give up in despair or rage against the proverbial machine. But as you say, having not been a victimn of oppression in any real ways beyond my gender in my life time, it makes it much MUCH easier for me to take a zen approach to it all. I really can appreciate where you're coming from in that respect. Thank YOU for taking the time to discuss this with me.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> I can't say that "you're wrong!" because I don't know for sure. I can tell you that, in my own opinion, linking any and all forms of corporal punishment as being "violent" is remarkably close-minded. Someone slugging someone else in anger is violent. There are also people who, when they hear "spanking", think of all kinds of sadistic forms of abuse and being beaten with belts and whatnot. That would be violent. Making a child go pick a switch so you can beat 'em with it is, IMO, pretty sadistic. A quick slap on the hand or the behind to get a small child's attention for a serious infraction *or to prevent a dangerous situation* (done, btw, out of love) is simply, IMO, not violence. There is a difference there. If violence = ANY kind of "hitting" then how come books and movies are often called violent, language is FREQUENTLY called violent, etc. There's not just the one definition of what "violence" is. The way I described what *I* think of as spanking (above) is not, IMO, violent. To think so would be, in my mind, willfully close-minded. That's just my take and I'm not making any judgements on you or on your friends there. Some of your friends who spank may indeed be violent people, but there's no one-size-fits all answer to this.


How does a spanking prevent a dangerous situation from happening? Supervision does that, holding a hand or restraining in some other way does that, but how does spanking do that?


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I know a lot of people who "spank the right way" which is apparently not in anger and behind closed doors to "keep their child's dignity" and I still see it as violence. They are commended for how good their kids are and how they all moved out and got married and are now flourishing adults....everyone just thinks they were awesome parents and they give advice all the time about parenting the way they did.

All of that being said I was the kid who grew up with their kids and let me tell you it was violent and all of their children were afraid of them. Even though they were completely loving, attached, and seemingly gentle when they weren't "disciplining/punishing"

So even the people who supposedly use spanking as a tool "the right way" I think are very wrong...


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

This. I was spanked according to my mom probably 2-3 times by her for running into our street (my bff lived right across the street and in my excitement I would run to her without looking or the hand of an adult, this was before the age of 4) and then by my grandma probably 4-5 times for similar safety issues.

I don't advocate spanking. I have spanked my dd probably 4-5 times and I feel pretty s****y about it, but i'm just a human and tomorrow I will try to do better, y'know? I feel that way about my mom and grandma for sure. They did the best they could and honestly my mom is pretty anti-spanking. Her whole thing is at the younger ages kids don't have enough impulse control to not do dangerous things and if you can give them a reason to stop and think before say running in the street the next time then thats what you have to do. Do I agree? I dunno. Have I spanked dd for that same reason? Yes, once. Do I think it worked? Who friggin knows man.....is that even quantifiable? I dunno that either, lol.

But I do know I don't remember being spanked AT ALL. Ever.

But what I do remember is being grounded as a teen and I HATED that and felt very misunderstood and disrespected. Totally non-violent with very lasting effects.

And I also kinda wish my mom would have been a stricter diciplinarian(sp? lol) I feel like she was waaaaay to loosey goosey. And she thinks she was pretty strict herself so it's all perception isn't it?

I just don't think there IS a cut and dry answer of this is the best way for every person on the planet just typing that seems sooooo silly. Ridiculous even.

And I am not pro spanking just to repeat myself.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> Same here. I wasn't spanked often, which is probably why I remember what the spankings were for.
> 
> I was grounded a couple of times as a teenager and I was way angrier about that than about being spanked.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

This is so interesting to me because my aunt and uncle are these people to a T. And I have to say I grew up with their kids and they were not really afraid of their parents, quite the opposite actually, very close together all the time and I was together with the too. They are a very very close family and the kids are both successes and married just like the pp said. And once again, I am not pro-spanking, but I have to say that just because you see one, ONE, family a certain way does not mean that every family is that certain way. That is just silly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> I know a lot of people who "spank the right way" which is apparently not in anger and behind closed doors to "keep their child's dignity" and I still see it as violence. They are commended for how good their kids are and how they all moved out and got married and are now flourishing adults....everyone just thinks they were awesome parents and they give advice all the time about parenting the way they did.
> 
> ...


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I did say I know a LOT of people like that


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I just don't think there IS a cut and dry answer of this is the best way for every person on the planet just typing that seems sooooo silly. Ridiculous even.


I don't know about anyone else, but I am for sure not saying that anything is the best way for every person on the planet. I am saying that physical violence, toward children especially, is unequivocally the *worst* way for every person on the planet, and that my opinion is that spanking counts as physical violence. Am I going to try to *make* everyone see it the same way? No. Do I *wish* they would? Absolutely.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I just think it's kind of self important to assume or believe that what you think is the best or only way would be right for other people....I may hav ideas about what is good or right but I certainly don't believe that I hold the answers for others.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

Agreed. I don't think anyone hitting anyone for any reason is ok especially not an innocent child. Yes children are innocent. Can they be annoying? Sure. Do they deserve to be slapped for "not listening" to an adult demand? No.

I worked with alzheimer's patients for years and let me tell you they have a lot in common with kids. Would it be acceptable for spanking your 90 y/o mother for running across the street? How about for kicking me? Throwing a tantrum? Biting someone else? They do dangerous things all the time b/c they don't know any better. Just like a child they need to be told 20 million times. You need to be preventative and on top of them all day long. You need to spend time with them and soothe them when they are upset. Yeah ok maybe an older kid would do something knowingly and on purpose but would you really spank a 10 y/o? Wouldn't you be able to reason with them and teach them a life lesson as oppose to resorting to physical violence?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> I don't know about anyone else, but I am for sure not saying that anything is the best way for every person on the planet. I am saying that physical violence, toward children especially, is unequivocally the *worst* way for every person on the planet, and that my opinion is that spanking counts as physical violence. Am I going to try to *make* everyone see it the same way? No. Do I *wish* they would? Absolutely.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> I did say I know a LOT of people like that


I'm sorry, I did misread your comments. But after reading it I have to say it still strikes me as preposterous. I know thats inflamatory but I can't think of a better way to say it. I mean are you contending that you knew a whole bunch of families growing up and they all acted, in this regard, the same way and in this regard got the same result of children being secretly afraid of their parents but in spite of their abusive upbringing went on to all become success stories? That just seems so unlikely....


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I agree that spanking a 10 year old would be a far less desirable an action to talking and reasoning.

And I, also have spent a lot of time with Alzheimer's patients. My experience was as a child volunteering at the nursing home my mom worked at. I do remember the nurses sternly grabbing patients hands to get their attention in the same way my grandmother would sternly grab my arm and sink a little bit of nail into my flesh to get my attention. Is that violent?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> Agreed. I don't think anyone hitting anyone for any reason is ok especially not an innocent child. Yes children are innocent. Can they be annoying? Sure. Do they deserve to be slapped for "not listening" to an adult demand? No.
> 
> I worked with alzheimer's patients for years and let me tell you they have a lot in common with kids. Would it be acceptable for spanking your 90 y/o mother for running across the street? How about for kicking me? Throwing a tantrum? Biting someone else? They do dangerous things all the time b/c they don't know any better. Just like a child they need to be told 20 million times. You need to be preventative and on top of them all day long. You need to spend time with them and soothe them when they are upset. Yeah ok maybe an older kid would do something knowingly and on purpose but would you really spank a 10 y/o? Wouldn't you be able to reason with them and teach them a life lesson as oppose to resorting to physical violence?


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I'm sorry, I did misread your comments. But after reading it I have to say it still strikes me as preposterous. I know thats inflamatory but I can't think of a better way to say it. I mean are you contending that you knew a whole bunch of families growing up and they all acted, in this regard, the same way and in this regard got the same result of children being secretly afraid of their parents but in spite of their abusive upbringing went on to all become success stories? That just seems so unlikely....


I don't want to speak for this poster, but I certainly grew up with several families that utilized spanking, my own being one of them. And yes, they *all* resulted in scared children, quite possibly because that is usually the point of spanking. It's classic negative reinforcement, and it creates an environment in which children do not act out (or, more likely, hide their misbehaviors) because they are scared of being struck. If they weren't scared of it, it wouldn't "work."

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I was spanked according to my mom probably 2-3 times ....this was before the age of 4...
> 
> ...


And after re-reading this, it seems obvious to me that you remember the grounding in your teen years but not the spankings in your childhood because the childhood years were likely about a decade earlier, and most people don't remember a lot from when they were toddlers. This does not mean that you were not profoundly negatively affected by the spankings you received, whether you realized it or not. It's quite likely that the reason you have resorted to spanking your daughter even though you seem to not be a fan of it is because you were spanked as a child.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hildare*
> 
> if someone is on the intraweb, on this particular website, then they obviously have access to the info about why they shouldn't spank.


FWIW, I've chosen not to spank (with my younger three, although I did spank ds1 a few times), because it just doesn't feel right to me at this point in my life. However, over my years at MDC, I've checked out links I've been given on this topic several times. Every one of those links was given to me with the assertion that "this clearly demonstrates what's wrong with spanking"...and not one of those links did that. Not one. Every one of them started off with something about the negative impact of spanking, indicated that the referenced research would explain this...and then proceeded to describe research on children who were beaten. I was spanked a few times. I had friends who were beaten. They're not the same thing.

If there's research out there that really does show these effects from spanking, I'd be interested in reading it. But, the last time I asked (several years ago), the poster I asked snottily dismissed me with some variation on "those links were posted upthread, and you could read them if you really wanted to"...which I had. They didn't say what people were claiming they said.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


Hey man, I am in no way arguing with that at all. I want to make it clear I am not in favor of spanking nor do I feel I have any answers on this subject.

But I do want to say that I do not feel spanking was a theme in my childhood AT ALL. I don't remember it, it was not used past the age of 3/4 and my mom is not a fan and I doubt she spanked my little brother at all 10 years down the line when he was a toddler.

I truely hope that my daughter does not see spanking as a theme in her life when she is my age, I have vowed to her never to use the s word as a threat and also never to do the deed again once I realized I really really did not want to do it. But it took me a little while to come to my own true feelings about it and by that time I had already spanked her.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

This is very intriguing to me. I guess it makes me wonder how I can undo the damage I have already done by already having spanked dd?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NellieKatz*
> 
> I think you're onto something here. I was recently reading a book called The World Peace Diet which is about veganism, and they talk about how one thing (in this case the practice of dominating and eating other creatures) has far-reaching effects on EVERYTHING else we do. Most importantly how we treat each other (i.e. human beings). So that makes sense that the spanking doesn't only affect the one being spanked. The spank-er also is affected....their self-image, their view of themselves in relation to others, how they feel problems should be/can be solved, etc. And another good point that was raised by another book I'm reading which comes to mind in this argument....(In this case it was a book about history & slavery) they said that when we treat others in a certain demeaning way for our own benefit (again, the particular argument was about slavery and oppression, but I'm drawing an analogy), we then sort of "have to" (for our own sanity) think less of that person or group of people, to justify our actions. It's to relieve the pain and stress caused by the cognitive dissonance, if I'm using the term right.
> 
> ...


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> FWIW, I've chosen not to spank (with my younger three, although I did spank ds1 a few times), because it just doesn't feel right to me at this point in my life. However, over my years at MDC, I've checked out links I've been given on this topic several times. Every one of those links was given to me with the assertion that "this clearly demonstrates what's wrong with spanking"...and not one of those links did that. Not one. Every one of them started off with something about the negative impact of spanking, indicated that the referenced research would explain this...and then proceeded to describe research on children who were beaten. I was spanked a few times. I had friends who were beaten. They're not the same thing.
> 
> If there's research out there that really does show these effects from spanking, I'd be interested in reading it. But, the last time I asked (several years ago), the poster I asked snottily dismissed me with some variation on "those links were posted upthread, and you could read them if you really wanted to"...which I had. They didn't say what people were claiming they said.


Okay, this link asserts that the more a child is spanked, the lower their IQ.

And this one asserts that the more often or severely a child is spanked or beaten, the more likely they are to experience depression and anxiety, immediately following the spanking and after.

From this link, which illustrates that spanked children are more likely to be bullies:

Quote:


> Taylor and colleagues asked about 2,500 mothers how often they had spanked their 3-year-old child in the past month. Nearly half of the moms said they had not spanked their child during the previous month, 27.9% said they spanked their 3-year-old once or twice within the last month, and 26.5% percent said they spanked their child more than twice in the past month.


Most of Murray Straus's work observes corporal punishment in an array of severity and frequency, and they all come to the same conclusions: spanking has negative effects, and beatings have worse ones. This may not be enough to "clearly demonstrate what is wrong with spanking" to you, but to me, anything that has been shown to simultaneously run the risk of decreasing my child's IQ and increasing his/her risks of becoming a bully, becoming antisocial, experiencing depression and/or anxiety, having unprotected sex, participating in domestic violence later in life, and becoming more aggressive overall is observably inappropriate at the least and absolutely idiotic at worst.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> Okay, this link asserts that the more a child is spanked, the lower their IQ.
> 
> ...


The first one refers to a study, and offers no backup for anything. I'll try to find the study itself next week (the next few days are crazy) and try to read it. I'll admit I find it very hard to credit, as I grew up in a time and place where everybody was being spanked, and my generation (locally) still managed to turn out a lot of awfully intelligent people.

The second one, I'll have to dig into next week, as well, as the meat of it (the actual analysis) is very wordy and it's bedtime. I will say that the assertion that anybody who is on the net, on this website, has access to this information (which is the point I was addressing with my above post) is laughable. I could read dozens, if not hundreds of pages of posts on this forum in the time it will take me to wade through that one study, let alone more of them.

The last one is pretty much laughable. Parental reports of how much they're spanking, combined with how much aggressive, bullying behaviour a child is exhibiting? That's correlation, but it's not necessarily causation. Of my three youngest, the only one I'm tempted to spank - ever - is ds2, because he's aggressive, sometimes bullies people, hits, throws, etc. Before noon today, he's punched his older sister in both the eye and the mouth, and this is not even remotely uncommon. The frustration of dealing with that kind of behaviour on an ongoing basis doesn't always lead to great moments in parenting - but those moments are a result of his aggressive behaviour.

The fact that websites assert or illustrate (not very clearly) that spanking does A, B or C does not mean that spanking has been shown to do any of those things. It means that lots of peopple assert that spanking has been shown to do these things.

I also have to admit that I did believe in spanking when ds1 was little (although I very rarely actually did spank him). He's now 18, and we've had no major, and few minor, behavioural issues with him. He's never been depressed. He's never been a bully. He's never been aggressive. He's been in the gifted program since third grade, and has been active at various times in choir, drama, Interact (service) club, Gymnastics, Ultimate, peer counseling, volunteer work at the Boys and Girls Club, and counseling at Outdoor School. He's an understanding, loving big brother. His friends adore him, partly because he always finds time for them, especially if someone is having a problem. He gives me hugs any time he notices I'm having a bad day (and he usually does notice). He's kind, outgoing, respectful, courteous, etc. etc.

Me? I was spanked. I've also struggled with depression and anxiety most of my life. I had serious aggression issues in my early teens. I had unprotected sex a few times, before I met my ex and smartened up on that front. And...none of it was because I was spanked. A lot of it was because I was sexually abused. Even more of it was because the wife of my abuser was a toxic, manipulative, evil woman who poisoned the lives of everyone she touched. Some of it was because my dad was/is an emotionally absent alcoholic. And, the aggression was mostly because of a combination of being bullied and having severe PMS, at a time when that diagnosis was barely known to the general public. So...a survey that asked if we were spanked, and then drew conclusions about the effect of spanking on my (or my sibling's) behaviour would be missing a whole lot of pieces. Surveys - and even diaries - also fail to account for beatings and flat out abuse, because mom isn't going to record "whipped junior with a belt for spilling my OJ", yk?

My biggest objection to all this is that most of what's presented here as fact about the effects of spanking is grossly oversimplified or applied with too broad a brush. It's also very, very likely that parents who don't spank have made a conscious effort not to do so, and are probably, in general, far more educated about other parenting strategies. Those two facts alone are going to have an impact on a person's childhood, imo.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I just think it's kind of self important to assume or believe that what you think is the best or only way would be right for other people....I may hav ideas about what is good or right but I certainly don't believe that I hold the answers for others.


This really isn't a "let's agree to disagree" sort of issue for me. There are places in the world where women still do not have the right to vote. Countries where children are sold into sexual slavery and people turn a blind eye. Places where there is state sanctioned torture and killings based upon sexual preference. I don't care how many people you can find to defend these actions or how many countries in which they are permitted under the law, wrong is wrong. So hitting your child is legal in the United States, so what? The outcome of the civil war is not what suddenly made slavery morally reprehensible, it was wrong long before it was illegal. I certainly hope that one day people look back upon the legally sanctioned violence of our time with the same disgust and disbelief that is now reserved for the once legal practice of beating your wife.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> My biggest objection to all this is that most of what's presented here as fact about the effects of spanking is grossly oversimplified or applied with too broad a brush. It's also very, very likely that parents who don't spank have made a conscious effort not to do so, and are probably, in general, far more educated about other parenting strategies. Those two facts alone are going to have an impact on a person's childhood, imo.


I don't need a study to practice observations, reasoning, and logical thinking. If I hit my child in order to cause them pain (whether or not I also believe that it will help to instill obedience) that is unacceptable. Among the other things I don't need studies to KNOW are wrong: slavery, human trafficking, domestic abuse, animal abuse etc... I do think people tend to hide behind studies when they are not confident about their own convictions. However, when you see a parent hit their child and the shame, physical pain, and humiliation that it causes them it is crystal clear that striking children is not ok.


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


Wrong is not wrong though. Wrong is relative to cultural belief. You might not LIKE someone else's "ok" but that doesn't make it wrong. My FIL told me "morally you should marry DP" - well, i'm morally opposed to marriage! So i can't, because to do so would be "wrong" (for me). You don't get to dictate morality except to your children, and then only while they're young.


----------



## umsami (Dec 1, 2003)

Regarding all of the spanking studies, there was an interesting paper published in the Akron Law Review which actually contradicted many of them. I don't necessarily agree with all of the author's conclusions but it was interested reading nonetheless. It looks at the results of a spanking ban in Sweden.

Honestly, I think that these papers that talk about the detriments of spanking are not necessarily looking at what I would consider "normal" (at least when I grew up) spanking--a spank on the bottom with a hand, once, not in anger. I think these are much more likely to be spanking out of anger--which tends to get out of control. And that's my big problem with spanking, IMHO. It's too easy for it to escalate. It's too easy for it to turn into true abuse. Kids having the &$*# beat out of them, etc.

I don't think any parent starts out thinking I'm going to be abusive.... or I'm going to spank in anger...or whatever. But it happens. I think that's why it is better to just have a no violence/spanking plan from the get-go. I also think it's why that our schools should have a mandated parenting class that teaches GD techniques and child development in high school.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoBecGo*
> 
> Wrong is not wrong though. Wrong is relative to cultural belief. You might not LIKE someone else's "ok" but that doesn't make it wrong. My FIL told me "morally you should marry DP" - well, i'm morally opposed to marriage! So i can't, because to do so would be "wrong" (for me). You don't get to dictate morality except to your children, and then only while they're young.


I believe that the ONLY immoral things are things that hurt others. Being married, or not being married, doesn't harm anyone.


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> I believe that the ONLY immoral things are things that hurt others. Being married, or not being married, doesn't harm anyone.


I tend to agree, but i have been reliably informed that both i and my kids will burn in hell because i didn't marry their (different! rofl!) fathers, and that sending my poor kids to hell is wrong and harmful. People's morality is really not as simple as "right" and "wrong".

One thing which is (becoming increasingly) obvious (especially since MDC dropped any pretence of moderation) is that a lot of what parents do is based on belief and not fact. On cultural or religious or other belief. If you agree with a practice it's because you're logical, if you disagree it's because you're not, but if you have a study to back you up the people who agree think it's a good study, the people who disagree think it's a poorly done study and you're only using it because you lack confidence in your (presumably therefore unprovable) convictions.

I am beginning to think that although there are things *I* wouldn't do as a parent, there's nothing much, outwith the realms of actual abuse, that is really "right" in terms of how to raise kids in general.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> I believe that the ONLY immoral things are things that hurt others. Being married, or not being married, doesn't harm anyone.


Precisely. Of course we can get into the intellectual debate about moral relativism, but then you better be ready to apply a justification for physical violence against children to physical violence against adults, women, old people, strangers, other family members...

Edited to say:

In the scheme of things there is no definitive right or wrong because everything is open to interpretation and personal opinion. However, the application of that line of thinking is really only acceptable when you are the only person being effected by your actions. We have all chosen to live in a society amongst others and therefore must adhere to certain codes of conduct. This principle is the foundation of our entire legal system. In South Africa women are gang raped as a corrective measure for being homosexual. The ideology behind the actions is justified by the beliefs of many in that culture. My issue is not with the ideology (you can have whatever warped views you want) but rather with the forcible application of that ideology onto others.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Oh this is just digusting. Correlating GANG RAPE to a smack on the hiney? You have been really pushing the limit in this conversation as far as what you have compared spanking to but this just crosses the line. Get a grip, lady.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> Precisely. Of course we can get into the intellectual debate about moral relativism, but then you better be ready to apply a justification for physical violence against children to physical violence against adults, women, old people, strangers, other family members...
> 
> ...


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

And how is that sort of outlandish argument going to get this conversation anywhere?


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> And how is that sort of outlandish argument going to get this conversation anywhere?


Of course you are entitled to your opinion (as I am mine). My post was actually agreeing with a previous comment about morality being relative. I chose an example that I knew would be reprehensible to the other members of this forum as a way to illustrate that point. You say imposing my personal code of conduct and moral compass onto how others should treat their children is "pushing the limit". Ok, tell me who has the authority to advocate against violence? Where do we draw the line and who gets to decide on the standards we live by.

If you would prefer an apples to apples comparison I will use spousal abuse instead. If a man lightly smacks his wife because she behaves in a way that he deems unacceptable there are many places in the world that protect his 'right' to do so. The greater point I was trying to make is:

In the scheme of things there is no definitive right or wrong because everything is open to interpretation and personal opinion. *However, the application of that line of thinking is really only acceptable when you are the only person being effected by your actions.* Your "smack your child on the bottom" that you may find completely morally sound is another person's "smack my wife in the face".


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> This. I was spanked according to my mom probably 2-3 times by her for running into our street (my bff lived right across the street and in my excitement I would run to her without looking or the hand of an adult, this was before the age of 4) and then by my grandma probably 4-5 times for similar safety issues.
> 
> ...


 I would not call grounding non-violent...non physical yes, non-violent, no.

Violence can come in many forms but its main objective is to squelch certain behaviors, especially those that challenge authority of the ruling class. In the microcosm of your family, a grounding is the equivalent of a trade embargo. Cuba has been grounded "for the rest of her life!" for it's infractions. A grounding is violent because it imposes arbitrary power and offers no chance for learning. It is purely punitive and rarely linked to the crime. I was grounded off the phone for not doing my homework. How was this related? It was not the use of the phone that caused my homework to be unfinished. It was my sheer boredom with the subject and everytime I tried to focus I fell asleep...how would staying off the phone help me focus on boring algebra? Especially since I didn't need the practice to do it? It didn't. The only person I ever spoke to on the phone at that age was my birth mother. It was their way of taking away my only connection to someone I loved outside of the immediate familiar unit and they knew it would bug me as much as I bugged them and hopefully it would keep me in line.

I love my dad and step mom, but these sort of tactics were, cruel, retalitory and counter productive. It is largely due to those sort of discipline techniques that I left home at 13 to go live with my birth mother. They will admit that now.

Groundings are violent because they serve to oppress willfulness and rebellion and as I mentioned upthread are the adolescent equivalent of a spanking. When children are small, we smack them because we can and because they incite fear of our loved ones (and ONLY refuge of safety and protection and provider of all basic needs) being angry enough or disappointed enough to cause us pain which is scary enough to figure out what we are supposed to, even if it means utter and total paralysis of action. Just because grounding doesn't involve hands doesn't make it any more respectful than a smack on the hiney.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I just think it's kind of self important to assume or believe that what you think is the best or only way would be right for other people....I may hav ideas about what is good or right but I certainly don't believe that I hold the answers for others.


 Not using violence of the phyiscal or passive kind IS better. Maybe that is self-important, or maybe it is just my belief or maybe it is actually proven to get better results. Maybe all of the above. Check out the CNVC, Ghandi, Martin Luthur King Jr., and a plethora of non-violent trainers, speakers and promoters and you will read about the success they have had with non-violence.

I cannot say for certain that spanking is *bad *and I am sure, as SB pointed out, there isn't much conclusive evidence that it is, but I CAN say without a shadow of a hint of a doubt, that non-violent techniques give children the skills they need to make good choices and meet their needs in non-violent ways rather than merely avoid bad choices and have fewer tools for meeting their needs with non-violent techniques. It may mean having a more difficult job when they are younger, but it will pay off in the long run. I know of not ONE adult or older child who has been raised in a truly non-violent communication home (I do not mean one who merely didn't hit or ground, or who was not involved in their discipline, but those who implemented NVC techniques to resolve and transform conflicts rather than squlech them) who has violent tendencies or problems with agression or who harbor resentment of their parents. The success rate is 100%. The success rate of violent discipline is 50% at best as far as I can tell.

It works for everyone because it is individually catered with a variety of skills and outlooks and tools to meet everyone's needs, build respect and foster love and self-confidence. Try it out. You might like it! Money back guaranteed!

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I agree that spanking a 10 year old would be a far less desirable an action to talking and reasoning.
> 
> And I, also have spent a lot of time with Alzheimer's patients. My experience was as a child volunteering at the nursing home my mom worked at. I do remember the nurses sternly grabbing patients hands to get their attention in the same way my grandmother would sternly grab my arm and sink a little bit of nail into my flesh to get my attention. Is that violent?


 Sink a little bit of nail into the flesh? I would pull my gran out of a home that did that to my gran. I would be livid if anyone ever did that to my child.

YES! That is excessively violent.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> Oh this is just digusting. Correlating GANG RAPE to a smack on the hiney? You have been really pushing the limit in this conversation as far as what you have compared spanking to but this just crosses the line. Get a grip, lady.
> 
> And how is that sort of outlandish argument going to get this conversation anywhere?


 She wasn't comparing the two, she was discussing moral relativity completely* as an aside. *

I understand, that as someone who has spanked their child you need to make it okay. I get that. It was a mistake and you own that. You're human, we all are. I have shouted and raised my voice and shut my kid in his room or shoved him off of me when he was being too rough because mommy needed a break or she was going to go postal. But it's not okay...it's can't be a mistake if it's also okay. I cannot say I am sorry if it happened and then justify that it might not have been such a bad thing I did afterall, or can I? I don't feel like I can.

Violence of all kinds is still violence and the sole purpose of violence is to oppress. I refuse to believe any mother wants to oppress their child. I believe that we participate in the oppression of our children because we have been led to believe it is the right and socially appropriate way to train them how to belong in society, but if what we want for our children is a happier life than we had, participating in systems that oppress their natural drive for freedom and individuality is NOT okay. Not for anyone.

I highly recommend reading Identity Skin Blood Heart by Minnie Bruce Pratt (I have a copy if you are interest PM me with your e-mail) and writings by Peggy McIntosh, Mark Ethan Smith and also checking out readings by ML King and Marshall Rosenberg. These people have made some very interesting observations about the ways that our social systems are inherently violent and how we participate often unwillingly in their perpetuation because we are trained to be oblivious to the damage they cause and indeed embrace and glorify the damage as valuable entities of our own oppression. Both the oppressor and the opressed are damaged infinitely and permanantly by these systems. For me to consider myself a good parent and a good teacher I feel it is vital for me to expose these systemic degrees of oppression and do everything in my power to counteract and destroy that which contributes to the oppression of my children and my students. I do not believe that we are hard wired to discipline our chuildren towards the authority of patriarchal systems we now live in. I believe that we can get back to our pre-historic roots of being a global society of matriarchal values of peace and protection and community, but we cannot do that by participating in or giving any credence at all to values that contradict our hearts.

I do not believe that any healthy, mentally fit mother's *heart* would ever tell them to inflict pain *on their child* on purpose.


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> Oh this is just digusting. Correlating GANG RAPE to a smack on the hiney? You have been really pushing the limit in this conversation as far as what you have compared spanking to but this just crosses the line. Get a grip, lady.


I am glad that it has been pointed out that my examples were directed at the secondary debate taking place regarding moral relativism. I missed your admission earlier about spanking your daughter. I was in no way trying to compare your actions with gang rape or brutality of a similar nature and I apologize if my statements came across that way.

For the record I was hit by both of my parents though they strove for a home grounded in non-violence. I also witnessed them physically fight. They were wonderful parents and I have good relationships with them as an adult. However, their resort to violence (yes VIOLENCE) though clearly the result of their own traumatic upbringings and the stress of being poor does not justify those actions. When I say that spanking is an act of violence I do not mean to further imply that all parents who make that mistake are horrible people and bad parents. I believe that yelling is also problematic. I have yelled at my spouse. I am not proud of it and it's something that I strive not to do. We all make mistakes. The important thing is to learn from those mistakes and take responsibility for our own choices and actions as adults (especially with our children as they're stuck with us).


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I guess it does seem weird but I did grow up in a very "religious" environment and about 90% of the parents spanked. I was SEVERELY abused as a child BUT I am completely normal and healthy and I think successful. I am an amazing SAHM and married to the love of my life. I graduated high school after being forced to quit and living on my own since I was 16. I was homeless for quite some time too. So do I think a child who grew up loved but spanked and was afraid of their parents for spanking could grow up to be normal? YUP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I'm sorry, I did misread your comments. But after reading it I have to say it still strikes me as preposterous. I know thats inflamatory but I can't think of a better way to say it. I mean are you contending that you knew a whole bunch of families growing up and they all acted, in this regard, the same way and in this regard got the same result of children being secretly afraid of their parents but in spite of their abusive upbringing went on to all become success stories? That just seems so unlikely....


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

For the person who commented with their grandma digging her nails into them, yeah I would say that is violence. I would also say the people you saw doing that at the nursing home were very very wrong. I specialized in Alzheimer's care for 5 years and never laid a hand on any of them unless it was a loving pat or hug. Did I go insane sometimes?! yup. I got kicked in the stomach 3x by a severely delusional patient while I was pregnant and by myself. (night shift and the other aide was on break) All I did was make sure she was safe and walk away. That's one example...I have been hit, kicked, punched (in the face by a large man and had a black eye), tackled, bit, had my face spit on...you name it I have experienced it.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> A grounding is violent because it imposes arbitrary power and offers no chance for learning. It is purely punitive and rarely linked to the crime.
> 
> ...


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

To me, if a parenting decision that I can make has been correlated to countless negative effects, I am going to choose an alternate route, whether there is causation or not. This is because if there is even a hint of evidence that spanking might be the cause, why bother with it? Especially when, as Gucci pointed out so eloquently, many of the negative effects--that are plenty of evidence for me, if not for you--are observable at the time of the spanking. For example, how can any logical person expect their child not to hit others when they are being hit? How can they be expected not to fear the parent who strikes them? How can they be expected to trust adults to make decisions for them when these decisions sometimes result in physical pain? These areas don't need studies, as far as I am concerned.

I look to studies more for the long-term effects of a parenting decision, and I have read tons of them. I don't have a bookmarked list, so you got the first ones I could find in a Google search. And it's easy to dig on them when you haven't even read the articles I linked to, or taken the time to go through the studies they are reporting on. And to the person who mentioned the Swedish study, one study contesting the findings of hundreds of others is not enough for me, sorry. Like I mentioned before, Murray Straus's body of work is enough evidence for me, personally, and I don't think at this point anything could change my mind back to spanking (I have never spanked, but it's what I was taught growing up). Some of these studies do eliminate other factors, so causation is evident. Many do include occasional light spanking, not "beatings." Though, again, as I mentioned earlier, most of them show that it's a matter of degree. A spanking with a hand on a clothed bottom might be very different from a beating on bare skin with a leather belt, but what the studies show is that the worse the violence is, the more severe the negative outcome is.

And I totally agree that some things are just wrong, period. *It is a basic human rights issue.* I believe all humans have the right to freedom, equality, and safety, unless they attempt to prohibit another from these same rights. This includes children. Slavery, rape, discrimination, and violence are examples of violations of basic human rights, which, to me, makes them undeniably and indisputably *wrong*. And I think we've already established that I am in the spanking = hitting = violence camp...


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> I do not believe that any healthy, mentally fit mother's *heart* would ever tell them to inflict pain *on their child* on purpose.


I think it's a stretch to say that all parents who spank are mentally dysfunctional.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I would say more often than not people spank in a moment of frustration and out of anger. If you take the time to methodically punish your child with a spanking I would think a rational person would decide against it....


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Originally Posted by *2xy* 



> I think it's a stretch to say that all parents who spank are mentally dysfunctional.


I didn't say that. I said, they were not listening to their hearts, because the heart of a healthy mother would not instinctively resort to violence. I do not believe that it would.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> I didn't say that. I said, they were not listening to their hearts, because the heart of a healthy mother would not instinctively resort to violence. I do not believe that it would.


Well, I don't know about you, but I think and feel with my brain. My heart pumps blood.....it doesn't tell me how to behave.

And to be honest, I think human beings are instinctively violent animals who have to work at non-violence. Doesn't the state of the world make that obvious? There hasn't been a non-violent period in human history, AFAIK.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> For example, how can any logical person expect their child not to hit others when they are being hit?
> 
> ...


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> Well, I don't know about you, but I think and feel with my brain. My heart pumps blood.....it doesn't tell me how to behave.
> 
> And to be honest, I think human beings are instinctively violent animals who have to work at non-violence. Doesn't the state of the world make that obvious? There hasn't been a non-violent period in human history, AFAIK.


The state of the world throughout our known history has been the records of patriarchy. I find this a dubious source.

I do not think with my heart (that is oxymoronic really) but it is a dead metaphor to say we feel and listen to our hearts (I did not think I'd have to explain that it is a metaphor, but there you go) it means that we listen to the part of our inner psyche that is connected to our most base instincts and free of social and cultural manipulation. I believe this is the root of non-violence. I think we NOW have to work at this because since the world's story has been written down (which does not mean all of our past only those parts that have been recorded by men for the benefit of men) we have been ruled by patriarchal systems that connect aggression and violence and oppression of weaker individuals with social success. I do not think this is nature, I believe it is nurture. My evidence is purely anecdoteal, but it is mine.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> This depends largely on the household. I got grounded a few times in high school. Every grounding was for being out past curfew, without calling home to let my mom know where i was. While one can still argue with grounding, it was absolutely linked to the "crime" in ourfamily. I've grounded ds1 once or twice - thought it was twice, but I can't actually remember the second one, so maybe it was just once. He didn't come home after school, didn't call, and didn't get back until after 7:30 (school was dismissed at 2:30). He was 12.
> 
> OTOH, I do know what you mean. One of ds1's friends has been grounded at least three dozen times (my best guess is that it's closer to 70) in the five years of high school. I can't recall a single time that the grounding had anything to do with his "crime". He got grounded for forgetting to take his ADHD medication, for not eating his lunch, for mouthing off his stepmom, etc. etc. It made no sense to me, I have to admit.


 Well, yes, mostly I was thinking of the other kind of illogical consequence. I am not a big fan of grounding as a punishment in and of itself, I suppose in the way you described it might make sense but being out was not the reason they didn't come home. I would be interested in finding out why he went out before I took away DS's right to. I would be asking what he felt he needed, and what his thinking was...I believe in restorative justice over punitive justice and I would be asking him to make up the pain and hurt he caused by disappearing. I would also work with him to find ways to meet his need for autonomy while also respecting my need to know he is safe. Grounding might be a part of that, but only if DS agreed that it seemed like a fair and appropriate consequence for his actions...but that's me. For example (/he's only 6) he had a really hard time getting ready for school yesterday and was being really very rude to his dad and on the bus I said "So what was that about?" and he finally said he was up all night playing Ben Ten in his head and so he couldn't sleep well, and I suggested that maybe it would be a good idea to take a break from ben 10 and he agreed and he's now on a break from the TV show...essentially he is grounded, but he is grounding himself and when he feels ready to handle it, he'll watch it again.

And before you roll your eyes and tell me how he's an easy kid and I don't understand what it's like to have a difficult kid...we've BTDT, and I am sure we will be going through tough spots again and again, but each time he learns more and more skills of how to make choices and how to self-regulate...it's a lengthy and arduous process.

Quote: 


> This is interesting. I was spanked a few times as a kid. I don't remember ever being afraid of being spanked. I was always afraid of disappointing my mom, though. We talked about it a few years ago, when we overheard my sister talking to her oldest in a similar way to the way mom used to talk to us sometimes. Mom realized that my sister was using the same conversational tone that she used to use, and her response was "I wish I could take it back - I didn't realize". She was never intending to make us feel as if we'd disappionted her - that was just the way it came across. I was terrified of getting that tone, and would have many times rather had a smack on the butt.


 I should clarify here and when I say smacked I merely mean forces of violence against kids...this could easily be replced with shaming, yelling, shouting, or any method to make a kid feel small, powerless, or voiceless in thier home. I was the same. One look from my dad and I was a puddle of tears. I wouldn't have preferred being smacked, I don't think, but I didn't like disappointing them much either...pain can be caused emotionally, too. It's still pain.

Quote:


> That kind of thing depends on a certain level of reasonableness from the people you're dealing with, though. There have been plenty of regimes who would have gunned down Ghandi without a second thought. I think non-violence can be effective, but it does have its limits.


 They could have, but they didn't...why? There would have been a million people standing in line to take his place, his disciples. Jesus was non-violent and his disciples took on his mission after his execution. Same with ML King. It only takes a brave person to break the cycle and make a change. It only takes one spark.

Quote:


> Once again, this doesn't allow for the other side of the equation. I try non-violent techniques. But, my kids are all different, and ds2 is like a stone wall. I have no idea what's going on his head most of the time, and no idea how to effectively discipline him. None. We're as respectful as we can be. We're totally willing to try to brainstorm techniques and approaches and problem solve. We just end up back in the space where everything is going fine, and I"m in the kitchen washing a pan, and dd1 screams "ds2 punched me in the mouth!". There's not even usually any build-up, and when there is, it's often of the "they exchanged two hostile sentences first" type. He literally walked up to her yesterday, and punched her in the eye...no argument, no anything - just a random act of violence. We have resorted to grounding (although I try not to frame it that way, as he's still young) because sometimes he just can't play safely with the other kids. But, if he grows up to be aggressive, or have violent tendencies, it's a reach (imo) to say that it's because of my parenting.


 Would any of them be better off getting a spanking? Dop genuinely believe that or are you merely trying to say it can't work for me. It does work. It takes patience and time and a lot of energy, but it does work because the whole point is to find the need and meet it. Teaching communication skills is not easy but it can work over time.

Quote: 


> Hmm...I screwed up once and smacked dd1. I wasn't trying to oppress her. It wasn't even a parenting decision, as such. She was two, and she walked up while I was nursing ds2, and he was just falling asleep and yanked his hair - hard. I smacked her without even thinking, because someone had just walked up and hurt my baby. I didn't hit her as hard as I would have, because my brain managed to click into "OMG - that's 'my baby, too!" before I made contact. But, nobody was trying to oppress anybody. I was trying to protect my baby. And, the one time I smacked ds2, I didn't even know I'd done it, until he told me. He'd slammed me in the head so hard that I couldn't see and went kind of blank with the pain. I was leaning over his bed, crying and he started screaming and yelled, "you hit me!!". His cheek was red, so I obviously had, but I still don't even remember doing it. I wasn't trying to oppress anybody in that situation, either. I was trying to defend myself. Violence isn't for the sole purpose of trying to oppress...sometimes, it's trying to protect. And, neither of these were even spankings - they were both full-out smacks in the face.


 We do not always willingly or knowingly participate in opressive systems...it is ingrained in us from a lifetime of living in patriarchal dog eat dog world in which we must be violent to be heard and the greater your violence the greater your power and success. It wasn't intentional from you, but the action was to oppress the needs of the older child to inflict pain on the smaller child. And you didn't do the wrong thing by protecting the child, but how did you protect the smaller child by hitting the older child...now you just have two hurt kids, ya know? OBVIOUSLY it would have been better to prevent the hurt from happening by keeping a closer eye on them....unfortunate but true. You cannot say it was to protect...it was retribution.

Quote: 


> You know, I'm pretty sure our pre-historic roots of protection would have involved a fair bit of violence. I doubt pre-historic humans fended of predators, for instance, by sending them good vibes and singing Kumbaya. We're veering from violence towards children into violence, in general, here, but I don't think women are inherently non-violent (less so than men? Maybe - we have less testosterone).


 Well, I disagree. I do think women are inherently less violent. If we weren't I do not think it would have been so easy to socially enslave us for so many generations. but that is an argument for another day.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 



> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> For example, how can any logical person expect their child not to hit others when they are being hit?
> 
> ...


I am not sure if you are purposefully misunderstanding me, or we are just so far out of sync that it's impossible for us to be on the same page, but somehow every single one of my points was lost in the translation...

I didn't say that if you hit your child, you child *will* hit others. My point is that *if* you hit your child, and your child then hits others, you have no defense, because telling the child that "hitting is wrong" is hypocritical.

I didn't say that if you hit your child, your child will be scared of you (though I do believe that). I said that you can't expect them *not* to be scared of being hit.

And I am sure your mother made countless decisions each day, as you do for your child. What to feed you, how to dress you, what your plans for each day and evening were. What I am saying is that I don't trust the decisions of people who hit me, because sometimes their logic leads them down a path that results in pain for me.

It is not surprising to me that you often find misleading statistics in studies, as you seemed to read everything I said incorrectly. No offense, but perhaps these studies aren't saying "children who are spanked will hit other kids" at all, as I certanly wasn't and yet you still read it that way.

Finally, I was not saying that if someone attempts to relinquish the freedom, equality, or safety of another, they should be met with violence, rape, discrimination, etc. I am saying that if a person tries to murder someone else, perhaps their freedom should be removed. If they try to rape someone else, perhaps they should not longer be given equal rights. If they try to imprison you in a basement, you can hit them to escape. That's what my caveat was intended to mean, not that if your little girl hits your other little girl, you can then hit her. How you are expected to *act* toward your children is not the same as what basic human rights they are entitled to. I believe that each human is entitled to a violence-free life, regardless of their age, social situation, or other factors. Exceptions to this can be found above, and *do not* include the mood and/or philosophy of their parent.


----------



## umsami (Dec 1, 2003)

I'm the one who mentioned the Swedish study--it's not one study debunking research, it's a paper published in a law journal looking at the effects of anti-spanking legislation in Sweden in terms of a drastic increase in crime. http://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/1820605.pdf

I think he draws a lot from this list of studies, though http://ches.okstate.edu/facultystaff/Larzelere/nztabconts.47.pdf (which are pages of studies--not just one). It's interesting reading--and does support what many here are saying. They point out that there are differences...and many of the spanking studies are contaminated (not my words) by overly severe methods of physical punishment (such as face slapping, beating, etc.) :shrug:

I want to know why there has been a 6x increase in child abuse in Sweden since 1981. It's worrisome especially for those of us who advocate a spanking ban here. Are they linked? Is it just better reporting/more awareness? Has criminilizing spanking somehow led parents not to react or use GD techniques and then over-react at some point? Or is it not-related?


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> *However, the application of that line of thinking is really only acceptable when you are the only person being effected by your actions.* Your "smack your child on the bottom" that you may find completely morally sound is another person's "smack my wife in the face".


I still do not see the comparison. First of all I will once again say that I am against spanking. But to me a parents role is vastly different to a spouses role. A child is a parents responsibility a spouse is an equal. I do look at my child as equal to me as far as we are both human beings and I do have boatloads of respect for her, but the long and short of it is I see my responsibility for as broken up into a few catagories:

education

safety

nourishment

socialization

At each age and stage my responsibility and approach change and grow. I will do whatever it takes to meet her needs in those areas. Period. She is not my equal intellectually, yet. And I have to make decisions for her and about her based on what she needs what I can do and what will work. I am not above trying different things until I get it right. I feel like for some children in some circumstances and in some families spanking is a tool in the tool belt and it can OF COURSE be used inappropriately and conversly can be used appropriately in my opinion. My humble opinion. And I would not tell you to try it or pressure you to do it ever.

But to compare an apples and oranges of relationship like that of husband and wife. That's like saying marrying a woman and marrying a little girl are the same thing..........


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> I guess it does seem weird but I did grow up in a very "religious" environment and about 90% of the parents spanked. I was SEVERELY abused as a child BUT I am completely normal and healthy and I think successful. I am an amazing SAHM and married to the love of my life. I graduated high school after being forced to quit and living on my own since I was 16. I was homeless for quite some time too. So do I think a child who grew up loved but spanked and was afraid of their parents for spanking could grow up to be normal? YUP


What seems so unlikely to me, and I apologize if it wasn't clear earlier, is that they alllllll did the same thing and allllll got the same result. I know so many people and not realy any of them did the saaaaame thing and not really any of them got identical results. Some of them did similar stuff but none of them got identical results. Seems very unlikely.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Well, yes, mostly I was thinking of the other kind of illogical consequence. I am not a big fan of grounding as a punishment in and of itself, I suppose in the way you described it might make sense but being out was not the reason they didn't come home. I would be interested in finding out why he went out before I took away DS's right to. I would be asking what he felt he needed, and what his thinking was...I believe in restorative justice over punitive justice and I would be asking him to make up the pain and hurt he caused by disappearing. I would also work with him to find ways to meet his need for autonomy while also respecting my need to know he is safe. Grounding might be a part of that, but only if DS agreed that it seemed like a fair and appropriate consequence for his actions...but that's me. For example (/he's only 6) he had a really hard time getting ready for school yesterday and was being really very rude to his dad and on the bus I said "So what was that about?" and he finally said he was up all night playing Ben Ten in his head and so he couldn't sleep well, and I suggested that maybe it would be a good idea to take a break from ben 10 and he agreed and he's now on a break from the TV show...essentially he is grounded, but he is grounding himself and when he feels ready to handle it, he'll watch it again.
> 
> ...


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

"By this logic, it was perfectly okay for me to smack dd1 and/or ds2 when I did so. If children are just like adults in this regard, then protecting myself and/or my other children from violence is the priority, right? I don't happen to agree with this, but I also have issues with this line of reasoning. The parent/child relationship is very different from other ones, rigth down to the legal aspects of it." - StormBride

First of all, this is simply inapplicable to all countries. In many places around the world men are allowed to physically punish their wives for 'poor behavior'. The reasoning behind this cultural norm is that women are subservient to men. Because they are considered the weaker sex, men are entrusted with the care taking, protecting, and even disciplining of their wives. In many western countries similar reasoning is applied to children as a way to dehumanize them. When someone is somehow lesser (less strong, less intelligent, less in control) justifying violence against them becomes easier.

"If dh is in a nasty mood and taking verbal swipes at me all day (okay - he doesn't, but as an example), let alone physically hitting me, I have every legal right to walk out the door and leave him by himself. If ds2 spends the whole day hitting his sisters, hitting me, etc. I have no legal right to walk out the door. In fact, I could be charged and have him taken from me if I did so! Children and adults aren't the same, and I'm not legally (or morally) expected to just take it when anybody else beats on me. And, no - that's not to say that I think it's okay to spank. It just means there are differences between dealing with children and dealing with adults. If ds2 were an adult in my life and treating me or my other chldren the way he does, he'd have been gone at least two years ago. I don't think anybody would think that was acceptable, either. So, let's not pretend that the parent/child relationship is just like any other interaction, because it's not." - StormBride

Of course the relationships between children and their parents contain nuance not found in any other relationships. For starters, as minors they cannot leave you if you choose to hit them. Also, aside from arranged marriage partnership is a choice. The only choice in the relationship between a child and their parent is that the parent CHOSE to have them. The child did not make a choice. If someone feels that it is impossible to raise a child in a method that does not resort to physical violence against them maybe parenthood was not a good decision. That is not to say that every parent who makes a mistake is a lost cause, just that if one feels that it is truly impossible to raise children without hitting them something is very wrong and I'm betting it isn't the kid.

Not sure why it wouldn't let me quote properly. Oh well.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I am not sure if you are purposefully misunderstanding me, or we are just so far out of sync that it's impossible for us to be on the same page, but somehow every single one of my points was lost in the translation...
> 
> ...


I'm not purposefully misunderstanding you. I've never purposefully misunderstood anyone in my life, and I'm not sure what the point of even having a discussion would be if I were going to do that.

We're out of sync. Nothing you've just said clarifies anything in my head, and I don't get the feeling you understood anything I said.

As for children hitting others, I'm not sure what "having a defense" even means. My son hits people. I don't think in terms of what kind of defense I have, because I'm not making it happen, and I have no freaking idea why he does it. And, fwiw - he was my most bonded, attached, AP'd baby of the entire bunch, because he responded best to it. I never had to figure out anything with him. I just did what came naturally - breastfed, bed shared, baby wore, etc. - and he was the happiest, easiest, most content baby I've ever met. After two years, he responded to a loving, attached, calm, secure home by...throwing things, destroying things and hitting people. And, I don't happen to think that he has a human right to beat up everyone he meets.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I just think it's kind of self important to assume or believe that what you think is the best or only way would be right for other people....I may hav ideas about what is good or right but I certainly don't believe that I hold the answers for others.


I think there are some things that are right and some that are wrong. It's pretty clear to me that it's wrong to stone a woman to death because she had premarrital sex. Rape is wrong. It's wrong for one spouse to hit the other. It's wrong to hit kids.

Some things are just wrong, period. Every one of those things have been socially acceptable actions at some point in the past. That doesn't mean they were "right."

eta- I've spanked ds1 a couple of times. It was wrong. It does not make me violent, evil, or horrible. I think I'm a great mom. But I vowed not to do it again, and worked my butt of to get past the societal conditioning that hitting kids is a-ok. There's a difference between making a mistake, and consciously choosing to hit your kid regularly. I wouldn't even say that those parents are bad parents. They are just making a bad choice. It's a choice they are making out of love and concern for their kids, but it doesn't make it right.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> "By this logic, it was perfectly okay for me to smack dd1 and/or ds2 when I did so. If children are just like adults in this regard, then protecting myself and/or my other children from violence is the priority, right? I don't happen to agree with this, but I also have issues with this line of reasoning. The parent/child relationship is very different from other ones, rigth down to the legal aspects of it." - StormBride
> 
> ...


----------



## Gucci&Granola (Jun 12, 2010)

"But, it also means that the whole "everyone has the same rights" thing is a red herring in many ways. The situations aren't the same." StormBride

I agree with you here. We do not all have the same rights and I am not parenting in a democracy (wink). My husband may not tell me that I have to eat vegetables, give me a timeout, or ground me. My example of spousal abuse in countries where women are considered second class citizens was directly aimed at the justifications people have given for hitting children. The logic is similar (though the situation is different). Hitting someone because you view their development, protection, and behavior as your responsibility (as some men do in some countries) is UNACCEPTABLE. The real point I was attempting to make is that I have yet to hear a good justification for hitting a child. In all 100+ posts not a decent reason has been given yet (and "because I can" is ridiculous).

As an aside, I am so sorry to hear about the struggles you are having with your son. It sounds very trying and frustrating and I am impressed with your commitment to nonviolence in the face of his outbreaks.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gucci&Granola*
> 
> "But, it also means that the whole "everyone has the same rights" thing is a red herring in many ways. The situations aren't the same." StormBride
> 
> ...


I don't do as well as I'd like, honestly. I don't hit him...but I definitely end up manhandling him too much. He just doesn't listen - like, at all. We're having him assessed, but we don't get in to see the ped until July...


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

Well I am sure they had differences within different families...but I know spanking was the punishment...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> What seems so unlikely to me, and I apologize if it wasn't clear earlier, is that they alllllll did the same thing and allllll got the same result. I know so many people and not realy any of them did the saaaaame thing and not really any of them got identical results. Some of them did similar stuff but none of them got identical results. Seems very unlikely.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

Although technically IDK if they are seeking any mental help and all of them have a strong faith in God which I have personally found to help keep me sane. If you look at my siblings from the outside they seem successful but on the inside they have a lot of issues and are on a lot of meds.


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

We have a simple rule in our house: this is a non hitting house.

Most people that ever are here, can recite this. Even the 2 year old neighborhood kids that walk in and out. And it's obvious how the simplicity makes everything clear to them. We'll explain when asked, and we've been asked too often if it also means 'no spanking' 

We hit nothing that lives. We don't hit friends. We don't hit siblings. We don't hit parents. We don't hit children. We don't hit cats. We don't hit plants. We don't hit mosquitos (this lie is a little secret that they are being let in on when they're old enough to understand lol).

Not long ago, a friend of DS hit his mom when she came to pick him up and he didn't want to leave. She told me afterward that he was more upset about breaking the house rule than about her feelings, and he voluntarily offered his excuses and asked if he could please come back and play if he promised not to break the rule again. This is a 6 yo who's had many aggression problems, but I choose to believe that the simplicity of our rule actually enables people to understand its non-negotiability.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

First, I should apologize forlast few posts, they were writen quickly and off the cuff without my usual editing before posting...I had a heavy load of cover lessons today and was posting between bells. Not my usual style.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> It was a peer thing, and I knew exactly what was going on. The single most logical thing I could have done would have been to have banned him from hanging out with that particular friend at all, but it's a strategy I don't believe in at all. He was getting something out of that friendship. I never figured out what, and I'm not sure ds1 did, either, and that friendship thankfully died a natural death a couple of years later. He basically didn't want to say "no" to someone, in the context of a very dysfunctional frienship. (This was quite common with this particular young man, and ds1 wasn't the only child who went through this with him, although they were "best friends", so it was a little more severe with him.)
> 
> ...


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I actually think by your own earlier reasoning you would think Jesus wasn't non-violent.....remember the whole temple-merchants debacle? He upturned tables, according to the bible anyway.

You actually said:

"Violence can come in many forms but its main objective is to squelch certain behaviors" So I would say in the bible this episode was according to your parameters violent. But I don't look at it that way. I look at it as righteous anger and totally useful.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Jesus was non-violent and his disciples took on his mission after his execution.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

And are all the non-violence promoters on this thread vegans? genuinely just curious


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> And are all the non-violence promoters on this thread vegans? genuinely just curious


I'm vegetarian, mostly vegan. Draw your own conclusions. I have my reasons and they are more complex than what I eat. Sorry.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I actually think by your own earlier reasoning you would think Jesus wasn't non-violent.....remember the whole temple-merchants debacle? He upturned tables, according to the bible anyway.
> 
> ...


A) Mostly Jesus was non-violent in his actions, his teachings (which was what I was dicussing) are entirely non-violent in their messages. One moment of losing your cool doesn't define your life's work, invalidate your over all message or undermine the whole, does it?

B) You're sort of sweeping over the point. Jesus was just one example of a person in history who is known for his non-violent TEACHING and PHILOSOPHY. Ghandi lost his cool too, I'm sure, and I bet M.L.King had a few moments of righteous anger where he tore someone a new pooper...but that's not what they preached because that was not the most effective tool for their objectives of love and peace. They were human, as are we, but that doesn't make succumbing to violent outbursts okay.

Righteous anger is good and can lead to positive action. It was righteous anger that led Ghandi to lead a peaceful revolution, it was righteous anger that led M.L.King to march and speak out for civil rights, it was righteous anger that led Alice Paul and her ilk to fight for the rights of women. It is righteous anger that lead the tibetan monks to stand up against the Chinese.

I am not sure what your point is, Daphinette, can you clarify? Are you saying that spanking is okay if, like Jesus, you lose your cool and need a little violent rage? Even his discples paint the scene as a moment of total loss of control for the big JC, and it was not one of his better teaching moments, if I recall. In fact it was one of those moments of, look sorry about that but man I was STEAMED! But maybe we read different versions. It was after all a story told by men to men, translated by other men and passed down to other men...who divided into different sects and re-wrote their own versions...so....ya know.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

I am a vegetarian, trying to give up my cheese omlette addiction. (hence the star where the a should be)


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I love meat! Eat it everyday!


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I actually think by your own earlier reasoning you would think Jesus wasn't non-violent.....remember the whole temple-merchants debacle? He upturned tables, according to the bible anyway.
> 
> ...


Upturned tables? My dad punched a hole in the wall once, but he didn't hit us (at least in that situation). I threw a pen across the room once, but I didn't hit my associate or boss. I can be pretty angry in what I represent in my art, but I use art as a medium to express my anger, not other people.

I still stand by my previous position, a position that is quite simple, in my opinion: people (and children) respond to pain because of fear of pain. Not because they are learning morals and values or whatever. Give people a reason to do what is right besides fear of pain. Again, do you want your child to do what is right because of fear that she'll experience pain, or do you want her to do what is right because it is right? I don't go on murdering rampages because I fear jail, I refrain from such actions because I know it is wrong. I've never bought into the idea that punishment is a deterrent. It may reduce crime to an extent, but it shouldn't be the primary focus.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> And are all the non-violence promoters on this thread vegans? genuinely just curious


Sorry, I responded to this question earlier but walked away from the computer and thought about it more. On reconsideration, I think what you are doing here by your genuine curiosity question is asking that non-violence promoters be held to a higher standard. I.e., if you stand for non-violence, then you sure as h3ll better be picking flies out of your soup so as not to harm them.

I expect people to stand by their present representations of what they believe. If their standard is not to inflict pain on humans, then I hold them to that. If their standard is to protect the earth by living out in the wilderness and eating only berries, then I'll hold them to that. If their environmental standard is to reduce waste, then I'm not going to ask that they venture into the wilderness and eat berries and crap in the woods. It is not all or nothing. I have strong ideas about behaviors toward humans. I have strong ideas about animals and bugs, but they are not my immediate contacts so I don't spend too much time thinking about their well being (beyond my immediate control). I wish I could live in the wilderness but that is not practical at this time. What I can do is put into practice certain things that limit my impact on the earth's resources. What I can do is limit the impact that my actions have on the things/humans/beings in my immediate control and environment. That's my present standard. What's yours? If you are Christian or Jewish or Muslim, can I hold you to a standard to never sin? To practice extremes to exhibit your faith and devotion?

Edited to say, Dauphinette, that maybe your question wasn't with regard to the position that I stated above, but I do see a lot of people use the vegan thing as a way to establish an all or nothing standard. First, veganism is not an established religion. Many people come to veganism for many different reasons. If you want to get real serious about purest veganism, you wouldn't even drink the tap water in my town because microscopic organisms are in the drinking water. My DH has been a practicing vegan for many years but number reason boils down to how he feels physically when he puts certain foods in his body. He has a pair of leather shoes, so he is not vegan in the respect, but he does try to severely limit the animal products that he consumes. It has little to do with animal rights or the like. He's a weirdo and he'll be the first to admit it! LOL. Anyway, just a sidebar.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I was thinking about this thread earlier, and had a few thoughts. The parents that I know that spank their kids are loving, caring, fun, involved parents. I should say, they appear that way, and just from seeing them with their kids in person, I would be really surprised if they weren't, kwim?

In talking to exdp about discipline, upon hearing that he does not spank, one of the first questions he gets asked is "if you don't spank, what DO you do?" Honestly, exdp isn't the best person for this part of the conversation because his "discipline" (he says he doesn't discipline) is so instictual that it's not possible for him to really articulate it in a way that could be useful for someone else.

People who spank seem to do so out of either anger or fear. Not just fear in the immediate sense, but fear about how their kids will "turn out" if they don't spank. It's so socially accepted that spanking is necessary if you don't want unruly brats. Spankers don't do it because they want to, or because it's fun. They seem to be afraid of what will happen if they don't (or because they are angry in the heat of the moment, but this is a little bit different). It's not necessarily because it's *right* to spank, but because it's less wrong than it would be to let their children run amok. And in their heads, spanking is the only way to keep them from doing that. There are some parents who do admit that gd is possible, but they seem to think that it's too hard, that they couldn't do it, or that it just wouldn't "work" for their kids.

Like a pp said upthread, I agree that parents don't want to hurt their kids. I think if people would listen to their hearts and think logically, most would realize that hitting is not the right way to teach children. But it's become so ingrained in our culture that most people don't even give it a second thought.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> And are all the non-violence promoters on this thread vegans? genuinely just curious


I don't know if I'm one of the non-violence promoters or not, but no I'm not vegan. We used to eat mostly vegan meals, but stopped because of ds2's food sensitivities. At this point, I'm not sure what I think is the healthier way to eat.

But that's besides the point, really. My top concern is human rights. Animal welfare comes somewhere after that. Like CatsCradle said, it's not all or nothing. We do what we can do, we vary in what we consider our top priorities.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

I sincerely believe that there are a few posters here that are purposefully baiting others and attempting to be less than constructive.

As the original poster, I would like to remind everyone that this thread originated as a request for help addressing spanking questions constructively, and understanding why the word "violence" seems to be so provocative. If you can't contribute without being incendiary/adding to the conversation, why are you posting? And if you are one of the ones that seems to be arguing against peaceful means of dealing with children (or in others words, *gentle discipline*), why are you even in this forum?


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> First, I should apologize forlast few posts, they were writen quickly and off the cuff without my usual editing before posting...I had a heavy load of cover lessons today and was posting between bells. Not my usual style.
> 
> ...


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

FTR, I assumed you were being genuinely curious because so many people here have it in their siggies....I am not vegetarian because I care much about animal rights, though the fact that it is quantifiably better for the environment and morally superior is like a little bit of (excuse the pun) gravy.

Just kidding, I really don't think that it's morally superior in anyway, just some people assume that's why I don't eat meat and think I am uppity vigilante veg-head.

The truth involves a rather gorey incident in the meat section of an Asian market that most people would rather not hear...can't touch the stuff ever since. The fact that I feel healthier without it (fewer asthma and allergy issues, more energy, and less odor issues with my feet, sweat and breath) is probably what has kept me off the meat past my initial aversion and what makes me think maybe I should go whole hog (hee hee) into veganism.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> As the original poster, I would like to remind everyone that this thread originated as a request for help addressing spanking questions constructively, *and understanding why the word "violence" seems to be so provocative*.


Okay, well for myself. I grew up in a home that was loving, peaceful, and a lot of fun. Mom was a SAHM, and we romped with the dog, went for long, rambling walks, listened to her sing at bedtime (and on walks, sometimes), did all kinds of arts and crafts, baked, made root beer and pickles and various ice cream desserts, and were constantly amazed by her "magic" (she almost always knew when it was going to rain, and just said that the birds told her...which I understand totally now, but thought was pure magic as a child). We read, and played with blocks and stuffies and a whole pile of Fisher-Price toys (the olds ones - my favourite, ironically, was the schoolhouse), and all that good stuff. And, if anything was wrong outside the house - if people were mean, or I fell and skinned my knee, or I was afraid of something, then I had home as a "soft place to land"...a haven and a refuge.

When I hear people equate spankings with violence, it puts my back up. I didn't live in a violent home (knew lots of people who did - many of them hung out at my place as teens, because my place was safe and fun and people could just be themselves). It makes me nuts when people blithely assert that I did, because they equate spanking and violence. So, yeah - I think the word "violence" is provocative.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I think that calling it violent is provocative because violence is such a negative word. People discipline the way they do because they think it's the right thing to do. They don't want to feel like someone is judging them as violent, or mean, or evil. Because they aren't those things (again, I'm talking about typical socially accepted spankings).

I'm Wiccan. I don't think anyone would get me to convert, but they CERTAINLY wouldn't get me to convert by telling me that I'm going to hell if I don't, or that Wiccans are bad people.

I eat meat (even though I do think it's more "right" to be vegan). I had a vegan friend who once made some VERY negative comments about my eating cheese. It didn't make me want to stop. It actually had the opposite effect, and my first (irrational) thought was that I was going to start eating more cheese, just to spite her (I didn't, because like I said it was irrational).

When people judge like that, it just makes the other person defensive. They start justifying- to themselves- that what they are doing is ok. It seems to me that it could easily just drive the other person farther away from the place you want them to be.

The best way, for me, to approach these situation is by emphasizing that you don't have to spank. I talk about my views on parenting- possibly saying that spanking, at best, causes kids to behave for self centered reasons. I might say that spanking undermines a parent's natural authority. That hitting doesn't help them learn socially acceptable behavior, and right from wrong, any better than it would help them learn math. I focus on teaching them how their actions affect other people- I don't see how spanking them would help with that.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

I think this brings us back to the cognitive dissonance thing. I am not saying that any home is violent when I say that spanking is violent. I am a vegetarian, and I happen to personally think meat is repulsive. I find eating meat gross. That doesn't mean that I find any household that eats meat gross. Or any person that eats meat gross. My husband eats meat, and I certainly don't find him gross. I find that act gross. Same thing with many religions; I find them confusing and hypocritical. That doesn't mean that I find every practitioner to be senseless hypocrites. So when I say that spanking is violent, and people hear that their loved ones or their homes are violent, that is a disconnect on their end. And I get that now; I will try to keep that disconnect from happening, though I feel no guilt for having been honest when asked.

No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent. Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?" So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing. I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive. I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Okay - I think I slipped up in communication there. It was the spanking that I was talking about when I said it was mostly an attempt to get our attention, not an attempt to shame. My mom's mom was really big on shaming kids, and mom never did anything with the deliberate attempt to shame us. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "liked" being spanked or wasn't scared or upset. I was scared of mom, just because she spanked us sometimes. I was upset when I got spanked. But, I'd have rather had a spanking any day than feel as if I'd disappointed her. It wasn't about some kind of "I'm such a bad kid - punish me" thing - spankings were just relatively minor, clean and over with quickly. The times that she made me feel as if she was disappointed in me weren't usually about attempts to discipline. It was a communication style that went wrong and didn't work out...and it hurt like hell. I never really received spankings as violence, in the sense you're talking about, which makes this whole discussion...wobbly. If the definition of violence is more about the person on the receiving end, and I perceived the "I'm sooo disappointed in you" vibe as being more damaging, etc. than a spanking, then which was more violent?

I don't necessarily think either was more violent than the other. They were both violent in equal ways but for YOU the result of the shaming was more effective in terms of controlling your behavior. If you had been a different kid you might have seen the physical as more violent.

We don't have to use the word violent if it has a bad connotation for you. We can call it controlling, or effective, or manipulative. None of those sound too good...how would you prefer to describe it?

I'll have to read some more about Ghandi, I guess. I haven't read up on him in a long time.

Not a bad idea, he was an interesting person.

I'm not exactly arguing any premise. I've just been here for six years, seeing one "fact" after another about spanking. Most of them didn't hold true for me or most of the people I knew (and, as I say, in the time and place I grew up, most kids were spanked - not a lot, and not in the "go cut yourself a switch" method, but it was fairly universal). It's very frustrating when things are repeatedly stated as fact, about something I've personally experienced and those statements just aren't the way it was/is. I have no problem with being anti-spanking, but being anti-spanking based on a bunch of flawed assumptions, and then applying those flawed assumptions to all spankers bugs the crap out of me.

Okay! Now I am following you. I agree with that as well. I know there aren't many studies that prove spanking is bad. I don't put much stock in studies anyway. I know what I know because I know it.

Now, see....at six (okay - not quite - he's six next month), ds2 is less self-confident and self aware than ds1 was at age two. (He's possibly even less self-confident than I was (and I was nowhere near as self-confident as ds1) and not even close to being as self-aware as I was. I can't speak for dh or my ex, although my ex can remember taking care of himself and his sister at age six, because his parents had a multi-day opium hangover, so his upbringing issues went way beyond spanking, in any case.) DS1 was able to clearly articulate his needs at age two. And, ds1 was spanked (although not often - spanking was always my last tool in the box, yk?). DS2 has no self control, or very, very little. We discuss feelings and needs and how to meet them and try to teach self-awareness. I've had more discussions about these things with ds2 than with ds1 and dd1 combined. In the meantime, ds2 isn't being hit - but dd1 is. I'm just not so sure any of this is accomplishing anything, and as time goes on, mere compliance and good behaviour starts looking pretty good.

Well, I don't mean to sound rude, and I know this might sound condescending, but if you didn't practice it with your other kids and you have only really been practicing it yourself for 4 years, and you are only practicing it with one child, and the other child still occassionally does get spanked, well, I just mean people study these techniques for YEARS and YEARS and are still figuring it out. It's not a science that can be implemented without flaw. It takes learning and practice and relearning from the parents' end, and so obviously there is going to be a lag in such a situation. Couple that with a child who for lack of a better term has a young or challenging spirit and you may have a more long term project on your hand. How adept are you at applying the NVC techniques on yourself, or your partner? If you are still struggling with identifying your own feelings and needs (I still do at times and I have been at it for a long time with certified training courses) you probably should expect more bumps in the road, ya know? I don't mean to sound all "I'm so smart and you're such a noob." at ALL. I'm just saying, it takes time and do try to have patience and keep practicing with yourself and your partner and your older kids all the time. Model in front of the little one, and every chance you get, not just for the negative, but for the positive stuff, too...you seem really happy and relaxed, why is that? (I find identifying positive feelings and connecting them to needs being met lay the ground work for identifying the negative feelings (plus it practices the skill when the body and mind are not stressed).

Your first son could be tempered like you or me, one smack and the message is clear, wanting to please (I had friends like you described of your DS, too). Your DS2 sounds more like my niece. The more you threaten violence the more aggressive she gets. You hit her, and she WILL hit you back. You yell at her and she will rage in your face. No fear of authority or search for firmer limits...not from any age. And talking to her about what she wants or needs is a nightmare...no Ruth, you don't need to pinch your sister until she bleeds...that is not the need, that's a feeling, you are feeling really angry and hurt? and you want her to feel angry too? No? Okay...etc etc ad nauseum....aye aye aye! It could go for hours, and by then the need is we're hungry and tired...can we just go to bed? My MIL and SIL think hitting and threats and yelling are the answer. I just can't follow the logic that goes...when she is "bad" and we punish her physically, she turns right around and does it again in your face so then we ignore her...and next time (which will probably be tomorrow) we'll do it all again. I do not think my MIL has ever babysat for my niece and not threatened to or actually smacked her bum...six years later and no improvement. But when she stays at my house, we just don't have that issue. She responds better to respect and firm limits. We don't hit, bite or scratch. Simple. And we stay on top of her like white on rice monitoring her every moment...she seems to like that. She wants you involved and in sight. It seems to give her sense of security. She is a sweetheart when you keep her active. Leave her alone for a minute and all hell breaks loose.

Maybe not. But, it also wasn't necessary. I could have pulled her off without smacking her. It was sheer reflex in response to ds2 being hurt. (He was under two months old at the time.)

True. I was going to say as much, but I didn't want to point out the obvious...should have could have would have...we all have been there and wished we could undo something. That's not the same as choosing it and choosing it again if you could do it all over again.

The aftermath isn't evidence of much, imo. He was already on a complete rampage when I held him down. About the only thing that changed as a result of my holding him down is that he would have punched me in the stomach or something, instead of cracking me in the head, if we hadn't been in that position. And, yeah - it was conscious oppression, although I probably would have said "suppression". It was hold him down or have him seriously hurt someone.

huh...okay, You said the after math was him screaming that you had hit him and he was very upset that you had and and he did not understand why. That's what I meant. You didn't mean to hit him but he certainly didn't seem to be processing that then...I am sure now things are different and he could understand that given a rational conversation.

I think that an instinct to protect ourselves applies, no matter who is doing the damage. As I said, I didn't even know that I'd hit ds2, until he told me. I have no conscious memory of doing so. It was an instinctive attempt to protect myself from something that was causing me extreme pain. The fact that the cause of my pain was my child wasn't even really on the radar at that point. I was in pain - lots of it - the headache from that encounter lasted almost two full days - and I lashed out at the source.

I'll give you that. But I still contend that pushing someone off of you is A) not the same as spanking, not even in the same ballpark, and B) still a violent act that we should do our best to avoid if we have better skills.

Rather than push my DS out of the way when he is a being a PITA and hurting me, I should recognize my own limits sooner and walk away, ask for him to leave me alone, demonstrate my NVC skills, stop the action and say "Mommy has had a long day. I am tired, hungry and I need some personal space for a little while. Please hang out with daddy or read a book for ten minutes so I can recharge, and then I promise I will help you/play with you/etc." But often I don't do that and then it is too late I snap...and again, I have been at this for a long time and I still am not an expert.

I

Hierarchy wasn't valued in our house, but we were still spanked. This is part of what I mean. I see a lot of assertions about what's going on in homes and our culture with respect to spanking, but they just don't match up with what I've seen and experienced, yk?

I don't understand this. How can you not value heirarchy but use spanking...what was the spanking for then? I don't understand. Can you clarify what the purpose of spanking IS if not to establish and implement the heirarchy of control...were the children in your home allowed to dole out spankings to mom and dad when they misbehaved? I want to believe you, but I can't imagine a situation in which spanking is used to demonstrate or support or institute egalitarian values. Can you explain what you mean?


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> I know what I know because I know it.


Okay...that was REALLY dumb.

I meant to say (my computer is doing this annoying pop up window thing like every five minutes and my train of thought keeps getting interrrupted dammit!) I meant to say that I know what I know about oppressive violence from my readings and study in feminist and racist discourse and from further delvings into history and anthropology. I have drawn certain conclusions about the way I can contribute or choose not to contribute to the systemic oppression of others. It has occurred to me the more I avoid tactics of oppression with my children the less likely it will be for them to oppress others and the more likely it will be easy for them to assimilate peaceful methods of conflict transformation in their future, a skill I think will be quite valuable in an ever growing globalized world. I do not think spanking necessarily causes negative results. I just know from experience that non-violent methods produce more capable human beings than any other form of discipline I have witnessed. Capable that is in what I want them to be able to do, which is help to build a better world with fewer systems of oppression and violence.

So sorry for that daft bimbo like comment. It is deeper than just a raspberry in your face, "...because I KNOW it, that's why!"

ETA: when I say my children, I include my students (ages 12-19), too.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I had a feeling when I asked that that someone would it take it here, lol.

I wrote that I was asking genuinely because I was......asking genuinely. I am trying to understand the whole non-violence argument. I will admit that I find humorous that violence for some ends at animals, but I'm not going to judge you for it so you don't need to put words in my brain or spell out my motives before you give me a chance to explain them.

I guess I do feel like if you have a general sense of violence as a very fluid thing, just any generally oppressive action then to me that train of thought pulls into extending that respect for all living creatures but if it doesn't for you and you can seperate the two then great, you are just making my point for me. If some people don't see violence towards or te killing of animals aqs a non-violence issue then it stands to PERFECT reason that some people, myself not included, might reasonably exclude spanking from their own list non-violence issues. period done.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Sorry, I responded to this question earlier but walked away from the computer and thought about it more. On reconsideration, I think what you are doing here by your genuine curiosity question is asking that non-violence promoters be held to a higher standard. I.e., if you stand for non-violence, then you sure as h3ll better be picking flies out of your soup so as not to harm them.
> 
> ...


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent. Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?" So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing. I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive. I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.


Well, to be fair a few have said that violence, certainly as defined or shaped by our justice system, is relative to intention and since there is no intention of cruelty in spankings, it should not be called violence, and furthermore lumping such discipline in with violence of a more terrible nature (beatings, bloodshed, etc) is exaggerated and belittles the point being made.

So you have actually gotten some answers, but it's not answers you are willing to accept. Which is fine, BTW, just not particularly typical of a genuine discussion, which I think is what people assumed was going on.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Well, to be fair a few have said that violence, certainly as defined or shaped by our justice system, is relative to intention and since there is no intention of cruelty in spankings, it should not be called violence, and furthermore lumping such discipline in with violence of a more terrible nature (beatings, bloodshed, etc) is exaggerated and belittles the point being made.
> 
> So you have actually gotten some answers, but it's not answers you are willing to accept. Which is fine, BTW, just not particularly typical of a genuine discussion, which I think is what people assumed was going on.


I don't remember reading this. I remember reading that moral relativism is applicable here, or not applicable here, and comparing spanking to rape, which no one did, is "disgusting," etc., etc, but not how it isn't actually violent. Now that you put all of those thoughts together, I see it as a coherent argument. I wouldn't say I am not willing to accept it, just that I don't agree with it, due to holes in the logic. (For example, if you know spankings cause physical pain, and you intentionally spank your child, how is the intention not to hurt the child?) I do at least accept it as what might be going through the heads of those who spank.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> The state of the world throughout our known history has been the records of patriarchy. I find this a dubious source.
> 
> I do not think with my heart (that is oxymoronic really) but it is a dead metaphor to say we feel and listen to our hearts (I did not think I'd have to explain that it is a metaphor, but there you go) it means that we listen to the part of our inner psyche that is connected to our most base instincts and free of social and cultural manipulation. I believe this is the root of non-violence.


The violence perpetrated by men and women are different. I don't think men are inherently more violent than women. Would you resort to violence to protect your child? The sexes respond with violence to different stimuli.

As for your metaphor...well, I'm well aware that it's a metaphor. But you are saying that a mentally healthy person's heart would not tell her to hit her child. So, that must mean that women who spank are mentally unhealthy, no? Or is it her heart that's unhealthy? Why did you say "mentally" in your post if that's not what you meant.

Our base instincts are, well...base. It's social and cultural manipulation that make us "civilized."

***********

WRT Jesus, the Old Testament of the Bible is extremely violent, and this is what Jesus said about that....

Quote:


> 5:17 "*Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them*. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, *you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven*.
> 
> 21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22 But I tell you that *anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment*. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca,' is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in *danger of the fire of hell*.


To the apostles....

Quote:


> 10:14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, *it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town*.


About the apocolypse....

Quote:


> 24:36 "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37*As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.* 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until *the flood came and took them all away*. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.


...come on, now. Grounding is violent, and this is non-violence? Spanking seems like small potatoes in comparison.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I
> 
> No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent. Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?" So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing. I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive. I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.


Well, I am one who doesn't equate spanking with violence. Or, I should say, I didn't at the beginning of this thread. What I think of when I think of "violence" is war, bar fights, gang violence...stuff like that. I don't have a vested interest in that thinking though (meaning, I don't spank, so it doesn't matter to me if it's violent or not). So I got to thinking...domestic violence is hitting your spouse/partner. Any type of hitting. So I guess, hitting your child would be violent as well.

That's just to show you that it can require a lot of thought for someone to make that connection, between spanking and violence. And if it took that amount of thought for me, I imagine it would take so much more for someone who thought that spanking was an acceptable thing to do.


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> Well, I am one who doesn't equate spanking with violence. Or, I should say, I didn't at the beginning of this thread. What I think of when I think of "violence" is war, bar fights, gang violence...stuff like that. I don't have a vested interest in that thinking though (meaning, I don't spank, so it doesn't matter to me if it's violent or not). So I got to thinking...domestic violence is hitting your spouse/partner. Any type of hitting. So I guess, hitting your child would be violent as well.
> 
> That's just to show you that it can require a lot of thought for someone to make that connection, between spanking and violence. And if it took that amount of thought for me, I imagine it would take so much more for someone who thought that spanking was an acceptable thing to do.


Honestly, I don't expect everyone (or anyone, really) to automatically make the same connections I do. So when I say "violence," I don't expect anyone to think of spanking. What I was having trouble with is the reactions I get when I say I feel that spanking is violence. Does that make sense? I have a better understanding of the emotional reactions I get and their basis now, though of course, I disagree with the conclusions.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I think this brings us back to the cognitive dissonance thing. I am not saying that any home is violent when I say that spanking is violent.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dacks (Jun 7, 2011)

I had a variety of experiences with spanking as a child.

My grandmother was fond of the spatula. If it was minor infraction we got plastic. If we put her in a really foul mood we were sent back to the kitchen to get the metal one. I find this kind of punishment cruel.

My brothers were routinely un-phased by spankings. Oh, they would cry and howl and beg to not get spanked, but then would often repeat whatever behavior got them spanked within 10 minutes. One brother had a defense mechanism where he would smile and laugh while getting the spanking. This infuriated the adults, who didn't understand what was going on. Needless to say, this was not an effective punishment for them, and it was cruel. It was also annoying to sit by through the cycle of yelling at them, begging, spanking, crying, repeat bad behavior. Totally useless.

My Mom also had a policy with any babysitters or neighborhood parents: if we acted up they had permission to spank us. We knew this, and they knew this. She drew the line when we a family we knew moved in with us. Mom, kids, stepdad. The stepdad had fashioned a thick wooden paddle from a cutting board, drilled holes in it so it would swing faster and sting harder. My Mom at least drew the line on him using that swatter on us. That thing was freaking cruel, and he loved using it.

I was once spanked by my Uncle at age 5. My cousins and I were playing in their house, running into the front door, goofing off, then running out the back door, repeatedly. At some point, I got underfoot my Uncle and ran into his legs. "Didn't Aunt Sandy tell you to quit running in and out?" To which I responded by kicking him in the shin and yelling "You're not the boss of me!" Listen, that 6'3" man picked me up by my arm to his eye level, told me "You do NOT talk to adults like that" and gave me one, serious swat on the butt. Then he put me down. I was too shocked to cry, and I knew I had been totally in the wrong. I never acted up with him again in my life, and I have no greater advocate in the world. Was this the most necessary kind of spanking? No, I will agree that there were other ways to address this. However, it was incredibly effective and did not make me feel abused or unloved.

I have also only seen him spank his own child ONCE. She was upset that there wasn't room in the vehicle to join us as he drove me and my Mom home from a family visit. She stood at the screen door and cried that she wanted to go with, that he didn't love her, on and on. Her Mom tried to keep her inside, but as the truck pulled out of the drive and onto the gravel road, she bolted for it. He brought the truck to a screeching halt and jumped out. He ran to her, picked her up, told her at eye level to NEVER, EVER run towards a moving vehicle, and gave her one, serious swat on the butt. The experience rattled him more than I can imagine, because they live on top of a hill on a gravel road, and there is simply no way another speeding vehicle could have stop in time as it topped that hill. The pain of one spanking is not going to scar her for life, but getting hit by a car would have.

So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse. But there is a loving way to spank. There are moments when it is more important to impress upon a child, with urgency, that _doing X will result in pain,_ and better you learn it by a swat on the hand or buttocks than permanent physical scarring or death. Teaching a curious child that the light sockets are dangerous with only words never got across to my brothers. A swift swat across the hands and a NO did get it across.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I had a feeling when I asked that that someone would it take it here, lol.
> 
> ...


Well, that has been conceded several times throughout this thread already. In fact is is essentially the premise of cognitive dissonance...so what's your point. I feel like you are dancing around one. Can you clarify what specifically you are trying to get at?

ETA: I do not really think you understand what I mean by non-violence and by Ghandi's definition (not mine by the way but the widely accepted definition in peace and conflict discourse). This site might help a little, and I will be searching for a link to the intro to Nonviolent Communication a Language for Life by Lucy Leu...the intro was written by Ghandi's nephew and it is just so beautifully explained there...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> The violence perpetrated by men and women are different. I don't think men are inherently more violent than women. Would you resort to violence to protect your child? The sexes respond with violence to different stimuli.
> 
> ...


You may have me on the jesus thing, as I said...it has been a long time since I read the bible. I was always taught that Jesus was all about the turning of the other cheek, being kind, generous and loving thy neighbour, being good to whores and tax men despite their woes, not judging others as it;'s not our job, but god's, and was more focused on the human relationship stuff more than the hellfire and damnation and all that....I am pretty sure that is what most people think of when they think of jesus...self-sacrifice, being nice, and treating people with kindness, etc. Maybe I had a less scary minister than you. LOL That's all I really remember from Bible camp...in light of this evidence, I kindly request we strike Jesus from the list of peaceful prophets and renounce his obviously unearned title as the so called Prince of Peace.

Just cause jesus was upon frther inspection a sadistic little man doesn't mean grounding a kid in its traditional sense is inherently any less violent by the definition commonly held in the peace and conflict transformation circles. It's still intended to enforce and reestablish authority over a weaker entity.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> But there is a loving way to spank.


I disagree. I don't think there is a loving way to hit your child. A person might think they are justified in doing it, but that doesn't mean there is a loving way to hit a kid any more than there is a loving way to hit your spouse. I wouldn't feel love if my partner hit me, and I'm sure kids don't feel love when they get hit either. When I'm hit, I feel mad, angry, sad, misunderstood. But not loved.

Quote:


> So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse.


I imagine that at least some of the people who hit their kids in those ways believe that they are justified in doing so. It's quite possible, even likely, that they love their kids, and do not consider what they are doing as cruel and abusive.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse. But there is a loving way to spank. There are moments when it is more important to impress upon a child, with urgency, that _doing X will result in pain,_ and better you learn it by a swat on the hand or buttocks than permanent physical scarring or death. Teaching a curious child that the light sockets are dangerous with only words never got across to my brothers. A swift swat across the hands and a NO did get it across.












Ya know what has taught my daughter not to put things into light sockets...socket protectors and constant vigillance.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.









It might surprise you to find out that in fact I agree that there is a loving way to spank...between two consensual adults alone in their own special baby-making place..possibly with a hand or a paddle...or a leather whip...blind fold optional...but perhaps I have shared too much.









Otherwise it's just pretty uncreative to smack someone to teach them about pain, IMHO.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Okay - I think I slipped up in communication there. It was the spanking that I was talking about when I said it was mostly an attempt to get our attention, not an attempt to shame. My mom's mom was really big on shaming kids, and mom never did anything with the deliberate attempt to shame us. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "liked" being spanked or wasn't scared or upset. I was scared of mom, just because she spanked us sometimes. I was upset when I got spanked. But, I'd have rather had a spanking any day than feel as if I'd disappointed her. It wasn't about some kind of "I'm such a bad kid - punish me" thing - spankings were just relatively minor, clean and over with quickly. The times that she made me feel as if she was disappointed in me weren't usually about attempts to discipline. It was a communication style that went wrong and didn't work out...and it hurt like hell. I never really received spankings as violence, in the sense you're talking about, which makes this whole discussion...wobbly. If the definition of violence is more about the person on the receiving end, and I perceived the "I'm sooo disappointed in you" vibe as being more damaging, etc. than a spanking, then which was more violent?
> 
> ...


----------



## erigeron (Oct 29, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *mommy212*
> 
> I was spanked a few times as a child, and I would never, ever describe my home as violent. I had a loving family and I was not terrified of being struck or making a mistake. I wa sonly ever spanked for direct disobedience. I am not pro-spanking but I don't consider spanking to make a violent home.


My family was emotionally abusive. I was also spanked a handful of times. I don't remember the spankings anymore, and I don't remember ever living in fear of a spanking. I do remember living in fear of being mocked, put down, etc. and I remember plenty of incidents of this. I'm not pro-spanking either; I think there are better methods of discipline. But spanking didn't cause me any lasting problems, and I have a basis for comparison because there are other discipline methods I was subjected to that did cause me lasting problems. I would imagine there are a fair number of people who were occasionally spanked and don't see it as a problem. This could be why it's difficult to convince some people of a zero-tolerance on spanking. It's a continuum from having been spanked once or twice to, well, some of the more horrific cases we read about, and below a certain point on the continuum a lot of people are unlikely to see the issue.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *hakeber* 

It might surprise you to find out that in fact I agree that there is a loving way to spank...between two consensual adults alone in their own special baby-making place..possibly with a hand or a paddle...or a leather whip...blind fold optional...but perhaps I have shared to much.









I stand corrected.









To follow on the heels of the pp, my mother spanked me a few times, or so I was told (she says it was in dangerous situations, to keep me safe). She was most definitely not violent. With the exception of those few spankings, she was as gd as anyone here- she was playful, considerate, kind to us kids... That doesn't mean I think spanking is ok. It's not, Imo. But I don't consider her spanking to have been harmful to me. My standards for parenting are higher than "not harmful" though. Just because it didn't screw me up, or because I don't remember it, doesn't mean that I think it's an acceptable way to treat my kids. Or for anyone to treat their kids. We are talking about hitting a person who is 1/4 of your size! How in the world can anyone logically thing that that is a good thing to do? I get that for some people, that's the only thing they can think of that will "work." But beyond that, if you assume that there is a GD thing that will "work," how could a parent thing that hitting their kid was the ideal option?

My dad spanked us (I guess. It's a safe assumption). But what I remember is the "standing in the corner" and "stop crying or I'll give you something to cry about." Now, I do believe that those things were harmful to me in some way.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Maybe I had a less scary minister than you. LOL That's all I really remember from Bible camp.


I've never been a Christian.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

All of this. Could not have said it better.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> I had a variety of experiences with spanking as a child.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dacks (Jun 7, 2011)

How lucky for you to live in a time when socket protecters exist and you have the financial capability to own them. Frankly, you never met my ornery, stick a penny in a light socket to see teen Mom jump, little brothers (circa 1986). Constant vigilance, ha!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

DevaMajka, you can disagree but essentially it's just agreeing to disagree because many other people in this thread are saying their experiences as human beings have been different and that is valid.

And as an anecdote I have a friend who really really likes to be spanked.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> I disagree. I don't think there is a loving way to hit your child. A person might think they are justified in doing it, but that doesn't mean there is a loving way to hit a kid any more than there is a loving way to hit your spouse. I wouldn't feel love if my partner hit me, and I'm sure kids don't feel love when they get hit either. When I'm hit, I feel mad, angry, sad, misunderstood. But not loved.
> 
> I imagine that at least some of the people who hit their kids in those ways believe that they are justified in doing so. It's quite possible, even likely, that they love their kids, and do not consider what they are doing as cruel and abusive.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

couldn't have said it better.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> Okay, well for myself. I grew up in a home that was loving, peaceful, and a lot of fun. Mom was a SAHM, and we romped with the dog, went for long, rambling walks, listened to her sing at bedtime (and on walks, sometimes), did all kinds of arts and crafts, baked, made root beer and pickles and various ice cream desserts, and were constantly amazed by her "magic" (she almost always knew when it was going to rain, and just said that the birds told her...which I understand totally now, but thought was pure magic as a child). We read, and played with blocks and stuffies and a whole pile of Fisher-Price toys (the olds ones - my favourite, ironically, was the schoolhouse), and all that good stuff. And, if anything was wrong outside the house - if people were mean, or I fell and skinned my knee, or I was afraid of something, then I had home as a "soft place to land"...a haven and a refuge.
> 
> When I hear people equate spankings with violence, it puts my back up. I didn't live in a violent home (knew lots of people who did - many of them hung out at my place as teens, because my place was safe and fun and people could just be themselves). It makes me nuts when people blithely assert that I did, because they equate spanking and violence. So, yeah - I think the word "violence" is provocative.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I think the shaming (which term I also dislike as I do think it carries a connotation of intent on the "shamer's" part, and that intent wasn't there, but this conversation is hard enough to have in a coherent fashion online as it is, so I'll go with it) was more painful and hurt more. I never said I thought it was more effective. It actually tended to make me feel like crap, put up a defensive shell, and be a complete bitch in many ways, for at least a few days. Spankings (which were, admittedly, administered at a much younger age than most of the shaming) were direct, to the point, and effective at what they were used for, which was getting my attention. .
> 
> ...


You're right this IS hard! I wish MDC had a video chat!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> I've never been a Christian.


So did you look all those quotes up just to prove me wrong about Jesus being a symbol of peace? wow.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> DevaMajka, you can disagree but essentially it's just agreeing to disagree because many other people in this thread are saying their experiences as human beings have been different and that is valid.
> 
> And as an anecdote I have a friend who really really likes to be spanked.


I didn't see where anyone said that the act of being spanked made them feel loved in that moment. They felt loved by their parents, sure. I felt loved by my mom. Not *because* I was spanked, though.

An adult friend who likes to be spanked and consents to it? Or a child friend who likes to be spanked by adults?


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> How lucky for you to live in a time when socket protecters exist and you have the financial capability to own them. Frankly, you never met my ornery, stick a penny in a light socket to see teen Mom jump, little brothers (circa 1986). Constant vigilance, ha!


I did this, it was actually a "grandma sticks the claws in the arms moment for me" but it was me with keys and the light socket instead of pennies and yes, I know I scared my grandma to death when I was laying on the floor in a daze at the age of 3-4, lol! She was watching me, my 2 yo cousin and my one yo cousin and trying to get dinner on the table for all of us, my grandpa, herself and my mom, I can give her a break for being flustered and surprisingly I wasn't afraid of her then nor have I ever been, I love her the most of my whole extended family. She wasn't afraid to be in charge and let us know who was watching out for us how to behave and what was important. I respect for it.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I didn't say they did say they felt loved by it. And the friend is an adult, I said it was anecdotal, but I wanted to share because there actually are multitude of people in the world who like to spanked and I know my friend would not say that it's violent, I kinda tickled just typing that because she likes it soooo much.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> I didn't see where anyone said that the act of being spanked made them feel loved in that moment. They felt loved by their parents, sure. I felt loved by my mom. Not *because* I was spanked, though.
> 
> An adult friend who likes to be spanked and consents to it? Or a child friend who likes to be spanked by adults?


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I'm really disheartened that there are people who are defending spanking on the GENTLE DISCIPLINE board on mothering.com. I'm even more bothered by the fact that the posts that are advocating spanking are still here.

The Terms of Service say:

Quote:


> We are not interested, however, in hosting discussions that advocate crying it out, harsh sleep training, physical punishment, formula feeding, elective cesarean section, routine infant medical circumcision, or mandatory vaccinations as a parenting philosophy.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> How lucky for you to live in a time when socket protecters exist and you have the financial capability to own them. Frankly, you never met my ornery, stick a penny in a light socket to see teen Mom jump, little brothers (circa 1986). Constant vigilance, ha!


Well, to be fair, we are are talking about TODAY, not 1986 (if it were 1986, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?) and socket plugs cost about 25 cents a piece...or you can just move some furniture in front of the sockets, or get creative like we did when we ran out of plugs and bought some duct tape.

I have also stated many MANY times...people do the best they can.

That being said that doesn't mean there isn't a *much much better alternative* that we ought to bring to light if asked for our opinion.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I didn't say they did say they felt loved by it. And the friend is an adult, I said it was anecdotal, but I wanted to share because there actually are multitude of people in the world who like to spanked and I know my friend would not say that it's violent, I kinda tickled just typing that because she likes it soooo much.


But that's what I was saying- there is no loving way to hit a (non consenting) child.

I said upthread that I liked to be spanked. But that's now, as a consenting adult. It's an entirely different thing to like spanking because it gives you pleasant erotic feelings. Not the same use of physical touch at all. Hitting kids as discipline "works" precisely because they don't like it.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I didn't say they did say they felt loved by it. And the friend is an adult, I said it was anecdotal, but I wanted to share because there actually are multitude of people in the world who like to spanked and I know my friend would not say that it's violent, I kinda tickled just typing that because she likes it soooo much.


I like it too...just not from my parents!

ew


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Now I just feel like I have wasted time on this thread.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Dacks (Jun 7, 2011)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> But what I remember is the "standing in the corner" and "stop crying or I'll give you something to cry about." Now, I do believe that those things were harmful to me in some way.


OH WOW THIS. This was the most awful thing, and my grandmother said it *all the time!* I mean I had a physical reaction to reading this right now. I always remember she used it when I didn't understand what I had done so wrong to get one spanking, or to be put in the corner, so I was upset, and she was threatening to just whip me as hard as she could. Bleh!

Sometimes spanking is necessary, and can be done effectively by a loving parent. But I simply do not get the reasoning to demand a child not cry or seem upset at all as a result of it.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I like it too, Hakebar.

But the whole "ew" part peeves me. Loving parents would not be spanking their kids for personal sexual gratification.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> But that's what I was saying- there is no loving way to hit a (non consenting) child.
> 
> I said upthread that I liked to be spanked. But that's now, as a consenting adult. It's an entirely different thing to like spanking because it gives you pleasant erotic feelings. Not the same use of physical touch at all. Hitting kids as discipline "works" precisely because they don't like it.


But I was adding that to the conversation because of pp who asserted that ALL spanking is VIOLENT ALL of the time. Not true.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I like it too, Hakebar.
> 
> But the whole "ew" part peeves me. Loving parents would not be spanking their kids for personal sexual gratification.


No kidding. That was my point.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> So did you look all those quotes up just to prove me wrong about Jesus being a symbol of peace? wow.


Not to prove you wrong. To bring attention to what the Bible really says.

You, yourself said that you don't remember much of the Bible, and I'm assuming that you are/were a Christian. I'm pretty sure that most people would have to look up scripture in order to properly quote it, no matter what their faith.

It's not hard. They can all be found in one place. I've debated about theology enough over the years to know where much of the dirt lies.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I definately see your point.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> I'm really disheartened that there are people who are defending spanking on the GENTLE DISCIPLINE board on mothering.com. I'm even more bothered by the fact that the posts that are advocating spanking are still here.
> 
> The Terms of Service say:


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Can you give an example of when a spanking is necessary and could not have been dealt with in any other way?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> Sometimes spanking is necessary, and can be done effectively by a loving parent.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I thought your point was that spanking was "ew". Sorry.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> No kidding. That was my point.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> Not to prove you wrong. To bring attention to what the Bible really says.
> 
> ...


Oh good...I was getting a little paranoid there.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

I think she did if you'll look back to her earlier posts about safety within this thread?

But I really think we will all have to agree to disagreee on this because to her necessary is not to you necessary, am I right?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Can you give an example of when a spanking is necessary and could not have been dealt with in any other way?


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> I'm really disheartened that there are people who are defending spanking on the GENTLE DISCIPLINE board on mothering.com. I'm even more bothered by the fact that the posts that are advocating spanking are still here.
> 
> The Terms of Service say:


Well...has anyone reported the offensive posts? The mods don't read every single post.


----------



## Dacks (Jun 7, 2011)

I apologize for saying necessary, there are always other ways of dealing with a thing, but my uncle effectively and permanently impressed upon his child that running at moving vehicles was an absolutely unacceptable action that would have gotten her killed.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Can you give an example of when a spanking is necessary and could not have been dealt with in any other way?


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> Another reason is that consistency is key. You mentioned that his older sister does get spanked still...is that something he is aware of? could it be that he equates that with a sign of your love and devotion for her and so he wonders why he doesn't get the same treatment and maybe he thinks it's because you think he is too bad to respond to it? I am just trying to think of why you have different techniques for two kids in the same house at the same time.


I'm off to bed, so I just pulled this part. I seem to have posted something confusing again. I don't spank any of my kids. I haven't spanked ds1 in 12 or 13 years, and I haven't' ever spanked dd1 (hit her the time she pulled ds2's hair, and that's it). I don't spank ds2, either. And, I obviously don't spank dd2 - she's just a toddler.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I'm off to bed, so I just pulled this part. I seem to have posted something confusing again. I don't spank any of my kids. I haven't spanked ds1 in 12 or 13 years, and I haven't' ever spanked dd1 (hit her the time she pulled ds2's hair, and that's it). I don't spank ds2, either. And, I obviously don't spank dd2 - she's just a toddler.


ahhh okay. misread that then. That makes more sense.

eta:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> In the meantime, ds2 isn't being hit - but dd1 is.


Just so you know I wasn't taking it out thin air. What did you mean to say?


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> I apologize for saying necessary, there are always other ways of dealing with a thing, but my uncle effectively and permanently impressed upon his child that running at moving vehicles was an absolutely unacceptable action that would have gotten her killed.


That's all I've been trying to say. It's not necessary. There are lots and lots of ways of doing the same job without using a swat. A swat may be faster, but it's not the only option. That's all the GD board has ever been about at its core.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I eat meat...if I could I would hunt. IDK it seems so natural to me to eat meat. However I am against the industrialization of meat. I get my meat from a local farm that practices a fast kill and stuns the animal so he doesn't feel it. They really take care of the animals and they are free ranging pastured animals.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I had a feeling when I asked that that someone would it take it here, lol.
> 
> ...


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

UMMM seriously? WHAT does that have to do with it not being violent? There are people who get turned on by circ too and it has to be a really tight circ with a dark scar. There are people who get turned on by rape too but well if they like it sooooooo much it must not be violent then right?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I didn't say they did say they felt loved by it. And the friend is an adult, I said it was anecdotal, but I wanted to share because there actually are multitude of people in the world who like to spanked and I know my friend would not say that it's violent, I kinda tickled just typing that because she likes it soooo much.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I've been surprised by people saying the act of spanking, which is a physical blow to some degree or another, isn't a violent act, and now I'm surprised to see people saying it can be necessary. Running into the road is a supervision issue, not a discipline issue. You don't spank a 2-year-old and then let them play unsupervised next to the street, because they're too young to understand regardless of whether they were spanked or not. At some age they're old enough to understand it, but then they'll understand, spanked or not.


----------



## Mom2M (Sep 23, 2006)

I really can't see how spanking could be considered non violent. The intention is to hurt the child in order for him not to forget that whatever he did was wrong. I am going to put a quote here that I consider a one of the best things I have ever read on non violence.

*Nonviolence*

Nonviolence belongs to a continuum from the personal to the global, and from the global to the personal. One of the most significant Buddhist interpretations of nonviolence concerns the application of this ideal to daily life. Nonviolence is not some exalted regimen that can be practiced only by a monk or a master; it also pertains to the way one interacts with a child, vacuums a carpet, or waits in line. Besides the more obvious forms of violence, whenever we separate ourselves from a given situation (for example, through inattentiveness, negative judgments, or impatience), we "kill" something valuable. However subtle it may be, such violence actually leaves victims in its wake: people, things, one's own composure, the moment itself. According to the Buddhist reckoning, these small-scale incidences of violence accumulate relentlessly, are multiplied on a social level, and become a source of the large-scale violence that can sweep down upon us so suddenly. . . . One need not wait until war is declared and bullets are flying to work for peace, Buddhism teaches. A more constant and equally urgent battle must be waged each day against the forces of one's own anger, carelessness, and self-absorption.

- Keneth Kraft, Inner Peace, World Peace


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dauphinette*
> 
> I think she did if you'll look back to her earlier posts about safety within this thread?
> 
> But I really think we will all have to agree to disagreee on this because to her necessary is not to you necessary, am I right?


I still don't fully understand what your argument is, so it is hard for me to know if I even disagree with you at all. Can YOU think of any examples it which it would be necessary to spank someone...even Dacks admitted that it wasn't really NECESSARY, it was merely effective...no one has ever argued the immediate effectiveness of spanking...the question is, did she already know that running into the street was dangerous (had that topic really never ever come up before? living where it sounds like they did I find it either dubious or irresponsibole if it hadn't.)? Did her desire to be with her father over ride her knowledge of avoiding the danger of the road? Did a smack really teach her not to run into the road, or did it teach her not to chase after her father? Who can really say? It was effective in that she was never hit by a car, yes, but was it effective in addressing the child's feelings of separation anxiety? Was it effective in making the child feel loved and protected? Was it effective in teaching the child important coping mechanisms for when she feels anxious and has the urge to fly into danger to meet the need behind that terrorizing emotion? Big feelings that cause a child to choose emotional reactions over physical preservation don't just disappear because they learn to listen to mom and dad, do they?

Equally, a smack on the hand and a NO works to teach a child that they will get a smack if they try to electrocute themselves...it does not teach them that sockets have electricity and what electricity does. There are other ways of teaching this that can also be effective, and until that time when they can learn that lesson keeping kids in arms and in arms reach or in a protected play space is probably the best bet if you can't child proof...now if you have no time (as I said up thread a dozen times) and you are over worked and busy and you need to teach a toddler to fend for themselves in an unchildproofed home and you either cannot afford to childproof, or you unable to, and you will be leaving a toddler alone in dangerous spaces for extended periods of time...then yes, smacking IS probably your best option depending on the kid (whether or not they will listen, my brother would have been all the more determined to stick his fingers in the socket). But none of the people the OP is dealing with is in that situation, so it's not really helpful, to this discussion, which was pointed out to me earlier.

ETA: I am not so daft as to assume there are no people in the world who ever are stretched beyond their limits. That doesn't make spanking a best choice option and handy a tool.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I would never trust to leave a child who liked putting pennies in outlets alone around outlets no matter how many times they had been smacked or how severely. Does anyone really then trust a child around outlets? I question whether it's even effective, or whether parents figure out they have to watch better in addition to hitting their kids.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamazee*
> 
> I would never trust to leave a child who liked putting pennies in outlets alone around outlets no matter how many times they had been smacked or how severely. Does anyone really then trust a child around outlets? I question whether it's even effective, or whether parents figure out they have to watch better in addition to hitting their kids.


Exactly! Was my ironic tone above not clear?


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

No, I coudn't tell, but it's hard to get tone on the internet. I didn't think that sounded like you.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamazee*
> 
> No, I coudn't tell, but it's hard to get tone on the internet. I didn't think that sounded like you.


hmmmmm...I always forget people can't see my eyebrows when I type...and the emoticons always feel a little too emotive to make the subtle point I am going for.

Okay, then to be clear, in post number 193, I was being ironic...no matter what the situation of your life, leaving a child to fend for themselves in an unsupervised dangerous area is not the best option...or necessary, or effective parenting, not even close. Even if you have smacked their bottom or hands a thousand times and you are sure they get it. It still doesn't make electric outlets safe for kids who are prone to putting pennies in them...you probably should hide the pennies, too, since a kid who puts pennies in outlets probably isn't too far off from trying to swallow them either.

ETA: This doesn't mean that our parents were bad unloving poor parents. That doesn't mean there is no room for improvement or doing things better.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Can I just say, when I'd tried multiple different socket protectors and my DS managed to figure them all out, I was tempted to try the swat on the hand thing. Nothing was working and he was getting into trouble even when he was arm's reach away from me, he was just so quick. I was afraid for his life.

So I can understand the temptation. I think we all do, I think almost every parent has reached that utter frustration/anger/fear level at some point. But there are other options. With the outlets, like a pp said, move furniture in front of them. Turn off the power to certain outlets, if possible. What we did was rewire all the outlets with internal safety shutters. We really didn't have the time or money to do that, but it made a whole lot more sense to me than hitting my child!

I don't know that I'd hand my child a pile of pennies if I knew he was going to stick them in outlets...

*sigh*

There are just so many other ways to deal with these situations.

I don't even know why some of these posts are up. It is painful for me to read people advocating and justifying hitting a child. I do think it's abuse. Obviously it's on one end of a spectrum and it's not the same thing as more extreme forms of abuse (and I've experienced all ends of the spectrum myself), and I don't necessarily blame parents if they know no other way -- many of us just do what we were taught to do, what people around us do, etc. But I really wish things could change on a society level. I don't understand why children from age 2-7 (or whatever the 'acceptable' age range to spank is







) lack that basic right to physical safety that the whole rest of society is granted.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

I had a woman from the church I grew up in (who is commended at how well behaved and successful her children grew up to be) "advise me" I was doing my DD an injustice in not spanking her....I asked what age she starts spanking and she replied "6 months". I nearly vomited. She is labeled successful as a parent b/c all her kids moved out at 18 and either got married right away or went to college. Everyone has their own opinion on when it is "acceptable" to hit a child (or never).

I don't understand why it became acceptable in the first place. I am "religious" and get told all the time I have to hit my child according to The Bible yet I have never seen any proof of that. The proverbs are referred to a lot..Yes I have read them. A rod was a stick used to guide sheep...If you spare the rod spoil the child and replace your interpretation of rod as a beating stick with guidance then it isn't about hitting is it? There is one about striking a child with the rod and leaving a bruise though and that one is kind of tricky research has led me to a few different things 1. it was against the law to strike a slave with the rod b/c it would kill him (so obviously it would kill a child) 2. you weren't considered a child until you were weaned (which was far from 1 y/o in those times) but nonetheless it is still a tricky one...this site has more info for people of religion using The Bible as an excuse to spank http://aolff.org/ and has a lot about scriptures and there meanings and literal interpretations.


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

This conversation reminded me of my extremely devout and VERY sweet friends (evangelical HSing Christians) who had THE nicest, friendly and sweet (and from all appearances, happy) kids.....they had this book and the only phrase that I remember from it was "to train up a child" - so I Googled that to see if it would lead me to the book. WOW. I don't know if this is the exact book that my friends used, but let me say again WOW

http://www.amazon.com/Train-Up-Child-Michael-Pearl/dp/1892112000


----------



## Lady Love (Mar 8, 2011)

This has been hard for me lately. I don't know what to do when my SIL tells her two year old daughter that she is going to "bust her" for going near the street. She is only two and has never had any "behavior problems" anyway. What am I supposed to tell my son when he sees his aunt hitting her? It disgusts me! In my DH's family "spanking" is seen as so different than hitting. If I make an issue of it it will cause so much hostility towards me and not help my niece's case...A tough problem.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NellieKatz*
> 
> This conversation reminded me of my extremely devout and VERY sweet friends (evangelical HSing Christians) who had THE nicest, friendly and sweet (and from all appearances, happy) kids.....they had this book and the only phrase that I remember from it was "to train up a child" - so I Googled that to see if it would lead me to the book. WOW. I don't know if this is the exact book that my friends used, but let me say again WOW
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Train-Up-Child-Michael-Pearl/dp/1892112000


I can't even read the reviews, I read the first sentence and nearly started bawling. How horrible.

For the record, we are extremely religious, devout Christians who strictly adhere to our Church's teachings... I don't believe God would want me to hurt this sweet child He has given to us. (I just don't want anyone to get the impression that all Christians are in favor of spanking or anything...)


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2xy*
> 
> Well...has anyone reported the offensive posts? The mods don't read every single post.


Yes, more than one of them. I'm really hoping that it's a matter of the mods being busy (I know that happens), or not really knowing where to begin in cleaning up the thread.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> ahhh okay. misread that then. That makes more sense.
> 
> ...


I think she's saying (Storm Bride, correct me if I'm wrong) that in the situation she's talking about, her dd was being hit by her ds.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> UMMM seriously? WHAT does that have to do with it not being violent? There are people who get turned on by circ too and it has to be a really tight circ with a dark scar. There are people who get turned on by rape too but well if they like it sooooooo much it must not be violent then right?


I think she made a good point actually, that not all spanking is violent. Spanking that is consensual is, imo, not violent. (circ'ing in most cases is not consensual, and rape is by definition not consensual).

That doesn't mean that I think the people who are saying spanking is violent are wrong (I'm not necessarily saying that they are right, either. It's sort of a semantics issue to me). They are obviously talking about spanking that involves a child, which means that it is not consensual.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dacks*
> 
> I apologize for saying necessary, there are always other ways of dealing with a thing, but my uncle effectively and permanently impressed upon his child that running at moving vehicles was an absolutely unacceptable action that would have gotten her killed.


He did impress upon her that it was unacceptable, and that she might get hit if she were to do it again. However, I doubt she understood that she could have gotten killed. If she did have the cognitive ability to understand that, she wouldn't have had to be hit to refrain from running towards moving cars.


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DevaMajka*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> I think she's saying (Storm Bride, correct me if I'm wrong) that in the situation she's talking about, her dd was being hit by her ds.


ahhhhhhhh...I get it. dur


----------



## jezebelle (Feb 18, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lady Love*
> 
> This has been hard for me lately. I don't know what to do when my SIL tells her two year old daughter that she is going to "bust her" for going near the street. She is only two and has never had any "behavior problems" anyway. What am I supposed to tell my son when he sees his aunt hitting her? It disgusts me! In my DH's family "spanking" is seen as so different than hitting. If I make an issue of it it will cause so much hostility towards me and not help my niece's case...A tough problem.


I feel your pain. I just got a call this morning that my nephew had to be picked up from day-care because he was physically fighting and broke another child's Nintendo DS. My mom had to go get him and pay $100 for the DS. When she got there, my nephew lied and said he had not done any of that and the daycare worker was lying. Then he got up in the daycare worker's face and yelled at her and another child. My nephew is 8, he has Asperger's and ADHD, and he lives with my brother (his dad) and my parents. My family is now likely going to shave his head and spank him for the first time in his life because they are absolutely at the end of their rope. I love my family, and I know that they have tried a lot of other alternatives, as my mom and brother are both generally anti-spanking. I want to intervene, to help them find another way, but I honestly can't think of anything. I don't think the spanking will help, I think it will just break the trust he has with his grandfather, and possibly give him a justification for hitting people in the future, but I don't know what to suggest. It is hard, because parents who are tempted to spank want to see immediate results, which spanking usually gives. I am not advocating it, I think it gives immediate results because it is scary and painful, but on the surface it seems to "work" at the time it is administered, and my solutions can't compete with that because they require time, dedication, and patience.


----------



## Midwesterner04 (Nov 19, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> For the record, we are extremely religious, devout Christians who strictly adhere to our Church's teachings... I don't believe God would want me to hurt this sweet child He has given to us. (I just don't want anyone to get the impression that all Christians are in favor of spanking or anything...)












Whatever we do to the little ones/"least of these" we do to Him... (I'm a conservative Catholic and see spanking as an issue of respectful care for the vulnerable and the dignity of every human being.)


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> I had a woman from the church I grew up in (who is commended at how well behaved and successful her children grew up to be) "advise me" I was doing my DD an injustice in not spanking her....I asked what age she starts spanking and she replied "6 months". I nearly vomited. *She is labeled successful as a parent b/c all her kids moved out at 18 and either got married right away or went to college*. Everyone has their own opinion on when it is "acceptable" to hit a child (or never).


This makes me laugh, in a dark way. My mom's parents wouldn't let her get married or move out at 18. So, she deliberately got pregnant, so they'd have "no choice" (culturally speaking at the time), but to let her get married. The only real reason for that was because she had to get the hell away from her mother and that was the only way she could think of to escape!


----------



## hakeber (Aug 3, 2005)

Off topic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezebelle*
> 
> I feel your pain. I just got a call this morning that my nephew had to be picked up from day-care because he was physically fighting and broke another child's Nintendo DS. My mom had to go get him and pay $100 for the DS. When she got there, my nephew lied and said he had not done any of that and the daycare worker was lying. Then he got up in the daycare worker's face and yelled at her and another child. My nephew is 8, he has Asperger's and ADHD, and he lives with my brother (his dad) and my parents. My family is now likely going to shave his head and spank him for the first time in his life because they are absolutely at the end of their rope. I love my family, and I know that they have tried a lot of other alternatives, as my mom and brother are both generally anti-spanking. I want to intervene, to help them find another way, but I honestly can't think of anything. I don't think the spanking will help, I think it will just break the trust he has with his grandfather, and possibly give him a justification for hitting people in the future, but I don't know what to suggest. It is hard, because parents who are tempted to spank want to see immediate results, which spanking usually gives. I am not advocating it, I think it gives immediate results because it is scary and painful, but on the surface it seems to "work" at the time it is administered, and my solutions can't compete with that because they require time, dedication, and patience.


You may want to lurk around the special needs parenting forum. It has some great ideas for helping kids with Aspergers and ADHD. I had a student last year with aspergers and the parents over there have a lot of wonderful advice on gentle guidance with kids on the spectrum of these issues.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakeber*
> 
> ahhh okay. misread that then. That makes more sense.
> 
> ...


DD1 is still getting hit...by ds2. I'm really not too sure she feels all that great about the fact that her little brother decks her, and then I chat with him, yk?


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> I can't even read the reviews, I read the first sentence and nearly started bawling. How horrible.
> 
> For the record, we are extremely religious, devout Christians who strictly adhere to our Church's teachings... I don't believe God would want me to hurt this sweet child He has given to us. *(I just don't want anyone to get the impression that all Christians are in favor of spanking or anything...)*


I'm not a Christian, but I certainly know not all Christians believe in spanking. There's that whole website...gentle Christian mothers or something like that?...devoted to childrearing, without spanking, with Christian values.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sosurreal09*
> 
> UMMM seriously? WHAT does that have to do with it not being violent? There are people who get turned on by circ too and it has to be a really tight circ with a dark scar. There are people who get turned on by rape too but well if they like it sooooooo much it must not be violent then right?


I already explained my point which was, once again, that all spanking is not considered violent by all people all of the time like pp proposed.


----------



## dauphinette (Nov 13, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Midwesterner04*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for this comment, it definately gives me something to think about.....I made a promise to myself not to spank several months ago, but I didn't have something concrete to tie it to, but this makes sense to me.


----------



## umsami (Dec 1, 2003)

In this situation, I would probably just try and model other alternatives. So, if you hear your SIL say that to her daugher, I'd probably say something like, "Oh, come hold my hand so you don't get hurt." or "Let's pretend our hands have glue on them and we're stuck together..."

I would also praise the little girl on her good behavior when you see it. Notice it, so at least she gets some sort of validation.

I also think a book like 1-2-3 Magic, while not ideal IMHO, is a good way to move spankers into non-spankers. It's a simple method that most parents can get and implement quite easily. Of course, if the parent says 1-2-3 and then spank the kid on 3, it loses its effectiveness.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lady Love*
> 
> This has been hard for me lately. I don't know what to do when my SIL tells her two year old daughter that she is going to "bust her" for going near the street. She is only two and has never had any "behavior problems" anyway. What am I supposed to tell my son when he sees his aunt hitting her? It disgusts me! In my DH's family "spanking" is seen as so different than hitting. If I make an issue of it it will cause so much hostility towards me and not help my niece's case...A tough problem.


----------



## BeeandOwlsMum (Jul 11, 2002)

I am going to close this thread so that I can read it all. I would like to remind everyone that advocating spanking is not something we wish to host. Discussion of alternatives to spanking, or ways to move toward gentle discipline are welcomed, but advocating for physical punishment is not.

If you have posted in a manner that is advocating or endorsing spanking or other forms of physical punishment, please edit your post. I will reopen this thread once I have had a chance to read it thoroughly. This may take me a couple of days. If you are unsure about what I mean, please PM me, and I would be happy to have a conversation about what needs editing.

Thank you.


----------

