On 6 Apr 2004 18:59:34 -0700, (Alina) wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment
wouldn't be very large.

You did :-) http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com


Yep, and 80 pages in a text document, even with some simple charts
would hardly be a load for an e-mail.

I had made the offer to anyone he and I both knew in the ng. That's
why I was questioning sending it to you. He could know you, or even be
you, and intercept it and pretend all along he had it. His veracity
has been questioned many times here.

The arguement that amuses me the most is the one that says,
"because
the world is that way and the child must learn that."

Has anybody actually told you THAT? It's sick.

Sometimes it pays to browse through a ng history of posting. Yes and
more than once. In fact it's practically a standard whenever a new
spanking compulsive shows up here to "debate."

They respond with that when ever asked "why spank?"

Basically I don't find punishment of any kind very useful. At least
not deliberately applied punishment. Children know the difference
between intended harm and natural human reactions.

So you agree with DoDson when he says it's ok if you loose control
once in a while?

Not what I said at all. Losing control and expressing one's natural
reactions are not mutually inclusive. Children don't need to see a
parent hurt, injure, or break things. The very low level negative
reactions, even a tiny change in facial expression, or body language,
a slight turning away; it ALL registers with the child. I've tested it
repeatedly.

Work with horses taught me that long before I had children to raise.
The more subtle the cues the more attention is paid to it if there are
outcomes. Babies probably have a built in unconscious tracking of
cause and effect. Sadly it's damaged by drug and alcohol exposure in
utero.

The former confuses and frightens them,

And seriously mines their initiative and self-esteem, and their sense
of security.

I assume you mean under"mines?"

The assumption of spanking complusives appear to be conflicted. On the
one hand they claim that the world is like that and the sooner
children learn it the better, with the parent being the best, most
informed, and safest conveyor of this "fact."

Where the conflict comes in is that they also claim that the child
feels safer and more secure if you firmly and painfully "correct"
unwanted behavior...even in the infant, and some believe pain should
be used there as well. Bad animal training, and very bad child
rearing.

Animals will either become cowed and withdrawn and afraid and/or
eventually will fight back violently.

Who do you think you learned the most important lessons from?

Mom.

Well, not according to the spankers that have come here to
"debate."

Although just when they claim that they have to "teach" children
they
describe some motive of the child they must curb that children
cannot
have enough knowledge or development to even have such a motive.

I guess they don't even try to *know* their children. Maybe they
forget children are persons, too.

It wouldn't matter even if they were puppies. The risk of unwanted
reactions and outcomes is extremely high when pain is used to teach.
Unintentional pain from the environment is a low risk because children
can pretty easily see and even control it themselves directly.

Intended pain from the protector, the caregiver is very confusing.
Children don't know that animals, for instance, aren't just like them
or like humans....that is why the first time they get nipped by a dog
or scratch or bitten by a cat they are terribly shocked. We see it
easily.

Some of us have trouble noting it when we are the parent who has just
hurt the child.

They don't mind doing that. They seem to think that pain is a great
teacher...forgetting that life has ample random exposure to pain
for
we humans to suffice for all the lessons pain can teach.

Pain in the form of corporal punishment is an inhibitor, not a
teacher.

Well even as an inhibitor not only does it have liimits but it can
quickly become sought after as "natural" in the child's world.

Alina, on the off chance that I'm being scammed, a common occurance
when folks try to debate honestly with Doan, (he thinks "play" is
debate apparently) I request you ask him for the study.

If he will email it to you I have two simple questions I'd like to
ask
that will establish if it is the same study I have, or simply some
commentary by others, or even just a summary by Embry.

Would you be willing to do that?

I don't want to be rude, but I am not interested in your ongoing
online argument with Doan, or to scam either of you two.

You might be interested in googling on our post archives.

But then I don't believe you are scamming and certainly not rude. I
did say on the off chance.

I have, however, asked him for that study. It is ME that is taking
long now, because he has asked that I send an envelope so he can
snail
mail it back.

He wants you to send an envelope? That's odd. He must be terribly
poor. Did he ask you to affix postage as well?

Baby is still a little sick so I have not gone out or
done much.

Okay. All in good time. It's no longer an issue for debate in any
case. I'm just curious.

Hope baby gets well soon.

If it helps you in any way, yes, I will let you know when I have it.

Thanks.

Thanks in advance.

No problem.

If it turns out to not be the study, or after a reasonable time he
doesn't provide anything, I'll be happy then to supply you with the
one I have...the complete study report on outcomes and methodology.

Thanks. I hope it will not be necessary.

Best regards,

Alina.

Best, Kane