hollowtrucker77 said:I’ve never been a fan of this whole "us versus them" mentality where everyone is just digging their heels in on both sides people love to act like they’re holding the moral high ground by using these tired old cliches, you know, talking about how someone is "always beating" a kid or "never laying a hand" on them to prove they’re right personally, I think both of those extremes miss the mark entirely if you want my take, in maybe 95% of situations, physical discipline isn't necessary, but there’s that remaining 5% where it actually becomes relevant, simply because sometimes it’s the only way to make the rules stick it’s perfectly fine for a child to understand they have some freedom, that they can ask questions or even try to negotiate, but they also need to realize there comes a moment where the bargaining ends and they just have to listen plus, let’s be real, some kids actually respond well to being told "no," while others just get more defiant and start acting out specifically because they were restricted kids aren't carbon copies of one another, and parents aren't always the sole reason behind a child's behavior—it's not always 100% on them look, I’m not advocating for hitting kids for fun, but I am leaving the door open to the idea that physical discipline might be needed, and in those specific instances, I truly believe it serves as an extension of parental authority rather than falling into the category of violence or terror
Personally, I’d say there’s maybe a 5% chance that Israel goes nuclear on Iran, mostly because nukes are just the logical next step in modern warfare. Physical force should only be used if you have to grab a kid before they bolt into traffic, or maybe if they're actively hitting another kid—but using it to "teach them a lesson" about how pain works? That’s just some mindless, low-IQ nonsense that's basically responsible for all the mess we're dealing with in society today...
Scott Miller7 said:Glad you're having fun with it. I'm not calling you out, though. Since you started this thread, you might as well share what actually motivated you to bring it up.😁
.. I’d love to see what all those "I don't have kids, but I would never hit my own child under any circumstances" types will do when their little golden child eventually pulls the same crap after 25 rounds of explanations and lectures... Will they try a 26th explanation, or finally reach for the belt?
Long before I had kids, I insisted I'd never hit them. Everyone laughed and said I'd see about that once I actually had some. Now they've seen it, and they're basically saying, "Well, you got lucky."😁 Besides, before I became a parent, I spent time caring for two kids who most people would label as absolute nightmares. I never laid a hand on them, and you could see a positive shift in their behavior within a week. People underestimate how much consistency, honesty, positive reinforcement, and actual attention mean to a kid.
Then there's this idea that kids today are impossible—worse and more spoiled than previous generations. Even if we assume that's true, kids in most American families still get beaten, and clearly, that isn't helping anything.
The issue is that children's rights are usually misinterpreted, and they rarely come with a discussion about responsibilities. You can't have rights without obligations. Parents constantly hear that they shouldn't hit their kids, but they aren't given any real alternatives, so many end up clueless when it comes to discipline. While I think parenting should be driven by instinct and common sense, it's obvious very few people actually know how to handle it. That's why mandatory parenting classes seem like a necessity.😁
The thing is, people treat having kids like it's just some automatic milestone or a standard accessory to marriage—not to mention all the unplanned pregnancies out there. But listen, if you don't have solid upbringing, you don't have a healthy society, and the family is the bedrock of everything we have here. I'm telling you, offering a maternity stipend only after someone completes a course... that's the easy fix.
silentpilot6 said:Right 😉... I bow down to the paper theorist 🙏 Practice matters, truly... many beautiful theories fall apart the moment they face a real-world situation. Did nobody ever tell you that? Haven't you noticed? Then it's obvious you're severely lacking in actual experience 😛
Porn really teaches people about sex, clearly :lol.... have you actually ever had sex? 😛
Good grief, you'd basically dismantle the entire education system—which, by the way, relies on passing down knowledge and theory—just to prove a point... what are we doing, looking for a secret dictator? The belt still serves a purpose, I guess 😁 😁 Don't get mad at me for joking around, but I really hope I managed to drive home the point I was making last time.
silentpilot6 said:Genetics, environment, social circles—are we really saying none of that matters? Is the burden of everything falling solely on the parents? By that logic, if you have good, responsible parents, every child should turn out exactly the same. I’m not so sure about that...
Generally speaking, those without children don't truly understand parenting. They might know the theory "on paper," but we all know how much you can manipulate paper. It's like love. You can read 1,500 love poems or 250 romance novels, but until you actually fall in love, you have no idea what it feels like. It’s the same with other things; you can look at photos, watch movies, or read all the textbooks you want, and you can daydream all day 😁 but until you actually experience sex, you don't truly know what it is. So why would raising children be any different? It is entirely possible—in fact, it's the reality 😁—that someone with one or more children who hasn't read a single book on the subject knows far more about parenting than someone without kids who has studied an entire library dedicated to "child rearing." 😁... I will always trust hands-on experience over pure theory. No book can account for every unique situation, every different child, or every unexpected event. I'm not saying theories are useless or shouldn't be studied, but paper can claim anything, whereas real life is almost always different from the textbook version 😬 of life... Therefore, claiming to know how to raise children when you don't have any (yes, I do this too 😁) is, to put it mildly, unprofessional. It's especially problematic when people use absolutes like, "I'll never..." Well, we'll see. 😁
If you bother to watch a few pornić, you'll realize women actually have a clitoris—which, hey, might guarantee you some decent sex, but... knowledge is always useful, though obviously, it doesn't work for YOU..
Morgan Cooper34 said:I personally think *Primal Scream* by Arthur Janov is one of the best books out there regarding child upbringing, even if it isn't strictly focused on parenting. But honestly? I think we have much bigger problems than just punishing children. We have the issue of unwanted children. Kids born not because parents actually wanted them, but just because they felt it was something they "had" to do.
A few posts ago, you asked: "why are you all so afraid to tear down those perfect images of your parents, the ones who molded you into such good, disciplined little kids through strict, old-school discipline? Get them off their pedestals."
Look, I don't put my parents on a pedestal, but I am certain they couldn't have been any better. Despite a few times getting grounded or taking a hit, my parents truly wanted me and loved me. As a kid, I felt that. I could even feel their regret whenever they had to punish me (which usually happened because I was intentionally being difficult and testing every single boundary they set—but that's a whole other story). On the flip side, you'll meet plenty of people who would never lay a finger on their child, yet they've never built a real connection with them either. Why? Because that child wasn't wanted. They weren't loved.
What you think you know on a conscious level isn't the whole truth. Believe me, those "few" times they hit you? They hurt you. If we dropped you back into that exact moment right now, you’d be sobbing like a little kid all over again. And don't get it twisted—you shouldn't put kids on a pedestal either. We're their educators and guides, not their buddies. You can give them choices, sure, but within set boundaries—especially for anyone hitting that pre-teen stage.
bluemason3 said:It’s not a belt for the kids, it’s one for the wife. ☕
Honestly, nothing beats having a buddy over, you yell out "Hey babe, grab us some bourbon!"—of course, bourbon—and she's there in a heartbeat... So how on earth is a kid supposed to ignore you?😁 Real talk: parenting is all about how the parents communicate with each other.
If I’m running my mouth being negative about gay people😛 then tomorrow, during puberty, my kid sees someone of that orientation on TV at an anti-gay rally...
You raise them by setting an example—call it whatever you want—not by using belts or some ridiculous corporal punishment nonsense. My music teacher, Mazur, used to yank me by the hair right behind the ear if I didn't hit the right note on the flute, which is why today I won't sing and wouldn't touch an instrument if you paid me. One single tug and just like that, music was dead to me—and I could've been the next Matija Dedić...
silentpilot6 said:This debate is ultimately futile because both sides are so deeply entrenched in their views that neither will budge. For some, discipline might mean physical punishment, whereas for me, it's often the most effective way to teach a lesson.
Look, do yourself a favor and pick up some actual books. It doesn't really matter what my two cents are; what matters is what the experts—the people who actually spent their entire lives studying child psychology—have to say. If you take a step back and actually dig into how human psychology works and why we struggle with certain things, it might actually shift your perspective. Because, let’s be real, that rigid mindset you’re clinging to is basically the blueprint for everything from organized religion to modern dictatorships. It’s built on the idea that the public is just a bunch of mindless infants who need to be "disciplined" into submission. Even guys like Harmon operated under that exact kind of paternalistic logic. I’m speaking from experience here. I’m not even expecting you to flip your worldview overnight, but at least do some homework before you go deciding how to raise a kid. Besides, there's a 90% chance you aren't going to go around swinging a belt at your own kids just because that's how your old man handled things.
silentpilot6 said:I don't have kids myself, but I spent some time living under the same roof as my sister, her husband, and their little boy. He wasn't a bad kid by nature, but he certainly had his moments where he’d act out just to see how far he could push his parents' boundaries... refusing to listen or stop what he was doing no matter what. To be honest, a quick swat was sometimes the only thing that worked, even though they tried everything else first. I’m just saying you really have to experience it before you can claim to know the answer. I'm not suggesting that there aren't parents out there who have never laid a hand on their child... but it feels a bit naive when people without children weigh in on what kids are actually capable of 😁. Similarly, you might have a "golden child" who is an absolute saint and never does anything to warrant discipline 😁, whereas other parents might think they have an angel, only to find out they're dealing with a little terror...
How is a kid supposed to figure out who they actually are if they never get the chance to say "no"?
You're right, it’s not exactly a walk in the park. That's why you have to make a rock-solid decision—if you slip up, you can't just spiral into a depression and throw in the towel. You’ve gotta keep swinging.
Society is basically undergoing this massive overhaul right now. Unlike back in the day, both parents are out working full-time shifts, and kids spend most of their lives being passed around between daycare workers who eventually just burn out. Then, the parents themselves are exhausted from grinding away at jobs they absolutely hate, so when they finally crawl home to their kids, they're just looking out for their own sanity. That’s what’s driving everything we see today—it isn't some lack of physical punishment.
I mean, even those parents who actually try to break the cycle of generational violence—they still crack sometimes. They end up oscillating wildly between extremes because they're just stretched too thin...
Look, it’s not as simple as everyone makes it out to be—most of us were basically raised with those aggressive, old-school discipline methods baked right into our subconscious as the go-to fix for everything. It feels easy, it feels straightforward, and honestly? It feels like there aren't any lasting consequences. I also reckon parents should probably steer clear of caffeine—it just cranks up your impatience, which basically turns you into a ticking time bomb for those reactive, conditioned outbursts. You really need to dive into some actual literature; Jasper July is solid reading if you want to get real. Raising a kid is arguably the biggest responsibility one can take on for the sake of the world—there isn't any other achievement you can measure against it. I mean, what's the point of discovering atomic energy if it ends up in the hands of unstable people? You end up with thousands suffering in the end, and for fifty years now, we've been staring down the barrel of total global annihilation... We throw money at building bridges, but we should be making sure moms get a three-year average salary guarantee and mandatory sessions with child psychologists—like, a required course you have to pass to qualify for maternity benefits. What difference does it make if you shave two hours off your drive to Venice when thousands of people could be suffering because of poor—or just straight-up inadequate—parenting?
Jeremy Alvarez5 said:Probably never. But honestly, I think you're looking at this all wrong. First off, what I need most in any relationship is honesty and trust. That’s the alpha and omega of everything, I guess. Then there's friendship, that sense of belonging, stuff like that. Who knows how I'd manage to maintain a sex life with my lady if that foundation was gone.
Also, if cheating on someone is strictly a symptom of a mental disorder, then man, a huge chunk of the population is sick.
Thirdly—and this is just theoretical, mind you, not from experience—I think I could probably handle sharing a wife, or in my current situation, women, with other guys. (Actually, I share them whether I want to or not since I don't "own" anyone and don't have that whole marriage thing going on right now). But in reality, I don't have that level of deep trust with anyone to even attempt something like that.
Fourthly, and maybe this is just me overthinking it, but did it ever occur to you that being called a "human being" might imply that monogamy isn't actually natural? Like, maybe trying to force ourselves into it is just a violation of human nature? And maybe the "illness" people talk about is just the fallout from forcing ourselves into these moral norms.
I don't know, maybe that's not true at all.
I remember one psychiatrist saying that once you make progress with schizophrenia, suddenly everyone claims it wasn't even schizophrenia to begin with.
If you want to see a really great critique of "prestigious" psychiatry and how it's practiced, there's an excellent film posted here by Shamantrix, if I recall correctly. I don't feel like digging for it right now, but it's definitely worth watching a couple of times so you don't miss the interesting details.
Classic guy logic right there. Honestly, it’d probably be easier for people around here to just accept bigamy, but if you ask me, this whole thing is really just a massive fear of actually dealing with deep emotions. Look, you can't build a foundation of honesty and trust with someone who's mentally unstable and can't even manage their own reactions. Plus, since they clearly can't face their own bullshit or recognize their own limits, they aren't ever going to truly respect you, either.
It’s honestly hilarious how you guys just breeze right past the idea that a few slaps actually leave a mark, haha What is wrong with you people? It’s not like we have our traumas tattooed on our foreheads or something. What do you think this is—a psychology textbook or some random Reddit thread? A smack to the face is an invasion of a kid's personal space, plain and simple—just like snatching a toy out of their hands. It's all the same stuff. Why are you so terrified of tearing down those perfect little statues of your "ideal" parents? You know, the ones who turned you into "well-behaved" little soldiers through old-school, drill-sergeant parenting. Just take them off the pedestal already.
Ryan Morris15 said:Furthermore, our modern lifestyle demands that we earn well, look good, and maintain nice cars and houses—all of which is quite expensive. To keep up with these societal expectations, both spouses usually have to work, often pulling overtime, while children end up being left with various unskilled babysitters. By the time parents get home, they are completely exhausted and just want to sit in front of the TV to numb their brains from the day's stress. It's the typical experience for a working-class American family. I don't mean to offend anyone; I imagine that one day when I have my own children, my daily life will likely follow a similar pattern, and I'll find myself having to steal moments from work or sleep just to spend time with them. As for corporal punishment, I think people sometimes overthink the issue—I don't recall being hit hard as a child, but I do remember my parents giving me a tug on the ear or a little smack on the fingers. Of course, it wasn't meant to cause pain, just enough to make me feel a bit uncomfortable. Does that count as abuse?
Look, you might not "remember" it, but there’s always someone else who remembers it perfectly fine—someone who isn't wrong. And trust me, that stuff sticks and messes with your life. And then one day, when you have kids of your own, you’re gonna realize how often you reach for that exact same solution, thinking it’s a conscious choice, but it’s not—it’s just the software that was hardwired into you. Solving a problem with a hit is easy, fast, and efficient, right? Plus, the fallout is "invisible." Seriously, what is wrong with people? Is there actually a single psychologist working today who thinks physical punishment is an okay parenting tool????
Keith Jones76 said:If therapy hasn't moved the needle, maybe the kid isn't the only one struggling here. It’s possible the entire family dynamic is out of whack. Holding onto a bowel movement is essentially an attempt at impulse control. Why would someone be that terrified of letting go? We could speculate—maybe they're harboring aggression toward a parent that they don't feel safe expressing, so they choose rigidity over losing control. Or, if there's pain involved, they might interpret it as a punishment, viewing their own bodily functions as some sort of sign that they're doing something wrong (again, purely hypothetical). There's also the chance the parents are just too rigid, overly strict, or haven't built a truly close connection with the child... There are plenty of other angles to consider. This needs a professional to sit down and break it all down systematically—and ideally, sooner rather than later.
It might be worth seeing a pediatric psychiatrist, especially since this has been dragging on for a while. And honestly, it wouldn't be surprising if the whole family needed to jump into therapy or at least a structured counseling session together. You have to de-escalate the tension surrounding the issue before you can actually start fixing it.
By the way, the clinical term for this is enkopresis. I don't think anyone has mentioned that yet.
It's entirely possible this all stems from daycare. Those teachers sometimes don't want to deal with the messy cleanup, and honestly, there's so much room for trauma there. They force kids to eat things they don't want to, too. Even those fancy private preschools that claim to use "alternative" methods—half the time that's just marketing bullshit to justify the tuition. The environment and the other kids play a huge role; bullying can wreck a kid's psyche in a heartbeat. Personally, I'd keep fighting and try working with different psychologists.
silentpilot6 said:If a kid tried to light a fire on the balcony and ended up setting the shutters ablaze, and you barely managed to stop the whole house from going up in flames, what would you have done? I would have sat him down and said, "Look at what you've done, you little troublemaker..." Well, because I did that, I ended up getting a beating and learned some hard lessons. That was that. 😁
Just install aluminum shutters and call it a day, right? 😁 Man, "it's fine, just fix it later" is such a dangerous, lazy way of thinking—it’s a mindset that’s been rotting through society for generations. Trust me, violence doesn't just spawn out of thin air; it’s learned behavior, plain and simple. The first three years of life are everything—that’s when you basically build a future bully. Honestly, I can't wrap my head around seeing moms who feel the need to constantly smack their kids... I mean, if they aren't already acting like primitive cavemen, shouldn't they be the ones providing some actual gentleness? Anyone using physical force like that is part of the problem. And let's be real, most of the time it isn't even a conscious choice—it’s just them repeating the patterns their own parents drilled into them (even if those parents are halfway across the country or long gone).
Whoever decided that some things are just "impossible" clearly hasn't met me. I guess I’m just a hopeless optimist at heart, but I truly believe there's a way to beat any illness. If you really connect with someone on a deep level—you know, build that kind of solid foundation—you'd probably do absolutely everything in your power, whether it's within your control or not, to help them fight through it.
The problem is, you’re basically prime real estate for people looking to take advantage of a sick partner. Just imagine this: your significant other is sneaking around behind your back while you're struggling, and you have no clue. I've read enough stories about how people act when they're dealing with certain disorders... honestly, how are you supposed to fix something that even the most high-end therapists in the country couldn't touch? How many times are you going to offer forgiveness before you run dry?
A woman could basically train herself to mirror every single facial twitch or grimace on a guy’s face—not because she’s being fake, but out of pure survival instinct. It’s that constant, low-key fear that he might snap, you know? If she can anticipate a violent outburst before it even happens, she might be able to steer things toward a calmer outcome—kind of like if women just had better "anger management" tools built into their daily lives.
I wouldn't even think about getting into a relationship if the person isn't already seeing a therapist. It’s basically a green flag—it means they’ve actually put in the work with a pro for a while. But seriously, why would you go looking for extra drama? We aren't talking about a fling that lasts a summer; we're talking about someone who could be in your life for the next thirty years. You've got to consider the long game—kids, shared assets, the whole nine yards...
Look, I was talking about the bias you see during divorce proceedings—that's the stuff divorced guys are always venting about. When I say "society," I’m talking about the actual institutions, like the courts and everything. You’ve got this guy working himself to the bone, basically running himself ragged, while the woman is out hitting up fancy restaurants with her side piece. And then, predictably, the kid ends up with the mother, even though she’s clearly been all over the place emotionally. But hey, I’m not trying to scare off women who are actually thinking seriously about having kids and the massive weight of responsibility that comes with it. HAVING KIDS IS A HUGE COMMITMENT. Don't jump into it unless you're ready for the messy parts, the good and the bad... because if you aren't, you're essentially hurting everyone in the community, regardless of whether you're a man or a woman. This isn't some thing you can just quit when things get difficult.
Look, we definitely shouldn't just brush off the positive impact feminism has had as a movement—honestly, you have to watch out for those tired old clichés, though I’ll admit my own take sits right on that fine line.
It sucks being misunderstood, really. I’m one of those guys who looks people straight in the eye—character is everything to me when I'm sizing someone up—but you can't just ignore raw instinct and pretend we're all in total control of our gut reactions. Like, for example, I haven't even looked at a woman's body in five years, but I did spend some time training myself to stay disciplined.
And before anyone jumps down my throat, I’m not saying women are biologically hardwired just to give birth. Quite the opposite, actually; I'm against any kind of limiting labels, regardless of what neurological studies might say. But let's be real—society as a whole still acts like the mother is the primary caregiver, and you don't have to ask a single divorced guy in the States to know that's the vibe. It’s basically one of those rare areas where we face actual discrimination, though, granted, it’s usually justified if you look at the exceptions.
I’m not going to waste my breath quoting your entire thread of posts. I'll just say this—for the benefit of everyone else lurking here—regarding brain research, well, let's just say I know a bit more than you do. The same goes for personality theories and their actual intrinsic motivations (which are anything but one-dimensional). Everything you’ve listed just highlights how much gaps exist in your knowledge and how biased your view is.
That isn't even the main issue. The issue is when you charge in with these opinions without any critical thinking, acting as if they're established facts. Honestly, none of this seems relevant to the topic at hand. This whole exclusionary vibe in your emails reeks of insecurity. It feels like you're projecting some personal issues from your real life onto this discussion. You seem to have this desperate need to pick a fight with someone because you can't find an outlet for it in reality. Maybe it touches a nerve regarding the subject matter, too. Anyway, we aren't going to solve your psyche here, so that's that. And yes, being "triggered" is clearly not the ideal headspace for an objective debate—that much was obvious.
As for what I personally think about men, I'm pretty qualified to judge, given I have an entire lifetime of experience to draw from. (Did a woman reject you recently? Is that why you think it's because you feel unfulfilled? ...Just a guess.)
You’re taking this whole thing way too personally. It’s not my fault there are biological differences between men and women. Just look at amygdala size, or even how we process decision-making and react to threats. Since you’re flexing your "massive expertise" (compared to me), it's pretty obvious you're just spooked by my point. Why is it so humiliating to admit that, in most cases, a woman wants a man to be the provider during pregnancy and those early stages of raising a kid? I don't get why women who love to intellectualize everything refuse to admit they're still looking for the same stuff we were hunting for in caves—evolution isn't exactly moving at lightning speed, you know? It's not like I went out and designed the world the way it is today. By all means, enlighten me if you actually have real research data that proves my points wrong.