Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Kane" wrote in message

No Kane, it's apparent that only YOU see direct links which do not
exist.

No, I am not the only person to see such links. Those doing research
in brain scans and behavioral observation research are my sources. As
well as my own long history of observation and treatment of abused
children.

Your knowledge of brain scans has already been proven faulty and you
continue with it?

I must have missed what you thought was proof, Dennis. Care to post it again?

Just as there is a long history of nonsense from people who claim that
spanking is abusive.

Again you're making assertions for which I've seen no proof offered. Care to
back up your words?

They are too caught up in their own self righeousness
that they cannot comprehend the damage that they are creating.

Damage, caused by people who advocate against hurting children? So it's people
who strongly advocate and practice only kind and respectful treatment of
children and NOT those who think nothing of dishing out pain, punishment,
humiliation and disrespect, who are the ones causing damage? Again, anything to
back up what you insist upon believing?

People who were physically abused generally resort to physical abuse
themselves. It's a never ending cycle, yet you still refuse to
differentiate between abuse and spanking,

Did you ever wonder how or why spanking is propogated from one generation to the
next in spanking families, just as severe physical abuse is propogated
multigenerationally in other families? Do you think spanking somehow propogates
itself because it's such a good idea, rather than because abuse works that way?

or show proof that those who spank
for disciplinary reasons or teaching their child correct behavior at a very
young age

What's wrong with modelling correct behavior, giving an abundance of time and
loving attention to young children, treating them respectfully, and catering to
their genuine needs so that they have no pent-up emotional energy motivating
them to exhibit bad behavior?

In other words the spanked child tends to have reactions that interfer
with them getting what they need and want without a lot of pain
involved. Sometimes for themselves and sometimes for others.

Where does that inference come in? My observations have been that the non
spanked child has very little awareness of the consequences of his/her
actions and becomes quite manipulative, and that becomes quite problematic
as they grow older.

Instead of manipulative, don't you really mean "going after their own needs and
interests instead of caving to the needs of the self-centered authoritative
adult's?"

I've noticed that it's often problematic to neurotic adults when they see people
(kids and adults) who don't share in their neurosis. Like those who find it
problematic when kids openly express their real feelings instead of covering
them up, for the benefit of the neurotic adult [who couldn't express his real
feelings as a child and, hence, now can't stand it when other children do
express their feelings (displeasure, etc.) appropriately].

I've done a great deal of animal training, and some of my most
interesting work was undoing the bad training of others. I did a great
deal of it.

Animals do not have the reasoning ability that humans do.

Does this mean you don't believe in spanking children whose minds are still
developing and are too young to reason very well - like those who are ~3 and
younger?

By 'stupid'
behavior, in the very young, it's behavior that causes pain to them.
EXACTLY as many animals react by avoiding that situation. As a child grows
older, he learns that there are consequences to his actions. Something
many of your thinking cannot comprehend because you have taken away all the
consequences.

Are you speaking of consequences for not gracefully caving to an adult's needs?
You seem to be speaking of imposing consequences rather than allowing natural
consequences to occur. What do imposed consequences teach, other than that
larger, stronger and more powerful beings get to have their way over the
smaller, weaker and less powerful? Like the toddler who gets a sore butt for
complaining that he has to miss out on the last half of Sesame Street (so that
the mother could bend him to her needs and get him to the sitter in time to make
her bridge game).

some snippage

It has only been in recent history where 'spanking' or any type of corporal
punsihment has been looked down upon. YOU want to blame the condition of
society upon the 'spankers' of the past, but if you take note, we've
actually come to the point where the lack of spanking has been much more
prevalent over the past 30 years or so than at any time in past history.

In ancient times, whipping, and caning were quite prevalent.. Now, for the
most part in most societies, they are considered barbaric.

Haven't you ever wondered why humankind hasn't yet gotten to the point where the
majority sees the painful treatment of children the same way - barbaric?

When I went to
public schools, one would expect to be punished by a swat with a wooden
paddle on the rear end if you misbehaved. Take a good hard long look at the
condition of the public schools since corporal punishment has been banned.

What do you think the percentage of non-spanked kids (non-spanked at home) is in
an average public school?

Do you think school kids who enjoy freedom from cp in school are unaffected by
the pain and punishment they grew up with at home.

Do you think non-cp at school is either supposed to be a cure-all that will fix
the problems the child brings from home, or should be again replaced with cp?

Only a fool could refuse to see the obvious. That we have created a
generation which has absolutely no respect for authority and no fear of
retribution. There are no consequences. Try your approach with teenagers and
they'll tell you to go to hell just as quickly as not. For why not, all it
will do is get them out of school for a day. No punishment, no discipline.

And I suppose you'll assert that such kids were raised in a non-spank,
non-punitive environment in their earliest years when their attitudes and values
were being firmly established?

We've listened to the psychobabble that we must never say anything negative
to a child as it might hurt their psyche.

What do you mean by negative? Care to give a couple examples?

but what we have created is a
generation of children who are emotional cripples who cannot deal with even
the slightest bit of criticism without going off on tantrums.

I'm not sure what children you think you're talking about. FYI, to the best of
my knowledge, the majorityof children in the US are still spanked in early
childhood.

Did you ever wonder why criticism is painful to some people and not to others?

While
positive reinforcement is always preferable, one also has to learn to deal
with reality and that there are negatives which arise. Those who are denied
that, are emotionally crippled for life.

Again, care to back up your belief with some kind of substantiation?

-Jerry-