The Fallacies of Pro-Spanking Science

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

Nice propaganda! ;-) Isn't Chris Dunga is the one that called
you stupid? And all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

Doan


On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

Doan wrote:
Nice propaganda! ;-)

Do you mean lying "propaganda," or as the word propaganda means,
"information?"

Isn't Chris Dunga is the one that called
you stupid?

That's correct. He was, as far as I know, referring to one subject.

And all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

That was "ALL" of my "response?" R R R R R R .

Liar.

Or was that not a rhetorical question?

Doan

Do you really think a dancing hysterical monkey can distract folks that
care about their children and are looking for real answers? R R R R R

Yer a liar, dancing monkeyboy. We never had any such exchange on any
subject related to spanking or Corporal Punishment.

We were discussing, off topic, (this was not the appropriate place for
the discussion) the issue of the Middle East and our country's
involvement. And political disagreement does not mean we disagree on
all things. A simple bit of education for a simple dancing monkeyboy.
Hope this helps.

Yer such a simple **** you can't find anything to rebut my actual post,
but must hunt for out of context issues to try and make yourself look
less like the dancing monkeyboy you are...and oddly, your attempts make
it even more clear.

And that's all you have done for your entire posting history to this
ng: dance like an hysterical monkey.

For those who wish to personally understand Chris Dugan's position on
CP I suggest you visit this site:

http://www.geocities.com/cddugan/homepage.html

Chris' arguments are rock solid, as he takes on some highly visable but
very misguided people. In some instances he exposes quite creative
lying. Quite a read.

Kane




On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:


Doan wrote:
Nice propaganda! ;-)

Do you mean lying "propaganda," or as the word propaganda means,
"information?"

Look it up! ;-)

Isn't Chris Dunga is the one that called
you stupid?

That's correct. He was, as far as I know, referring to one subject.

And I agree with him. ;-)

And all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

That was "ALL" of my "response?" R R R R R R .

And didn't said "ALL", stupid! ;-)

Liar.

How can I lie if what I said above is true as you comfirned? STUPID! ;-)

Doan

Or was that not a rhetorical question?

Doan

Do you really think a dancing hysterical monkey can distract folks that
care about their children and are looking for real answers? R R R R R

Yer a liar, dancing monkeyboy. We never had any such exchange on any
subject related to spanking or Corporal Punishment.

We were discussing, off topic, (this was not the appropriate place for
the discussion) the issue of the Middle East and our country's
involvement. And political disagreement does not mean we disagree on
all things. A simple bit of education for a simple dancing monkeyboy.
Hope this helps.

Yer such a simple **** you can't find anything to rebut my actual post,
but must hunt for out of context issues to try and make yourself look
less like the dancing monkeyboy you are...and oddly, your attempts make
it even more clear.

And that's all you have done for your entire posting history to this
ng: dance like an hysterical monkey.

For those who wish to personally understand Chris Dugan's position on
CP I suggest you visit this site:

http://www.geocities.com/cddugan/homepage.html

Chris' arguments are rock solid, as he takes on some highly visable but
very misguided people. In some instances he exposes quite creative
lying. Quite a read.

Kane




On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

Doan wrote:
On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:


Doan wrote:
Nice propaganda! ;-)

Do you mean lying "propaganda," or as the word propaganda means,
"information?"

Look it up! ;-)

Isn't Chris Dunga is the one that called
you stupid?

That's correct. He was, as far as I know, referring to one subject.

And I agree with him. ;-)

Monkey's don't have opinions based on fact, just their silly dancing.

And all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

That was "ALL" of my "response?" R R R R R R .

And didn't said "ALL", stupid! ;-)

You are correct. You did not say "ALL," you said, "all." As in, from
this post and your attributions and the orginal post:

"And *all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

*is this not the word, "all?"

Liar.

How can I lie if what I said above is true as you comfirned? STUPID! ;-)

By claiming that my response consisted of only the "**** you, Chris"
statement. just as you wrote.

I understand that hysterical screaming dancing monkeyboys have trouble
with the language, but a direct quote is just that...what you actually
said, and you did say "all." And I certainly said more than "**** you,
Chris," now didn't I, monkeyboy?

Yer just trying to entertain yourself. Guess you wore your dick out, or
got callouses that hurt now.

0:-



Doan

Or was that not a rhetorical question?

Doan

Do you really think a dancing hysterical monkey can distract folks that
care about their children and are looking for real answers? R R R R R

Yer a liar, dancing monkeyboy. We never had any such exchange on any
subject related to spanking or Corporal Punishment.

We were discussing, off topic, (this was not the appropriate place for
the discussion) the issue of the Middle East and our country's
involvement. And political disagreement does not mean we disagree on
all things. A simple bit of education for a simple dancing monkeyboy.
Hope this helps.

Yer such a simple **** you can't find anything to rebut my actual post,
but must hunt for out of context issues to try and make yourself look
less like the dancing monkeyboy you are...and oddly, your attempts make
it even more clear.

And that's all you have done for your entire posting history to this
ng: dance like an hysterical monkey.

For those who wish to personally understand Chris Dugan's position on
CP I suggest you visit this site:

http://www.geocities.com/cddugan/homepage.html

Chris' arguments are rock solid, as he takes on some highly visable but
very misguided people. In some instances he exposes quite creative
lying. Quite a read.

Kane




On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:


Doan wrote:
On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:


Doan wrote:
Nice propaganda! ;-)

Do you mean lying "propaganda," or as the word propaganda means,
"information?"

Look it up! ;-)

Isn't Chris Dunga is the one that called
you stupid?

That's correct. He was, as far as I know, referring to one subject.

And I agree with him. ;-)

Monkey's don't have opinions based on fact, just their silly dancing.

So you are stupider than a monkey? ;-)

And all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

That was "ALL" of my "response?" R R R R R R .

And didn't said "ALL", stupid! ;-)

You are correct. You did not say "ALL," you said, "all." As in, from
this post and your attributions and the orginal post:

I said "all you can response" not "all of your response". You are
showing your stupidity again. ;-)

"And *all you can response is "**** you, Chris"?

*is this not the word, "all?"

It's "all you can response", stupid! ;-)

Liar.

How can I lie if what I said above is true as you comfirned? STUPID! ;-)

By claiming that my response consisted of only the "**** you, Chris"
statement. just as you wrote.

Liar, I didn't say "only", stupid! ;-)

I understand that hysterical screaming dancing monkeyboys have trouble
with the language, but a direct quote is just that...what you actually
said, and you did say "all." And I certainly said more than "**** you,
Chris," now didn't I, monkeyboy?

But you did say "**** you, Chris", did you not, "never-spanked" boy?

Yer just trying to entertain yourself. Guess you wore your dick out, or
got callouses that hurt now.

LOL! Resorting to profanity again, "never-spanked" boy. Let me guess,
your mom approved of that too, right? :-)

Doan

0:-



Doan

Or was that not a rhetorical question?

Doan

Do you really think a dancing hysterical monkey can distract folks that
care about their children and are looking for real answers? R R R R R

Yer a liar, dancing monkeyboy. We never had any such exchange on any
subject related to spanking or Corporal Punishment.

We were discussing, off topic, (this was not the appropriate place for
the discussion) the issue of the Middle East and our country's
involvement. And political disagreement does not mean we disagree on
all things. A simple bit of education for a simple dancing monkeyboy.
Hope this helps.

Yer such a simple **** you can't find anything to rebut my actual post,
but must hunt for out of context issues to try and make yourself look
less like the dancing monkeyboy you are...and oddly, your attempts make
it even more clear.

And that's all you have done for your entire posting history to this
ng: dance like an hysterical monkey.

For those who wish to personally understand Chris Dugan's position on
CP I suggest you visit this site:

http://www.geocities.com/cddugan/homepage.html

Chris' arguments are rock solid, as he takes on some highly visable but
very misguided people. In some instances he exposes quite creative
lying. Quite a read.

Kane




On 28 Sep 2005 wrote:

Pro-spanking "science" is replete with Cargo Cult thinking and
expressions of opinion. They just "know" that it works, while ignoring
their careful exclusionary construction in variables -- leaving out
critical components to the issue of so called "success" of spanking as
a teaching tool.

One of the better, along with Chris Dugan, the originator of this
newsgoup, debaters that uncover the fallacious thinking of the so
called scientists (which do not warrant such a title) is this author,
Tom Johnson, in his article subtitled, "A Point-by-Point Rebuttal to
the Apologetics of Two Pediatricians."

The two in question have left the AMA fold to start a strange campaign
for corporal punishment of children.

Some excerpts from Johnson's article:

"In their introduction the authors cite an FRC poll which reveals that
"more than than four out of five Americans [of 1000+ surveyed] who were
actually spanked by their parents say that it was an effective form of
discipline." The authors call these results "impressive" without taking
into account two very strong and natural biases: reluctance to fault
one's beloved parents and desire to present oneself as a well-formed
individual. The first, touching as it may often be, has many times led
even horribly abused children to blame themselves for the hurts they
have received, thereby acquitting the abuser (though when there is the
threat of further abuse, these pardons may be interpreted partly as the
repression of provocative anger.) The latter is suggested in the
familiar argument of "I got spanked and I turned out okay"--as if
someone could as readily state that they turned out not so good." ...

"More troublesome is the way the authors gratuitously characterize
child abuse as the act of an "angry, uncontrolled parent." While this
is an accurate picture of many cases, it is also something of a
stereotype. The more chilling reality is that a lot of child abuse is
committed in a fairly calm and deliberate manner, and usually with a
disciplinary purpose." ...

" In any case, child abuse has a long history of passing for reasonable
discipline, not only in the mind of the abuser but also in the eyes of
society. It must therefore be stressed that cruelty, not anger or lack
of composure, is the essence of this crime against children." ...

"On the other hand, the authors do report that corporal punishment "was
not adversely related to any of these [adolescent] outcomes [of
aggresiveness, deliquency, and psychological well- being]."
Interestingly, however, the subject of this study, according to the
footnotes, was specifically "harsh corporal punishment." So these
conclusions, if accepted as sound, would seem to vindicate even quite
severe spankings. Considering their statement in this article's very
first paragraph that "loving and effective discipline is quite
definitely not harsh and abusive," and as much they emphasize
"mildness," it is surprising that the authors are not misgiven about
this research." ...

http://www.nospank.net/johnson2.htm

Doan wrote:

........piffle, and nothing more.........

Dance monkeyboy.

0:-

LOL! Lie "never-spanked" boy.

Doan

On 29 Sep 2005 wrote:


Doan wrote:

.......piffle, and nothing more.........

Dance monkeyboy.

0:-