doing it right

a spanking is for correction. It is intended to correct children, to help them
make better choices in the future. It can very much be an act of love, and done
right is very useful. It is not hitting in anger. If it is done that way, it is
wrong.

I thought about this a lot and put up an analysis of a spanking at my site.

I believe that done right it is a good thing. Done wrong it can be a very bad
thing. The difference is usually love, and there are people that use corporal
punishment very effectively, others don't

thanks

Sharon
http://www.e-lovestories.com

Sharon,

So, it is okay to hit a child as long as the child is hit in love. And
you teach the child that it is okay to hit those you love when they
displease you and when you want them to change their behavior.

And you teach the child that it is okay be hit by those you love, when
you have displeased them and they want you to change your behavior.

And it sounds to me like you have a perfect formula for domestic abuse.
Hit and be hit by those you love and those who love you.

I don't think I care to read your book. You've provided me with all I
need to know.

I raised my children without hitting. I did not want them to learn that
hitting in love or being hit in love was ever acceptable. They are two
strong and lovely women.

LaVonne

LadySharon811 wrote:

a spanking is for correction. It is intended to correct children, to help them
make better choices in the future. It can very much be an act of love, and done
right is very useful. It is not hitting in anger. If it is done that way, it is
wrong.

I thought about this a lot and put up an analysis of a spanking at my site.

I believe that done right it is a good thing. Done wrong it can be a very bad
thing. The difference is usually love, and there are people that use corporal
punishment very effectively, others don't

thanks

Sharon
http://www.e-lovestories.com

LadySharon811 wrote:

a spanking is for correction.

Can you give some examples of corrections you make with spanking that you can't
correct without using pain and punishment?

It is intended to correct children, to help them
make better choices in the future.

How does that compare with friendly and playful parental involvement and emotional
closeness in helping children learn to make wise choices? What harmful side effects
does each method (spanking and close parental involvement) have?

It can very much be an act of love, and done
right is very useful.

I love my wife, yet after 25 years of marriage, I've never struck her. Does that
mean I don't love her as much as I should?

I learned to use the same approach with my two (now grown up) children. I can't
imagine having a closer relationship with either one of them. Are you telling me
things would be even better had I used spanking on them instead of respectfully
dealing with them and their emotions in non-punitive ways when we had differences?

It is not hitting in anger. If it is done that way, it is
wrong.

I thought about this a lot and put up an analysis of a spanking at my site.

I believe that done right it is a good thing.

Can you tell me how it is better than non-punitive ways of parenting?

Done wrong it can be a very bad
thing.

How can there be a right and a wrong way to strike someone, with the intension of
causing them pain?

The difference is usually love,

I think there is considerable confusion over what love really means.

Using my understanding of love, early in their childhoods, I spanked. But I
realized that I loved my two kids too much to want to hurt them in disciplining
(teaching) them, so I adopted non-punitive means for parenting, and I'm glad of it.

and there are people that use corporal
punishment very effectively, others don't

Killing people can very effectively stop unwanted behavior too. Because something
is "very effective," doesn't necessarily mean it's the right thing to do.

-Jerry-


thanks

Sharon
http://www.e-lovestories.com

On 27 Mar 2004 19:43:14 GMT, (LadySharon811)
wrote:

==a spanking is for correction. It is intended to correct children, to help them
==make better choices in the future. It can very much be an act of love, and done
==right is very useful. It is not hitting in anger. If it is done that way, it is
==wrong.
==
==I thought about this a lot and put up an analysis of a spanking at my site.
==
==I believe that done right it is a good thing. Done wrong it can be a very bad
==thing. The difference is usually love, and there are people that use corporal
==punishment very effectively, others don't
==
==thanks
==
==Sharon
==http://www.e-lovestories.com


A website lovingly devoted to stories about spanking
and enemas.

Yep, there's a good source, all right.





--
The danger to the life and well-being of children
increases in direct proportion to their proximity
to religion and its practitioners.
-Ivan Gowch

On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 21:15:23 -0600, Carlson LaVonne
wrote:

==Sharon,
==
==So, it is okay to hit a child as long as the child is hit in love. And
== you teach the child that it is okay to hit those you love when they
==displease you and when you want them to change their behavior.
==
==And you teach the child that it is okay be hit by those you love, when
==you have displeased them and they want you to change your behavior.
==
==And it sounds to me like you have a perfect formula for domestic abuse.
== Hit and be hit by those you love and those who love you.
==
==I don't think I care to read your book. You've provided me with all I
==need to know.
==
==I raised my children without hitting. I did not want them to learn that
==hitting in love or being hit in love was ever acceptable. They are two
==strong and lovely women.
==
==LaVonne
==
==LadySharon811 wrote:
==
== a spanking is for correction. It is intended to correct children, to help them
== make better choices in the future. It can very much be an act of love, and done
== right is very useful. It is not hitting in anger. If it is done that way, it is
== wrong.
==
== I thought about this a lot and put up an analysis of a spanking at my site.
==
== I believe that done right it is a good thing. Done wrong it can be a very bad
== thing. The difference is usually love, and there are people that use corporal
== punishment very effectively, others don't
==
== thanks
==
== Sharon
== http://www.e-lovestories.com

Don't waste your time on this miscreant, LaVonne.

Judging by the referenced website, "Sharon" is a
pervert who is obsessed with spanking and enemas
-- and, therefore, almost certainly a male.

But definitely a troll!

Chrs.



--

The virtue most often rewarded is patience.
-Ivan Gowch

Ivan Gowch wrote in message . ..
A website lovingly devoted to stories about spanking
and enemas.

Yep, there's a good source, all right.


I tried to read one of those stories, but could not get to the end. In
short: a girl got in a fight at school and teacher punished her by
paddling in front of all the class.

Now, I wonder: what would that girl learn?

a) Using violence as a way to resolve things actually gets you nowhere
and does diminish you as a human, so by hitting another person even if
he/she provoked you, all you did prove you're just as low as such
person. You acted by instict and incincts can be controlled, once you
learn to controll your instincts (and realase your anger in some other
way, not just repressing it), you'll by long a far way in you life.

b) Violence is OK: you can hit another person just as long as you have
authority over him/her within your social structure, AND/OR nobody
with authority over YOU will ever find out.

c) Nice girls don't fight. If you're angry, swallow it. You can
allways get even with the world once you've grown up, become a
teacher/mother and have kids to spank.


Other responses are welcome.