this is a ...disturbing topic, care to shed some background? any time of violence or abuse is not tolerated here or in person
13627438549650759648574635
-
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?
-
@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.
-
@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 :shrug:
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
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.
-
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.
-
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!
-
@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.
-
All I know is Im gonna beat my kids.
-
This post is deleted! -
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. 😉
