Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> [snip] > : And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. > In your note of 8/14/96, Orenda, you wrote, "I did spank my son > twice on his underwear, with a belt…" > Chris, who wonders why Orenda’s son is becoming retroactively more > heavily clothed… > Because my son told me as I was typing the last post that I never > spanked him on anything but his jeans. His memory is much better than > mine, so I have no reason to doubt him. But I would have spanked him on > his underwear IF I would have needed to to get him to quit the dangerous > behavior. Lucky me, I didn’t have to.
But of course, as you said to me, you don’t believe in using instruments anyway, and Tammy was quick to assert that you had never said any such thing. Belts aren’t instruments, are they, Orenda? Is your definition of spanking still clear — a mild open-handed swat on the clothed butt–or is spanking just getting a little bit arbitrary? Remember your definition of arbitrary? Could that hitting of your 13 year old son just possibly crossed the line into abuse in some states? LaVonne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Orenda
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I do agree the distinction is very subtle. I found her word > substitution interesting, however. In her objection to defining > spanking as hitting children as discipline, she redifined spanking as > swatting on the behind as discipline, boldly stating that swatting > wasn’t hitting. Her preferred word swat not only means hitting, but > hitting, usually with an instrument. What is she telling us? > Give it a rest LaVonne. Call spanking hitting if you want. I and > others will just continue to point out that you do it merely to play up > the totally negative and more horrible connotations of hitting ( > punching in the stomach or face, hitting a child with a hot iron, or > broom – in other words ABUSE ) vs. spanking, which is a swat to the > bottom. I didn’t say a swat was not a hit… I said a swat held milder > connotations. ( until you want to whack people with ball bats.) Not all > dictionaries say anything about implements. But, of course, you have to > stress that. I could use the word pat, but that is a little too mild, > don’t you think?? That’s still hitting your child. > And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. Once it > was the only time I ever had to spank him twice for something, and the > second was the last time I ever found it neccesary to spank him.
Thanks, Orenda. I thought I remembered that you did indeed hit children with belts, but this was so much easier than going through dejanews. I can see what you prefer the word swat! LaVonne
Response:
> >I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank > whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for > running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then > why on earth would you do it to your child > I was thinking how do you treat your child in ways that ARE SIMILAR to the > way you treat your co-workers and other adults. > Would you send a co-worker to their room? Would you make a co-worker go to bed > at 8:00? Would you tell a co-worker they were not allowed to go out and play > until they finished their carrots?
Well, I wouldn’t make a child eat their carrots either , or "send them to their room", but as to your other examples — if you were responsible for a mentally handicapped adult, would you swat or hit them for running in the street, or for any reason at all? Not in the US you wouldn’t, because swatting or hitting adults is not legal, regardless of their mental capacity. The only people who can legally be smacked, hit, spanked, swatted, etc., are children. > I am not saying if I agree or disagree. I’m just trying to point out that this > does not make a very good argument.
I think it makes an excellent argument. You cannot smack adults — you can only smack children! LaVonne
Response:
: > : > Orenda earlier included using a belt on her son as an example of : > "responsible spanking." I don’t precisely recall her saying that parents : > "should" use belts on kids, but the distinction is subtle at best. : Of course you can’t recall precisely, because she never did. You know as : well as I that if you thought you could you’d post it. Here it is: > I did spank my son twice on his underwear, with a belt, for > behavior that he continued after ignoring everything else I tried to do
Orenda posted the above statement on 8/14/96 under the thread heading, "Re: What is responsible spanking? (WAS: Re: Dr. J." Chris
Response:
[snip] : And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. In your note of 8/14/96, Orenda, you wrote, "I did spank my son twice on his underwear, with a belt…" Chris, who wonders why Orenda’s son is becoming retroactively more heavily clothed…
Response:
It is not criminal assault when I change my daughter’s diaper > against her will, and no sane person would argue that it should be.
ahh…. there’s the rub. Good post Chris…. keep ‘em coming. Orenda
Response:
> [snip] > : And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. > In your note of 8/14/96, Orenda, you wrote, "I did spank my son > twice on his underwear, with a belt…" > Chris, who wonders why Orenda’s son is becoming retroactively more > heavily clothed…
Because my son told me as I was typing the last post that I never spanked him on anything but his jeans. His memory is much better than mine, so I have no reason to doubt him. But I would have spanked him on his underwear IF I would have needed to to get him to quit the dangerous behavior. Lucky me, I didn’t have to. Orenda
Response:
About my post: > I did spank my son twice on his underwear, with a belt, for > behavior that he continued after ignoring everything else I tried to do > Orenda posted the above statement on 8/14/96 under the thread > heading, "Re: What is responsible spanking? (WAS: Re: Dr. J." > Chris
I did write that… seems my son told me the underwear part is false, I never hit him anywhere but over his jeans. And he was 13 and involved with behavior that could have easily killed him. So I feel it was justified. It left no marks, but it did make him cease the behavior ( the first spanking with my hand didn’t. I told him then I would use the belt if he did it again. ) A lot of choice spankers don’t think teenagers should be spanked at all. I didn’t feel it made sense to do it at all if it wasn’t going to work. I feel it was responsible… it wouldln’t have been if he’d have been much younger. Orenda who was trying to be honest about how she spanked, because none of you would have known if it was the truth or not…. in fact, the truth seems to be what you question most.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >: > >: > Orenda earlier included using a belt on her son as an example of >: > "responsible spanking." I don’t precisely recall her saying that parents >: > "should" use belts on kids, but the distinction is subtle at best. >: Of course you can’t recall precisely, because she never did. You know as >: well as I that if you thought you could you’d post it. > Here it is: > I did spank my son twice on his underwear, with a belt, for > behavior that he continued after ignoring everything else I tried to do > Orenda posted the above statement on 8/14/96 under the thread >heading, "Re: What is responsible spanking? (WAS: Re: Dr. J." >Chris
Odd…the following was posted 10/4/96 under this same thread. Orenda seems to have updated the method of spanking. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. Once it >was the only time I ever had to spank him twice for something, and the >second was the last time I ever found it neccesary to spank him. >Orenda
Response:
> : > I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you > : > know it. > : You have said that, but then you redefined the definition of spanking > : to mean a swat on the behind. > Orenda earlier included using a belt on her son as an example of > "responsible spanking." I don’t precisely recall her saying that parents > "should" use belts on kids, but the distinction is subtle at best.
I do agree the distinction is very subtle. I found her word substitution interesting, however. In her objection to defining spanking as hitting children as discipline, she redifined spanking as swatting on the behind as discipline, boldly stating that swatting wasn’t hitting. Her preferred word swat not only means hitting, but hitting, usually with an instrument. What is she telling us? LaVonne
Response:
> I do agree the distinction is very subtle. I found her word > substitution interesting, however. In her objection to defining > spanking as hitting children as discipline, she redifined spanking as > swatting on the behind as discipline, boldly stating that swatting > wasn’t hitting. Her preferred word swat not only means hitting, but > hitting, usually with an instrument. What is she telling us?
Give it a rest LaVonne. Call spanking hitting if you want. I and others will just continue to point out that you do it merely to play up the totally negative and more horrible connotations of hitting ( punching in the stomach or face, hitting a child with a hot iron, or broom – in other words ABUSE ) vs. spanking, which is a swat to the bottom. I didn’t say a swat was not a hit… I said a swat held milder connotations. ( until you want to whack people with ball bats.) Not all dictionaries say anything about implements. But, of course, you have to stress that. I could use the word pat, but that is a little too mild, don’t you think?? That’s still hitting your child. And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. Once it was the only time I ever had to spank him twice for something, and the second was the last time I ever found it neccesary to spank him. He was thirteen and involved in very dangerous behavior. I never said anyone HAD to spank their kids at all, so how do I advocate using a belt ?? He was 13…. my hand alone wouldn’t have discouraged him from anything. It wasn’t as if he was spanked a lot, or didn’t get a lot of love, or that I didn’t try other forms of discipline. Orenda
Response:
: And yes, twice I spanked my son with a belt, over his jeans. Once it : was the only time I ever had to spank him twice for something, and the : second was the last time I ever found it neccesary to spank him. He was : thirteen and involved in very dangerous behavior. I never said anyone : HAD to spank their kids at all, so how do I advocate using a belt ?? He : was 13…. my hand alone wouldn’t have discouraged him from anything. Thank you, Orenda, for clarifying your position. You believe that using a belt on a teenager can qualify as "responsible spanking." Chris
Response:
> Orenda earlier included using a belt on her son as an example of > "responsible spanking." I don’t precisely recall her saying that parents > "should" use belts on kids, but the distinction is subtle at best. > Chris
Of course you can’t recall precisely, because she never did. You know as well as I that if you thought you could you’d post it. Tammy
Response:
: > : > : > : >>I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or : spank : >> whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for : >> running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t : then : >> why on earth would you do it to your child : > : >I was thinking how do you treat your child in ways that ARE SIMILAR to : the : >way you treat your co-workers and other adults. : >I do in many ways treat my children similar to co-workers, the main : difference being that I give my children more respect compassion and : understanding. And most importantly I love them. : >Would you send a co-worker to their room? No wouldn’t send a co-worker : or my children to their room. Isolation and avoidance isn’t a solution : to me. Would you make a co-worker go to bed at 8:00? No and not my : children either they go to bed when they are tired if they choose to : stay up fine they still as I and a co-worker need to go to work they : need to go to school intrestingly after they experienced being tired in : school because they didn’t get enough sleep to meet thier needs they on : thier own decided to go to bed earlier. : >until they finished their carrots? : > : >I am not saying if I agree or disagree. I’m just trying to point out : that this does not make a very good argument. : Makes a good argument to me. That is because you are blinded by the fact that you agree with the conclusion. Your conclusion may be 100% correct then still this is a poor argument. : I don’t understand why a parent would : treat someone they don’t necessarly love who is a co-worker or an adult : or friend with more respect, and compassion and not hit them and : justify hitting their own child who they claim to love and cherish. First of all your lack of understanding is not an argument. Second, just the fact that I don’t hit my co-workers doesn’t mean I have more respect for them. In fact I almost completely ignore a particular co-worker due to lack of respect. : If : you wouldn’t hit a person you don’t care about why would you hit : someone you do care about. Doesn’t make any sence to me. Because caring is the reason people want to raise there kids. You may think spanking is a poor way to raise kids it seems better to use a poor alternative than to use no alternative at all and don’t care about what happens. And of course you should realize that if you think this argument really carries weight you should equally use it against other education methods. Would you find the following convincing: I don’t understand why a parent would treat someone they don’t necessarly love who is a co-worker or an adult or friend with more repect and compassion and not send them to bed early and justify bedding early their own child who they claim to love and cherish. — All opinions expressed herein are currently under revision Antoon Pardon Brussels Free University Computing Centre
Response:
> > I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you > know it. > You have said that, but then you redefined the definition of spanking > to mean a swat on the behind. If you wanted to use a word that didn’t > mean hitting, why did you choose a word defined as a hit with a sharp, > slapping blow, usually with an instrument? You choose the word, > Orenda, and that’s what swatting means.
usually doesn’t = always and in fact couldn’t her hand be the said *instrument* that she is using to swat with??? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -><snip> > But, regardless of what you think, reality has shown that spanking > often is not milder at all. Even the words you choose to define > spanking as something than other than hitting do not work. Hitting > occurs along a continuum. Spanking, regardless of what you call it, > fits on the continuum of hitting. You can hit a little, you can hit a > lot–you can hit softly, you can hit hard–you can hit with > instruments, you can hit with your hand–you can hit an unclothed > bottom, you can hit a clothed bottom–you can hit a bottom only, or > you can hit a face, or a stomach. But, you cannot spank, you cannot > even swat your child, without hitting. > LaVonne > Orenda
I think this has been covered time and time again, for the last time, we all know that spanking invovles the act of hitting. But if your vocabulary is so limited that you will equate a pat on the head, with a spanking , with a punch in the stomach with being run over by a car as all being simply hitting then we now know why your interpertation of the spanking data is so narrow. I have yet to read Strassberg’s study so I will refrain making a broad statement but, from reading " Intimate Violence" by Straus And Gelles in * that* particular study spanking *is* equated with gross abuse, including murder. And so while I may agree that child abuse *may* contribute to violence later in life I can not see where in *that* particular study it is shown that simple parental spankings are the cause. Even they stress that even though they see spanking as *abuse* they concede that on their abuse scale it ranks low and severe abuse is the major cause of violent behavior. Tammy — "Resistance is futile….." Locutus of Borg "Best of Both Worlds I & II"
Response:
> >I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank > whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for > running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then > why on earth would you do it to your child who I assume you love and > care about. To me it’s an abuse of power. > Sissy
I am decidedly undecided on the merits of spanking, but I’m so tired of this simple-minded comparison of adults’ and children’s "rights". Children are not the same as adults, and should not be treated like adults. When I ask my 21-month-old daughter to come to the diaper table and get her diaper changed, and she refuses (as she usually does), I go get her, pick her up, and put her on the diaper table and change her diaper. If I grabbed an adult, forcibly put her on a table (against her will) and pulled down her pants, that would constitute criminal (sexual?) assault. It is not criminal assault when I change my daughter’s diaper against her will, and no sane person would argue that it should be. Chris — Ph.D. Candidate (Russian History) University of Illinois at Chicago
Response:
: > I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you : > know it. : You have said that, but then you redefined the definition of spanking : to mean a swat on the behind. Orenda earlier included using a belt on her son as an example of "responsible spanking." I don’t precisely recall her saying that parents "should" use belts on kids, but the distinction is subtle at best. Chris
Response:
>I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank > whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for > running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then > why on earth would you do it to your child
I was thinking how do you treat your child in ways that ARE SIMILAR to the way you treat your co-workers and other adults. Would you send a co-worker to their room? Would you make a co-worker go to bed at 8:00? Would you tell a co-worker they were not allowed to go out and play until they finished their carrots? I am not saying if I agree or disagree. I’m just trying to point out that this does not make a very good argument.
Response:
> > > [snip] > By the way, Orenda now prefers the words striking and swatting over > hitting. Of course, striking and hitting are synonyms, and swatting > is defined as hitting with a sharp blow, usually with an instrument, > so I guess I can live with either of those two words. Striking and > swatting a child for purposes of discipline are, in my mind, > unacceptable. Nonconsentually striking or swatting an adult is a > legally reportable offense. > I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you > know it.
You have said that, but then you redefined the definition of spanking to mean a swat on the behind. If you wanted to use a word that didn’t mean hitting, why did you choose a word defined as a hit with a sharp, slapping blow, usually with an instrument? You choose the word, Orenda, and that’s what swatting means. I said the word swat usually doesn’t carry as heavy handed a > meaning as hit. ( unless you’re a Babe Ruth fan ) SIGH…. once > again… YOU love the word hit because it can mean horribly violent > abuse. Most people don’t carry that idea with the word spank. They > think of a swat on the butt. Usually with an open hand. It’s not > "cute" it is just milder.
But, regardless of what you think, reality has shown that spanking often is not milder at all. Even the words you choose to define spanking as something than other than hitting do not work. Hitting occurs along a continuum. Spanking, regardless of what you call it, fits on the continuum of hitting. You can hit a little, you can hit a lot–you can hit softly, you can hit hard–you can hit with instruments, you can hit with your hand–you can hit an unclothed bottom, you can hit a clothed bottom–you can hit a bottom only, or you can hit a face, or a stomach. But, you cannot spank, you cannot even swat your child, without hitting. LaVonne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Orenda
Response:
> >> > [snip] >I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank > whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for > running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then > why on earth would you do it to your child who I assume you love and > care about. To me it’s an abuse of power.
Yes, Sissy, it is an abuse of power — a point that several of us have made over and over again. It’s nice to have someone new making the point! We have received all kinds of answers to your above question, including but not limited to–parents have the responsibility of raising kids, privilege of the parent/child relationship, teaching right from wrong, kids not being able to reason, justice for wrongdoing, chastisement, parents and kids aren’t equal, parenting isn’t a democracy, it didn’t hurt me any, etc. Of course, none of these reasons answers the question, but it is amazing how many people do think so! Other people argue vehemently against the word hit, in favor of spank, swat, smack…..hitting carries too many negative connotations. What is so interesting is, as you say, any of those actions, regardless of the name, would be illegal if practiced nonconsentually on anyone other than a child. If my supervisor used the mildest form of corporal punishment–spank once, open hand, clothed butt, not only would this be illegal, but a terrible abuse of power. Yet, we allow the practice when the spanking recipient is half our size! Amazing, isn’t it? LaVonne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
: I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank : whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for : running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then : why on earth would you do it to your child who I assume you love and : care about. No I wouldn’t to a co-worker. But then I wouldn’t really try to stop him for running in the street either. Sure if I thought he was just careless I would grab him but should he give but the least kind of strugle against me I would let him go and run in the street however foolish I would think of him for doing it. : To me it’s an abuse of power. If you really take this analogy serious any kind of action going further than what I have described above is abuse of power. If you want to treat your kids the same way as you treat your co- workers, be my guest but I think that a very bad idea. If you don’t then why should this argument have any convicing value. — All opinions expressed herein are currently under revision Antoon Pardon Brussels Free University Computing Centre
Response:
[big snip] =>> I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you =>>know it. I said the word swat usually doesn’t carry as heavy handed a =>>meaning as hit. ( unless you’re a Babe Ruth fan ) SIGH…. once =>>again… YOU love the word hit because it can mean horribly violent =>>abuse. Most people don’t carry that idea with the word spank. They =>>think of a swat on the butt. Usually with an open hand. It’s not =>>"cute" it is just milder. =>>Orenda =>>I just have one small comment question. Would you swat or hit or spank =>whatever word you wish to apply a co-worker or another adult for =>running into the street or for any reason at all? If you wouldn’t then =>why on earth would you do it to your child who I assume you love and =>care about. To me it’s an abuse of power. => Sissy Absolutely. An abuse of power over the only person in the *world* who may legally BE hit. Thanks for pointing it out, Sissy. Regards. — | Ivan Gowch I dogmatize and am contradicted, | | And sentiments I find delight. | | - Samuel Johnson |
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > [snip] > : My children personally learned > : not to cross the sidewalk in the yard. Now… if that lesson came from a > : swat on the butt, was the "risk" that the cohorts would have you believe > : looms so large in that child’s future, be worth having a living child > : rather than a crushed one lying in the road ??? > : Think about it. > Spanking is worse than useless for teaching toddlers not to run > into the street. Dr. Dennis Embry’s study at the U. of Kansas found that > toddlers who were spanked for running into the street did it *more* than > toddlers who weren’t. What *did* work was defining safe play areas in a > positive way and giving stickers and praise for safe play.
Yes, and Power & Chapienski found young toddlers who were occasionally spanked to be no less impulsive or more compliant that children who were never spanked. Children whose parents relied on spanking had children more impulsive and less compliant than the other two groups. Yet swat on the butt or crushed in the street continue to be presented as our two options. By the way, Orenda now prefers the words striking and swatting over hitting. Of course, striking and hitting are synonyms, and swatting is defined as hitting with a sharp blow, usually with an instrument, so I guess I can live with either of those two words. Striking and swatting a child for purposes of discipline are, in my mind, unacceptable. Nonconsentually striking or swatting an adult is a legally reportable offense. LaVonne
Response:
In an attempt to kill two birds with one stone. And let me tell you all, that’s a cliche, and not an advocation to go out and kill feathered beasties with rocks. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> [snip] > : My children personally learned > : not to cross the sidewalk in the yard. Now… if that lesson came from a > : swat on the butt, was the "risk" that the cohorts would have you believe > : looms so large in that child’s future, be worth having a living child > : rather than a crushed one lying in the road ??? > : Think about it. > Spanking is worse than useless for teaching toddlers not to run > into the street. Dr. Dennis Embry’s study at the U. of Kansas found that > toddlers who were spanked for running into the street did it *more* than > toddlers who weren’t. What *did* work was defining safe play areas in a > positive way and giving stickers and praise for safe play.
I lived in Manhattan Kansas, where one Kansas U. is… I think it’s where Dr Embry is from. For one thing, the streets in are no where near as dangerous as other places I have lived, and this is one (1) research, and I’m sure if there were other’s we would have heard of them by now. I’m going on what I learned, my friends learned, and my children have learned. The only kids in my neighborhood who run into the street at all, are the ones who are never spanked. And they do it mostly when their folks aren’t around, not when they are, so I don’t think they do it for attention. ( Unless they love my horn blaring in their ears. ) And I’m talking about 8 to 12 year olds, who should know better, not little kids. And the only two kids I have ever seen hit by cars were never spanked. > Yes, and Power & Chapienski found young toddlers who were occasionally > spanked to be no less impulsive or more compliant that children who > were never spanked. Children whose parents relied on spanking had > children more impulsive and less compliant than the other two groups. > Yet swat on the butt or crushed in the street continue to be presented > as our two options.
It’s not offered as two options, obviously, if you can teach your child in another manner, we haven’t condemed that. Speculation wrong… maybe not a lie this time. Spanking if it becomes neccesary to help ensure the child’s safety is offered by me only as a lesser of two "evils". > By the way, Orenda now prefers the words striking and swatting over > hitting. Of course, striking and hitting are synonyms, and swatting > is defined as hitting with a sharp blow, usually with an instrument, > so I guess I can live with either of those two words. Striking and > swatting a child for purposes of discipline are, in my mind, > unacceptable. Nonconsentually striking or swatting an adult is a > legally reportable offense.
I didn’t say that kids should be spanked with instruments…. and you know it. I said the word swat usually doesn’t carry as heavy handed a meaning as hit. ( unless you’re a Babe Ruth fan ) SIGH…. once again… YOU love the word hit because it can mean horribly violent abuse. Most people don’t carry that idea with the word spank. They think of a swat on the butt. Usually with an open hand. It’s not "cute" it is just milder. Orenda
Response:
[snip] : My children personally learned : not to cross the sidewalk in the yard. Now… if that lesson came from a : swat on the butt, was the "risk" that the cohorts would have you believe : looms so large in that child’s future, be worth having a living child : rather than a crushed one lying in the road ??? : Think about it. Spanking is worse than useless for teaching toddlers not to run into the street. Dr. Dennis Embry’s study at the U. of Kansas found that toddlers who were spanked for running into the street did it *more* than toddlers who weren’t. What *did* work was defining safe play areas in a positive way and giving stickers and praise for safe play. Chris
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.