School Spankings

[Twin Fist]

i love it when peopl who were never spanked, then turn around and say 'spanking leads to...."

uh, how would you know?

I was spanked, hell i was beaten by my mom.

but never without my deserving it.

And I am no killer, not an abuser, not unbalanced, etc.

Some kids only need a talking to. Some kids need a belt upside thier ***.

 

[zDom]

A swat on the butt hurts for a couple minutes, worst case scenario.

Hurtful words can scar a person for a lifetime.

So what is REALLY more harmful to a person? I don't understand people who think that being "hit" is such a horrible thing. There are worse things in life.

And lack of discipline is one of them.

 

[Mimir]

If the school's had more ways to be able to control the kids, the schools wouldn't have nearly the problems they do today. If the kid knows that the teacher or principal can't really do anything to them, then they will go wild. Of course much of this goes back to the philosophy of the parents who think their kid is an angel no matter that he is setting the cat on fire.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I am going to weigh in here with Tez. My mother never never spanked me. She had the skin stripped off her back with a piece of a combine belt by her father because his dinner was late. She vowed to never strike her children. When I misbehaved she would sit me down and explain how my misbehavior had a negative effect on her. If I mouthed off, she would ask me why I wanted to hurt her. The end result was my feeling awful, crying, and promising to never do it again, and Meaning it. I would do anything to avoid one of Those talks from my mom.
When I lived with my dad there was no reasoning just" Whack." That very soon turns into "**** you, do your worst". My behavior never got any more civilized just more sophisticated. What the corporal punishment taught me was, men who are mentally and emotionally weak use physical force (violence) and intimidation as a means of domination/control. It was a good lesson, and has been reinforced on a few occasions but does a father want to teach this to is daughter? I hope not.
Perhaps your daughter's behavior improved it's because you have a loving relationship with her that she was missing not because you struck her?

Lori M

I would venture to say that it was due both to the spanking and the relationship. I am not silly enough to believe that just spanking a child is the end of discipline. I explain why I do what I do. I am sure that some of it sinks in.

But you reminded me of the very last time I had to spank her. We were in the store, and she did not want to walk with me. I told her several times why she needed to, but she still refused. When I went to get her, she pulled away. When I picked her up, she tried to get away. Two swats on her butt solved that problem. Then I explained the situation to her, I did not just leave it at that. She actually told me that she was sorry.

I would wonder what you all do/did when your child was pulling and hitting to try to get away from you in places like stores and such. Or when a child is trying to do something that could be physically injurious.

I do find an interesting trend though. It seems that those of you who are against spanking have either been beat as children, or have parents who were beat. I would guess that that has something to do with why they are against spanking, which is not beating. I can certainly understand why you would be hesitant to even spank. My father was beat at times by my grandfather, and yet he was able to spank me with restraint.

 

[Sukerkin]

I can see what some people who are strongly against corporal punishment are coming from, I just believe that no one solution applies to everyone.

Likewise, corporal punishment takes many forms and how it is meted out is one of the factors that can turn it from knee-jerk reaction to reasoned punishment.

I got a good hiding what felt like (but wasn't) most days for some infraction or other but I never got the feeling that the punishment was coming from anywhere but a desire on the part of my parents to mould my actions to something resembling civilised behaviour.

What I had done wrong was considered, explained and the regret my father had that he had to smack me again was very clear. It was never a capricious act or one done because my parents were too tired or couldn't be bothered to try any other methods.

No other methods worked with me. I was wilful, stubborn and 'burdened' with the knowledge that I was cleverer than everyone else around. I reckoned I could do what I wanted and didn't see that the constraints that applied to others also applied to me. Try some of the 'modern' methods on me and I would have been away as soon as your back was turned. Persistence would have won you nothing as I can teach mules things about stubborness even today.

Some children don't need such strong tactics. They are genetically pre-disposed to be civil and cooperative. Others are not so constructed and one of the old saws from the scriptures that shows that sometimes those long-gone clerics knew a thing or two about social control; "spare the rod and spoil the child" is a timeless truism in such cases.

 

[Tez3]

Actually I've never said spanking leads to anything but I do argue against the fact the fact that many people think spanking = discipline, not spanking = no discipline.
Many posters here are being intolerant of the fact that many people don't believe in smacking a child. Many are equating those of us who don't smack nor find they need to smack as bad parents.
Hey if you want to smack your kids fine but don't label us as irresponsible because we don't want to.
5-0 Kenpo you proved an earlier point of mine when you said you hit your child for hitting.
Part of bringing up kids is anticipation, in a supermarket my child would be sat in the trolley seat clipped in, when out they would be on a rein (don't know what you call them but children always used to be on them, meant they could walk by themselves but not wander or get into trouble) when they were older I would make shopping an experience the children could enjoy, we'd make it a game. If a tantrum is in the offing diversion tactics work wonders when out, ignoring it (or having a tantrum yourself is mindblowing for a kid lol) when indoors or when they are yelling and screaming just tell them to do it louder, they soon cotton on it's pointless because mum doesn't panic and jump to their commands. Children will push to see what their limits are and even smacking is gaining attention so if they've made you smack them, guess who won? Not you, them. They pushed your buttons. Bet you didn't feel good about smacking did you? and after the pain was over for the child what did they really learn? Children learn to say sorry really quickly in life, it's a magic word with adults. I've seen children hit others and say sorry immediately, not because they were but because they knew the adult would make them say it and nothing else would happen so they said it first and be forgiven immediately. 'Ah look little Johnnie didn't mean to hit you he said sorry" yeah right.
Sukerkin, I bet you would have behaved for me lol! I can made male soldiers behave by myself so kids are a piece of cake lol!:whip1:
These aren't modern methods by any means, it's good old fashioned 'headology' as Terry Pratchett would say.

 

[teekin]

5-0 Kempo and Sukerkin, you both make it very good points. Communication, meaningful loving communication between parent and child seems to a critical part of discipline, especially when physical punishment is involved. I would hazard that Kempo 5-0 is correct that those of us who have been beaten or had our parents beaten can not bring ourselves to strike those we care about.
Lori M

 

[Sukerkin]

Irene, that sounds like a challenge to me (I'm trying hard to shoehorn a double-entendre in but it's late and I am failing ) :lol:. Of course, I'm all trained and good now (mostly ) so it would hardly be fair on me to take you up on that, particularly as another part of my ingrained mind-set is to be as co-operative and politely accomodating to members of the fairer sex as is humanly (or logically) possible .

To re-iterate, I'm not in the slightest sense gainsaying that non-physical methods don't work for some children, just trying to cast off this mantle of new-age psycho-babble that says that physical punishment permanently damages a child in their adult life. The other myth that needs throwing in the skip is that such physical punishment is 'unnecessary' in all cases.

The particular theory that draws my ire is the one that says that hitting a child only teaches them that hitting is the solution to problems. That's pure sophistry. Speaking from personal experience, the discipline I received in my youth was directly responsible for my non-violent stance when I reached my 'teens. I learned that even when you win a physical fight, you still lose because you get punishment from someone stronger than you are. A very valuable life lesson and it is the practical-proof-by-experiment inversion of the supposed 'truth' (espoused largely by people with no children) that being smacked as child means you will use physical force before all else as an adult.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Call me irritated by this response. In fact, very irritated as I think about it more.

Actually I've never said spanking leads to anything but I do argue against the fact the fact that many people think spanking = discipline, not spanking = no discipline.

5-0 Kenpo you proved an earlier point of mine when you said you hit your child for hitting.

How do you resolve these two statements that you put in the same post. On the one hand, you say that you never said spanking leads to anything. But in the very same post you said I proved a point of yours that I hit my child for hitting, thus implying that it is my hitting of her leads her to hit others.

And here is your earlier post to which I believe you were refering:

there's plenty of people who do spank their children and it doesn't teach them anything other than how to hit their children when they are older.

So yeah, you did say that spanking leads to something.

And you need to re-read what I said. I never said that I hit her for hitting. I stated that I swatted her twice on her butt for refusing to obey me in a store and pulling away from me. Stop twisting what I said to suit your own argument. I am speaking plain English.

Many posters here are being intolerant of the fact that many people don't believe in smacking a child. Many are equating those of us who don't smack nor find they need to smack as bad parents.
Hey if you want to smack your kids fine but don't label us as irresponsible because we don't want to.

No one in this entire thread (and I re-read it all just to be sure) ever said that those who do not spank their children are irresponsible. To the contrary, in fact, you and others have said that those who do spank are irresponsible and abusive of their children. So give me a freakin break on this one.

And dont pretent that hey if you want to smack your kids fine is your true feelings on the matter. You have made it plainly clear that you believe that those that do are abusive, unthinking, and uncreative monsters.

Part of bringing up kids is anticipation, in a supermarket my child would be sat in the trolley seat clipped in, when out they would be on a rein (don't know what you call them but children always used to be on them, meant they could walk by themselves but not wander or get into trouble) when they were older I would make shopping an experience the children could enjoy, we'd make it a game. If a tantrum is in the offing diversion tactics work wonders when out, ignoring it (or having a tantrum yourself is mindblowing for a kid lol) when indoors or when they are yelling and screaming just tell them to do it louder, they soon cotton on it's pointless because mum doesn't panic and jump to their commands. Children will push to see what their limits are and even smacking is gaining attention so if they've made you smack them, guess who won? Not you, them. They pushed your buttons. Bet you didn't feel good about smacking did you? and after the pain was over for the child what did they really learn?

I could tell from both the tears and her behavior afterwards who won. I did. Her behaviour improved immensly, and since, I have not had to lay a hand on her. Not only does she behave well around me, but is better with her mother and others as well.

And its not about pushing buttons, as you ignorantly (in the dictionary sense of the word) claim. As I said before, it is about the reasoned use of physical punishment to reinforce behavior. I have never hit my child out of frustration or anger, and for you to say otherwise is insulting.

 

[Tez3]

"I would wonder what you all do/did when your child was pulling and hitting to try to get away from you in places like stores and such."

Kenpo 5-0 you asked this and I answered. On the specific point of hitting a child who has hit someone I do believe it's an inappropriate punishment.
Don't you dare to presume to put words into my mouth and don't you presume to know what I think about people who smack children. I've been on MT long enough that people know I say exactly what I mean, if I thought people who smacked children were monsters I'd say so, no worries. I don't and all I'm doing is responding with my view, an alternate view,
Why are you so defensive if you believe you are right?

 

[Tez3]

Irene, that sounds like a challenge to me (I'm trying hard to shoehorn a double-entendre in but it's late and I am failing ) :lol:. Of course, I'm all trained and good now (mostly ) so it would hardly be fair on me to take you up on that, particularly as another part of my ingrained mind-set is to be as co-operative and politely accomodating to members of the fairer sex as is humanly (or logically) possible .

To re-iterate, I'm not in the slightest sense gainsaying that non-physical methods don't work for some children, just trying to cast off this mantle of new-age psycho-babble that says that physical punishment permanently damages a child in their adult life. The other myth that needs throwing in the skip is that such physical punishment is 'unnecessary' in all cases.

The particular theory that draws my ire is the one that says that hitting a child only teaches them that hitting is the solution to problems. That's pure sophistry. Speaking from personal experience, the discipline I received in my youth was directly responsible for my non-violent stance when I reached my 'teens. I learned that even when you win a physical fight, you still lose because you get punishment from someone stronger than you are. A very valuable life lesson and it is the practical-proof-by-experiment inversion of the supposed 'truth' (espoused largely by people with no children) that being smacked as child means you will use physical force before all else as an adult.

Oo er missus!
I was never smacked as a child ( though I dare say a least one person on this thread will think I should have been) nor were any of my friends and we are talking 50 years ago here, we weren't little angels by any means but punishments for wrong doing were meted out and lessons learned.
My only point about what you learn from smacking is in relation to one particular thing, that you cannot teach a child not to hit someone by hitting them in turn. I cannot see what that teaches other than you can hit someone as long as you are bigger. I make no comments on smacking for other reasons nor am I judging anyone who does smack their child other than questioning it's value in this one point. I'm not nor have I ever said that smacking leads to people thinking they can then hit people but Ireally do question the use of corporal punishment when the offense is one of violence.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

"I would wonder what you all do/did when your child was pulling and hitting to try to get away from you in places like stores and such."

Kenpo 5-0 you asked this and I answered. On the specific point of hitting a child who has hit someone I do believe it's an inappropriate punishment.
Don't you dare to presume to put words into my mouth and don't you presume to know what I think about people who smack children. I've been on MT long enough that people know I say exactly what I mean, if I thought people who smacked children were monsters I'd say so, no worries. I don't and all I'm doing is responding with my view, an alternate view,
Why are you so defensive if you believe you are right?

Quite frankly, I am using your own words against you, and you seem unable to defend what you said when confronted by them.

You did not just question spanking children, you outright condemed it. I dont know how you could sit here and say otherwise.

And you mis-read what I said then, intentionally or not. I asked the question you stated, yes. But then you said I hit my child for hitting, which was not the case. Perhaps you need to be a little bit more careful in the formation of your comments.

And just as you have gotten defensive when confronted just now, how even more so if someone said that you were a bad parent.

 

[Tez3]

Quite frankly, I am using your own words against you, and you seem unable to defend what you said when confronted by them.

You did not just question spanking children, you outright condemed it. I dont know how you could sit here and say otherwise.

And you mis-read what I said then, intentionally or not. I asked the question you stated, yes. But then you said I hit my child for hitting, which was not the case. Perhaps you need to be a little bit more careful in the formation of your comments.

And just as you have gotten defensive when confronted just now, how even more so if someone said that you were a bad parent.

Oh dear, we are upset aren't we? My dear man, I'm never defensive, I attack.... always.
Yes I condemn the smacking of children but no I don't think if you smack you are a bad parent. It's the act of smacking I condemn not the parent. Hate the sin, love the sinner sort of thing. I didn't say you hit your child I said you proved my point about hitting children to stop them hitting other when you asked that question which was how else do you punish a child that hits.

 

[Kacey]

I will start by saying that I do not agree with corporal punishment as a general thing - but there are times when it is appropriate.

For example, I used to live in an apartment which had cement stairs leading down to the basement, which contained the recreation room and the laundry facility. The stairs to the basement were open at the top and the bottom, although there was a railing around the top; the stairs were individual slabs of cement supported by a metal framework, with open spaces between the stairs. They were often wet, and therefore slippery. One of my neighbors had two children, one of whom was about 14 months old, and the other about 6 years old, at the time I am describing. His mother was attempting to watch him, his older brother, and a dog, who were all playing in the courtyard. The younger boy kept approaching the stairs, and his mother kept telling him "no" (not very effective with kids that age), and bodily removing him from the area. She didn't want them to leave the courtyard, as the traffic was fairly heavy as soon as you left the apartment building's property. Finally, she swatted him once on his diapered bottom when he approached the stairs yet again; her hand was cupped, and the noise was considerably greater than any contact the boy could have felt - and he never went near the stairs again except accompanied by his mother, more from startlement than anything else. In the general course of events, comparing the potential psychological damage from that one swat to the risk of the boy falling down the stairs and seriously injuring or killing himself, I found that appropriate. Others may not. But there are times when the child is too young, or the danger too immediate, for some children, for talking to them about the problem to be effective.

 

[teekin]

I will start by saying that I do not agree with corporal punishment as a general thing - but there are times when it is appropriate.

For example, I used to live in an apartment which had cement stairs leading down to the basement, which contained the recreation room and the laundry facility. The stairs to the basement were open at the top and the bottom, although there was a railing around the top; the stairs were individual slabs of cement supported by a metal framework, with open spaces between the stairs. They were often wet, and therefore slippery. One of my neighbors had two children, one of whom was about 14 months old, and the other about 6 years old, at the time I am describing. His mother was attempting to watch him, his older brother, and a dog, who were all playing in the courtyard. The younger boy kept approaching the stairs, and his mother kept telling him "no" (not very effective with kids that age), and bodily removing him from the area. She didn't want them to leave the courtyard, as the traffic was fairly heavy as soon as you left the apartment building's property. Finally, she swatted him once on his diapered bottom when he approached the stairs yet again; her hand was cupped, and the noise was considerably greater than any contact the boy could have felt - and he never went near the stairs again except accompanied by his mother, more from startlement than anything else. In the general course of events, comparing the potential psychological damage from that one swat to the risk of the boy falling down the stairs and seriously injuring or killing himself, I found that appropriate. Others may not. But there are times when the child is too young, or the danger too immediate, for some children, for talking to them about the problem to be effective.

Kacey, I don't consider that to be corporal punishment. She did not cause the child to suffer pain, she used psychology. The cupped hand on diapered bottom made a big noise that startled the child. Well done Mom. A judicious use of one well placed "swat" when all else had failed and the consequences of not disciplining the child were dire. I find this appropriate as well. Now if Mom had backhanded the child, I'd have issues with that.
Lori M

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Oh dear, we are upset aren't we? My dear man, I'm never defensive, I attack.... always.
Yes I condemn the smacking of children but no I don't think if you smack you are a bad parent. It's the act of smacking I condemn not the parent. Hate the sin, love the sinner sort of thing.

It is obvious that we have two different definitions of what being defensive means.

And again, just as I said before, you condemn spanking in all situations. How reasonable is that?

I didn't say you hit your child I said you proved my point about hitting children to stop them hitting other when you asked that question which was how else do you punish a child that hits.

That may have been your intent, but it is definately not what you said. You referred specifically to what I had said about my child. Not about the question that I had postulated. Again:

5-0 Kenpo you proved an earlier point of mine when you said you hit your child for hitting.

That quote, made by you, was never, in any way, uttered by me. I never said that I hit my child for hitting, which is what you said here. You are wrong, and refuse to admit it.

But that's ok. I believe it goes to show not only myself, but everyone else, exactly where you are coming from, and how you formulate an argument. People can then go from there.

Honestly, if you do not want to institute corporal punishment with your children, that is perfectly fine. I don't think that anyone who does believe in it would codemn you for your position. Even though you believe people do such a thing, no one here has.

However, you have no problem condeming corporal punishment when others do it. Your position is that people who do so are taking the easy way out. That is an interesting position due to the fact that you have no idea what it takes to spank a child. You have said that you have never done so, so how would you know how easy or not such a thing is to do?

You should even recognize the fact that I have never condemned a "failure" to spank a child. I have said that I believe that corporal punishment is a viable alternative in terms of punishment, however, not the only one.

 

[Tez3]

I wasn't particularly arguing, I just put my views forward. I'm so sorry if having views that you don't agree with is upsetting for you.
It's a very emotive subject, in some countries hitting children is banned completely as is the death penalty and the carrying of guns, all subjects that will raise blood pressure on this forum, trying to argue against any of these is always going to like putting your head aboue the parapet.

 

[theletch1]

The subject is, indeed, one that has and will probably continue to spark much debate. The key, folks, is to remember that it is the subject that is being debated and not the personalities that are doing the debating. It is of the utmost importance that each of us decide not to take anything here personally and, even more importantly, decide not to make anything personal. It's the whole attack the message not the messenger thing we like to keep going on this site.

 

[MJS]

Dont misunderstand. There is a difference between spanking (a swat or two on the butt with a hand) and abuse (hitting with a cane).

Exactly, and IMO, I think this is where some are mixing up the two. As I said in another post, I was raised where I got that 'knock it off look' and I knew that if I continued, I would get spanked. As you said, there is a difference between a whack on the rear and leaving a bruise or throwing the kid around the room. That is abuse.

People take abuse and a whack on the rear, mix it up, which is why you have kids making threats to call the police, and why parents call the cops and want THEM to raise the child for them. ie: my kid won't listen to me, my kid won't go to school, etc. Those are a few examples.

 

[Sukerkin]

Quite so, Mike. That's a point I've tried to make every time this particular hot-potato comes around.