| And again he barks........ Kane barks ...... again! was Kids should work...

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 18:32:46 -0800, Doan wrote:

I'm considering your [subject] field for my signature line. May I have
reprint rights, and full citation?

Thanks in advance.


On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:01:55 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:38:43 -0800, Doan wrote:

And others may disagree with you! ;-)

But then what happens to that "standard" in "reasonable
standard,"
eh?

Reasonable doesn't mean no disagreement! Are you so stupid??? ;-)

Thank you for the help with my growing stupidity.

No thanks from me. Either you inherited from your parents or you
managed
to gain it all by yourself! ;-) Which is it?

Eh? You squeeked?

Reasonable means:
1. Capable of reasoning; rational: a reasonable person.

Yes, that sounds correct, but I don't recall disagreeing one what
reasonable is. Please point out my stupidity in doing so.

Did it say anything about agreement?

Gosh, it's so nice to be able to help out a genius. Are you just
letting me win this one out of kindness?

No, IT didn't say anything about agreement. I did.

See your stupidity, now. :-)

I guess if I am going to move the discussion forward I must use only
your words? Gosh I must be stupid.

2. Governed by or being in accordance with reason or sound
thinking:
a
reasonable solution to the problem.

Same......

Stupid!

Same.

3. Being within the bounds of common sense: arrive home at a
reasonable
hour.

Same.....

Stupid!

Same.


4. Not excessive or extreme; fair: reasonable prices.

Same......

Stupid!

Same.


Aaaaah....Does this mean then that the exact point on the spanking
to
abuse continuimn is very very broad, since all the "reasonable"
folks
on the planet would likely have a very broad range between the
upper
and lowermost?

Yup!

Gosh, that's going to play hell with years and years of posting by the
apologists, now isn't it. They insist they can tell where that limit
is and that they don't cross it, despite so much evidence to the
contrary.

It probably looks something like a bell curve distribution.

Do you mean "they look"?

We are talking about reasonable "people" not reasonable "things."

The
"reasonable" people are somewhere in the middle.

"Somewhere?" I'm stuck again. I have never been able to positive about
where "somewhere" is unless someone turns it into a "here."

Can you do that for us...the poor spanking parents chomping at the bit
to get back to their parental spanking duties and we logic impaired,
and "Don't know spanking from beating" folks?

The extremes on both
sides are people like you and the religious nuts! ;-)

They don't spank? Oh, wait I see. Well if I was a spanking parent, I'd
have no trouble using your explanation to avoid being on the religious
nut end of the spectrum.

Trouble is to spank I have to start somewhere, and avoid going
somewhere, to avoid injury to the child, and or having my ass slammed
in jail and my kids lost.

And oddly the spankers who have come roaring in here to tell us just
where that line is seemed to, with a blustering "you just better look
out fellah," tossed over their shoulders as the door hit them in the
ass, not be around much these days.

If so, could we establish, for the sake of the poor parents
chaffing
in anticipation for your answer, and mine of course, and for the
sake
of all those logic impaired ASZ's to finally get the skinny on this
old quandry, what the bottom most point is on the broad
boundry...so
that NO one will inadvertently cross it and injure their child and
wind up with allegations of abuse?

Already explained above. See it now, stupid! :-)

Yep. Stupid me. I just can't get from your explaination how I can, if
I decide to join the ranks of spankers that you are just inches away
from convincing me to join, where I should stop to avoid abuse.

I may have dozens of kids to spank. I've got the problem with them
each being different....some easy to make comply, and some very hard,
and then there is this: some of the very hard to get to comply are
fragile and delicate, while some of the very strong and hardy are the
easiest to get to comply.

How easy should I tap the hardy to "discipline them corporally" and
how hard can I vigorously spank the highly recalcitrant, but extremely
delicate ones?

I'm afraid just defining what a reasonable person is didn't work.
My
apologies for sending you on a wild goose chase. It must have been
my
failure to define the elements of the question adequately.

Nope! Just stupidity on your part. :-)

If I we hadn't established, by your sincere efforts to help
parentkind, I'd think you were just, like some posters, weaseling.

I'm really serious here, Doan. Of all the people that have come her as
spankers or apoligists, claiming, when asked, that they knew the
answer, YOU are the only one left that is consistently here. Obviously
you want to help spanking parents or you wouldn't be here.

They, and I, and all the ASZs, want to know. Now is your big chance.
Please don't blow it.

We'll be so disappointed.

But, I have to admit, being the stupid person that I am, I was
unable
to refine my question further. Do you mind continuing though I have
failed?

Sure. At least now, we all know that you are a stupid person.

Well, if I was truly unable to refine the question so you understood
that it was the question about limits, rather than broad, weasely
"reasonable standards" then I am truly stupid.

Since you
can't blame it on spanking (you did claimed to be "never-spanked",
right?),

I must be stupid. I can't find that post. And illogical too.

I might have said certain individuals never spanked me, but that's
hardly proof I was never spanked or spanked. I think you are
stretching waaaay beyond your capacity...though I can see you don't
and never do understand that.

It's what gets you were you are right now.

it must be inherited then. ;-)

One never knows does one. I might be stupid, and I might not be.

You on the other hand are sure of your superiority, by the tenor of
your posts.


Thanks in advance.

You're welcome.

Don't mention it.

Apparently you wish to refute yourself rather than refute me.

Apparently, you're too stupid to understand.

To understand what?

The "reasonable person" standard!

Yep. Yah got me again. I am too stupid to understand the "reasonable
person" "standard!"

At least as it applies to someone whackin' away on a kid when so many
folks are NOT reasonable at all, and their standard tends to be more
when the kid is in enough pain to comply, and damn the injuries,
physical and psychological.

If they have to be outside the zone of reasonable then we must know
the where the zone begins on the no abuse side of spanking. Can you
point out that starting point, for all children if you don't mind? Or
the 90% that we can expect will be spanked by American parents.

That even reasonable people can't agree on a sufficiently clear and
definable boundary narrow enough for use out side your world of
"science" {:-]} for the practical applications we have all
sought
in aps for so very many years?

Yes, reasonable people can disagree. Haven't you got that yet?

Oh yes, I understand that just fine. How does reasonable disagreement
by reasonable people reasonably going to tell me where to stop, what
the limit of force is that will injure, not huge injury...that's easy,
but when the injury first starts.

After all, like all the fine spanking parents that have come here,
should I start, I TOO do not want to be accused of hurting my child,
and in fact, being the loving parent I am, of course I DON'T want to
hurt them in any way that might have effects beyond the moment.

So, since you are the one that so frequently defends their right to
decide I have to assume you know exactly what they are deciding on!

And that would be including the limits of spanking before it can
become abuse, would it not?

I guess I'm rightly identified as stupid then. Smart folks like you
are trying so hard to educate me.

I am in no position to educate you.

I know. But I thought you were trying to, and I'm cooperative if
nothing else. Mind, you keep sending me to look for proof of YOUR
claims...as my Sensei used to. So I extend the same respect to you as
he.

You claim things, wonderful things, like parents can spank without
hitting, know the limits wherein the child will not be injured, and
have such control over themselves they will not cross that line (the
one I can't find).

The only thing holding me back, Doan, and I just KNOW you can defeat
them, is the ASZ's simplistic solution of not spanking at all and
learning non punitive parenting methods.

That takes time, it doesn't relieve my own frustrations, if I, the
metaphorical "I" of course, were a pervert, it could not make me happy
and jolly like spanking can for some folks, and I will, if I stay with
them, and not go with you folks, never here those sweet and poignant
words from my children:

"Well, it never hurt me, yup, not a bibp,..blip...ah....what was the
question again?"

That is the job of your parents!

They did a great job.

Did they teach you that it is right to call other women
"smelly-****"???

No! How could you ask such a thing? I am shocked and offended.

I learned to do that by them being so honest and straightforward as to
call and asshole and asshole, asshole and smelly **** sucker.

Great models. This kind of name calling came long after their time. I
don't live in their time. I am in YOUR time, sucker, and you are just
going to have to learn to live with being exposed. From now on.

I think the Plant is finally getting the idea I am not going away, and
it's feeble attempts to cover up It's ugly hatred of children and
families isn't going to be ignored. Others may give up on you, Dung,
but not me.

Would you mind working your way through all the explanations now
and
get to the practical applicable answer, the definative one, for our
use?

I don't mind at all. ;-)

Ah. It's coming. I've waited sooooo long. Not patiently I'll admit,
but tenaciously.

Some kind of border where spankers, (remember we ASZs only have a
logic problem, and a defining problem...we don't have the
following
problem) can be assured they will not cross over into abuse.

Yup! Call the local DA office or CPS agency! Ever heard of the
"community standard"?

All the will tell me is very like what you tell me. They end up with
an admonition on the order of, "leave no marks that last beyond x
amount of time, and no internal injuries." I mean that's all so
confusing to me, and I want to be a good spanker, honest.

It's starting to look a little like I'm doomed to being an ASZ I
guess, and never getting to spank kids, having to fall back on my
non-punitive methods. I am going to miss the fun you folks have.

If one is to have a "standard," one is stretching credulity just
a
tad
to claim that "others" might not agree with it, don't you think?

No!

When one says standard I would hope they were referring to
something
that could be used for other than weasel debating. Something that
can
be applied with some hope that it will serve a purpose.

Are we dealing with a reasonable person? ;-)

I'm going to make a wild guess. I'm going to guess you are a
reasonable person. Did I get it right? }:-

I was hoping for a dozen or even five, but I guess you being so honest
and all I have no one but you to ask:

What is the lower limit of the broad "standard that is reasonable that
a reasonable person would chose" I cannot cross lest I risk harm to my
child by abuse and beating?

I am relieved you are here to give me your reasonable answer, and I am
shivering with excited anticipation as I await your answer.

I think your definition leaves a lot to be desired, especially
since
all you did was cut and paste definitions of "reasonable" which I
think, stupid me, isn't going to answer the original question. You
KNOW what that is of course.

I can lead you to the water, but I cannot make you drink!

Excuse me, was that "I can lead you to the sewer, but I can't make you
blink?"

And your reply of "reasonable standards" by a "reasonable person"
just
doesn't cut it.

It is to all the reasonable people I met.

I know. I have the same problem. I guess you are just like all the
others that have slunk away from this ng, but too stupid to leave.

Why do you the police use the
"reasonable force" standard.

Gosh, that has to do with assault, doesn't it? I'm not asking for the
standards for assault, only spanking. I mean I'm sure, though the
spankings may be terrible ineffective, I can keep from assualting a
child under current law.

My problem isn't that of a legal limit. It's the injury and long term
harm risk limit I'm concerned about.

I thought I explained that, again and again and again...ad neauseum.

It could mean knocking you to the ground
to blowing your off with a gun.

Ooooonmy, I'd never do that to a child, I just want to spank them
within the safe limits you and the folks you support in making their
own decision keep claiming they know.

You do know, don't you? I mean precisely?

Ask LaVonne to ask the night sergeant
where the police draw the line, will you? :-)

No, I'm really much more interested in my question, not the one you
just thought up to send folks scurrying off from the issue here.

I admit, and I think my fellow ASZs will have to agree, we are very
very very stupid when it comes to figuring what is and isn't a
spanking when it is NOT at the furtherist extreme of either end of
the
spectrum.

True! But anti-spanking zealotS are not "reasonable" now, are they?
;-)
Ohhhhhh...how can you say that? I mean their very reason for being
Zealots is to be reasonable with children.

Hey, I'll bet they can't find the line for that either. THAT'S why the
cowards won't spank...dummies. They don't know the limits for spanking
vs abuse, nor for reasonable and unreasonable with children, so they
chicken out.

Hahahah. We'll show'em, won't we Doan. We shall spank merrily away,
knowing that whatever reasonable decision we make is the right one,
until we have to defend it in court, and our children are injured for
life, one way or the other.

This is such a fun game you've introduced me to. I don't think I've
ever had a chance to play before. Will you play with me some more,
please?

And I know, being the honest caring considerate soul you so often
prove you are, that you don't want have any of us take up spanking
wihtout the sage advice you offer, to spank only in a "reasonable"
manner.

I never want anyone to "take up spanking"!

Oh, okay. I didn't mean it that way.

Hey! Maybe I could do YOU a favor in exchange for the favor you are
doing me. You teach me logic and reasonable spanking and I'll teach
you English.

I tell everyone to consider
all the options and make up his/her own mind.

I just think you are wonderful, my hero.

"Everyone"! Doesn't that just take your breath away folks? Look he
tells "everyone." Now that is a free country for you.

And he's reasonably sure that if someone he says that to directly
kills their child or causes grevous harm, no one can come back and
charge him criminally or being civil suit...or if they can, he is so
convinced of his morally and ethically superior position on this issue
that he stands foursquare with the parents who spank, until the bitter
end.

Talk about BRAVE!

You see, unlike you, I
do believe that parents know what is best for their own kids.

You are right. I actually do believe, isn't it silly, that SOME
parents do not know what is best, though I'll admit the temptation to
let Darwin and nature prevail is tempting.

You are sure one up on me there, Doan.

I notice that when CPS thinks the parents know best and kill the child
later folks here tend to become a bit upset that CPS was so trusting.

That doesn't seem to jibe with your wonderful family philosophy
paradigm.

I learned
that from my own parents! :-)

We know, }:-}

I admit I would be totally at sea if I had a child over my lap and
whatever instrument to strike her with if I had to use your
"standard"
to decide how hard, and when to stop.

Then you shouldn't do it! You do have a brain, right? USE IT! ;-)

No, no. that's not it. I want to join the ranks of the happy spankers.
I want to, and you are frustrating me by making it so hard.

If I have to hang out with the ASZ's much longer I just don't know
what I'm going to do.

By the way, how DO the other parents, the ones with a brain that you
seem to think I lack, decide on what is the best instrument, how hard
to hit, how long to hit, and what the indicators are that they are
approaching the injury boundary and should stop?

It's a real mystery to me, and I've admitted to my illogic, my
stupidity, and my ignorance, Sensei, so that I could be completely
open to your teachings, with out resistence in my heart, or laziness
in my soul.

Should I go sit in the icy fountain now and await the canning your
monks will administer so that I might be enligtened to the truth of
spanking?

Is that how YOU know? By the spankings your parents gave to you? There
teaching? How lucky you are. How unfortunate I.

Now please lend us your wonderful scientific mind and help us out.
Children's safety could depend on you.

I would rather have the parents make up their own mind. How about
you?
;-)

I would if they'd just stop injuring and killing their children.
Unlike you, I am not a brave warrior on the path of spanking
righteousness, so coward that I am, I chose not to spank, and I, in my
miserable quacking fear racked twitching slobbering whining..well, you
get the idea.....beg others not to.

I guess I just want others to join me in my misery. I do so admire
your bravery on the part of parent and child.

I mean, it immediately becomes NOT a standard because two or
more
folks that have a similar characteristic of "reasonable" "may
disagree
with you."

Right?

Nope!

Well, okay if you say so.

Would you mind then, since MY problem, my stupidity, remains. I
cannot
find in your answer a way for spankers to decide were to stop...I
know
THYE think they are being "reasonable" so often when they have
flaid
hide off their children and broken bones.

Really? Do a jury of their peers also think it "reasonable"???

No, I don't think many get off, but there was that teen offspring
kicker in Canada just recently.

Ah, so, to further explore. Do I have to get a jury of peers to
supervise any spanking I might chose to do on my child?

Hey! You guys, you spankers that ran off, you never told me that.

Cheaters. If you had me back when I asked YOU my problems would have
been solved, my new Sensei would not be burdened with my stupidity and
stubborness in not seeing, and I would have given up my feeble
attempts to get more parents to chose not to spank, and I would be
happy to today, happy I tell you. Dang you guys.

Apparently, they too....though I'd hesitate to call them stupid or
logic impaired as we ASZs seem to be.....lack the necessary
standards
of reasonableness you are holding out so tantilizingly to us.

True!

Gosh, this feels just like the first day in Algebra...I'm soooo
confused.

It will help if you stop frequenting those anti-spanking zealotS
websites!
;-)

Oh, I spend MUCH more time here at your feet, Master.

Help us Doan. Help us.

I'll try but I am just one person. I can't help you if you don't
help
yourself. ;-)

I can see that.

So you can expect a lot of me here, asking questions, learning,
absorbing your courage and wisdom for a long time to come.

I mean, after all, your answer could even resolve the age old
question
of what is and isn't pornography.

They already have, stupid!

Yes, Sensei, kneeling head bowed low almost to the floor

It's called the "community standard".

Oh please master, will you cane me again if I ask a stupid question?

What is the "community standard?" Does it mean that I get to just Pat
my child in Patagonia and Flail them in Flanders?

I am soooo confused.

I don't think I like "community standard" or even "reasonable
standard."

You see, when it all comes down to it I am a softy for my kids. I
can't bear thinking I might actually hurt them deliberately.

Tell me how to spank so that I might not injure them. I beseech you
master.

I have a hunch you are just saying, as you have so many times in
the
past, 'let the parent decide, no matter what.'

If not the parents, then who?

But no, you wouldn't, would you? R R R R R

Of course, using the "reasonable person" standard!

A moments break. I need to recalibrate my Logical Fallacy ****
Detector.

There. Now let's run the test.

Ah yes, there it is:

Whoooop! whooooop! Whoooooop!

5,025 !!! Wow! on the Beggin the Question scale, and a whopping
9,112 !!! Wow! (really it says "Wow!" on the scale) on the
Oversimplifying scale, and look at that will yah?
A 10,000! WOWOWOWO!! lights going off sirens screaming, on the ---

Failing to Accept the Burden of Proof scale.

This is an all time record. You will, if you'll give me your address,
recieve, via UPS, your very own gold planted tin loving cup filled to
the brim with farm fresh bull****, guaranteed to last for at least 10
Usenet aps posts.

Do you grease your butt before you stick your head up there, and
what
will we do when you disappear....we can't do without Doan?

Nope! I wiped it every time I think of you! :-)

Funny, I never think of you when I wipe my butt.

Odd, isn't it?

We must be different somehow.

Kane

" And again he barks........ Kane barks ...... again! was
Kids should work..."
Doan d t November, 2003