or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Gentle Discipline › Spanking vs. violence.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spanking vs. violence. - Page 8  

post #141 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by jezebelle View Post

As the original poster, I would like to remind everyone that this thread originated as a request for help addressing spanking questions constructively, and understanding why the word "violence" seems to be so provocative.



Okay, well for myself. I grew up in a home that was loving, peaceful, and a lot of fun. Mom was a SAHM, and we romped with the dog, went for long, rambling walks, listened to her sing at bedtime (and on walks, sometimes), did all kinds of arts and crafts, baked, made root beer and pickles and various ice cream desserts, and were constantly amazed by her "magic" (she almost always knew when it was going to rain, and just said that the birds told her...which I understand totally now, but thought was pure magic as a child). We read, and played with blocks and stuffies and a whole pile of Fisher-Price toys (the olds ones - my favourite, ironically, was the schoolhouse), and all that good stuff. And, if anything was wrong outside the house - if people were mean, or I fell and skinned my knee, or I was afraid of something, then I had home as a "soft place to land"...a haven and a refuge.

 

When I hear people equate spankings with violence, it puts my back up. I didn't live in a violent home (knew lots of people who did - many of them hung out at my place as teens, because my place was safe and fun and people could just be themselves). It makes me nuts when people blithely assert that I did, because they equate spanking and violence. So, yeah - I think the word "violence" is provocative.

post #142 of 215

I think that calling it violent is provocative because violence is such a negative word. People discipline the way they do because they think it's the right thing to do. They don't want to feel like someone is judging them as violent, or mean, or evil. Because they aren't those things (again, I'm talking about typical socially accepted spankings).

 

I'm Wiccan. I don't think anyone would get me to convert, but they CERTAINLY wouldn't get me to convert by telling me that I'm going to hell if I don't, or that Wiccans are bad people.

I eat meat (even though I do think it's more "right" to be vegan). I had a vegan friend who once made some VERY negative comments about my eating cheese. It didn't make me want to stop. It actually had the opposite effect, and my first (irrational) thought was that I was going to start eating more cheese, just to spite her (I didn't, because like I said it was irrational).

When people judge like that, it just makes the other person defensive. They start justifying- to themselves- that what they are doing is ok. It seems to me that it could easily just drive the other person farther away from the place you want them to be.

 

The best way, for me, to approach these situation is by emphasizing that you don't have to spank. I talk about my views on parenting- possibly saying that spanking, at best, causes kids to behave for self centered reasons. I might say that spanking undermines a parent's natural authority. That hitting doesn't help them learn socially acceptable behavior, and right from wrong, any better than it would help them learn math. I focus on teaching them how their actions affect other people- I don't see how spanking them would help with that.

post #143 of 215
Thread Starter 

I think this brings us back to the cognitive dissonance thing.  I am not saying that any home is violent when I say that spanking is violent.  I am a vegetarian, and I happen to personally think meat is repulsive.  I find eating meat gross.  That doesn't mean that I find any household that eats meat gross.  Or any person that eats meat gross.  My husband eats meat, and I certainly don't find him gross.  I find that act gross.  Same thing with many religions; I find them confusing and hypocritical.  That doesn't mean that I find every practitioner to be senseless hypocrites.  So when I say that spanking is violent, and people hear that their loved ones or their homes are violent, that is a disconnect on their end.  And I get that now; I will try to keep that disconnect from happening, though I feel no guilt for having been honest when asked. 

 

No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent.  Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?"  So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing.  I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive.  I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.

post #144 of 215

 

Okay - I think I slipped up in communication there. It was the spanking that I was talking about when I said it was mostly an attempt to get our attention, not an attempt to shame. My mom's mom was really big on shaming kids, and mom never did anything with the deliberate attempt to shame us. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "liked" being spanked or wasn't scared or upset. I was scared of mom, just because she spanked us sometimes. I was upset when I got spanked. But, I'd have rather had a spanking any day than feel as if I'd disappointed her. It wasn't about some kind of "I'm such a bad kid - punish me" thing - spankings were just relatively minor, clean and over with quickly. The times that she made me feel as if she was disappointed in me weren't usually about attempts to discipline. It was a communication style that went wrong and didn't work out...and it hurt like hell. I never really received spankings as violence, in the sense you're talking about, which makes this whole discussion...wobbly. If the definition of violence is more about the person on the receiving end, and I perceived the "I'm sooo disappointed in you" vibe as being more damaging, etc. than a spanking, then which was more violent?

 

I don't necessarily think either was more violent than the other.  They were both violent in equal ways but for YOU the result of the shaming was more effective in terms of controlling your behavior.  If you had been a different kid you might have seen the physical as more violent. 

 

We don't have to use the word violent if it has a bad connotation for you.  We can call it controlling, or effective, or manipulative.  None of those sound too good...how would you prefer to describe it?

I'll have to read some more about Ghandi, I guess. I haven't read up on him in a long time.

 

Not a bad idea, he was an interesting person.

 

 

I'm not exactly arguing any premise. I've just been here for six years, seeing one "fact" after another about spanking. Most of them didn't hold true for me or most of the people I knew (and, as I say, in the time and place I grew up, most kids were spanked - not a lot, and not in the "go cut yourself a switch" method, but it was fairly universal). It's very frustrating when things are repeatedly stated as fact, about something I've personally experienced and those statements just aren't the way it was/is. I have no problem with being anti-spanking, but being anti-spanking based on a bunch of flawed assumptions, and then applying those flawed assumptions to all spankers bugs the crap out of me.

 

Okay!  Now I am following you.  I agree with that as well.  I know there aren't many studies that prove spanking is bad.  I don't put much stock in studies anyway.  I know what I know because I know it.

 

Now, see....at six (okay - not quite - he's six next month), ds2 is less self-confident and self aware than ds1 was at age two. (He's possibly even less self-confident than I was (and I was nowhere near as self-confident as ds1) and not even close to being as self-aware as I was. I can't speak for dh or my ex, although my ex can remember taking care of himself and his sister at age six, because his parents had a multi-day opium hangover, so his upbringing issues went way beyond spanking, in any case.) DS1 was able to clearly articulate his needs at age two. And, ds1 was spanked (although not often - spanking was always my last tool in the box, yk?). DS2 has no self control, or very, very little. We discuss feelings and needs and how to meet them and try to teach self-awareness. I've had more discussions about these things with ds2 than with ds1 and dd1 combined. In the meantime, ds2 isn't being hit - but dd1 is. I'm just not so sure any of this is accomplishing anything, and as time goes on, mere compliance and good behaviour starts looking pretty good.

 

Well, I don't mean to sound rude, and I know this might sound condescending, but if you didn't practice it with your other kids and you have only really been practicing it yourself for 4 years, and you are only practicing it with one child, and the other child still occassionally does get spanked, well, I just mean people study these techniques for YEARS and YEARS and are still figuring it out.  It's not a science that can be implemented without flaw.  It takes learning and practice and relearning from the parents' end, and so obviously there is going to be a lag in such a situation.  Couple that with a child who for lack of a better term has a young or challenging spirit and you may have a more long term project on your hand.  How adept are you at applying the NVC techniques on yourself, or your partner?  If you are still struggling with identifying your own feelings and needs (I still do at times and I have been at it for a long time with certified training courses) you probably should expect more bumps in the road, ya know?  I don't mean to sound all "I'm so smart and you're such a noob."  at ALL.  I'm just saying, it takes time and do try to have patience and keep practicing with yourself and your partner and your older kids all the time.  Model in front of the little one, and every chance you get, not just for the negative, but for the positive stuff, too...you seem really happy and relaxed, why is that? (I find identifying positive feelings and connecting them to needs being met lay the ground work for identifying the negative feelings (plus it practices the skill when the body and mind are not stressed).

 

Your first son could be tempered like you or me, one smack and the message is clear, wanting to please (I had friends like you described of your DS, too).  Your DS2 sounds more like my niece.  The more you threaten violence the more aggressive she gets.  You hit her, and she WILL hit you back.  You yell at her and she will rage in your face.  No fear of authority or search for firmer limits...not from any age.  And talking to her about what she wants or needs is a nightmare...no Ruth, you don't need to pinch your sister until she bleeds...that is not the need, that's a feeling, you are feeling really angry and hurt?  and you want her to feel angry too?  No?  Okay...etc etc ad nauseum....aye aye aye!  It could go for hours, and by then the need is we're hungry and tired...can we just go to bed?  My MIL and SIL think hitting and threats and yelling are the answer. I just can't follow the logic that goes...when she is "bad" and we punish her physically, she turns right around and does it again in your face so then we ignore her...and next time (which will probably be tomorrow) we'll do it all again.  I do not think my MIL has ever babysat for my niece and not threatened to or actually smacked her bum...six years later and no improvement.  But when she stays at my house, we just don't have that issue.  She responds better to respect and firm limits.  We don't hit, bite or scratch.  Simple.  And we stay on top of her like white on rice monitoring her every moment...she seems to like that.  She wants you involved and in sight.  It seems to give her sense of security.  She is a sweetheart when you keep her active.  Leave her alone for a minute and all hell breaks loose. 

 

 

Maybe not. But, it also wasn't necessary. I could have pulled her off without smacking her. It was sheer reflex in response to ds2 being hurt. (He was under two months old at the time.)

 

True.  I was going to say as much, but I didn't want to point out the obvious...should have could have would have...we all have been there and wished we could undo something.  That's not the same as choosing it and choosing it again if you could do it all over again.

 

The aftermath isn't evidence of much, imo. He was already on a complete rampage when I held him down. About the only thing that changed as a result of my holding him down is that he would have punched me in the stomach or something, instead of cracking me in the head, if we hadn't been in that position. And, yeah - it was conscious oppression, although I probably would have said "suppression". It was hold him down or have him seriously hurt someone.

 

huh...okay,  You said the after math was him screaming that you had hit him and he was very upset that you had and and he did not understand why.  That's what I meant.  You didn't mean to hit him but he certainly didn't seem to be processing that then...I am sure now things are different and he could understand that given a rational conversation. 

 

 

I think that an instinct to protect ourselves applies, no matter who is doing the damage. As I said, I didn't even know that I'd hit ds2, until he told me. I have no conscious memory of doing so. It was an instinctive attempt to protect myself from something that was causing me extreme pain. The fact that the cause of my pain was my child wasn't even really on the radar at that point. I was in pain - lots of it - the headache from that encounter lasted almost two full days - and I lashed out at the source.

 

I'll give you that.  But I still contend that pushing someone off of you is A) not the same as spanking, not even in the same ballpark, and B) still a violent act that we should do our best to avoid if we have better skills. 

 

Rather than push my DS out of the way when he is a being a PITA and hurting me, I should recognize my own limits sooner and walk away, ask for him to leave me alone, demonstrate my NVC skills, stop the action and say "Mommy has had a long day.  I am tired, hungry and I need some personal space for a little while.  Please hang out with daddy or read a book for ten minutes so I can recharge, and then I promise I will help you/play with you/etc." But often I don't do that and then it is too late I snap...and again, I have been at this for a long time and I still am not an expert. 

 

I

Hierarchy wasn't valued in our house, but we were still spanked. This is part of what I mean. I see a lot of assertions about what's going on in homes and our culture with respect to spanking, but they just don't match up with what I've seen and experienced, yk?

 

I don't understand this.  How can you not value heirarchy but use spanking...what was the spanking for then?  I don't understand.  Can you clarify what the purpose of spanking IS if not to establish and implement the heirarchy of control...were the children in your home allowed to dole out spankings to mom and dad when they misbehaved?  I want to believe you, but I can't imagine a situation in which spanking is used to demonstrate or support or institute egalitarian values.   Can you explain what you mean?

post #145 of 215



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post

 

  I know what I know because I know it.

 

Okay...that was REALLY dumb.

 

I meant to say (my computer is doing this annoying pop up window thing like every five minutes and my train of thought keeps getting interrrupted dammit!)  I meant to say that I know what I know about oppressive violence from my readings and study in feminist and racist discourse and from further delvings into history and anthropology.  I have drawn certain conclusions about the way I can contribute or choose not to contribute to the systemic oppression of others.  It has occurred to me the more I avoid tactics of oppression with my children the less likely it will be for them to oppress others and the more likely it will be easy for them to assimilate peaceful methods of conflict transformation in their future, a skill I think will be quite valuable in an ever growing globalized world.  I do not think spanking necessarily causes negative results.  I just know from experience that non-violent methods produce more capable human beings than any other form of discipline I have witnessed.  Capable that is in what I want them to be able to do, which is help to build a  better world with fewer systems of oppression and violence.

 

So sorry for that daft bimbo like comment.  It is deeper than just a raspberry in your face, "...because I KNOW it, that's why!"  

 

ETA:  when I say my children, I include my students (ages 12-19), too.


Edited by hakeber - 6/9/11 at 8:16pm
post #146 of 215

I had a feeling when I asked that that someone would it take it here, lol.

I wrote that I was asking genuinely because I was......asking genuinely.  I am trying to understand the whole non-violence argument.  I will admit that I find humorous that violence for some ends at animals, but I'm not going to judge you for it so you don't need to put words in my brain or spell out my motives before you give me a chance to explain them.

I guess I do feel like if you have a general sense of violence as a very fluid thing, just any generally oppressive action then to me that train of thought pulls into extending that respect for all living creatures but if it doesn't for you and you can seperate the two then great, you are just making my point for me.  If some people don't see violence towards or te killing of animals aqs a non-violence issue then it stands to PERFECT reason that some people, myself not included, might reasonably exclude spanking from their own list non-violence issues.  period done.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsCradle View Post




Sorry, I responded to this question earlier but walked away from the computer and thought about it more.  On reconsideration, I think what you are doing here by your genuine curiosity question is asking that non-violence promoters be held to a higher standard.  I.e., if you stand for non-violence, then you sure as h3ll better be picking flies out of your soup so as not to harm them.  

 

I expect people to stand by their present representations of what they believe.  If their standard is not to inflict pain on humans, then I hold them to that.  If their standard is to protect the earth by living out in the wilderness and eating only berries, then I'll hold them to that.  If their environmental standard is to reduce waste, then I'm not going to ask that they venture into the wilderness and eat berries and crap in the woods.  It is not all or nothing.  I have strong ideas about behaviors toward humans.  I have strong ideas about animals  and bugs, but they are not my immediate contacts so I don't spend too much time thinking about their well being (beyond my immediate control).  I wish I could live in the wilderness but that is not practical at this time.  What I can do is put into practice certain things that limit my impact on the earth's resources.  What I can do is limit the impact that my actions have on the things/humans/beings in my immediate control and environment.  That's my present standard.  What's yours?  If you are Christian or Jewish or Muslim, can I hold you to a standard to never sin?  To practice extremes to exhibit your faith and devotion?  

 

Edited to say, Dauphinette, that maybe your question wasn't with regard to the position that I stated above, but I do see a lot of people use the vegan thing as a way to establish an all or nothing standard.  First, veganism is not an established religion.  Many people come to veganism for many different reasons.  If you want to get real serious about purest veganism, you wouldn't even drink the tap water in my town because microscopic organisms are in the drinking water.  My DH has been a practicing vegan for many years but number reason boils down to how he feels physically when he puts certain foods in his body.  He has a pair of leather shoes, so he is not vegan in the respect, but he does try to severely limit the animal products that he consumes.  It has little to do with animal rights or the like.  He's a weirdo and he'll be the first to admit it!  LOL.  Anyway, just a sidebar. 



 

post #147 of 215



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jezebelle View Post

 

No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent.  Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?"  So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing.  I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive.  I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.



Well, to be fair a few have said that violence, certainly as defined or shaped by our justice system, is relative to intention and since there is no intention of cruelty in spankings, it should not be called violence, and furthermore lumping such discipline in with violence of a more terrible nature (beatings,  bloodshed, etc) is exaggerated and belittles the point being made. 

 

So you have actually gotten some answers, but it's not answers you are willing to accept. Which is fine, BTW, just not particularly typical of a genuine discussion, which I think is what people assumed was going on. 

 

post #148 of 215
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post



 



Well, to be fair a few have said that violence, certainly as defined or shaped by our justice system, is relative to intention and since there is no intention of cruelty in spankings, it should not be called violence, and furthermore lumping such discipline in with violence of a more terrible nature (beatings,  bloodshed, etc) is exaggerated and belittles the point being made. 

 

So you have actually gotten some answers, but it's not answers you are willing to accept. Which is fine, BTW, just not particularly typical of a genuine discussion, which I think is what people assumed was going on. 

 



I don't remember reading this.  I remember reading that moral relativism is applicable here, or not applicable here, and comparing spanking to rape, which no one did, is "disgusting," etc., etc, but not how it isn't actually violent.  Now that you put all of those thoughts together, I see it as a coherent argument.  I wouldn't say I am not willing to accept it, just that I don't agree with it, due to holes in the logic.  (For example, if you know spankings cause physical pain, and you intentionally spank your child, how is the intention not to hurt the child?)  I do at least accept it as what might be going through the heads of those who spank. 

 

post #149 of 215


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post




The state of the world throughout our known history has been the records of patriarchy.  I find this a dubious source. 

 

I do not think with my heart (that is oxymoronic really) but it is a dead metaphor to say we feel and listen to our hearts (I did not think I'd have to explain that it is a metaphor, but there you go)  it means that we listen to the part of our inner psyche that is connected to our most base instincts and free of social and cultural manipulation.  I believe this is the root of non-violence.


The violence perpetrated by men and women are different. I don't think men are inherently more violent than women. Would you resort to violence to protect your child? The sexes respond with violence to different stimuli.

 

As for your metaphor...well, I'm well aware that it's a metaphor. But you are saying that a mentally healthy person's heart would not tell her to hit her child. So, that must mean that women who spank are mentally unhealthy, no? Or is it her heart that's unhealthy? Why did you say "mentally" in your post if that's not what you meant.

 

Our base instincts are, well...base. It's social and cultural manipulation that make us "civilized."

 

***********

 

WRT Jesus, the Old Testament of the Bible is extremely violent, and this is what Jesus said about that....

 

 

Quote:

5:17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

 

21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

 

 

To the apostles....

 

 

Quote:

10:14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

 

 

About the apocolypse....

 

 

Quote:

24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

 

 

...come on, now. Grounding is violent, and this is non-violence? Spanking seems like small potatoes in comparison.

post #150 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by jezebelle View Post

I

 

No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent.  Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?"  So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing.  I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive.  I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.

Well, I am one who doesn't equate spanking with violence. Or, I should say, I didn't at the beginning of this thread. What I think of when I think of "violence" is war, bar fights, gang violence...stuff like that. I don't have a vested interest in that thinking though (meaning, I don't spank, so it doesn't matter to me if it's violent or not). So I got to thinking...domestic violence is hitting your spouse/partner. Any type of hitting. So I guess, hitting your child would be violent as well.  

 

That's just to show you that it can require a lot of thought for someone to make that connection, between spanking and violence. And if it took that amount of thought for me, I imagine it would take so much more for someone who thought that spanking was an acceptable thing to do.

 

 

post #151 of 215
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevaMajka View Post



Well, I am one who doesn't equate spanking with violence. Or, I should say, I didn't at the beginning of this thread. What I think of when I think of "violence" is war, bar fights, gang violence...stuff like that. I don't have a vested interest in that thinking though (meaning, I don't spank, so it doesn't matter to me if it's violent or not). So I got to thinking...domestic violence is hitting your spouse/partner. Any type of hitting. So I guess, hitting your child would be violent as well.  

 

That's just to show you that it can require a lot of thought for someone to make that connection, between spanking and violence. And if it took that amount of thought for me, I imagine it would take so much more for someone who thought that spanking was an acceptable thing to do.

 

 



Honestly, I don't expect everyone (or anyone, really) to automatically make the same connections I do.  So when I say "violence," I don't expect anyone to think of spanking.  What I was having trouble with is the reactions I get when I say I feel that spanking is violence.  Does that make sense?  I have a better understanding of the emotional reactions I get and their basis now, though of course, I disagree with the conclusions.

 

post #152 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by jezebelle View Post

I think this brings us back to the cognitive dissonance thing.  I am not saying that any home is violent when I say that spanking is violent. 

 

I don't think it's a cognitive dissonance. I think it's a simple disagreement. A violent home is a home in which violence occurs, imo...and my home wasn't violent, and I didn't experience spankings as violence. You can call it a cognitive dissonance if you want - I consider spankings and violence to be two different things.

 

I am a vegetarian, and I happen to personally think meat is repulsive.  I find eating meat gross.  That doesn't mean that I find any household that eats meat gross.  Or any person that eats meat gross.  My husband eats meat, and I certainly don't find him gross.  I find that act gross. 

 

Okay, fine. But, I still can't see how that can translate over into violence in a home not meaning a violent home. A "gross" home or a "gross" person is a home or person that you find gross. A violent home is a home where there is violence, yk?

 

Same thing with many religions; I find them confusing and hypocritical.  That doesn't mean that I find every practitioner to be senseless hypocrites.  So when I say that spanking is violent, and people hear that their loved ones or their homes are violent, that is a disconnect on their end.  And I get that now; I will try to keep that disconnect from happening, though I feel no guilt for having been honest when asked. 

 

I still see this as something else. If violence in the home doesn't make a violent home, iyo, then what does?

 

No one has yet offered up a strong argument as to why spanking should not be considered violent.  Just "that's my opinion" or "why would it be violent?"  So I am sticking with the cognitive dissonance thing.  I think that people need to justify their actions and don't want to feel like a violent human, because they see violence as negative and spanking as positive.  I don't really understand the logic any better, but I think that's because it's not a logical jump; it's self-preservation because, for whatever reason, they lack the skills/education/desire to change to a different form of discipline.

 

hmm...I'll have to think about why I don't see it as violence. I don't have a big problem with knowing that I have a violent side. I beat the crap out of several people in high school, and I've been seriously tempted to do it to a few others as an adult (and, yeah - the whole threat of violence in the form of arrest and criminal charges is a deterrent, although not the only one). Spanking falls into a different category for me.



 

post #153 of 215

I had a variety of experiences with spanking as a child.

 

My grandmother was fond of the spatula. If it was minor infraction we got plastic. If we put her in a really foul mood we were sent back to the kitchen to get the metal one. I find this kind of punishment cruel.

 

My brothers were routinely un-phased by spankings. Oh, they would cry and howl and beg to not get spanked, but then would often repeat whatever behavior got them spanked within 10 minutes. One brother had a defense mechanism where he would smile and laugh while getting the spanking. This infuriated the adults, who didn't understand what was going on. Needless to say, this was not an effective punishment for them, and it was cruel. It was also annoying to sit by through the cycle of yelling at them, begging, spanking, crying, repeat bad behavior. Totally useless.

 

My Mom also had a policy with any babysitters or neighborhood parents: if we acted up they had permission to spank us. We knew this, and they knew this. She drew the line when we a family we knew moved in with us. Mom, kids, stepdad. The stepdad had fashioned a thick wooden paddle from a cutting board, drilled holes in it so it would swing faster and sting harder. My Mom at least drew the line on him using that swatter on us. That thing was freaking cruel, and he loved using it.

 

I was once spanked by my Uncle at age 5. My cousins and I were playing in their house, running into the front door, goofing off, then running out the back door, repeatedly. At some point, I got underfoot my Uncle and ran into his legs. "Didn't Aunt Sandy tell you to quit running in and out?" To which I responded by kicking him in the shin and yelling "You're not the boss of me!" Listen, that 6'3" man picked me up by my arm to his eye level, told me "You do NOT talk to adults like that" and gave me one, serious swat on the butt. Then he put me down. I was too shocked to cry, and I knew I had been totally in the wrong. I never acted up with him again in my life, and I have no greater advocate in the world. Was this the most necessary kind of spanking? No, I will agree that there were other ways to address this. However, it was incredibly effective and did not make me feel abused or unloved.

 

I have also only seen him spank his own child ONCE. She was upset that there wasn't room in the vehicle to join us as he drove me and my Mom home from a family visit. She stood at the screen door and cried that she wanted to go with, that he didn't love her, on and on. Her Mom tried to keep her inside, but as the truck pulled out of the drive and onto the gravel road, she bolted for it. He brought the truck to a screeching halt and jumped out. He ran to her, picked her up, told her at eye level to NEVER, EVER run towards a moving vehicle, and gave her one, serious swat on the butt. The experience rattled him more than I can imagine, because they live on top of a hill on a gravel road, and there is simply no way another speeding vehicle could have stop in time as it topped that hill. The pain of one spanking is not going to scar her for life, but getting hit by a car would have.

 

So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse. But there is a loving way to spank. There are moments when it is more important to impress upon a child, with urgency, that doing X will result in pain, and better you learn it by a swat on the hand or buttocks than permanent physical scarring or death. Teaching a curious child that the light sockets are dangerous with only words never got across to my brothers. A swift swat across the hands and a NO did get it across. 

post #154 of 215



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dauphinette View Post

I had a feeling when I asked that that someone would it take it here, lol.

I wrote that I was asking genuinely because I was......asking genuinely.  I am trying to understand the whole non-violence argument.  I will admit that I find humorous that violence for some ends at animals, but I'm not going to judge you for it so you don't need to put words in my brain or spell out my motives before you give me a chance to explain them.

I guess I do feel like if you have a general sense of violence as a very fluid thing, just any generally oppressive action then to me that train of thought pulls into extending that respect for all living creatures but if it doesn't for you and you can seperate the two then great, you are just making my point for me.  If some people don't see violence towards or te killing of animals aqs a non-violence issue then it stands to PERFECT reason that some people, myself not included, might reasonably exclude spanking from their own list non-violence issues.  period done.

 


Well, that has been conceded several times throughout this thread already.  In fact is is essentially the premise of cognitive dissonance...so what's your point.  I feel like you are dancing around one.  Can you clarify what specifically you are trying to get at?

 

ETA: I do not really think you understand what I mean by non-violence and by Ghandi's definition (not mine by the way but the widely accepted definition in peace and conflict discourse).  This site might help a little, and I will be searching for a link to the intro to Nonviolent Communication a Language for Life by Lucy Leu...the intro was written by Ghandi's nephew and it is just so beautifully explained there...
 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2xy View Post


 


The violence perpetrated by men and women are different. I don't think men are inherently more violent than women. Would you resort to violence to protect your child? The sexes respond with violence to different stimuli.

 

As for your metaphor...well, I'm well aware that it's a metaphor. But you are saying that a mentally healthy person's heart would not tell her to hit her child. So, that must mean that women who spank are mentally unhealthy, no? Or is it her heart that's unhealthy? Why did you say "mentally" in your post if that's not what you meant.

 

Okay, I'll try again...I said that we as parents need to listen to our hearts.  A mentally healthy person does not have a heart that tells them spanking their kid is okay.  A mentally healthy person's heart would protect their children, so I do not believe that someone who spanks their child is really listening to their heart.  So to answer your question in bold...NO, I am saying a woman who spanks her child is not listening to her heart. I think if they are listening to their hearts and still coming up with the idea that it is a good idea to act violently towards their children as a way of raising them into loving and caring people, they might be sociopaths.

 

Is it still unclear? 

 

Our base instincts are, well...base. It's social and cultural manipulation that make us "civilized."

 

 

Well, I guess I don't think much of being civilized if hitting a defenseless child is the best we can come up with.

 

 

 

 

 

 

***********

 

WRT Jesus, the Old Testament of the Bible is extremely violent, and this is what Jesus said about that....

 

 

 

To the apostles....

 

 

 

About the apocolypse....

 

 

 

...come on, now. Grounding is violent, and this is non-violence? Spanking seems like small potatoes in comparison.



You may have me on the jesus thing, as I said...it has been a long time since I read the bible.  I was always taught that Jesus was all about the turning of the other cheek, being kind, generous and loving thy neighbour, being good to whores and tax men despite their woes, not judging others as it;'s not our job, but god's, and was more focused on the human relationship stuff more than the hellfire and damnation and all that....I am pretty sure that is what most people think of when they think of jesus...self-sacrifice, being nice, and treating people with kindness, etc.  Maybe I had a less scary minister than you. LOL  That's all I really remember from Bible camp...in light of this evidence, I kindly request we strike Jesus from the list of peaceful prophets and renounce his obviously unearned title as the so called Prince of Peace.

 

Just cause jesus was upon frther inspection a sadistic little man doesn't mean grounding a kid in its traditional sense is inherently any less violent by the definition commonly held in the peace and conflict transformation circles.  It's still intended to enforce and reestablish authority over a weaker entity.

 

post #155 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacks View Post

But there is a loving way to spank.

I disagree. I don't think there is a loving way to hit your child. A person might think they are justified in doing it, but that doesn't mean there is a loving way to hit a kid any more than there is a loving way to hit your spouse. I wouldn't feel love if my partner hit me, and I'm sure kids don't feel love when they get hit either. When I'm hit, I feel mad, angry, sad, misunderstood. But not loved.

 

 

Quote:

So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse.

I imagine that at least some of the people who hit their kids in those ways believe that they are justified in doing so. It's quite possible, even likely, that they love their kids, and do not consider what they are doing as cruel and abusive.

post #156 of 215



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacks View Post

 

So to me there are several kinds of spanking, many of them are cruel and at least border on abuse. But there is a loving way to spank. There are moments when it is more important to impress upon a child, with urgency, that doing X will result in pain, and better you learn it by a swat on the hand or buttocks than permanent physical scarring or death. Teaching a curious child that the light sockets are dangerous with only words never got across to my brothers. A swift swat across the hands and a NO did get it across. 



bigeyes.gif

 

Ya know what has taught my daughter not to put things into light sockets...socket protectors and constant vigillance. 

 

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.  thumb.gif

 

It might surprise you to find out that in fact I agree that there is a loving way to spank...between two consensual adults alone in their own  special baby-making place..possibly with a hand or a paddle...or a leather whip...blind fold optional...but perhaps I have shared too much.mischievous.gif

 

Otherwise it's just pretty uncreative to smack someone to teach them about pain, IMHO. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by hakeber - 6/9/11 at 9:44pm
post #157 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post

 

Okay - I think I slipped up in communication there. It was the spanking that I was talking about when I said it was mostly an attempt to get our attention, not an attempt to shame. My mom's mom was really big on shaming kids, and mom never did anything with the deliberate attempt to shame us. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "liked" being spanked or wasn't scared or upset. I was scared of mom, just because she spanked us sometimes. I was upset when I got spanked. But, I'd have rather had a spanking any day than feel as if I'd disappointed her. It wasn't about some kind of "I'm such a bad kid - punish me" thing - spankings were just relatively minor, clean and over with quickly. The times that she made me feel as if she was disappointed in me weren't usually about attempts to discipline. It was a communication style that went wrong and didn't work out...and it hurt like hell. I never really received spankings as violence, in the sense you're talking about, which makes this whole discussion...wobbly. If the definition of violence is more about the person on the receiving end, and I perceived the "I'm sooo disappointed in you" vibe as being more damaging, etc. than a spanking, then which was more violent?

 

I don't necessarily think either was more violent than the other.  They were both violent in equal ways but for YOU the result of the shaming was more effective in terms of controlling your behavior.  If you had been a different kid you might have seen the physical as more violent. 

 

I think the shaming (which term I also dislike as I do think it carries a connotation of intent on the "shamer's" part, and that intent wasn't there, but this conversation is hard enough to have in a coherent fashion online as it is, so I'll go with it) was more painful and hurt more. I never said I thought it was more effective. It actually tended to make me feel like crap, put up a defensive shell, and be a complete bitch in many ways, for at least a few days. Spankings (which were, admittedly, administered at a much younger age than most of the shaming) were direct, to the point, and effective at what they were used for, which was getting my attention. .

 

We don't have to use the word violent if it has a bad connotation for you.  We can call it controlling, or effective, or manipulative.  None of those sound too good...how would you prefer to describe it?

 

I'm okay with "effective". That's what they were. It certainly sounds better to me than "violent". I don't find spanking, at least as it was practice in our house, to be particularly controlling and it's never even registered with me as manipulative (maybe that's because I've crossed paths with a handful of master manipulators, including my ex, and not one of them would have ever laid a hand on anyone in anger or discipline - I simply don't equate a swift smack on the butt with manipulation).

 

I'll have to read some more about Ghandi, I guess. I haven't read up on him in a long time.

 

Not a bad idea, he was an interesting person.

 

 

I'm not exactly arguing any premise. I've just been here for six years, seeing one "fact" after another about spanking. Most of them didn't hold true for me or most of the people I knew (and, as I say, in the time and place I grew up, most kids were spanked - not a lot, and not in the "go cut yourself a switch" method, but it was fairly universal). It's very frustrating when things are repeatedly stated as fact, about something I've personally experienced and those statements just aren't the way it was/is. I have no problem with being anti-spanking, but being anti-spanking based on a bunch of flawed assumptions, and then applying those flawed assumptions to all spankers bugs the crap out of me.

 

Okay!  Now I am following you.  I agree with that as well.  I know there aren't many studies that prove spanking is bad.  I don't put much stock in studies anyway.  I know what I know because I know it.

 

I saw your other post where you criticized your phrasing here, and I get that, but I also get what you mean. I tend to come to my conclusions based on things other than research (although I've done a lot of that in some areas over the years). Once in a while, I'll come across research that really challenges my belief/knowledge about something, but it's not usually the way it works for me. I find myself rethinking things for other reasons than research, most of the time.

 

Now, see....at six (okay - not quite - he's six next month), ds2 is less self-confident and self aware than ds1 was at age two. (He's possibly even less self-confident than I was (and I was nowhere near as self-confident as ds1) and not even close to being as self-aware as I was. I can't speak for dh or my ex, although my ex can remember taking care of himself and his sister at age six, because his parents had a multi-day opium hangover, so his upbringing issues went way beyond spanking, in any case.) DS1 was able to clearly articulate his needs at age two. And, ds1 was spanked (although not often - spanking was always my last tool in the box, yk?). DS2 has no self control, or very, very little. We discuss feelings and needs and how to meet them and try to teach self-awareness. I've had more discussions about these things with ds2 than with ds1 and dd1 combined. In the meantime, ds2 isn't being hit - but dd1 is. I'm just not so sure any of this is accomplishing anything, and as time goes on, mere compliance and good behaviour starts looking pretty good.

 

Well, I don't mean to sound rude, and I know this might sound condescending, but if you didn't practice it with your other kids and you have only really been practicing it yourself for 4 years, and you are only practicing it with one child, and the other child still occassionally does get spanked, well, I just mean people study these techniques for YEARS and YEARS and are still figuring it out. 


I think we're confusing each other. Practice what? Discussions about needs and how to express and meet them? I've practiced that with all of my kids, right from the get go. I practiced it with ds1, as well. Yes - we have used some punitive measures, including spanking when he was little (his last spanking was...12 years ago? Maybe 13?) and the one (or two) grounding. I've done less of it with ds1 and dd1 than with ds2, because with ds1 and dd1, it worked - they responded to it from the beginning and I didn't have to have discussions that involved much beyond, "so, what's wrong, and why are you so mad at so-and-so"..."oh, I can understand that - I think my feelings would be hurt, too", etc. etc. With ds2, it doesn't work that way. We talk and try to listen and figure out what's going on, and help him label emotions and recognize cues that he needs sleep, food, etc. It doesn't do anything. That's why I've had more discussions with him than with his two older siblings combined, not because this is a new approach for me.

 

It's not a science that can be implemented without flaw.  It takes learning and practice and relearning from the parents' end, and so obviously there is going to be a lag in such a situation.  Couple that with a child who for lack of a better term has a young or challenging spirit and you may have a more long term project on your hand.  How adept are you at applying the NVC techniques on yourself, or your partner?  If you are still struggling with identifying your own feelings and needs (I still do at times and I have been at it for a long time with certified training courses) you probably should expect more bumps in the road, ya know?  I don't mean to sound all "I'm so smart and you're such a noob."  at ALL.  I'm just saying, it takes time and do try to have patience and keep practicing with yourself and your partner and your older kids all the time.  Model in front of the little one, and every chance you get, not just for the negative, but for the positive stuff, too...you seem really happy and relaxed, why is that? (I find identifying positive feelings and connecting them to needs being met lay the ground work for identifying the negative feelings (plus it practices the skill when the body and mind are not stressed).

 

I've never studied NVC techniques, as such. But, from what I'm gathering here, I've been using them most of my life. My feelings are often mixed, but I can recognize when that's happening. DH...not so much, but he tries, and he does work with ds2, as well. (No - we're not always patient. The frustration level with ds2, on the part of everyone around here, gets pretty high on occasion. Even dd2 sometimes tries to avoid him, which is just heart-breaking to see, because it crushes him. He adores his baby sister.)

 

Your first son could be tempered like you or me, one smack and the message is clear, wanting to please (I had friends like you described of your DS, too). 

 

DS1 was/is a people pleaser. But, it was also simple limit/boundary testing. If it got to a point where I'd spank him, he understood that he'd reached the boundary, yk? DS2 doesn't...get boundaries.

 

Your DS2 sounds more like my niece.  The more you threaten violence the more aggressive she gets.  You hit her, and she WILL hit you back.  You yell at her and she will rage in your face. 

 

I honestly don't know if ds2 would hit me back. That hasn't been an issue. The time I hit him (you know...I seem to recall there was another one - within the last year - can't recall the circumstances, though...I've had to fight it down more than once, so...I'm not sure...), he settled down almost immediately. He doesn't generally hit/hurt people out of a reaction to threatening or being hit himself. We still haven't figured out his triggers. A few of them are straightforward - basic "I want that and she won't give it to me" type stuff. Some of it? Not at all. When he first started this stuff, he'd never been threatened or hit or anything like that. He did get yelled at a lot for a couple of months when he was...just over two, I guess. I was in late pregnancy, exhausted, miserable, and he was being incredibly difficult and dd1 was also going through an awful phase, and I wasn't coping very well. But, the crazy-making behaviour started before that. It's been going on for a solid four years.

 

No fear of authority or search for firmer limits...not from any age.  And talking to her about what she wants or needs is a nightmare...no Ruth, you don't need to pinch your sister until she bleeds...that is not the need, that's a feeling, you are feeling really angry and hurt?  and you want her to feel angry too?  No?  Okay...etc etc ad nauseum....aye aye aye!  It could go for hours, and by then the need is we're hungry and tired...can we just go to bed?  My MIL and SIL think hitting and threats and yelling are the answer. I just can't follow the logic that goes...when she is "bad" and we punish her physically, she turns right around and does it again in your face so then we ignore her...and next time (which will probably be tomorrow) we'll do it all again.

 

Okay, so what's the logic of me continuing to try to monitor his behaviour, talk to him, work through things, etc. when that's not working? If there's no logic to spanking a child when that doesn't change the behaviour, then what's the logic of not spanking a child when that doesn't, either? I'm not saying I want to spank him, but the approach we're using is NOT working. In the last two weeks, he's punched his older sister in the face at least eight times. He's tried to bite her. He's hit his little sister. And, there is no rhyme or reason to it that can be detected from outside. (I do know there's reason for it inside him - but we can't find it.)

 

I do not think my MIL has ever babysat for my niece and not threatened to or actually smacked her bum...six years later and no improvement.  But when she stays at my house, we just don't have that issue.  She responds better to respect and firm limits.  We don't hit, bite or scratch.  Simple.  And we stay on top of her like white on rice monitoring her every moment...she seems to like that.  She wants you involved and in sight.  It seems to give her sense of security.  She is a sweetheart when you keep her active.  Leave her alone for a minute and all hell breaks loose. 

 

DS2 isn't exactly like that. He can be a complete sweetheart (sweetest kid I've ever met, in some ways), but he can also be a raging animal. And, it's not "if we stay on top of him, he's fine, but if we leave him alone, and all hell breaks loose". Sometimes, he's happy to play alone for a while, and even wants to do so. Sometimes, he can sit and play Lego with dd1 for an hour or two (I recall one day when they played with a PlayDoh ice cream maker for three solid hours - heaven!!). Sometimes, he'll sit on the couch and read board books to his little sister for 10-15 minutes, then play with her for a bit. Keeping him active is great...to a point. Then, he gets tired and balks and wants to sit and watch tv or otherwise be entertained. He's really, really difficult to figure out.

 

Maybe not. But, it also wasn't necessary. I could have pulled her off without smacking her. It was sheer reflex in response to ds2 being hurt. (He was under two months old at the time.)

 

True.  I was going to say as much, but I didn't want to point out the obvious...should have could have would have...we all have been there and wished we could undo something.  That's not the same as choosing it and choosing it again if you could do it all over again.

 

True.

 

The aftermath isn't evidence of much, imo. He was already on a complete rampage when I held him down. About the only thing that changed as a result of my holding him down is that he would have punched me in the stomach or something, instead of cracking me in the head, if we hadn't been in that position. And, yeah - it was conscious oppression, although I probably would have said "suppression". It was hold him down or have him seriously hurt someone.

 

huh...okay,  You said the after math was him screaming that you had hit him and he was very upset that you had and and he did not understand why.  That's what I meant.  You didn't mean to hit him but he certainly didn't seem to be processing that then...I am sure now things are different and he could understand that given a rational conversation. 

 

Oh, sorry - I thought you meant me hitting him as the aftermath of me holding him down! (This kind of conversation is really hard by forum!) That incident was...a year and a half ago, or two years ago, maybe? I can't remember if I was still pregnant with dd2 or not. But, I suspect it would go down pretty much the same way if it happened today. He doesn't understand the way people react to him at all. He did get that I was sorry I'd hit him, even though it was hard to explain that I didn't mean to. But, he didn't get that he'd hurt me. It wasn't even on his radar. And, it still isn't. He had a major meltdown a couple of months ago when I took him out of a house where dd1 was having a playdate (he wanted to stay, but he wasn't invited). During that meltdown, he knocked something off the girl's bookshelf, tore all over their house trying to hide, punched me, slapped me, tried to gouge my eye, and sunk both hands into my throat with everything he had (it hurt for the rest of that day and all the next day). And, the final conclusion was that "nobody likes him" because I made him leave and wouldn't let him ride sideways in his car seat.

 

Anyway, I'm going way off topic. DS2 has been amazingly frustrating to deal with, for a very long time. And, talking to him and trying to make note of the positives and helpling him label his emotions and needs and such hasn't made a damn bit of difference. The only real improvement in the last four years is that a year and a half or so ago, he finally quit peeing on my carpets multiple times a week (sometimes multiple times a day)...which is actually huge, but...yeah...he's kind of exhausting.

 

I think that an instinct to protect ourselves applies, no matter who is doing the damage. As I said, I didn't even know that I'd hit ds2, until he told me. I have no conscious memory of doing so. It was an instinctive attempt to protect myself from something that was causing me extreme pain. The fact that the cause of my pain was my child wasn't even really on the radar at that point. I was in pain - lots of it - the headache from that encounter lasted almost two full days - and I lashed out at the source.

 

I'll give you that.  But I still contend that pushing someone off of you is A) not the same as spanking, not even in the same ballpark, and B) still a violent act that we should do our best to avoid if we have better skills. 

 

Pushing him off of me probably wouldn't have been that bad. I didn't,though. I really hit him. His cheek was red.

 

Rather than push my DS out of the way when he is a being a PITA and hurting me, I should recognize my own limits sooner and walk away, ask for him to leave me alone, demonstrate my NVC skills, stop the action and say "Mommy has had a long day.  I am tired, hungry and I need some personal space for a little while.  Please hang out with daddy or read a book for ten minutes so I can recharge, and then I promise I will help you/play with you/etc." But often I don't do that and then it is too late I snap...and again, I have been at this for a long time and I still am not an expert. 

 

Well, I didn't mean to hit him at all, so I'm not sure what changes I could have made. But, leaving him wasn't an issue. He was hurting his sister, and if I'd walked out, he'd have just gone after her again. Believe me, if "please do X for ten minutes" was an option with this kid, I'd be using it...to save my own sanity, if nothing else! (This is part of what I was talking about upthread when I talked about how one can just leave an abusive partner - I couldn't just take dd1 and walk out and leave ds2 in the house alone to cool off, yk?)

 

 

Hierarchy wasn't valued in our house, but we were still spanked. This is part of what I mean. I see a lot of assertions about what's going on in homes and our culture with respect to spanking, but they just don't match up with what I've seen and experienced, yk?

 

I don't understand this.  How can you not value heirarchy but use spanking...what was the spanking for then?  I don't understand.  Can you clarify what the purpose of spanking IS if not to establish and implement the heirarchy of control...were the children in your home allowed to dole out spankings to mom and dad when they misbehaved?  I want to believe you, but I can't imagine a situation in which spanking is used to demonstrate or support or institute egalitarian values.   Can you explain what you mean?

 

hmm...I was interpreting your use of "hierarchy" a little differently than you meant it (thinking of the very authoritarian "you do what I say NOW" kind of environment, with a "head of the house" and stuff like that). Yes - the adults were in charge (well, mostly mom, because my dad was very passive). Spankings were definitely used to enforce the rules and make sure things were done the way they were supposed to be done. But, the rules themselves weren't just about mom and/or dad being in control, yk? They were about everybody having consideration for each other, and keeping everybody safe.



 

post #158 of 215

Quote:

Originally Posted by mommy212 View Post

I was spanked a few times as a child, and I would never, ever describe my home as violent. I had a loving family and I was not terrified of being struck or making a mistake. I wa sonly ever spanked for direct disobedience. I am not pro-spanking but I don't consider spanking to make a violent home. 


My family was emotionally abusive. I was also spanked a handful of times. I don't remember the spankings anymore, and I don't remember ever living in fear of a spanking. I do remember living in fear of being mocked, put down, etc. and I remember plenty of incidents of this. I'm not pro-spanking either; I think there are better methods of discipline. But spanking didn't cause me any lasting problems, and I have a basis for comparison because there are other discipline methods I was subjected to that did cause me lasting problems. I would imagine there are a fair number of people who were occasionally spanked and don't see it as a problem. This could be why it's difficult to convince some people of a zero-tolerance on spanking. It's a continuum from having been spanked once or twice to, well, some of the more horrific cases we read about, and below a certain point on the continuum a lot of people are unlikely to see the issue.

 

post #159 of 215

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post

 

It might surprise you to find out that in fact I agree that there is a loving way to spank...between two consensual adults alone in their own  special baby-making place..possibly with a hand or a paddle...or a leather whip...blind fold optional...but perhaps I have shared to much.mischievous.gif

 

 

I stand corrected.  winky.gif 

 

To follow on the heels of the pp, my mother spanked me a few times, or so I was told (she says it was in dangerous situations, to keep me safe). She was most definitely not violent. With the exception of those few spankings, she was as gd as anyone here- she was playful, considerate, kind to us kids... That doesn't mean I think spanking is ok. It's not, Imo. But I don't consider her spanking to have been harmful to me. My standards for parenting are higher than "not harmful" though. Just because it didn't screw me up, or because I don't remember it, doesn't mean that I think it's an acceptable way to treat my kids. Or for anyone to treat their kids. We are talking about hitting a person who is 1/4 of your size! How in the world can anyone logically thing that that is a good thing to do? I get that for some people, that's the only thing they can think of that will "work." But beyond that, if you assume that there is a GD thing that will "work," how could a parent thing that hitting their kid was the ideal option?

My dad spanked us (I guess. It's a safe assumption). But what I remember is the "standing in the corner" and "stop crying or I'll give you something to cry about." Now, I do believe that those things were harmful to me in some way.


Edited by DevaMajka - 6/9/11 at 9:45pm
post #160 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakeber View Post

 Maybe I had a less scary minister than you. LOL  That's all I really remember from Bible camp.


 



I've never been a Christian.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Gentle Discipline
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Gentle Discipline › Spanking vs. violence.