In the UK they say the children going to prison will double, and total smacking ban needed

So you approve of teachers hitting children @Alligatorob?
No, in fact at the end of my post I said "I think it is best to end it".

My point was that based on my experience it did no harm. However as I also said probably no good either.
The idea is not the severity of beating/spanking/smacking - whatever you want to call it.
The idea is using pain as a teaching tool.
Having been on the receiving end many times I think its more about showing control and kind of humiliating the kid rather than the pain. Paddlings were always quite public. The pain went away more quickly than the recollection of having been put into that position.

Thinking about it I cannot remember a single girl being punished that way. Not quite sure what that means or why. I know the girls were not all perfectly behaved...
 

Last edited:
No, in fact at the end of my post I said "I think it is best to end it".

My point was that based on my experience it did no harm. However as I also said probably no good either.

Having been on the receiving end many times I kind of think its more about showing control and kind of humiliating the kid rather than the pain. Paddlings were always quite public. The pain went away more quickly than the recollection of having been put into that position.

Thinking about it I cannot remember a single girl being punished that way. Not quite sure what that means or why. I know the girls were not all perfectly behaved...
Humiliation or pain - both ignorant ways to teach a child anything.
It is, however a great way to teach kids that it's OK for adults to touch them, & we know where that can lead.
I won't say what I'd do to a teacher who did that to me.
Besides physical abuse, my mother tried to humiliate me into doing what she wanted me to do.
For example, when I was 14 & wanted my hair longer & she didn't like it, she'd tell me "Get a haircut or people will think you're on dope."
By then, I was her size & she wouldn't dare hit me, because she knew I'd hit her back (as I did a year previously).
I said, "Only a dope like you would think that."
I sometimes hear people say, "My parents hit me & it taught me to respect them."
Uh, no......you're confusing "respect" with "fear."
 
Last edited:
Contrary to popular belief, there isn’t a problem with “kids of today." You see, parents complain about kids behaviour exactly the same way they did many years ago.

“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”
Socrates (469–399 B.C.), which shows our ancestors of long ago felt the same way about children:

In addition, many pro-spanking parents also refer to the phrase “spare the rod and spoil the child” as being from the Bible. However, the phrase in those words originated from Samuel Butler’s satirical poem: “Hudibras,” which was published in 1662. His poem, and novel called ‘The Way of All Flesh, was written to expose and condemn violence against children. Yet, it has been adopted by some parents as a means to justify corporal punishment and other physical actions against children.

Many parents of today, and even yesterday, lack the parenting skills they once had. One of the big reasons for this is due to our lifestyles being far from ideal, as far as family goes. Once upon a time, it was a village that helped to raise a child, not just one or two parents.
Parents learned about parenting from a young age, by growing up and observing parenting in their close-knit community. Kids had more freedom to explore, climb, run and burn off pent up energy, rather than fight over Playstation controllers. Parents were much less time poor, and were able to be more present emotionally and physically with their children. Community was everything, and there was much less in the way of behavioural problems.

Today, we have a much more detached, disconnected, unsupported and isolated lifestyle. There are behaviours out of control which are not due to a lack of smacking, but due to a myriad of environmental factors. These include diet (an overload of sugar, wheat/grains, preservatives, colours and other additives, which create hyped up and unfocused kids), excessive screen time, parents not knowing how to help their children through emotional storms, choosing to punish them for their feelings instead of talking them through, and parents working crazy hours just to get enough money coming in.

Kids crave regular, quality one on one time with their parents, which is so hard to juggle with modern family life. It’s not an optimal environment for children to flourish. There are going to be repercussions, and punishing the symptom, the communication for help, is going to get us nowhere. Blaming today’s children for this is just folly. Forget the so called fixes, try to understand the root cause.

The above narrative is from an argument: Smacking Is Proven To Be Ineffective – Here’s 11 Reasons Why It's a much longer article but well worth reading.
 

Humiliation or pain - both ignorant ways to teach a child anything.
It is, however a great way to teach kids that it's OK for adults to touch them, & we know where that can lead.
I won't say what I'd do to a teacher who did that to me.
Besides physical abuse, my mother tried to humiliate me into doing what she wanted me to do.
For example, when I was 14 & wanted my hair longer & she didn't like it, she'd tell me "Get a haircut or people will think you're on dope."
By then, I was her size & she wouldn't dare hit me, because she knew I'd hit her back (as I did a year previously).
I said, "Only a dope like you would think that."
I sometimes hear people say, "My parents hit me & it taught me to respect them."
Uh, no......you're confusing "respect" with "fear."
Of course its OK for adults to "touch" their children, at least in this sense, (though I know its not what you meant), I used to carry my own daughter miles on my shoulders, at her insistence, "carry me" being the cry, or "my legs are tired"!

If you knew my daughter as a child you would have known just how hard it was to get a hug off her, (she just wasn't like that, too independent or something), so carrying her when maybe her legs were not so tired was just one way I could show my love and care for her. Besides, whilst walking along with her on my shoulders she'd be holding a more or less nonstop conversation with me, so she'd be getting " verbal hugs" you tried to tell her how special she was, as much as possible.

In the end what may be good for you and your child may not be good for mine, and in the very minor way smacking is permitted in the UK I wish to see decent parents who are not ever abusing their children, the right to make their own decisions on this, and not have the state, (on behalf if you don't mind my saying, of busy bodies thinking they know best all the time), reach further into what should be our private lives.
 
Would it be correct to call it "social science"?

Marriages lasted fifty odd years ago, (only 5% ending in divorce, for good or I'll), most children could rely on the care of a " stay at home parent,(/mother), and so on,...., what allogorythym, or formula due you wish to try to use, and gain any certainty at all your comparisons are meaningful.

In my fathers rights campaigning days I came across a "Parenting Satisfactory Index", (the calculations and statistics being used there being way past anything I could understand).

I do know when I tried to volunteer to take part in a project by Birkbeck College in London into issues surrounding parenting, my application to assist them was turned down, (perhaps they felt me too strident in my views on " The Best Interests of the Child paramount legal principle, and its negative consequences?). Therefore I'll assume any kind of social science can be swayed by whoever is chosen to take part!
 
Would it be correct to call it "social science"?

Marriages lasted fifty odd years ago, (only 5% ending in divorce, for good or I'll), most children could rely on the care of a " stay at home parent,(/mother), and so on,...., what allogorythym, or formula due you wish to try to use, and gain any certainty at all your comparisons are meaningful.

In my fathers rights campaigning days I came across a "Parenting Satisfactory Index", (the calculations and statistics being used there being way past anything I could understand).

I do know when I tried to volunteer to take part in a project by Birkbeck College in London into issues surrounding parenting, my application to assist them was turned down, (perhaps they felt me too strident in my views on " The Best Interests of the Child paramount legal principle, and its negative consequences?). Therefore I'll assume any kind of social science can be swayed by whoever is chosen to take part!
Very true Graham but, we have no idea how many were happy marriages. Women were often dependent on their husbands. In the 1950's my auntie (who was working) tried to buy some furniture on credit, she was told she would need her husband or father to sign the agreement because, as a woman, she was not the head of the house. My mother worked while we were at school, as did a lot of the mothers although, they were regarded as earning "pin money" so not real jobs. :rolleyes:
 
Very true Graham but, we have no idea how many were happy marriages. Women were often dependent on their husbands. In the 1950's my auntie (who was working) tried to buy some furniture on credit, she was told she would need her husband or father to sign the agreement because, as a woman, she was not the head of the house. My mother worked while we were at school, as did a lot of the mothers although, they were regarded as earning "pin money" so not real jobs. :rolleyes:
We will have to be careful here, not to upset peoples understandable sensitivities, and of course forum rules.
However, yes were talking of a time when "reasonable chastisement of ones wife was permitted, wives/husbands couldn't be forced to testify against one another and so on, (making my point I hope, how hard it is for any kind of " social science" to be all that reliable I'd have thought).
 
I've read the usual critical psychology arguments about corporal punishment and they inevitably will point to studies I view as having biased agendas. The controversy using such arguments and research will never convince significant numbers of people that is reflected in how their advice has been rejected in places. Much of that points to psychology profession elite's cultural guilt trips about inflicting any pain as though we humans are above such. Read the news...what a joke. IMO simplistic politically correct thinking.

Arguments against physical damage from such practices being cruel as caning are valid, however in this era there are many ways to inflict pain or uncomfort without causing physical damage. For instance just putting those jailed in somewhat warm facilities with a bit of skunk odors, say a modest 85F for a week will be enough to deter many from returning more than say 6 months in a modern jail. One needs to understand when I grew up, few homes in summer had air conditioning, much less prisons and jails so in my view no that does not come under "cruel and unusual" regardless of how much the ACLU rants.
 
Last edited:
How about being illtreated when being beaten with a cane for the slightest thing by so called Sisters-of-Mercy as I was when under six years of age.
If you cried you were incarcerated in a tiny cupboard for as much as six hours at a time.
So much for religion.

SO many came forward when my book was published and so much has been found out over the years. I am 92 now but I got through schooling ok albeit an evacuee one after being bombed out twice during the London Blitz. When I was finally re-united with my family my parents never raised their hands to me BUT a note of authority would show itself when, if I had misbehaved, ordering me to get to bed.

There seem to be more children today with mental related problems in school than when I was a kid and I cant help but think that its all the ruddy violence and such like nowadays due to the massive amount of technology and walking around with headphones or earplugs in listening to the brain bashing music .

Is there someone out there who can help me down off the soapbox I managed to get on. 😁😁😁😁
 
How about being illtreated when being beaten with a cane for the slightest thing by so called Sisters-of-Mercy as I was when under six years of age.
If you cried you were incarcerated in a tiny cupboard for as much as six hours at a time.
So much for religion.

SO many came forward when my book was published and so much has been found out over the years. I am 92 now but I got through schooling ok albeit an evacuee one after being bombed out twice during the London Blitz. When I was finally re-united with my family my parents never raised their hands to me BUT a note of authority would show itself when, if I had misbehaved, ordering me to get to bed.

There seem to be more children today with mental related problems in school than when I was a kid and I cant help but think that its all the ruddy violence and such like nowadays due to the massive amount of technology and walking around with headphones or earplugs in listening to the brain bashing music .

Is there someone out there who can help me down off the soapbox I managed to get on. 😁😁😁😁
I know this sounds trite, (as it is), but "love" is the answer to what is going wrong, as its bound to be for anyone growing up isn't it, "Who does love each child", "Who is able to feel love for the child, despite whatever obstacles may be put in their way by the other parent, or the authorities, if they get involved"?

An institution cannot show love in the same sense, for obvious reasons, though there are a great many wonderful institutions around, charities etc., again in spite of whatever failings they might have, (you mention religious organisations but I'd argue the same applies to them).

Terry Wogan used to talk about the holy brothers or whatever he called them, who taught him at Belvedere college in Dublin, and for all your bad experiences, the description he gave of his school days was warm, and something he looked back on with affection, (albeit he joked about what might happen if you got on the wrong side of his teachers)! :)
 
How do you differentiate between beating the hell out of a kid, and a light top on the bum? Legally, state where one begins and the other ends, and be able to back that up in court. If you want to protect kids from beatings, by a national law; it has to be a broad law encompassing all corporal punishment. Reserving the right to whack your kid for misbehaving is as gross as it sounds.
British prisons, for centuries, used all manner of harsh, painful, corporal punishments, and Britan had no shortage of criminals.
 
Last edited:
How do you differentiate between beating the hell out of a kid, and a light top on the bum? Legally, state where one begins and the other ends, and be able to back that up in court. If you want to protect kids from beatings, by a national law; it has to be a broad law encompassing all corporal punishment. Reserving the right to whack your kid for misbehaving is as gross as it sounds.
British prisons, for centuries, used all manner of harsh, painful, corporal punishments, and Britan had no shortage of criminals.
You're overstating everything to a degree where argument becomes impossible, but I remember a former prime minister in the UK saying his children were smacked, (so not your average abuser of children as you must think I am!).
 


Back
Top