The old belt (Parents using violence to correct you)

[Kahunaburger]

You have to realize that a child acts differently to their parent. Did you never disobey your parent after they lectured you? If you say no your lying, every child does. Sometimes you need to take it to the next level, usually when it involves them doing something stupid and dangerous. If I lecture them to not press buttons on the dvd player and see them do it again, when I see them try to touch a hot stove I am going to use a stronger method because I know lecture is only so effective. How can you say 100% its unwarrented? Thats idealistic and shortsited.

Yes, I have pretty much always done what I was lectured to do, as has everyone I have lectured. It's just good parenting - you don't need to exercise violence to exercise authority.

You usually see the child lying to their parent as a response to authoritarian parenting, which is associated with corporal punishment, yelling, or other examples of violent behavior. Authoritative parenting implies setting clear expectations and ensuring your child fulfills those expectations, and generally is more effective at achieving genuine behavioral change because the child *wants* to do the right thing.

Authoritative also involves following up on established punishments, which when kids are you is corporal. So wheres your argument now? Yes I took psychology as well and know what the parenting styles entail.

You apparently didn't pay very much attention in psychology, then. There's no 1-to-1 correspondence between parenting style and corporal punishment - authoritarian is more closely associated with corporal punishment, permissive is less closely associated with corporal punishment, and authoritative lies somewhere between the two. You can have authoritarian parents who never lay a finger on their kids, permissive parents who use corporal punishment at the rare times they discipline their kids, and so on.

 

[Kahunaburger]

You can look at the evidence I posted above, too.

Yeah sure. Just gimme a second. I have to gather all the "evidence" gathered by "professionals" that concludes that violent video games turn people in soul less psychopaths.
You can find evidence to support any dumbass theory if you look hard enough. Don't make it fact.
So it remains. Unless you have extensive knowledge of raising children yourself, your opinion is just as worthless as everyone else's so please do us a favour and stop talking about your "facts" and "evidence". Mmkay.

Lol anti-intellectualism. Do you also plan to vote for Sarah Palin?

 

[bombadilillo]

You have to realize that a child acts differently to their parent. Did you never disobey your parent after they lectured you? If you say no your lying, every child does. Sometimes you need to take it to the next level, usually when it involves them doing something stupid and dangerous. If I lecture them to not press buttons on the dvd player and see them do it again, when I see them try to touch a hot stove I am going to use a stronger method because I know lecture is only so effective. How can you say 100% its unwarrented? Thats idealistic and shortsited.

Yes, I have pretty much always done what I was lectured to do, as has everyone I have lectured. It's just good parenting - you don't need to exercise violence to exercise authority.

You usually see the child lying to their parent as a response to authoritarian parenting, which is associated with corporal punishment, yelling, or other examples of violent behavior. Authoritative parenting implies setting clear expectations and ensuring your child fulfills those expectations, and generally is more effective at achieving genuine behavioral change because the child *wants* to do the right thing.

Authoritative also involves following up on established punishments, which when kids are you is corporal. So wheres your argument now? Yes I took psychology as well and know what the parenting styles entail.

You apparently didn't pay very much attention in psychology, then. There's no 1-to-1 correspondence between parenting style and corporal punishment - authoritarian is more closely associated with corporal punishment, permissive is less closely associated with corporal punishment, and authoritative lies somewhere between the two. You can have authoritarian parents who never lay a finger on their kids, permissive parents who use corporal punishment at the rare times they discipline their kids, and so on.

If there's no 1 on 1 correlation then why did you take my statements as authoritarian? Why did you even BRING IT UP if it has nothing to do with it and I was referencing how it can be used in authoritative. Someone didnt pay attention to the posts.

 

[bombadilillo]

You can look at the evidence I posted above, too.

Yeah sure. Just gimme a second. I have to gather all the "evidence" gathered by "professionals" that concludes that violent video games turn people in soul less psychopaths.
You can find evidence to support any dumbass theory if you look hard enough. Don't make it fact.
So it remains. Unless you have extensive knowledge of raising children yourself, your opinion is just as worthless as everyone else's so please do us a favour and stop talking about your "facts" and "evidence". Mmkay.

Lol anti-intellectualism. Do you also plan to vote for Sarah Palin?

Its actually anti-cherry picker. Should I reference Tiger Mother which says beat your children often and is just as accepted as these sources and says the opposite?

 

[Kahunaburger]

You have to realize that a child acts differently to their parent. Did you never disobey your parent after they lectured you? If you say no your lying, every child does. Sometimes you need to take it to the next level, usually when it involves them doing something stupid and dangerous. If I lecture them to not press buttons on the dvd player and see them do it again, when I see them try to touch a hot stove I am going to use a stronger method because I know lecture is only so effective. How can you say 100% its unwarrented? Thats idealistic and shortsited.

Yes, I have pretty much always done what I was lectured to do, as has everyone I have lectured. It's just good parenting - you don't need to exercise violence to exercise authority.

You usually see the child lying to their parent as a response to authoritarian parenting, which is associated with corporal punishment, yelling, or other examples of violent behavior. Authoritative parenting implies setting clear expectations and ensuring your child fulfills those expectations, and generally is more effective at achieving genuine behavioral change because the child *wants* to do the right thing.

Authoritative also involves following up on established punishments, which when kids are you is corporal. So wheres your argument now? Yes I took psychology as well and know what the parenting styles entail.

You apparently didn't pay very much attention in psychology, then. There's no 1-to-1 correspondence between parenting style and corporal punishment - authoritarian is more closely associated with corporal punishment, permissive is less closely associated with corporal punishment, and authoritative lies somewhere between the two. You can have authoritarian parents who never lay a finger on their kids, permissive parents who use corporal punishment at the rare times they discipline their kids, and so on.

If there's no 1 on 1 correlation then why did you take my statements as authoritarian? Why did you even BRING IT UP if it has nothing to do with it and I was referencing how it can be used in authoritative. Someone didnt pay attention to the posts.

Note the words "associated with" in my post. I was pointing out that authoritarian parents more frequently utilize violence, and that violence doesn't lead to positive outcomes for authoritarian parents. I was also pointing out that the parenting methods that *do* function well don't rely entirely on the threat of punishment.

 

[Ninonybox_v1legacy]

A quick beat on the ass is acceptable, just don't go overboard and start throwing around punches and reverse suplexs.

 

[SillyBear]

I am secure in the knowledge that if you ever have a kid you will eat your words soooooo bad. I thought this way before I had kids. Its a lot different. Its really pointless debating it. You dont know so you can have whatever idealistic theory you want. Have fun being wrong.

I have a three year old child. I have never hit him. Millions of parents also do not hit their children, and most studies indicate between 40-50% of parents don't hit them. I just suggest you take a look at what professionals are saying and take it on board. There is serious, worrying evidence that shows a direct link between smacking children and complications from it. I just found a few more sources from psychological and pediatric societies in the UK and Australia if you would like to see them, but they are mirroring the advice I showed you earlier. Don't hit your children. It doesn't work and it doesn't do anything except make you feel better.

Yeah sure. Just gimme a second. I have to gather all the "evidence" gathered by "professionals" that concludes that violent video games turn people in soul less psychopaths.
You can find evidence to support any dumbass theory if you look hard enough. Don't make it fact.
So it remains. Unless you have extensive knowledge of raising children yourself, your opinion is just as worthless as everyone else's so please do us a favour and stop talking about your "facts" and "evidence". Mmkay.

I love the way you discount evidence gathered by well respected psychologists and pediatric academies that have cited irrefutable scientific studies and investigations. You must be a clever cookie!

Even if you disagree with some of the most well respected scientific organisations in the western world, you can't question the validity and accuracy of their studies.

But, if you'd prefer to throw that all out the window go ahead. It doesn't speak very well for yourself.

By the way, I've never seen any convincing evidence that proves video games are linked with psychopathy. All the "evidence" I've seen has been highly sensationalised and has had considerable flaws in the scientific method. The sources I posted above do not show any flaws in their method and are reliable and valid experiments.

 

[bombadilillo]

You have to realize that a child acts differently to their parent. Did you never disobey your parent after they lectured you? If you say no your lying, every child does. Sometimes you need to take it to the next level, usually when it involves them doing something stupid and dangerous. If I lecture them to not press buttons on the dvd player and see them do it again, when I see them try to touch a hot stove I am going to use a stronger method because I know lecture is only so effective. How can you say 100% its unwarrented? Thats idealistic and shortsited.

Yes, I have pretty much always done what I was lectured to do, as has everyone I have lectured. It's just good parenting - you don't need to exercise violence to exercise authority.

You usually see the child lying to their parent as a response to authoritarian parenting, which is associated with corporal punishment, yelling, or other examples of violent behavior. Authoritative parenting implies setting clear expectations and ensuring your child fulfills those expectations, and generally is more effective at achieving genuine behavioral change because the child *wants* to do the right thing.

Authoritative also involves following up on established punishments, which when kids are you is corporal. So wheres your argument now? Yes I took psychology as well and know what the parenting styles entail.

You apparently didn't pay very much attention in psychology, then. There's no 1-to-1 correspondence between parenting style and corporal punishment - authoritarian is more closely associated with corporal punishment, permissive is less closely associated with corporal punishment, and authoritative lies somewhere between the two. You can have authoritarian parents who never lay a finger on their kids, permissive parents who use corporal punishment at the rare times they discipline their kids, and so on.

If there's no 1 on 1 correlation then why did you take my statements as authoritarian? Why did you even BRING IT UP if it has nothing to do with it and I was referencing how it can be used in authoritative. Someone didnt pay attention to the posts.

Note the words "associated with" in my post. I was pointing out that authoritarian parents more frequently utilize violence, and that violence doesn't lead to positive outcomes for authoritarian parents. I was also pointing out that the parenting methods that *do* function well don't rely entirely on the threat of punishment.

Authoritarian parenting is so close to authoritative in effectiveness it might as well be negligible. Especially if one parent is authoritative and one is authoritarian. My access to the study is through my college library site so I cant post the link, but it is based off of a lot of factors and while authoritative is ideal, you are right. Authoritarian (especially one parent designated as that role) is very very close.

 

[thelonewolf266]

Its quick, its effective and it works.
Not hitting your kids just turns them into spoiled little cunts who think they are invincible.
If you love your kids, beat them.

So you're saying anyone that wasn't beat as a child is a ****?
I take it your parents where vehemently opposed to violence then.

 

[Kadoodle]

Its quick, its effective and it works.
Not hitting your kids just turns them into spoiled little cunts who think they are invincible.
If you love your kids, beat them.

That was a dumb response. You really have no idea. It's not effective. It teaches violence. It teaches resentment. Children who are beaten for punishment have a higher chance of becoming criminals. They're not fucking dogs. There are other ways to teach a child right from wrong that work just as well if not better.

If you really love your child, then you want him/her to love you back. You do not achieve the latter with violence, such only brings fear and resentment.

Now I'm all for a slap in the face if the kid is being a ***** or won't shut up. But you don't draw blood, you don't bruise, you do not maim. That counts as cruel and unusual punishment, and is illegal.

 

[dyre]

I am secure in the knowledge that if you ever have a kid you will eat your words soooooo bad. I thought this way before I had kids. Its a lot different. Its really pointless debating it. You dont know so you can have whatever idealistic theory you want. Have fun being wrong.

I have a three year old child. I have never hit him. Millions of parents also do not hit their children, and most studies indicate between 40-50% of parents don't hit them. I just suggest you take a look at what professionals are saying and take it on board. There is serious, worrying evidence that shows a direct link between smacking children and complications from it. I just found a few more sources from psychological and pediatric societies in the UK and Australia if you would like to see them, but they are mirroring the advice I showed you earlier. Don't hit your children. It doesn't work and it doesn't do anything except make you feel better.

Yeah sure. Just gimme a second. I have to gather all the "evidence" gathered by "professionals" that concludes that violent video games turn people in soul less psychopaths.
You can find evidence to support any dumbass theory if you look hard enough. Don't make it fact.
So it remains. Unless you have extensive knowledge of raising children yourself, your opinion is just as worthless as everyone else's so please do us a favour and stop talking about your "facts" and "evidence". Mmkay.

I love the way you discount evidence gathered by well respected psychologists and pediatric academy's that have cited irrefutable scientific studies and investigations. You must be a clever cookie!

Even if you disagree with some of the most well respected scientific organisations in the western world, you can't question the validity and accuracy of their studies.

But, if you'd prefer to throw that all out the window go ahead. It doesn't speak very well for yourself.

By the way, I've never seen any convincing evidence that proves video games are linked with psychopathy. All the "evidence" I've seen has been highly sensationalised and has had considerable flaws in the scientific method. The sources I posted above do not show any flaws in their method and are reliable and valid experiments.

Have you considered that HoboSteve and bombadilillo might just enjoy the power of being able to make their children crawl in fear at a whim?

The fact that people could so adamantly defend the beating of children against all psychological evidence surely means that they just like having things their way, right or wrong.

 

[callmegreen]

I find There to be a HUUUGGGEE gap between spanking/smacking upside there head and fucking BEATING THEM!! because when me and my little brothers were bad we'd get a hard spanking and a talking to but FUCKING BEAT WITH A BELT!?! .... thats overboard

 

[Kahunaburger]

You can look at the evidence I posted above, too.

Yeah sure. Just gimme a second. I have to gather all the "evidence" gathered by "professionals" that concludes that violent video games turn people in soul less psychopaths.
You can find evidence to support any dumbass theory if you look hard enough. Don't make it fact.
So it remains. Unless you have extensive knowledge of raising children yourself, your opinion is just as worthless as everyone else's so please do us a favour and stop talking about your "facts" and "evidence". Mmkay.

Lol anti-intellectualism. Do you also plan to vote for Sarah Palin?

Its actually anti-cherry picker. Should I reference Tiger Mother which says beat your children often and is just as accepted as these sources and says the opposite?

Tiger Mother is kind of a punchline, actually. It's more effective as proof that you can sell books by pandering to racist stereotypes.

 

[zarguhl]

It's no different to hitting an adult. But if you hit an adult you get arrested or get hit back. You get away with hitting kids because they can't defend themselves and the law won't protect them either.

If an adult was small so couldn't defend themselves and people kept hitting them, then they couldn't get any help from the law, they'd go crazy.

Same thing happens to kids. They go crazy. i.e. become "mature" (brainwashed, beaten down) adults.

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

To get your answer, just look at the state of kids today. I'm a very bad person to ask about this right now, as a little five-year-old bastard ran screaming into my job interview today and almost certainly fucked it seven ways from Sunday.

My parents hit me when I stepped out of line, and you know what? I'm fucking glad that they did. I'm a big enough man to admit that I deserved better than half of what I got, and it taught me to respect their authority.

Recalcitrance is hardly a new trend, as far as I can tell there have always been some kids who are simply insolent little shits. Personally I hate kids and have no intention of having them, but as a general rule I'm pacifistic and I don't see why violence is needed in order for effective discipline.

 

[Kahunaburger]

snip

So, in other words, you ignore evidence you don't like and assume everyone else does so as well.