What do you think about parents slapping children as a means of punishment?

I don't think I'd do it myself, but I honestly don't have any problems with it being a small part of my own upbringing.

not seeing this ever again is reason enough to make this illegal.

The answer to all of the above is "no".

I don't blame my Mum at all - things were different then and people held different beliefs, but I don't think there's any excuse for hitting a child today. I believe in positive parenting and time outing and I'm glad Little Angels is public service broadcasting this method on the BBC.

I've not realised until now - it was always Mum who smacked us, never Dad.

If anything, I believe being hit by a family member does more damage than being hit by a random stranger, because it also hurts the bonds between you and the only people you should be able to completely trust and be loved by.

On one occasion I remember making my mother very angry indeed (no idea what I did) and then smugly retorting "anyway, you can't smack me, they're going to make it against the law and you'll be arrested". She didn't like that display of smart-arsery at all.

I agree with others when they say "I wouldn't do it to my kids", however I don't think anyone is going to say "Yes I fully intend to slap my kids, I think it's an essential part of their upbringing" either.

Had I ever been hit harder than that, or ever been hit because of anger alone, then I'm sure it would have had a different effect.

(having said that, I remember the fear, knowing it was about to happen, and the pulling/turning away - not a fun memory)

Matt DC>>> Well, I'm not sure you can draw a line. "It's ok to hit your kids but only so it doesn't show" is the law in England, no? That seems even more absurd to me. All violence against children should be illegal imo. I do understand that tired and desperate parents slap their kids' wrists, and I know that sometimes it does no harm at all and is promptly forgotten and that these homes can still be full of love and all that, but making even some violence legal = saying that domestic violence is ok = utterly and completely wrong.

Wait a minute, it's Thanksgiving and I'm 500 miles from my parents. Never mind.

I don't think my bond with my parents has suffered because of spankings I received as a child.

If a child is being completely uninhibited I'm not against physical punishment. I take issue with people who cannot tell the difference between fair physical discipline and outright cruelty.

Mum always used the time out on my sister, slapping and sending her to her room never worked (she just used to play with her toys) - she used to move one of the dining room chairs to the top of the stairs, and point to it, and my sister used to yell 'not the chair mummy, not the chair....'it definitely worked!

My dad used to threaten to 'give me something to cry for' if I was upset being told off, which of course made me even more upset, not very clever really. But having been at the receiving end of both types of 'punishment' I'm still not anti it.

I empathise a little with parents of little gets, mind you. But not greatly.

it's far more complex than telling kids violence is the solution to any problem, when I remember being slapped I remember my Dad or Mum being apologetic afterwards, I know for a fact there was always a mass apology session afterwards which was quite cathartic.

x-post with Lauren, I think with a tiny toddler is maybe different, I think, if I remember correctly, I was only slapped from the age of 4 or 5. Though who knows! I will ask my Mum later.

It's odd aswell, Madchen's post about trying to escape the slap being pure comedy resonates with me aswell, this sounds ridiculous but I am faintly amused when I think about some of the times running away from the wooden spoon or whatever.

Well, duh, yeah, the child is a CHILD and you are an ADULT. Who has the power there, you think? And who has to take the responsibility to be calm and reasonable?

x-post I think if I was slapped by my parents when calm that would be fucking sadistic.

^^^^ this is true. It's the age when a child is trying to gain more independence and thus is more likely to question authority/engage in smart-mouthery.

Yeah, I know! Every time I got spanked, I received an explanation beforehand and my parents always waited until they had calmed down before the spanking, so it was never a situation where it was like they were beating me up or we were fighting and they hit me. I don't see how slapping could fit into that, so I wouldn't even consider slapping as a viable option for child discipline.

x-post - I guess there's a bit of confusion over vocab in this thread. My perception is that the term spanking is more violent than a slap. A slap to me is a very short not very hard act of bringing your hand onto skin.

Maybe I shouldn't have kids.

Basically I like to think I wouldn't do it, at all, but I don't think parents that do should be put in jail, or made to feel guilty for their whole lives.

I remember hurtful words said by my parents FAR more clearly than any slap (I think mum slapped my legs maybe twice in my life). Can we legislate against that sort of hurt? Not easily.

(xpost: I think it comes from seeing the irritating, unholy terrors that run around now because we've got a generation of whiny parents who blame everything wrong in their lives on the fact that they got spanked when they were kids.)

Unfortunately, it's the quickest way to assert control of the child for people who otherwise aren't very good parents.

Hanna, are you a parent?

That's why I agree with Ronan on the importance of the follow-up. His parents made it clear to him that they didn't approve of themselves after they'd smacked him, that they felt bad about it, but that he had to understand that he had done something really bad to provoke it. My Mam was a bit like that as well. She only ever smacked me a couple of times. I don't remember why, or the smack itself, but I remember the heart to heart conversations afterwards very well. That's partly why I would never presume to interfere if I saw someone smack their child in the street. It's not right, but I don't know what the kid might have done and what frame of mind the person's in. It could be the last resort that makes them get help with a difficult child. They might have just lost someone close to them. You just don't know, especially if you're only seeing them once, for a minute, smacking their child in a supermarket.

On the other hand, I'm still jumpy around my Dad, because he would really lose the rag when he was mad, and then I would be expected to apologise to him! That just seemed plain wrong to me and it still does.

Yes. (see above)

I don't have to justify my mother's behaviour - she only ever smacked us when we'd done something bad, it stung, but I knew straight away that we'd really stepped over the mark, and so I changed my behaviour. With my sister it didn't work, so my mother devised another punishment that worked much better.

It ovbiously is a big deal to lots of people, but I don't understand why, in controlled circumstances it's still preceived as such a taboo. Yes some parents abuse it, but parents who do will be bad parents in lots of other ways as well, it's not the smacking that's at fault, its the parenting.

This whole discussion of where (on the ass is OK?!? in the face is not!?!) and how and to what extent it's ok to hit children is just absurd to me, I don't think I can read this thread anymore.

My mum and dad both smacked me and every time i deserved it thoroughly, it didn't happen often mind, once was for shoving a metal pipe through the spokes of N1cholas Wh!te's front bicycle tyre and making him graze his chin, others were for being about as naughty.

always a sharp tap, and never a larruping. It certainly put home the point that I had done wrong. always on the backside or legs though, never in the face. They talked to me about these things too, it was never pure revenge or malice.

I don't have to justify my mother's behaviour - she only ever smacked us when we'd done something bad, it stung, but I knew straight away that we'd really stepped over the mark, and so I changed my behaviour.

It seems to have worked, as intended, for both parties. Is there anyone here who has been slapped in this kind of way who has major psychological issues?

Also, Rock Hardy OTM, I suspect.

I mean what are the police going to do, if it's a simple slap and then nothing, I think that's just self righteousness.

Details please: did this father on the tube spank on the butt or punch in the mouth? IT'S IMPORTANT WHETHER YOU THINK SO OR NOT.

the biggest beating i remember one time wasn't to me, but my sister was like being really disobedient and got told off pretty bad, and as my dad was walking off she muttered "yeah hit me if you dare" holy shit she got the shit beaten out of her.

challenging your parents' authority is one of the sure fire ways of getting a smackdown.

i don't know if i'll ever hit my kids if i have some.. i'd probably go for psychological punishment that'd really mess them up.

You know those metal rulers that are curvy? Whack. Back of the hand, back of the head . . . . punched to the floor and kicked, head shoved down (used) toilet, mouth washed out with soap, thrown down stairs, hands whacked under desk lid . . . . a Catholic Education.

Out of my peer group there is more than one army nut, several breakdowns and for what was a class full of very bright kids from very well off backgrounds not one who's made anything of themselves save for the people who inherited daddies businesseses.

Conclusion - violence to promote order amongst children is a fairly bad idea as ideas go. I do imagine, however, that it's great stress relief for complete and utter BASTARDS.

As for parents and the odd slap - I can't abide by it but at the same time I can totally understand a parents frustration at times - I've done a fair bit of work dealing with behaviourly "interesting" children and boy can they push your patience. However, if its done as a quick and easy behavioural corrector then its bullshit and damaging. If the kid can see that the parent isn't angry and is just doing it as part of a system then they're getting their brains warped in a very serious way.

Also is it really possible that no parents whatsoever slap their children in countries where it's illegal? I think it's natural for people to lose their temper and while it shouldn't be encouraged, common sense should be used. You can't make anger a crime.

Also is this repressed public facade really so healthy, god knows what goes on in the privacy of peoples homes.

Please explain this in more detail, cos I don't understand the logic

I was occasionally presented with the old southern stereotype of having to go cut my own switch from the peach tree.

Vicky - There are parents who will give the child a whack for very minor discretions as a quick and easy way of letting the child know that its actions are bad. Basically these people are thick, lazy fuckers who don't want to spend a few minutes explaining why what they're doing is bad and want to get on with more important things.

In some ways, I was a very difficult child, I suspect.

Anyway, in later years I married and we produced a high-spirited, intelligent and willful child of our own, and I was the one who wanted to not use any sort of corporal punishment with her. I suppose due to my own experiences. So my punishment method of choice was the time out. But I'm here to tell you, folks - if you have a strong-willed child, the time-out chair is not the mild-mannered zen-like punishment you might think it is. Many's the day her time-outs wore us both out, and I would have been a lot happier just spanking the snot out of her.

Was it better, in the long run, to have gone the non-corporal punishment route? I have no way to know. It sure as hell was interesting, and I've got gray hair I'm not sure I would have if it hadn't been for all those battles of will with a hard-headed toddler.

Just one woman's experience.

Now from the kids perspective - is the act of playing wrong? are flowerbeds wrong? is getting covered in muck wrong? the poor thing probably came to the conclusion that some part of its brain that was to do with fun, experiment and learning needed to die, which it probably promtly did with the result that the child grew up ever so slightly more of an emotional trainwreck, but at least one that didn't make noise when daddy was trying to watch war movies.

I don't think of the kind of smacking my parents used as violence. Sometimes I think they used it when it wasn't really necessary, but they learnt from their mistakes and apologised if they thought afterwards they hadn't been fair. The other thing that was sometimes threatened as a punishment was that they would take away a stuffed pig I was incredibly attached to, a threat that filled me with complete dread far more than any smackings. If they'd taken away the pig, that would really have been cruelty. Smacking at least was over and forgotten quickly.

I think if ever I have kids, I'll find it really hard to find ways of punishing them for being really bad without smacking. My parents never grounded me, but I didn't go out much anyway so it would've been a bit of a feeble punishment. I never thought much of "we'll stop your pocket money", because I got about £1 a week and my parents always forgot about it anyway.

Eventually I think she gave in to my steely will and I ate only Marmite on toast for about a year.

But with smacking you get the punishment over with quickly, and the kid doesn't have too much time to brood and get bitter. With psychological (um, for want of a better word, that makes it sound a bit too sinister) punishments like sending to them to their room for ages or grounding or being made to do loads of chores, the kid gets loads of time to dwell on the situation and feel really wronged and hard done by. That was what I did anyway. When I was sent to my room I got loads of time to plan evil things I could do to make my parents really sorry (usually running away and becoming a street-kid or something). My running-away efforts were always completely pathetic, thankfully.

What's funny (and also maddening) with kids is to watch them eat the hell out of something one day and have them say "but I hate that!" a month later. But that's a whole nother ball of broccoli.

I so hope that if we have kids they're not like my sister when it c

"traipsing down the road to corpulence" is a great phrase.

I remember getting a spanking a couple of times, always from mom. I remember getting hit and slapped on the head by dad. Only a few times, though. But I can still feel what it felt like!

I'm not sure what my stance is on spanking.

oh god i did the make my parents feel sorry thing too... i used to "lock" myself in the room. my parents had keys and so i put like 50 layers of sellotape over the keyhole. which was clearly so hard to defeat.

i hated my school teacher, once me and my mum met her on the street, and i overheard them talking and she told my mum "don't bother with the hitting, ken really hates NAGGING" and ever since then my mum was there with the NAG ATTACK!! arrrrrgh life was hell ever since

"Gunes" = how Willie in the Simpsons probably pronounced guns. I dunno, help me out here.

On the derailment of pathetic childish "I'll make them sorry" efforts, I once hid behind a fence in the garden for two hours, and my mum had all the neighbours looking for me and was about to phone the police. She was worried I'd been nabbed by a paedophile.

Funny though it was like the weapon of choice in Hong Kong, all families have it - and NOBODY uses it ever to actually do any dusting! so i guess that felt natural.

maybe it was character building for me, in a way, when i was alone sometimes i would hit myself a few times to learn how to sustain blows.

except for the scandinavians?

I'm a bit more wary of deliberate, cool-headed spanking as a punishment (though it is far far less cruel than psychological punishment eg ignoring the child for days until he/she apologises!). When I was growing up my mother in particular used to be very whole-hearted in her endorsement of corporal punishment but as I remember it was used very rarely. I think my sister once got spanked when she stole some chewing gum, but other than that there was just the threat of it.

No, my father was horribly abused - he was the only one out of three kids being physically abused - so he was very aware of how much that could fuck you up. He and my mother believe that slapping is not the solution, you can teach your child certain behavior without resorting to physical pain. A child is weaker than you, you should not abuse that. In the past my dad would go up to people who hit their kids saying they should at least not do it in public. Our neighbours physically abused their children. I was friends with them and have seen them abuse their kids (making them eat from the ground like a dog because the boy had pissed in a pot). After all these years I still remember that. If I remember it, how horrible it must have been for those kids? I know there's also *small slaps* you can give your kids, but I saw what little that helped. *shrug* I don't know. I hope when I have kids (xrosses fingers), I never resort to it. I know it's sometimes difficult not to (like my nephew who's like a little devil incarnate).

my older brother was nothing short of being a little shit, so i can see why mum got angry enough with him to spank him. but he never learned from it, he just kept being a little shit. would sending him to his room have been a better idea?well he'd just have climbed out the window. and extra shores basically meant extra opportunities for him to make my life hell. as an adult, he has violent tendencies. is it cos mum spanked him? i suspect he'd have grown up to be violent anyway, but i'm also sure spankings just reinforced for him the idea that violence is a means of getting what you want. i don't know what a parent would do with someone like him.

Oh, and while Dad would deliver the hardest spankings and slappings (obv, because he had more upper body strength), Mom would deliver the ones that I would actually still dwell over for days afterward. Because Dad would regularly express how those actions hurt him much more than it hurt me but that he had to do it because I disappointed him that much -- and I could totally see that hurt in his eyes -- but Mom was just wildly angry and would remind me of my transgression for days afterward. So I think Dad's approach would prob be the better one.

(Why am I starting to remember this stuff??)

I have never even met anyone who would argue that spanking children is acceptable. To me, and yes, to the entire Swedish society in large, it's not even something to debate. My very strong belief is that violence is the opposite of love and care and trust. And in my opinion even a symbolic spanking, that doesn't even hurt, is just that: a symbol of violence. Obviously a lot of people here don't share that view, for various reasons, and I really don't mean to come across as judgemental, even if I do have a big problem seeing the logic in a lot of people's arguments here.

A lot of people seem to think that some violence is ok, but I can't understand how you could ever draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not. You'd never interfere with someone who slapped their child in public, ok, but what about a really bloody hard slap, or ten or a hundred slaps? I believe that society needs to make it clear that no violence is not ok, because if some violence is, how can anyone ever be expected to step in to prevent child abuse? That's hard enough to do anyway, without part of the violence being sanctioned by law.

I really don't think I could ever hit, slap, spank, whatever your preferred terminology is, my future children. If I did, it would be as a desperate last resort, and I sure as hell hope someone would interfere and tell me I was wrong, and make me get some councelling and anger managment therapy.

As I said, sorry that I seem to come across as a naive dumb-liberal, I think most of my responses here are reflections of surprise really. It's clear that this issue is looked upon very differently in England and the US, fair enough. But to me it's just as incomprehensible as gun-crazy Americans defending the right for everyone to carry weapons.

Ronan OTM pretty much throughout. I'll provide the exception to his rule: I'll say that I probably would/will spank my kids, in extremis, with full talk afterwards, etc etc. I'd consider myself just more realistic than those who say they wouldn't.

I can't find the PJ O'Rourke quote about this. Anyone know the one I mean?

Hanna, one of the reasons that what you're saying sounds like madness is that you seem to be coming from the point of view of super-pure socialism - that it is the job of the state, as the better part of the people, to decide what is and isn't good, and that if it's left up to people, various people will slide various lengths down the scale until it's possible for a group of people to slide far enough down that they're completely outside the pale of The People (EG the Pitcairn abuse scandal). Is this sort of what you're saying? I think a lot of the opposition here is from people who live in a very strong non-state idea of society, where their natural (social) moral sense will keep them from crossing the line between EG smmacking achild on the wrist and seriously abusing them.

If they're very bad, I tend to give them the silent stare. This calms them down within 20 seconds or so, and gets them upset. (I don't do this a lot. Last time probably last year?), which amazes Dawn.

I think there's a danger that if you use smacking as the standard punishment and as a constant threat, it's easy to resort to it too quickly when you lose your temper.

The more I think, the more I hope I won't ever smack my children. I'm still very hesitant about the idea of the state legislating in the UK over mild smacking.

So, Scandos - how do you make an unruly child understand what they're doing is wrong?

It wouldn't have nothing to do with that idea, it would have one thing in common with it. But socialism is the wrong word, granted.

I can also very much see a point in what I'm presenting as Hanna's views: it's a question of "people left to their own devices will do good things, with a few regrettable exceptions" vs. "those exceptions are not acceptable". As you say, we all take the second side on the subject of murder.

(I don't actually beleive this)

The same goes for "liberal". The use of the word here is incomprehensible in a way for Swedish people, even though I know exactly what you mean. The only acceptable version of "liberal" in America seems to be "no one should tell ME how to behave, it's my children/my guns/my money/whatever". Mindless, egotistical "freedom" I would call it.

And the stance most of you people here displays seem, if you place it in the context of the more socially developed and modern Scandinvaian culture 1) very out of date and funny, and 2) very controversial. And you thought you were alternative hipsters, no?

Is this where I mention swedish eugenics?

I don't know what you mean here. The position stated on guns & money is exactly the opposite of US liberals (though much closer if you include "my genitals"). Are you sure you're not thinking of libertarians?

It's perfectly clear that in Sweden they've found another way of doing things, as have plenty of people in other countries, so why anyone would actually choose to smack is beyond me.

If I thought they'd stay where they were put and didn't need to be behind a door, I'd go for Vicky's Mum's chair, or the bottom step of the staircase.

They regret it. Big time.

One of these days i'm going to ask them about it.

I don't really think my view on this has to do with a strong legislative state vs. the freedom of people to do what they please (though yes, I probably do come from a more socialist standpoint than many people here). Kevin Gilchrist pretty much sums it up upthread actually. It's rather that I believe that all people have a right to not be subjected to violence, and that this extends to children too. And I think this fundamental right by far outweighs a parent's right to do what they please with their kids.

Also, obviously it is entirely possible to raise children without using physical punishment. I can't go into any detail, naturally, I have no first-hand experience with child raising, but I live in a society where an overwhelming majority of all children including me and everyone I know are raised without spanking or any other kind of violence, and surely many many children in UK and US as well, and that should really be proof enough.

Try 15-20 minutes for every year of their life and you may be getting close.

i also remember when my dad was drunk and wanted me to drive the car home with all of us in it at age 14 and I said no so my friend (who drove all the time because his dad had a dealership) drove and my dad was disparaging me for it so I threw a roll of quarters at him and when we got home my dad said wait a minute and my brothers and friend went into the house and my dad and I had a fistfight in which I didn't do too well because he was a former golden gloves boxer and later he asked for my forgiveness and I gave it to him and he begged me not to tell my mother but I couldn't hold up my end of that bargain.

I have never spanked my children or hit them in any way (other than wrestling around and doing superhero chops etc.) and there is no need for me to do so. I do not think that society is a lawless mess because whiny parents refuse to beat their children. I have been a social worker (in both affluent and non-affluent places) and have seen and heard things that most of you guys don't want to ever see or hear in terms of family violence. I am not an absolutist on this issue but I'm just against hitting children, it doesn't work and it breeds a culture of fear and the knowledge that hitting is okay because it is love, and fuck that shit.

It works.

would putting them in the child seat of the trolley would do it?

It works.

Not with my son it didn't.

One thing to remember about the smacking debate is that it affects children up to 16 (in the UK, don't know about eleswhere) - how do people who are 'pro-smacking' feel about a 15 year old being smacked?

x-post

if it hasn't been pointed out already (2 lazy 2 read the thread lol :[ ), it's basically taken for granted by now that physical abuse (esp. any kind of discipline that involves using objects, ie. belt or paddle) (yeah, not the same as slapping) has a profound, permanent effect on developing brains. i can understand why people honestly believe not only in its efficacy, but that it really is a sad eventuality of parenthood, but it isn't. boundaries can be set and enforced much more effectively (and beneficially) without using violence against your motherfucking kid. the "i turned out fine" tack never really did much for me either - not that it's untrue or anything, it's just a pretty crap way of framing the issue.

Another question, then: do people who haven't been spanked have a different attitude to discipline? One of the central tenets in my life is that having discipline is a central, admirable quality that is necessary in almost all walks of life; being undisciplined means not treating people right, not doing jobs properly, and basically wasting opportunities.

This could be an individual neurosis I guess.

"theoretical libertarians don't have children (they do! in idaho! with guns!)"
cheeky! by libertarian I mean the same as "libertine" or more clearly: "fan of freedom".

"or think that simone de beauvoir has anything at all to teach us about what should be done with children"
that sounds like an informed opinion but I'm not a beauvoirean. feel free to elaborate, or not: I know you don't like that idea and it's ok , maybe others would like to talk about it.

I'm not planning on having any kids for a long time, but I'm applying to be a teaching assistant next year, and so I'll need to learn how to keep kids under control without losing my temper and whacking one.

x-postssss

I've always felt that the first (really, the only) job of parenting is to train my child not to need me anymore.

as for mme. de beauvoir, her rhetoric just never matches what she was ever able or willing to do with her life; good for quotes, but her whole be-free! life was marked by being dominated by a certain hyper-intellectual (with whom I share a birthday!) and there's a reason they never had kids.

man i hope I'm correct about that. anyway, not trying to be a jerk but sounding like one, so I'll step back out. maybe coming back to ILE is not such a hot idea, except in haiku form.

As it is, I feel that a law which allows a parent to hit a 15 year old, but would find them guilty of a crime to hit a 16 year old is absurd. So I was wondering if 'pro-smackers' (sorry, it's a horrible term - I know almost no-one wants to smack their children, but I can't think of a better term) have an age at which they feel the law shoudl step in and remove the parents right to hit their child.

"as for mme. de beauvoir, her rhetoric just never matches what she was ever able or willing to do with her life"
I agree this is the opposite of what is called "living as a philosopher" but if I stay with the idea I reported, it can discredit that claim and arguments on the emotional level and the logic aspect can still hold some truths, for others, who would be free to "avenge" her by walking the walk, too?

I haven't read skinner's "walden II" but I don't think there is a need to make this book absolutely representative of socialization of child-rearing, especially if nonsensical ideas like forced breeding are in it. Maybe some of his ideas could be recuperated as a trend if improved : an alternative to the tried and true (statistically speaking) dominant model of the "family" : the dominant model is not perfect and that means lives get ruined, it's normal to look for solutions, like social workers are doing, but hey I know it's an idea that is way too progressive, especially since everyone in north america voted right-wing recently, there won't be interest in this any time soon (unless reality tv jumps onboard or something, who knows :-)

As for The State asserting its authority over parental rights at a certain age, I agree, legal at 15 and illegal at 16 makes little sense. On the other hand, if anyone is still spanking their child post-puberty, that is patently bad parenting that verges on child abuse. Still, I don't support the notion that The State should ever have authority over parenting style. I wish that state Child Welfare Departments were better funded and better staffed (and so able to respond more quickly to charges of abuse), and offered training and workshops for parents, but that's the extent of government involvement in child rearing that I can get behind.

This has an eerie parallel to the issue of abortion rights. I'm not necessarily pro-spanking, I think it's a last resort, it's definitely overused, but I don't want The State legislating its will on me.

only half of US
voted for the GOP
don't stereotype

similarly: I
agree that "nuclear" fams
are a weird concept

but I ask that you
talk to parents instead of
reading walden two

it's not natural
for folks to say "okay, state,
sure, raise MY children"

it will never work!
system = anathema to
freedom. q.e.d.

I was thinking it could be something more like anarchist communities that would rise children, than "state".

but hey I know it's an idea that is way too progressive, especially since everyone in north america voted right-wing recently, there won't be interest in this any time soon

Please feel free to con yourself all you want, but don't pass that shit on to the unsuspecting as "fact."

But as for the Scandinavian view, I’m not sure there’s anything extra-planetary about it. I mean, it seems to me that the important thing is that any given society has some sort of agreed-upon guideline for what kind of physical punishment is “normal”; this way, we can all of us more easily spot those situations where a parent is acting beyond the rational “normal” punishment routine, and losing control, or randomly inflicting actual-violence on a child. (The U.S. has a spread of “normal” that’s possibly a bit too large, and it’s unfortunately kind of class-based.)

I was the youngest of four. By the time I came around, my parents had been able to test out their parenting skills on my older siblings and shake out a few of the bugs. As I recall my childhood (and this is always highly suspect) my parents never, never came anywhere close to meting out physical punishment that inflicted injury on me. Never. I can't even imagine it.

They used spanking so rarely that it seems to me it was at most a once-a-year event that had completely petered out by the time I was six or seven. The spanking itself was intended to inflict a very minimal amount of pain. I would be "turned over their knee" and struck five or six times with an open hand - never on bare skin. It had an atmosphere of formality and was very quickly over with. My pride smarted far longer than my bottom did. Pain played an almost insignifigant role in the whole affair.

Usually, if it came to a formal 'spanking', I had been warned several times about non-compliance and the imminence of a spanking should compliance not be forthcoming. It was never a surpise. Never out of the blue.

Lastly, my parents did employ what they called a 'swat' from time to time. This, too, petered out when I was quite young. A 'swat' was a single, light blow to the seat of my pants. It would come (as far as I was concerned) out of the blue, but it was mainly employed when my parents were wholly unsuccessful at getting my attention by more conventional means and I was the one who was out in the wild blue yonder, utterly ignoring them. They might as well have been barking like dogs in the night for all I was paying attention. A 'swat' would instantly recall me to what I was supposed to be doing. It didn't hurt. It was always a bit of a shock, though.

As I recall, their use of physical blows was always sparing and remarkably restrained. Lucky me. I do believe that there are times when words fail to get the required response, simply because they are words. At such times a direct, unmistakably physical connection can cut through the noise and get your point across. The point of a spanking should never be: "I am bigger than you. I can hurt you. Be afraid." It is OK in my opinion to convey the point: "Pay attention to what I say next time. I'm serious about this."

If you have a temper that makes it possible you'll hurt your child, I'd be extremely reluctant to recommend spanking, lest you cross the line on a surge of anger. If you can control your anger then it can be just another tool in the toolkit - rarely used, but effective.

I Am Curious (George), when I wrote
but hey I know it's an idea that is way too progressive, especially since everyone in north america voted right-wing recently, there won't be interest in this any time soon

you said

Please feel free to con yourself all you want, but don't pass that shit on to the unsuspecting as "fact."

re-reading myself now, I shouldn't have wrote "everyone", sorry about that. You had quite a strong reaction there isn'it? and you didn't quote my smiley :-(
don't get me wrong it was an attempt at humor, yes? taking the piss pretending to be the bad kind of cynic, resenting the result of latest elections in Québec, Canada and the USA. I guess it's just a coincidence the right politically owns all that territory nowadays.

Just renting. Hopefully their lease will run out soon. As for having a strong reaction, those of us who voted against Bush hate being forgotten by the international left as much as the right here at home. At least I do.

Cultural disagreements are playing a large role here - I don't see why the idea of an anarchist community is absurd for instance. Nevertheless, it's a small matter.

I've enjoyed Nabisco's posts so far, but I really want to know one thing - is it acceptable for a father to spank his 15 year old daughter? If not, should the state intervene? No-one here has argued that smacking should continue into adolescence (for entirely obvious reasons - I don't think that people who smack their children are wicked or cruel, for what it's worth, I just think that the state should dicourage the practice while better equiping parents for the realities of discipline, including anger mangagement. In fact, I feel this would be beneficial to society as a whole), so do people think that adolescents should be afforded the same protection as adults against assault? At what age does that stop? I understand the desire for this to be a case by case matter, but that is impractical; also does anyone think there is a case in which a 15 year old should be spanked? I really think not, and repeating myself, they should be protected. Even if you feel that smacking is acceptable, you must surely think that the law fails in it's duty to protect teenagers from violence.

from a counselor
or teachers if they find out;
it's the law (most states)

As for how to discipline children--"problem" children don't even exist in nonviolent households.

Arizona: ARIZ. REV. STAT. Sec. 15-843

"If the governing board of a local school district authorizes the use of corporal punishment, the board shall prescribe rules setting forth means and procedures for the administration of corporal punishment consistent with the following: .... to be used when all other disciplinary measures have been exhausted ... will be administered by spanking the buttocks of the student to cause no more than temporary pain and not to inflict permanent damage ... only administered by educationally certified personnel ... witnessed by an adult employee.. parents to be notified promptly that corporal punishment has been administered".

Never happened to me but very few others escaped it; they would threaten and carry out it for the smallest thing...the closest I came was when I almost didn't turn in a permission slip for something, aged 11.

haha xpost I'll take YOU to goth school, mister!

wha?????????

Your characterization of society being unhealthy due to the presence of violence is dubious at best. First of all: does spanking a misbehaving child qualify as "violence?" Are we really so prude that a term hitherto reserved for murder, destruction, and assault can now include corporal punishment?

People spank each other for sexual pleasure; would you consider this to be violent? I will venture to guess that you wouldn't because the aim of this sort of spanking is not malicious, therefore it doesn't qualify as proper violence.

I put it to you, though, that the aim of spanking a child as punishment is not malicious either. The purpose is to reinforce correct behavior in a child who cannot understand the ramifications of his or her actions and it is done so that the child may turn into a young adult who acts correctly. Is this sort of education malicious?

If you accept that spanking for pleasure isn't violence because it has a non-malicious purpose, then you must also accept that spanking children for misbehavior isn't violence because the purpose is also non-malicious.