Jump to content

Smacking Ban


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, PB 4.2 said:

Genuine reply here.   I recall being smacked at age 4 or 5 and thinking - 'If my parents love me why are they hitting me?'      

Obviously, I'm not scared or anything, but It potentially made me trust them less as a wee nipper. 

I just remember thinking I'd better behave 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Who here is willing to admit both that their parents smacked them AND that they believe they had bad and abusive parents?

I think you are missing the point.

Abuse is not about the intent of the behaviour. It is about the impact of the behaviour...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

Oh I see, you've entirely missed the point. Here it is: smacking isn't a little bum slap or an arse tap. 

The point of smacking is to inflict pain and/or fear and/or humiliation otherwise how is it supposed to influence behaviour? A little 'bum slap' or 'arse tap' is completely irrelevant and anyone hiding behind that sort of terminology is kidding themself as to what they're actually doing to their kids.

 

That's exactly what smacking is to a large number of people and the definition doesn't indicate the strength of said smack. How's about you stop making up your own definitions to suit your skewed debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angusfifer said:

I think you are missing the point.

Abuse is not about the intent of the behaviour. It is about the impact of the behaviour...

and good parents will take that into consideration. The bad ones won't give a shit. Smacking I'm on about, not abuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bairnardo said:

Fair enough. Nice to see someone attempt to address and discuss the issue. Now with the benefit of hindsight, were they bad and abusive parents on the basis that they smacked you?

Absolutely not.   But I do think they'd have been better parents if they chose to correct my behaviour using non-violent means.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PB 4.2 said:

Genuine reply here.   I recall being smacked at age 4 or 5 and thinking - 'If my parents love me why are they hitting me?'      

Obviously, I'm not scared or anything, but It potentially made me trust them less as a wee nipper. 

Scared, probably not

Scarred, definitely 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, whiskychimp said:

That's exactly what smacking is to a large number of people and the definition doesn't indicate the strength of said smack. How's about you stop making up your own definitions to suit your skewed debate.

There's the fundamental disconnect. Folk who hit their kids want it to be considered a little tap on the arse, completely ignoring the fact that a little tap on the arse will do absolutely nothing to change behaviour. 

It's utterly dishonest. Smacking is about causing pain, fear or humiliation. If not, perhaps you can explain how you change behaviour by negative reinforcement without causing some significant negative emotions. Classic double think.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, invergowrie arab said:

Fascinating to see so many portraying hitting children as a calculated, balanced decision where all factors have been weighed up and the task gravely and sincerely carried out rather than just arseholes losing their temper.

Going over old ground but its not always a loss of temper, sometimes it can  complete exasperation or a warning of danger. If a measured skelp is what it takes to make the kid realise how much the parent is concerned/affected then it can have the desired response. There can also be the lose of temper/parent at end of tether but as long as the response is measured then if it gets the job done then it works. I've never been a fan of that myself because a new boundary has been set but as we're basically debating (snigger) the physical response then as long as that is measured then that's probably the main issue here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

There's the fundamental disconnect. Folk who hit their kids want it to be considered a little tap on the arse, completely ignoring the fact that a little tap on the arse will do absolutely nothing to change behaviour. 

It's utterly dishonest. Smacking is about causing pain, fear or humiliation. If not, perhaps you can explain how you change behaviour by negative reinforcement without causing some significant negative emotions. Classic double think.

 

Fear and humiliation are part of life and very much part of what keeps adults on the straight and narrow. Greed also plays a part and none of these emotions are pleasant.  Just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pull My Strings said:

There's the fundamental disconnect. Folk who hit their kids want it to be considered a little tap on the arse, completely ignoring the fact that a little tap on the arse will do absolutely nothing to change behaviour. 

It's utterly dishonest. Smacking is about causing pain, fear or humiliation. If not, perhaps you can explain how you change behaviour by negative reinforcement without causing some significant negative emotions. Classic double think.

 

A tap on the arse changes my daughters behavior. It's reinforcement by shock value not pain, humiliation or fear. 

She understands her behaviour has gone beyond a telling off. She has never been tapped on the arse by anyone losing their temper..... ever.

If we lose our temper we walk away. Always.

As for negative reinforcement, should I positively reinforce every second she isn't sticking her fingers in sockets etc. That seems a weird concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Unleash The Nade said:

Scared, probably not

Scarred, definitely 

Bless it's my wee rattled cyclist pauper on speed dial as per.   

Hopefully storm Brian knocks you off your bicycle and down a very steep embankment and into some very very jaggy nettles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Agreed. 

There is some utterly high and mighty shite being spouted in this thread. The proof of the pudding is a lack of people willing to call their own parents abusers on the basis of a smack. 

I have purposefully not said whether I agree or disagree with the new law so far on here, purely because the sensationalism thats being used in the arguements so far makes it utterly pointless.

Tbf, not everyone was smacked by their parents on here, so they cannot answer the question posed. 

Edited by Bobby Skidmarks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, whiskychimp said:

A tap on the arse changes my daughters behavior. It's reinforcement by shock value not pain, humiliation or fear. 

She understands her behaviour has gone beyond a telling off. She has never been tapped on the arse by anyone losing their temper..... ever.

If we lose our temper we walk away. Always.

As for negative reinforcement, should I positively reinforce every second she isn't sticking her fingers in sockets etc. That seems a weird concept.

What's shocking about a tap on the arse? 

Reading this again, you appear to be utterly perfect, or delusional. I suspect delusional. If not then you're really in the wrong thread. This thread is about hitting kids.

Edited by Pull My Strings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...