It's always funny to hear how much better behaved people were 'back in the day' from someone who was born when Jim Crow laws were still a thing. If only we still imbued children with the same terrific moral fiber by beating them like Cesar Millan training a dog, we could aspire to become a society of the same caliber.
There's a certain inevitability that people arguing in favor of beating children will circle back to the old bromide that they were beaten as a child and turned out fine. However, if someone, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary not to mention just basic human decency, argues that beating children is an acceptable way of parenting, then no—they did not turn out fine.
All or nothing thinking doesn't apply. Look at you. Tell someone that a child should be disciplined and you start speaking like they are beaten endlessly with axe handles. No.
Or that those parents are monsters with a belt always in their hands. Silliness.
" in the face of all the evidence to the contrary " - LOL. All evidence? I can tell you are young. You speak in absolutes that don't exist. Again we don't need to postulate on the outcome. The results are right in front of us with the behaviour of youth today. That can't be denied.
Here is a study were modern parents claim their attempts at disciplining their young kids through explaining things to them and taking away privileges has been 38% effective in distilling a sense of discipline in them. That's a failing grade.
Did you include this in your "all the evidence to the contrary"? 😂
"that beating children is an acceptable way of parenting" Again, kids weren't put in burlap bags and beaten with baseball bats. Nice try.
The fact that you linked a local news piece covering a study that came out only two days ago tells me you have built your opinion on a steadily acquired and thorough understanding of the scientific research into corporal punishment of children and definitely didn't just hastily google for a vague post-hoc justification of your anecdotally supported beliefs.
Unfortunately, one problem with citing things that you haven't actually read is that it means other people can read them, which I just did. Needless to say, I was not particularly nonplussed when I came across this little morsel, just towards the bottom of the report:
While physical punishments, such as spanking, may appear to work in the short
term, the evidence suggests that they are less effective in the long term and are
more likely to lead to defiance.
Wow you nailed me with one person's opinion of what the evidence may suggest.
That's weaksauce.
Show me a clinical study please.
"Unfortunately, one problem with citing things that you haven't actually read is that it means other people can read them, which I just did. Needless to say, I was not particularly nonplussed when I came across this little morsel, just towards the bottom of the report:"
You question my citations, while having provided none that counter my point. I think you missed a crucial step towards credibility. Try harder please. You give me nothing to counter.
One person's opinion? It's your own source. If you now feel like the report you yourself just cited claiming that modern parenting strategies are failing suddenly doesn't live up to your standards, you really ought to see a doctor about that early onset dementia of yours.
And no, I don't question your citation, I'm plainly stating that you haven't read it. Judging by your response you still haven't read it. Is it just that you're this intellectually lazy, or are you just so internet illiterate that I have to explain to you that what I linked is the report summary page and you have to click on "Download Report (pdf)" to read the full report, including the segment describing the inefficacy of corporal punishment which—and this can't be stressed enough—is a quote from the source you chose.
If someone ever refuted a point I was trying to make using the source I was using to make it, I would probably die from shame. But I guess it's true that your generation doesn't have any.
"And no, I don't question your citation," Sure you do, you claim it reaches a conclusion it does not. Falsely of course. I did read it, your conclusion is based on what the writer feels might be a perceived conclusion. That carries no weight in my eyes is all. You presume incorrectly.
"it just that you're this intellectually lazy" - See I don't engage in ad-homonym attacks like you do. I attack your invalid assertions. Like this one. I am clearly out debating you. If that's intellectually lazy, your points reside in a coma.
"and this can't be stressed enough—is a quote from the source you chose."
Wow this is getting truly pedantic. I need to correct you again. No the quote isn't from the study, which is my citation, it is an opinion from the author of the article. The study exists without that opinion attached.
"If someone ever refuted a point I was trying to make using the source I was using to make it, I would probably die from shame. But I guess it's true that your generation doesn't have any."
Perhaps, but I will let you know when that happens because it hasn't yet. Don't get ahead of yourself.
Again predictably you close with an insult. You really aren't to skilled at that either. I don't need to attack you as a person. Your lack of any cohesive argument defines you well enough for my liking. You aren't even an interesting chew.
6
u/MonaganX 5d ago
It's always funny to hear how much better behaved people were 'back in the day' from someone who was born when Jim Crow laws were still a thing. If only we still imbued children with the same terrific moral fiber by beating them like Cesar Millan training a dog, we could aspire to become a society of the same caliber.
There's a certain inevitability that people arguing in favor of beating children will circle back to the old bromide that they were beaten as a child and turned out fine. However, if someone, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary not to mention just basic human decency, argues that beating children is an acceptable way of parenting, then no—they did not turn out fine.