Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
#51 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 1:59 PM
my mum smacked me, and so did my dad on the ODD occassion if i was really naughty. woah, i was really scared of getting a smack off my dad - not that he was some brutal tyrant or anything. haha. just that he didn't do it often, so you knew he was really angry if he did.

so i got 'spanked' and still love my mum and dad more than anything. i even got a good old spanking when when i was 13 years old for coming home drunk :/ but after that, i didn't go out drinking with my friends in a hurry. which i'm greatful for because anything could of happened to me (ran over/fell over/..raped at the extreme)
so i'm greatful that i got disciplined for that.
yes, i'm happy that i got spanked. :umm:
Advertisement
Field Researcher
#52 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 2:36 PM
I was mostly a good kid, but when it warrented, I got spanked. I don't think any less of my folks. In fact, my father is the kind of person I want to be when I grow up. I think where spanking gets a bad rap (especially from the "I wasn't spanked and will never spank" crowd) is that the terminology is too broad for them. When the pro-spank crowd uses the term, the refer to a swift open palmed slap to the childs butt, which shocks the child more than harms them (Spanking was phased out as a punishment for me when I started to realize I was over reacting to a very minor pain). Almost every pro-spanker here has said that use of an outside object (belt, paddle, ect.) is wrong and they would not use it. In fact, the only time my father hit me with something other than an open palm was when he was teaching us the mechanics the "rat tail" (wrapping up a wet towel and using it in a whip like mannor) and accidetally hit me, but he was profusely apolagetic about it and probably more upset about me getting hit than I was. And it was an accident.

Yes, children can be reasoned with and should be. Spanking should not be the first option on the table and should be used if and only if all other attempts to reason with a child are not working OR if the child is engaging in an activity that may be harmful to the child's health or. It shouldn't be used to shut a child up, because they will only cry louder nor in front of the child's friends. Once the child calms down, the reason why s/he was spanked should be explained.
#53 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 3:24 PM
When I was a kid, I didn't get spanked, but instead whipped with a switch. That's a little thin, flexible branch off a tree that's been shaved of the bark. And that was when I was like 3-4 years old. Later, it was with an extension cord. Once I got to be around 8 or 9, instead of that, I was punched, kicked and picked up by my hair and tossed across the room. But, I guess that's what happens when you have an alcoholic for a father. So for that reason, I refuse to hit my son, even to spank him. But he grew up playing video games (he started on the N64 when he was like 3) so when he's bad now (which is very rare) I just take away the video games. Since he's only 7, I only let him play for an hour a day, once he's done with his homework. If he's bad, I won't let him play for a day or longer. He hates not being able to play his games, especially since we got a Wii, so that works well.
#54 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 4:28 PM
Like HP's nephews, my brother and I had a specific spanking object. We weren't bad children, and always behaved in public, but I think that started when we were young. I think, even before the spanking age, children need to be let out of the house. Take them to the park, to a restaurant, to the mall, just out around other people. Start teaching them then: "This is the way we behave in public. We don't swing from the lamp above our table in the restaurant." I think that might eliminate a lot of the need for punishment.

I can completely say that having a specific object for spanking works as a strong deterrent. For the same reason children don't touch a hot stove more than once, spanking works. You associate something negative and unwanted with a certain behavior. Even with Nanny Jo, her "time out" is more than just time out. There are negative things associated with that time out. But if a child likes to be alone and can find enjoyment even in a situation where they're alone, time out is simply not going to work. But having that spanking object? All my dad had to do was leave it out and we'd give it a wide berth. Didn't want to come near that thing.

Last thing for now: How many times have you been out and seen a child acting up? I mean, really acting up? In a store, playing on the merchandise, running around, bothering people. The parents say "If you don't stop that, you're not getting this or that." Now how many times have you seen the children JUST NOT CARE. So what mom takes your toy away. You'll get it back. Children can hold out a lot longer than adults. And so you do take that one toy away and keep it until he's 45. I'm sure that's not the only toy he's got. But I think the absolute worse is when parents don't show a united front on punishment. What's the point if Little Billy can just run to mom when dad takes the toys away, or run to dad when Mom won't give ice cream? The absolute best (sarcastic)? Getting punished TWICE. Get it once with mom, then sit and wait for dad to come home. I can bet you a million dollars I never played tent with the lamp with the exposed bulb under a flammable blanket again
Moderator of Extreme Limericks
#55 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 6:06 PM
I've always been of the mindset that spanking teaches the wrong lesson--and no matter how adults try to spin it, I've always seen it as physically abusive. In the real world, adults aren't supposed to hit each other. They can face lawsuits, or find out the hard way that the person they're hitting has a gun, or have to deal with any other number of unpleasant circumstances. Similarly, if a child hits another child and gets caught, that child is labeled a bully and usually ends up in trouble with his parents or his teacher or whoever else happens to be in charge at the time.

So I guess what I would like to know is how parents are able to justify hitting a child. If they're not supposed to hit other adults, and their children aren't supposed to hit other children, how is ok for an them to hit their child? It shouldn't be. And yes, I know that most of you will argue that it's a "light spanking" and only hurts "a little bit"--but you're still hitting your child, and it still hurts.

And honestly, it seems like there are lot of overwhelmingly negative side-effects that go along with spanking. In some cases, children who are spanked will come to the conclusion that hitting someone is the best way to solve a problem. Or, they might end up living in fear of their parents--and that hardly seems healthy. And what about the parents who get carried away with the spanking?

Adults are supposed to be bigger and stronger and smarter than their children. Surely they can come up with something better than spanking?

And I've also noticed that a lot of you are insisting that unless you spank your child, the child is just going to go on doing whatever it is that they're doing, but in such a way that they won't get caught. How would spanking them change that...? Wouldn't they just go on doing their thing secretly so that they could avoid a spanking? I have a hard time believing that spanking a kid once is enough to convince that kid to never do whatever it is that he got spanked for again.

Anyway... I guess I don't even see how spanking could be particularly effective. I mean, if parents truly do just use a light slap across the bottom, as they claim to do, how does that work better than revoking a privilege? A spank is relatively quick, while a revoked privilege can last for days or weeks. And, on top of that, it leaves the option available for the child to earn back the privilege--which, in the long run, seems like it might teach the child a more valuable lesson than a sore butt ever could.

There's always money in the banana stand.
Original Poster
#56 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 6:24 PM
HP, I definitely agree. (I love long posts. Guys, feel free to rant on as long as you want! )

To add on to my useless post: What about spanking children with certain disabilities, such as my brother with Down syndrome? Whenever he's spanked, he just yells and screams because he doesn't know what he's being punished for, so he just assumes that people are hitting him for no reason and gets violent. I think this is what many small children do, so spanking them doesn't work and only makes the matter worse.
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#57 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 6:56 PM
I think there's a pretty big jump of logic between a parent using spanking as an occasional method of behavior correction when all else fails to a child deciding that's the best way to solve a problem. I can see that perhaps being the case if the -only- punishment a child is ever given is a spanking, or if the parents go overboard with it, but I think most children who are old enough to be spanked would be able to tell the difference between mom or dad spanking them as a punishment for bad behavior (and mom and dad, being mom and dad, having the right to do so) and them just hauling off and decking another kid because they didn't give them the toy they wanted, or whatever.

Spanking is only effective as behavior correction if used occasionally, and only with certain children - it's not a matter of a smack across the bottom working better than revoking a privilege... if revoking a privilege would work, then great, do that... If spanking is the only thing you ever do, you're not really teaching and guiding your children, just smacking them because you're annoyed with them, or don't know what else to do - but in some situations, with some children, a swat on the behind is enough to get their attention so you -can- use other methods. Some kids -just don't care- that you're taking away a privileges or offering a reward if they're in a certain mood (like my nephew, Jonathan, can get sometimes, who could care less if you take away things he likes - he's way more delighted at the fact that he's being bad, and that you're displeased about it) - you have to show them a more immediate consequence of their bad behavior.

When I was visiting my sister with my ferret, I would take the ferret out to play with the twins. Ferrets love being tossed around, so I would pick up the ferret and toss her gently onto the bed in a way that she'd land softly and would bounce around dooking delightedly. Seeing this example, the twins would pick her up too... but in a way that they would squeeze her midsection tightly, and she would chitter in pain at this. I explained several times that they had to be gentle with her, that even though she could be tossed onto the bed, that squeezing her was bad and hurt her... they continued to do it. So finally, after one of them squeezed her particularly hard and she shrieked in pain, I took her away, set her aside, and pinched him on the arm, hard enough to hurt. "You see how that hurts? You're hurting her every time you squeeze her, and she feels pain just like you do. Be gentle with her!" I didn't have any trouble with either of them being too rough with her after that... with the one because he knew it actually would hurt her, and with the other probably because he knew Auntie would pinch him too if he made the ferret chitter like that again. They didn't learn that it's okay to pinch from that, but that other creatures feel pain just like they do, and to be gentle... and if they didn't, there would be unwanted consequences.

No, it's not okay for adults to hit each other, or for kids to hit each other. Nor would it be right for random adults to hit your kids. But in some circumstances, with your own children, physical methods are necessary to correct their behavior. I remember reading an article a few days ago about a dad whose teenage daughter kept sneaking out at night to go be with her drug dealing boyfriend... the dad found her, and when she refused to get in the car, he physically forced her into the car. She complained to the cops, and though she had no injuries, the dad was charged with assault. Eventually the charge was overturned as even though it may have hurt, he had a right to physically correct his child. Slightly different situation, but I think it's still applicable, in that a parent may have to do something that in other situations (like if this wasn't his daughter) would be completely unacceptable, for the good of the child.

I think kids probably -should- have some measure of fear of their parents. Certainly not all the time - the affection and love and feeling that their parents care for them and want the best for them should be the primary thing, but if a child doesn't fear their parents -at all- then it becomes very hard to correct their behavior. Even if you -don't- spank your kids, they should have some measure of fear - knowing that you will have some tough consequences if they behave badly may keep them from doing something they've been told not to do, fearing your reaction and the punishment.

Children will hide bad behaviour whether they're spanked or not. That's just how they are. If they get punished for something but don't understand -why- what they did was wrong, they'll probably just go ahead and do it, but sneakier next time.

If you're going to spank your kids you have to make sure you're not just doing it out of anger, and don't get carried away with it and do it too hard, or too often, or anything like that. It takes a lot of self-control when all you want to do is strangle the little brat to think out what would really be the best course of action for the situation, the child, and the way they're being at the time... most of the time, spanking isn't the answer, but every once in a while, it might help in correcting the behavior of certain children.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
Test Subject
#58 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 7:28 PM
Being spanked taught me a few lessons :
- not to throw tantrums in public
- solidarity : when my brother and sisters and I would fight, my parents would punish every one, you learn fast to find a solution for to your problems.
I the last, I do see a difference between me and my four siblings and the way my three cousins act. They fight a lot, they scream a lot, they know that screaming long enough will get them what they want. My siblings and I know that screaming long enough will only get us punished.

My parents didn't believe in removing TV/Games... Times out and spanking were our punishments. I don't understand parents who do that. I do think that each child is to be treated differently, but, when you have to punish one of four, spanking and time outs are definetly a lot more practical that forbiding one to watch TV and allow the other.
Original Poster
#59 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 7:30 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Faithlove13xxx
Lol, oh, and I just remembered spanking also frequently leads to sexual fetishes as adults, because spanking is often the first time that area of the child is ever touched, even if only through vibrations. That's not the parent's intentions... of course... I just think it's uber icky and I would always think of that if I ever spanked a kid.


Um...OK...?
Well, that's strange.

@Oceanborn: Spanking is against the law in Norway? I wonder how that would work. Wouldn't parents still be able to spank their children in secret without anyone knowing? After all, you can never be quite sure what goes on behind closed doors in someone's home...

So many edits! Aaahhh! Anyway, the punishments I normally get are grounding, which means that I can't go out with my friends, use the computer, or talk on the phone...normally for a week. My parents aren't incredibly strict, so I don't get grounded often. Anyway, I try not to tick off my parents, since my dad can benchpress 400 pounds and you don't want to make him angry...:bombface:
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#60 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 8:26 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Faithlove13xxx
HP,
Actually most studies done on disciplining young children is to ignore their attention getting bx and eventually they will learn they cannot manipulate you all the time.


That I have to disagree with. By not reacting you're permitting the behavior. I don't think every situation is appropriate to spank them, certainly, but I think if the kid is acting up in some way, you do have to react...

Quote:
Anyway, but honestly if you really want to make an impact, get your kid, walk out of the store leaving everything behind and take them to their room and let them sit there for a while. It'll be dramatic enough to show them they are wrong, ect.


Which would be an appropriate reaction if your kid is throwing a fit in public at the store - remove them from the situation.

Quote:
Even if you hit your kid... which, I hate it when a kid is crying and their parent slaps them... yeah, pain will make the kid shutup. ???


Depends on the situation - if the kid's just crying for attention, a swat on the ass might work. Or even just a threat of it... "You're not starving, cold, or in pain, knock off the waterworks or I'll give you something to -really- cry about!"

Quote:
Here's kind of an easy way to understand without all the psychobabble from my texts and such...
http://www.ehow.com/how_2222921_und...e.html?ref=fuel


I disagree with almost all of that, honestly. Maybe because I think spanking isn't -usually- the method one should use and that seems to think that it's the only method of correcting a child's behavior for people who do so. Maybe because "Discipline should be aimed at calming the situation" (Step 4) seems like an utterly ridiculous statement to me. Discipline should get the child to understand what they did was wrong, that their actions have consequences, and to not to do whatever they did wrong again. If you can deal with something in a calm way that doesn't involve spanking, great, but your primary goal is not to be calm, but to correct the child's behaviour.

Quote:
Lol, oh, and I just remembered spanking also frequently leads to sexual fetishes as adults, because spanking is often the first time that area of the child is ever touched, even if only through vibrations. That's not the parent's intentions... of course... I just think it's uber icky and I would always think of that if I ever spanked a kid (which i probably never will).


Err, what? A child has its bottom cleaned hundreds of times in diaper changes long before they are ever spanked... And some adults develop (eeww) diaper fetishes. Should one not wipe a baby's bottom because the child might develop a fetish about poo later in life? I know it was a bit of a silly statement but really, fetishes come from everywhere and you never know what will develop them...

I went over to my sister's house wearing fishnet stockings, and one of the twins immediately ran up to me and felt my legs and gushed, "What are these on your legs? They are SO cool! They have little holes in them that you can see skin through! I really really like those! How far up do they go? Can I see?" and started trying to peek up my skirt. I'm almost sure that boy's gonna have a fetish for fishnets as a result... which doesn't bother me in the slightest.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
Lab Assistant
#61 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 8:39 PM
I agree with a lot of what you have said HP.

When I was around nine years old I had a habit of lying compulsively. Regardless of the fact that my parents often saw me commit the acts that I would later lie about. My mother would ask me about the alleged acts and would often give me multiple chances to confess, but I always maintained that "I didn't do it!" She then had two forms of punishment: Writing lines or a spanking with a belt. I never got the option of choosing which I preferred, but looking back on it, I would have preferred the spankings. I absolutely hated writing lines. What most offended me about them is that they involved sins I had not committed. For example, if I lied, I would have to write "I will not lie, cheat, or steal" 300 times. I often protested to my mother that I hadn't cheated or stolen anything, but she would respond with a "if you've lied, then you HAVE cheated and stolen". While I did not entirely understand her message and hated writing lines they were temporarily effective because my pride was deeply upset by the fact that I had been implicated in moral crimes I had not committed and so, I did learn my lesson...until the next time.

Occasionally I would get spankings with a belt. These occurred from between ages nine to about twelve. Before the age of nine, if I did anything wrong, I was usually told "no" and slapped on the hand (and in truth, I rarely did anything that warranted much punishment because I had not yet discovered my childhood fondness for lying). At age twelve, there were more effective ways to punish me, namely I was grounded and could not partake in certain social events (the pre-teen's equivalent to "Oh noes! The end of the world!").

On two occasions I was spanked when I had NOT committed the acts I was being punished for. I will remember these two events for the rest of my life. In part, I understood then and understand now that when you do something wrong you ARE supposed to be punished in some way or another. So, when I received justified spankings, I was not particularly bothered by them (that is, I didn't think my parents were mistreating me). But those two occasions when I was wrongly punished ultimately taught me that lying was wrong. It's not that I didn't occasionally relapse, but I came to recognize that lying once or twice makes people distrust you even when you are being honest. This is a message that my parents and I think most parents sometimes aren't able to express clearly to their children.

For me, my childhood experience has taught me a few things: While I do not in any way support the spanking (or beating, the line is sometimes toed or crossed) with objects such as belts, paddles, or (my grandmother's choice weapon) birch switches, I think that given certain children and particular situations, an open-handed spanking (on the hand or behind) may be effectively employed so long as the parent expresses a verbal message and is completely under control of any anger they may have (or even better, if they have NO anger). One reason I hate spanking with objects is that the punisher doesn't particularly have a concept of their own strength and it is easier to lose control. When you hit someone with your open hand it hurts you almost as much as it hurts the other person. This sends a message to both the child and the parent. Any pain that the parent gains may encourage him/her to seek other forms of discipline for his/her children. And if the child is told that the process of spanking is painful to the parents also, the child may understand that he/she really have done something wrong if his/her parent will hurt themselves in order to mete out punishment. Next, (though not in this order necessarily) there are other forms of disciplining wayward children, example: writing lines.

All in all, however parents choose to discipline their children, (though I hope it isn't by beating) the effectiveness is dependent on the child, the situation, and the parent. The point of discipline and punishment isn't to beat waywardness out of children but to teach them how to behave. For it to be effective you have to be willing to verbally communicate the message and if necessary (and if you believe in it) use the slap on the hand or the behind to emphasize that message.

I know that in this thread some members have brought up studies that denounce the effectiveness of this or that form of discipline. However, studies are not infallible. They are always corrupted in some way by variables that the studiers do not take into consideration either because they don't think it will effect the study or because they are unable to account for all factors. Perhaps, age and gender of the parent, age and gender of the child, reason for punishment, how often the punishment occurs, region, socio-economics, social and psychological history of the family past and present, and etc.

Furthermore, some forms of non-physical discipline, specifically psychological, are more detrimental to a child's mental and emotional health than spankings. "Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me" is just about the biggest lie that I was ever told.

Sorry for the length of the post! I could have not told you my entire childhood history as a compulsive liar, but my point was a bit to let you perhaps interpret for yourself. And for the record, there's not much more I dislike than a liar (which isn't loathing of my childhood self but to demonstrate that I DID learn my lesson.)

EDIT: For clarification, I did not mean to suggest in ANY way that parents should psychologically abuse their children but rather that there are things that are worse than spanking!
Field Researcher
#62 Old 3rd Apr 2008 at 11:29 PM
Yeah, being spanked makes kids happy. Which is why they cry so much after getting slapped. Of course, that makes total sense. Tell me, why are people who have never been spanked, yet are prone to falling on their butt a few times while learning to walk, immune? Or sports players who get patted on the butt as a congradulatory gesture?
Original Poster
#63 Old 4th Apr 2008 at 12:17 AM
Quote: Originally posted by HystericalParoxysm
I went over to my sister's house wearing fishnet stockings, and one of the twins immediately ran up to me and felt my legs and gushed, "What are these on your legs? They are SO cool! They have little holes in them that you can see skin through! I really really like those! How far up do they go? Can I see?" and started trying to peek up my skirt. I'm almost sure that boy's gonna have a fetish for fishnets as a result... which doesn't bother me in the slightest.


That made me laugh out loud, literally.

Anyway, it's sorta hard for me to imagine people developing fetishes from being spanked as children. I don't support spanking, but, again, I believe that it can be useful in certain situations, but only when absolutely necessary.
#64 Old 4th Apr 2008 at 12:38 AM
Faithlove, you're right. Just because it's something you disagree with based off your limited personal experience doesn't make it true. But this can also be said of your point of view. You've quoted studies, yes, but that doesn't make it an end all be all. How many times have conflicting studies, often by the same people, been put out? Chocolate was bad, then good, then bad, then good again. There are so many things to take into account with studies. Even who the researcher is and what their personal preference is. We like to think that in doing research, we're unbiased, but isn't that the whole point of doing research? To prove a point one way or the other? And yes, I'm aware of double blind studies. But the head researcher isn't the only one with his biases.

A case for not spanking as only punishment: My brother thinks that boys should be rough, so he roughouses with his son. Yes, this includes playful hitting and wrestling. But every time my nephew does something bad, it's this same roughouse hitting; he doesn't associate the hit with the wrongdoing. Instead, he thinks you're playing and he hits back. It's made it really hard for his mother to discipline him. He has no set boundaries, no structure, and because my brother play-hits with him all the time, he thinks you're doing the same when you have to discipline him. Which reminds me of something. If you think about the kids on Supernanny, they have other issues with their bad behavior. They're usually something like boundary issues, no structure in their lives, etc. I think this is what they're responding to more than the time out. They're actually being told no, and the parents are sticking to their guns.

As far as writing lines goes, I think that's just crap. They used to do that to us in grade school, and it just became a joke. It sucked the first time, but then students started finding ways to cheat (such as drawing a line down the paper for the I's). Then it became a competition: let's see who could finish them first. Completely ineffective for us.
Top Secret Researcher
#65 Old 4th Apr 2008 at 12:41 AM
Quote: Originally posted by LOZOTRON
i think its just instinctive. pain means 'no'.

I completly agree!
When you touch something sharp.
Doesn't it hurt? Yes.
So when the child is bad...it gets spanked...which means 'no' (stated above)

So long, my luckless romance
My back is turned on you
I should've known you'd bring me heartache
Almost lovers always do

Lab Assistant
#66 Old 4th Apr 2008 at 4:03 AM
I agree with pretty much everything HP said. Spanking is an appropriate form of punishment sometimes and forsome children. I definitely do not agree with outlawing it. I seem to recall that a psychologist who said it was a form of abuse and wanted it illegalized had a son who committed suicide... now I know, correlation does not equal causation, and in this case it may not even be closely correlated, but it does make you wonder.

As for anti-spanking people who have said that spanking is just an excuse for parents to not have to deal with teaching their children through reason... I absolutely disagree. If I ever have to spank my children, I plan on following through shortly after with a talk about what they did wrong. Of course there will be parents who are irresponsible like that. But on the other end of the scale, you have parents who never do anything to discipline their children, either they ignore them (thereby condoning their behavior) or give them what they want, and the kids end up being horribly spoiled brats. No matter what methods you get into you're going to get parents who use them irresponsibly.
#67 Old 4th Apr 2008 at 12:00 PM
I don't know why I keep bringing up Nanny Jo (someone else mentioned her, and I guess she's the only person I can think of who doesn't spank their children), but her main point is to always explain to children WHY what they did was wrong. I imagine the child would still not understand what they did was wrong if you just sent them to their room. It's all about the why.

Someone said earlier that if you hit with your hand, it'll hurt you just as much? No. No it won't. And I HATED that line "this hurts me more than it hurts you," because to a five year old (and even now, and I'm 20!) That's just a load of complete and utter crap. YOU can still go sit down without your butt tingling painfully! You didn't have the anxiety of waiting while someone else got the belt. I think the most effective thing about spanking for me was the waiting. I was in trouble with my mom, and had to wait in the unprotected open while she got the belt or whatever, THEN I had to wait until my dad got home! That coupled with me being used being out in public kept me in line. But then, I was generally too busy being amused by everything. I was such an easy child to please.
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#68 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 12:24 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Faithlove13xxx
Yeah, but the genitals don't feel the vibrations from being wiped... it's different.

And Its not like I make this stuff up. It;s people who deal with sexual psychology... which is not my field.

And I have had the misfortune of experiencing both real beatings and normal spankings as a child.. and I've never said that they were the same. I said in my first statement that spanking isn't what I would call abuse... it just doesn't feel the same.
But most psychological studies and parental styles show that it's not very effective. It might help in the short run.... but teaching lessons is what changes behavior in the long run.
And just because you disagree with it based off of your limited personal experiences doesn't make it untrue or not thoroughly researched.

And to the person above.... being a pathological liar is a mental disorder, and not so much a conduct problem....


I've changed quite a few dirty diapers, and an active kid that's had a dirty diaper on for a while, well... let's just say, you have to wipe a lot more than their bum. The fetish of spanking I think is influenced a heck of a lot more by the "ooh I've been bad, punish me" factor than any sort of... butt-to-genital vibrations. I think if it -were- a matter of genitals feeling vibrations for the first time we'd have a lot more adults getting aroused at the sight of those coin-operated rocking horse rides you see outside grocery stores sometimes.

There are studies that say all manner of things, and while I don't think all research is wrong, certainly, I don't think that just because a scientist says it makes it true. Over the course of human history, there have been tons of extremely educated people who have been dead wrong about things that were accepted as absolute fact. I am much more inclined to believe what I have personally experienced and know to be true because it has been demonstrated in front of me.

Of course I believe parents should work to teach their child valuable lessons, and not rely on spanking as a primary or even common method of behavior correction. Most of the time, it's much more effective to simply sit down with a child and explain things to them, or go with positive and negative reinforcement by promising rewards or taking away privileges. Kids understand a heck of a lot more than most people give them credit for, and I've found even in my personal experience of my sister's kids, watching her with them vs. what I do when I take care of them is very different - and they end up having very very few spankings when they're in my care. When they ask me questions, I give them honest answers that don't just answer their question, but teach them something about the way things are, too - and often, by being honest and straightforward with them about things in general, it encourages them to behave better around me. I think it gains their respect more than the standard "because I said so" answers that tend to encourage children to be willful and disobedient simply because they don't think there's a good reason to be doing what you say.

I've also found that with small enough children, rather than spanking, it can be just as effective to, well, pick 'em up and toss them. Gently, of course, in a way that they will not be injured, onto a couch or a bed... but it can often get across the same message: I'm bigger than you, and I can control you (with perhaps a slight mental implication of "If she wanted to toss me somewhere other than the bed, she totally could... maybe I should quit this temper tantrum..."). If they've been in the middle of a screaming fit, it surprises them, and often gets them giggling - this can be difficult as sometimes it makes them a bit more hyper, but they're a heck of a lot easier to deal with in a giggly mood than if they're throwing a fit.

But I also know from personal experience that sometimes, in certain situation with certain children, a quick smack or two on the bum, hard enough to hurt a bit, is required to get through to a child that is otherwise being completely unreasonable. If nothing else, it gets their attention enough that it may disrupt what they were doing at the time so that you can get through to them via other methods.

And regarding Chessa's post... it's clear that they were not a pathological liar with a mental disorder, but simply a child with a conduct issue that liked lying, and needed for it to be made clear that it was unacceptable behavior. Pathological lying can be a mental disorder, but many, many children discover that they can lie and get away with things, or that lying about things makes life/themselves seem more interesting, so they experiment with it for a while, and need to be dissuaded of it. While I think spanking with a belt is kinda harsh, sounds like at least in that case, whether it was spanking or another method of punishment, being punished for things that they didn't do got the message across, and corrected the behavior.

One of the thing Chessa mentioned as well was not advocating using an object in spanking. Certainly, belts, birch switches, paddles, etc., I don't believe should be used, but I personally don't think one should use their hand. You do have to be more careful to make sure you're not using undue force, but using something like the silicone spatula my sister has for her boys actually works pretty well - the cover is soft so it doesn't hurt too badly (I've smacked myself with it to see what it felt like), and by having a specific object you only ever use for that purpose, sometimes all you have to do is get it out and the kids realize they'd better straighten up in a hurry. Often this avoids the need to spank them at all - just the sight of that red spatula makes my sister's twins calm right down in most cases so that they can be talked to in a more reasonable fashion.

As I mentioned in my first novel-length post, I was only spanked twice when I was a kid - once when I was about four, and the second time when I was about seven. Besides that, it was completely unnecessary and would not have done anything to correct my behavior - and my family realized this, and were more about speaking calmly to me and reasoning with me when I acted up. Some kids you may never need to spank at all. It really depends on the child, and if it's not necessary and would not be effective with that sort of child and in that situation, certainly, other methods should be used. For me, the knowledge that my parents could spank me but wouldn't unless I did something that warranted it was enough of a deterrent to keep me in line much of the time.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
#69 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 1:52 AM
I don't approve of throwing kids, actually....
#70 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 2:23 AM
I can recall being spanked twice in my life. I too do not find it as child abusive but it really depends on what the child did. I wouldn't do this to my own kids though. I don't have kids but I also would not be comfortable doing it.
Test Subject
#71 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 2:27 AM
Honestly I think spanking is an OKAY way to punish a child. But honestly with an older child Its better to take something away from them that they enjoy. Ie. Games, toys, going outside, going to friends houses. Grounding seems to be a much more effective way (well it worked for me anyways) to keep your child to behave.

Also I used to get spanked with a paddle when I was little. And my dad would make me very bruised. Once he did it so bad my WHOLE BUTT was purple and I couldn't sit down in school. The nurse had a look at it and almost took custody away from my dad.

Yikes.
Inventor
#72 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 2:28 AM
I think that, within reason, a parent has the right to discipline their children as they see fit. I'm not suggesting for a moment that it's okay for a parent to cause harm to their child, but I see no harm in an open handed slap on the bum if the situation warrants it.

Admittedly, I speak from the point of view of someone who doesn't like, and has no intention of ever having children. But there are some times when children, especially toddlers, just do not listen. Something needs to be used to get their attention. At work a few years ago, I actually had the back of my head cut quite badly by a four year old who threw a shoe at me. The mother's response - "Shh darling, mummy doesn't like it when you do that." *rolls eyes*

hszmv and davious both raised the analogy of training a dog, and I really don't think it's too far off. I personally prefer positive reinforcement (and negative reinforcement as a second choice, though I think this is harder to apply to children than animals). In some circumstances though, it is appropriate to use positive punishment to reinforce the acceptable behaviour. A toddler has to learn the word 'NO' just as a dog does. And really, it's not just us who do this - a bitch will gently nip her pup if it steps too far out of a line, a mare will nip her foal, etc. I concede that 'natural' does not necessarily mean 'good', but I see this as little more than a natural behavioural response. I guess negative punishment is probably also a good move where kids are concerned, but I'm less familiar with this method than others.

Just my two cents

Please call me Laura
"The gene pool needs more chlorine."
My Site
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#73 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 2:52 AM
Faithlove - I don't mean in any way that could possibly hurt them, and obviously it really depends on the situation, but a kid that's just being difficult, annoying, won't pay attention, or is just having a grump fit for no real reason, picking 'em up and tossing them gently onto the couch or a bed (and of course I don't mean hurling them from across the room or anything like that, I mean no further a distance or height than if they'd run and jumped themselves) usually distracts them enough from what they were doing previously, puts them in a better mood, and gets rid of any tension in the situation. 98% of the time, they immediately start giggling and cry, "Again!" and the other 2% they just sit there looking surprised. This really only works with quite small kids (ages about 2-5) as if they're too small you wouldn't want to do it for fear of accidental injury, and if they're too big, they're too unwieldy to pick up and toss safely.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
#74 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 3:20 AM
i think picking up and 'tossing' them is a good way to distract kids. (and i'm sure HP means in a fun way - not a violent one :P) this probably does work better than shouting or threatening, i have 2 very naughty siblings, and i always use this method. if either one are kicking off a fuss i'll just grab and tickle them, or make a joke about them whinging. they usually see the funny side and forget what they where acting up about.. if not i just vacate and let my mum and dad deal with it. haha. which usually involves a lot of shouting and crying.
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#75 Old 6th Apr 2008 at 3:28 AM
Faithlove - Never said you wouldn't then do that - but with kids is that sometimes they're so busy being upset or unruly about something, you can't sit and discuss things with them at all as they have no desire to listen at that particular point in time. You have to get their attention first or disrupt their rampage/distraction/grumpyness before you can possibly talk to them and have it get through to them. With ANY method of behaviour correction you have to explain things to them - whether you're away privileges, grounding, time out, spanking, or picking them up and tossing them onto the couch, etc. does no good unless you actually talk to them about what they did wrong, and your expectation of what they should do right the next time.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
 
Page 3 of 6
Back to top