Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(My Fox DC)   Study shows spanking boosts odds of mental illness. Could we just do it until things get hard for me?   (myfoxdc.com) divider line 274
    More: Interesting, anxiety disorders, mental illness, physical punishment, positive reinforcement  
•       •       •

4025 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Jul 2012 at 2:04 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



274 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-02 04:40:54 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: All you farking retards that claim "Kids today are so much more undisciplined" need to shut your farking mouths. Let me guess, every year the football players at your high school get smaller and smaller, basic training or any other indoctrination you went through gets easier and easier, TV/music is shiattier. Guess what you old piece of shiat, if the world actually reflected your view of "Pussification" we would be nothing more than a gaggle of mouthbreathing, undisciplined assholes that can barely get to the fridge without falling through a coffee table. God I hate that shiat so much. No, the world is not going to hell and the population isn't slowly drifting into oblivion. You are just a dumb, old piece of shiat that needs to die already and stop talking shiat about every generation that comes after yours. And if you have to hit your kid in any form it is because you are a goddamn ape.


I mad too
 
2012-07-02 04:41:05 PM  

Wangiss: When my children engage in dangerous behavior, like running into the street or hitting each other with hard objects, I spank them. They're just curious about the world--they're 3 and 4 years old--but I feel the need to memorably reinforce the significance of their choices. Do you think that's wrong?


I think it's wrong because it puts children in a separate class where they have fewer rights and less access to justice.

I've got two responses in terms of "what to do":

1. Take a look at how we treat adults in dangerous situations. Factory workers, for example, get slammed day-in and day-out with safety-as-a-behavior messages. As it turns out adults are not that great at things like this either, so without identifying a particular difference in the way a child reacts we should probably follow the same best-practices available to adults.

2. If your child is too young to understand the danger, making it memorable won't help because they will not be able to identify the situation in the first place. If your child can understand the danger making it memorable is useful, but be careful what you're making memorable -- hitting a child may help them recall the situation, but how do you know they're associating the abstract concept of the danger with the pain you're causing? Also consider other options that might more reliably make that association -- i.e. the same things we do to help adults remember (or dogs, for that matter), none of which involve pain.

I don't give a shiat if you think it's wrong in a stop-judging-me sense, but I am interested in learning what you (would) do in situations like that. Do you also object to yelling?

To be clear, I'm not judging anyone along the lines of "you're a bad person" -- "spanking" is widely accepted in the US and clearly most people aren't doing it because they like hurting children. But like we've changed our societal view on the rights of blacks I'd like to change our societal view of the rights of children.
 
2012-07-02 04:41:39 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: All you farking retards that claim "Kids today are so much more undisciplined" need to shut your farking mouths. Let me guess, every year the football players at your high school get smaller and smaller, basic training or any other indoctrination you went through gets easier and easier, TV/music is shiattier. Guess what you old piece of shiat, if the world actually reflected your view of "Pussification" we would be nothing more than a gaggle of mouthbreathing, undisciplined assholes that can barely get to the fridge without falling through a coffee table. God I hate that shiat so much. No, the world is not going to hell and the population isn't slowly drifting into oblivion. You are just a dumb, old piece of shiat that needs to die already and stop talking shiat about every generation that comes after yours. And if you have to hit your kid in any form it is because you are a goddamn ape.


teamfrancis.emrydesign.com
 
2012-07-02 04:41:40 PM  

profplump: You might mean a specific form of hitting, but it's still hitting. And our societal tolerance doesn't limit parents to the particular action in which you engage or approve of; basically anything a parent calls "spanking" and that doesn't rise to the level of a beating is tolerated.


That's bullcrap. That's like saying a unicycle is the same as a Porsche - they both can be used for transportation, so that makes them the same thing, right? A person who hits their kids is causing injury - but spankings don't injure, they sting. There's a big difference.
 
2012-07-02 04:42:20 PM  

buckler: Wangiss: profplump: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Except when we incarcerate them with a bunch of other savage people who will ALSO beat the sh*t out of them. Sorry dude, we're WAY meaner to grown-ups than we are kids.

I agree, prisions are a bad time. And in a thread about prisons I'd rant about the tolerance of violence there.

But again, the violence there is illegal even if it does happen. Even if we turn a blind eye we at least acknowledge that it's wrong. Whereas people here are openly saying that children are valid targets for violence at the whim of their parents, with no consequences.

When my children engage in dangerous behavior, like running into the street or hitting each other with hard objects, I spank them. They're just curious about the world--they're 3 and 4 years old--but I feel the need to memorably reinforce the significance of their choices. Do you think that's wrong?

I don't give a shiat if you think it's wrong in a stop-judging-me sense, but I am interested in learning what you (would) do in situations like that. Do you also object to yelling?

/Learning here.

I don't. But you later need to engage in periodic rewards for proper behavior, coupled with loss of privileges for inappropriate behavior, then wean them off rewards while getting them to understand that proper behavior leads to its own rewards, and failure to do so leads to its own punishments. It always worked for me.


Okay, I'm easing into this. My 4-year-old son is getting longer-term rewards and short-term positive reinforcement enough, I think. Thanks for the positive reinforcement.
 
2012-07-02 04:43:22 PM  

profplump: LaraAmber: I was responding to the "why don't we use physical exercise as a punishment" that you said. Because they a. won't do it and b. won't understand it's a punishment.

They won't understand physical exercise as punishment. But they will understand hitting. Whereas dogs are too stupid to understand hitting.

At what point do children become smarter than dogs, so that hitting is justified, and at what point do the become smart enough to understand other, non-hitting punishments?


I never claimed that dogs are too stupid to understand hitting. My dog would definitely understand if I hit her with a stick (my open hand would be seen as rough affection in her eyes).

Smart enough to understand other non-hitting punishments? Depends on the offensive, but about age 5. For some things it's about starting to understand cause and affect. For others, developing a sense of empathy. For others, developing the an understanding of delayed gratification/punishment. (Why spanking at my son's age only works if done immediately.)

When my son is older he will understand the idea of losing privileges later for a behavior done now. (TV, computer, etc.) He will also respond to "and how would that make you feel if he did that to you" and discussing the reasons behind rules. At age 2 he doesn't get all that. But he does understand "mom said no and if I do it anyway, I will go over her knee". He's learning to listen and considering I'm still his favorite parent, the spankings don't seem to be bothering him much.

I think that's the real reason kids take so long to potty train. The diaper is extra padding.
 
2012-07-02 04:45:59 PM  

profplump: Wangiss: When my children engage in dangerous behavior, like running into the street or hitting each other with hard objects, I spank them. They're just curious about the world--they're 3 and 4 years old--but I feel the need to memorably reinforce the significance of their choices. Do you think that's wrong?

I think it's wrong because it puts children in a separate class where they have fewer rights and less access to justice.

I've got two responses in terms of "what to do":

1. Take a look at how we treat adults in dangerous situations. Factory workers, for example, get slammed day-in and day-out with safety-as-a-behavior messages. As it turns out adults are not that great at things like this either, so without identifying a particular difference in the way a child reacts we should probably follow the same best-practices available to adults.

2. If your child is too young to understand the danger, making it memorable won't help because they will not be able to identify the situation in the first place. If your child can understand the danger making it memorable is useful, but be careful what you're making memorable -- hitting a child may help them recall the situation, but how do you know they're associating the abstract concept of the danger with the pain you're causing? Also consider other options that might more reliably make that association -- i.e. the same things we do to help adults remember (or dogs, for that matter), none of which involve pain.

I don't give a shiat if you think it's wrong in a stop-judging-me sense, but I am interested in learning what you (would) do in situations like that. Do you also object to yelling?

To be clear, I'm not judging anyone along the lines of "you're a bad person" -- "spanking" is widely accepted in the US and clearly most people aren't doing it because they like hurting children. But like we've changed our societal view on the rights of blacks I'd like to change our societal view of the rights of children.


Of course children are a separate class. They can't have sex with adults; they can't buy insurance; they are legally required to be in school. You have a beef with that? You're the first I've encountered.

as for alternative options, I see where you're coming from.
 
2012-07-02 04:46:19 PM  

profplump: I'd argue that hitting children is often not done in any way that provides a predictable structure or reinforces the particular lessons parents want to pretend it does -- it's often done somewhat capriciously when parents are frustrated and reinforces the idea that making mother mad will get you hit.

But even assuming it was always administered predictably, why don't we use the same "structure" for adults?

/ For that matter, why do dog trainers tell us not to hit dogs?


You are correct. Spanking is often not used in the constructive and detached manner it should be. I can only speak from personal experience as my parents only spanked me five time in my life, all before the age of 12. My dad always told me that he would never swat me in anger and after the spanking, I was lectured so as to understand why spanking became my punishment versus a simple lecture or timeout.

The same structure is used for adults in the sense of verbal warnings, verbal reprimands, fines and tickets, and then prison sentencing. Adults should already understand and obey the structure of society. If a child steal from their mother's purse or father's wallet, you ask them to understand if they understand why this is wrong (like verbal warning or ticket). If the behavior persists, it results in verbal reprimand and fine (timeout for a child, probation or small jail time for an adult), and if the behavior then continues to other's property, a spanking can result (prison time).

I assume that people say never to spank a dog since most will react out of anger and not out of teaching the dog to negate that impulse. But you don't start with hitting, it becomes the last resort to get the dog's attention. First you start with verbal commands (NO! for bad behavior like nibbling and jumping), then come more severe consequences such as physical clues that the behavior will not be rewarded (you don't pick up a dog you are reprimanding nor do you pay it attention for consistently bad behavior therefore, standing with your arms crossed and your body language away from them. These in fact are techniques used by the Supernanny as well as dog trainers like Victoria Stillwell from "It's Me or the Dog". For increased bad behavior such as aggression, a simple detached smack on the behind followed by a sharp No! associates the punishment with the behavior. This has to be consistent and firm.

I have trained three chows, one cocker spaniel, and one pug. I have rarely used spanking because the verbal and physical cues should be enough. These are my personal experiences just like parenting is a personal experience tailored to the personality and inherent nature of the child/dog.

Good behavior should be rewarded; bad behavior should be reprimanded. There are levels to the reprimand, but good teaching should ensure that bad behavior never takes root. None of my chows have ever bitten me or anyone else (yes, anecdote) and I believe this not to be accidental, but due to consistent upbringing with love and affection as well as discipline.

In nature, dogs will nip their siblings for bad behavior, and alphas in particular use both verbal and nonverbal cues to train the pack.
 
2012-07-02 04:46:46 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: TV/music is shiattier


C'mon now. That's CLEARLY true.
 
2012-07-02 04:47:41 PM  

Wangiss: Okay, I'm easing into this. My 4-year-old son is getting longer-term rewards and short-term positive reinforcement enough, I think. Thanks for the positive reinforcement.


Periodic positive reinforcement really is the most powerful motivator. Much better that the kid actively seek out ways to do right and please you than to be unwilling to make a move out of fear of pain.
 
2012-07-02 04:47:53 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: All you farking retards that claim "Kids today are so much more undisciplined" need to shut your farking mouths. Let me guess, every year the football players at your high school get smaller and smaller, basic training or any other indoctrination you went through gets easier and easier, TV/music is shiattier. Guess what you old piece of shiat, if the world actually reflected your view of "Pussification" we would be nothing more than a gaggle of mouthbreathing, undisciplined assholes that can barely get to the fridge without falling through a coffee table. God I hate that shiat so much. No, the world is not going to hell and the population isn't slowly drifting into oblivion. You are just a dumb, old piece of shiat that needs to die already and stop talking shiat about every generation that comes after yours. And if you have to hit your kid in any form it is because you are a goddamn ape.


I assume that, after wading through that vitriolic screed, you are inviting us all to your lawn?
 
2012-07-02 04:48:24 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: TV/music is shiattier

C'mon now. That's CLEARLY true.


Since 1980
 
2012-07-02 04:49:05 PM  

PeterPipersPickledPecker: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: All you farking retards that claim "Kids today are so much more undisciplined" need to shut your farking mouths. Let me guess, every year the football players at your high school get smaller and smaller, basic training or any other indoctrination you went through gets easier and easier, TV/music is shiattier. Guess what you old piece of shiat, if the world actually reflected your view of "Pussification" we would be nothing more than a gaggle of mouthbreathing, undisciplined assholes that can barely get to the fridge without falling through a coffee table. God I hate that shiat so much. No, the world is not going to hell and the population isn't slowly drifting into oblivion. You are just a dumb, old piece of shiat that needs to die already and stop talking shiat about every generation that comes after yours. And if you have to hit your kid in any form it is because you are a goddamn ape.

I assume that, after wading through that vitriolic screed, you are inviting us all to your lawn?


fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.
 
2012-07-02 04:50:06 PM  

buckler: Wangiss: Okay, I'm easing into this. My 4-year-old son is getting longer-term rewards and short-term positive reinforcement enough, I think. Thanks for the positive reinforcement.

Periodic positive reinforcement really is the most powerful motivator. Much better that the kid actively seek out ways to do right and please you than to be unwilling to make a move out of fear of pain.


Oh, hells yes. I gave out 98 cents the other days in pennies for picking up the whole house. They were nuts for it, even though all they know is you can buy quarter-machine toys. I wish my wife would do this while I'm at work. Coming home to a clean house would be worth a dollar a day.
 
2012-07-02 04:50:42 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.


I love your screen name.
 
2012-07-02 04:51:07 PM  

Wangiss: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: TV/music is shiattier

C'mon now. That's CLEARLY true.

Since 1980


5 words: My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
 
2012-07-02 04:51:36 PM  

profplump: / For that matter, why do dog trainers tell us not to hit dogs?


There is no need to smack your dog.
When my pup doesn't listen, I grab her by the scruff of the neck and she gets a firm talking to.
If this action surprises her and she decides to try to nip at me, I fling her into a wall.
Hitting is just plain mean.
 
2012-07-02 04:52:40 PM  

Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.


Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.
 
2012-07-02 04:54:49 PM  

Mrs.Sharpier: Too Pretty For Prison: realmolo: then the girls got a spanking next time they were at his house for talking to me about it. What a pud.

Anonymously call CPS


Oh FFS. Somebody needs to paddle both of your asses to teach you to mind your own farking business.
 
2012-07-02 04:55:04 PM  

SuperChuck: davynelson: spentmiles From birth to about 18 months old, children have absolutely no concept of right or wrong. They don't understand rules or morality or any of our societal constructs. They don't even have the required depth perception to keep them from crawling off a cliff. No amount of talking or timeouts or taking away their favorite toys will get through to children of this age. The only discipline mechanism that they understand is pain. So, unless you want your infant growing into a completely unmangeable toddler, you have to spank them.

So what crimes do they perpetrate between 0 and 18 months that you think deserve to be met with pain?

Playing with electrical outlets, climbing bookshelves, that sort of thing. Anything that's going to get them hurt. You can't explain to them that that behavior could cause injury so you send the message in a safer way. A smack on the hand or the butt is a lot better than electrocution or a serious fall.


You do realize you could punch the wall and get the same result, right? Between zero and eighteen months, they have literally no cause-effect understanding. Everything is random. You're better off just picking them up and setting them down somewhere else.

I can understand the logic behind spanking older kids, bad logic though it is, but trying to make a fish fly ain't gonna work either.
 
2012-07-02 04:56:20 PM  

profplump: Be prepared to defend your points against rebuttals that we also don't hit "adults" that meet whatever criteria you define as a justification for hitting children.


To be fair, spanking for reprimanding is not the same as hitting a child. No one should ever slap, punch, or kick a child. But I do believe in spanking as a serious punishment once the behavior has gone beyond the scope of timeouts and verbal warnings.

Adults shouldn't need the same discipline as children as they should have already know the boundaries of society. Adults should know not to hit, steal, wound, assault, but children have to learn those ideas from scratch. People don't come out knowing how to talk or walk or read, they have to be taught. You can be a great teacher (rewarding for progress, calm and rational explanation) or a shiatty teacher (inconsistent rewards, random punishments, unequal proportionate retribution).
 
2012-07-02 05:03:12 PM  

PsiChick: Between zero and eighteen months, they have literally no cause-effect understanding


This ignores that babies cry in order to get attention. They learn that crying signals affection and if not taught to be somewhat self-sufficient, they will use this behavior well into the toddler years.

Babies aren't naturally manipulative, but it is most certainly a learned behavior that they understand the beginnings of cause and effect. If they didn't, then they could never be encouraged to learn about object permanence at 4-8 months.
 
2012-07-02 05:03:19 PM  

profplump: jshine: Well, if you really want to get pedantic, businesses don't have any actual "arms" with which to hit. Corporations are amorphous legal entities created on paper with some (but not all) of the rights of a real person. For instance, corporations can pay taxes and be sued, but can't vote, can't be imprisoned, etc. ...so to compare a corporation to a parent is bound to lead to specious arguments.

But in civil law corporations are almost exactly equivalent natural persons, and that's exactly where you were making your argument.

And in particular if we talk about a child guardians in the context of civil law, they often don't have arms with which to hit either -- just like a corporation a child's guardians are often a group of people with collective responsibility, not a natural person.

My point is just that if responsibility for civil infractions is a valid justification for hitting people it should apply to both children and adults.

...anyway, there's not much point having a discussion with a partisan. You have your beliefs, and you're welcome to them. :-)

If you mean I can't be convinced that it's allowable to hit children, I agree it would be difficult. I'm not unwilling to hear argument, but it would take some extraordinary evidence to convince me that children don't deserve the protections that adults get.

But I'm not seeing you budge one iota on this issue either, so the name calling is probably not worthwhile.


Ok, if you prefer legalistic arguments, I'll keep this one short & to-the-point:

Here's the relevant law in California/

Or, to quote:

For purposes of this subdivision, "serious physical harm" does not include reasonable and age-appropriate spanking to the buttocks where there is no evidence of serious physical injury.

In other words, it's legal. Laws vary by state, but as I recall, it's legal in all 50. ...so if you want to nit-pick legal analogies, then good news!: there's no need to bother.
 
2012-07-02 05:04:31 PM  

Mrs.Sharpier: Bell-fan: The_Original_Roxtar:
Good lord! I mean we've gone what... 10,000 years of civilization with kids getting spanked and yet SOMEHOW we were not overwhelmed with insane people being everywhere.



Just because we've gone X years with Y doesn't mean that we can't become more reasoned and apply scientific data to our everyday lives to improve them.

Most poor uneducated or violent people aren't going to be the ones reading these studies, it will be doctors and social workers and hospital administrators. Hopefully at a younger age or during their teen years children and students can become educated through data like these.

With the facts these teens might grow into parents that, instead of using violence, control and power, instead use reasoning and words and sound judgment to discipline their children.


You sound like the type of mom I fairly often run into when in the supermarket.

Kid of 7 or 8: "I don't have to listen to you"
Mom "Yes you do, now be quiet"
Kid "F you, I hate you"
Mom "That is a mean thing to say and it hurts my feelings"
Kid " I don't care you are stupid"

Rinse repeat. They get nowhere with the kid because there are no real consequences. The fear of pain is often enough. However, if you don't even have the capability of installing the fear of pain in which you rarely have to follow through, you are removing the most potent learning tool in the human psyche. Especially for males.
 
2012-07-02 05:04:45 PM  

PsiChick: SuperChuck: davynelson: spentmiles From birth to about 18 months old, children have absolutely no concept of right or wrong. They don't understand rules or morality or any of our societal constructs. They don't even have the required depth perception to keep them from crawling off a cliff. No amount of talking or timeouts or taking away their favorite toys will get through to children of this age. The only discipline mechanism that they understand is pain. So, unless you want your infant growing into a completely unmangeable toddler, you have to spank them.

So what crimes do they perpetrate between 0 and 18 months that you think deserve to be met with pain?

Playing with electrical outlets, climbing bookshelves, that sort of thing. Anything that's going to get them hurt. You can't explain to them that that behavior could cause injury so you send the message in a safer way. A smack on the hand or the butt is a lot better than electrocution or a serious fall.

You do realize you could punch the wall and get the same result, right? Between zero and eighteen months, they have literally no cause-effect understanding. Everything is random. You're better off just picking them up and setting them down somewhere else.

I can understand the logic behind spanking older kids, bad logic though it is, but trying to make a fish fly ain't gonna work either.


At 18(ish) months, my kids definitely understood "don't touch that" followed by a smack on the hand. I do have to admit, that to this point I've found myself rarely needing to spank. And yelling seems to be much more traumatic for them. And timeouts are far more effective than I expected. Parenting is all about learning
 
2012-07-02 05:05:16 PM  
I only gave my kid a good, hard spanking once. Really, it was the only time I felt I had to.

It was when she lied to me. Just straight-up lied, right to my face, convincingly. Later that night, I had a serious conversation with her. Of course, she was genuinely remorseful and swore she would never do it again. But I explained to her that it wasn't just that she had lied to me... it was the betrayal of trust that was the real 'crime'.

I said "I can't have a smart and convincing liar living under my roof, and I won't." Then I beat her ass purple. End of story.

/she was a good kid
//she's now a decent young woman
 
2012-07-02 05:05:34 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.

Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.


I figured that's what it meant. It's a very descriptive six syllables.
 
2012-07-02 05:07:27 PM  

Cookbook's Anarchist: PsiChick: Between zero and eighteen months, they have literally no cause-effect understanding

This ignores that babies cry in order to get attention. They learn that crying signals affection and if not taught to be somewhat self-sufficient, they will use this behavior well into the toddler years.

Babies aren't naturally manipulative, but it is most certainly a learned behavior that they understand the beginnings of cause and effect. If they didn't, then they could never be encouraged to learn about object permanence at 4-8 months.


Hmong babies dont cry, though. It's very, very rare, I kid you not.


Tigers.
 
2012-07-02 05:08:05 PM  

profplump: steamingpile: Did you read those studies? I would like it further broken down by economics and race in the first one, I would bet the biggest factor in the first study is there was no father in the house.

The first study -- Mothers' Spanking of 3-Year-Old Children and Subsequent Risk of Children's Aggressive Behavior -- controls for race, mother-father relationship, religion, education, presence of other aggressive parenting behaviors, intimate-partner aggression, and a whole slew of other factors. So I have no idea what your complaining about.


Didn't see the breakdown at all, just a summation perhaps its just because I'm on mobile. I just don't buy the violence aspect, mainly because me and all my friends were spanked as kids but none of us were aggressive while young. Its weird that we got more aggressive in high school when no punishment was being given.
 
2012-07-02 05:09:13 PM  

Grables'Daughter: GameSprocket: [cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com image 425x257]

God I love that movie.

/turn on


Way better scenes in the Secretary but ya it is a good time to watch it some more ^_^
 
2012-07-02 05:11:14 PM  

skrame: vudukungfu: Fox. No retarded, but #1 with retards.

No retarded?


You're the one farker who got it. too.
 
2012-07-02 05:12:46 PM  

The Southern Dandy: Studies also show that children that aren't spanked grow up to be whiney little biatches that think the world owes them something.


This!
 
2012-07-02 05:13:54 PM  

Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.

Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.

I figured that's what it meant. It's a very descriptive six syllables.


Nice, people who immediately put together dick sucking and science are my favorites.
 
2012-07-02 05:14:41 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.

Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.

I figured that's what it meant. It's a very descriptive six syllables.

Nice, people who immediately put together dick sucking and science are my favorites.


Whoa there.
 
2012-07-02 05:17:44 PM  

Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.

Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.

I figured that's what it meant. It's a very descriptive six syllables.

Nice, people who immediately put together dick sucking and science are my favorites.

Whoa there.


The sentence seemed more flattering when it went through my head.
 
2012-07-02 05:18:48 PM  

spentmiles: From birth to about 18 months old, children have absolutely no concept of right or wrong. They don't understand rules or morality or any of our societal constructs. They don't even have the required depth perception to keep them from crawling off a cliff.


You were doing well until that. Neonates know not to crawl off cliffs. You don't need depth perception -- edge detection is sufficient for that.
 
2012-07-02 05:19:48 PM  

Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Wangiss: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: fark yes, party on my lawn. Old people suck dick, they only think lawns are for their rocking chairs or cross burnings.

I love your screen name.

Thank you for the props. Unless you look over the wall of the bathroom stall you have no idea if it is a chick or dude. So you are both gay and straight at the same time. It doesn't really work the other way though.

I figured that's what it meant. It's a very descriptive six syllables.

Nice, people who immediately put together dick sucking and science are my favorites.

Whoa there.


I think you just stepped through the Glory Mirror.
 
2012-07-02 05:20:06 PM  
I've never spanked my kid and I don't plan to. I have to work a little harder sometimes to make sure he understands the consequences of his actions but I don't believe hitting is the answer. Timeouts can be effective when used properly. How can a person not see that telling your kids that hitting is wrong and then spanking them sends the kids mixed messages?

I've thought about it a lot, worrying if I'm raising an entitled d-bag because I don't spank him. However, he is polite. He shares his toys. He gets along well with other kids and adults and seems fairly well adjusted. I don't know the answer but for me and my family, we don't hit our kid. Ever. There are times when I could see why a parent would want to and there have been moments where I can feel my temper rising, but I just don't hit.

The big issue with parenting is that you never know if you are screwing your kid up until it is too late to do anything about it.
 
2012-07-02 05:21:12 PM  

Kazrath: However, if you don't even have the capability of installing the fear of pain in which you rarely have to follow through, you are removing the most potent learning tool in the human psyche. Especially for males.


They're not computers!!
 
2012-07-02 05:23:38 PM  

PsiChick: I can understand the logic


I seriously doubt it.
 
2012-07-02 05:23:50 PM  
Study ACTUALLY says that people with mental health problems as an adult are more likely to be spanked as a child.

As in, they were screwed up before they were born, not screwed up by the spanking.
 
2012-07-02 05:24:38 PM  
There is a massive difference in spanking and---beating the crap out of a kid.
 
2012-07-02 05:32:48 PM  

It Smee: I've never spanked my kid and I don't plan to. I have to work a little harder sometimes to make sure he understands the consequences of his actions but I don't believe hitting is the answer. Timeouts can be effective when used properly. How can a person not see that telling your kids that hitting is wrong and then spanking them sends the kids mixed messages?

I've thought about it a lot, worrying if I'm raising an entitled d-bag because I don't spank him. However, he is polite. He shares his toys. He gets along well with other kids and adults and seems fairly well adjusted. I don't know the answer but for me and my family, we don't hit our kid. Ever. There are times when I could see why a parent would want to and there have been moments where I can feel my temper rising, but I just don't hit.

The big issue with parenting is that you never know if you are screwing your kid up until it is too late to do anything about it.


My wife spanks out of frustration ofr anger, but I never do. I spank as a direct, fully explained punishment. "Son, if you knock your sister's food off the table one more time, you're going to get a spanking. She needs that food." *fling!* *spank* "Son, that was unacceptable. you may not throw your sister's food. She is hungry, just like you, and she needs to eat something because it's dinner time. That was the last food and now we're going to have to make something yummier for your sister that you can't have because you made a bad choice. Now you need to say sorry to your sister."

Shiat like that, y'know? But the wife will get crazy and hit the kids and call me all stressed out. "I'm so sorry, I didn't know what tio do1"

I'm so glad I know what to do--I never lose it completely. Though, clearly, there will be people who think it's sub-optimal to varying degrees.

There's a hashtag for things like this. What is it, #realtalk or some BS like that?
 
2012-07-02 05:32:51 PM  

LaraAmber: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: LaraAmber: Because the dogs like it. My dog loves getting smacked on her side.

The amount of force I'd have to administer to my half bulldog/half boxer to even register on her pain meter is so extreme I don't want to even contemplate it.

Yep, German Shepherd/Rottweiler. I'd break my hand before it hurt her.


With my shiny new husband came a Rottweiler that out weighed me by about 20 pounds. Walking the dog was a test of strength and patience for my hubby, for me it would have been dangerous for both of us if he had decided to chase something. A pinch collar didn't phase him and they can do damage in the wrong hands. I got him a halter-style headcollar -- where the head goes the body follows. He hated it at first, but when he figured out that it meant we were going somewhere he was happy to have me put it on him.

It is Not a muzzle. Don't think they would work on pugs, but boxers are listed. It's hard to guessimate the needed size -- if you take the dog shopping you'll see how it works and fits before you buy. The Jindo that I have now (years later) doesn't mind her halti at all, of course sometimes she gets to wear it while we hang out in the evening just so it remains as "invisible" to her as her regular collar.

Spanking, like all discipline, when done in anger is in danger of being done excessively, retaliative, and/or brutally. Once a kid can grasp the concept consequences it should not be necessary.
 
2012-07-02 05:33:17 PM  
what about spanking your spouse whereby your spouse consents to such spankings? And I don't just mean erotic spanking, but domestic discipline, such that the spouse has broken a house rule and therefore should be disciplined.
 
2012-07-02 05:37:42 PM  

WhyKnot: what about spanking your spouse whereby your spouse consents to such spankings? And I don't just mean erotic spanking, but domestic discipline, such that the spouse has broken a house rule and therefore should be disciplined.


o_O
 
2012-07-02 05:59:50 PM  

It Smee: How can a person not see that telling your kids that hitting is wrong and then spanking them sends the kids mixed messages?


You sound like you have set up a proper structure that has not required spanking. But, you did admit that you don't plan to versus "never will" which means you see it as nuclear option, a last resort.

We (people that advocate spanking in situations) do not see it as sending a mixed message because you also teach kids about degrees of behavior not just black and white thinking. For instance, would you tell you child that hitting is wrong but also teach them self-defense or would you expect hitting is wrong to translate to complete passive behavior?

Hitting a child out of anger is always wrong but strong assertive discipline can be seen as very adult. You can teach a child to be assertive and controlled if you teach them that being in control does not always mean physical dominance. It is a very fine line to walk which is why it takes consistency and fortitude.

I applaud your efforts to control your anger and even more so to identify when anger is becoming the root cause of your desire to reprimand. First, your child should be able to know when you tolerance is being breached and then they should curtail their behavior rather than push its limits. Often times, children will push their limits because there is no consistency in the learning and discipline. I have seen situations where one parent coddles and another screams and rails against the behavior and that is what teaches them that there are variable limits rather than absolutes.
 
2012-07-02 05:59:54 PM  
meanwhile not spanking your child guarantees 100% chance of mental retardation in both parent and child

it's time for stupid parents to have a time out, thanks super nanny!
 
2012-07-02 06:01:43 PM  

WhyKnot: what about spanking your spouse whereby your spouse consents to such spankings? And I don't just mean erotic spanking, but domestic discipline, such that the spouse has broken a house rule and therefore should be disciplined.


t1.gstatic.com
 
2012-07-02 06:18:15 PM  
i never got spanked as a kid because i never did anything wrong

/suck it long and suck it hard
 
Displayed 50 of 274 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report