MK, vol. 219483

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:I’ve only skimmed part of this thread, so I might have missed it, but here’s my take: stripping a kid of their phone, computer, and TV access—it’s way more brutal and painful than any slap they could ever get.
If you lay a hand on a child, you’re an abuser. Period. There’s no middle ground between being an abuser and just letting them run wild when they act up; those are the only two options.

Is there some magical law out there that stops a parent from taking away things they actually paid for? What do we call a parent who does that? A thief? No, because let's be real, they bought the stuff... 🤔
Besides, kids under 13 aren't even allowed on Facebook without parental permission, yet there are tons of them doing it anyway. 😉>

Anyway, MK can get pretty flooded with trolls who hide behind "reasonable" posts just to derail good discussions. Sometimes they're hard to spot because they all act like they're smarter than everyone else.

No, you can discipline a child by setting boundaries or taking things away for a while.
And I guess you should ask why everyone in this thread seems so obsessed with hitting kids. ☕

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:I was reading some news reports about various foster care facilities and group homes for kids under 18. Honestly, if a 12-year-old genuinely thinks they're being abused, they should just head straight to one of those institutions.
I have a feeling they’d be begging to go back home pretty fast. A little occasional spanking or getting a firm earful isn't nearly as bad as the reality of what kids actually face in those state-run homes.

This also feels like blackmail, or just exploiting a child's position.

But I guess you don't even see that. ☕

Linda Price5 said:You are spreading falsehoods; physical discipline and abuse are not the same thing. An elderly person isn't an abuser just because a senile grandmother loses her temper once and gives them a quick smack, but that smack is still violence and is prohibited under Family Law.

From what I've observed here, nobody has claimed that every single strike is abuse, but every instance of physical punishment is violence, and all physical punishment is illegal in the US.

Moderator Charles Fox10 has been encouraging physical punishment of children, which is prohibited by law.

That is precisely what this topic is about.

Aside from the fact that you constantly go around calling people abusers and violent thugs on this forum whenever physical discipline—or even just a verbal disagreement—comes up, extrapolating everything into beatings and assaults. You're basically just verbally abusing others by slapping labels on them as part of your usual trolling routine.

In America, certain types of marriages are banned, so some people promote them instead. I haven't noticed you calling them abusers. ... A lot of things are prohibited, so if people think those rules aren't realistic, they share their opinions against them.

Linda Price5 said:You are spreading falsehoods; physical discipline and abuse are not the same thing. An elderly person isn't an abuser just because a senile grandmother loses her temper once and gives them a quick smack, but that smack is still violence and is prohibited under Family Law.

From what I've observed here, nobody has claimed that every single strike is abuse, but every instance of physical punishment is violence, and all physical punishment is illegal in the US.

Moderator Charles Fox10 has been encouraging physical punishment of children, which is prohibited by law.

That is precisely what this topic is about.

Look, I’m usually pretty sharp, but clearly my brain is on vacation today.
Every single person arguing against punishment seems to think that even pulling someone's hair counts as abuse. It makes their entire stance look idiotic.
By that logic, there's more violence happening in elementary schools than in homes, yet you never see a 12-year-old getting disciplined for beating up kids their own age.

I read through Charles Fox10's posts, and I didn't interpret them the way everyone else did. To me, it was clear that he, like most of the older regulars on this forum, is just arguing for the occasional swat if a kid goes too far.

At the end of the day, semantics don't matter when people are out here calling for prison time for anyone who pulls a kid's hair or gives them a slap. ☕

redviper32 said:That’s true, I guess, but strictly speaking, corporal punishment isn't actually a crime itself. The rules say it's forbidden to justify or glorify criminal acts, but a crime is only what's specifically defined under the Penal Code.

It seems like a bit of an oversight by the admins, but hey, since we're already nitpicking, we might as well go all the way, right? 😁

Under American law, hitting children is prohibited.

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:I was reading some news reports about various foster care facilities and group homes for kids under 18. Honestly, if a 12-year-old genuinely thinks they're being abused, they should just head straight to one of those institutions.
I have a feeling they’d be begging to go back home pretty fast. A little occasional spanking or getting a firm earful isn't nearly as bad as the reality of what kids actually face in those state-run homes.

🤦

Things can always get worse. To me, the idea that a child should be happy because they only (yuck) get hit occasionally—just because things could be even worse elsewhere—is absolutely terrible. 😢

rustydrifter10 said:Under American law, hitting children is prohibited.

🤦

Things can always get worse. To me, the idea that a child should be happy because they only (yuck) get hit occasionally—just because things could be even worse elsewhere—is absolutely terrible. 😢

🤦
Well, yeah, that's true, I guess, but it isn't actually a crime under the Penal Code. I honestly don't quite get why that part seems so hard for people to wrap their heads around!

Alex Barnes8 said:This also feels like blackmail, or just exploiting a child's position.

But I guess you don't even see that. ☕

No, actual abuse is when kids are being mistreated at home—like an alcoholic mother, or a father who blows the entire paycheck on drugs and booze and then comes home out of nowhere to beat his wife and kid. That’s abuse. And in those situations, kids go... anywhere, as long as it's far away from them.

If a kid is smart enough—and let's face it, kids are getting sharper by the day—they can ask someone to take them away, whether it's foster care or whoever else, because that is their right!

But look, we already know what we're dealing with here, and none of us have high expectations for your input in a debate anyway. 🙂

redviper32 said:🤦
Well, yeah, that's true, I guess, but it isn't actually a crime under the Penal Code. I honestly don't quite get why that part seems so hard for people to wrap their heads around!

Look, if an action is illegal—like hitting children—then promoting, encouraging, or glorifying those exact same actions is also off-limits. Seriously, it's not that complicated to understand.

redviper32 said:🤦
Well, yeah, that's true, I guess, but it isn't actually a crime under the Penal Code. I honestly don't quite get why that part seems so hard for people to wrap their heads around!

And once again:

Promoting or justifying illegal acts is strictly prohibited on this forum, and under Family Law (Section 88), it clearly states: "Parents and other family members shall not subject a child to humiliating treatment, mental or physical violence, or abuse."

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:Look, I’m usually pretty sharp, but clearly my brain is on vacation today.
Every single person arguing against punishment seems to think that even pulling someone's hair counts as abuse. It makes their entire stance look idiotic.
By that logic, there's more violence happening in elementary schools than in homes, yet you never see a 12-year-old getting disciplined for beating up kids their own age.

I read through Charles Fox10's posts, and I didn't interpret them the way everyone else did. To me, it was clear that he, like most of the older regulars on this forum, is just arguing for the occasional swat if a kid goes too far.

At the end of the day, semantics don't matter when people are out here calling for prison time for anyone who pulls a kid's hair or gives them a slap. ☕

Actually, they call it violence. And under American Family Law, that's strictly prohibited.

I went through Chuck's posts, and I didn't interpret them the way everyone else did. My takeaway was that he, much like most of the veteran users here, is simply advocating for an occasional spanking if a kid truly crosses the line.

An "occasional spanking" when children misbehave is categorized as physical violence under American Family Law; therefore, it is entirely inappropriate for a moderator to promote such views.

The terminology shouldn't matter when you have people arguing for prison sentences for anyone who pulls a child's hair or hits them.☕

In my view, the focus should actually be on education. 🤷

loneraven25 said:...let's just put this thread back where it belongs,
and if it’s not something you care to read—well, you don't have to, does it?

I’m completely on board with this and fully support the idea, though I have to say I’m firmly against deleting anything at all.
How are we supposed to figure out what went wrong if everything has been deleted?

Alex Barnes8 said:Charles Fox10 was essentially advocating for violence by labeling it as a disciplinary measure.😁

I’m honestly not quite sure what your issue is with Charles Fox10. From where I’m sitting, he seems like one of the better moderators we have on here, and I don't even know him personally.

Laura Chavez93 said:The entire MK really ought to be abolished ☕

Please, let’s be reasonable here—I would really advise against throwing out such silly ideas. If we aren't careful, some wannabe intellectuals might actually take them seriously, thinking they've found a golden opportunity to jump in and try to act smarter than everyone else.

Daniel White9 said:And what about the moderator, Aaron Harris2?
He shut the thread down because it was inciting violence. 😁

I honestly find it hard to believe that the thread was locked on the grounds of supposedly inciting violence. If you ask me, it was shut down because of this massive uproar and the whole "witch hunt" vibe—it felt more like an Inquisition being carried out by a few self-righteous forum members.

slynomad14 said:MK is definitely a character, and honestly, he should just stay exactly the way he is...

So a kid makes a mess and you give them a quick smack on the butt, and suddenly, wow, it's physical abuse...

Oh, I would just love to get my hands on the parent who thinks they can raise a kid without ever once laying a finger on them...

There are definitely households where one parent refuses to discipline, which usually results in the other parent becoming the "designated enforcer" to balance things out.
In my case, my child received a punishment because they were being abusive toward me, even though I was never treated that way myself.

Megan Ruiz13 said:So, I'm being accused of lying again? That they were obedient because of fear? 🤷

The first part of my post is factual; the second part still stands.

There. My response to the first part is done, and that's my conclusion.

I don't see where I ever called for instilling fear into their bones. 🤷

They panicked and deleted everything in sight—the stuff that needed deleting and the stuff that didn't...🙄

I first discovered this forum about a year ago and have read through a massive amount of threads. To be honest, I couldn't make heads or tails of most of the debates, mostly because the long-time users with hundreds of posts tend to act like they belong to some elite club, often "jumping" on any newcomer who tries to join in.
Because of that, I've set aside most of the pdf-ov, but my favorite topics remain the occasional TV jokes, health discussions, and MK.
For me, this forum is a place to relax, have some fun, and pick up interesting tidbits, and MK really is a standout favorite.
I actually managed to convince my son last night that the crew over at MK is fantastic and that the debates move as fast as a halftime show during an NFL game; now here I am reading and wondering just how far "human stupidity" can go (there's that saying, "the universe and human stupidity are infinite, but I'm not quite sure about the universe"—that quote by AE makes perfect sense to me right now).

Hey rustydrifter10,

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:No, actual abuse is when kids are being mistreated at home—like an alcoholic mother, or a father who blows the entire paycheck on drugs and booze and then comes home out of nowhere to beat his wife and kid. That’s abuse. And in those situations, kids go... anywhere, as long as it's far away from them.

If a kid is smart enough—and let's face it, kids are getting sharper by the day—they can ask someone to take them away, whether it's foster care or whoever else, because that is their right!

But look, we already know what we're dealing with here, and none of us have high expectations for your input in a debate anyway. 🙂

Alex Barnes8 was constantly being subjected to things like this—and those are just the mild versions—yet the conclusion drawn (by others, including you) was that she was just trolling. 🤷

rustydrifter10 said:Look, if an action is illegal—like hitting children—then promoting, encouraging, or glorifying those exact same actions is also off-limits. Seriously, it's not that complicated to understand.

Well, it doesn't actually say it that way in the fine print! I just wanted to point that out, I guess. The way it's worded, it says those things are prohibited specifically regarding criminal offenses under the Penal Code. It really ought to say anything action that goes against the law. I am so sorry if there was a misunderstanding here! 🙂

@Daniel White9 - I'm talking about that specific quote from the rules that rustydrifter10 was quoting, which is what I was referencing in my previous post.

rustydrifter10 said:Under American law, hitting children is prohibited.

🤦

Things can always get worse. To me, the idea that a child should be happy because they only (yuck) get hit occasionally—just because things could be even worse elsewhere—is absolutely terrible. 😢

And what happens when a fifteen-year-old smashes a MacBook $2333 just for the hell of it?
Should we just sit them down and explain why that's wrong? 👏
What if they wreck a $40,000 car?

You can't even pull them aside by the ear anymore without risking a trip to jail.

But sure, let's just completely ignore the existence of kids who don't act out and never need discipline.

redviper32 said:🤦
Well, yeah, that's true, I guess, but it isn't actually a crime under the Penal Code. I honestly don't quite get why that part seems so hard for people to wrap their heads around!

Thanks.

The forum rules state: It is prohibited on this forum to incite or justify any illegal acts.


By that logic, inciting or justifying physical discipline for children is against the rules here.

So, what are the consequences for violating this specific rule? How have users been penalized for such infractions in the past, and what was the disciplinary action taken against the moderator?

Aaron Collins25 said:I’m completely on board with this and fully support the idea, though I have to say I’m firmly against deleting anything at all.
How are we supposed to figure out what went wrong if everything has been deleted?

I’m honestly not quite sure what your issue is with Charles Fox10. From where I’m sitting, he seems like one of the better moderators we have on here, and I don't even know him personally.

Please, let’s be reasonable here—I would really advise against throwing out such silly ideas. If we aren't careful, some wannabe intellectuals might actually take them seriously, thinking they've found a golden opportunity to jump in and try to act smarter than everyone else.

I honestly find it hard to believe that the thread was locked on the grounds of supposedly inciting violence. If you ask me, it was shut down because of this massive uproar and the whole "witch hunt" vibe—it felt more like an Inquisition being carried out by a few self-righteous forum members.

There are definitely households where one parent refuses to discipline, which usually results in the other parent becoming the "designated enforcer" to balance things out.
In my case, my child received a punishment because they were being abusive toward me, even though I was never treated that way myself.

I first discovered this forum about a year ago and have read through a massive amount of threads. To be honest, I couldn't make heads or tails of most of the debates, mostly because the long-time users with hundreds of posts tend to act like they belong to some elite club, often "jumping" on any newcomer who tries to join in.
Because of that, I've set aside most of the pdf-ov, but my favorite topics remain the occasional TV jokes, health discussions, and MK.
For me, this forum is a place to relax, have some fun, and pick up interesting tidbits, and MK really is a standout favorite.
I actually managed to convince my son last night that the crew over at MK is fantastic and that the debates move as fast as a halftime show during an NFL game; now here I am reading and wondering just how far "human stupidity" can go (there's that saying, "the universe and human stupidity are infinite, but I'm not quite sure about the universe"—that quote by AE makes perfect sense to me right now).

What do you mean—you don't believe him? 🤔
He literally said it himself, just read it:

Child abuse, violence against kids, and all that—I absolutely do not condone any of it. For that reason I am closing this topic right now.

Wait, are you saying he's being a bully? 🤔

Daniel White9 said:Hey rustydrifter10,

Alex Barnes8 was constantly being subjected to things like this—and those are just the mild versions—yet the conclusion drawn (by others, including you) was that she was just trolling. 🤷

Maybe try reading her posts more often; then you'd actually get why she's trolling.
And no, I don't hold my breath expecting a rational debate from everyone on this forum.
I wish it worked that way, but some people just twist every single thing you say just to start a fight.

Time to give you the view from the muški kutak...😳

And there they go again, the feminists are attacking. 🤷

Honestly, with this kind of PMS-driven feminism, the mods and regular guys on this forum are fighting battles every single day.

Scanning through the subforum, I’ve realized that censorship in the muški kutak only seems to target the moody feminists. Everyone else can blather on all they want until they drive my respected colleagues crazy... and then what? You're left with nothing.🤷

Look, if you can't handle some guy banter, just shut down the muški kutak entirely....

And regarding those gay topics—come on. This is the muški kutak: grabbing beers, watching TV, porn, boobs, hookers... and then suddenly, "oh, let's bring in the gay topics or we'll be violating someone's rights." Give me a break...🙄

Just open a separate subforum for gay people and call it a day. 🤷

Feminists have their own space, but nooooooo, they just *have* to invade the muški kutak....😁

That’s the kind of nonsense going on over there.

Alex Barnes8 said:And I guess that's precisely why you have to be more careful with them, not less than you would with adults.

Dictators also tend to be completely incapable of humor or joking when it comes to their own "values."☕

Dictators usually suffer from distorted moral values, which means they almost never actually say the word 'violence.'
They just rely on a long list of euphemisms that they pull out whenever it suits them. ☕

Fanaticism and dictatorship can sprout from just about any moral value if you let them.☕

The hallmarks are pretty clear: an absolute, unwavering belief in one's own truth, a total lack of humor or irony, zero sense of life's nuances, and a certain childish self-importance.☕

Luckily, they're usually not smart enough to push things too far before a crisis hits—one big enough to make people trade their common sense for pure instinct.😳

Megan Ruiz13 said:Time to give you the view from the muški kutak...😳

And there they go again, the feminists are attacking. 🤷

Honestly, with this kind of PMS-driven feminism, the mods and regular guys on this forum are fighting battles every single day.

Scanning through the subforum, I’ve realized that censorship in the muški kutak only seems to target the moody feminists. Everyone else can blather on all they want until they drive my respected colleagues crazy... and then what? You're left with nothing.🤷

Look, if you can't handle some guy banter, just shut down the muški kutak entirely....

And regarding those gay topics—come on. This is the muški kutak: grabbing beers, watching TV, porn, boobs, hookers... and then suddenly, "oh, let's bring in the gay topics or we'll be violating someone's rights." Give me a break...🙄

Just open a separate subforum for gay people and call it a day. 🤷

Feminists have their own space, but nooooooo, they just *have* to invade the muški kutak....😁

That’s the kind of nonsense going on over there.

😂

Well... maybe it would be helpful if you actually took a moment to look up what feminism actually means, just so we can avoid these kinds of blunders.😁

MK constantly sees attacks from some sort of feminists... much like how the Church sees communists everywhere.😬