Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,886
6,561
71
✟320,442.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Despairing over the next generation, saying saying things are going down hill is at least as old as the written word with each generation repeating it about the next. Somehow I don't think it has all been downhill these past 5,500ish years
I have to wonder if a lot of that perception is that each older generation thinks their opinion is more valid than the younger generation's, especially when the kids actually know the facts far better than their elders.

It takes maturity and wisdom to realize that a lot of the time the young whippersnappers are right, or at least a lot closer to being right than those who are older. Some people never get either wisdom or maturity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iluvatar5150
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,982
9,400
✟379,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
If an adult slaps another adult - that is assault. Even the threat of a slap can be assault in law.

It is not magically changed when the person slapped is a child. If anything slapping a child is worse because of the obvious difference in power and strength between adults and children.
There is a difference between slapping a random person (child or adult) on the street, and spanking a child whom I am responsible to correct.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This is just word salad.
Lol yeah I am a bit dyslexic.
People still punish bad behavior.
Not consistently or with any great consequence. I think its widely acknowledged that dicipline in schools has been slipping for a while and that punishment in the Justice system at least for young people has become quite lenient. The definition of what is classed as bad has changed and it allows more behaviour that we once thought was morally wrong.
Rights aren’t subjective.
Rights themselves are not subjective but what qualifies as being something worth protecting to apply those Rights to is the subjective part. Some may say access to drugs is a human Right as it makes them happy, relieves the suffering they experience. Some may say polygamy is a human Right as not allowing this denies a persons religious or sexual relationship status.

So just because something is said to be a Right doesn't make it right. Its only a subjective feeling, belief or preference if you support subjective morality. Theres nothing truthful beyond the subject like a law of nature for example.
Rules still exist. Parents still enforce them.
Yeah theres still rules and laws and norms though norms have changed a lot and they are really the underlying driving force for rules and laws. But like I said the rules and punishment have weakened in some areas especially when it comes to kids and adolescents.

I think theres a general instability or maybe lack of direction as to what we should and shouldn't do, whats best behaviour and whats not. Thats because I think as a society we have no moral basis everything is up to individual and group beliefs, preferences and feelings.
And there’s a distinct irony of the “back in my day we spanked and punished and our kids turned out fine” but then also looking at those kids who are now parents and saying “they aren’t effective parents.”

So which is it? They turned out fine or they’re not great parents?
So it sounds like your generation just wants to hear they were great parents and had it all figured out. Don’t use the past as an example of fault, move on with your life and don’t dwell, but do acknowledge how back in my day kids had respect for authority and were better behaved and the world was better for it.

That inherently is the problem with the whole “back in my day” argument. You say everybody turned out great, society is better, kids were better, then you see those kids as adults and parents who opt to not do something because of how it negatively impacted them, then you cry about how adults these days are lost and yielding lost children.

This is the generation of parents you raised. You want the parade for what you think you did right, but not the criticism for what you didn’t.
Actually I am not saying that so you must have misunderstood what I meant. Its not a generational thing as far as which generation is better at bringing up kids. Both generations have made mistakes. I am actually saying the overuse of corporal punishment was abusive so that cannot be good but also as a reaction against those abuses society went to the other extreme of watering down punishment and the consequences for misbehaviour.

Its not so much what any generation believes as each generation will have their own relative views on whats right as time goes by or compared to the past. But rather I am talking about a truth principle about crime and punishment that the West has lived by for millenia. The idea that the law had authority, that there were consequences for bad behaviour, that people respected parents authority. These are all principles and not something relative to a generation or culture. They stand independent like a law of nature.
Word salad. Ideologies have always been a part of society.
Yes but we don't want our society to be ruled by one ideology being enforced on the many as is happening today. Being pushed into our institutions, families and private lives, these should be free from ideology.
Oh brother.
'where art thou'.
Nobody is saying you can’t feel that way. You can feel whatever way you want. When people say “feelings are valid,” they’re not saying that the feeling you have is right and unchallangable, they’re saying they’re inevitable.

That still means when people try to say “poor men, we have it so hard these days because we’re now not regarded as a plane above like we were in the past and that makes it difficult,” people can (and should) say “get over yourself, you aren’t a victim.”
So what about when they are not complaining but actually expressing real disadvantage. How would you tell the difference. Or do you assume that all male expressions of suffering are complaints about losing their past status. I would have thought we were way past that stage seeming womens rights have been going for 50 plus years now.

At what point do men become a victim or can't they ever qualify because they are men. Maybe thats the problem that the same stereotyping is now happening to them and many are not recognising it. If we are to have equality then that means equality for both males and females and not focusing more on one group than others.

Focus on traumatized boys critical to gender equality, research shows
The study in the Journal of Adolescent Health, along with similar new research, suggests an adequate focus on helping boys is critical to achieving gender equality in the longer term.

The report points out that boys and men are frequently overlooked in the equality equation. “We cannot achieve a gender-equitable world by ignoring half of its occupants,” the report states. “It is crucial that boys and men be included in efforts to promote gender equality and empowerment.”
Focus on traumatized boys critical to gender equality, research shows - Men's Rights Agency

Gender Inequality Harms Not Only Women And Girls, But Also Men And Boys
Boys were more likely than girls to report adversity including physical neglect, sexual abuse and violence victimization. Moreover, boys facing adversity were 11 times more likely to be engaged in violence, compared to four times among girls. The report proposes that a more inclusive approach to measurement is required to ensure that gender equality can be attained by 2030. The recognition that gender inequality harms all genders is an important one, but it requires a mindset shift, or even a generational shift.
Gender Inequality Harms Not Only Women And Girls, But Also Men And Boys

So do these boys and men qualify as victims.

White men are not victims in current society and have not been victims in past society. And if you’re still stewing on the cultural revolution of the 60s and 70s where people pushed for women and minorities representation and rights, you need to join the now.
Despite mentioning men as victims above to show anyone can play the victim game I don't like the idea of victims and oppressors as it end up a competition as to who is the biggest and least victim. Like males are seen as unworthy on the victim eligibility scale and white males are even lower. Its a stereotypical and divisive way to see the world.

I was referring to the cultural revolutions and how they have influenced todays thinking the "now" thinking. This is important to understand if you want a more complete perspective on why we think and behave the way we do today.
So what you’re saying is that without that intrinsic leg up that they’ve come to rely on for literal generations, men are less educated, less competitive in jobs, more likely to be criminals, more unfit parents, and struggle mentally.
No I am saying the measures taken to make society more equal, to make women more equal as well has changed society in many ways perhaps too much so to the point men are beginning to fall behind. Of course there are other factors like work is less labor intensive which is more about the natural evolution of society and other environmental influences.

But that should not deter society from identifying the disadvantages that have occured for boys and males no matter what the cause. We should be acknowledges all disadvantages regardless of gender if we want a truely equal and fair society.

I mentioned these recent changes don't just effect males but also they are setting womens rights backwards in some ways as well. This ideology that has swept modern society is not good for anyone. Its creating hate between genders and other identity groups and is very divisive.
Sounds like men are fairly weak and didn’t deserve that leg up to begin with and the whole “men run things because they’re men” model is garbage to begin with as they are an unstable lot.
Sounds like you don't like men.
Sorry not sorry, but I don’t feel bad at all for men who are upset that education represents all genders and minorities, not just white men.
The point was that education is not representing everyone equal. Not at least by the trending results we are seeing which is showing females outperforming males. Where in some areas like degrees white males are actually falling below other minorities like Asians.

The point is regardless of blame any inequality should be a concern even white males disadvantage. Like I said when do males qualify as a disadvantaged group, when the disadvantage becomes greater. How great does it have to become before its acknowledged as a problem we have to address.
I don’t feel bad that you now have to compete with women in the workplace to advance. You can regurgitate all the carefully cultivated statistics you want, but you’re just bitter that in generations past things were handed to men by virtue of the fact that they have penises and now they have to work like everybody else to succeed in life.
No I acknowledge this, its a well recognised fact that males had advantage. Not all was because they were evil oppressors of women though. For example there was a time when most work was labor intensive which suited males more so they ended up do,onating the work hierarchy.

That was just a reality of how life was then. In fact for much of our history both males and females were disadvantaged as most people lived in adject poverty and died young from disease. It was a struggle to even put food on the table let alone who had the right to work. BUt yes men then exploited their position by then denying women access.

No one is denying the bad stuff men done in taking advantage of their position and abusing women. All I am doing is arguing that a fair and equal society should consider all people regardless of group identity. That is the most fair and consistent way to generate equality. Not to focus or some and not others because of some subjective assumption that they are not worthy. All are worthy being made in Gods image.
Men are not victims. Some of them very desperately want to be victims because they want pity and feel that pity gives them power, but that doesn’t make them victims. It’s a joke to claim men are marginalized victims and it’s completely impossible to take anybody who says such a thing seriously. It shows such a lack of knowledge and demonstrates innate, learned biases that are, thankfully, becoming artifacts. The sputtering last words of the “back in my day” generation as they die off or fade into irrelevance. An irrelevance they chose to embrace.
Hum, like I said I don't like the idea of playing victim games based on a subjective belief or idea about which identity groups are worthy or not.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,340
7,677
51
✟314,549.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There are many more disadvantages that can be named.
These are not disadvantages. This is what happens when the advantages they had were taken away.

The workplace is a competitive place and if one can’t compete that’s one you.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,340
7,677
51
✟314,549.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
That inherently is the problem with the whole “back in my day” argument. You say everybody turned out great, society is better, kids were better, then you see those kids as adults and parents who opt to not do something because of how it negatively impacted them, then you cry about how adults these days are lost and yielding lost children.
I fall prey to this. There’s a lot of students I train to be therapists who seem to be such delicate flowers. I keep having to remind myself that my generation of being expected to just get on with it and don’t let anyone see you struggle is as dead as non-avian dinosaurs.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,882
2,517
Worcestershire
✟160,866.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There is a difference between slapping a random person (child or adult) on the street, and spanking a child whom I am responsible to correct.
I would be grateful if you would kindly explain what that difference is.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
These are not disadvantages. This is what happens when the advantages they had were taken away.
What advantages exactly did they have that has anything to do with say more males being homeless today. How is this linked to some advantage men had decades ago. How are young boys falling behind in all grades of education got anything to do with mens advantage.

As I said it doesn't really matter if you think that the suffering that men experience today with suicide, homelessness, and abuse is because now they don't have any priviledge which I think is unsupported anyway.

But it doesn't matter because the current ideology is that any difference no matter how it was caused is seen as disadvantage if the identity group is not on the exact same level of education, work, degree, career, health, housing status as each other. Thats the measure that Wokist use to determine if society is equal = equal outcomes.

So if evidence comes about that shows a gender or sex among the many genders today as having disadvantage as I have shown with how boys are suffering disadvantage in education then the same equality has to be applied to all identity groups including boys and men. If not then the very ideology that professes to hold the key to achieving equality are not practicing their own beliefs and thus cannot be trusted.
The workplace is a competitive place and if one can’t compete that’s one you.
Yes the workplace is a competitive place, too competitive I think. Why is so much stress and emphasis being pushed on young men and women to get that job and career and not on families and raising kids. We seem to have it backwards. We have become more material and money dependent to exist and really we are slaves to the system.

In some ways all thats happening is that women are joining men as priviledged at the top while a larger growing group of struggle street are at the bottom. Things aren't becoming more equal and people are not becoming more happy or fullfilled. Especially young people.

If what the ideologues and the activists did as a reaction to the abuses of corporal punishment in the past was suppose to fix things it certainly hasn't because theres even more problems. We may have stopped the physical abuse of punishment but young people especially males are still experiencing abuses and disadvantage to the point where we have massive mental illness and suicide. Suicide is the greatest abuse we can allow young people to end up in.

Now many kids don't even have a family or functional family to grow up in and the stats show that these situations are actually creating more abuse against children including physical abuse.

So if the aim was to make things better from the abuses of the past we may not be strapping them but we are bashing them with higher rates of DV and we are screwing their heads up with higher rates of mental illness, suicide, addiction, violence and crime. Now its intergenerational violence and abuse. Things are not getting better.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,340
7,677
51
✟314,549.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
What advantages exactly did they have that has anything to do with say more males being homeless today.
You do realise that women used to be unable to work if they were married? So men were not competing against women in the workplace. So they got the jobs (obviously). Now they have to compete they are blaming everything except their own inadequacies.

Which is very similar to what incels do.
 
Upvote 0

Chesterton

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding
Site Supporter
May 24, 2008
23,780
20,212
Flatland
✟864,078.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
You do realise that women used to be unable to work if they were married?
That's why I'm so proud to be of Native American ancestry. In my culture, before the evil Europeans arrived, we made ALL the women do ALL the work.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,982
9,400
✟379,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I would be grateful if you would kindly explain what that difference is.
Disciplinary actions on children that you are responsible for are often illegal if you do them to another person you are not responsible for. Grounding your child is fine, but do that to someone outside of your household or care and that's wrongful imprisonment. Confiscating your child's toys is fine, but if you do that to someone outside of your household or care, that's theft. Forcing your child to work to pay for something he or she might have broken is fine, but if you do that to someone outside of your household or care and don't have all your i's dotted and t's crossed, that's slavery. So we can't use just any example of something being illegal if you do it to someone outside of your household or care on the street as a valid test for whether or not it may be legitimately used as a means of disciplining a child under your care. Therefore, using this means to classify any and all forms of corporal punishment as assault is not valid.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You do realise that women used to be unable to work if they were married? So men were not competing against women in the workplace. So they got the jobs (obviously). Now they have to compete they are blaming everything except their own inadequacies.

Which is very similar to what incels do.
I think its all contextual. Like I mentioned there was a long period for most of our history before the industrial revolution where there was no work and people had to do what they could to survive. There was no issue about women and mens rights as everyone was poor and suffering compared to today.

Then there was a period where most work was heavy labor, heavy industry, construction and mining which was most suited to men. So it was not a case that males forced women to be at home but this was just how society was.

By the time women were marching for their rights things were already changing. The Pill and new support with womens sanitary was probably one of the biggest influences that allowed women into the workforce. Industries began to change with factory work, admin and health support which suited women.

So there were other factors that caused males to be dominate work and certain industries until society as a whole changed technically.

Of course males took advantage at times for example in certain disciplines like STEM which we needed to open up at all. BUt in reality as studies have found that when a society if equal and allows people to freely choose they work and career it seems women naturally choose Human services and males choose STEM.

Thats why I disagree with the narrow view that all differences, all inequality is caused by a victim and oppressor relationship and that to have an equal society we much have equal outcomes rather than equal opportunity. Equal outcomes ignores the individual and natural differences between genders and each individual person who is unique and not the sum of their identity group.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No, we don't. Wile there re is a problem of indiscipline in some schools and there is bad behaviour in society, it has never been solved by corporal punishment. There seems to be an assumption that parents not 'slapping' their infant children has led to these widespread social problems. That, I think, is an absurd conclusion.

If it were true then there would be some justification for physical punishments for minor crimes. I don't believe anybody wants that.
First I think its not a case of "not slapping" has led to a dicipline and bad behaviour problem. Its "not slapping" and 'not having any serious consequence or punishment" for bad behaviour that has led to poor dicipline and bad behaviour because obviously when young people know theres not really any serious consequernce for their behaviour they will take advantage and push their luck.

The Do Gooders came along and protested that punishment and consequences were oppressive and inhumane. Instead of diciplining with serious consequences (not physical punishment) they thought making a kid feel happy all the time and protecting them from the slightess discomfort and putting them in cotton wool would solve their behaviour problems. But it didn't, it made things worse.

By the way this is a society wide belief that feelings are the measure of morality. If something makes people feel aweful, suffer, feel denied, then it must be wrong and must be avoided. Feeling good, pleasure, happy all the time is morally good. Based on feelings anything can be made out as oppressive if it makes someone feel sad or uncomfortable.

Second I think the breakdown in dicipline and the bad behaviour as a result is a symptom of a bigger problem of the family breaking down. The family structure that allowed good child rearing has been destroyed. Single parent and fatherless families have massively increased. That initself undermines being able to bring up kids properly and is often associated with child behavioural problems.

There needs to be a strong family connections where the parents are respected and fathers are teaching their sons to be respectful and decent humans. Where kids feel safe and secure and loved.

That cannot happen when the very foundation is being ripped right from under kids. We don't even know what a father is anymore let alone have strong and kind fathers. But that was the aim all along of the academic ideologues and activists to undermine and destroy the family.

It use to be that what was really good for you, what taught you a lesson. how you grew to become a better person was through suffering and pain and then looking at yourself, facing reality. It was out of this that we grew and learnt. When people did wrong they knew they had to face uo and take the punishment. There was some guilt and reflection for the harm done to others. This was a truth principle which we have built our society on.

I think the threshold of what is tolerated as being bad has risen where what we once thought was not acceptable is now acceptable.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,882
2,517
Worcestershire
✟160,866.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Disciplinary actions on children that you are responsible for are often illegal if you do them to another person you are not responsible for. Grounding your child is fine, but do that to someone outside of your household or care and that's wrongful imprisonment. Confiscating your child's toys is fine, but if you do that to someone outside of your household or care, that's theft. Forcing your child to work to pay for something he or she might have broken is fine, but if you do that to someone outside of your household or care and don't have all your i's dotted and t's crossed, that's slavery. So we can't use just any example of something being illegal if you do it to someone outside of your household or care on the street as a valid test for whether or not it may be legitimately used as a means of disciplining a child under your care. Therefore, using this means to classify any and all forms of corporal punishment as assault is not valid.
But what is the difference between hitting a child and hitting an adult? It seems to me to be a simple, direct question.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,882
2,517
Worcestershire
✟160,866.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
First I think its not a case of "not slapping" has led to a dicipline and bad behaviour problem. Its "not slapping" and 'not having any serious consequence or punishment" for bad behaviour that has led to poor dicipline and bad behaviour because obviously when young people know theres not really any serious consequernce for their behaviour they will take advantage and push their luck.
Poor behaviour or simple naughtiness should be addressed, intelligently and thoughtfully. My view is that slapping children is less effective than other disciplinary actions. I am all in favour of rigorous punishments when necessary - just not assaulting children. All the studies (and there have been many) indicate that physical punishments are less effective than others.

Slapping is quick and easy - and often the first or only resort of an inadequate parent. There is always a better option. Even done 'with love' it is still assault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Poor behaviour or simple naughtiness should be addressed, intelligently and thoughtfully. My view is that slapping children is less effective than other disciplinary actions. I am all in favour of rigorous punishments when necessary - just not assaulting children. All the studies (and there have been many) indicate that physical punishments are less effective than others.

Slapping is quick and easy - and often the first or only resort of an inadequate parent. There is always a better option. Even done 'with love' it is still assault.
There is a fine line between physical punishment being measured and someone losing control and abusing. In our stressed out lives its easy to react and go overboard. I tend to agree that physical punishment is not the best way to dicipline.

I think the real issue is that the authority parents have has been undermined partly because of the breakdown of families, partly because people don't even know what a father or mother represents anymore and partly because generally authority throughout society has been undermined.

I think it all starts with the family. If parents act as parents working together then kids understand their place and respect the authority of the parents. Its a relationship.

When figures of authority within society earn respect by also abiding by the same truth priniciples of law and order, respect for the law then we don't need a big stick to people most people in line. People come to respect the principles themselves as like a truth or natural law that enables society to function.

But these long held and hard fought principles are being undermined by modern society, by the breakdown of families, loss of fathers and the hypocracy of those in positions of authority.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,882
2,517
Worcestershire
✟160,866.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There is a fine line between physical punishment being measured and someone losing control and abusing.
I asked another poster about this and so far have received no response. A large person striking a small one strikes me as abusive, especially when the large person is in authority. I would be grateful if you could explain when a adult assaulting a child is not abusive.

(This is not a thread about the breakdown of society, itself a contentious issue.)
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,982
9,400
✟379,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
But what is the difference between hitting a child and hitting an adult? It seems to me to be a simple, direct question.
What's the difference between involuntarily detaining a child an involuntarily detaining an adult? Without context, your question is meaningless.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,698
963
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟245,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I asked another poster about this and so far have received no response. A large person striking a small one strikes me as abusive, especially when the large person is in authority. I would be grateful if you could explain when a adult assaulting a child is not abusive.
First as I said I don't advocate for physical punishment because its an unpredictable tool in the hands of some perhaps many which gets out of hand. But I also don't see how a measured slap on the backside by say a mother is being abusive so long as this is done within a respectful and loving relationship and not just smacking for the sake of it.

Technically the way abuse is determined nowadays even locking a kid in their room for time out, taking their phone or game and grounding them away from their friends or anything that denies them or makes them feel sad or deprived is considered abusive to some.

I mean if the punishment was to say deny access to phone or ground them someone could make the case that the child will be denied contact with their friends which then effects thenm psychologically which then effects them physically as psychological problems often do. What is the difference to actual physical punishment.

If the psychological harm from non-physical punishment (as punishment will always be seen as some sort of cost to the offender then technically all punishment can be seen as physically abusive. Thats according to the PC Wokists at least.
(This is not a thread about the breakdown of society, itself a contentious issue.)
Of course it is. If the family is considered the bedrock of society then when families breakdown then society breaks down. It is within broken families that child disicpline is undermined. It is within a broken society and families that kids get abused. Even in the name of diciplining a child.

It is the societal ideas and beliefs about what is family, what are parents and what makes good child rearing that cause problems with child dicipline. If families and society are broken down to the point that they have lost their ability to promote good families, law and order then this is going to be at the root of bad behaviour and disrepect.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Divide

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2017
2,577
1,231
61
Columbus
✟81,201.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I don't buy it that kids will have problems if they get knocked on their butt by their parents. I got knocked on my butt when I was a kid and I got the belt too. But I can see now that even with the whippings we asked for it. There was 4 of us kids and we were a how you say, a lively bunch?!

I didnt have emotional problems or depression or anything like that. I might have thought it was unfair at the time but not now. I can see their restraint now! Scripture backs me up, spare the rod and spoil the child. So when I raised my 2 boys, yeah, I lit them up when they needed it. You know what they got from it? Respect for their elders, respect for girls. Them boys aint depressed!

A belt helps a boy become a man and learn what's important. They have to have boundries.

What is this? Another way for rebellious teens to torture their parents?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,886
6,561
71
✟320,442.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Technically the way abuse is determined nowadays even locking a kid in their room for time out,
It is abusive and stupid. If a parent needs to lock their kid in to enforce a timeout they have already lost.

A kid or anyone else who is locked in is a disaster waiting to happen. The kitchen fire suddenly adds a dead child to the cost.

As I see it the huge problem with corporal punishment is that it almost always relies on the adult being bigger and stronger and often has at least hints of might makes right. Locking a kid in taps into all the same problems.

And what happens somewhere between 12 and 18 when at least for male children they are bigger and stronger than their parents?
 
Upvote 0