Found something that was trending in mid 2019 - early 2020. Funny or horrifying? Smart parenting or psychological child abuse?
https://www.facebook.com/sweetv1/videos/10104342664807102
https://twitter.com/xowildcherry/status/1141521191913443328
I’ll admit that I chuckled. But I also think it’s psychological child abuse and very wrong, and that’s more important than laughing at “kids are dumb sometimes”. Your opinions?
~Max
OK I admit I giggled too.
But I agree it’s abusive. That’s just asking for trust issues and eating disorders. To the little kids I have known their stuffed animals aren’t just toys. They’re sort of alive to the kid. It wouldn’t surprise me that the kid thinks that if the parent will beat up a toy to make the child do X thing, the kid might be the one getting punched next time 
Just wait until that stuffed tiger gets tired of the abuse, comes alive and eats the parents.
Yikes, how awful! I mean, yeah, kinda funny, unless you’re the kid. Our pediatrician always said, “Forcing kids to eat when they’re not hungry is the surest way to an eating disorder.” Actually, she kind of yelled it at my husband, who’d been trying so hard to coerce my son to eat it had become a power struggle. I dragged them both to the pediatrician. Watching her dress him down was fun - this tiny Iraqi woman yelling at my 6’3" Indian husband, who was just staring at her in astonishment.
Anyway, my husband stopped forcing it. My kid started eating. Problem solved. Beating up a kid’s stuffed animal like that is definitely at least borderline abusive and absolutely counterproductive.
“Eat your dinner or I’ll beat up your friends”-Says a lot more about the parent than it does the child.
I don’t think that’s the message. More like “eat your dinner or I’ll beat you, like I beat your friend who wouldn’t eat”.
~Max
Oh, that makes it so much better.
If your kids won’t eat, stop giving them sugary drinks and snacks, except as a reward for clearing their dinner plate. Also, make nicer food.
Threatening violence, albeit to their toys, is still violence. At the absolute minimum, it’s a terrible example to set.
I remember the first time I saw that commercial. I think that’s better than beating the stuffed animal, for sure.
The BuzzFeed article shows a dad pretending to feed the stuffed animal, who “likes” the food. I remember that trick from my younger days.
~Max
Sugar/dessert should not be a “reward”, and kids should not have to clean their plates. This is again setting up unhealthy habits. Kids need to be encouraged to listen to their bodies about being full. We allow one treat per day, and the two rules about it are that the kid has to have eaten enough healthier food, and that only kids who are sitting at the table get dessert. (The latter rule was implemented to deal with their habit of getting up and ignoring calls to come back to the table.)
What’s “enough” is a call we make based on dinner, but also on what else they’ve eaten that day. It sets up the healthy concept that treats are fine in moderation, and that helthy foods need to make up the bulk of your diet.
We don’t generally provide sugary snacks or drinks. We also don’t necessarily limit their one treat to after dinner. If they want to dip into their candy stash as a treat in the afternoon, that’s their treat for the day.
That’s just like, your opinion, man.
~Max
I vote for “horrifying” and “child abuse.” It would be appalling to display that level of violence to a small child for any reason, let alone just to coerce them to eat. IMO the reaction of the kids is funny only as very black humor.
Parents who do stuff like that are either ignorant or sociopathic. Terrorizing kids to eat food they don’t want isn’t right.
Yeah, I vote child abuse, and possibly sociopathic. and I guess I have no sense of humor because I didn’t find it even a little funny.
Maybe we just had easy kids, but I don’t really “get” the whole “how do you make them eat” thing anyway. We put food in front of the kids. We didn’t give them a lot of snacks between meals, so they were usually hugry at meal time. We told them that they had to taste new-to-them foods, except when they were five. (“Five year olds are picky eaters, and you don’t have to try new foods when you are five. But next year when you are six we will expect you to try new foods again”) If they hated a food, we didn’t force them to eat it, beyond one taste.
Both our kids had a reasonably healthy diet as children and enjoy eating a variety of foods as adults. They both have a handful of foods they don’t like, too. Which, you know, is fine.
I say you were just lucky. I don’t even have kids, this is just based on friends and family.
~Max
(bolding mine)
Your disagreement with me appears to be purely semantic.
There’s a joke in here about Beating a Dead Horse, but it’s probably more trouble setting it up than it’s worth.
The idea of beating a stuffed animal to change your child’s behavior sounds kinda sick.