Consequences were the same

[Yugl]

studies can prove anything, stop acting like there's only studies that are against spanking.

here you go:

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/nurtur...ut-better.html






now we can argue the validity of this and other studies until the cows come home, but stop acting like there's no research out there.



btw, there's a study done that all convicted criminals eat bread. might want to avoid it.

Ksandra, just accused me of saying that there is no research on this topic and saying that there is only research against physical punishment. You realize you contradicted your assertions? Furthermore, neither of your accusations are correct. Can you point out where I said there is only research against physical punishment? You've committed the same error as your strawman bread study: You made broad interpretations from observations.

Read what's there, not what you want to be there. I said he countered research with anecdote. He claimed studies oppose physical punishment. He "countered" that with an anecdote. Am I not justified in saying that he countered research opposing physical punishment with an anecdote? You're trying your best to undermine the power of studies, but doing that does not undermine my statement since it only pertains to his (Acturus) actions.

Why is it so hard for you to admit that I've made valid points, and that swatting your kid isn't the end of the world, as long as it isn't done to the extreme, and the action is explain so the child understands why he got swatted?

Why is it so difficult for you to accept that I've proven that physical punishment is ultimately inferior to alternative punishments and that the repercussions that it entails outweigh the temporal "benefits" you presuppose it has? In other words, it should never come down to it if you're a good and innovative parent?
^ See how easy that is?

[Ksandra]

Read what's there, not what you want to be there. I said he countered research with anecdote. He claimed studies oppose physical punishment. He "countered" that with an anecdote. Am I not justified in saying that he countered research opposing physical punishment with an anecdote? You're trying your best to undermine the power of studies, but doing that does not undermine my statement since it only pertains to his (Acturus) actions.

that would be find if you didn't keep saying it, studies are out there we get it. doesn't mean we can't talk about experiences. my point is you keep acting like we should only talk about studies and nothing else.


our anecdotal evidence just proves that spanking can be an answer. No one here has said it's the only answer. The only people who insist we're saying that are the ones that are against it.


[edit] and way to miss the joke about the bread lol

[Abandon]

holy hell, how dense can one person be? hitting children to correct them has been a staple of the human condition for ages. It has been working for thousands of years, and all of a sudden, research says it doesn't work? Does that make any sense to you?

[Yugl]

that would be find if you didn't keep saying it, studies are out there we get it. doesn't mean we can't talk about experiences. my point is you keep acting like we should only talk about studies and nothing else.


our anecdotal evidence just proves that spanking can be an answer. No one here has said it's the only answer. The only people who insist we're saying that are the ones that are against it.


[edit] and way to miss the joke about the bread lol

I'm pointing out the absurdity of countering studies with anecdotal evidence. You are one experience. The studies are multiple experiences and tend to control for certain factors. The latter is particularly important because unlike personal anecdote that aims to retroactively justify causation, the experiment aims to alienate that from the outset. Furthermore, unlike personal memories, items are recorded so nothing becomes "muffled."

Now read my response to Abandon. There are lots of solutions that can work and give you the desired effect. Ironically, drugging, the method Abandon opposes, is one of those solutions. You could also silence the child by murdering them. You can discipline them by tying them up with a rope. You can shut them up by taping everything but their eyes, ears, and nose. If you're merely looking to qualify solutions as you suggest you're doing, then why have you not thought of and argued for these solutions?

My conjecture is that you find some or all of those solutions reprehensible given certain values, standards, and independent desires. Although (I imagine) you and other posters take this for granted, it's central to the tension we're dealing with. When Abandon claimed to have made a valid point, he was correct only in the technical sense (Formal Logic allows you to assume the premises to be true), but what most people strive for is soundness (Needing to prove that the premises are true). Given that values, standards, and independent desires vary from individual, the soundness of his claims will vary. In short, to charge that you've successfully qualified a position is to assert that you've internalized and reconciled the values, standards, and desires of the individual you're trying to convince. It is on this level that most proponents of physical punishment have failed because they often only speak in terms of preventing the phenomena.

[Ksandra]

Now read my response to Abandon.

When Abandon claimed to have made a valid point

I don't think you know what you're talking about anymore. what I quoted was something you were talking to acturus about, not abandon.


And again, we showed research, now we move on from there. thread would be p. boring if it was research only.

[Titanss]

everyone is so fucking sensitive now. Very different from when most of us grew up. A slap in the face or on the back of the head wasn't shit. Now it's assault

[Raytheon]

Quite an interesting read, and even more interesting debates going back and forth. I'd like to ask a question of you all, however:

How many of you actually have children of your own?

I ask this, simply because, saying what you would or wouldn't do, or what works and doesn't work, means jack shit unless you've been there and was faced with that decision. I'm not saying that if you don't have children, you don't have a valid point or can't make an argument, but simply, it's much easier to be an outside observer, critiquing, than actually making the decision for yourself.

We've all been kids though, and have seen it from that side one way or another. I know kids who were never beat that didn't disrespect their parents at every turn, and I see kids who got beat and just revolted harder. I've also seen the opposite for both. Personally, my dad would fuck us up if we did something bad/stupid enough. (Because I saw a post about minorities exchanging "my mom beat me" stories, I'd like to point out I'm white as Iron Kids bread)

Playing with fire: Beat with belt on bare ass, confined to bedroom for entire week.

Fighting with brother: Whatever I did to him, my dad did to me. I know I know, eye for an eye makes the whole world blind etc.

Countless other scenarios where I was pretty much being a douche and my dad beat the douchyness out of me. He never punched me in the face though. He also never beat me in front of public. I think this is key in the sense, being embarrassed hurts longer than being spanked.

I have a great relationship with my dad, I go over and hangout at his place, toss back a few and bullshit, like a son should do with his father when he's grown. I'm thankful my dad gave enough shit about me he wouldn't let me become some retarded asshole who just though he could get a away with shit. I'd even go as far to say it prepared me for lots of things in life. When I joined the military, what he says to me "Well, they can't do anything to you that I never did. And they can't take away your birthday, you'll be fine."

BEATING and DISCIPLINING are 2 very different things. Like all things, a time and a place.


Thanks for beating my ass when I needed it, Dad.

[Abandon]

i approve of raytheon's post.

[Ksandra]

wanted to point out to the belted/spooned/etc. people (mine was a broom!), when you have kids you need to avoid them. Not because it's harmful or destroys their brains or anything, but because hitting with an object is classified as excessive and will get child services on your asses. My friend had an issue where he hit his kid's butt with a belt and the kid told his teacher. The friend almost got his kid taken away because it was with a belt instead of the hand, and he had to fight pretty fucking hard to keep his kid. just wanted to give that warning. :3

[Acturus]

Read what's there, not what you want to be there. I said he countered research with anecdote. He claimed studies oppose physical punishment. He "countered" that with an anecdote. Am I not justified in saying that he countered research opposing physical punishment with an anecdote? You're trying your best to undermine the power of studies, but doing that does not undermine my statement since it only pertains to his (Acturus) actions.


Why is it so difficult for you to accept that I've proven that physical punishment is ultimately inferior to alternative punishments and that the repercussions that it entails outweigh the temporal "benefits" you presuppose it has? In other words, it should never come down to it if you're a good and innovative parent?
^ See how easy that is?

Let's be honest with ourselves here. I didn't "counter research with anecdote". I countered my perception of the research as I've read it with my own anecdotes. If we're going to invalidate my argument on the basis that those posting in this thread may only do so provided that they can find corroborated evidence in scientific study, then I'll be happy to take my leave along with the vast majority of rest of those posting. After all, as mentioned above, scientific study is generated to push a particular point of view anyway, and since our biggest concerns for kids over the last half-decade have been test scores and bullies, it's easy to find "research" that "supports" how kids become poor students and bullies.

The truth of the matter is that my "anecdotes" will influence how I raise my child significantly more than any study out there that I may or may not have read, and having read it, may or may not understand, and having understood it, may or may not agree with. I'm not one to play the whole "if you aren't in my shoes, then you don't get it," but this is precisely the situation as I see it. I was raised in a very specific way, with a very specific rewards/punishments system put into place by my parents, and I turned out pretty fucking awesome, relatively speaking. My very existence here and now and the success that I perceive that I have as a result of what brought me to here and now offers me more proof than any "evidence" published in a "scientific study".

i.e. I don't have the burden of pretending that I'm empowered by academic knowledge. I lived it, it worked, I'm going to continue it. And if it doesn't work as I try to continue it, I will change my processes until something does work.

As a result of my formative years, which you call anecdotal, but I call empirical, I can safely say that I will do my best to emulate the system of rewards and punishments that was imposed upon me, because empirically (anecdotally) speaking, it worked.

However, at the end of it all, I do agree that there are possible negative outcomes that could result from a child being brought up in a household environment where corporal punishment is used, but the key word in all of that is "environment", a sum total of the surroundings and behaviors.

Saying "spanking is bad, yo" for no other reason than you believe it and you read some stuff on the internet to support it is pretty myoptic, in my opinion. But hey, if you ever breed, or if you've bred and you're committed to the no spanking rule, have at it. I'm friends with a number of folks whose parents never raised a hand to them, and they turned out just as fine as I did. Of course, I'd like to believe it was because of more than just "daddy never spanked me", but unfortunately it's just an anecdote that I can't back up.

[Ksandra]

A+ Acturus

[Yugl]

I don't think you know what you're talking about anymore. what I quoted was something you were talking to acturus about, not abandon.

This is what I mean about reading what I write, not what you want to see. You think I'm telling you to review my response to Acturus since that is the post you quoted. However, I wrote that you should read my response to Abandon. This is is not a mistake. It is intentional because my response to him applies to you as well.

And again, we showed research, now we move on from there. thread would be p. boring if it was research only.

Accuracy and entertainment conflict (As we've seen with many cases in the media). If your justification is for the latter, then we're obviously meeting two different criteria since I am a proponent of the former. At this point, the thing you've encouraged is simply people speaking past each other while making occasional attacks to "get the upper hand."

Quick rebuttal:

Let's be honest with ourselves here. I didn't "counter research with anecdote". I countered my perception of the research as I've read it with my own anecdotes.

"Lets" is very misleading here. You are the one who made claims about research in that post. If you were being dishonest about it, then that is your own fault. Do not drag others into the problem.

If we're going to invalidate my argument on the basis that those posting in this thread may only do so provided that they can find corroborated evidence in scientific study, then I'll be happy to take my leave along with the vast majority of rest of those posting.

If you, like most religious figures, wish to prioritize anecdote over research, then you're free to do so. I don't find faith to be particularly good or bad as many people here do, but I will say that we're going to be talking past each other, so we might as well stop responding to each other.

After all, as mentioned above, scientific study is generated to push a particular point of view anyway, and since our biggest concerns for kids over the last half-decade have been test scores and bullies, it's easy to find "research" that "supports" how kids become poor students and bullies.

Are you suggesting that scientific research is subjective or are you accusing the people who conduct research of compromising the integrity of their work?

The truth of the matter is that my "anecdotes" will influence how I raise my child significantly more than any study out there that I may or may not have read, and having read it, may or may not understand, and having understood it, may or may not agree with.

So are you willing to grant that you're sharing your method of handling the situation regardless of whether the method is "good" or "bad"?

I'm not one to play the whole "if you aren't in my shoes, then you don't get it," but this is precisely the situation as I see it.

So in this situation you admit you're playing the "if you aren't in my shoes, then you don't get it," card?

I was raised in a very specific way, with a very specific rewards/punishments system put into place by my parents, and I turned out pretty fucking awesome, relatively speaking. My very existence here and now and the success that I perceive that I have as a result of what brought me to here and now offers me more proof than any "evidence" published in a "scientific study".

That's an absurd conclusion to reach. No controls. No formalization. Even worse, the "conclusion" is that you believe you turned out "fine." While I don't mean to use this as an ad hominem (SP), I think that people arguing they've turned out "fine", should specify what that means because I'm certain there are certain posters here whom people would argue did not turn out fine. The rest for later.

[quannum]

the stuff i've read says that spankings don't really matter one way or the other. the act of parenting as a whole, doesn't really matter. there are studies on identical twins separated at birth and they generally turn out the same behavior-wise. the culture/environment that the kid grows up in has a more significant role and you can think of parenting as just 1 aspect of culture. the kid's location, peer group, dna and just random chance are what shape them.

freakonomics and the blank slate talk about this.

[Ksandra]

Accuracy and entertainment conflict (As we've seen with many cases in the media). If your justification is for the latter, then we're obviously meeting two different criteria since I am a proponent of the former.

hey wall, nice to meet you.


my point was we did the research part already. responding to every person saying "that's not research that's anecdotal!" is lame and doesn't allow to take things a step farther especially considering there's research that supports both sides. spewing out links on the internet proves nothing.

[Raytheon]

Thanks Abandon.

As for the scientific studies, I don't know how to take these most of the time. A study is just a study, and the fact that you can find proof supporting both sides even further confuses me. Different doctors, different test subjects, different environments, scenarios, just too many different variables to come to a conclusion that is accepted as 'the norm'.

Personal experience has always been enough for me, but I'm not against learning about what a scientist found out during their research. I just take it with a grain of salt and see if it even remotely resembles my circumstance.

As people, I would assume we could all agree there is a distinct line between discipline and going overboard. The spanking or whatever shouldn't cripple, break bones, cause bleeding, or any other long-term damage. Personally, it would seem that it's just 1 tool used for a 'shock-and-awe' effect. If you don't follow that up with some conversation of why you physically disciplined the child in the first place, like, "This is what you did wrong, this is why it is wrong, and this is why I disciplined you", you're not finishing the job.

As a dad of a 3yo and 1yo little girls, it's a rough job. Nobody has all the answers, and as someone else stated, there's no 'one-size-fits-all' disciplining of children.

Should this girl have got punched in the face? Naw. Should her dad keep her dumbass off the internet and actually pay attention to wtf she's doing? Yes. He didn't fail when he hit her, he was already failing as a parent when she's posting these videos and saying crazy shit an 11yo girl shouldn't be saying.

meh, /offsoapbox

[Uzor]

holy hell, how dense can one person be? hitting children to correct them has been a staple of the human condition for ages. It has been working for thousands of years, and all of a sudden, research says it doesn't work? Does that make any sense to you?

Well; just because mankind has done or believed something for a long time, does not necessarily make it the best alternative. I mean, mankind for a long time believed the earth to be flat, for example. So yes, it would make perfect sense to me if research would show that not spanking works best.

Sure, spanking might work, but that doesn't mean it's the best alternative. That's not to say spanking is the worst alternative either - I believe that's hard to judge. I think it's a matter of personality of the child, and that different methods work best for different kids, just like different learning methods in school work best for different people.

[Dimmauk]

LOL@ Spanking has worked for thousands of years. Other things "worked" but we stopped because it was wrong, like slavery. I could never hit my child, but that doesnt stop me from punishing her.

[Drex]

LOL@ Spanking has worked for thousands of years...like slavery

Man we got all these people taking the thread seriously and then you say some dumb shit like this, come on now

[NynJa]

hey wall, nice to meet you.

You are talking to Yugl...remember that

[Ksandra]

If you, like most religious figures, wish to prioritize anecdote over research, then you're free to do so.

so explain to us what makes you prioritize one research over the other as there is research on both sides. I know you'd never admit it, but I can pretty much guarantee that your decision that the "don't spank" research is "more valid" is because of your own anecdotes on real life views. you just hide it in that extra layer so that makes it ok amirite?

Are you suggesting that scientific research is subjective or are you accusing the people who conduct research of compromising the integrity of their work?

also, this is a rather ignorant of the internet response. there are studies for everything on both sides of a lot of issues. This one included. Of course a study gets less validity when you've got studies that prove both arguments. this goes for both pro and anti spanking. it suggests as most people have been saying this isn't a black and white situation and more likely that it's an issue of whatever your more comfortable/effective with doing when it comes to child rearing will be more effective.

You are talking to Yugl...remember that

trufax, but then, what else am I supposed to do until I go tutor mah student? :3