Corporal Punishment - What are your thoughts on this matter?


  • One Woman Army

    Who doesn't remember the good ol' days as a child when you managed to anger your parents to such an extent that they just resorted to low-key violence.
    Getting spanked, whipped or even beaten with low force by your parents.
    With either their hands or improvisational devices such as belts, spoons, clocks and so on.
    Now the year is 2019.
    Humans are getting weirder and stranger with each passing year. And a lot more open.
    A lot of taboos and do not's have been lifted and are now even perfectly legal in many parts of this world.
    So.
    What are you thoughts and opinions on the "traditional" form of punishment for children?
    Do you still view it as an appropriate lesson for underage people or are there better ways in your opinion?
    And with what age should such teachings no longer be practised by the parents onto their own children?


  • One Woman Army We Are Groot! Soul Searchers Watch Anime Eyes Movie Buff Global Moderator

    It doesn´t lead anywhere, in my opinion. Using force or intimidation as an education method will only induce the child to feel humiliated and frightened, it doesn´t instill any respect or appreciation for the morals and precepts that parents intend to teach.

    There are multiple ways by which to condemn or approve an action without having to resort to physical punishment.

    Children should be educated in an environment of respect and understanding, not repression, they should be given the confidence to make mistakes and be able to make decisions without fear of reprisals.


  • Fake Moderators

    @cjko has made a topic about it, and I urge everyone, to check that out too 😁
    Re: Our president vetoed bill prohibiting corporal punishment on children.. any contradiction and comment for this?

    @Karina-Kara said in Corporal Punishment - What are your thoughts on this matter?:

    What are you thoughts and opinions on the "traditional" form of punishment for children?

    Its a necessary evil

    Why necessary?

    There's an idiom in my mother tongue;

    लातों के भूत बातों से नहीं मानते

    which translates to, some people only understand the language of brute.

    But why Evil?

    Because some people, also forget the thin line between punishment, and harassment.
    They, start to develop a superiority complex, and hence, in the lust of their power over the weak, goes to any and every extent, to "improve" the person.

    Do you still view it as an appropriate lesson for underage people or are there better ways in your opinion?

    We cannot generalise, the behaviour/ treatment, that a person should get. Everyone is unique, everyone has unique flaws, and hence should be dealt with, accordingly.

    I always advocate the usage of Positive Reinforcements towards younger children.
    But the older, and especially the persistent ones, should be ruled with an ironfist.

    And with what age should such teachings no longer be practised by the parents onto their own children?

    As long as the child, is mature enough.



  • I'm reading here with a little dismay about the 'Positive Reinforcement' route, and the hyper-rationalisation employed by @lego-batman. I don't have kids ("THAT I KNOW OF!", crazy laughter belying sheer magnitude of the briefness and fickleness of human relationships), but I'd always start from the viewpoint that all kids are jerks, and your own would be no exception. "My little Noah, he's really clever, and he's not like other kids". Well ...no, he's not really, is he?

    Don't like smacking a kid? Say you're out for a walk, and he's messing with a dog, or throwing stones. In your pocket you should keep a pair of handcuffs and a chain. At the first sign of insurrection, fit him up in the cuffs and chain him to you so that he trails along behind you like a prisoner. He'll love it because it's like you're playing a game, like he's Chewbacca in Return of the Jedi, or George Clooney in 'Brother Where Art Thou?', and in that way, he'll remember it's always cooler to have a laugh than be a bellend.

    And if another passing parent remonstrates at your unorthodox disciplinary measures, just say, "I'm only pretending he's my prisoner, whereas you're literally making him a prisoner with your filthy, traitorous capitalist economy".

    Besides which, even if you disapprove of hitting kids, there's far worse, more insidious things you can do with them. Have you seen those parents who are constantly talking with their kids? Y'know, having a little conversation with them, all the time about nothing? What's the matter with you? JUST WALK ALONG IN SILENCE. What are trying to do, raise King Extrovert Gobshine of the Universe?



  • @Karina-Kara Generally, I don’t think punishment is necessary. I believe in positive reinforcements. I have a fairly big family, some of us were punished when did wrong, others just had positive reinforcements. I was one of the lucky ones that got positive reinforcements and as a result I was the most behave child with the best grades and a clean record. In school and in law. I now use positive reinforcements on my pets and they are very well behaved and obident. I think positive reinforcement is the best way to go because punishment can cause issues to a child. However, I have met people that claim that punishment is the only way their children will listen to them, I still disagree, but I also don’t know their children. So I can’t tell them what does and doesn’t work if I’m not there to try it and/or witness it



  • To become a full person it is required for human beings to go their own ways. This means to be able to live in this world and do good you are absolutely required to break some rules. If you cannot break rules, you'll never be able to do anything meaningful. You won't be able to change the world for the better. Because you can only follow.

    Even just to be an independent adult you need to be able to make your own decisions and stick to them. And how would you learn that if you always agreed with your parents? It's plain impossible. But if your parents don't give you any rules, there is nothing to disagree with. It makes you just as well incapable of walking your own path.

    In other words, a child must be disobedient now and then. And it is perfectly natural that little children between 2 and 3 years stop doing what you want them to do. It's not a matter of insolence or even sin. This is how children grow up, how they become capable of handling life's adversities (!). And what parent wouldn't want their children to grow up and be their own man or their own woman? to be able to walk out into the world and be successful at the things they want to make a difference with?



  • Violence of adults against children will always, always make a child feel violated. Because it is being hurt, against his will, by someone it deeply needs and loves, and it has no way to defend itself, it is absolutely at the mercy of the adult, powerless. Imagine a giant coming along and beating you up, because you don't conform to his will, a will which you don't even understand...

    It is not surprising, that the people who brought the most harm over humanity, like Hitler or Stalin, to a staggering degree had incredibly cruel upbringing. That is of course not to say, that all people who get beaten as children become evil monsters, but violence almost always breads violence. Most people will not be violent against their neighbours, but in all likelyhood they will be against their children, unless something wakes them up.

    In my experience the problem is not children being disobedient, it is always adults not being able to properly deal with that disobedience. If you encounter a "problem child", you can be damn sure its not the kids fault, that it is the way it is.



  • The argument that certain children only listen to violence is easily defeated. It is in our nature to test our limits, it is part of growing up, part of maturing. If you set violence as that limit, you will produce children who only react to violence.

    In todays times there are countless examples of people who have grown up without being beaten, and who have turned out to be amazing individuals. I think it is safe to say, that violence against children is certainly not necessary.

    And let me remind you that beating up your children is only one form of violence. There are countless other forms of violent behaviour, of things that a child experiences as a violation. But we all do make mistakes. And children heal well. If you only are able to say "sorry" to them, and explain them, that what you did was wrong, they will forgive you. That's all it takes.



  • As I hinted before I'm also not a fan of "laisser faire", of letting your children just do what they want, because then they cannot be disobedient, which they absolutely must be, to grow up.

    I'm a friend of clear rules. There should be as little rules as required, but those that are required should definitely be there. And with all the rules in place, your child should always know what the consequences are. You should explain the rules as good as you can of course and the reasons for them, as much as the child can understand. This way it can feel safe and also learn to break a rule every now and then and live with the consequences.

    You might have guessed what the important thing is: that nothing here is arbitrary. Heavier rulebreaking has heavier consequences (but never violence of any form). There is no reason for the child to feel violated. It just learns to deal with the world, it learns to deal with the consequences of its own actions and there is no better education than that.



  • @lego-batman
    So from your words I deduce that you absolutely do not believe the voices that say- ‘Make your boys learn better’. Good to know.
    Also, I deduce that you’re Atheist as the religions demands to respect and honor the All-father. Good to meet a fellow Atheist too.
    I also deduce that you feel that its not right to blame the parents if the child turns into a brat and misbehaving child (aka Lil Tay), provided that the freedom has been given to them in their toddler years.

    I’m totally with you on the fact that regular violence has an adverse effect on the minds of children. Today’s children are not that strong-willed and bold-hearted as the ones in the past used to be. They’ll call 911 (in US) if they experience violence being conducted against them by their parents. In modern times, with the evolving mind and advent of technology, we see the violence being replace with love. Most parents wants to teach their kids in a pleasant friendly manner. They want to be their friends and reduce the generation-gap side-effects. And that, I believe, is the way to go. Either that or giving out your child to non-violent day-care centres 🙂

    However, occassional violence is a necessary evil. I would rather not go that way but sometimes, you can’t help. Especially when those brats are 3 year olds who can’t understand the language of feelings and emotions.



  • @lego-batman
    That phrase is used in reference to the ‘Rape’ committed whereby the parents are blamed for not educating the boy child better. It seeks to indicate that the parents are at fault for ‘teaching a girl to be restricted and behave in a certain manner’ instead of ‘teaching their boys to learn to respect girls’.

    So you’re an Agnostic, technically.

    Well, there are always pro’s and con’s to every aspect. Since you say over-protectiveness is concerning and real love is being strict and caring, does occasional outburst and rare violence come under ‘strictness’? If not, then what does? And I would also rather not hit a child under any circumstance, except certain ones... For instance, if they effing decide to run in between a busy road (lame, eh?), I would hit them to create a sense of fear that it should not be done again as it is wrong. But thats just my opinion.



  • Corporal's have their orders just like everyone else and I dare say at their rank they ought to know better than slip. Make them do push-ups like the rest. 😉



  • That phrase is used in reference to the ‘Rape’ committed whereby the parents are blamed for not educating the boy child better. It seeks to indicate that the parents are at fault for ‘teaching a girl to be restricted and behave in a certain manner’ instead of ‘teaching their boys to learn to respect girls’.
    Well, there are always pro’s and con’s to every aspect. Since you say over-protectiveness is concerning and real love is being strict and caring, does occasional outburst and rare violence come under ‘strictness’? If not, then what does?

    By strict I mean clear. Clear on where the limits are, on what the child is to do and not to do. And on what the consequences will be if it doesn't obey. Strict also means that there always will be the consequences, just as they were stated before. E.g. you tell your child no chocolate flakes for breakfast if you start a fight with someone, then there absolutely should not be any chocolate flakes, even if he apologizes.

    Obviously rape is going pretty far, and I would certainly blame parents for not teaching their boys to not violate girls. Those parents made lots and lots of mistakes even before if it comes to something like that though...

    And I would also rather not hit a child under any circumstance, except certain ones... For instance, if they effing decide to run in between a busy road (lame, eh?), I would hit them to create a sense of fear that it should not be done again as it is wrong. But thats just my opinion.

    Agree to disagree about the violence, but I definitely agree with communicating the weight of the danger!



  • When I can not get my own way with my own toddler then I will drop to the floor and scream the house down because shocking them is the only way.

    When I can not get my own way with my own teenager then I will do it right in front of their entire school.



  • @Wolfie_11 said in Corporal Punishment - What are your thoughts on this matter?:

    @lego-batman
    So from your words I deduce that you absolutely do not believe the voices that say- ‘Make your boys learn better’. Good to know.

    I'm not with ya on this one. What does that phrase entail?

    Also, I deduce that you’re Atheist as the religions demands to respect and honor the All-father. Good to meet a fellow Atheist too.

    Nope, not an atheist, but also not an idiot citing the bible without thinking himself. Well I'm a bit on both sides actually which is troublesome because there is always people from every camp who disagree with me 🤷

    I also deduce that you feel that its not right to blame the parents if the child turns into a brat and misbehaving child (aka Lil Tay), provided that the freedom has been given to them in their toddler years.

    You got that one wrong. I very much do blame parents for their brats, if the family is intact (e.g. if outside factors like getting a different education from separated parents or other things are not impeding the upbringing). However the older the child gets, their own responsibility for their behaviour drastically increases, with 25 being the absolute limit for me. Whoever blames their parents for any of their troubles over 25 is but a grown child.

    I’m totally with you on the fact that regular violence has an adverse effect on the minds of children. Today’s children are not that strong-willed and bold-hearted as the ones in the past used to be. They’ll call 911 (in US) if they experience violence being conducted against them by their parents. In modern times, with the evolving mind and advent of technology, we see the violence being replace with love. Most parents wants to teach their kids in a pleasant friendly manner. They want to be their friends and reduce the generation-gap side-effects. And that, I believe, is the way to go. Either that or giving out your child to non-violent day-care centres 🙂

    You are right, as long as it's real love that's good. Hmm, well, there is something wrong with the overprotectiveness and overfriendliness of our generation too. Real love is both caring and strict.

    However, occassional violence is a necessary evil. I would rather not go that way but sometimes, you can’t help. Especially when those brats are 3 year olds who can’t understand the language of feelings and emotions.

    No, especially with a 3 year old I think violence should never be used. There are lots of ways to restrict them from doing what they want.



  • @lego-batman said in Corporal Punishment - What are your thoughts on this matter?:

    By strict I mean clear. Clear on where the limits are, on what the child is to do and not to do. And on what the consequences will be if it doesn't obey. Strict also means that there always will be the consequences, just as they were stated before. E.g. you tell your child no chocolate flakes for breakfast if you start a fight with someone, then there absolutely should not be any chocolate flakes, even if he apologizes.

    Thats like providing lollipop. A reward for a work well-done and a manner well-followed. But how do we ensure that he learns the manner and does do the same everytime even after he has suffered the punishment once. What makes you think he won’t disobey you again and if he does would the punishment be the same? What if the child instead develops a liking for the bad habit and doesn’t give a dime about missing chocolate flakes for breakfast? What would be your next move? Another lollipop?

    Agree to disagree about the violence, but I definitely agree with communicating the weight of the danger!

    Sure.


  • One Woman Army

    All I know is Im gonna beat my kids.



  • alt text

    Corporal's have their orders just like everyone else and I dare say at their rank they ought to know better than slip. Make them do push-ups like the rest. 😉


  • Banned

    This post is deleted!





By using TalkWithStranger, you are accepting our privacy and usage terms . You must be 18+ or 13+ with parental permission to use our online chatting site.