Kids should work.

Ignoramus15011 wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

Exactly. How would he be a better person if your were hitting him in the name of
discipline? I can't think of one reason, and research has yet to find a reason
for disciplinary hitting of children.

I just do not understand why an intelligent parent should be a
childbeater.

I do not understand why any parent "should be a "childbeater." And I'm not sure
this parenting behavior has all that much to do with intelligence. I've met
professors who hit their children, and individuals who have not completed high
school who do not hit their children . I suspect there are many variables that
lead a parent to this behavior -- how the parents were parented and the level or
respect parents have for their children.

Thanks for posting to alt.parenting.spanking.

LaVonne

And I why wonder what kind of parents can't tell the difference between
spanking and beating!!! ;-)

Doan

On 1 Dec 2003, Ignoramus15011 wrote:

After hearing childbeaters such as some posters in this thread
advocate beating little tots etc, I was thinking about child beating
recently, being a father of a 2.5 years old.

And I realized how much more powerful I was than my 2.5 year old son.

He needs me much more than I need him, objectively. He needs me to
provide him with toys, love, care, food, entertainment, etc. To lift
him here and there or give him magic carpet rides on a blanket. I do
not "need" him, aside from the fact that I love him and like his
company etc.

So, I have so many ways with which I could either punish him, or
provide him other incentives.

For example, I can threaten to not play with him. Or to take away his
toys. Etc etc. This all, so far, is plenty enough to make sure that he
does not misbehave too much. Beating just is not needed.

I only perform his requests that are made politely. Screaming at me to
give him something does not work.

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I just do not understand why an intelligent parent should be a
childbeater.

Granted, some parents are not as smart as me and they cannot think of
incentives better than physical intimidation. Admittedly, for such
parents, beating their chidlren may be a better alternative than
having them wildly rampage streets. I only admit this as a remote
possibility, not as a sure statement that child beating is the only
way to go for dumb parents.

i

In article , Doan wrote:

On 22 Nov 2003, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:03:50 -0600, toto
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:18:51 -0800, Doan wrote:

Yep. This is exactly so because all punishments are essentially
the
same, but positive methods allow for the differences that parents
see.

Then it should be easy to prove. Again, just put the alternatives
to
same statiscal scrutiny as with spanking.

Time outs used as punishment are not positive discipline.
Nor is lecturing or scolding or any of the *other* methods that
were studied.

Doan's only argument, of course, will be asking you to provide
citations and data from peer reviewed studies that support: lecturing;
scolding; *other* methods not working.

Wrong! I am asking for NON-CP alternatives, any non-cp alternative!
If spanking is as bad as you and the anti-spanking zealotS claimed, why
is it so hard to find an alternative that stood the same statistical
scrutiny???

He has used the infamous logical fallacy for years here (to the point
he has bored his opponents to the point of ignoring him) of
"slanting," that is picking only the evidence that supports his
argument (the declaration by Straus) and ignoring all mass of other
evidence that buries him.

Which are???? You meant like Straus et al (1997) in which the "no-spank"
group turned out to be a group that were spanked???

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

Are you so blind? ;-)

I've never seen him, for instance, respond to the Embry Street Entry
study with anything but the usual blind hysteria neurotic responses of
all his pro spanking buddies, his phony declarations to neutrality
notwithstanding.

I have! I have asked Chris when he mentioned this study to post the
details of this study so we can learn from it. HE REFUSED!!! I wonder
why. I am now asking you. Can you post the relevant information of
this study so we can all take a look at it? Can you tell us how many
kids were studied? What the methodology is? What confounding factors
were controlled for? Come on, Kane. Show us who the real "phony" is?
:-)

And all "positive discipline" really is is just teaching to the needs
of the child, and her actual capacities at developmental level.

The devil is in the details. I am a pragmatic person, show me how
your theory work in real life situations. We have a large population
of kids in juvenile halls. Let's try your "positivie discipline" there
first and see how it go. BTW, corporal punishments are not allowed in
juvenile halls! ;-)

Doan seems to think that because those that spank also use SOME
rational means of teaching their children then spanking somehow is a
positive factor in learning. Talk about Cargo Cult Mentallity.

I want to use the same measurements that anti-spanking zealotS like
Straus used! If the reduction antisocial behaviors is a benefit than
Straus et al (1997) showed that spanking less than once a week is a
benefit! The cargo-cult mentality is not subjecting the non-cp
alternatives to the same statistical scrutiny.

The only reason children turn out as well as they do (and I notice
more than a few don't) is that humans are so resiliant and can survive
a lot of trauma. I don't consider that parenting, of course; for the
child to just survive.

The problem with your "reasoning" is that few of the non-cp cultures
"survived"! Can you you name a non-cp culture? ;-)

Doan

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Ignoramus15011 wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

Exactly. How would he be a better person if your were hitting him in the name of
discipline? I can't think of one reason, and research has yet to find a reason
for disciplinary hitting of children.

Straus et al (1997):

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

Straus & Paschal (1998)
"There is also an important limitation of the CP scale. We cannot be sure
that the children with a score of zero on the CP scale were never spanked.
In fact, some are likely to have been spanked in a previous year or in some
other week of this period. Consequently the claim that CP, when used only
rarely and as a back up for other disciplinary strategies, is beneficial
(Larzelere et al., 1998) might apply to children who experienced no CP in
either of the two sample weeks."

I just do not understand why an intelligent parent should be a
childbeater.

I do not understand why any parent "should be a "childbeater." And I'm not sure
this parenting behavior has all that much to do with intelligence. I've met
professors who hit their children, and individuals who have not completed high
school who do not hit their children . I suspect there are many variables that
lead a parent to this behavior -- how the parents were parented and the level or
respect parents have for their children.

Do you know the difference between spanking and beating, LaVonne?

Thanks for posting to alt.parenting.spanking.

Or is it alt.parenting.beating???? ;-)

Doan

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I don't know of animals that beat their young.
Only degenerate humans could be that base.
;-)

"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...
How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I don't know of animals that beat their young.
Only degenerate humans could be that base.
;-)

Mama cats swat kittens on the nose for misbehavior, along with a hiss.

On 2 Dec 2003, Ignoramus15011 wrote:

In article , Doan wrote:

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Ignoramus15011 wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

Exactly. How would he be a better person if your were hitting him in the name of
discipline? I can't think of one reason, and research has yet to find a reason
for disciplinary hitting of children.

Straus et al (1997):

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

Straus & Paschal (1998)
"There is also an important limitation of the CP scale. We cannot be sure
that the children with a score of zero on the CP scale were never spanked.
In fact, some are likely to have been spanked in a previous year or in some
other week of this period. Consequently the claim that CP, when used only
rarely and as a back up for other disciplinary strategies, is beneficial
(Larzelere et al., 1998) might apply to children who experienced no CP in
either of the two sample weeks."

ot sounds to me that you are misquoting a thorough researcher. It
seems like his research indicated some contamination of the
non-spanking group and he was forthright in pointing that out.

And you would be wrong! First, in Straus et al (1997), they didn't know
(or pretended not to know) that their "non-spank" group were actually
spanked (56% of the sample, how do they missed it?) When this was pointed
out by Larzelere, they capitulated, became "indebted" to Larzelere and
finally blamed it on Straus' bias:

"Straus, for example, has made explicit the fact that his research is
motivated by secular humanism. This includes a deeply held belief that
good ends should not be sought by bad means; that all forms of interpersonal
violence, including spanking, are wrong, even when motivated by love and
concern; and that we therefore need to develop nonviolent methods of
preventing and correcting antisocial behavior. These deeply held values may
account for the failure of Straus to perceive the serious limitation of
measuring CP using a 1-week reference period."
(ARCHIVES, In Reply. March 1998)

Second, only after it being "pointed out" to them did they put that
"limitation" in Straus & Paschal (1998) thus showing a serious hole
in their theory that any and all spanking are detrimental!

Third, as pointed in Larzelere & Smith (2000), what they don't tell you
(or conveniently left out) is that, using the same data set, the non-cp
alternatives like: grounding, removing privileges, docking allowances, or
sending the child to his or her room (time-out) showed the same
correlations!


It is sad that you have nothing better than a twisted quote to justify
violence against children.

It is sad that we can't argue rationally but prefer to use emotionally
charged words like "violence" and "beating".

Doan

i

I just do not understand why an intelligent parent should be a
childbeater.

I do not understand why any parent "should be a "childbeater." And I'm not sure
this parenting behavior has all that much to do with intelligence. I've met
professors who hit their children, and individuals who have not completed high
school who do not hit their children . I suspect there are many variables that
lead a parent to this behavior -- how the parents were parented and the level or
respect parents have for their children.

Do you know the difference between spanking and beating, LaVonne?

Thanks for posting to alt.parenting.spanking.

Or is it alt.parenting.beating???? ;-)

Doan

On 2 Dec 2003, Ignoramus15011 wrote:

In article , Doan wrote:
And I why wonder what kind of parents can't tell the difference between
spanking and beating!!! ;-)

spanking is beating with the palm of the head.

Then this newsgroup is alt.parenting.beating with the palm of the head!!!
:-)

Doan

i

Doan

On 1 Dec 2003, Ignoramus15011 wrote:

After hearing childbeaters such as some posters in this thread
advocate beating little tots etc, I was thinking about child beating
recently, being a father of a 2.5 years old.

And I realized how much more powerful I was than my 2.5 year old son.

He needs me much more than I need him, objectively. He needs me to
provide him with toys, love, care, food, entertainment, etc. To lift
him here and there or give him magic carpet rides on a blanket. I do
not "need" him, aside from the fact that I love him and like his
company etc.

So, I have so many ways with which I could either punish him, or
provide him other incentives.

For example, I can threaten to not play with him. Or to take away his
toys. Etc etc. This all, so far, is plenty enough to make sure that he
does not misbehave too much. Beating just is not needed.

I only perform his requests that are made politely. Screaming at me to
give him something does not work.

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I just do not understand why an intelligent parent should be a
childbeater.

Granted, some parents are not as smart as me and they cannot think of
incentives better than physical intimidation. Admittedly, for such
parents, beating their chidlren may be a better alternative than
having them wildly rampage streets. I only admit this as a remote
possibility, not as a sure statement that child beating is the only
way to go for dumb parents.

i

In article , Doan wrote:

On 22 Nov 2003, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:03:50 -0600, toto
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:18:51 -0800, Doan wrote:

Yep. This is exactly so because all punishments are essentially
the
same, but positive methods allow for the differences that parents
see.

Then it should be easy to prove. Again, just put the alternatives
to
same statiscal scrutiny as with spanking.

Time outs used as punishment are not positive discipline.
Nor is lecturing or scolding or any of the *other* methods that
were studied.

Doan's only argument, of course, will be asking you to provide
citations and data from peer reviewed studies that support: lecturing;
scolding; *other* methods not working.

Wrong! I am asking for NON-CP alternatives, any non-cp alternative!
If spanking is as bad as you and the anti-spanking zealotS claimed, why
is it so hard to find an alternative that stood the same statistical
scrutiny???

He has used the infamous logical fallacy for years here (to the point
he has bored his opponents to the point of ignoring him) of
"slanting," that is picking only the evidence that supports his
argument (the declaration by Straus) and ignoring all mass of other
evidence that buries him.

Which are???? You meant like Straus et al (1997) in which the "no-spank"
group turned out to be a group that were spanked???

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

Are you so blind? ;-)

I've never seen him, for instance, respond to the Embry Street Entry
study with anything but the usual blind hysteria neurotic responses of
all his pro spanking buddies, his phony declarations to neutrality
notwithstanding.

I have! I have asked Chris when he mentioned this study to post the
details of this study so we can learn from it. HE REFUSED!!! I wonder
why. I am now asking you. Can you post the relevant information of
this study so we can all take a look at it? Can you tell us how many
kids were studied? What the methodology is? What confounding factors
were controlled for? Come on, Kane. Show us who the real "phony" is?
:-)

And all "positive discipline" really is is just teaching to the needs
of the child, and her actual capacities at developmental level.

The devil is in the details. I am a pragmatic person, show me how
your theory work in real life situations. We have a large population
of kids in juvenile halls. Let's try your "positivie discipline" there
first and see how it go. BTW, corporal punishments are not allowed in
juvenile halls! ;-)

Doan seems to think that because those that spank also use SOME
rational means of teaching their children then spanking somehow is a
positive factor in learning. Talk about Cargo Cult Mentallity.

I want to use the same measurements that anti-spanking zealotS like
Straus used! If the reduction antisocial behaviors is a benefit than
Straus et al (1997) showed that spanking less than once a week is a
benefit! The cargo-cult mentality is not subjecting the non-cp
alternatives to the same statistical scrutiny.

The only reason children turn out as well as they do (and I notice
more than a few don't) is that humans are so resiliant and can survive
a lot of trauma. I don't consider that parenting, of course; for the
child to just survive.

The problem with your "reasoning" is that few of the non-cp cultures
"survived"! Can you you name a non-cp culture? ;-)

Doan

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, ChrisScaife wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I don't know of animals that beat their young.
Only degenerate humans could be that base.
;-)

I saw the same argument used against abortion! Do you know of any animal
that put their youngs in diaper??? ;-)

Doan

On 2 Dec 2003, Ignoramus29143 wrote:

In article , Doan wrote:

On 2 Dec 2003, Ignoramus15011 wrote:

In article , Doan wrote:

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Ignoramus15011 wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

Exactly. How would he be a better person if your were hitting him in the name of
discipline? I can't think of one reason, and research has yet to find a reason
for disciplinary hitting of children.

Straus et al (1997):

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

Straus & Paschal (1998)
"There is also an important limitation of the CP scale. We cannot be sure
that the children with a score of zero on the CP scale were never spanked.
In fact, some are likely to have been spanked in a previous year or in some
other week of this period. Consequently the claim that CP, when used only
rarely and as a back up for other disciplinary strategies, is beneficial
(Larzelere et al., 1998) might apply to children who experienced no CP in
either of the two sample weeks."

ot sounds to me that you are misquoting a thorough researcher. It
seems like his research indicated some contamination of the
non-spanking group and he was forthright in pointing that out.

And you would be wrong! First, in Straus et al (1997), they didn't know
(or pretended not to know) that their "non-spank" group were actually
spanked (56% of the sample, how do they missed it?) When this was pointed
out by Larzelere, they capitulated, became "indebted" to Larzelere and
finally blamed it on Straus' bias:

"Straus, for example, has made explicit the fact that his research is
motivated by secular humanism. This includes a deeply held belief that
good ends should not be sought by bad means; that all forms of interpersonal
violence, including spanking, are wrong, even when motivated by love and
concern; and that we therefore need to develop nonviolent methods of
preventing and correcting antisocial behavior. These deeply held values may
account for the failure of Straus to perceive the serious limitation of
measuring CP using a 1-week reference period."
(ARCHIVES, In Reply. March 1998)

Second, only after it being "pointed out" to them did they put that
"limitation" in Straus & Paschal (1998) thus showing a serious hole
in their theory that any and all spanking are detrimental!

Third, as pointed in Larzelere & Smith (2000), what they don't tell you
(or conveniently left out) is that, using the same data set, the non-cp
alternatives like: grounding, removing privileges, docking allowances, or
sending the child to his or her room (time-out) showed the same
correlations!

you just confirmed exactly what I said. The researcher's sample was
contaminated and he, being a thorough researcher, pointed out that
possible effects of that contamination make it difficult to establish
any conclusions.

What??? Straus, himself, admitted his "failure to perceive the serious
limitation" only after it was "pointed out" to him! He already made
his conclusion!

Doan

"Doan" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, ChrisScaife wrote:

How would he a better person if I was beating him (the animal society
way) instead of teaching him interaction according to modern
principles of human society.

I don't know of animals that beat their young.
Only degenerate humans could be that base.
;-)

I saw the same argument used against abortion! Do you know of any animal
that put their youngs in diaper??? ;-)

That is because animals are not able to do that,
but they are able to injure their offspring.
They choose not to.

As for abortion... I would rather not start on that one right now.

Chris