A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Spanking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 31st 03, 04:53 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message
...

Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue.

One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional

or
psychological abuse.


In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment

for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive.

For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from

this
protection.

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children

to be
victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically,
emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18.

This is weird logic, Dennis.

LaVonne


LaVonne.. not true at all.

Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by anyone
outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use corporal
punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system.

But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method of
discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at the adult
stages of their lives.

So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here.


  #12  
Old October 31st 03, 04:57 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:


Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this

issue. One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with

emotional or
psychological abuse.


In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual

punmishment for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive.

For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt

from this
protection.

LOL! Are you saying that cp is allowed in the juvenile justice system????


Doan, that was LaVonne Carleson's statement, not mine.

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little
children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is
considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once
that little child turns 18.

So spanking is the same as being flogged as a criminal???

This is weird logic, Dennis.


Doan, again you are attributing Lavonne's ludicrous statements to me and
they are not mine.

Yup! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive???
:-)

Doan


Hardly. Especially when the anti spanking zealots try to attribute the
nonsense of one of their own to me.




  #13  
Old October 31st 03, 04:59 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Sorry Doan, I thought you were trying to put Lavonne's words into my mouth.
I misread your intentions there.

"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:


Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this

issue. One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with

emotional or
psychological abuse.


In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual

punmishment for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive.

For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt

from this
protection.

LOL! Are you saying that cp is allowed in the juvenile justice system????

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little
children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is
considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once
that little child turns 18.

So spanking is the same as being flogged as a criminal???

This is weird logic, Dennis.

Yup! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive???
:-)

Doan




  #14  
Old November 1st 03, 03:32 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:50:17 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote:


"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
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?


*I* didn't -post it Gerald, someone else did and Kane effectively

backed
down on his claims.


"Effectively backdown?" Is that weaselspeak for "I couldn't debate him
fairly"

Just as his 'wealth' of experience eventually boiled
down to his reading of parenting books and personal observations upon
further questioning by myself and others.


Apparently you missed the many citations of researchers, but that's
okay. It's common for the victims of intergenerational cp to be
neurotically selective and hysterically blind to anything that brings
into question their carefully built artifice that preserves their
world view.


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?


Can you even read? Kane has said all along that he considers

spanking as
abusive, in fact at one point, called one 'cruel' for punishing a

toddler
who could not comprehend right from wrong.


You are correct. I do not think Alborn was asking you to give proof of
what I said. Obviously you have some crawfish DNA grafted into yours.


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?


Take a good hard long look at the public school system, the complete
breakdown in discipline and you can see EXACTLY what damage has been

done.

A good long hard look will show you that there is NO such thing at
all. Children are safer in school than they are at home. There are
more injuries and deaths that take place at the hands of their parents
and caregivers than by school personnel or fellow students.

You are a media casualty. Don't feel bad we all fall for it from time
to time.

Any search of relevant data on the safety of children, mortality
tables, etc. especially from the CDC and the DOJ will show you to be
miles from the truth.

Now just like Alborn I'm going to ask you to support your contention
that there is a "complete breakdown in discipline" vis a vis the
schools with some proof.
You make the claim, you accept responsibility for proof or show
yourself as ignorant or a liar. Your choice.

The fact that people like yourself and Kane equate any and all

punishment
which may involve some sort of humiliation or pain as 'cruel and

unusual'
punishment has led to an utter breakdown of discipline throughout

society.

I do not recall using the "cruel and unusual" punishment argument. I
will say it is cruel. It isn't hard to see that it is when you take a
150 to 200 pound adult whalin' on a 30 to 40, or less, child. It's
bullying.

As for "unusual" I don't think spanking is unusual. I think it is far
too usual.

I suppose you, like Kane are going to make the stretch that after

centuries
of acceptable spanking, even at the extremes in the past, that THAT

is now
responsible for the condition of society today, even considering the

fact
that non-spanking has gained a lot of following over the past thirty

or
forty years, and the psychobabble that anyone who decides their child

may
need some discipline is somehow abusive has attempted to put a stigma

on
even the mildest of discipline?


I have seen postings again and again that even in the US, a supposedly
enlightened nation, over 90 percent, sometimes even 98 percent of
parents spank or adults say they were spanked. With numbers like that
how can you possibly defend that non-spanking is the culprit for yoru
imagined breakdown in discipline?

In fact teens, a good indicator, have shown a steady decline in
criminal behavior over the past decade and before...all the while as
non-spanking grows and teachers and others, including parents, strive
to develop skills at non-punitive parenting.


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?

Yawn.. again, you try to confuse spanking with abuse.



Non of us are confused except you spanking freaks in denial. You and
other just like you continually claim that pain teachs, yet deny that
spanking is painful. Or you seem to when you claim it isn't "abuse."
Pain inflicted to get your way is nothing BUT abuse. More especially
non-pain, non-punitive methods have been shown to be superior
repeatedly.

Your denial of Embry's work is a perfect example of your frantic
scramble to protect your sick model of parenting.

Then please explain
how, with the disappearance of corporal punishment in the public

schools,
that any and all respect and discipline has vanished along with it.


Do you not think it odd that exactly where cp in the schools prevail
they have the worst records of behavior and the lowest academic
scores? Take a look at Texas, one of the hot for paddling state, for
instance. Or try Alabama, Arkansas, or Oklahoma.

Yes, everyone knows that abuse propogates from generation to

generation, but
any parent worth their salt also knows how their own children react

to
outside stimuli. Some children never need to suffer a spanking while

others
may well need a physical reinforcement. But of course, to you and

Kane, you
can use 'reason' and set guidelines which have absolutely no

consequences
for the child.


You neglected, in the beginning of this article to acknowledge my
claims to have worked with children who had been spanked and punished.
I noticed that.

I worked with children so screwed up by parenting NOT fit or allowed
to be used on animals that they had become dangerous to themselves and
others. I turned them around with gentle and non-punitive methods.

They were so screwed up it took longer for them to get that I wasn't
punishing them than it did for them to turn around when they finally
accepted I wasn't.

The hardest part was getting them over thugs like you.

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?


WHO said it was wrong? You want to pick apart every statement and

try to
put words into my mouth?


He isn't suggesting it's wrong or not. He's suggesting using it, and
if you missed that you are truly in sad shape.

Although I think I can see how you just managed to weasel out of
answering the meat of his question. Why spank if you have all those
other things going for you? Sounds like he expects you to be a good
parent that DOES use those things. Me, I'm not so sure about you at
this point. You are too wedded to abuse for my taste, and trying to
deny it by calling it something else.

They used to say that slavery was good for the darkies too. And that
women, by their natures, just couldn't think for themselves.

We seem to have gotten over that, but it took a damn war. I'd like you
assholes to wake up before the there has to be laws to do it for you.

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?"


NOPE.. not at all. Bull**** plain and simple.


You certainly are.

If you do not understand
that children learn, at a very young age to manipulate their parents

to get
what they want, then I pity your child.


Awww...poor widdle parents.

It's not always the needs of a
self centered authoritive adult, it's called PROTECTING a child and

teaching
them right from wrong.


I have taught many children and protected them at the same time
without using punishment, pain, humiliation. They want to learn but
the first time you hit them or punish them you start the clock on them
becoming manipulative to try and survive your nonsense and still learn
what nature compelles them to learn.

IF spanking on a limited basis achieves this, then
so be it, but you are trying the exact same nonsense that Kane is and

it
isn't working.


What in heaven's name is "spanking on a limited basis?" Is that like
getting just a little bit pregnant?

You cannot differentiate between abuse and discipline,


I have, and I suspect Alborn is even more skilled at, no trouble
differentiating between them. I disciplined every child I worked with
and the children I raised. And I am one tough disciplinarian. I am as
tough on me and other caregivers of children as I was on the children.

One has to have a clear moral purpose and a deep understanding of
child development to satisfy me if they are going to claim to be
disciplining.

You do NOT discipline when you spank. YOu simply punish. The two even
come from different root words. There is NO connection between them.

and
therefore are just as intellectually dishonest


Someone who claims that hitting a child to cause pain is just
"spanking" therefor something different is calling others
"intellectually dishonest?"

Pot, kettle, black.

as he is by attempting to put
down any and all efforts by parents to maintain what they feel is

best for
their own child.


I don't put down any and all efforts by parents. I put down the idea
that pain teaches what we want to teach....well, unless we are busy
raising the next generation of failures, emotionally crippled, and
criminal thinkers.


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].


Oh, so now anyone who disagree's with your position is neurotic?

LOL.

No, not anyone. I have some people that disagree with me on this issue
who I consider very healthy and thoughtful people. It depends on how
honest they are. You aren't. That appears neurotic to me.

Quite a stretch. No, I followed this thread for a long time before I
stepped in, watching Kane attempt to impress others with questionable
credentials and contradict himself time and time again in order to

somehow
put himself on moral high ground.


And what do you have to offer in the way of credentials or experience?
Or even cogent argument? You've just babbled away about your beliefs
and continually offered attacks against the one you debate.

To attempt to portray any and all spanking as abuse is simply not

being
honest


Is unecessary pain administered to someone involuntarily abusive?

and to attempt to being condescending as Kane has tried to be does
indeed cause one to respond in kind.


I don't condescend except to those that earn it. You are building up a
huge account.

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?


Since all the above quotes were by Kane, why don't you ask him that
question.


What question? Why don't you answer my questions?

If you've followed the thread closely, you'll note that he even
allowed his young daughter to be in direct danger (didn't supervise

her
close enough) and did nothing but talk to her afterwards.


All children will sooner or later get out of the direct control of
their parents. That was, you might note, an extreme rarity. And you'll
also note that they not only never did it again, after we talked about
it, but she increased her vigilance of ME when exploring, to see if
she was on the right track or could use some help.

Had I spanked her the Embry effect likely would have been put in
place...as nature intended....exploring is in a child's nature. They
will do it when you are there and can help, or if they are afraid of
you, when you are NOT there later when you can't stop them.

That is the cause of all that lack of discipline you whine about.
Spanked children being forced to explore dangerously on their own by
YOU and the other spankers and punishers.

I think this makes my point that his continual 'close supervision'
statements which attempt to portray any parent whose child receives

any kind
of pain (such as touching something hot) is somehow negligent is

quite
incorrect on his part.


I made no such claim. I merely stated it is the responsibility to
supervise, not that it was required they be perfect. How neurotic of
you.


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?

What adult's needs? You act as if you personally have been the

victim of a
brutal adult.


Certainly. Not intentionally but because most adults do not KNOW they
are being brutal when they punish.

MOST adult's don't have a 'need' to punish their child,


R R R R sure.

but
anyone who cannot understand setting limits and teaching the child

there are
consequences for exceeding those limits is fooling themselves.


I had not the least difficulting in doing just that. My logical and
natural consequence was simply that they had to attend my talk with
them..which they willingly did because there was NO shaming,
humiliting, hurtful namecalling, nothing painful in talking with me.
We worked out limits that they either followed, younger, because they
trusted me, or later in life because they understood the information I
shared with them and helped them explore.

I have yet
to see ANY child who does not test the limits.


Me either. I've also never seen a child, and that includes the very
sick ones I worked with, that couldn't operate inside the limits if I
thoughtfully parented him or her respectfully.

It's called being a parent
and teaching your child right from wrong.


Tell me about it. I did tons of it.

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).


Or the child who is so used to getting their way that they dart out

into a
busy street,


Wherever did you get the idea that children that aren't punished get
their own way all the time, or even most of the time?

One of the first things I teach children is how to negotiate fairly
and equitabley with others. They love it. They don't feel powerless
and overwhelmed but empowered and respected within the limits of their
capacity.

or the natural consequences of letting them go ahead and put
their finger in a light socket and see if it hurts them?


YOU might do that. Neither Alborn or I would. Nor would we need to hit
them to make them stop. If they are too little to know we simple don't
have any light sockets handy. If they are older we can demonstrate
with batteries in series or a transformer. I've done that with a
child. But then we homeschooled and our lives were filled with all
kinds of experiments that included risks we taught the child to attend
to.

It's very easy when the child trusts you. It's very HARD when they
don't.

Get real... the world is fraught with dangers, and to attempt to make

it
somehow an adult's 'need' to punish for the hell of it is ignoring

the issue
and attempting to do the same thing that Kane is doing.


The need to punish you exhibit is very plain. Your belief that
children can't learn without, obvious. You are simply wrong. You
taught your own children NOT to learn without pain. Nice work.

IF you let your
child follow 'natural consequences' then you most assuredly are

negligent in
your duties as a parent in teaching them to avoid many things which

are
harmful.


Where did you see Alborn or myself make such a claim? Why would I
mention supervision at all if I believed that unfettered natural
consequences were the only way to teach a child not to do something
risky?

You complained about others putting words in your mouth. Are you
unaware of how blatantly you just did that?


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?

Nope, not at all. I am quite willing to distinguish the difference

between
'spanking' as a teaching method and later as a disciplinary tool, and
outright abuse.


Of course you are. That is the nature of neurosis. You have to protect
yourself from the knowledge that spanking is pain and pain is abusive.
YOu do it by considering, I'd wager, that since children learn from
natural consequences that YOU can apply consequences (but you of
course forget the "natural" part).

OF COURSE 'painful' treatment of children is barbaric, but for the

most
part, a reasonable parent's disciplinary action of swatting a child's

butt
usually results more in a mild reinforcement than outright pain.


Oh please. You just refuted, or attempted to refute, the whole point
of using spanking. Spankers that start this nonsense prove
conclusively they are out of their ****ing minds.

"Don't try to call spanking hitting." I've heard it again and again.
When I ask if they will give me permission to "spank" them they seem
to back right off and start babbling this bull**** you just came up
with.

To a child what you think is a mild little swat is as jarring as if a
linebacker nailed you with his fist.

Again,
keep on trying to use the words to portray any and all spanking as

abuse and
you continue to ignore the real issues.


Please. Not this old saw again. If it isn't painful what is the point?
I can get a child's attention in many ways that do not include
"spanking." A simple touch on the shoulder, her name, stepping in
front of them...but then I have the child's trust.

I wonder why YOU have to use spanking to get that attention I get so
easily?


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?


Doesn't matter what the percentage is. The plain fact is they can

tell you
to go to hell, and there are no consequences at school. You have

reinforced
a complete breakdown in discipline, and it shows.


What they "can" do and what they do are two different things. My
children, and the children I worked with, once turned around, wouldn't
think of speaking to others that way. Well, unless they were nutcases
that were going to try and spank them. I did have one child leave
school and come and find me when he was told he was going to be
spanked. Smart little kid. 4th grader.

We put a stop to that, and the supposed bad behavior, which he hadn't
done anyway (got the wrong kid), never happened.


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.


Has no bearing.


Beg your pardon? What planet are you living on?

Children who are abused at home will still bear that
stigma. Those who have been taught discipline, either thru spankings

or non
spankings will show that same discipline at school.


R R R R You really are a dunce aren't you? The worst acting kids I
knew when I was a schoolboy were the kids MOST spanked at home.

But I will grant you, if the discipline is NOT punishment based, but
true discipline...teaching....you are correct. I proved that
repeatedly and taught other parents to do it as well, and they too
succeeded.

But many will bow to
peer pressure,


I love this one. It's the punished child that will, when confronted
with the fear of punishment from their parent, take that toke, let the
boy in her pants, spray graffiti, steal that lipstick.

It's the parent that has raised the child with a constantly growing
trust that the child will hear and see in her mind when tempted and
who she cannot bear to cause pain to.

By the time a child is a teen they aren't afraid of their parents no
matter how much "disciplining" by pain and fear they have had. It is
the child that lives free of fear of pain that can't bear to hurt
others, and most especially their parent.

and those that don't have just been as abused by the system
because they have been subjected to complete chaos, brought on by

those who
cannot distinguish between discipline and abuse who have set the

standards.

You just indicted yourself completely. YOU are unable to distinguish
between discipline and punishment. And that is the problem. Big time.

That is the chaos that you set upon your children. Just when they need
to think you want them to do a kneejerk conditioned response to
you...and as a teen they WILL NOT DO IT FOR LONG. They will fight
it...even younger children will, and they will learn to sneak or they
will wait until they are bigger than you.


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?

What about the child who brings NO problems from home???


Check out who is bringing the problems from home. It's isn't the
punished child. It is the much punished child that is the most
disruptive in the classroom.

Isn't he or she
allowed to get an education,


Yes, so stop spanking your children and driving them to act out away
from you in their desparation to learn what they are trying to learn.

or are they to simply sit back and watch the
complete breakdown of discipline ruin their chances at an education?


Tell me again about this complete breakdown and the 90% of children
that are spanked. See if you can sort out your logic just a bit.

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?


Many were indeed.


Bull****. There are so few that are so raised that the odds are
extremely against you ever seeing one. Or knowing one when you did.

I wasn't raised in a vacuum. Again, you seem to be
following the same logic as Kane and beleive that somehow each and

every
child can be treated in the exact same manner.


Odd you should mention that yet again. I answered you once on this. It
is YOU that think that. That pain is applicable to teaching. Fear and
humiliation are not required for teaching. It's a construct of the
neurotic that is a product of intergenerational cp.

Sorry, this is the real
world. Just ask anyone who has dealt with hyperactive children or

children
who have truly been abused.


YOU? Tell us your experience.

Those are the very children that will react the most dramatically by
acting out MORE if they are spanked. Even punishment is virtually
useless with them...they are eitehr incapable of reacting in the way
you want (hyperactivity) or they are abused and have had it all done
to them. They'll just keep you on a cycle with them in charge.

You'll punish for some transgression, usually some apparently wanton
destruction or injury to others...everything will calm down for a few
days, they slowly the tension will build to the next event of wanton
destruction or disobedience, and you'll whack'em again, and
congratulate yourself because things will be calm again...and the ...
well, you get the idea.

The child owns your behavior at that point. They can MAKE you spank
them any time they wish it...and an abused child wishes to have
control over that very much...that way they can plan their life with
much more of a feeling of control.

Of course it is sick and they'll do it to their kids.

Even those who weren't, be it spanked or non
spanked children, they all need an individual approach. Your one

size fits
all approach doesn't work, and the attempt to portray anyone who

disciplines
their child as abusive doesn't work well either.


So tell us how leaving out spanking and punishment and using the vast
repertoire of non-punitive methods is a one size fits all approach?

Some of the children I raised I would never even gently jostle..they
were so sensitive, while others I had to do "airplane" and "buzzybee"
with daily or they wondered if I loved them...r r r

Some I'd have to chase down and grab up to talk with, while others the
mere lifting of my eyebrow was enough to get their attention.

Don't you think it's about time you stopped the nonsense with this
'one size fits all' nonsense?


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?


Never criticize a child.. always use positive reinforcement.


I beg your pardon? I don't know what you have found from Gerald's
posts but I defy you to find any such claim in any of mine. My
criticism isn't, just like with adults, meant to hurt or punish
though. It would be pointless. With an adult it might get me a poke in
the nose, but with the child all it does it shut them down..they can't
think, they can't chose a better action, they can't trust me.

And as for reinforcement...r r r r . You forget, I'm quite content
with natural consequences as long as their is no psychic or physical
injury involved.

And I have been known, when a child is doing something I don't like
and watching me out of the corner of their eye, to simply turn away.
Children are tuned into adults.

The lighter the touch the more reactive the child, if one knows what
one is doing.

I learned that doing Dressage work with horses. You don't get a horse
into a Levade, Passage, or even Capriole with brutality. You do it
with gradually decreasing intensity of cues so the horse is watching
you like a hawk for the next cue.

Children are, if their sensitivity isn't dulled by cp, even more
reactive than horses.

It is quite
true that one's self esteem can be greatly damaged by continual put

down's,
but it's come to the point that if you do not use some kind of

positive
reinforcment or praise for every thing a child does, then one is some

kind
of abusive creature.


Don't know where you get your information, but I suspect you are
looking at what you read with **** colored glasses. Dobson the dog
trainer does that a lot. A child performing a simple act of
exploratory behavior is transformed into a guerilla warrior out to
carry off your entire fortune and rape you to boot.

I detect just a bit of that viewpoint in you.

"manipulate the parent" r r r r ....poor widdle parent.

Kane has pointed that out quite well in his ramblings.. note he has

stated
that he never tells his children what to do or where to play, or

that
something is wrong, but always tries to 'give them a safe place to

play, a
grassy playground' etc.. or tells them how good they were (even when

his
child was in a very dangerous situation).. how many 'examples' do

you
need?


You need to reread that. Of course I told her she was good at what she
was doing...climbing...because that is the truth. Now was that the
only thing I told her, or discussed with her? Hmmmm...now was it?

**** colored glasses viewpoint. Nice going.

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.


How far does that knowledge extend? If you listen to Kane, he's

been
around many non spanking parents for all his 70 years.


Nope, but most of it. You are putting words in my mouth...tsk tsk tsk.

Over the past twenty
or thirty years, we've been bombarded with 'parenting' books and

'studies'
which attempt to portray spanking as completely abusive.


You are such a big strong man to resist this horrible attack on you. I
so admire your resiliance and persistence.

The numbers of
those who use absolutely no spanking has been growing steadily.


Oh, not nearly as fast as it will be comin' at you soon.

It's about like the long struggle for abolishion. All the real action
took place in about 20 years, after a couple of hundred years of
agitatin'

And it's going to happen with spanking. Soon afterward, when parents
are forced to give more thought to dropping cp they'll have to then
look at non-cp punishment...because it doesn't work all that well
either unless backed by the threat of cp.

And the gain will be immense. More and more people will understand the
need to pursue peaceful means of resolving human conflict. I suspect
I'll be dead and gone, but I'm heartened to see the progress made, and
the strong likelihood of success just a small way ahead.


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

to
others?

Criticism when done constructively should never be painful. When one

has
never experienced criticism in their entire life, then they don't

know how
to deal with it.


Do you think that children that haven't been spanked and haven't been
punished then have not experienced criticism?

The only way criticism is painful is when one has been so abused

mentally
that their self esteem is at an all time low.


No, it is more likely to be a difference in perception and reaction to
the environment. I was remarking to a collegue not long ago that when
I ran the physical plant in a small hospital I was always stopping by
the nursery to gaze at the newborns. Not much meds used for childbirth
in the out of the way place I lived. And the children were as
different from each other as adults are.

Some were sleepy and dreamy. Some where wide awake and wiggling like
they couldn't get to exploring soon enough. Others were looking about
silently like it was all too much stimuli for them. Others were so
****ed off they were livid with rage and screamed about it.

Hardly what we are talking
about here, taking things to the extreme as Kane has attempted

throughout
this entire thread.


I have taken things to extremes? r r r

It's extreme to call spanking for pain abusive?

I think I have been very self controlled. My rage at you assholes is
monumental, but I contain myself for the most part.

I can understand how YOU might feel, what with your sick views being
attacked, as though it's extreme.

I should hope you'd have some extreme feelings. Children that are hit
do, with varying negative results.

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-


Not a belief but a fact of life which should be apparent to anyone

with a
bit of common sense.


What "common sense" are you referring to here...that spanking is not
hitting?

How many more school shootings, or attempted school
shootings will convince you?


It would take about 10 done by children that were raised without pain
parenting to convince me. Line them up. I'll bet with careful
examination we'll find in fact there was pain parenting involved.

Are you aware that at least two of the instances of school shootings
included a recent school paddling of the perps? Are you aware that
some were children that had no real parenting...no one home...parents
already violent people?

The kids at Columbine, and the growing numbers of those who attempt

to wreck
havoc on classmates because of being ridiculed or outcast by their

peers has
been growing by leaps and bounds in the past few years.


All spanked I'd wager. All punished.

Do you think this
is a new concept? Have we only recently had cliques in schools, or

kids
who have been ridiculed or outcast by others?


Nope. We've always had them and they have shot up the schools before.
You need to do a little history checking.

Or could it be that we are creating a generation of emotional

cripples as I
suggest.


Yes, spanking does that. I consider you a great example.

No, of course not. Let's ignore the fact that in times past, we
had the exact same conditions and kids learned to deal with it. Why

do you
suppose that is?


R R R R R

Look up how old most of the most notorious cut throats, highwaymen,
and otherwise badass in the Old West were when they started. They came
right out of those old schoolhouses where the paddled ruled.

Germany prior to its adventure in fascism was a notoriously pain
parenting state.

Maybe they didn't have everything sugarcoated and spoon fed to them

that the
world was such a great place, and they were such good people and that

the
world revolves around them.


I don't recall that children currently have such treatment.

Maybe they realized that there would be consequences for their

actions if
they decided to act upon their egotistical delights.


And yet they produced their own murderers, bandits, and big time
colonizing thugs that exploited others heavily. Read some history.

Were is this utopian past you claim?

I lived in much of it and I don't recall seeing all this sweetness and
light you claim. The jails were full. Murder was common, and in many
instances more so than today.

We had no lack of violence back then, nor of children that were out of
control.

Again, learn to distinguish between abuse and discipline and teaching

a
child right from wrong and we can have a meaningful discourse.


Learn to distinguish between discipline and punishment and you could
be right.

Kane
  #15  
Old November 1st 03, 03:36 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote:


"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message
...

Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this

issue.
One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive

behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with

emotional
or
psychological abuse.


In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual

punmishment
for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically

abusive.
For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is

exempt from
this
protection.

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little

children
to be
victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered

physically,
emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child

turns 18.

This is weird logic, Dennis.

LaVonne


LaVonne.. not true at all.

Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by

anyone
outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use

corporal
punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system.


LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that
it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things
that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric.

But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method

of
discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at

the adult
stages of their lives.


One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the
clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no
matter how slight.

Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers.

Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not.


So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here.


So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs.

Kane
  #16  
Old November 1st 03, 10:08 AM
Gerald Alborn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Kane" wrote in message


I've noticed that you make a lot of claims, yet offer nothing to substantiate
any of them, even claiming that Kane's knowledge is faulty and that he's backed
down on all his claims, etc. You offer nothing to support your positions except
for a tight (even seemingly desperate) grip on your beliefs.

Did you ever consider taking a long hard look at why you are so compelled to
simply accept your beliefs about parenting and spanking, etc., without coming
out into the fresh air, smelling the coffee and asking yourself why you must
simply accept, without question, that your beliefs constitute a model of pure,
unadultrated truth that all should live by?

Twenty years ago, I had essentially the same attitude you have. I was a spanking
parent. I saw no reason to question it or my belief that it was the way children
needed to be parented. Then, at a friend's urging, I ended up in a Parenting
Effectiveness Training (PET) class.

A short time afterward, I started to ask questions about my firmly rooted
beliefs. I started to look into the whys and the hows of parenting, etc. I must
admit that I didn't have an open mind about this before then. Since then, I have
had a yearning to know more about it, how emotions work, what developmental and
emotional needs are, how children's needs are so often violated by traditional
parenting methods, what motivates people (including children) to behave as they
do, and how parenting is blindly passed from one generation to the next without
so much as a question or a passing thought about it. These and many more
questions never come to the surface of a person's mind when one has a grip on
beliefs that is as firm as yours. In all fields of life, a firm grip on
preserving the ways of the past offers little benefit for the future.

We didn't go to the moon using the technology of the 1800's. People are creative
beings with energy, imagination, and drive for the advancement of knowledge to
better understand our world and to better our lives. We spend trillions on
learning about the world, about the universe, and about life and how to make it
better - in many ways. But, when it comes to raising children, the ways of past
generations is good enough and no one has any business questioning any of it.
Apparently it might offend one's parents and grandparents to not blindly accept
their ways and carry those ways forward into future generations. So, knowledge
about parenting, and how the minds of little children work during their crucial
years of early development, is not an arena where most people want to or care to
visit or to make any changes or advancements?

Dennis, are all your beliefs so firmly rooted that I may as well assume they are
cast in concrete, such that there is no chance for changing them?

Is everything you disbelieve "nonsense?"

-Jerry-

  #17  
Old November 3rd 03, 05:43 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

No Gerald, it is KANE who has made a lot of claims. Consider the absolute
nonsense of what you propose.. KANE claims that a practice which has been
acceptable throughout history is harmful, yet you want ME to substantiate
that it is not???

KANE claims that he has so damned much 'experience' when it eventually
boiled down to his own limited observations.

KANE claimed that rich or powerful people never spanked their children,
(based upon his own fraternizing with a few in his lifetime) and wants proof
that throughout history of ANY of the great leaders being spanked. Common
sense would tell you that the wealthy and powerful would not stray from
acceptable practices of the period, and in fact, most literature points out
that many were schooled in private institutions, most of which DID in fact,
use corporal punishment for disciplinary actions.

Then, both you and he avoid the separation between a swat on the behind with
the open hand as a means of teaching a young child to avoid a dangerous
situation, and the use of spanking for older children to instill discipline,
with outright abuse.

I have dealt with hundreds and hundreds of children, both abused and non
abused, and I can assure you, most of the parents in this group can tell you
that each child responds differently and no one single method works for
every child, even within the same family.

No one is proposing abusive treatment of children, as you and Kane seem to
try to portray and you cannot capture the high moral ground by avoiding the
distinction between abuse and spanking.

I argue vehemently because it is precisely this nonsense that people like
yourself and Kane try to imply that all spanking is abusive by avoiding the
separation of such and attempt to put yourselves upon high moral ground.

And I DO take a long hard look at the truth and how people like you have
created a generation of children who lack respect or discipline in their
lives simply because you've coddled them to the point of not being able to
deal with reality.



"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Kane" wrote in message


I've noticed that you make a lot of claims, yet offer nothing to

substantiate
any of them, even claiming that Kane's knowledge is faulty and that he's

backed
down on all his claims, etc. You offer nothing to support your positions

except
for a tight (even seemingly desperate) grip on your beliefs.

Did you ever consider taking a long hard look at why you are so compelled

to
simply accept your beliefs about parenting and spanking, etc., without

coming
out into the fresh air, smelling the coffee and asking yourself why you

must
simply accept, without question, that your beliefs constitute a model of

pure,
unadultrated truth that all should live by?

Twenty years ago, I had essentially the same attitude you have. I was a

spanking
parent. I saw no reason to question it or my belief that it was the way

children
needed to be parented. Then, at a friend's urging, I ended up in a

Parenting
Effectiveness Training (PET) class.

A short time afterward, I started to ask questions about my firmly rooted
beliefs. I started to look into the whys and the hows of parenting, etc. I

must
admit that I didn't have an open mind about this before then. Since then,

I have
had a yearning to know more about it, how emotions work, what

developmental and
emotional needs are, how children's needs are so often violated by

traditional
parenting methods, what motivates people (including children) to behave as

they
do, and how parenting is blindly passed from one generation to the next

without
so much as a question or a passing thought about it. These and many more
questions never come to the surface of a person's mind when one has a grip

on
beliefs that is as firm as yours. In all fields of life, a firm grip on
preserving the ways of the past offers little benefit for the future.

We didn't go to the moon using the technology of the 1800's. People are

creative
beings with energy, imagination, and drive for the advancement of

knowledge to
better understand our world and to better our lives. We spend trillions on
learning about the world, about the universe, and about life and how to

make it
better - in many ways. But, when it comes to raising children, the ways of

past
generations is good enough and no one has any business questioning any of

it.
Apparently it might offend one's parents and grandparents to not blindly

accept
their ways and carry those ways forward into future generations. So,

knowledge
about parenting, and how the minds of little children work during their

crucial
years of early development, is not an arena where most people want to or

care to
visit or to make any changes or advancements?

Dennis, are all your beliefs so firmly rooted that I may as well assume

they are
cast in concrete, such that there is no chance for changing them?

Is everything you disbelieve "nonsense?"

-Jerry-



  #18  
Old November 3rd 03, 06:22 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Kane, if all you can do is spout insults, then you have truly lost your
argument.

"Kane" wrote in message
om...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:50:17 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote:


"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
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?


*I* didn't -post it Gerald, someone else did and Kane effectively

backed
down on his claims.


"Effectively backdown?" Is that weaselspeak for "I couldn't debate him
fairly"


EXACTLY. You've attempted to twist at every turn, you've attempted to put
words into the mouths of others, and in fact backpeddled on many issues.


Just as his 'wealth' of experience eventually boiled
down to his reading of parenting books and personal observations upon
further questioning by myself and others.


Apparently you missed the many citations of researchers, but that's
okay. It's common for the victims of intergenerational cp to be
neurotically selective and hysterically blind to anything that brings
into question their carefully built artifice that preserves their
world view.


Your research was shown to be nothing but nonsense, brain scans cannot
measure emotions or other factors. And it's blindness not to see the
generation of misfits your thinking has brought into being.



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?


Can you even read? Kane has said all along that he considers

spanking as
abusive, in fact at one point, called one 'cruel' for punishing a

toddler
who could not comprehend right from wrong.


You are correct. I do not think Alborn was asking you to give proof of
what I said. Obviously you have some crawfish DNA grafted into yours.


Bull**** Kane, he WAS asking ME to give proof, which has already been posted
here by others. As for crawfish, you'll note that I haven't backed down a
bit in my position, nor have I weaseled around and contradicted myself as
many times as you have in this debate.



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?


Take a good hard long look at the public school system, the complete
breakdown in discipline and you can see EXACTLY what damage has been

done.

A good long hard look will show you that there is NO such thing at
all. Children are safer in school than they are at home. There are
more injuries and deaths that take place at the hands of their parents
and caregivers than by school personnel or fellow students.


Again, your ignorance of the facts are showing Kane. Children are NOT safer
in school, not even with the narcs on campus, or the metal detectors at the
entrance ways.

This is the typical liberal bull**** that is attempting to take away ALL
parental rights by the bogus claims that children are injured more at home
by 'caregivers' and parents than at school. How about the schools which
cover up incidents of abuse? I personally know of several cases involving
lawsuits where children have been abused in the schools. We've had several
incidents recently where a teacher taped children's mouths shut with duct
tape.

And then you tend to forget the emotional abuse which occurs.. No Kane,
some parents DO abuse their children and injure them, but you cannot
possibly show any true statistics to back up those claims that they are
'safer' in the public schools. Nor even in the private schools, given the
history of abuse by priests in the Catholic church in this country.


You are a media casualty. Don't feel bad we all fall for it from time
to time.

*I* am a media casualty?? LOL.. YOU my friend are a casualty of nonsensical
doublespeak by psychologists who think they can analyze children and apply a
single rule to all.

Anyone who thinks they can learn parenting from a book is bound to
eventually realize that they can throw the book away once they realize their
children are not exactly alike. Perhaps you lack some bit of common sense
in your background because apparently, you failed to learn that lesson.

Any search of relevant data on the safety of children, mortality
tables, etc. especially from the CDC and the DOJ will show you to be
miles from the truth.


Post your facts then if you have them. It is YOU who are making the claim.


Now just like Alborn I'm going to ask you to support your contention
that there is a "complete breakdown in discipline" vis a vis the
schools with some proof.


How many metal detectors did you see when you were in school? How many
'narcs' and school police were routinely placed on campus as a matter of
common nature?

How many riots took place on campus in our day? How many shootings by
students occurred. I can tell you, EXACTLY NONE. Nationwide.

And you need more proof?


You make the claim, you accept responsibility for proof or show
yourself as ignorant or a liar. Your choice.


NO, you are showing yourself as a complete ass who cannot face reality.


The fact that people like yourself and Kane equate any and all

punishment
which may involve some sort of humiliation or pain as 'cruel and

unusual'
punishment has led to an utter breakdown of discipline throughout

society.

I do not recall using the "cruel and unusual" punishment argument. I
will say it is cruel. It isn't hard to see that it is when you take a
150 to 200 pound adult whalin' on a 30 to 40, or less, child. It's
bullying.


Bull**** Kane.. You are again confusing spanking and abuse. Quite a
difference. You are dishonest and your ONLY reason for posting your
nonsense is to attempt to take away parental rights. I consider it abusive
NOT to instill discipline in a child or to give a small child a swat to keep
them out of harms way.

As for "unusual" I don't think spanking is unusual. I think it is far
too usual.

I suppose you, like Kane are going to make the stretch that after

centuries
of acceptable spanking, even at the extremes in the past, that THAT

is now
responsible for the condition of society today, even considering the

fact
that non-spanking has gained a lot of following over the past thirty

or
forty years, and the psychobabble that anyone who decides their child

may
need some discipline is somehow abusive has attempted to put a stigma

on
even the mildest of discipline?


I have seen postings again and again that even in the US, a supposedly
enlightened nation, over 90 percent, sometimes even 98 percent of
parents spank or adults say they were spanked. With numbers like that
how can you possibly defend that non-spanking is the culprit for yoru
imagined breakdown in discipline?


Where are those statistics Kane? Apparently, you are backpeddling again
since YOU personally have claimed that the rich and powerful do not spank,
and doubt they ever spanked throughout history.

You've been around non spanking parents for most of your nearly 70 years..
YOUR OWN WORDS. Now then, you either admit you are a damned liar, or your
'experience' and 'observations' were very limited indeed.


In fact teens, a good indicator, have shown a steady decline in
criminal behavior over the past decade and before...all the while as
non-spanking grows and teachers and others, including parents, strive
to develop skills at non-punitive parenting.


Actually, the stats I recall from memory is that crime has declined steadily
overall, but teen crime has risen slightly.



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?

Yawn.. again, you try to confuse spanking with abuse.



Non of us are confused except you spanking freaks in denial. You and
other just like you continually claim that pain teachs, yet deny that
spanking is painful. Or you seem to when you claim it isn't "abuse."
Pain inflicted to get your way is nothing BUT abuse. More especially
non-pain, non-punitive methods have been shown to be superior
repeatedly.


Bull**** and your use of the word 'freaks' shows how truly biased and bull
headed you are.

Your losing it dude.


Your denial of Embry's work is a perfect example of your frantic
scramble to protect your sick model of parenting.


LOL.. your denial of Pavlov's work shows that you consider young children
not as intelligent as a dog.


Then please explain
how, with the disappearance of corporal punishment in the public

schools,
that any and all respect and discipline has vanished along with it.


Do you not think it odd that exactly where cp in the schools prevail
they have the worst records of behavior and the lowest academic
scores? Take a look at Texas, one of the hot for paddling state, for
instance. Or try Alabama, Arkansas, or Oklahoma.


Sorry, again another outright lie. CP has been banned in ALL states of the
union. Nice try but it aint working.

And before your lil buddy jumps in wanting my proof, again, it is YOU who
made the outlandish claim, not I.


Yes, everyone knows that abuse propogates from generation to

generation, but
any parent worth their salt also knows how their own children react

to
outside stimuli. Some children never need to suffer a spanking while

others
may well need a physical reinforcement. But of course, to you and

Kane, you
can use 'reason' and set guidelines which have absolutely no

consequences
for the child.


You neglected, in the beginning of this article to acknowledge my
claims to have worked with children who had been spanked and punished.
I noticed that.


And you neglected all along to ignore my claims that I too have worked with
children from both sides of the fence.. also with abused children as well.

And I WAS in a position where I had complete control and had to instill
discipline in a class setting and learned quite readily which ones been
spanked, which ones had been abused, and which ones were adapt at dealing
with control and discipline.


I worked with children so screwed up by parenting NOT fit or allowed
to be used on animals that they had become dangerous to themselves and
others. I turned them around with gentle and non-punitive methods.


Ahh, there's the kicker Kane, and you are too stupid to see it. I have a
nephew who was physically abused by his father. He did not respond to
spanking, even light spanking it only made him angrier, so yes, your
approach did work quite well with him. That is where you are screwed up,
you cannot differentiate between children and their needs. You seem to
think that the exact same treatment can be used on all.. believe me, it
cannot. You have never worked with hyperactive children have you, well I
have.


They were so screwed up it took longer for them to get that I wasn't
punishing them than it did for them to turn around when they finally
accepted I wasn't.


Of course it will work with some. Especially those who were abused. But
try it with a child who has merely been swatted on the butt with the open
hand as punishement and it seldom works. They learn they can 'get away'
with something.

You seem confused Kane. You don't realize that children learn at a very
young age how to play parents against each other. If one is of your ilk,
and the other a spanker, they would drive you crazy. No, I seriously doubt
you've had very much 'experience' in dealing with children, perhaps a few,
but not the 'wealth' of experience you try to lead us to believe.


The hardest part was getting them over thugs like you.


LOL.. there you go, losing it again guy. For a supposed retired Air Force
Colonel, I suppose you kissed the guys asses to get em to do their work.


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?


LOL.. what a moron you are proving to be. Treat them respectfully and they
will have no pent up energy? LOL You truly keep digging yourself deeper
into a hole here.


WHO said it was wrong? You want to pick apart every statement and

try to
put words into my mouth?


He isn't suggesting it's wrong or not. He's suggesting using it, and
if you missed that you are truly in sad shape.


Apparently, you cannot read well,OR comprehend.




Although I think I can see how you just managed to weasel out of
answering the meat of his question. Why spank if you have all those
other things going for you? Sounds like he expects you to be a good
parent that DOES use those things. Me, I'm not so sure about you at
this point. You are too wedded to abuse for my taste, and trying to
deny it by calling it something else.


LOL.. you are a moron Kane. You still confuse spanking with abuse. You are
so dead in your mindset that you cannot possibly see reality.

They used to say that slavery was good for the darkies too. And that
women, by their natures, just couldn't think for themselves.


There you go again, wild, outlandish claims attempting to claim the high
moral ground by being dishonest. I wondered when the race issue would enter
the picture.

We seem to have gotten over that, but it took a damn war. I'd like you
assholes to wake up before the there has to be laws to do it for you.


LOL.. DUH.. there should be a law against assholes like yourself who
haven't got enough sense to deal with the real world. You do more damage
than good and are too stupid to relaize it.

There ARE laws against abuse Kane. But YOU apparently seem to want to
control everyone's ability to rear their children as they see fit and
consider anything other than what you consider acceptable as unacceptable.
You are a closed minded asshole who deserves no further responses.

**rest snipped and unread as being the irrelevent rantings of a luncatic**

Have a nice day asshole.


  #19  
Old November 3rd 03, 06:22 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Yawn.

"Kane" wrote in message
om...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote:


"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message
...

Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this

issue.
One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive

behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with

emotional
or
psychological abuse.

In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual

punmishment
for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically

abusive.
For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is

exempt from
this
protection.

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little

children
to be
victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered

physically,
emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child

turns 18.

This is weird logic, Dennis.

LaVonne


LaVonne.. not true at all.

Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by

anyone
outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use

corporal
punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system.


LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that
it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things
that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric.

But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method

of
discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at

the adult
stages of their lives.


One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the
clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no
matter how slight.

Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers.

Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not.


So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here.


So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs.

Kane



  #20  
Old November 3rd 03, 06:24 PM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Putting a heavy backpack and forced twenty mile hikes is not a 'pysical
punishment'.. lol


"Kane" wrote in message
om...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote:


"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message
...

Dennis Hancock wrote:

Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this

issue.
One
cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive

behavior in
dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with

emotional
or
psychological abuse.

In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual

punmishment
for
any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is

considered
physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically

abusive.
For
some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is

exempt from
this
protection.

What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little

children
to be
victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered

physically,
emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child

turns 18.

This is weird logic, Dennis.

LaVonne


LaVonne.. not true at all.

Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by

anyone
outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use

corporal
punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system.


LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that
it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things
that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric.

But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method

of
discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at

the adult
stages of their lives.


One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the
clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no
matter how slight.

Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers.

Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not.


So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here.


So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs.

Kane



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Debate on spanking Doan General 0 June 12th 04 08:30 PM
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking Kane Spanking 1 October 25th 03 10:41 PM
|| U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking Kane Spanking 0 October 9th 03 08:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.