Off Topic

[Bradandez]

I still don't see what's the problem. Like I said my mom gave me and my siblings a good smack to the face at least once in our lives. Did we deserve it? Definitely. We were being little shits. Did it scar us? Nope. We learned our lesson, we know better now. And my mom is a naturally scary person, she's scares us way more than our dad ever could (she even scares him, lol). So we know way better to not act up or we're gonna get punished for something. Simple as that.

And of course we hit the dogs way less. Dogs are way more obedient than a child will ever be.

[anaphasiia]

Not everyone, probably most people aren't "scarred", but this:

We learned our lesson (...) we know way better to not act up or we're gonna get punished for something.

is the problem. You said yourself, you didn't learn why it was wrong, you were only motivated not to do it by negative reinforcement. The kind of thinking this encourages irrational (especially when it's tried to be justified) and anti-intellectual. Maybe you would learn later why it was wrong, but that's after your main growth stage, and you take your early intellectual malnourishment with you. I can see it in you, the same irrational sidestepping to not answer the points/questions I brought. People who make the argument you did did not give substance, they just say "I got slapped when I was young, then I became a good boy because I was told it's wrong" over again, thinking it's good evidence to support their position.

I'm not saying I know who you are better than you, but you make what I'm saying so obvious with your argument.

[OCG]

My view on this story.

Ducktaping this dog was not right thing to do. For dogs, barking is like talking is to people. Yes it can be loud but still. Imagine if someone ducktaped a man because he was speaking. It sounds beyond horrible. Only way it would be justified is if dog was violent and tried to bite her and she did it in self-defense.
Physical punishment, that is not easy topic. I think dog deserves to be a bit hit with hand and yelled at if he takes a shit or pees in house on purpose. Dogs do that sometimes if they want to protest about not taking them out for example despite weather being bad. Violent beatings however, I do not approve and only small ones if it is like I said above.
For children, it depends on age of child and if they did something on purpose or not. I definitely think rebel teens that disrespect parents in every way, including insults and violence should be hit hard and be thoguht who is who.

[anaphasiia]

I definitely think rebel teens that disrespect parents in every way, including insults and violence

If they are mindfully capable and being violent then perhaps, but then I think authorities are better to deal with violent teens. I think parents should not go down the route of harmful physical interaction even in a position like that (that's something that is more my opinion and not that I think is absolutely right). Besides, it's not a common situation at all for teens to be violent towards parents.

Reiteration: why is it okay for a parent to hit their child for stealing the cookie jar, but it's bad for a boyfriend to hit his girlfriend for cheating on him? Because children's minds aren't developed as much and don't understand reason? So because of that, violence is now okay because it works as negative motivation, and it works because they cannot stand up for themselves? Remember, physical punishment is everything about fear of more physical punishment, nothing about understanding.

should be hit hard and be thoguht who is who.

And then we have this, another example of "the reason you shouldn't hit me isn't that it does nothing good, it's because authority does not get hit. Why authority in particular? Because I say so. Now let me hit you to teach you not to hit people."

[OCG]

It's not a common situation at all for teens to be violent towards parents.

Have you tried googling "teen attack parents" in searchbar?

And then we have this, another example of "the reason you shouldn't hit me isn't that it does nothing good, it's because authority does not get hit. Why authority in particular? Because I say so. Now let me hit you to teach you not to hit people."

So you are saying authority should be hit? Lets see what would happen if you hit cop for example.
Also, punishing teenage kid with hit is mainly for showing how it feels when someone hits you. If he hit parent first, parent hitting back would be perfect way of showing how it feels when you hurt someone because teen hurt them first. Its not done for showing off you are stronger but still, there are some rules and parents need full respect.

[Dart]

I still don't see what's the problem. Like I said my mom gave me and my siblings a good smack to the face at least once in our lives. Did we deserve it? Definitely. We were being little shits. Did it scar us? Nope. We learned our lesson, we know better now. And my mom is a naturally scary person, she's scares us way more than our dad ever could (she even scares him, lol). So we know way better to not act up or we're gonna get punished for something. Simple as that.

And of course we hit the dogs way less. Dogs are way more obedient than a child will ever be.

This.

Let's just agree to disagree on the subject before anyone takes it out of hand.

Out of hand? Oooh, I loooove when people are somehow offended by a conversation that includes disputes of any kind.

Let's just live in our own safe space and never talk about anything, right Mr Mediator?

Oh fuck off! To me it's clear that we have different opinions on the matter and aren't likely to persuade another, hence the reason I suggested dropping the subject in the first place.

[Bradandez]

Hey, so violence isn't the answer. Nothing negative is the answer. Let the little kids be little shits. Oh, trying to talk to a spazztic little gremlin isn't working? Keep talking to them calmly. It ought to work out eventually.

You know ISIS? Let's just give them a calm talking too. I'm sure that'll work out. They'll stop decpitating innocent people for sure that way.

[OCG]

Speaking of ISIS, I just learned today they killed another guy. This time a Russian. May he rest in peace and I hope Russian forces find the killers.

[anaphasiia]

Have you tried googling "teen attack parents" in searchbar?

There are 7 billion people in the world. Of course results will come. That doesn't mean even 1/100 teens have hit their parents.

So you are saying authority should be hit?

What? Not at all. I said nobody should be hit.

Also, punishing teenage kid with hit is mainly for showing how it feels when someone hits you. If he hit parent first, parent hitting back would be perfect way of showing how it feels when you hurt someone because teen hurt them first.

I don't have a big problem with this, because of the specific reason behind it. But I think there are better solutions still. In fact, it's why I hit my mother in return when she hit me a few years ago when I finally was big enough to stand up for myself.

Oh fuck off!

To me it's clear that we have different opinions on the matter and aren't likely to persuade another

It doesn't mean it isn't worth talking about. Conversations can have a lasting effect, maybe over time one party changes their mind because of something said a while ago. I don't appreciate when people stifle a conversation because they're afraid of potential hot air. I have nothing against anyone; the only point here I got annoyed was at your post.


Also, I apologize for if my posts have a "choppy and impulsive" sound to them, I have trouble writing clearly. They could sound better if I worked on them longer, but it takes me a long time as it is.

Hey, so violence isn't the answer. Nothing negative is the answer. Let the little kids be little shits. Oh, trying to talk to a spazztic little gremlin isn't working? Keep talking to them calmly. It ought to work out eventually.

This post has three non-sequiturs and even doesn't agree with itself at one point. That also isn't at all what I said, I don't know how you misunderstood.

You know ISIS? Let's just give them a calm talking too. I'm sure that'll work out. They'll stop decpitating innocent people for sure that way.

ISIS is deranged. Little kids don't have radical motivations and are no threat. You can easily restrain children fighting without joining the fight.


Obviously if you are attacked with a knife you will defend yourself and possibly attack back. That is not what I was talking about though. Ridiculous and over the top examples that are uncommon were thrown at me that obviously can be special cases, but OCG and Bradandez - especially Bradandez - have not made that distinction between normal and special cases. I'm saying you being the instigator of violence when it is not absolutely necessary is wrong, and 99% of corporal punishment are not special cases.

[Itooh]

Reiteration: why is it okay for a parent to hit their child for stealing the cookie jar, but it's bad for a boyfriend to hit his girlfriend for cheating on him?

That's a really good point!
I admit I mostly disagree with you, but your thoughts are still interesting and relevant. And this question in particular make me doubt my certitudes.

Let's begin with what I think first: I completely agree on the fact that authority shouldn't be “blind”. Whether it's for education or law enforcement, punishing only for disobedience makes me cringe. It sounds a lot like “I might be wrong, but I don't want you to question my power.”. Disgusting.
However, the concept of punishment is still necessary in education. I would love to think that kids (or anyone actually) could think with reason and empathy, and that with careful explanations, it would always be possible to make them understand how to properly behave in society… But, even myself included, when we do something bad without any consequences, we have a tendency to still doing it. At best, we're a little ashamed.
(for those tempted to throw me a rock or something, I would just ask what you do regularly in regards of global warming, food consumption, energy, poverty, diseases in poor country, or even the music industry? We all have bad habits, nobody's perfect)
(okay, except YOU maybe, if you insist on throwing that rock)

And let's look at it with all our pessimism: children have the potential for being wrong at everything. Morals, safety, judgment, social behavior… They don''t know anything, they can ignore thousand year of civilization and grow up as the most ignorants and uncivilized being. When there's no consequences, nobody actually cares.
Punishment is therefore necessary. But it shouldn't be used only as a “negative stimuli” (electroshocks, like in Brave New World, yaaaay!), but as a way to make the child (“subject”? oh god we're changing into crazy evil psycho-sociologists) aware of their actions. Punishment should be an encouragement to reflexion: “My behavior had strong consequences. It seems unfair! But why did it make my parents so angry? Why am I getting punished? Should I think of other feelings next time?”. That's why punishment has to be accompanied with conversation, and care. Alone, it's just a justice without any brain, that could push the kid to grow against it.

As for violence as punishment, particularly with kids, the purpose shouldn't be hurting them! Would we punch a kid, or even a teenager, in the stomach to punish him? Making them feel pain is pointless, counterproductive, and contrary to modern values! (Unless you want to teach them that “Whenever something displeases you, be tough, and deal with it with violence”. In this case, go on, hit your kids all you want, but be sure to die before that, please :3)
But a physical punishment isn't necessarily painful. I remember getting a big smack when I was about 8, for insulting my mother in her back. Sure, my cheek burned a little after that, but nothing really serious, it was pain only for a second. What resulted of that, however, was a terrible shame. And that's where physical punishment is efficient when it's “genuine”: it brings shame. Nobody like that.
And today, I still feel ashamed of the words I used, even having thought it disgust me! Not only because of the punishment, of course. I learned their true meaning, how strong and mean they were, and how unjustified it was for me to insult my mom in such a way! But wasn't it for the punishment, I probably would have forget that day, marked today as “actions I have to erase as soon as time-travel exist”. Being violently punished made me think about it, let a strong mark (no physical, though, I'm fine). I really learned from it.

Being punished is good for everyone. While it can be very harmful if not balanced, it is a necessary part of education.

***

And yet that doesn't resolve the issue you brought: why would it be okay to punish a kid, and not a spouse? That could be a whole part 2. But it's almost midnight, so I'll try to be quick. I'm not fixed on that dilemma anyway.
Globally, I would think that an adult is more competent than a kid at understanding the world, the society, and its rule. Therefore, in most cases, they has the ability to educate them, to judge, and thus to punish.
Two adults though, have the same “level” of knowledge. Whatever their age difference is, it is commonly accepted that after maturity, people are independent minds and make their own judgments. It doesn't mean that they can't learn from each other, but judgment or punishment seem misplaced. Trying to do our own justice to another adult is forcing them to agree on our personal believes, which aren't references of any sort. There are Courts and a whole system for that. So yeah, an adult alone should never “punish” another one, especially violently.

Still, it's easy to find flaws in that reasoning. Sometimes some kids are rights when adults are wrong. Sometimes an adult have to yell at another to make them understand. Sometime adults can be complete idiots. Sometime a punishment has no effect on children. Sometime a punishment shouldn't even be.
There's still a whole reflexion to have.
Education is haaaard. Kids are annoying and stupid. And the most annoying thing with them is that they are actually really perceptive and thoughtful individuals.

[OCG]

I don't have a big problem with this, because of the specific reason behind it. But I think there are better solutions still. In fact, it's why I hit my mother in return when she hit me a few years ago when I finally was big enough to stand up for myself.

Some that know me better might call me a hypocrite now because I once said to someone that they should fight back, but thats if parent is abusive.

But if your mother was not abusive and hit you for a valid reason and you hit back, then shame on you. In my culture, this is one of the worst things you can do.

[Keane]

Welcome to RPC, 4chan!

[OCG]

That is for DandyGuy

[anaphasiia]

I completely agree with your entire post Itooh! I want to make it clear that I didn't mean explaining to them "better" why they are wrong is the only answer, just that violence very rarely is (in my opinion, pretty much never). Explaining doesn't always work because of course they cannot think as well as we do.

But a physical punishment isn't necessarily painful. I remember getting a big smack when I was about 8, for insulting my mother in her back. Sure, my cheek burned a little after that, but nothing really serious, it was pain only for a second. What resulted of that, however, was a terrible shame. And that's where physical punishment is efficient when it's “genuine”: it brings shame. Nobody like that.

I believe the reason for shame is auxiliary. Perhaps being knocked down a level through physical punishment temporarily lowered your self-esteem, and with less pride to cloud you, you saw the insult for what it was and became ashamed.

I have less of a problem with this method, but I still have a problem: it's very crude. It's situational of course, so I can't say when something will or won't work, and I'm obviously not a parent yet. But, I know many parents who have had to handle very nasty kids and never laid a finger on them, and the children are better for it. They are just wonderful parents with a great ability for working with children.

That brings forward another thing I think about: Parenting is a blind career. There is no training, you can be a neglectful, stupid fool and know nothing about parenting and still be allowed to raise children, make a terrible job raising the child and have no consequences. For something so important, how is this the case? Why is good-quality parenting not enforced? At least have a standardized program and/or test for parents to learn proven good parenting methods. Some children love their parents all through their teen years. I think if we had quality control for parenting, there would be more of this. Conflicts are handled better, it could lead to a future of distinctly smarter children. Parents like the people I mentioned who are very skilled at handling children would be more widespread, maybe even status-quo.

Two adults though, have the same “level” of knowledge. Whatever their age difference is, it is commonly accepted that after maturity, people are independent minds and make their own judgments. It doesn't mean that they can't learn from each other, but judgment or punishment seem misplaced. Trying to do our own justice to another adult is forcing them to agree on our personal believes, which aren't references of any sort. There are Courts and a whole system for that. So yeah, an adult alone should never “punish” another one, especially violently.

Indeed. One way I see it is: If hitting an adult for any reason is wrong, then it must be at least a little bit wrong to hit a child. They are still living beings.

But if your mother was not abusive and hit you for a valid reason and you hit back, then shame on you. In my culture, this is one of the worst things you can do.

I don't care about your culture, I care about pragmatism.

I think her reason for hitting me was wrong, obviously, because I said I think hitting is almost always wrong. I am not violent and I didn't deserve punishment of any kind there, period.

Welcome to RPC, 4chan!

Welcome to 4chan, Keane!

[Dart]

To me it's clear that we have different opinions on the matter and aren't likely to persuade another

It doesn't mean it isn't worth talking about. Conversations can have a lasting effect, maybe over time one party changes their mind because of something said a while ago. I don't appreciate when people stifle a conversation because they're afraid of potential hot air. I have nothing against anyone; the only point here I got annoyed was at your post.

Also, I apologize for if my posts have a "choppy and impulsive" sound to them, I have trouble writing clearly. They could sound better if I worked on them longer, but it takes me a long time as it is.

My apologies, it's not that I'm avoiding conflict but rather don't see the point of carrying nonproductive arguments. Also I wouldn't worry about your writing, I myself royally suck at English and tend to write things out wrong regularly.

Reiteration: why is it okay for a parent to hit their child for stealing the cookie jar, but it's bad for a boyfriend to hit his girlfriend for cheating on him?

Why would you HIT someone for taking cookies, that's just dumb. Both are abuse and neither get the message across to be fair, and I never said I agree with such measures.

I also need to point out again that I am all for not being violent, however sometimes aggression is the only way you can reach certain people. Take my younger brother Benjamin, he absolutely refuses to learn from his mistakes unless you force him to. He'll physically hurt people, calls them names, and acts like an overall prick no matter what you do in a non-aggressive manner. It's just how some people (myself included) tend to learn.

An example of this kinda responsive learning(while not person to person) is when somebody pokes an open electrical current. Everyone's told not to, and electricity isn't forgiving if you do. Despite this that didn't stop me from doing so and shocking I myself in the process. Now I remember what it felt to be electrocuted and am not about to do it again.

Globally, I would think that an adult is more competent than a kid at understanding the world, the society, and its rule. Therefore, in most cases, they has the ability to educate them, to judge, and thus to punish.

Again I agree though not entirely. I have a neighbor named Timmy and he has a son named Trey. Quite frankly, Timmy's a jerk because he blames and punishes (though not physically) his son for stupidly mundane things that shouldn't be that big an issue. In his case, Timmy is not wise has no understanding of the world and much less his own kid and yet never is physically aggressive despite being an asshole parent.

Tangent aside I could sum it up like this: I agree that parents should be of a certain level of wisdom, knowing when and how to react to each individual child of theirs, but I don't agree that many parents are wise and fly all over the spectrum of being a bad parent

I have less of a problem with this method, but I still have a problem: it's very crude. It's situational of course, so I can't say when something will or won't work, and I'm obviously not a parent yet. But, I know many parents who have had to handle very nasty kids and never laid a finger on them, and the children are better for it. They are just wonderful parents with a great ability for working with children.

So do I, but it takes a combination of parental skill and the ability to understand the personality of their kid(s) to make it work. My Sis's are all like that, and all their kids (well except Owen- though he has anxiety-based depression and maybe a few other things- and is a discussion for another day) are all amazingly behaved for their ages.

[anaphasiia]

Why would you HIT someone for taking cookies, that's just dumb. Both are abuse and neither get the message across to be fair, and I never said I agree with such measures.

It's not that uncommon. And to recall my original, original, original message, these same people think laying a finger on an animal is evil.

But that blew up to its own conversation, which I wasn't expecting.

[Dart]

Eh no worries, these sorta things happen every now and then and they do help in showing what you believe in (or in my case, highlight insecurities )

Welp, as much as I'd like to stay online and finish the convo, I did set out to finalize as much if my new sig today as humanly possible, so this is where I have to say goodnight.

[incognito]

I would love to think that kids (or anyone actually) could think with reason and empathy, and that with careful explanations, it would always be possible to make them understand how to properly behave in society…

Yeah, I also agree, but some are just too stupid to understand that, and therefore it is when punishment is needed.

Punishment is therefore necessary. But it shouldn't be used only as a “negative stimuli” (electroshocks, like in Brave New World, yaaaay!), but as a way to make the child (“subject”? oh god we're changing into crazy evil psycho-sociologists) aware of their actions. Punishment should be an encouragement to reflexion: “My behavior had strong consequences. It seems unfair! But why did it make my parents so angry? Why am I getting punished? Should I think of other feelings next time?”. That's why punishment has to be accompanied with conversation, and care. Alone, it's just a justice without any brain, that could push the kid to grow against it.

I think we should take a look of a friend's case, he has a daughter, kinda young, and his daughter had an extremely violent behavior, towards everyone, he tried almost everything, threats, yelling (gosh in addition that guy is really creepy when yelling ) that lasted a year, until he lost his patience, he burned her with a cigaret while yelling at her, and since she isn't as obnoxious as before, I know the method is quite extreme, but in some cases it is the solution (like when the question is, "how to stop these baddies ?" or "which word rimes with "silence""")
Yeah, sometimes dogs are smarter than kids.

[#Toilet Paper#]

he burned her

Was she jew ? *Laughs*

[incognito]

No.