Posts by George Davis6

Hey! Since you seem a bit too lazy to go hunting for these yourself:

http://modernparenting.com/kids...punishment/

http://mommyblog.com/toddler...behavior/

Kenneth Barnes4 said:Yeah, because it's a totally normal reaction for a kid to bolt to a corner and scream his head off after getting a spanking.

👍

I really don't have the energy for that... 🤣

So look, I think learning how to make decisions and understanding that your actions have consequences is a vital part of life. I was saying that physical punishment teaches kids that what they do matters. Google "decision making" and try to wrap your head around it 🙂 but whatever, it doesn't matter. I'm just putting my thoughts into words whenever I have some downtime.😬

No, that’s not what we’re teaching them. What we’re actually doing—and it's pretty heartbreaking when you think about it—is teaching them to be terrified of their own parents. We're basically raising kids with zero self-confidence, making them believe that violence and hitting are just totally acceptable ways to behave!

I’d love to dive into this with you! It’s such a fascinating question—why do most developed nations, including the US, have strictly outlawed corporal punishment? It really comes down to a massive shift in how we view human rights and child development over the last century. Basically, the consensus among experts—think psychologists from places like Harvard or Stanford—is that hitting a child doesn't actually teach them "discipline without drama," it just teaches them to fear the person holding the belt! Instead of learning why a behavior was wrong, kids often just learn how to avoid getting caught next time. Plus, there's the whole argument about setting a precedent: if we teach children that violence is an acceptable way to resolve conflict at home, we're essentially training them to act that way out in the world later on. It’s all about moving toward more constructive, communicative ways of teaching boundaries. It isn't always easy—let's be real, parenting is tough!—but the goal is to break that cycle of physical force and focus on long-term emotional intelligence instead.

So, since you mentioned your parents weren't exactly big on physical discipline—which I totally respect, by the way!—help me out here: how did you actually learn that actions have consequences? Are you trying to say there's something "off" with how you were raised, or are you actually feeling like you missed out on that kind of guidance? I'm genuinely curious!
I mean—if you’re actually looking to get jumped, just let me know!🤣🤣)

I’m just going to ignore this because you're talking total nonsense—it honestly makes zero sense. I really don't have the energy to explain things to you. To me, you're someone who actually advocates for using physical force against people who can't fight back or defend themselves, and frankly, that makes you a complete non-entity in my book.

Like I already said—and maybe you should go ahead and double-check the actual laws if you don't believe me?—corporal punishment of children is strictly illegal here in the United States, so this whole debate is pretty much pointless.

Kenneth Barnes4 said:And there it is. That’s the whole damn issue right there. "Will it be easy to hit them?" Of course it isn't easy. Raising a kid isn't easy; if it were, everyone would be doing it perfectly. The point isn't whether it feels hard for you or easy. It's about what needs to be done. You aren't looking at what's necessary to get a kid on the right track; you're just focused on "is this hard for me" or "can I handle this." I don't know about you, but that's where I see the problem.

You're dodging my previous questions.

I don't see why I WOULD need to hit my kid if they’re actually listening to me. 🤔🤔

Look, through consistent effort, I've reached a point where I might have to repeat myself a few times—maybe raise my voice just a little bit—but that's really it. My kid knows exactly where the boundaries are and understands what's allowed and what isn't. No yelling, no hitting, no trauma. And honestly? It's totally doable, you know? 😉

Kenneth Barnes4 said:Alright, moving on... let me write a bit about why it’s vital for a kid to understand that their actions have consequences.

When parents overprotect a kid from everything—especially negative outcomes (like if the kid messes up and the parent rushes in to fix it)—that kid never learns that actions have CONSEQUENCES. When we teach kids that what they do matters, we're actually teaching them how to make their own choices and how to avoid bad outcomes (I’m talking a smack on the butt here, not, you know, assault or something.

In cases where kids are shielded from seeing the fallout of their behavior, they grow up unable to correctly link results to their own actions. Decision-making in adulthood isn't just the simple stuff: like having three candy bars to choose from, where it's easy to pick one (or you're too indecisive to pick any at all).

It goes deeper than that. It's a process where a person realizes that if they combine A and B, they get result C. If a kid never sees the consequences, they'll head from A to B without ever considering the end result. Basically, a person enjoys the process for whatever subjective reasons, but they either don't want the final outcome or can't predict it.

Okay, I'm overcomplicating this... fine, here's a totally unrealistic, hypothetical example.
Someone is hiking through the woods toward a bungee jumping site. They're stoked, singing: "YAY BUNGEE IS COOL, LALALA bungee mungee lala lungee." 🤣🤣 Then an indecisive person comes along, hears them singing, and joins in. Since singing "bungee mungee lala" is fun, they walk through the woods together, having a blast. But then they reach the actual bungee jumping spot—the goal. Person A, who was singing about it, is thrilled because the whole trip was leading to this. Person B (the indecisive one) finally sees what's actually happening—they're expected to jump—and they aren't interested. So they just turn around and leave. Because Person B enjoyed the walk and the singing, but didn't account for the destination, once they hit the goal, they're out. Get what I'm saying?

Or take a guy hitting on a woman with sexual undertones. She plays along because she thinks it's fun, like a game or something. Then the guy expects sex, but the woman doesn't realize that's where this is heading and just wanders off to do something else she finds fun. The guy feels provoked or like there was some ulterior motive, when really, there wasn't.

It's the same thing with reading between the lines. You say something to someone to imply a point, but they don't grasp your direction or your target; they only hear the literal words. It's the same A+B=C formula for everything.

People like that cause total chaos in life. Why? Because the other person—who usually has a clear goal in mind (which is most people, let's be real)—assumes they're on the same page because they're acting like it. Then suddenly, they pivot, and you realize they weren't. It's similar to the chaos caused by people who struggle with emotional attachment but then suddenly want something intensely. They push hard to get something, the other side builds an emotional connection, and then these people just vanish because they don't build those connections. So, who's to blame? We could throw ASPD or BPD diagnoses at everyone at this point 😬

Look, I get that most people won't see how this all connects, but it does. This is how I reached the conclusion that physical discipline should be used as a consequence for bad behavior. Kids won't always understand exactly where they're headed in the moment. But if a parent gives you *that* look—you know what that means, you're screwed—you move. Simple.

Seriously, tell me—when you mess up or do something totally stupid, when your partner or whoever just gives you a good old-fashioned smack to teach you a lesson, does that actually work for you?

Or look at criminal sentencing. What kind of prison system are we talking about? If we just had public lashings, man, people would learn pretty fast not to steal... damn....

I mean, I don't get why people were such idiots and banned corporal punishment in the first place if it’s clearly—you know—so effective!

Someone else made a great point earlier—once you have kids of your own, you'll see if you can really bring yourself to hit them. To cause that much pain. To basically crush a child's spirit like that.

Melissa Stewart6 said:"A good spanking is a blessing from above," my elders used to say.

Women didn't have the right to vote, slavery was a thing—it was all just part of the legacy left behind by our "ancestors."

feralranger said:I don't consider myself an advocate for corporal punishment, per se; I wasn't raised under the belt, nor have I ever felt the need to swing one. However, observing the world around us and acknowledging the simple fact that no two children are cut from the same cloth, I find I cannot strictly condemn a friend who chose to discipline her kids with a firm hand. Nor, on the other hand, can I offer unbridled praise to my neighbor—a psychologist, no less—who insisted on raising her child strictly "by the book," only to produce a notorious schoolyard bully who spends more time in the principal's office than in class.

You're making the same point again. 🤦

So, you're saying your two little anecdotes are somehow valid for drawing conclusions, but a massive study covering over 160,000 kids doesn't count?

We’re just full of prejudices, Flynn!

🤣🤣🤣

feralranger said:In essence, they are functionally identical. The only real distinction is quantitative. Being grounded, much like being incarcerated, represents a form of physical punishment because it is an undeniable fact that both methods restrict one's freedom of movement. Simultaneously, they serve as a form of psychological punishment due to the emotional weight they carry.

It is quite simply the reality of the situation, regardless of whether that aligns with your particular preconceptions or not.

Which is precisely why I find it rather tiresome when self-proclaimed experts, who rely on these types of psycho-physical punishments, act so indignant toward my friend because she gave her kid a quick smack on the backside... yet they see absolutely nothing wrong with the little boy who was raised strictly "by the book" by his mother—a professional psychologist—only to end up becoming a school-wide bully.

Got anything else to add, or are you just going to keep barking the same line over and over?

We've already established that there's definitely something off with that kid. Whether it's ADHD, being on the spectrum, or who knows what else... we're past that.

So, what's next? ☕

Through the woods and down the road 😁😁

Something small is definitely off here—I'm certain of it. Don't you think?

Physical punishment leaves lasting scars. ALWAYS. And look, this isn't me trying to "spin" the argument or whatever you claim I'm doing—these are just straight-up facts. I even included a link to a study covering over 160,000 kids, though I'm guessing you didn't even bother to click it.

Look, I’m not just making things up out of thin air here—I’m basing this on what I’ve gathered from reading actual professional literature and seeing it play out countless times in real life. There are clear reasons why kids turn into bullies, even if you’re dead set on arguing otherwise. Besides, did she even go out and get a formal psychiatric evaluation for her?
I’m going to pass on commenting on that second example. No matter what I say, you'll probably just insist those kids are perfect little angels.

feralranger said:It’s futile; he’ll just come crawling back. And honestly, you aren't going to be able to tie him down.

George Davis6 As the saying goes:
Finding a way to distract a child by pivoting their interest toward something entirely different—well, I have found that this tactic works remarkably well in a staggering number of situations.

Zero points in the long run—everything works if you only care about the short term. Do you honestly believe that’s some groundbreaking concept she hasn't already mastered?

I find myself staring at this particular statement, and I cannot help but feel a profound sense of exhaustion at its sheer absurdity. It is truly remarkable how we continue to circle the same drain, over and over again, without ever actually making any progress toward a sensible conclusion. One might almost call it a Herculean task just to maintain a shred of sanity while navigating these repetitive cycles, though even that seems like an overly generous description of our current predicament.

Do you honestly believe she’s oblivious to what he’s saying? Please. The woman is a professional psychologist; she’s spent her entire career studying the human mind, yet she’s essentially centered her whole existence around her only child. She hasn't had much else going on in her life besides him. And despite all that expertise, the boy has turned into such a notorious bully that his entire school district knows him by name.

But how can you say for sure how much she actually loved him?

Like I said before—bullies are usually just unhappy kids deep down. Period. I don't think there's anything else left to discuss here.

feralranger said:

Robert Reyes4 As expressed by feralranger:
It is simply because they neglected them from the very beginning. Once you fail to lay down a solid foundation right out of the gate, trying to patch things up later becomes an uphill battle that most people aren't prepared for.
I am inclined to believe that the most vital element is...
A proper diet should serve as a catalyst for developing self-discipline and a newfound respect for others; however, one simply cannot achieve such lofty virtues through the blunt instrument of punishment.

It isn't always that simple, nor does there exist some sort of universal "magic formula" for these situations. I recall a kid who attended school with my son; he was quite frankly the most relentless bully in his entire grade. The kicker? His mother was a professional psychologist specializing specifically in child development! She raised him strictly "by the book," following every psychological principle to the letter, yet somehow, her little boy still turned out to be a nightmare for everyone else.

On the other hand, one of my close friends—my maid of honor from years ago—certainly believed in the old-school method of discipline, relying heavily on a firm hand to keep her three children in line. And yet, looking at them now, they turned out to be the absolute picture of propriety; we're talking top-tier manners, elite private schooling, Ivy League degrees, the whole nine yards. They’ve never once stepped an inch out of line or caused a moment of scandal.

We raised our children without ever resorting to corporal punishment, yet it is becoming increasingly apparent that her offspring are navigating life with far greater ease and success than ours ever did.

One shouldn't fall into the trap of assuming that your particular experience serves as some sort of universal blueprint or a definitive "how-to" guide for everyone else. There are countless examples out there that prove otherwise.

Look, she could be a world-class psychologist with a dozen PhDs, but if a child isn't getting that emotional fulfillment—especially during those crucial first three years—it doesn't matter. It's been proven time and again: kids who bully others are usually just emotionally neglected. At the end of the day, they're just unhappy kids trying to boost their own sense of self by exerting power over everyone else.

feralranger said:"Quote"

I’ll just keep my mouth shut for once, rather than... I find myself wondering.If you cannot provide a substantive answer to that question, then I fear your entire argument is nothing more than mere empty rhetoric, is it not? I am referring, of course, to the classic scenario involving a child—take, for instance, the offspring of a professional psychologist—who simply refuses to heed any counsel, advice, or repetitive instruction. You asserted that your philosophy does not equate to "letting them do whatever they want," but unless you can specify exactly how you intend to enforce those boundaries when verbal persuasion and constant repetition have utterly failed, your position remains a hollow platitude. It is remarkably easy to peddle empty abstractions, don't you agree?

1. Physically removing the child from the situation/person/action—basically, picking them up and moving them away from whatever they're trying to smash or hit. Then, you have a real talk about what happened and why afterward. And I mean a serious conversation—not just a quick two-minute chat before handing them chocolate and turning on Disney+.

2. Distraction—getting the kid interested in something else to redirect their attention. Honestly, this works wonders in so many situations!

3. Truly getting to know your kid—spending actual quality time playing and talking with them (instead of just scrolling through Facebook, which seems to be what a lot of moms do these days...😠) so you can figure out what triggers certain behaviors. There are almost always patterns in how kids act, and if you pay attention, you can predict and prevent them before they even start.

Watching that video at the start of this thread, I can't help but notice how some moms try to "explain" the whole stranger danger thing to their kids... it’s all just sort of vague, dismissive, and honestly, pretty useless. When we're talking about things that could actually be life-threatening, we need to approach the conversation differently—we have to frame it as something TRULY dangerous and serious. Whether it's sticking a finger in an outlet, mixing water with electricity, wandering off with a stranger, or darting across a busy street... the way we deliver these lessons (our facial expressions, our tone, the grimaces, describing the actual consequences, even acting out being scared, etc.) matters immensely. It's how the child learns to associate fear WITH the action itself, rather than just fearing US because they think they're going to get grounded or spanked.

A massive study involving more than 160,000 kids

http://www.iflscience.com/brain/span...iant-children/

Seriously, why did you even start this thread? It feels like nothing anyone says actually sinks in with you. Honestly, maybe you had a rough childhood or something—it’s hard to tell with that narcissistic streak you've got going on.

Besides, corporal punishment is strictly illegal here in the States. There isn't even a point in debating it.

So, let me get this straight—you work with kids, you threaten them, you hit them, and then you have the nerve to openly admit it on a forum? Are you for real? Should I just report you now?

Have some shame. Just... yikes.

Robert Reyes4 said:Punishing a kid is only justifiable if they know exactly what they're doing is wrong and they do it anyway. Your car example doesn't fit that.
If a kid does something dangerous, you explain it to them—and if it's truly life-threatening, you make it clear with some drama.

That’s exactly it! 👍

Plus, so many tricky situations can be avoided entirely just by talking things through beforehand. We shouldn't even let kids get into those spots in the first place! Using things like storytelling or role-playing is such a great way to help them grasp how the world works and where the boundaries are.

Kenneth Barnes4 said:👍

Everything here is spot on. Sure, a kid can decide which color straw they want at the movies, but they aren't equipped to make massive life decisions because they can't see the big picture yet. That's why adults handle the heavy lifting. You teach a child through small steps. By letting them pick the minor things with zero real consequences, you're training them to make decisions. They’ll apply those same patterns to much bigger things once they grow up.

When you see a kid messing up, but the fallout isn't permanent or dangerous, let them fail. Let them learn from experience so they understand that actions have consequences. For example, if a kid leaves a carton of milk right on the edge of the table, don't nag them five times saying, "The milk is going to fall." Just let it fall. Then, the kid has to clean up the mess. Next time, they'll be more careful because they know they don't want to deal with the cleanup. If you constantly intervene or fix it for them, they learn nothing. If you keep them under a glass dome, deciding everything for them and cleaning up every mistake, they never grasp the actual impact of their actions. They just focus on keeping things smooth in the moment, totally blind to the consequences hitting them later.

The only time you should really discipline a child is when they're doing something that could seriously hurt themselves or someone else. Say a kid decides to try driving the car because they saw Mom doing it. That's a situation where physical discipline is used because explaining the danger is too hard for a kid who thinks it's just a game. They might feel bad or negative about being punished, but after that, you have to explain that what they did was genuinely dangerous. After the discipline, you go back to treating them with the same respect, love, and care as always. That way, the kid doesn't walk away thinking, "I'm being mistreated," but rather, "If my parents generally treat me great and I only get disciplined when I do something dangerous I don't understand, then there must be a good reason."

If a parent is just some brute who doesn't care about a child's emotional state, then yeah, you've got a problem. But like I said before, those kinds of people are going to act however they want and leave lasting scars on a child regardless of whether they use physical punishment or not.

There is no scenario where a child MUST be physically disciplined. There isn't a single situation where an adult MUST be physically punished either. Do you see the analogy there?

You can explain to a child that something is dangerous without resorting to physical punishment. Kids aren't idiots! Physical discipline leads to nothing but fear of parents, a loss of self-esteem, and all sorts of other nasty long-term consequences... And as for that idea that a child will "conclude" one thing or another—they won't. A child doesn't understand why Mom or Dad suddenly seems to hate them in the moment they're being hit or why they're causing them physical pain. A parent needs to be a safe harbor—a refuge from pain, insults, and humiliation...

analogseal86 said:I'm going to see this solely because of Alexander 😁 🙂

It’s just perfect—seriously, absolutely perfect... and he is totally right for this role.

Overall, I really liked the movie! My only tiny gripe is that I didn't quite feel a deep emotional connection to the characters...