Smacked children more successful later in life, study finds

[Dyp100]

Yeah, I was smacked as a child, and what good has it done me? I'm pissed upon by everyone, not happy at all in my life, easily fearful of people, anti-social and I get bad grades.

And yes, I'll blame it all on the person who laid a hand on me, at least partly.

 

[Nomad]

Equal rights means equal beatings.

I completely agree. And since beating up a random stranger is frowned upon, so should beating up your kid. Equal beatings. And since one group's not supposed to get beat up, the other group shouldn't either. Either everyone gets beat up, or noone gets beat up. I prefer the second option, but that's just me.

On a serious note, by your reasoning then there is no difference between say a 13 year old girl and a 25 year old man, because they're equals right? So if those 2 have any form of a sexual encounter with each other there should be no repercussions on the older man's part, because they're equals, of course. No, I'm sorry, you're wrong. By society's standards that would be considered rape, and within good reason (a girl that age who is still busy developing has no business with a fully developed man). But I digress.

First of all, I can sense this is going to derail the discussion. Let's keep the comparisons to beatings in the future, to avoid derailment, okay? But still, I will meet your argument. In my eyes, there is nothing wrong with the 13<->25 matchup as long as they're both in on it. We have no right to impose our own personal sense of morals on other people, just as little right as they have to impose their morals on us. (Note: Not condoning violence is not a matter of morals, as it is physically harmful)

The issue, for me, would be if the 25-year old is, say, her teacher. Because then she would be in a position of dependency towards the man, and then you can't be sure the relation is voluntary. But all other things being equal, and they are both in on it, then I see no problem.

You're arguing that it's wrong because the law (through society's standards) says it is. And first of all, by that reasoning, smacking your child is also wrong. Because it's illegal in multiple countries. And you can never remove a law, because it's automatically sound - it's the law, after all. Second, the law and the standards are what they are because it's so hard to know if the 13-year old in that situation really wants to do what they're doing. It's there to protect the children, not because it's morally despicable. Because that's subjective.

If our History and Global Studies classes ever taught us anything, it's that there's no such thing as equals. Sure, we're all human, but we have always had social classes of different statuses. Why? Because there are those who lead, and those who follow, and that rule applies especially in parenting.

... If history has ever taught us anything, it is that society is not constant, but rather variable and adaptable. 100 years ago, universal sufferage was a rarity. The notion of women having the right to vote was, in large parts of the world, humorous at best. Just because something has been a certain way before, it doesn't mean the way it was is good. In fact, it almost certainly means the opposite - because society is, for natural reasons, steadily improving. Very few people actively work for a worse tomorrow.

For further input regarding social class, I refer you to my post history in the socialism/communism/ideology threads. Or you can just go read a random litterary work by Marx. Whichever you prefer. My point is that I've refuted that particular conservative chestnut more times already than I can count, and I'm not really inclined to do it again in a thread that doesn't really concern it.

By your definition a child should have the same authority as their parents, and I'll be damned if that's ever truly the case. Should they question their parents motives or reasoning? I believe so, but I don't think a child should ever be seen as "equal" (at least in that sense) until they've moved out on their own accord.

Then our opinions differ, and there's really not much more to say about it. Because there's no argument in there, just a moral statement. You make the moral statement that some people are worth more than others. I make the moral statement that everyone is worth the same. There is no truth in there, because it's a subjective judgement. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is inconsistency in your arguments. If you support human rights, you support equal value. Because it's stated specifically in multiple paragraphs - the opening ones even - in the UDHR that all people have equal value. If you support the UDHR, you support its central thesis. You, apparently, do not support the UDHR. I don't know about you, but others here that have argued against it in this thread have expressed support in other contexts. That bothers me.

Anyways, I went a bit off topic. To answer the question at the end, yes, I was physically disciplined when I was young, and I'm not some delinquent hellbent on opposing my parents at every corner. What you parents and scornful children need to understand is 2 things: 1) There's a HUGE difference between a sharp slap on the bottom to teach right and wrong and putting your child in a coma one night while you were drunk for back sass, and 2)supressing your child will cause them to act out more than anything else. Prime example would be the Puritans, they supressed their people and lo and behold, nymphos were born. Think on that for a bit.

... I don't know if that part was directed at me, because I never asked if you were beaten as a child. Nor do I particularly believe it has relevance to the discussion. Personal anecdotes do not go as evidence in intellectual debate. But still, I can't do anything except disagree with your point. Violence is always violence, magnitude does not change its nature. A Beetle is no less a car than an SUV. Again, you presented no argument, so I can't refute it.

 

[Bluesclues]

I was spanked as a child - I usually deserved it. My older sisters were also spanked. We were never daemon children, because we knew that if we started fighting then we'd get a smack from mum or dad.

I have 5 little cousins at the moment, all under aged 7. None of them have ever been spanked, and they are all the most pretentious, elf-entitled spoiled little brats I've ever seen. They bully each other, and when given a "stern talking to" tell their parents to fuck off (from a 4 year old!) and when sent to the "naughty step" they just wander off and get their DS and start playing. Then they get another "stern talking to" and maybe sent to bed.

The parents seem to think it's abhorrent to spank a child, and equate it to kicking the living hell out of someone (like many on this thread do). Yet they have such little control over their children, as the kids have learned that if they push the boundaries the worst that will happen is they'll get an early night and can try again the next day.

I'm going to spank my kids, but only as and when they deserve it. I do not condone child abuse - I doubt anyone here does - but sometimes the tactics of the current "be their best friend approach" just fail miserably, and the child needs to learn to *not* attack the dog with a knife, or to push a sibling down the stairs, or to run around the house kicking holes in the walls.

They used to be great kids when there were only 1 or 2 in each family (the 5 are split across 2 couples), but when they all get together they wind each other up and cause havoc, and know their parents just won't do anything about it (case-in-point, when my step-dad - their grandpa- tells them not to do something in a stern voice, they don't do it. But they don't listen to their own parents - I overheard one child say to a younger one "Don't listen to my daddy, he always says stupid stuff like that. He's not very clever, just do it anyway".

I feel that things like the "naughty step" and so on are decent reprimands - but there are times when the child needs a much firmer lesson. Spankings should only be administered for very bad behaviour. Mind you, I'm probably not going to be allowed kids - I am of the belief that if a kid is playing near a fire, and they go to touch it, I'll say "Don't do that, it's hot, it'll hurt" but I won't actually stop them. They'll learn soon enough haha.

Once a kid is older, like over aged 10, it's not that you don't hit a child because they'll hit you back (I'll still be under 50, and since I'll be a copper or in the army I'll be in pretty decent shape, certainly not fearing a little punk ) but rather that groundings, confiscations and "time-outs" become much more effective as the child is developing socially - they have friends, they have a greater attachment to the things they do in their free time than when they were smaller, and stopping them from going to the cinema with their friends is a greater punishment, particularly if they were looking forwards to it, when they do something really stupid or wrong.

A million times this.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I was spanked as a child - I usually deserved it. My older sisters were also spanked. We were never daemon children, because we knew that if we started fighting then we'd get a smack from mum or dad.

I have 5 little cousins at the moment, all under aged 7. None of them have ever been spanked, and they are all the most pretentious, elf-entitled spoiled little brats I've ever seen. They bully each other, and when given a "stern talking to" tell their parents to fuck off (from a 4 year old!) and when sent to the "naughty step" they just wander off and get their DS and start playing. Then they get another "stern talking to" and maybe sent to bed.

The parents seem to think it's abhorrent to spank a child, and equate it to kicking the living hell out of someone (like many on this thread do). Yet they have such little control over their children, as the kids have learned that if they push the boundaries the worst that will happen is they'll get an early night and can try again the next day.

I'm going to spank my kids, but only as and when they deserve it. I do not condone child abuse - I doubt anyone here does - but sometimes the tactics of the current "be their best friend approach" just fail miserably, and the child needs to learn to *not* attack the dog with a knife, or to push a sibling down the stairs, or to run around the house kicking holes in the walls.

They used to be great kids when there were only 1 or 2 in each family (the 5 are split across 2 couples), but when they all get together they wind each other up and cause havoc, and know their parents just won't do anything about it (case-in-point, when my step-dad - their grandpa- tells them not to do something in a stern voice, they don't do it. But they don't listen to their own parents - I overheard one child say to a younger one "Don't listen to my daddy, he always says stupid stuff like that. He's not very clever, just do it anyway".

I feel that things like the "naughty step" and so on are decent reprimands - but there are times when the child needs a much firmer lesson. Spankings should only be administered for very bad behaviour. Mind you, I'm probably not going to be allowed kids - I am of the belief that if a kid is playing near a fire, and they go to touch it, I'll say "Don't do that, it's hot, it'll hurt" but I won't actually stop them. They'll learn soon enough haha.

Once a kid is older, like over aged 10, it's not that you don't hit a child because they'll hit you back (I'll still be under 50, and since I'll be a copper or in the army I'll be in pretty decent shape, certainly not fearing a little punk ) but rather that groundings, confiscations and "time-outs" become much more effective as the child is developing socially - they have friends, they have a greater attachment to the things they do in their free time than when they were smaller, and stopping them from going to the cinema with their friends is a greater punishment, particularly if they were looking forwards to it, when they do something really stupid or wrong.

A million times this.

Seconded.

 

[Chipperz]

When I was a ****, I got hit. It worked pretty well...

 

[ucciolord1]

Nooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!
[sub]I'm a kid... don't smack me[/sub]

 

[LeonLethality]

This is what I have been telling everyone!

See when I was a young'n I was smacked when I did something wrong it I learned "Okay if I do that I get hurt, don't do it" much like you would normally if you touched a burning candle later on (About when I was 13) my parents started using the whole taking away what I cherish like my games or being able to go over to friends and practically doubled my chores for the day so I learned if I wanted to have fun I had to stay in line, and when I was 16 (now I am 17 and the same rule will apply until I move out) I am old enough to get a job and support myself so now if I do things wrong (I hardly do because I learned) they now threaten kicking me out of the house or paying rent to stay and I am turning out pretty damn well, I know this is how I am going to raise my children because I know this is the right way as it is how I was raised and shows how obedient I am and I am certainly not violent, the only time I do anything violent to another person is at tae kwon do practice while sparring (Or when I have to use it for self defence) other than that I am pretty non violent except for smacking my friends on the back of the head for being stupid.

 

[Jark212]

I got the belt and spatula when I was young...

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Were you smacked as a child?.

No i was not.I have near perfect parents.

Are you suggesting that not leveraging corporal punishment makes for a superior parent? I have to be honest, with a person like ME, sometimes it took a smack on the butt to hold my attention long enough for any discipline to stick. A parent who refuses to utalize a tool in use for millenia because of some silly moral high ground argument is doing themselves and the world an injustice in my book. Beating a child is rarely the answer, but on the occasion when it is necessary and useful, one should never hesitate.

 

[CrysisMcGee]

My mom smacked me when I was getting mouthy, back when I was 14. Shut me right up. So yes, I can see how it could work.

 

[TheOnceandFutureKing]

If I have kids I'm gonna beat them like Pinatas.

 

[effilctar]

Bender: Wow, your kid is great. How hard did you say you had to hit him?
Lady: Pretty hard...

[sub]That's the first thing that came to my mind.[/sub]

Anyway, the research questioned 179 teenagers and that in my opinion is waaaaaay too small of a sample size to draw any real conclusions from. Besides some could argue about the interpretations of the results; does it mean they are more optimistic or scared of failure?.

Still, I know Russell Peters [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn5jlrxcpkI] had it right; "somebody gonna get a hurt real bad!"

In further maths Statistics 2, 30 people is a significantly large sample... That said, you're right. I was smacked and I turned out good and without any behavioral issues other than the typical matricidal tendencies.

 

[Xojins]

I was spanked as a child, and I've done pretty well so far. I'm not exactly a violent person but will definitely be aggressive when I need to be.

 

[LeonLethality]

I got the belt and spatula when I was young...

My grandma could wield a wooden spoon very skilfully =/ dangerous tool I learned never to step out of line around her... especially in the kitchen.

 

[x0ny]

I used to get beaten with a bamboo stick, I did really well in school GCSE's and A Levels, and the first 2 years of University. Then I found World of Warcraft, and I didn't do as well as I could've done.

Anyway, having graduated, I now help run a chinese takeaway with my parents. I wouldn't say I'm successful, but I could be alot worse.

 

[lacktheknack]

Excuse me while I'm completely unsurprised. And yes, I've been smacked as a kid, and now I don't get into trouble.

Seems easy enough to me.

 

[Chrono180]

I think child "abuse" for the most part is a nonsensical concept. I mean, I was beaten by classmates, hit by my parents and molested by my teachers but I turned out ok. I mean, its perfectly normal to want to slaughter millions of people who remind you of people who hurt you, right? RIGHT?

 

[Bluesclues]

snip to keep text wall down

To give you a rebuttal to all your points in no particular order:

A) Comparing an SUV to a Volkswagen Beetle is comparing apples an oranges...almost literally. Apples and oranges may both be considered fruits, but they taste different, look different, feel different, and technically, are grown different (different trees and climates). The same applies to your cars. While they both may be considered automobiles, and SUV is very different from a Beetle in the sense that it can carry more passengers, it can carry more cargo, it has the ability to go faster, to handle more road types and weather climates, and it is safer due to how much more heavily built it is. On the negative side, it costs more money to build, maintain, and run. You can argue all you want that they are still both cars, but do to their build they perform in very different ways, and therefore belong in two different classes of the same overall creation. Also, the answer to that question was directed towards the original thread creator. It's amazing what you learn when you read.

B) To refer to your comment about my argument of wrong by society's standards...I argued that pedophilia is wrong by society's standards, and your defense is "so is smacking your child." If you want to really be specific, BEATING your child is what is considered illegal. While I do agree with you that hitting a random stranger is frowned upon, the same does not (or should not, in my opinion obviously) apply for familiar archetypes. Example: Let's say my brother and I fist fight over something meaningless. I'm not about to call the police on him because of that. Similarly, and returning to the topic of this thread, let's say I have a son, a young child, and I take him to the store and he is misbehaving, and despite several warnings he persists. If firmly tap his rear in the store, could you honestly say that you would have me arrested for child abuse? I'm not permanently marking my child as I am performing the action in such a manner that does nothing more than sting and humiliate. Nor am I striking him out of anger, frustration maybe, but certainly not of anger. What if I wait till I am home to strike my child as such? Will you follow me home only to attempt to witness it and report it accordingly? Because I could just as easily have you arrested for trespassing and harassment. I guess what I'm trying to relay with my convoluted examples is that nothing is so simply black and white, there are shades of gray. A serial killer and man arrested for a drunken bar fight do belong being punished equally, as I presume you are suggesting. They both belong punished, yes, but the magnitude of one situation is far worse than the other.

C) Yes, violence is always violence, and the world would be better off without it. But humankind is aggressive by nature regardless, as we've shown through evolution and expansion. While peace and harmony and cooperation are noble things to strive for, they are the things of fairytale, much like Marx's idea of communism. I didn't check your previous posts as you said, so I don't know what your view of ideologies are, but I do know that there's a good reason why Communism (or Marxism as it's now called since Castro says what he does is Communism) never works, and the same has applied to Socialism as well. By nature we just don't have the ability to comply with those ideologies. In the example of Communism, in my understanding it could never be applied for 2 reasons: 1) eventually the leader in power becomes corrupt (or his successor does, etc etc.), or 2) the people dislike the idea of having their hard work seen as equal to the work of a slacker and so they rebel and the economy withers and chaos and blah blah blah. You probably heard this argument before (or have made it).

D) Equal rights means equal beatings was meant to be a joke in reference women's rights and to the comment you made about hitting your wife. Hence why I followed with a paragraph that started "on a serious note."

Did I miss anything? Keep in mind please that I agree with you on a lot aspects I just don't see why you would consider a child equal to their parent in the aspect of respect. Human sure but parents have authority over their children and I feel they should be allowed to exercise it, within reason of course. If that includes a slap on the wrists or a temporary sore bottom, I don't see the issue with using it as a disciplinary measure...is it 100% right or perfect? No, of course not. But then nothing ever is. I'm tired of writing so...your stage.

 

[Shru1kan]

Bender: Wow, your kid is great. How hard did you say you had to hit him?
Lady: Pretty hard...

[sub]That's the first thing that came to my mind.[/sub]

Yes.

And I hope to see you later for tea.

Haven't you given up all hope on accomplishing anything in your life?


OP: Yeah, I was hit, yeah, I'm aggressive now. But I can't tell, anger runs in the family.