Discussion in 'Serious' started by LennyRhys, 22 Oct 2017.
What's not to like, meringue, fruit, and cream....hmmm, lovely.
Which has been deprecated in human behavioural studies ages ago!
@Corky42, once again the problem lies in how "physical punishment" is defined and how exactly the many studies go about controlling the variables in these experiments. You are now saying that children don't know the difference between general physical violence in the home and structured physical punishment, and that's demonstrably untrue. You keep citing studies but I'm not seeing any clear links between said studies and the argument you're trying to make; moreover you are also saying "it can be argued" but you're not actually making an argument. Can you show me the studies that demonstrate physical punishment leading to increased violence in children? And are you also taking into consideration that there are studies that provide evidence to the contrary?
@MT - I have no problem with the above. Parenting is an immensely complex matter and I think that there is an acceptable spectrum of parenting styles, including how parents discipline their children. The thing is, people who are in favour of physical punishment are not necessarily against other forms of punishment (myself included), nor are they of the opinion that withholding physical punishment is wrong (crackpot alert). If you're of the opinion that smacking children is a bit like what you'd do to a dog, I have no beef with that at all - your kids, your business. My beef is with the people who say well I'm right and you're wrong; it's my way or the highway, buddy, so when the government intervenes, we have little choice but to fall in line, regardless of principles and convictions.
Let's consider what is the purpose of physical punishment. Obviously it's meant to be aversively conditioning (yay, Pavlov! I know, doesn't work well on humans, but we're usually talking adults here): to stop a child doing something because it learns it has painful consequences. Therefore:
- It must be systematic, not random. There must be a clear association between action and consequence. Random smacking is wanton abuse.
- It must be proportional, lest the message gets lost. Parents sometimes forget this: "My child isn't crying, so I must hit it harder, so that it gets the message". Unfortunately the message it gets is: I want you to suffer, rather than I want you to learn. Again, that is abuse.
- It must be backed up by an explanation and alternative behavioural option: knowing that a behaviour has painful consequences is not enough; the child must understand that it is wrong; basically why it warranted smacking, and that there is an alternative, better action to meet the need that the punished behaviour intended to meet. Else again: I want you to suffer, rather than I want you to learn and do better. Abuse. And above all:
- It must be a last resort: if the behaviour is really dangerous or unsafe, and child is too young to really understand the consequences of its actions and the explanation of why they are wrong (which has to do with their ability to understand cause and effect, their theory of mind and their stage of moral reasoning). It is preferable for the child to learn through understanding, rather than just through fear of punishment. Otherwise it is again wanton abuse.
Physical punishment would be any form of discipline that's intended to cause physical pain, i assumed that was a generally accepted definition of the term. The studies don't seek to control the variables because if they did they'd be influencing the outcome, are the results caused by what they did in their attempt to control the variable or something else, in other words the results wouldn't reflect real world examples.
It's not demonstrably untrue that children can't tell the difference between general physical violence in the home and structured physical punishment, if that were true then it would defeat the whole reason for smacking in the first place, if a child has developed the understanding and reasoning skills needed to understand the difference between the two then they've also developed the understanding and reasoning skills to be capable of understanding that there's no difference in the end result of generally or structurally administered pain.
Basically if a child has developed the skills needed to understand the difference between the two then they've also developed the skills as to make physical punishment unnecessary.
As for the studies there's loads of them (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and those were just from the first page of Google results, the reason i keep saying it can be argued is because like i said in certain situations i believe smacking can be justified, however those *situations are, or should be, so rare and don't reflect what i assume is the generally accepted definition of corporal punishment.
*To clarify I'd personally consider smacking to be acceptable in a situation where a child is in imminent danger of more serious harm or pain such as running out into the road, reaching to touch a hot fire, etc, etc.
I will get back to this shortly - I currently have a more pressing engagement (Stranger Things Season 2...)
Hey! What's more important than pointless and pedantic debating on Bit-Tech forums?!?
Cheesecake. That's about it.
OK, besides cheesecake and e-peen, what's more important than pointless and pedantic debating on Bit-Tech forums?!?...
Gifs of cats?
OK, besides cheesecake and e-peen and gifs of cats, what's more important than pointless and pedantic debating on Bit-Tech forums?!?...
/cue Monty Python sketch...
Thinking back yes I I was smaked I think on rare occasions when I was little. To be honest I barely remember it and certainly it wasn't something major in my upbringing.
I won't do it with my children, though my wife has once or twice, though it's pretty hopless as she isn't going to go and hurt the boy enough for him to do anything other than laugh at it.
Actually thinking back I don't think my father ever did. Perhaps there is something less appropriate about a father smacking his children than the mother.
What's the point then?
Does this rule apply to BDSM?
Separate names with a comma.