If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Doan wrote:
And the **** is coming out of my mouth again! :-) But I do believe and have proof that my mouth is FULL OF ****! ;-) Doan ---------------------- I wouldn't doubt it. Steve |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Doan wrote:
On 9 Jun 2004, Chris wrote: In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in thousands of families. Ah! I just love the logic. :-) Isn't this the same argument that you don't like about spanking? Afterall, spanking has been used for thousands of years and BILLIONS of families. Doan ---------------- LIAR! No it hasn't, except as an aberration, and evil act everyone hated you for. Most tribal peoples leave their kids the hell alone unless they are in good humor, and they NEVER hit them for ANY reason!! Steve |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:23:03 -0700, Doan wrote:
On 9 Jun 2004, Chris wrote: In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in thousands of families. Ah! I just love the logic. :-) Isn't this the same argument that you don't like about spanking? Afterall, spanking has been used for thousands of years and BILLIONS of families. Sorry. Not the same logic at all. And no, that's not the argument he used either. You overlooked the word "successfully." That's the key. If all you have is a hammer ever problem looks like a nail. Some parents have learned about other ways to solve problems than using a hammer. And in fact, we now drive nails, or make fastenings with many more things than hammers and nails. We've even learned how to line up molecules so materials will bond to each other without "spanking" them. In other words. Parents are improving. Are you against improving? Improvement can save a lot of cat's-asses in good wood, avoid a lot of smashed fingers, and reduce production of a lot of, dare I say it? Injured children. Doan Not hitting, and doing other things instead seems to be too hard for some. Probably they should think about getting a pet rock. Kane |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Chris" wrote in message ... In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in Chris, this is anecdotal evidence. If I argued that there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, you would correctly counter that just because there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, that most definitely does not mean that all parents who spank get good results. So why should I accept the same kind of reasoning from you regarding non-punitive techniques? As I keep saying, how well strictly non-punitive techniques work depends on children's willingness to cooperate. The fact that there are some children, or even a lot of children who are sufficiently willing to cooperate for purely non-punitive techniques to be considered "successful" in no way implies that there aren't other children for whom eliminating parents' authority to punish would be a disaster. (And that's doubly true - actually, a lot more than just doubly true - if a lot of parents forced to use exclusively non-punitive techniques wouldn't put nearly the effort into them that parents who are highly committed to making non-punitive techniques work do.) Further, what evidence do you have regarding whether those "thousands of families" rely entirely on non-punitive techniques? What evidence do you have that the parents in those families never punish, and never even raise the possibility that they might punish if they feel like they have to? And even if you can find thousands of families where you can be sure that even the possibility of punishment never comes up, do those reflect the vast majority of families who are trying to use exclusively non-punitive techniques, or do a large percentage of parents who would like to use exclusively non-punitive techniques find that they need at least the possibility of using punishment as leverage? Keep in mind that knowing that their parents could punish if they feel the need gives children a bit more incentive to make non-punitive techniques work than they would have otherwise. I'm not trying to say that non-punitive techniques aren't useful. They are. I'm just challenging your unsupported assertions about how reliably they work. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message ... In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in Chris, this is anecdotal evidence. If I argued that there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, you would correctly counter ----------------------- The fact is that there ARE NO SUCH RESULTS! You will SAY that they "had good results", when by your criteria spanking IS ONLY result that concerns you, and NOT what the child will do in the future, or whether he is emotionally crippled, and why? BECAUSE BOTH I AND CHRIS WEEKS KNOW THAT *YOU* are emotionally crippled TOO and COULDN'T POSSIBLY NOTICE SUCH A THING, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO PROPER REFERENT!!!! As I keep saying, how well strictly non-punitive techniques work depends on children's willingness to cooperate. ---------------------- That's an entirely nonsensial circularity! *IF* they WERE cooperative, then NO such punishment even *COULD* BE necessary, and *IF* they are NOT, then it cannot have the desired effect!! If you're truthfully willing to stand on such nonsense, then it proves NOT ONLY that you're an uneducated IDIOT, BUT ALSO INSANE!! Further, what evidence do you have regarding whether those "thousands of families" rely entirely on non-punitive techniques? ---------------------------- They may not, no evidence is needed, we all KNOW what WE do when we are assaulted and coerced, and kids are NOT shown by ANY reseearch to be AT ALL different from every other ADULT human being!! I'm not trying to say that non-punitive techniques aren't useful. They are. I'm just challenging your unsupported assertions about how reliably they work. ----------------------- They work, because that is the well-known treatment of one another that has resulted in all great and good friendships DOWN THRU HISTORY! While abuse and attempt at coercion ONLY causes revenge formation, assault, murder, and warfare! Are you so ****ing stupid that you will not admit that if someone pushes you that you won't turn around and smack the **** out of them, or if they are bigger that you will not BOTH: Lose ALL respect for them, and plan longterm REVENGE UPON THEM!! Between the obvious success of friendships based on equality and respect wthout coercion, and the total failures caused by assault and coercion, what makes you imagine IN YOUR WILDEST DREAMS that you have a SINGLE PHILOSOPHICAL LEG TO STAND ON???????????? Steve |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Chris" wrote in message ... : In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: [snip] : But by and large, the system works. I beg to differ. Punishment is the most heavily overrated child discipline technique. I posted an article by Gordon the other day about workshops he has led, inviting participants to list the ways they reacted to punitive authoritarian control as children. Virtually none of the reactions were desirable. I agree that its heavily overrated. That does not, however, imply that there aren't situations where it is necessary or beneficial. Which of the reactions listed did you engage in as a child, Nathan? Note that I don't ask if you engaged in some of them because I know you did - we all did. This seems a bit personal. There are limits to how much of my life and history I want to post publicly, especially with archives like Google to preserve the information (and it could get preserved in a reply even if I'd flag it to prevent archiving of my own message). I'll scratch the surface of the issue a bit, but I don't want to go into detail. My most serious ongoing negative reaction was when I was in elementary school, and had to do with being forced to go to school when I thought it was boring and tedious. That gives me an excellent reason to support educational choice. But I don't view not requiring children to go to school at all, or giving children carte blanche to choose "schools" where they can play all day without learning much, as a viable solution. Some children may be responsible enough to make good choices about their education without outside limitations on what choices they can make, but I wouldn't trust myself at that age to do so. I'll also admit to having circumvented the rules about bedtime quite a bit by reading in bed through the light of my open door - and hiding my book if my father's chair creaked indicating he might be getting up. The very few times I was caught, I wasn't punished, but I was always afraid that I might be (and I wouldn't have regarded it as unfair or unreasonable if I was). So I have no illusions that punishment is anywhere near reliable when kids expect not to get caught. Knowing that parents consider a behavior serious enough to be worth punishing over might make enough difference in the child's thinking to have an impact on the child's behavior - or it might not. As for the rest, I exhibited some of those behaviors, but aside maybe from frequent arguments over chores (in which, looking back, I was generally being unreasonable), they were neither frequent nor particularly serious. Then again, my parents weren't all that punitive in their basic outlook. They were willing to threaten, and to punish if necessary, when discussion and persuasion didn't work, but punitive techniques weren't their first preference. By and large, a system with this many side effects, and with some such side effects on the list manifesting themselves in every child raised under it, doesn't "work" very well at all. I think I'm looking at the glass as three quarters full and you're focusing on the one quarter that's still empty. Yes, the system has problems, but most children grow up to be productive citizens who generally respect each other's rights and legitimate interests. And those who don't are kept in check enough that most people feel reasonably safe. That gives us an awful lot to lose if we make a radical change and it fails. Keep in mind that parents who use purely non-punitive techniques (to the extent that parents who never resort to even indirect threats of punishment exist at all) are ones who choose that kind of technique voluntarily, and who choose to invest the time and effort to make them work. Keep in mind that at present, parents who try to use non-punitive techniques and don't succeed can resort to threats and, if necessary, punishment as a back-up. The jump from that to taking away parents' authority to punish at all for anything short of criminal behavior would be an enormous one and, I contend, an extremely dangerous one. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"Chris" wrote: Which of the reactions listed did you engage in as a child, Nathan? Note that I don't ask if you engaged in some of them because I know you did - we all did. My most serious ongoing negative reaction was when I was in elementary school, and had to do with being forced to go to school when I thought it was boring and tedious. That gives me an excellent reason to support educational choice. But I don't view not requiring children to go to school at all, or giving children carte blanche to choose "schools" where they can play all day without learning much, as a viable solution. Some children may be responsible enough to make good choices about their education without outside limitations on what choices they can make, but I wouldn't trust myself at that age to do so. ------------------------- You simply don't know yourself well enough to grasp the principle of boredom. Without being coerced, once that stops, a child sooner or later leaves behind his block to creativity caused by the revenge formation due to abuse, and he starts being curiously interested in learning things again, usually quite intently! He need only be offered something interesting without being forced to engage in it and he will be a fan for life! This was proven at numerous "free schools" including the famous Summerhill run by A.S. Neill. Kids, who when they came decided to play for as much as several YEARS, to get rid of their revenge formation for their previous abuse, all had caught up and even surpassed their classmates in other schools upon testing only a year or so after finally becoming ultimately bored and deciding to come to some classes again!! And they became extremely creative people with interesting inventive careers indeed, numerous among them getting higher degrees with honors. I'll also admit to having circumvented the rules about bedtime quite a bit by reading in bed through the light of my open door - and hiding my book if my father's chair creaked indicating he might be getting up. The very few times I was caught, I wasn't punished, but I was always afraid that I might be (and I wouldn't have regarded it as unfair or unreasonable if I was). -------------- Of course you would, and why lie to us and yourself about this now?? You obviously felt it immensely unfair or else you wouldn't have been reading then!!!! God you're repressed!!! Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! They already KNEW all that! Did they abide our wishes that they call? Not always, but when we cried once before them they always called us thereafter (they told us they didn't realize how much we worried) and they to always called us to tell us they were safely someplace for the night. If you're hitting your kids just because you can't dare show them your emotion then you're a REAL SICKEE!! So I have no illusions that punishment is anywhere near reliable when kids expect not to get caught. Knowing that parents consider a behavior serious enough to be worth punishing over might make enough difference in the child's thinking to have an impact on the child's behavior - or it might not. -------------------------------- Ridiculous, punishment is NOT at ALL useful or effective when the activity is THE CHILD'S HUMAN RIGHT!!!!!!! As for the rest, I exhibited some of those behaviors, but aside maybe from frequent arguments over chores (in which, looking back, I was generally being unreasonable), they were neither frequent nor particularly serious. Then again, my parents weren't all that punitive in their basic outlook. They were willing to threaten, and to punish if necessary, when discussion and persuasion didn't work, but punitive techniques weren't their first preference. ---------------- Which you have to thank for your small remaining creativity. By and large, a system with this many side effects, and with some such side effects on the list manifesting themselves in every child raised under it, doesn't "work" very well at all. I think I'm looking at the glass as three quarters full and you're focusing on the one quarter that's still empty. Yes, the system has problems, but most children grow up to be productive citizens who generally respect each other's rights and legitimate interests. And those who don't are kept in check enough that most people feel reasonably safe. ------------------------- YOU need a course in psychology, and statistical info on depression!!! That gives us an awful lot to lose if we make a radical change and it fails. ------------------------- That's like believing that since you keep hitting your head on the cabinet door that taking it off the hinges or wearing a hat might somehow do something terrible!! It's idiotic!! Keep in mind that parents who use purely non-punitive techniques (to the extent that parents who never resort to even indirect threats of punishment exist at all) are ones who choose that kind of technique voluntarily, and who choose to invest the time and effort to make them work. Keep in mind that at present, parents who try to use non-punitive techniques and don't succeed can resort to threats and, if necessary, punishment as a back-up. The jump from that to taking away parents' authority to punish at all for anything short of criminal behavior would be an enormous one and, I contend, an extremely dangerous one. ------------------ What a deluded asshole you are! None of the above are beneficial AT ALL, and ALL are extremely HARMFUL AND ABUSIVE! You're quite insane, deranged, and damaged!! My kids were raised that way, with their rights respected, never coerced, never threatened or forced, and they are both very happy and open people, and both are degreed computer professionals. Steve |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: But I do believe and have proof that my mouth is FULL OF ****! Steve You are right! :-) Doan |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! I find it curious that someone who claims to have such strong respect for his children's rights and desires would adopt as arrogant, disrespectful, and insulting a tone as you do toward other adults. How would you expect your children to react to the kind of tone you are using here on this newsgroup? What would your children think if they told you they felt one way about something, and you tried to insist that they could not possibly feel that way and must feel some other way entirely? And why would you expect such a tone to be any more successful with adults than it would be with your children? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Simple answer - Steve is a "never-spanked" kid! :-) Doan On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Nathan A. Barclay wrote: "R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! I find it curious that someone who claims to have such strong respect for his children's rights and desires would adopt as arrogant, disrespectful, and insulting a tone as you do toward other adults. How would you expect your children to react to the kind of tone you are using here on this newsgroup? What would your children think if they told you they felt one way about something, and you tried to insist that they could not possibly feel that way and must feel some other way entirely? And why would you expect such a tone to be any more successful with adults than it would be with your children? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HALF OF KIDS IN FOSTER CARE NEEDLESSLY | Malev | General | 0 | December 12th 03 03:53 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
New common sense child-rearing book | Kent | General | 6 | September 3rd 03 12:00 PM |