|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Mar 28, 2009 10:29:49 GMT -5
fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=60949fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=60948There have been a few quotes on the mainpage recently that have disturbed me a little bit. These people are hitting their kids with whatever they have lying around BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO HURT THEIR HAND. I don't like the idea of hitting kids at all, but I do think that there are some situations that it could happen. Like the time my little cousin almost ran onto the highway, my aunt picked him up and swatted him once, open-handed. But hitting kids for simple disobedience like refusing to take out the trash? That's over the line, and I think it's reprehensible that people still do things like this. Your thoughts? Am I just being stupid? Or does this disquiet anyone else?
|
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Mar 28, 2009 10:31:27 GMT -5
Clive Owen wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Mar 28, 2009 10:49:18 GMT -5
If you're hitting kids hard enough to hurt your fucking hand, you're abusing them. Fucking fundies, this makes me want to hurt my hand "disciplining" them. There are a few things I can't stand, abuse is one of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jebediah on Mar 28, 2009 11:10:41 GMT -5
There is definitely a difference between being spanked and being abused. My siblings and I were all spanked as children, and it does work. Once I had been turned over my moms knee and spanked, I never did whatever it was again. And I've never felt like I was abused.
But I agree with Vene, if you're hurting yourself, that's going too far.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Mar 28, 2009 12:11:38 GMT -5
That's the thing that stuck out to me. If you hurt your hand from hitting your kid, then obviously you are going way too far. And I think it's disgusting. If there's one thing I really hate, it's child abusers.  |
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Mar 28, 2009 12:57:33 GMT -5
Love it. Yeah, hurting your hand from spanking is definitely abuse. Basically hitting a kid out of pure anger is abuse. Come on, there aren't other ways of correcting a kid? |
|
|
|
Post by Caitshidhe on Mar 28, 2009 13:14:21 GMT -5
Unless you have a ridiculously low pain threshold, if you're hitting your kid hard enough to hurt your own hand then YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Just about everybody I know was smacked as a kid when they did really really really stupid or dangerous things, but not just whenever their parents felt they were being a pill. That's just wrong--and then the kids themselves are more likely to grow up and abuse THEIR children. Oh, boy, never-ending cycles!
I don't think that fundie Christians are more likely to abuse their children just because of their religion. It's just that the ones who DO are likely to use Christianity as a rationalization or a defense for their actions.
|
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 28, 2009 15:36:08 GMT -5
Unless you have a ridiculously low pain threshold, if you're hitting your kid hard enough to hurt your own hand then YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Just about everybody I know was smacked as a kid when they did really really really stupid or dangerous things, but not just whenever their parents felt they were being a pill. That's just wrong--and then the kids themselves are more likely to grow up and abuse THEIR children. Oh, boy, never-ending cycles! I don't think that fundie Christians are more likely to abuse their children just because of their religion. It's just that the ones who DO are likely to use Christianity as a rationalization or a defense for their actions. It's going to look more likely simply by virtue of the numbers of Christians in this country versus the rest of us. Though I wonder what the percentages are on abuse, and especially how many do blame it on the Bible. |
|
|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Mar 28, 2009 19:09:48 GMT -5
Unless you have a ridiculously low pain threshold, if you're hitting your kid hard enough to hurt your own hand then YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Just about everybody I know was smacked as a kid when they did really really really stupid or dangerous things, but not just whenever their parents felt they were being a pill. That's just wrong--and then the kids themselves are more likely to grow up and abuse THEIR children. Oh, boy, never-ending cycles! I don't think that fundie Christians are more likely to abuse their children just because of their religion. It's just that the ones who DO are likely to use Christianity as a rationalization or a defense for their actions. Yeah, my mom used to smack me if I was about to do something dangerous. I once tried to whack a hornet's nest with a baseball bat... my mom smacked my wrist for that one, but again, she kept her hand open and it didn't really hurt all that much. But it stopped me from every doing anything that idiotic again. I'll admit that kids can be little jerks, but that doesn't make it OK to hit them for behaving badly. I think that's reprehensible. There's a difference between smacking your kid to keep them from doing something really stupid, and beating them with random crap just because they did something that you didn't like. |
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Mar 28, 2009 19:19:08 GMT -5
It's going to look more likely simply by virtue of the numbers of Christians in this country versus the rest of us. Though I wonder what the percentages are on abuse, and especially how many do blame it on the Bible. I think it's because they make such a stink about being persecuted if they're busted for child abuse. The church is out there screaming about how it's their right to beat their children. They just make such a big stink about it when they're arrested. |
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 28, 2009 19:44:54 GMT -5
I think it's because they make such a stink about being persecuted if they're busted for child abuse. The church is out there screaming about how it's their right to beat their children. They just make such a big stink about it when they're arrested. Religious persecution: The last refuge of a scoundrel. This doesn't totally surprise me. I know a few people who respond with "No Government can tell me how to raise my kids!" So within a community like a Church (doesn't have to be a Church, but I'm not surprised if it's more frequent in them), I'm not surprised to see that sort of reaction. Especially if they feel "God" has entitled them. |
|
|
|
Post by gotpwnt on Mar 28, 2009 20:20:40 GMT -5
My mother tried spanking me. It didn't stop me from doing whatever it was that I was doing. Then she tried the "timeout" thingy. It also failed to keep me from doing what I was doing. Then she told me if I kept doing what I was doing, I was gonna end up like my father. That stopped me from doing what I was doing.
Different things work for different people. But hitting someone hard enough to hurt yourself is going to far.
|
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Mar 28, 2009 20:39:22 GMT -5
Unless you have a ridiculously low pain threshold, if you're hitting your kid hard enough to hurt your own hand then YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Just about everybody I know was smacked as a kid when they did really really really stupid or dangerous things, but not just whenever their parents felt they were being a pill. That's just wrong--and then the kids themselves are more likely to grow up and abuse THEIR children. Oh, boy, never-ending cycles! I don't think that fundie Christians are more likely to abuse their children just because of their religion. It's just that the ones who DO are likely to use Christianity as a rationalization or a defense for their actions. Thank you for reinforcing my decision to NOT BREED. My ex used his Christfaggotry to "rationalize" his abuse, and I *know* he would have abused any sprog we (hypothetically) would have produced. Yes, Fundies *are* more likely to be abusive, because "God told them to." |
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 28, 2009 20:51:46 GMT -5
My mother tried spanking me. It didn't stop me from doing whatever it was that I was doing. Then she tried the "timeout" thingy. It also failed to keep me from doing what I was doing. Then she told me if I kept doing what I was doing, I was gonna end up like my father. That stopped me from doing what I was doing. Different things work for different people. But hitting someone hard enough to hurt yourself is going to far. Hell, hitting someone that far is not necessarily needed in instances when dealing with adults, in self defense. Using it to discipline a child makes me seriously question your mental faculties. And a lot of other things, including motives. |
|
|
|
Post by gadfly on Mar 28, 2009 21:11:25 GMT -5
I'm not against spanking if it can be carried out in a non-abusive manner. My mom spanked me when I was little. She used her hand or sometimes a wooden spoon, and never bruised me (or injured herself, for that matter).
I think that the key to spanking effectively is not to spank a kid when you're still angry (i.e., keep control of yourself, which goes for any punishment you could dish out) and to not ritualize the whole thing. Keep the spanking as quickly done and quickly over with as possible, which is why I personally, were I to someday have children, wouldn't spank with an implement. I also wouldn't spank on the kid's bare bottom. I think that making the kid pull their pants down or doing that for them introduces a level of humiliation which doesn't need to be there... and plus, it can really hurt the kid sexually if they inadvertently become sexually aroused (which I have heard of happening).
So, yeah, I don't think that spanking is inherently wrong, but I also think that it can go wrong fairly easily, which is why a parent should talk to their kid first and use a loss of privileges or rewards if they are unsure if the kid's misconduct warrants a spanking. Sometimes losing a reward or a privilege can sting more than a not-so-hard swat on the butt.
|
|
