help me argue my case - pulling hair to teach not to pull hair

[pranava]

I don't believe in pulling a child's hair to teach not to pull hair, or biting to teach not to bite, or hitting to teach not to hit. Mostly I don't believe in it because is simply doesn't "feel" right. Also I believe that children imitate adults behavior so we shouldn't do anything we don't want them to do.

How do I explain or argue this more concretely? How do I counter the arguement " I did it with my kid and they never pulled hair/bit/hit anyone again."

I need some creative concrete and non-judgemental come backs.

Thanks!!

[Ceinwen]

My first answer would be 'Why would you want to teach it that way?'

Anecdotaly (and embarassingly) I lost it one day after my two year old, totally unprovoked, out of no where - bit my seven year old. And broke the skin. My older dd was heart broken, crying about why her younger sister would hurt her...

In the heat of the moment I grabbed younger dd and slapped her bottom.

She wound right up and slapped me in the face - with a big grin. I couldn't even process it... I hit her - she hit me.

Soooo, again, the first (and only) time I slapped my two year old in an effort to get her attention re: the seriousness of what she had done... she just slapped me right back.

Not effective.

[sapphire_chan]

Just smile sweetly and explain that you prefer to model good behavior rather than talking a line you don't walk yourself. The subsequent protestations that their suggestion wasn't hypocrisy could be really amusing.

[PreggieUBA2C]

I explain it this way:

Whatever I do to others, I make okay in our relationship. If I hit; I make hitting okay. If I bite, I make biting okay. I don't want that to be okay in my relationships- not with my children or anyone else. So I don't do those things. This is independent of what others choose to do; I make my own choices and they make theirs. Obviously if there is an ongoing conflict (someone continues to hit me) then I still choose my own response and that would definitely mean defending myself and in the case of my child, explaining the above and also continuing to model what I consider okay in our relationship; hitting still isn't okay, no matter how many times I'm hit.

It pretty much follows that golden rule thing...

[hakeber]

I think you don't need to get a third degree burn to know that fire can hurt people, and you don't need to get bitten to understand that biting hurts other people...many times the reason they are biting is BECAUSE they want to hurt you, be it in anger, frustration, or self-defense.

It is ludicrous to suggest that children cannot understand the pain they inflict when they bite/hit unless they get bitten/hit.

It MIGHT teach them not to bite or hit people bigger than them. It MIGHT teach them not to bite or hit people they love. It might also teach them that biting and hitting are okay if you have a point to prove.

Either way the message being sent is WAAAAAYYYY too open to interpretation, so to be clear it makes more sense to just say "No biting people or animals." and when the action happens to take swift and immediate action to remove the child from the object of their agression and redirect them to a suitable outlet.

Clear undeniable message. Violence is not an acceptable form of expression.