Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
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?
Yes locking kids in rooms doesn't make sense. It doesn't teach them anything. But then that is really the premise of society that just locks people up for doing wrong.

But many parents don't actually lock kids in but enforce a grounding. So technically the kid is free to defy this and go and this seems to be the end result when things get out of hand.

Also the same arguement can be made for locking kids in detention at school which seemed to be a common punishment. So perhaps this is the reason the SJW protested about all punishment being oppressive because they can rationalise all these measures are abusive and harmful.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,798
2,464
Worcestershire
✟155,877.00
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.
This seems to me to be a rather involved way of avoiding the question. In many countries physical punishment of children is illegal. In many more it is simply not done, indeed is considered abhorrent, unnatural. Where it is legal it is contentious.

Generally, the use of the cane, tawse or the biblical rod would be an assault - abuse. Whether a token slap on the behind or the back of the legs of a toddler is abuse or not, it is assault, by any definition you choose. What the toddler learns from this may well be to avoid it by not repeating the action that led to it; so at that level it can be effective. However, it may not be the only lesson for the toddler. 'Might is right' is another; the use of force is acceptable.

In the case mentioned above a father or mother struck a toddler after he or she dashed out onto the road. The lesson is nothing without telling him or her about the danger of traffic. That lesson is both more effective and less traumatic than the smack.. That is how it is done in many countries ad the infant death rate from road accidents is not greater. The smack is unnecessary.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
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.
Correct. My son is eight and he already knows more about the solar system, dinosaurs and Clone War era Mandalorian/Jedi/Sith politics than me.

I’m a proud dad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There was no issue about women and mens rights as everyone was poor and suffering compared to today.
This is incorrect. There were no women’s rights and the men were very definitely in a position of privilege. Go back long enough and a father would would be paid a cash sum if a daughter was raped because he could no loner expect a bride price and would have to support her.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
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.
Do you have kids? The way you talk about these things seems a bit removed.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
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.
No one thinks that. Where do you get this stuff from?
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
A belt helps a boy become a man and learn what's important.
Can’t believe I’m reading this. This is what you see in the supervillain’s origin story.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Divide
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,952
9,388
✟375,184.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
This seems to me to be a rather involved way of avoiding the question.
No, it demonstrates the poor logic suggested by the question.
In many countries physical punishment of children is illegal. In many more it is simply not done, indeed is considered abhorrent, unnatural. Where it is legal it is contentious.
Bandwagon fallacy.

Generally, the use of the cane, tawse or the biblical rod would be an assault - abuse.
Some people need it. But not everyone does, and that would be overkill for children that are small enough.

Whether a token slap on the behind or the back of the legs of a toddler is abuse or not, it is assault, by any definition you choose. What the toddler learns from this may well be to avoid it by not repeating the action that led to it; so at that level it can be effective. However, it may not be the only lesson for the toddler. 'Might is right' is another; the use of force is acceptable.

In the case mentioned above a father or mother struck a toddler after he or she dashed out onto the road. The lesson is nothing without telling him or her about the danger of traffic. That lesson is both more effective and less traumatic than the smack.. That is how it is done in many countries ad the infant death rate from road accidents is not greater. The smack is unnecessary.
You're describing a situation where a token smack on the back of the legs of a toddler would be justifiable. Of course, that would also come with a verbal rebuke. And there is no good reason to believe that it would make a bully or worse out of the child, or give the child other problems.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
3,798
2,464
Worcestershire
✟155,877.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
1.No, it demonstrates the poor logic suggested by the question.

Bandwagon fallacy.

Some people need it. But not everyone does, and that would be overkill for children that are small enough.


You're describing a situation where a token smack on the back of the legs of a toddler would be justifiable. Of course, that would also come with a verbal rebuke. And there is no good reason to believe that it would make a bully or worse out of the child, or give the child other problems.
I don't think this is an issue amenable to logic. And there is no fallacy. What I said is just factual.
 
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
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No one but a self absorbed psychopath thinks that.
Actually psychopaths don't feel much at all especially shame and guilt. Today feelings are the measure of morals. The idea of measuring morals through feelings is well recognised. But at times like during the 1920's where emotions become the only way to measure whats good, bad, real or fact.

This seems to be happening now in modern society. We have abandoned the gods and the long held moral truths we gained by our experience as our moral measure and having no measure of morality or whats real beyond ourselves we have turned inward to look for answers. THis naturally ends up with feelings becoming the ultimate measure of whats right and wrong and real in the world.

The political nausea when feelings replace facts
How feelings took over the world
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Do you have kids? The way you talk about these things seems a bit removed.
Yes I have kids. Though older I have witnessed the change in dicipline decline in schools and society. You only have to look at the level of teachers now wanting to quit because they cannot handle teaching within an environment where theres no real discipline and safty in schools.

More teachers are quitting over student behavior than for any other reason. Levels of student misbehavior are rising, but time-tested practices can help teachers minimize classroom chaos.

Two-thirds of teachers think of quitting over bad behaviour, survey finds
 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,171
8,320
up there
✟299,588.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
When a new and part time school psychology program came into being in the early 90s the kids were taught about their rights and immediately teachers and parents fell to false abuse claims simply because the kids were told they just had to speak out without proof. The more the kids tried to use their new toy, the more secure the school psychologist's position became in dealing with the now out of control youngsters. Win for job security but loss for a tried and true previous system.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This is incorrect. There were no women’s rights and the men were very definitely in a position of privilege.
THis seems silly to make a general sweeping statement about male privilege and males oppressing women throughout our entire history. It perhaps shows the ideological thinking rather than the reality of what happened.

For example the average peasant during the medievil times was poor. Everybody worked including kids. There was no concern about equal rights as people were just trying to survive. They worked together to survive.

Under Greco-Roman rule women were subservient. But once Christianity became the religion of the Roman Empire this changed womens status and rights where under marriage laws men and women were more equal and women had the right to property and the husbands estate once he died.

The Romans allowed adultery so women were treated as sex objects. CHristianity changed that and gave women more rights by putting an end to extra marital affairs.

It was males who invented the Pill and sanitary pads which freed women to be able to go out into society and work without worrying about being bound to the home pregnant or housekeeping.

As mentioned males ended up dominating work in our early history because most work was labour intensive and suited for men and not because they came up with some evil plot to deny women the right to work. Once work expanded into less manual labour women then began to move into the workforce.

Today things have almost done full circle where now there is less manual labour and more human service jobs which women now dominate. Are we to say that women are forming some oppressive matriarchy where they have privilege over males in modern society. No this is just a natural evolution of society.

Soon most jobs will be replaced by Ai then are we to say that robots are oppressing people. No once again that is the natural progression. Women in business will support the same things men do once they get there. If anything there is a class destinction of the rich and poor and the upper class don't care about gender. Women are happy to join men at the top of the working hiearchy when it comes to money and the privilege that goes with it.

Not everything was about one sex being evil to another but rather much was dictated by the times, the culture and the environmental factors that in how people lived.
Go back long enough and a father would would be paid a cash sum if a daughter was raped because he could no loner expect a bride price and would have to support her.
Yes that was the system back then. But your taking a small aspect of this system and twisting it out of context to make out that males were being oppressive. As part of the many variations of that system whicvh was based on property and inheritence which included the transfer of property through marriage.

There were different versions of this which included women and their families being gifted with money and property. There were also endentured slaves for which women did own as well.

This was a different time but it certainly was not some evil plot created by men to oppress women. It was an entire system for which women bought into as well just like they do today in joining males at the top of the work hiearchy and enjoying tho privilege that comes with it.

For much of our history males have naturally formed hiearchies when it comes to work and providing for families. They dominated as hunters out away from families to find food to survive, they dominated early manula work in building cities and infrastructuire and they dominated war as part of protecting our way of life. None of this domination was because they were evil oppressors. Only a small portion of men became tyrannical and oppressive.
 
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

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
THis naturally ends up with feelings becoming the ultimate measure of whats right and wrong and real in the world.
If anything that is down to popularism in politics. And who are the popularises in politics? That’s right: the right wing extremists like Trump and Johnson.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
I get this from the Wokist ideologues themselves who promote this ideology, the ones who claim Westernised discipline and punishment is oppressive.
How liberal discipline policies are making schools less safe
How liberal discipline policies are making schools less safe
Thais is just another example of dichotomous thinking. Not assaulting kids does not equal absurd discipline policies. Discipline is not impossible without violence.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Thais is just another example of dichotomous thinking. Not assaulting kids does not equal absurd discipline policies. Discipline is not impossible without violence.
I don't know would you call students standing up to teachers, spitting at them, threatening them and disrespecting them and causing teachers to want to quit absurd policies.

If that is what the policies are producing then they are absurd policies.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
11,893
7,309
51
✟305,453.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
If that is what the policies are producing then they are absurd policies.
When you have demonstrated that not using corporal punishment on kids predicts a significant amount of the variance of such behaviour I'll concede the point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paidiske
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
12,416
923
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟240,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
When you have demonstrated that not using corporal punishment on kids predicts a significant amount of the variance of such behaviour I'll concede the point.
I'm not trying to show that 'not using corporal punishment' leads to "a significant amount of the variance of such behaviour". So you are misrepresenting what I am saying. What does that even mean to say "not using corporal punishment will cause a significant behaviour change". Its obviously going to cause changes in behaviour because you have not said if anything replaces that punishment.

I am saying that 'not using corporal punishment' but also not replacing that punishment with any other sufficent discipline and punishment leads to "variance of such behaviour" or poor behaviour.

In fact the replacement method for disciplining kids in recent times has resulted in little to no dicipline and punishment for bad behaviour and even rewarding bad behaviour.

As mentioned this was a specific idea by progressives who believed in the softly softly approach to discipline. But also because of whats called 'restorative justice' where the standards for discipline are lowered to acommodate minority groups who cannot meet the strict standards in the name of equality.

Seems strange that the principle for having discipline which is to teach people to meet a certain standard acceptable in society in schools is turned on its head by lowering standards to the person or identity group rather than making the person or identity group meet the standard society expects. The Wokists have got it backwards.

The evidence for this is the poor behaviour in families, schools and general society. But especially a breakdown in dicipline in families and the massive increase in single parents and in particular no father. This is then compounded by lower standard in schools which reflect the ideology behind policies.

I already gave you the evidence for this.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0