I thought the expression was;
Children should be beaten
but not killed.
Or am I confusing it with a similar statement?
For real. I am the laziest parent in Lazyville and yet I never seem to find myself having to beat my kids. We get regular compliments on their behavior in public, too. I just make them fear my sarcasm instead of my fist. It works for us.
The point I was making, which was what was quoted was replying to, was with respect to kids with behavior issues. The claim was that they will only respond to physical punishment. I was saying that physical punishment is so not necessary, it just takes commitment and work. Hitting is a cop out, especially if you believe there is no other choice.
That could be. I honestly don’t know because I just don’t have an urge to hit her. I’m not saying I’m perfect or anything, it’s just the way I am, and my child is a very nice, obedient kid. Not perfect, but a good kid.
My parents hit me (they didn’t abuse me, just the usual physical discipline of the time) and I never got the sense it made it easier on them; it just seemed to upset them. And it sure wasn’t any more effective than other methods. The kids I knew who got hit the most were invariably the worst kids, as a matter of fact, though of course there’s an argument to be made that that could be correlation, not causation.
I certainly don’t have the urge to hit either. Are you getting that from my posts? Because if that’s how it’s coming across that is the opposite of what I’m saying. Some think that hitting is the fix. I’m saying that parenting without it can be hard and sometimes behavior changes take time but it works and is the right thing to do.
That’s how my wife and I felt with our first kid. Raising kids? A piece of cake! So easy, if you’re smart and cool like we were. Never dreamed of raising a voice, much less a hand, in anger.
After the 2nd one, we both acknowledged we frequently bit back the urge to get physical with her. And to keep from screaming and doing all the things we swore we would never do. And never dreamed would cross our minds.
We did refrain, but OMG, we each took turns being the ‘sane’ parent at times.
We’ve got two great young adults now, though.
Each child challenges their parents differently.
Not that there’s any justification for what the dad in question did. It’s okay to feel anger, but one must deal with it appropriately. That’s a parent’s job.
This makes me wonder.
Mine is a very nice child, a model student, social, polite. Sure there are 10 times a day when things go awry, but I never feel like hitting her, more like jumping off the balcony myself.
I have to accept that she is everything I wanted in a child, but is she that way because I don’t hit her, and have never even threatened to do so (she got time out twice in her life and she got the message)? Or do I never feel like hitting her because she is such a nice kid?
In the end it doesn’t matter, I have a built-in fear of “going there” so it is not an issue anyway. To me corporal punishment is not the solution. It never is.
Hey! I’m not putting up with any Junior Sith Modding around here!
Kids learn from example. Teach them poor impulse control, they learn poor impulse control. Teach them abuse, they learn abuse.
First, I said “parents who think that a swat to the butt has to be the same thing as hitting a child, and that physical punishment has to be the same thing as abuse”. That is not the same thing as “a swat to the butt is the same as beating someone with a belt”.
Second, I was responding to those who were responding to the OP, dumbass.
Where did you get the 4th grade quote? Not that it matters, I obviously typed 9 instead of 7. Is that the worst you have? That I made a – gasp!! – typo?
My math “is not so good”, but none of that has anything to do with the subject at hand. You are really reaching here.
Ya know, if you all didn’t act like hysterical paranoids when someone points out that not all parents agree with your way of raising children (which is what Lynn did and why you were trying to fry her), then you’d still be bashing Lynn, eh?
I have never said that, nor do I think you saying it is quite within this board’s rules. Whatever, it is simply another example of people making up whatever they feel like and pretending it’s Truth.
Whoa whoa WHOA.
Slow down a minute here.
So basically what you’re saying is that it’s perfectly acceptable…
TO RAPE LITTLE BABIES
Oh my God!
You’re a worse monster than Lynn “Officer, these Children were Dead when I Found Them” Bodoni!
Do you guys happen to have the phone number for your straw supplier? As much as you’re using, you’ve GOT to be getting a hell of a deal.
This is not the poster you are trying to mod…
I have 7 siblings. Our parents never even gently smacked us. Also, they’ve never yelled (at least in my presence) and I’d have to strain to remember a time when I heard them curse. Never once were any of us “wild and out of control.” Of course we got in trouble and did things that our parents did not want us to, but that is not wild or out of control. My parents were strict (about following rules) and stern (when they had to be), and that was enough to mold 7 pretty decent human beings without being beaten/abused. All of my nieces and nephews appear to share similar experiences and character. Also, and maybe as a product of our personalities and character, I think my siblings’ hung around friends with pretty decent character. I know I did.
Maybe you should re-evaluate the circle of friends you consorted with.
[QUOTE=White Unicorn]
It’s true that for some kids, this is the only thing they’ll respond to.
[/QUOTE]
So how is it that my parents went 7 for 7 without physically assailing their children and that (apparently) your friends went 0 for (how ever many friends you had)?
I’m going to have to go with “because the sock is LYING.”
You are aware that many things influence how kids turn out and even how parents take care of them other than whatever parenting skills they may have, right? For example, in your case you all could have just been so desperate for attention and approval that you never seriously stepped out of line. Or not. The point is that there is no one right way to raise kids since they aren’t all the same, nor living in the same places.
Also, once again, physical discipline is not the same thing as assault. Where did you learn that physical interaction must be assault?
However, what Lynn actually said was that if you do not physically punish your kids they WILL turn out badly. It is quoted in the OP.
That assertion is bat shit insane and deserves no support. In addition she asserted that some kids require physical correction because they will respond to nothing else. Again, wrong. If one chooses to use physical punishment (not assault) it is a choice, but I cannot imagine the scenario where it is the ONLY choice left.
That is why people are railing against her. It was the black and white assertions of the necessity of physical punishment that was so wrong.
As she has not come back, in this thread or the other, to contradict this reading of her words or to clarify, I’m taking her at her word.
That’s precisely my point. White Unicorn seems to think that not beating your children will necessarily produce bad children.
[QUOTE=curlcoat]
Also, once again, physical discipline is not the same thing as assault. Where did you learn that physical interaction must be assault?
[/QUOTE]
There are more definitions of “assail” than the legal one. If I tell you that you write like a monkey with a pencil in it’s teeth, I’ve assailed your literary form but I’ve not assaulted you. If a parent beats a child, they certainly are assailing them, though it isn’t necessarily considered assault, legally.
I trust that you have forgiven your parents.
She said physically discipline, not punish. Now, I’m not Lynn so I don’t know what she defines that as, and it can include punishment, but it doesn’t have to. For example, if you told your kid to quit coloring on the wall and he didn’t stop, you could physically remove him from the wall and physically put him in his room.
Also, punishment by definition is in the eye of the receiver, it has to be something that the person perceives as a penalty. So whether you think something is punishment doesn’t mean anything if the person who is being disciplined doesn’t think it is.
Do you know that? Are you claiming to know that every last child in the world can be raised to be a worthwhile functioning adult using only time outs, loss of privileges and talk therapy? And that you can think of every scenario possible in the course of raising children, and that none would involve physical punishment as the best and/or only choice?
My point is that every kids is an individual, so no one child rearing theory is going to work with every kid. Well, except for being flexible I guess.
So why are your black and white assertions that it is wrong OK?
Where did White Unicorn say anything about beating kids?
Where is this “beating” thing coming from? Do you assume that physical interaction has to be a beating? Shoot, I’d think the most common thing one would think of when told a child was “physically disciplined” was a spanking - do you think a spanking is a beating??