Lessons from the verbally abusive principal

A big lesson is that having the authority to spank is not necessary to
be abusive. Verbal abusers in particular can be thoroughly abusive
without spanking until it becomes physically abusive.

No-spanks often become verbally abusive when things do not go their
way. Like no-spanks in this newsgroup, they react to every little idea
that does not share their agenda. Like the principal Marlene Whitby at
William Penn Elementary School, their techniques of control are often
little more than childish name-calling and verbal assaults. They are
bullies!

A secondary lesson is that schools invested heavily into no-spank
ideology before it became trendy. Public educators having been pushing
no-spank since shortly after the sexual revolution of the 1960s
purportedly repealed the laws of biology and made the genders equal.
Educators were pushing it even before creation of the accumulated
mountain of rubbish that no-spanks now try to pass off as research.
(Legitimate social science research seldom flows in one direction only
and results are often inconclusive.)

Still another lesson is that putting supposedly well-trained and highly
professional child experts in charge of children guarantees absolutely
nothing good will come of it. Like Katie's sister, who no longer
wanted to have anything to do with Katie because the principal said
Katie was a bad person, students learn bullying from professional
educators. Bullying in schools is the leading cause of school
shootings.

Not one teacher, during or since 8-year-old Katie White was dragged
from classroom to classroom by principal Marlene Whitby, while being
called a thief and a liar, ever said this is not right. Not one came
forward. They were all too job scared.

Like the defendants at Nuremberg, the teachers at William Penn
Elementary School were good supporters of the regime. They went along
with the program as if it was perfectly normal to treat drag a kid
around like a dog! There was no law against it; the principal was not
arrested. Instead, the principal's abuse was excused an overzealous
management technique that won't happen again.

The problem with no-spank goes even deeper. In much the same way that
the shortage of priests caused the Catholic Church to admit potential
pedophiles into its seminaries, the shortage of schoolteachers caused
by no-spank is opening the schoolhouse doors to some less than savory
women. Almost every week there is a news item about a schoolteacher
having sex with a student. The Elizabeth Forward Township principal is
just the tip of the iceberg for much more common verbal abuse and
bullying in schools.

There is no magic in the secret ritual of no-spank techniques. Real
conflict resolution is more art than science. It is not something to
be imparted by professors of education, who never have been very good
at teaching universally applicable discipline techniques for the
classroom.

Schools were supposed to be flagships of the no-spank movement. Their
professionally trained staffs were supposed to be the exemplars to
parents of students as well as the future parents that sat before them.

The game plan was simple. If students were no longer paddled at
school, and if a de facto child welfare Schutzstaffel discouraged
parents from spanking at home, eventually no-spank would rule the land
from sea to shining sea.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way. Like the no-spank techniques
themselves, the plan was flawed. From sexual activity in the restrooms
to verbal abuse in the classrooms, the results of no-spank and its
single parenting cousin can be seen in schoolhouses every day.

Much like that *peculiar* institution of slavery, notions of feminist
equality and its no-spank agenda must be propped up by a vast armada of
laws. In time, as happen to both organized slavery in America and
feminism in the Soviet Union, the system will collapse and the status
quo will return. It is the fate of all unnatural schemes that must be
supported by laws. That really is the big lesson that no-spanks have
yet to learn.

Well said!

Doan


On 10 Nov 2005, Opinions wrote:

A big lesson is that having the authority to spank is not necessary to
be abusive. Verbal abusers in particular can be thoroughly abusive
without spanking until it becomes physically abusive.

No-spanks often become verbally abusive when things do not go their
way. Like no-spanks in this newsgroup, they react to every little idea
that does not share their agenda. Like the principal Marlene Whitby at
William Penn Elementary School, their techniques of control are often
little more than childish name-calling and verbal assaults. They are
bullies!

A secondary lesson is that schools invested heavily into no-spank
ideology before it became trendy. Public educators having been pushing
no-spank since shortly after the sexual revolution of the 1960s
purportedly repealed the laws of biology and made the genders equal.
Educators were pushing it even before creation of the accumulated
mountain of rubbish that no-spanks now try to pass off as research.
(Legitimate social science research seldom flows in one direction only
and results are often inconclusive.)

Still another lesson is that putting supposedly well-trained and highly
professional child experts in charge of children guarantees absolutely
nothing good will come of it. Like Katie's sister, who no longer
wanted to have anything to do with Katie because the principal said
Katie was a bad person, students learn bullying from professional
educators. Bullying in schools is the leading cause of school
shootings.

Not one teacher, during or since 8-year-old Katie White was dragged
from classroom to classroom by principal Marlene Whitby, while being
called a thief and a liar, ever said this is not right. Not one came
forward. They were all too job scared.

Like the defendants at Nuremberg, the teachers at William Penn
Elementary School were good supporters of the regime. They went along
with the program as if it was perfectly normal to treat drag a kid
around like a dog! There was no law against it; the principal was not
arrested. Instead, the principal's abuse was excused an overzealous
management technique that won't happen again.

The problem with no-spank goes even deeper. In much the same way that
the shortage of priests caused the Catholic Church to admit potential
pedophiles into its seminaries, the shortage of schoolteachers caused
by no-spank is opening the schoolhouse doors to some less than savory
women. Almost every week there is a news item about a schoolteacher
having sex with a student. The Elizabeth Forward Township principal is
just the tip of the iceberg for much more common verbal abuse and
bullying in schools.

There is no magic in the secret ritual of no-spank techniques. Real
conflict resolution is more art than science. It is not something to
be imparted by professors of education, who never have been very good
at teaching universally applicable discipline techniques for the
classroom.

Schools were supposed to be flagships of the no-spank movement. Their
professionally trained staffs were supposed to be the exemplars to
parents of students as well as the future parents that sat before them.

The game plan was simple. If students were no longer paddled at
school, and if a de facto child welfare Schutzstaffel discouraged
parents from spanking at home, eventually no-spank would rule the land
from sea to shining sea.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way. Like the no-spank techniques
themselves, the plan was flawed. From sexual activity in the restrooms
to verbal abuse in the classrooms, the results of no-spank and its
single parenting cousin can be seen in schoolhouses every day.

Much like that *peculiar* institution of slavery, notions of feminist
equality and its no-spank agenda must be propped up by a vast armada of
laws. In time, as happen to both organized slavery in America and
feminism in the Soviet Union, the system will collapse and the status
quo will return. It is the fate of all unnatural schemes that must be
supported by laws. That really is the big lesson that no-spanks have
yet to learn.

Thank you.

No-spanks tend to validate the Law of Logical Argument. That law
essentially states: "Anything is possible if you don't know what you're
talking about."

Although no-spanks boast about how they will one day ban all spanking,
in reality they are merely pushing another unworkable and unsustainable
*peculiar* institution based on some cockeyed notion of their
superiority. No-spank is eugenics by proxy.

Watch no-spanks long enough and it becomes obvious that they don't know
what they're doing, much less talking about.



Doan wrote:
Well said!

Doan


On 10 Nov 2005, Opinions wrote:

A big lesson is that having the authority to spank is not necessary to
be abusive. Verbal abusers in particular can be thoroughly abusive
without spanking until it becomes physically abusive.

No-spanks often become verbally abusive when things do not go their
way. Like no-spanks in this newsgroup, they react to every little idea
that does not share their agenda. Like the principal Marlene Whitby at
William Penn Elementary School, their techniques of control are often
little more than childish name-calling and verbal assaults. They are
bullies!

A secondary lesson is that schools invested heavily into no-spank
ideology before it became trendy. Public educators having been pushing
no-spank since shortly after the sexual revolution of the 1960s
purportedly repealed the laws of biology and made the genders equal.
Educators were pushing it even before creation of the accumulated
mountain of rubbish that no-spanks now try to pass off as research.
(Legitimate social science research seldom flows in one direction only
and results are often inconclusive.)

Still another lesson is that putting supposedly well-trained and highly
professional child experts in charge of children guarantees absolutely
nothing good will come of it. Like Katie's sister, who no longer
wanted to have anything to do with Katie because the principal said
Katie was a bad person, students learn bullying from professional
educators. Bullying in schools is the leading cause of school
shootings.

Not one teacher, during or since 8-year-old Katie White was dragged
from classroom to classroom by principal Marlene Whitby, while being
called a thief and a liar, ever said this is not right. Not one came
forward. They were all too job scared.

Like the defendants at Nuremberg, the teachers at William Penn
Elementary School were good supporters of the regime. They went along
with the program as if it was perfectly normal to treat drag a kid
around like a dog! There was no law against it; the principal was not
arrested. Instead, the principal's abuse was excused an overzealous
management technique that won't happen again.

The problem with no-spank goes even deeper. In much the same way that
the shortage of priests caused the Catholic Church to admit potential
pedophiles into its seminaries, the shortage of schoolteachers caused
by no-spank is opening the schoolhouse doors to some less than savory
women. Almost every week there is a news item about a schoolteacher
having sex with a student. The Elizabeth Forward Township principal is
just the tip of the iceberg for much more common verbal abuse and
bullying in schools.

There is no magic in the secret ritual of no-spank techniques. Real
conflict resolution is more art than science. It is not something to
be imparted by professors of education, who never have been very good
at teaching universally applicable discipline techniques for the
classroom.

Schools were supposed to be flagships of the no-spank movement. Their
professionally trained staffs were supposed to be the exemplars to
parents of students as well as the future parents that sat before them.

The game plan was simple. If students were no longer paddled at
school, and if a de facto child welfare Schutzstaffel discouraged
parents from spanking at home, eventually no-spank would rule the land
from sea to shining sea.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way. Like the no-spank techniques
themselves, the plan was flawed. From sexual activity in the restrooms
to verbal abuse in the classrooms, the results of no-spank and its
single parenting cousin can be seen in schoolhouses every day.

Much like that *peculiar* institution of slavery, notions of feminist
equality and its no-spank agenda must be propped up by a vast armada of
laws. In time, as happen to both organized slavery in America and
feminism in the Soviet Union, the system will collapse and the status
quo will return. It is the fate of all unnatural schemes that must be
supported by laws. That really is the big lesson that no-spanks have
yet to learn.

Opinions wrote:
Thank you.

No-spanks tend to validate the Law of Logical Argument. That law
essentially states: "Anything is possible if you don't know what you're
talking about."

You got to be talkin' about spankers.

Although no-spanks boast about how they will one day ban all spanking,

We aren't boasting. We are stating fact. This country is well on it's
way in that direction. Note the school paddling rates falling. Only 23
states still have it on the books and they are banning it locally.

In the 60's over 90% of the population thought spanking was okay. It's
barely 50% today.

in reality they are merely pushing another unworkable and unsustainable
*peculiar* institution based on some cockeyed notion of their
superiority. No-spank is eugenics by proxy.

No claim of superiority goes with the spanking ban agenda. Simply the
truth. We have a world to veiw as proof of where brutal child rearing
methods take humankind.

And there is nothing the least cockeyed about calling a spade a spade.
If I hit you, it's battery. If I hit a child and it's mine or in my
charge it's 'spanking.'

Between us who really had the cockeyed notion of superiority and a
'peculiar institution.' Because something is common does not make it
right. And spanking is not right.

Watch no-spanks long enough and it becomes obvious that they don't know
what they're doing, much less talking about.

Yet another dancing screeching monkeyboy I see. Nothing to really offer
in the way of debate so run away.

Oddly, your little diatribe of frustration is a better description of
the spankers and apologists that come to the newsgroup from time to
time. They usually leave screeching...well, like a monkeyboy.

You sure are full of, among other things, opinion, Opinion. But little
real support morally or scientificially for your claims.

0:-



Doan wrote:
Well said!

Doan


On 10 Nov 2005, Opinions wrote:

A big lesson is that having the authority to spank is not necessary to
be abusive. Verbal abusers in particular can be thoroughly abusive
without spanking until it becomes physically abusive.

No-spanks often become verbally abusive when things do not go their
way. Like no-spanks in this newsgroup, they react to every little idea
that does not share their agenda. Like the principal Marlene Whitby at
William Penn Elementary School, their techniques of control are often
little more than childish name-calling and verbal assaults. They are
bullies!

A secondary lesson is that schools invested heavily into no-spank
ideology before it became trendy. Public educators having been pushing
no-spank since shortly after the sexual revolution of the 1960s
purportedly repealed the laws of biology and made the genders equal.
Educators were pushing it even before creation of the accumulated
mountain of rubbish that no-spanks now try to pass off as research.
(Legitimate social science research seldom flows in one direction only
and results are often inconclusive.)

Still another lesson is that putting supposedly well-trained and highly
professional child experts in charge of children guarantees absolutely
nothing good will come of it. Like Katie's sister, who no longer
wanted to have anything to do with Katie because the principal said
Katie was a bad person, students learn bullying from professional
educators. Bullying in schools is the leading cause of school
shootings.

Not one teacher, during or since 8-year-old Katie White was dragged
from classroom to classroom by principal Marlene Whitby, while being
called a thief and a liar, ever said this is not right. Not one came
forward. They were all too job scared.

Like the defendants at Nuremberg, the teachers at William Penn
Elementary School were good supporters of the regime. They went along
with the program as if it was perfectly normal to treat drag a kid
around like a dog! There was no law against it; the principal was not
arrested. Instead, the principal's abuse was excused an overzealous
management technique that won't happen again.

The problem with no-spank goes even deeper. In much the same way that
the shortage of priests caused the Catholic Church to admit potential
pedophiles into its seminaries, the shortage of schoolteachers caused
by no-spank is opening the schoolhouse doors to some less than savory
women. Almost every week there is a news item about a schoolteacher
having sex with a student. The Elizabeth Forward Township principal is
just the tip of the iceberg for much more common verbal abuse and
bullying in schools.

There is no magic in the secret ritual of no-spank techniques. Real
conflict resolution is more art than science. It is not something to
be imparted by professors of education, who never have been very good
at teaching universally applicable discipline techniques for the
classroom.

Schools were supposed to be flagships of the no-spank movement. Their
professionally trained staffs were supposed to be the exemplars to
parents of students as well as the future parents that sat before them.

The game plan was simple. If students were no longer paddled at
school, and if a de facto child welfare Schutzstaffel discouraged
parents from spanking at home, eventually no-spank would rule the land
from sea to shining sea.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way. Like the no-spank techniques
themselves, the plan was flawed. From sexual activity in the restrooms
to verbal abuse in the classrooms, the results of no-spank and its
single parenting cousin can be seen in schoolhouses every day.

Much like that *peculiar* institution of slavery, notions of feminist
equality and its no-spank agenda must be propped up by a vast armada of
laws. In time, as happen to both organized slavery in America and
feminism in the Soviet Union, the system will collapse and the status
quo will return. It is the fate of all unnatural schemes that must be
supported by laws. That really is the big lesson that no-spanks have
yet to learn.

Hi All,

The article above makes a valid point. Often in here we see the
exchange of verbiage degenerate into abuse. Standard debate tactics
degrade into insults and meaningless discussion. We've even seen some
making empty legal threats if the spin isn't going their way. Trully a
sad reflection of the state of dialogue. I would hope that parenting
techniques that enhance and reward those that are trying to improve
their family would be the purpose of a group like this.--Again I do not
support anti-reasonable force statutes that would further punish
families that don't fit into the ridgid schematic of the social
engineers. I would much rather see local courts/communities handle
individual cases rather than seek a "simple solution" to the challenges
of modern parenting.

As always--non-spanker by choice,
Chris C.
TX

wrote:
Hi All,

The article above makes a valid point. Often in here we see the
exchange of verbiage degenerate into abuse.

You certainly have done your share of that.

Standard debate tactics
degrade into insults and meaningless discussion.

Oh, you mean when you were outed as having cut and pasted other's
material without attributing it to them? Even misrepresenting an anti
spanker's material as supporting spanking?

How about making claims that have no basis in fact?

We've even seen some
making empty legal threats if the spin isn't going their way.

Gee, you wouldn't be referring to your little escapade, now would you?

Trully a
sad reflection of the state of dialogue.

You certainly have proven that.

I would hope that parenting
techniques that enhance and reward those that are trying to improve
their family would be the purpose of a group like this.

The subject of this clearly stated as discussion of spanking by
parents. And you are a supporter of this. Live with it

--Again I do not
support anti-reasonable force statutes that would further punish
families that don't fit into the ridgid schematic of the social
engineers.

It's all in those words, "reasonable force." Reasonable force would be
that used to protect one's self from attack, or others.

No one is going to get a law past that removes this from current law.
It's not reasonable to spank a child.

I would much rather see local courts/communities handle
individual cases rather than seek a "simple solution" to the challenges
of modern parenting.

Sure you would, as long as that supports spanking as the vicious
assault that it so obviously is. Your denial is beyond belief.

As always--non-spanker by choice,

I find it really easy to be non-dog kicker, since I have none around to
prove my high principles upon.

You have no children, do you, Chris?

Chris C.
TX

You never debate, and you never have with me, so any claims that you
are mistreated and that's why you don't want to debate ring hollow
here. At least with those that know your posting history as some do.

But your baloney peddling is amusing.

Just hope no one googles your posting history that doesn't already know
what a phony you are.

0:-