Music Talk Board

I think the whole spanking vs not spanking is kind of a case by case thing. We can pull out examples where it "worked" for some, and cases where it doesn't, and the same for not spanking. Basically it's your overall parenting skills, and everyone works differently.

I don't think spanking is wrong, and someone who spanks their kids isn't a shitty person, and I do agree with moderation. I do agree that a parent that doesn't know the difference between spanking and child abuse shouldn't do it, but I don't think all spanking should be considered child abuse.

(07-11-2014, 12:48 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]My overall opinion on hate speech laws is that it should only be an illegal act when it is actively encouraging violence. I only watched a ten minute excerpt from that film when the attack first happened, but what I saw felt blatantly Islamophobic. I'm on the fence about this stuff. I wouldn't be too upset if this kind of thing was prohibited from public use, but I don't if making this sort of thing should be a criminal offence, especially if it's just ignorance. I do understand not wanting this stuff to be publicly used because there are detrimental effects towards members of society (especially racial, LGBT, etc. groups because those are things you can't change, while with Islam they could be attacking the ideology rather than Muslims themselves. That wouldn't count as hate speech to me). Hate speech is in a way libel on a large scale, but I don't mean that as if we should press charges against every idiot who makes a racist comment (countries that have hate speech laws don't do that, hence the National Front, etc., which is why I lol when people accuse France or wherever of being a totalitarian state). I do not believe any of this should be censored to prevent attacks though. By that point, it's the terrorists who are in the wrong. Attacking an embassy is obviously way worse than publishing a dumb, Islamophobic film.

True. I just feel like practicing free speech that would not in itself encourage violence but that could predictably inspire it is all too similar to explicit encouragement in the end. It's as if I knew where Salman Rushdie was hiding and revealed it to the public. Not to alert the radical Muslims who are out to get him either -- just because. But like you said, you're on the fence (with Salman, presumably. Oh wait, whoops).

I recently said that being a jerk is, to an extent, legal, and protected by the constitution. Cheating on one's own spouse, being verbally racist and being an egotistical individualist who spends money exclusively on oneself are all legal, but all that's being a huge jerk. Which again, is legal, to that extent.

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't stand up against what we perceive to be wrong. We just have to cause as little collateral evil as possible while doing it.

(07-11-2014, 12:04 AM)Grungie Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks to WWF's spanking thread, I'm kind curious about spanking causing serious complications. Everybody I knew growing up were spanked, and most of my college friends said they were spanked, and everybody is normal, so I'm curious if it's really a serious thing, or it's blown out of proportion. Kind of like how anti-circumcision people try to convince you babies are constantly dying and your dick no longer works.

I'm almost reluctant to admit that I've never had any real qualms with spanking in general. Everyone I hear talk about it seems to use the terminology "medieval punishment". In fact, it was probably by far the most effective punishment (and I need to underline the definition of punishment as implying fruitfulness -- punishment without any intention of discipline is just vengeance) I personally could ever get, and I turned out fine. I turned out better than fine, even. I respect healthy authority but know to recognize when it's out of line, and whether obeying it would be "objectively" bad.

If you end up injuring a child, you've completely missed the point of spanking. It's far more about humiliation than about physical pain, which is why it'd be far more humiliating (and effective) to be spanked in front of your friends than grounded in front of them.

I'm also circumcised, and I've explained before why. It is far better that I was (albeit at age 4) because It's also the far more hygienic option. I think many anti-circumcision advocates are kind of ignorant.

I am against female genital mutilation, which is pointless and it actually kills people. The purpose behind it is also abominable.

(07-11-2014, 12:48 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I am definitely against spanking. Most people I know who simply got 'spanked' did not grow up damaged, but in many cases corporal punishment can be apart of worse child abuse. I know people who live in messed-up households where spanking turned into worse things as they got older.

Then it's the worse corporal punishments that are bad in themselves rather than light spanking. This is where I'm saying that injuring a child invalidates the purpose of spanking. If hitting doesn't work as discipline, then a parent should change method completely. To me, there are obvious lines that should be drawn. If you go beyond them willfully, you're not a parent, you're a tyrant who shouldn't have children.

Tap a child gently on the bum twice, that's okay in my book. Flagellate one with a belt until (s)he bruises, you're sick.

(07-11-2014, 12:48 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]In not serious cases, it's just a short-term effect, but not one that I am supportive of. My dad likes to brag about spanking me as a kid, saying that 'that's what good parents do' and that 'that's why I'm so good', etc. I disagree, because it was rare that I ever did anything bad. When I did (and got caught), I'd get spanked for a few minutes, cry like a bay, etc. It didn't really change my behaviour. Furthermore, I still broke rules (rules that I don't consider to be 'bad', like sneaking out with my cousins lol) and never got caught, but that did not lead to me growing up bad.

Well I only got spanked for really heinous things, like hitting my brother. Like I said, if it doesn't work for your child, you need to find a different strategy. I know this through experience because my little brother is notorious for being a troublemaker and no amount of grounding matures him. I'm starting to think my parents should try considering other punishments. Might be a little too late for that though, as he's sixteen.

(07-11-2014, 12:48 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]

Stupid rant: One time my dad slapped me across the face at school for holding a pencil wrong, and to this day he uses this story to brag about how we stood up to the liberal-infiltrated school system and their 'being too easy on kids' :roll:

Also when we first got my dog my dad tried to make me hit him to 'learn how to enforce discipline'. I refused to do it, and my dog is still super well-behaved. 8)

Geezus, now that's just ridiculous and certainly does not warrant a slap on the wrist, let alone the face.

As for pets -- they don't learn that way. Pets tend to learn through reward rather than discipline. Plus, they tend to behave according to instinct.

When it comes to children, I personally think that that might be effective, but I fear that it merely encourages them to behave in order to get something, not because good behavior is a reward in itself. There should be a balance between reward and punishment that works for the child, even if that means no punishment or, alternatively, no reward at all.

(07-11-2014, 12:48 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]Another piece of anecdotal evidence is my cousin, who is just a couple of months younger than me. My uncle is vehemently against spanking, and my cousin is as well-behaved as I am.

Like I said, maybe he was disciplined otherwise and that worked for him. Grungie is right, punishment should be a case-by-case thing, which is why we have courthouses at the judicial level.

I'm certainly against child abuse, but I certainly don't believe all forms of corporal punishment qualify as such, but that's just me. I do however believe it should be chosen almost as a last resort, if everything else fails (and if it fails as well, keep searching). I'd probably be more traumatized if I were punished "softly", such as being banned from going to an event that only happens once a year. Proof being that I barely recall one spanking (it happened rarely, and when I was quite young) but I recall all those times I was stripped of my video games for months because of my grades (though that was more for motivational reasons than disciplinary) and that year I couldn't go to the school Christmas party because I had too many strikes in my agenda and instead went to detention. Not that those were punishments I believe were detrimental, but they certainly seemed more unfair and heartless at the time.

I pretty much agree with most of what Joel said. Maybe it's because I grew up in the South, and I believe in some of the old school style stuff. If you're not going to spank your kids, at least learn how to raise your kids better, and have some good discipline tactics, as we're all tired of seeing shitty kids in public walk all over their parents, and all their parents say is "now Billy please don't do that". Not saying those parents have to spank their kids, but obviously they're not doing shit with their kids.

Edit: I grew up in the South too, Grungie. Of course I left the South when I was eight but I was still raised by a Southern mom and a machismo dad.

Since I mentioned France, I remember last year they actually provided security to a publisher who allowed a someone to publish a depiction of Muhammad. So people who cite France as this huge pro-Islam violator of free speech aren't correct (especially given the Islamphobia that exists there and all throughout the Western world lol). This is not relevant to the conversation, just me thinking out loud.

(07-11-2014, 04:11 AM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]True. I just feel like practicing free speech that would not in itself encourage violence but that could predictably inspire it is all too similar to explicit encouragement in the end. It's as if I knew where Salman Rushdie was hiding and revealed it to the public. Not to alert the radical Muslims who are out to get him either -- just because. But like you said, you're on the fence (with Salman, presumably. Oh wait, whoops).

I recently said that being a jerk is, to an extent, legal, and protected by the constitution. Cheating on one's own spouse, being verbally racist and being an egotistical individualist who spends money exclusively on oneself are all legal, but all that's being a huge jerk. Which again, is legal, to that extent.

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't stand up against what we perceive to be wrong. We just have to cause as little collateral evil as possible while doing it.

I do not think it is or should be illegal to 'be a jerk'. I think there's a difference between some person saying 'I hate minorities lol' and a public speaker actively encouraging lynching. That's the extent of what I support regarding hate speech laws, which is similar to what you guys have in Canada (I had to watch a video in school about how America is the only free country. They cherrypicked the worst cases of Canadian and European violations of free speech and compared it to only the best of America's judicial system lol. I went and did some actual research afterwards. All of the Canadian examples they cited ended up being dropped charges because they were not actual hate speech. I am okay with Canada's hate speech laws).

Though like I said, I'm still a bit on the fence on extreme cases of hate speech that aren't technically encouraging violence. If we all of the sudden get a bunch of public organisations telling businesses to not hire black people, for example, using blatant lies about all black people (hence my libel/slander comparison), and suddenly we see an increase in black unemployment, who am I going to side with- the people saying 'this is how a free country works' or the people fighting against discrimination? I know who I'd pick. That's a poor example that probably won't happen on a large scale though. Edit: Okay lol that's obviously not legal but this is hypothetical don't focus on that aspect of my example. >_>

Quote:I'm almost reluctant to admit that I've never had any real qualms with spanking in general. Everyone I hear talk about it seems to use the terminology "medieval punishment". In fact, it was probably by far the most effective punishment (and I need to underline the definition of punishment as implying fruitfulness -- punishment without any intention of discipline is just vengeance) I personally could ever get, and I turned out fine. I turned out better than fine, even. I respect healthy authority but know to recognize when it's out of line, and whether obeying it would be "objectively" bad.

If you end up injuring a child, you've completely missed the point of spanking. It's far more about humiliation than about physical pain, which is why it'd be far more humiliating (and effective) to be spanked in front of your friends than grounded in front of them.

All of us are using anecdotal evidence so it's probably hard for us to come to a conclusion. We were both spanked and turned out all right, but I reject the notion that being spanked is why we're 'all right'. I do not think it was the most effective punishment I ever got, and I see it as senseless violence (I will get to this in the next portion on spanking so don't draw conclusions here :p )

Quote:I'm also circumcised, and I've explained before why. It is far better that I was (albeit at age 4) because

I had a foreskin problem wherein it was stuck to my head.

my lower one, if that's what you're asking

It's also the far more hygienic option. I think many anti-circumcision advocates are kind of ignorant.

I am against female genital mutilation, which is pointless and it actually kills people. The purpose behind it is also abominable.

I too was circumcised (as a baby) and am not upset about that. I am not against movements opposing non-consensual circumcision when there is no medical reason for doing so. As for hygiene, it is easier to take care of a cock when circumcised but I'm not going to denounce a non-circumcised penis as un-hygienic because that will depend on how much a person cares about their hygiene in general.

Female genital mutilation is a gruesome abomination that needs to completely fall out of practice. It's tragic how common that is and I feel for anyone who has to experience that.

Quote:Then it's the worse corporal punishments that are bad in themselves rather than light spanking. This is where I'm saying that injuring a child invalidates the purpose of spanking. If hitting doesn't work as discipline, then a parent should change method completely. To me, there are obvious lines that should be drawn. If you go beyond them willfully, you're not a parent, you're a tyrant who shouldn't have children.

Tap a child gently on the bum twice, that's okay in my book. Flagellate one with a belt until (s)he bruises, you're sick.

First off I'd like to say that the 'lightly tap on the bum' tactic isn't even spanking in my mind. What I got was closer to 'get the belt until you bruise'. I'm not trying to get the impression that I was abused nor am I trying to be all 'fuck you dad lolololololo!!!!' but it was still senseless 'violence' (too harsh of a word?) if you ask me. I don't think my dad ever cared about giving an effective punishment, I think it was just trying to feel like a 'manly' parent and being too machismo for these 'bleeding heart' parenting methods (my family has a really depressing and narcissistic world view lol). When I remove myself from the situation and try to imagine it from as neutral of a standpoint as possible, I can't see any justification for it.

Quote:Well I only got spanked for really heinous things, like hitting my brother. Like I said, if it doesn't work for your child, you need to find a different strategy. I know this through experience because my little brother is notorious for being a troublemaker and no amount of grounding matures him. I'm starting to think my parents should try considering other punishments. Might be a little too late for that though, as he's sixteen.

In case you're wondering, the only time I remember (doesn't mean there aren't more that I don't remember) being spanked for something heinous was when I threw a chair at school.

I don't know what to do about your brother, but I'm under the impression that spanking really just sparks resentment, not cooperation. I've never heard of someone being spanked at sixteen though. If my parents wanted to hit me at that age it'd be an actual fist fight followed by being kicked out lol (I was a good sixteen year old though so that's not an issue :flower: )

I think there's more to reprimanding children than just spanking and grounding though. If I'm ever a parent I will be sure use grounding and the 'I am disappointed' routine (always the most effective towards me and works when I have to deal with children) when I need to punish children. To ensure good behaviour, I will reward only consistent behaviour (I see too much of the 'do these few things for me and I'll buy you a toy' tactics). Just some general thoughts, and I'm only getting that out there because when people find out I oppose spanking the immediate response is 'well what else are you going to do?! :x ) Living a modest lifestyle to begin with will hopefully let them know that I do not give out free handouts and that they can't expect to walk all over me.

I have yet to have to work with a truly annoying brat by myself but I'd force cooperation by not doing a single thing they want me to do until they adjust their behaviour and physically stopping them from doing anything bad, non-violently reprimanding them for each attempt. I am not trying to make this sound easy/simple. I will never hit a kid though.

Quote:Geezus, now that's just ridiculous and certainly does not warrant a slap on the wrist, let alone the face.

As for pets -- they don't learn that way. Pets tend to learn through reward rather than discipline. Plus, they tend to behave according to instinct.

When it comes to children, I personally think that that might be effective, but I fear that it merely encourages them to behave in order to get something, not because good behavior is a reward in itself. There should be a balance between reward and punishment that works for the child, even if that means no punishment or, alternatively, no reward at all.

Yeah fuck anyone who wants to hit my dog he is above that. 8)

I think I addressed your views on punishment in my previous section. I am in agreement on your thoughts towards rewards and punishments.

Quote:Like I said, maybe he was disciplined otherwise and that worked for him. Grungie is right, punishment should be a case-by-case thing, which is why we have courthouses at the judicial level.

I'm certainly against child abuse, but I certainly don't believe all forms of corporal punishment qualify as such, but that's just me. I do however believe it should be chosen almost as a last resort, if everything else fails (and if it fails as well, keep searching). I'd probably be more traumatized if I were punished "softly", such as being banned from going to an event that only happens once a year. Proof being that I barely recall one spanking (it happened rarely, and when I was quite young) but I recall all those times I was stripped of my video games for months because of my grades (though that was more for motivational reasons than disciplinary) and that year I couldn't go to the school Christmas party because I had too many strikes in my agenda and instead went to detention. Not that those were punishments I believe were detrimental, but they certainly seemed more unfair and heartless at the time.

He was otherwise disciplined, and so was I. That's why I'm saying the spanking was completely unnecessary. Spanking isn't building a good work ethic, consistently good behaviour, or a genuine sense of cooperation. It provided a brief period of 'trauma'. That's it.

And just because a punishment is non-violent doesn't mean it is 'soft'. I too was stripped of my video games for months, and I'm far more supportive of that than spanking. That's more of a motivation thing, as you said. I wouldn't do it for a set amount of time though, just until the child shows consistent change. The school party, however, might be a little excessive (I'm assuming that was the school's punishment since it was detention, which I had to go a few times as well :p ) It depends on the exact circumstances though.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I do not think it is or should be illegal to 'be a jerk'. I think there's a difference between some person saying 'I hate minorities lol' and a public speaker actively encouraging lynching.

I agree.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]That's the extent of what I support regarding hate speech laws, which is similar to what you guys have in Canada (I had to watch a video in school about how America is the only free country. They cherrypicked the worst cases of Canadian and European violations of free speech and compared it to only the best of America's judicial system lol. I went and did some actual research afterwards. All of the Canadian examples they cited ended up being dropped charges because they were not actual hate speech. I am okay with Canada's hate speech laws).

I don't even know our own hate speech laws.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]Though like I said, I'm still a bit on the fence on extreme cases of hate speech that aren't technically encouraging violence. If we all of the sudden get a bunch of public organisations telling businesses to not hire black people, for example, using blatant lies about all black people (hence my libel/slander comparison), and suddenly we see an increase in black unemployment, who am I going to side with- the people saying 'this is how a free country works' or the people fighting against discrimination? I know who I'd pick. That's a poor example that probably won't happen on a large scale though. Edit: Okay lol that's obviously not legal but this is hypothetical don't focus on that aspect of my example. >_>

It's coo', I get what you mean, haha.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]All of us are using anecdotal evidence so it's probably hard for us to come to a conclusion. We were both spanked and turned out all right, but I reject the notion that being spanked is why we're 'all right'. I do not think it was the most effective punishment I ever got, and I see it as senseless violence (I will get to this in the next portion on spanking so don't draw conclusions here :p )

Okay.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I too was circumcised (as a baby) and am not upset about that. I am not against movements opposing non-consensual circumcision when there is no medical reason for doing so. As for hygiene, it is easier to take care of a cock when circumcised but I'm not going to denounce a non-circumcised penis as un-hygienic because that will depend on how much a person cares about their hygiene in general.

Lol, of course. But it's quite rare (or at least, I'd suspect) that someone would wait until their child is old enough to make that decision.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]Female genital mutilation is a gruesome abomination that needs to completely fall out of practice. It's tragic how common that is and I feel for anyone who has to experience that.

Amen.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]First off I'd like to say that the 'lightly tap on the bum' tactic isn't even spanking in my mind. What I got was closer to 'get the belt until you bruise'. I'm not trying to get the impression that I was abused nor am I trying to be all 'fuck you dad lolololololo!!!!' but it was still senseless 'violence' (too harsh of a word?) if you ask me. I don't think my dad ever cared about giving an effective punishment, I think it was just trying to feel like a 'manly' parent and being too machismo for these 'bleeding heart' parenting methods (my family has a really depressing and narcissistic world view lol). When I remove myself from the situation and try to imagine it from as neutral of a standpoint as possible, I can't see any justification for it.

Fair enough.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]In case you're wondering, the only time I remember (doesn't mean there aren't more that I don't remember) being spanked for something heinous was when I threw a chair at school.

I don't know what to do about your brother, but I'm under the impression that spanking really just sparks resentment, not cooperation. I've never heard of someone being spanked at sixteen though. If my parents wanted to hit me at that age it'd be an actual fist fight followed by being kicked out lol (I was a good sixteen year old though so that's not an issue :flower: )

Well taking my video games away always sparked more resentment in me then something short and forgettable (like losing TV privileges for the rest of the evening). Like we said, every child learns differently.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I think there's more to reprimanding children than just spanking and grounding though. If I'm ever a parent I will be sure use grounding and the 'I am disappointed' routine (always the most effective towards me and works when I have to deal with children) when I need to punish children. To ensure good behaviour, I will reward only consistent behaviour (I see too much of the 'do these few things for me and I'll buy you a toy' tactics). Just some general thoughts, and I'm only getting that out there because when people find out I oppose spanking the immediate response is 'well what else are you going to do?! :x ) Living a modest lifestyle to begin with will hopefully let them know that I do not give out free handouts and that they can't expect to walk all over me.

I totally agree with this point. Modesty is important and getting the child to understand that good behavior is in itself a good thing is paramount. I agree that consistent behavior should be rewarded. I myself notice that my parents are always making "deals" with my brother in order to get him to behave for a short period of time.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I have yet to have to work with a truly annoying brat by myself but I'd force cooperation by not doing a single thing they want me to do until they adjust their behaviour and physically stopping them from doing anything bad, non-violently reprimanding them for each attempt. I am not trying to make this sound easy/simple. I will never hit a kid though.

Of course. Parenting is, I suppose, something to perfect.

(07-11-2014, 05:21 AM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]He was otherwise disciplined, and so was I. That's why I'm saying the spanking was completely unnecessary. Spanking isn't building a good work ethic, consistently good behaviour, or a genuine sense of cooperation. It provided a brief period of 'trauma'. That's it.

And just because a punishment is non-violent doesn't mean it is 'soft'. I too was stripped of my video games for months, and I'm far more supportive of that than spanking. That's more of a motivation thing, as you said. I wouldn't do it for a set amount of time though, just until the child shows consistent change. The school party, however, might be a little excessive (I'm assuming that was the school's punishment since it was detention, which I had to go a few times as well :p ) It depends on the exact circumstances though.

Yeah, it was at the school's discretion. Every kid who got 3 strikes (disrespect of authority, not giving in homework, etc.) in fifth and sixth grades got that sort of punishment at the end of the semester (4 strikes for grade three and four and 5 strikes for the first two years).

I never wanted to imply that a "soft" punishment meant an easy one to get by. I meant soft as in non-violent. My apologies.

I have a question for the 'muricans: Why is Oosa Boston named Boston? English Boston is an absolute shithole, why would anyone want to be associated with it? Silly colonies.

(08-09-2014, 05:48 PM)Mr Maps Wrote: [ -> ]I have a question for the 'muricans: Why is Oosa Boston named Boston? English Boston is an absolute shithole, why would anyone want to be associated with it? Silly colonies.

'Cause Oosa Boston is a different kind of shithole.

Because Boston has a shitty accent where they don't pronounce their r's

Boston guy: "I need to buy some b'icks"
Regular USA guy: "Bics? Like pens, from the Bic company?"
BG: "No! B'icks!"
Reg: "...I have no idea what you're saying, man."


Also, roundabouts. So many roundabouts (for no fucking reason) in Boston.

Also the only place where khaki and car key is pronounced the same.