Moderator: TheMachine
Xyun wrote: And what do you propose as a solution to this epidemic problem of teenage pregnancy? Pass a law banning teenagers from doing something they are going to do anyway?
Right, when I was a 6'2" sophomore in high school I would've stopped having sex if my mom had slapped me when she found that condom in the toilet I forgot to flush instead of talking to me and making sure I knew what I was getting into and doing.Taly wrote:Give parents back the right to punish their kids. They slap the kids or ground them the kids take them to court for abuse. WTF is that crap? no wonder our times now are so fucked up. Parents don't do anything for kids, talk to the kids and can't punish them. Why should we all be that way?
I never knew that people actually used the bible to help support their views on whether to use corporal punishment or not. Pro-spanking arguments:It is ineffective: Spanking a child will stop the child from misbehaving for the moment, but studies have shown that the child's compliance will only last for a short time; corporal punishment actually increases the child's non-compliant behavior in the future. Psychologist H. Stephen Glenn said "Corporal punishment is the least effective method [of discipline]. Punishment reinforces a failure identity. It reinforces rebellion, resistance, revenge and resentment. And, what people who spank children will learn is that it teaches more about you than it does about them that the whole goal is to crush the child. It's not dignified, and it's not respectful." 1
It may trigger criminal, anti-social, violent, aggressive behavior later in life: A longitudinal study of 442 boys born in 1972, found that one out of every three boys -- those who have a specific version of a gene -- who was maltreated during childhood will be almost certain to exhibit anti-social or criminal behavior as an adult. Maltreatment was defined as including physical abuse. If this is true for boys subjected to physical abuse, one wonders if the violence associated with conventional levels of corporal punishment could also trigger violent or aggressive behavior later in life? Unfortunately, the study is recent, and researchers do not yet know what level of violence is needed to trigger the negative adult behavior. It can be argued that, in the absence of precise data, parents should err on the side of caution and avoid spanking at all costs. More details
It has been linked to many adult problems. Corporal punishment studies have linked spanking during childhood to higher levels of adult depression, psychiatric problems, and addictions. Another study shows that children who were spanked have a lower IQ when compared to children whose parents used other methods of discipline and control.
It can lead to abuse: Because a spanking works for a while, the parent often repeats the spanking whenever the child misbehaves. Corporal punishment may then become a standard response to any misbehavior. This can lead to increasingly frequent and harsher spanking which can exceed the "reasonable force" threshold and become abuse. According to the Institute for the Prevention of Child Abuse, "85% of all cases of physical abuse result from some form of over-discipline through the use of corporal punishment". Each year about 44 Canadian children are known to have been killed by family members; 35 of them by parents. The figures for the United States are probably about 10 times higher.
It can unintentionally cause serious physical damage: Boxing on the ear can burst an eardrum.
Shaking can cause a concussion, whiplash, blindness, serious brain damage, or even death.
Spanking can injure muscles, the sciatic nerve, pelvis, coccyx (tail bone), genitals or spine.
Hitting a child's hands can injure bones, blood vessels, joints and ligaments; it can induce premature osteoarthritis.
A child who is hit can accidentally fall and seriously injure themselves.
It trains a child to use violence: Spanking can teach children that it is acceptable for the strong to use force against the weak -- the concept "Might makes right" is regularly reinforced. They have an increased likelihood of becoming more aggressive towards their siblings, their fellow students, and (later in life) against their spouses and their own children. Violence as a way of behaving is a learned response.
Slapping or any other type of force used on the buttocks is a sexual violation: The buttocks are an erogenous zone of the human body. Their nerve system is connected to the body's sexual nerve centers. Slapping them can involuntarily trigger feelings of sexual pleasure which become mixed with the pain. This can lead to confusion in the child's mind which influences the way in which they express their sexuality as adults.
Spanking lowers a child's IQ: A study at the University of New Hampshire, released in 1998-JUL, found that spanking children apparently slows down their intellectual development. 3 A study of 960 children found an average 4 point reduction in IQ among students, from and average IQ of 102 for children who are not spanked, to an average IQ 98 for who are. A reduction of 4 points is enough to have a significant negative functional effect on the students. More information
Spanking creates fear in the child: "The message a toddler gets from a slap or spanking is that a parent or other loved and trusted adult is prepared to induce pain and even do physical harm to force unquestioning obedience. That's terrifying to a little kid...However well-intentioned, a slap registers as the shattering of the whole deal between parent and child. Young children are left awash in feelings of fear, shame, rage, hostility, self-destructiveness and betrayal that they can't yet resolve or manage."2
Reaction to Bible passages about spanking.
The pro-spanking position seems to be mainly based on seven passages in the Bible.
The Bible contains seven verses that may relate to the spanking of children:
Five in Proverbs specifically mention the use of a rod to beat a child.
One is more ambiguous; it mentions a parent "chastening" of a child. But the verse probably refers to the use of a rod because it mentions crying, and it is surrounded by other verses that specifically refer to that form of punishment.
A verse in Hebrews refers to a father disciplining his son. The method is not specified. However, most of the other passages which describe child discipline refer to the use of a rod. So, this verse probably implies the use of a rod as well.
Christians differ in their reaction to these biblical passages:
Most religious liberals probably feel that these passages merely reflect the child-raising customs of the age. They note that the verses were written in a pre-scientific age when child psychology had not developed as a field of study. Most probably accept that spanking is hazardous to the sexual and emotional health of children. In their own parenting style, they either reject corporal punishment entirely as a method of discipline, or adopt it only in very unusual circumstances. Some would interpret the passages in Proverbs as accurately reflecting Solomon's parenting style, and the devastating consequences of corporal punishment on his son. They generally would not believe that these passages represent God's intent for parents. They suggest that they represent only Solomon's policies -- techniques which the Bible later indicates are counter-productive and dangerous. Rather than promoting corporal punishment, they might interpret the Bible as recommending against its use.
Robert Ingersoll, a well known 19th century free-thinker, who wrote in 1891 about King Solomon:
"To me it has always been a matter of amazement why civilized people, living in the century of Darwin and Humboldt, should quote as authority the words of Solomon, a murderer, an ingrate, an idolater, and a polygamist -- a man so steeped and sodden in ignorance that he really believed he could be happy with seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines."
Most Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians, believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. This leads many of them to feel that the above passages place upon them a religious obligation to physically punish rebellious children. Darrel Reid, head of Focus on the Family - Canada (a Fundamentalist Christian group) said that "The theological underpinning for family corporal punishment is tied up with the responsibility that God gives families for raising the young. You can find it particularly in the early books of the Bible, where God says your responsibility is not just nurturing but also correcting them."
There are wide variations in biblical interpretation among conservative Christians: A Church of God congregation in Aylmer, ON is mainly composed of German-speaking Mennonites from Mexico. It it their belief that the Bible requires that when they spank their children, they must strike them with an object, typically a wooden stick or a leather belt. They believe that they are forbidden to spank their children with their hand, because the hand is considered an instrument of love, guidance and comfort.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon Church, is a conservative Christian group which discourages spanking.
Some interpret the "rod" in the Proverbs passages as referring to a shepherd's rod that is used to gently guide sheep. This is possible interpretation for four of the six passages, which refer to such vague terms as chasten and reproof. This seems unlikely, because the rod is also mentioned in Proverbs 23:13 and 23:14 as being used to "beat him."
It might be argued that four of the six passages in Proverbs refer to a male child. Perhaps the author did not intend girls to be beaten with a rod.
A common theme among the most conservative Evangelical Christian sources is that it is important to start the discipline of children at an early age. A leading Fundamentalist Christian leader, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, recommends spanking children from the age of 18 months. Some believe that corporal punishment is the only effective method to be used. Discipline and spanking are often closely linked; the terms are often used interchangeably. Non-violent parenting techniques are often not emphasized. They often promote the belief that without spanking and hitting, children will grow up completely undisciplined.
One Evangelical source points out that a child who is forced to accept punishment from her/his parents will be more likely to accept punishment and chastisement from God as an adult.
Over at least the past two decades, there has been an increasing concern about violence in society, including spousal abuse; violent hate crimes; violence motivated by sexism, racism and homophobia; school shootings; etc. It is to be expected that increasing attention is being paid to corporal punishment of children. This naturally leads to increased tension between religious conservatives and the rest of society.
Recommendations by Pro-Spanking Advocates
Most of the older books on child-raising advocated corporal punishment as a normal disciplinary method. More modern books available in conservative Christian bookstores still do. But most current books written from a secular or a liberal religious perspective recommend that alternative methods be used and that spanking be avoided.
Some points made by supporters of spanking:
All of the "pro-spanking" sites on the Internet that we have been able to find are written from a Christian Fundamentalist or other Evangelical perspective. 3 to 10 A common thread running through many of these sites is the concept that the only alternative to spanking is to impose no discipline at all. To raise a child without discipline is a form of severe child abuse.
"Spanking was good for me; I turned out OK. It should be good for my children." From a caller to a phone-in show on a radio program that I participated in.
Spanking is necessary, even if it is only used as a last resort, as a backup where other methods have failed.
Spanking is the only method of discipline for toddlers who cannot understand reason and explanations.
The eight strongest studies demonstrate beneficial outcomes from corporal punishment.
Parents who have an authoritative personalities and child raising methods have the best behaved children.
Ever since corporal punishment was abandoned in the public schools, discipline has declined and school violence -- even shooting -- has increased.
Since parents started to abandon spanking, youth violence has increased. 11
In his Reference Guide, Dr. James Dobson, founder of the fundamentalist Christian agency, Focus on the Family recommended that babies younger than 15 months should not be spanked. He wrote:
"There is no excuse for spanking babies or children younger than 15 to 18 months of age. But midway through the second year (18 months) boys and girls become capable of knowing what your telling them to do or not do."
"If children cry for longer than five minutes, "the child is merely complaining...I would require him to stop the protest crying, usually by offering him a little more of whatever caused the original tears."
A summary of Larzelere's presentation in a debate with Straus about spanking. This debate was held at a conference of the National Foundation for Family Research and Education at Banff in Alberta, Canada.
Summary
This presentation summarizes the current scientific basis for a balanced middle position on child effects of nonabusive spanking by parents. There have been two major problems in research on parental disciplinary responses in general and spanking in particular. The first is the tendency to polarize viewpoints into all-good vs. all-bad options, rather than differentiating effective from counterproductive ways to use a wide range of disciplinary tactics. For example, cognitive developmental and clinical behavioral viewpoints tend to contradict each other on optimal disciplinary responses, even though they complement each other nicely on most other issues about parental discipline. The second problem concerns the causal direction of associations between spanking and child behavior. Even longitudinal correlations often fail to isolate the effects of spanking on subsequent child misbehavior. The original level of child misbehavior may have caused both the original spanking frequency and the subsequent child problems. This possibility is consistent with the fact that alternative disciplinary responses are more often associated with more detrimental child outcomes than is nonabusive spanking, compared to the reverse.
There have been 13 published studies and 3 unpublished studies capable of isolating the effects of parental spanking on child outcomes. Most of them (12 of 16) have found beneficial child outcomes of spanking under some important circumstances. Such beneficial outcomes are mostly limited to the use of nonabusive spanking to back up milder disciplinary tactics with 2- to 6-year-old children by loving, sober parents who are in control of their anger. When parents use spanking primarily to back up milder disciplinary responses, such as reasoning or time out, then those milder tactics become more effective disciplinary tactics by themselves. In this way, parents can work themselves out of the need to use spanking without compromising their disciplinary effectiveness. Beneficial outcomes have included reductions in noncompliance, fighting, antisocial behavior, emotional problems, and hostility.
In contrast, 4 of the 16 causally conclusive studies found only detrimental child outcomes of nonabusive spanking. The detrimental outcomes occurred almost entirely for children over 6 years old. The detrimental outcomes tend to be small, and do not apply to subgroups that view spanking as more appropriate and loving (e.g., African-Americans and conservative Protestants). Further, a replication of the best study found identical small detrimental child outcomes for all four alternative disciplinary responses for 6- to 9-year-olds available from the interview: grounding, sending the child to a room, removing privileges, and taking away an allowance. Whatever accounts for this small detrimental child effect, it does not seem to be unique to spanking, but may reflect overly frequent uses of any negative consequence (rejecting manner?, impulsive rather than loving discipline?, insufficient discussion?).
In conclusion, the current scientific evidence suggests that some kind of balanced middle position on spanking is preferable to either of the polarized extremes. Parents should resort to the mildest disciplinary tactic they think will be effective, and be open to mutually acceptable compromises negotiated by their children. But they should back up reasoning and time out when necessary, whether with a nonabusive spanking (appropriate only near the ages of 2 to 6) or some alternative (e.g., grounding). Parenting experts need to expand effective nonabusive disciplinary options for parents, not prematurely restrict them.
Umm, yes. It's called the penal system..kyoukan wrote:Do you slap adults and confine them to their bedrooms if they do something that you don't like?
Agree!Here is my advice, dont use that spermacide lubricated condom your first time, its to complicated. That sounds stupid but there are tricks to using condoms and you will learn them with experience, the lubrication makes accidents easier to happen. Use a normal strait up condom...
Be careful with this because some lubricants can damage a condom. Read the package and don't rely on spermicidal lubricants! If you both build up to it (and that is part of the fun), there will be no need for lubrication. Granted there are times a woman may have a harder time getting naturally lubricated but first times are not one of them!...and if you need the extra lubrication, which you definatly might being first times and all, use an external water based thingy, like ky or so, small amounts.
). Unfortunately, that takes time that you and this girl won't have *shrug*
Wrong. Parents can be held accountable in court for the action of their kids. Certain actions by minors may land them in juvenile courts or detention, but those kids know they can get away with anything they want and that it will not follow them into adulthood because a minor's record is always sealed.kyoukan wrote:If minors break laws they go through the penal system as well, so that argument isn't valid.
Yeah, you're right. My dad was an ass beater and I.....decided not to be like my dad.eOmniz wrote:Right, when I was a 6'2" sophomore in high school I would've stopped having sex if my mom had slapped me when she found that condom in the toilet I forgot to flush instead of talking to me and making sure I knew what I was getting into and doing.Taly wrote:Give parents back the right to punish their kids. They slap the kids or ground them the kids take them to court for abuse. WTF is that crap? no wonder our times now are so fucked up. Parents don't do anything for kids, talk to the kids and can't punish them. Why should we all be that way?
Violence is not an answer, not to be too cliche. It solves nothing and just perpetuates future abuse. A slap isn't going to stop a high schooler from smoking, but it will subliminaly enforce the notion that violence is acceptable in situations, specifically domestic. Gratz on increasing the number of future spouse abusers.
I can't believe you really believe that.
I spanked my gf's son when he acted wrong before he was even 1 year old. He learned what not to do, and he turned out awesomely. Past 3 he never needed it. By you're reasoning, I was hitting him and he was going to turn out to be a monster. It's about control and discipline. Obviously you cant put the 2 together. Not disciplining a child is NEVER the answer. Children need consistently just like adults do, just in different ways.kyoukan wrote:If minors break laws they go through the penal system as well, so that argument isn't valid. If spanking was an effective form of discipline then kids who got spanked would never get into any trouble. There are better ways to discipline a kid other than to teach them that sudden outbursts of overpowerment and violence are acceptable ways of dealing with other people.
I would rather adults be punished with violence when they act like a bunch of retards instead of kids. Imagine being able to put some cunt like midnyte or brotha over your knee and whale the shit out of them every time they said something stupid, without them running for the nearest attorney.
but hey go ahead and hit your kids all you want. just keep them the christ away from my well adjusted ones. and don't stand around like a baboon scratching your head and wondering why your son or daughter are acting out physically and getting into fights all the time because they learned from you that hitting people when they make you angry is acceptable behaviour.
my dad spent an inordinate amount of his spare time chasing my boyfriends away. trust me when I say that if your daughter has half a brain you will never be able to keep up.Voronwë wrote:when my daughter is 14, and some 17 year old guy drives 2 hours to see her, he better have a good time, because it will be the end of his life.
god...don't you two remember the 80's?Xouqoa wrote:seconded, revoking Audiophilia access immediately!kyoukan wrote:what the hell? I'm officially banning you from talking about music forever.
K, first off, shes closer to 15 than I am to 17 (she will be 15 next month, I wont be 17 til July). Also, her dad likes me OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS, and her mom loves me, they were the ones that invited me to come down to Birmingham to see them. Also, they are the ones that are letting her come stay with me some this summer.Voronwë wrote:when my daughter is 14, and some 17 year old guy drives 2 hours to see her, he better have a good time, because it will be the end of his life.
) , only in her. Once we got into the movie, I noticed she was acting kinda strange, she was sitting pretty far away from me on her seat, and looked pretty nervous (which is all I thought it was, nervousness). So of couse, I started to try to move a bit, and put my arm around her, when she, laughing (which she uses as a defense mechanism it seems), started telling me to cut it out, and that she would explain later.
I am a kid still I am sure, but I know how I feel about this girl, and I definately have my hormones in control, if I didn't I wouldn't be a virgin right now. I have had chances to fuck girls that I really do like, but I haven't, because I want my first time to be with someone special, I really do.Taly wrote:uh 15 is STILL a KID!
and no offense to ya Asheran but you are still a kid. Some of these people have said the right things like take the time to think it over, do it for the right reason. Don't let hormones take control!
I wouldn't actually care if I hadnt been stupid at first asking how to talk to her about sex, cause that was retarded, dunno what I was thinking. Really more than anything, if we dont have sex, I just want to stay friends at least. I mean, we live too far away from each other to be really going out, but I don't know how I would be able to stand it if we ended up not friends.Bojangels wrote:If you want her back, all you have to do is stand outside her window on top of a car holding a boombox over your head in the rain blasting your 80's Monster Love Ballads CD.
If that doesn't work, maybe you could talk to her about why you asked several other girls out. If she really thinks you're 'special' and believes your story, she'll dump her boyfriend for you. What's her e-mail address btw? I wanna forward her this thread.
