if this is an attempt at being funny, you're not, so stop posting. if you're trying to bring this up as a serious argument, you're ignorant and didn't read the thread, so stop posting.
-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Serious On raising children and specifically spanking
- Thread starter tcr
- Start date
You seem a bit tense. I'm of the persuasion that internet debating, especially with strangers whose levels of credibility and expertise are suspect to begin with, is often fruitless and that this topic is one in which people go in with presuppositions from which they aren't going to be dissuaded regardless of what information is presented, as the other side is generally considered child abusers or liberal hippies. And given that the first response to this topic was a joke like mine, I don't see it as particularly offensive or tasteless.
Besides, seriously, how many people on here are actually parents and can speak with authority and actual deep consideration of this topic? Most of what I have seen has been debating what people learned in intro college courses to psychology (that is, yes, I read all the topic, but I don't care enough to get enmeshed in the argument at this point).
You're not contributing anything to this thread. It might very well be fruitless to discuss this topic but we're doing it anyway, you are free to leave us alone or make an actual contribution, but you're not stopping the discussion merely by questioning whether it's fruitful to debate. I'm not sure what you think you're adding to this all by doubting the credibility of everyone in this thread without even daring to take a stance yourself.
On the topic of expertise, I will be the first to admit I'm not an expert, but I am against spanking based on cursory research, a lot of experience with abused people, and a general principle that if an action is likely to cause a lot of harm and is never truly necessary, it is better to err on the side of caution and abstain from doing it. I think it's a pretty reasonable position all things considered and if I can convince even one person that spanking your child is bad, that's a job well done in my eyes. That is, I guess, why I like to argue on the subject despite the fact that I, nor a lot of other people in this thread, technically have what you would call "expertise" (on that note, for someone who does not claim to have expertise in the subject yourself, you do like to make a lot of assumptions on where other people get their info from - have you ever taken an intro college course on psychology, or are you simply making assumptions here?)
By the way, I'm not sure if you are insinuating this yourself, but it's worth noting that parenthood does not automatically grant someone authority on the subject of pedagogy. There are too many parents who have bad ideas on parenting in general or are simply too lazy or unstable to be able to raise a child properly.
I mean, I was just making a stupid joke; you're the one who took it seriously. ;P But, I'll take you up on the chance to leave you guys alone, though! I'll just say two thing:
1. I have taken an intro course to psychology and was forced to look at a chart concerning the psychology of mate selection, which depicted the different sizes of monkey genitalia per species. It was an image embedded deep into my subconscious and which still haunts me during my dreams today. But more importantly, I am a PhD student in the liberal arts at a pretty well ranked university. That being said, there's a lot of logical flaws that are common across academia and publications. Most people treat research studies as though they've been done by a completely impartial group that is merely reporting the facts. But, that's not how that works- people research things for a reason. They want to have certain results, so they go after certain results with their testing. Furthermore, you also have to take into mind that research requires funding and that the people that will give you money are those whose positions you will help bolster. There's tons of ways to manipulate data and there's a lot that goes into a study. That's why I'm so skeptical about debating anything really at an intro level. I know my own field is extremely complex and that most debates on the popular level consist of two people who really don't understand the issue arguing for extreme positions that the vast majority of serious scholars wouldn't take.
2. And of course, being a parent doesn't give you the magical triumph of authority over all other positions. But, it does help and really change your perspective on things, and forces you to reckon with realities that otherwise you just have to look at on paper. But yeah, there are narcissistic parents out there who just abuse their children and of course one has to account for such. And, I can understand why you hold your position having experience with people who were abused and I earnestly don't want you to feel like I was undermining that in any way. I just like making stupid posts, please feel free anytime to ignore anything I say. :P
literally none of the op except the name drop of operant conditioning is intro psychology 101 and that you would even assume as such I find incredibly insulting considering I am a psych major pursuing his concentration on developmental psych with the hopes of one day contributing to research to stuff as this
frankly if you dont have anything to say other than “fuck descriptive statistics backed studies” and “i was abused as a child and i turned out fine” then kindly leave the thread and do not continue posting, I do not want this thread derailed with such inane bullshit and would rather people actually give the OP and its sources a long hard read, it is utterly ridiculous
frankly if you dont have anything to say other than “fuck descriptive statistics backed studies” and “i was abused as a child and i turned out fine” then kindly leave the thread and do not continue posting, I do not want this thread derailed with such inane bullshit and would rather people actually give the OP and its sources a long hard read, it is utterly ridiculous
yes, science is not an objective measure wherein researchers are above reproach in biases/funding. duh. ppl do stupid shit in academia all the time it is not groundbreaking. this has been demonstrated with multiple fields of research i.e. diet companies funding obesity studies. however, to repudiate entire bodies of work which fundamentally oppose spanking would require more than just a broad generalization of this phenomenon. like, pointing toward actual faults and shady funding. like, damn y'all really like hitting kids lmao
Last edited:
Oh yes it backfires sometimes
Here, I'll share a memory I still keep to this day.
So back when I was a kid, mom and dad did exactly this. And eventually self destructed in their face... (This was when I was 11 or 12)
So mom and dad used this type of violence, when I was a kid, right? Well guess what. One day, the youngest one was like "Oh so you want to spank me huh?! Not this time!" He was pretty close to utterly beating my mother, but she fought back with even worse violence, so she could still to teach him a lesson. I swear, his face was freaking red after such... At the time, I felt mom deserved it, because I honestly got in a ton of trouble until my teenage years. Later on in my teenage years, since I was well behaved, I thought "oh that perspective was horrible, she was just teaching him not to do bad things", and now I feel the young one deserved what he got because 1: I still kind of hate him to this day and refuse to admit it, and 2: He did bad stuff
Yup, so exactly. You all may not realize it, but sometimes using pain as a way to teach kids a lesson can backfire. They realised that, because once I got to being 13, my parents were like " OK, maybe whooping was never a good idea."
I am part of the group of people that is totally against aggression in children and adolescents, since it is proven that the child until his 7 years is still in development stage, not having totally the sense of what is right and wrong. In addition, even if you are the parent, anyone has the right not to be assaulted, this becomes an abuse, and depending on the severity and amount of aggression the child receives, it becomes a traumatic problem for the child.
My mother has always been braver than my father, so she has assaulted me a few times, while my father always solved everything by talking. Using my father as an example, he proved that I do not need to be assaulted to behave as a child or as a person. Most of the friends I have who have been assaulted several times as a way to receive education, have become violent people in the future, using aggression to solve anything, which for me is worrying.
Anywhere you will hear that the basis for solving everything will be dialogue, whether at school or even at your job, so why bullying a child? If you've been assaulted and you think nothing has shaken you about it, that's fine, but each case is a case. Besides, nobody likes to be beaten, and probably you did not like it too, so we all managed to do differently with our future children, cousins, friends and show that it is not the violence that will solve, because in fact you will only create a field of battle between you and your son, and probably when he is older, will face you and try to defend yourself.
My mother has always been braver than my father, so she has assaulted me a few times, while my father always solved everything by talking. Using my father as an example, he proved that I do not need to be assaulted to behave as a child or as a person. Most of the friends I have who have been assaulted several times as a way to receive education, have become violent people in the future, using aggression to solve anything, which for me is worrying.
Anywhere you will hear that the basis for solving everything will be dialogue, whether at school or even at your job, so why bullying a child? If you've been assaulted and you think nothing has shaken you about it, that's fine, but each case is a case. Besides, nobody likes to be beaten, and probably you did not like it too, so we all managed to do differently with our future children, cousins, friends and show that it is not the violence that will solve, because in fact you will only create a field of battle between you and your son, and probably when he is older, will face you and try to defend yourself.
this is just satire right? Idk I'm not even staunchly anti violent or anything but I'm fairly certain every law from every first world country is very clear on this. Like if I forcefully put my hand on a stranger's butt I'd be charged with assault. I don't get why it's suddenly different when instead of a full grown adult it is a helpless child??? Who you control in basically every other capacity???
I've edited this post at least three different times because I'm not exactly sure how to say what it is I want to say. Corporal Punishment is.... complex for me. I've been spanked before and I've spanked others before so you'd think I would accept it easily but the thing is, it's a nuanced thing that actually has very little to do with Corporal Punishment. When your punishing a child, more important than the punishment, is an explanation of why it is that you're punishing them. When I'm punishing a child, I typically explain why it is that I'm punishing them and what for. Children are typically smart but simple. They pick up on things easily but don't care for things that aren't immediate. Such is the creature we all like to call "child". If you punish a child and then leave it at that, they wont learn anything. You need to explain that what they did was wrong and they need to not do the thing again, thoroughly. A punishment fitting the crime is important and depending on the severity of the crime, Corporal Punishment may be acceptable. *IMO though, Spanking should be a very rare, if at all, kind of punishment. Like pulling it out at any particular moment shows how bad of a parent you are due to your lack of patience and borderline sociopathic nature towards children. TL;DR show some self restraint* The most important thing though, is the explanation after the fact. Don't just leave it at the punishment and expect the child to not feel resentment more than any sort of lesson learned. Any negative feelings as a result of a punishment, even Corporal Punishment, can be lessened by simply explaining your actions and how they were wrong.
If you're hitting someone who's old enough to understand logic and empathy, why not convey what you want them to know in words.
If you're hitting someone who isn't old enough to understand logic and empathy, why are you hitting someone who won't understand what they're being hit for.
If you're hitting someone who isn't old enough to understand logic and empathy, why are you hitting someone who won't understand what they're being hit for.
The goal of punishment should be to teach children not to do certain things because those things are wrong.
Spanking doesn’t accomplish this. What spanking teaches kids, at best, is not to do certain things out of fear of receiving the punishment. They haven’t learned right vs wrong; only that they’re afraid of being hit. Worse, they could even learn to keep doing what they’re doing, but learn to destroy the evidence so they don’t get caught.
Maybe that explains why being spanked as a child is linked to criminal behavior in adults. Just a hunch.
Spanking doesn’t accomplish this. What spanking teaches kids, at best, is not to do certain things out of fear of receiving the punishment. They haven’t learned right vs wrong; only that they’re afraid of being hit. Worse, they could even learn to keep doing what they’re doing, but learn to destroy the evidence so they don’t get caught.
Maybe that explains why being spanked as a child is linked to criminal behavior in adults. Just a hunch.
Depends on the context of the situation. Smacking someone is immediate and does make them more receptive. Not that it necessarily works on everyone or that it works on someone 100% of the time but as I said, it's context. Understanding what works in what situation. "A hell raiser flying through the store at mach 1 not caring for what anyone has to say" is probably the most immediate example I can give. Giving them a solid smack on the back of the head and telling them how none of what they were doing is ok is a legitimate option in cases like those. But as I said, you need to tell them what their doing wrong and why they're wrong in the moment otherwise, to the child, it's pretty much just an act of violence for violence's sake.
by focusing so much on whether hitting kids 'works' or not you're side-stepping the debate. it's not wrong because it's ineffective (which it is, but that's a secondary issue), it's wrong because you're doing bodily harm to another person who 1) doesn't deserve it 2) is likely not able to fully understand why you're doing it 3) is at an age where it could (and frequently does) negatively impact their psychological development. they won't associate doing the wrong thing with getting hit, they'll associate you catching them with getting hit, and they'll associate authority figures with violence. by slapping kids you're not teaching them to be good people, you're teaching them to be dishonest and that violence is an acceptable way to solve problems.
would you hit an adult who did something you didn't like? if no, why would you do the same to a child?
This isn't necessarily an argument about ethics, it's an argument about parenting in general with a focus on spanking. So no, I'm not side stepping any argument, I just haven't been arguing about the ethics sense that wasn't the focus of my argument. Also, "would you hit an adult who did something you didn't like?" Do you think it's a valid option for a black person to knock a white person out for using the N word in a derogatory manner? Not really equating violence over racism vs hitting a child, just noting that flaw I see in your reasoning. That being that context matters.
I gave my opinion on spanking in my first post in a somewhat hand wavey notion so I'll re-state it here with a little more clarity. Corporal punishment should be a done rarely, if at all. I do somewhat agree with your ethics as they somewhat fall in line with mine. Violence should always be the last resort and double so for a child who doesn't have the cognitive functions to understand that what they're doing is wrong. However, in no study is it stated that Corporal Punishment is bad 100% of the time. Depending on the context of the situation, Corporal Punishment can be a viable option.
It's abuse, plain and simple. As someone who grew up in an abusive household (and no, not just spanking), if you support or defend assaulting your kids as a punishment, you're a shitty person. No other way to slice it. Get this fucking caveman idea that inflicting pain on your children is the correct way to rectify their behavior like they're some kind of animal out of your head, and try talking to them like they're actual human beings and not dogs who pissed your furniture again.
I also suspect spanking is often used by parents who are quite frankly lazy. Explaining things like basic morality to your kid is hard, and having conversations about why their behavior is wrong and what impact it has on people around them takes time. I was spanked (and worse) hundreds of times and not once was it ever explained to me why it was happening, or why what I did was wrong. How is a person supposed to learn from that? Well, I didn't. If anything, I behaved progressively worse as the abuse worsened.
I also suspect spanking is often used by parents who are quite frankly lazy. Explaining things like basic morality to your kid is hard, and having conversations about why their behavior is wrong and what impact it has on people around them takes time. I was spanked (and worse) hundreds of times and not once was it ever explained to me why it was happening, or why what I did was wrong. How is a person supposed to learn from that? Well, I didn't. If anything, I behaved progressively worse as the abuse worsened.
KurashiDragon
it looks like ur move here is shaping up to be something like 'physical restraint is acceptable and physical restraint is part of corporal punishment so I gotcha- corporal punishment is actually acceptable in some contexts'. let me assure you that if you read the thread it has nothing to do w physical restraint, and even in the context of the child running around in the glass store there are better ways to restrain your child than smacking them in the head. try not to continue to stubbornly persist in this category error if you can help yourself from negative attention seeking posts.
it looks like ur move here is shaping up to be something like 'physical restraint is acceptable and physical restraint is part of corporal punishment so I gotcha- corporal punishment is actually acceptable in some contexts'. let me assure you that if you read the thread it has nothing to do w physical restraint, and even in the context of the child running around in the glass store there are better ways to restrain your child than smacking them in the head. try not to continue to stubbornly persist in this category error if you can help yourself from negative attention seeking posts.
Physical restraint as in holding a child down? My definition of Corporal punishment is smacking and Spanking. Something immediate to get the child to calm down or listen. Trying to physically restrain a child is actually pretty difficult. Anyway, my move has always been "Try talking it out more and hitting less. Corporal Punishment is necessary in some instances but it's been proven to not be very effective a lot of the time and downright detrimental in the long term if done commonly." I also never once said that Corporal Punishment is the only option for controlling a child. Just a viable option depending on the context.
Taking things out of the realm of the theoretical for a bit: all kids are different, but I have an actual five year old who can definitely be a handful and a half and we've always managed to find ways to keep him safe or discipline him without hitting.
I know saying "I've been managing to raise a child without violence or corporal punishment" is every bit as anecdotal as the people saying they were hit as kids and they turned out fine, but most of the discussion here has been in the abstract so... Actual parent, strongly disagree with violence as punishment, even "just" ritualized violence.
I know saying "I've been managing to raise a child without violence or corporal punishment" is every bit as anecdotal as the people saying they were hit as kids and they turned out fine, but most of the discussion here has been in the abstract so... Actual parent, strongly disagree with violence as punishment, even "just" ritualized violence.
THIS.
As a pacifist, I am very strongly against spanking children. Even if it would be helpful, which I don't believe, I believe it's immoral.
I don't have children and really don't want them, but if I did, I would NEVER be able to spank them.
Spanking will only make children fear their parents, while it doesn't teach them anything about what they did wrong. Instead of spanking or just some random punishment that has nothing to do with what the child did wrong (being grounded, no more tv/gaming/whatever)... A good parent should explain what the child did wrong. Talking to the child is much more important than punishment. If the child realizes what it did wrong and learns something from the experience, punishment should no longer be needed.
If you punish the child, let your child fix what it did wrong as punishment. For example, if your child ruined someone else's property, let your child buy or repair that what it has broken. Much more constructive than spanking, grounding or saying 'no TV/gaming for a week'.
Some people say violence is the only thing a child understands, but I don't believe that. If you talk to them on their level, you should be able to teach them something. And if they don't understand a proper explanation of what they did wrong, they also won't understand why they were spanked, making spanking ineffective (and regardless of effectivity, immoral).
Respect children the way you would respect an adult. Would you spank your partner or a friend if you were angry because of something they did or said? Hopefully not. Hopefully, you would try to talk to them, hoping they would realize what they did wrong. If you would respect your partner or friend enough to do that, you should also respect a child enough to do that instead of spanking.
Last edited:
Well generally, psychologically it will make the children feel fear of the parent and push them away from doing something, which in the current term of time where it will be done will stop the cold from doing it. Although it has gained popularity as most of the time getting children to actually listen has to get into brute force. It's understandable if it's a 'once in a while' punishment being only in extreme scenarios as doing it daily for every little thing will negatively attribute to the child. When constantly hit, children only see everything as wrong... wrong... wrong, and will constantly be stressed for every little thing they do. Based on many sources, it has been articulated that;
"Not only does hitting kids do little good; it can worsen their long-term behavior. Children who experience repeated use of corporal punishment tend to develop more aggressive behaviours, increased aggression in school, and an increased risk of mental health disorders and cognitive problems."
Many psychologists, doctors and more have supported this statement in some kind of form, almost everyone. Some of you may argue that you were hit as a kid, but the thing is, how often was that? Maybe once in a while, maybe because you did something really bad? But imagine being hit for every little thing, waking up slightly late, not finishing every chore and bit of homework on time, getting hit for every little thing.
I personally believe spanking is fine, but only generally when something really bad has been done.
"Not only does hitting kids do little good; it can worsen their long-term behavior. Children who experience repeated use of corporal punishment tend to develop more aggressive behaviours, increased aggression in school, and an increased risk of mental health disorders and cognitive problems."
Many psychologists, doctors and more have supported this statement in some kind of form, almost everyone. Some of you may argue that you were hit as a kid, but the thing is, how often was that? Maybe once in a while, maybe because you did something really bad? But imagine being hit for every little thing, waking up slightly late, not finishing every chore and bit of homework on time, getting hit for every little thing.
I personally believe spanking is fine, but only generally when something really bad has been done.