A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Spanking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 6th 04, 04:57 PM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?

On 6 Apr 2004 08:01:47 -0700, (Alina) wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message . com...

I'll be interested to see your take on the study. It's quite old,

25
years or more.


But old doesn't mean outdated, does it?


There is considerable material since. Survey's of the available
research are around.

http://tinyurl.com/2mtk8

Rather a lot of them.

Well, you can always e-mail. Your copy of the study should be

showing
up in your mail box soon, if Doan has it to e-mail to you.


Oh, but you know that isn't quite viable either :-), due to it's
size.


I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. Unless it were
loaded with graphics a text attachment wouldn't be very large.

(...) obvious physical advantage) to repress a behaviour in the

child. Not
to teach him, but to train him.


Well, there are those that take a strictly "training" approach to
child rearing.


Yes, but there are different ways to "train". There's the abusive,
"don't do 'cause I'll hurt you" way, and then there's the "that's a
good boy, here's a treat" way (talking about animals here). Both
approaches are also apllicable on children, I believe it's called
negative and positive reinforcement. So why go negative when you can
do positive?


The arguement that amuses me the most is the one that says, "because
the world is that way and the child must learn that." As though there
is any shortage of negative experiences for children in their day to
day life, right from birth on.

Having both "trained" animals and "taught" children I found that

the
gentle principles of the way I taught were not only applicable to
animal training that I went to gentle methods very early on with

both,
of course.


Exaclty what I meant.

Not far from my own views.


So what are your own views?


Open google newsgroups in your browser. Open alt.parenting.spanking.
Open any message with my name on it. Click on my name in the address
field, and an archive of every post of mine will come up.

Basically I don't find punishment of any kind very useful. At least
not deliberately applied punishment. Children know the difference
between intended harm and natural human reactions.

The former confuses and frightens them, the latter they are curious
about, even if it might frighten them.

Were you raised in a CP using family? How
did you come to your present postion on this issue?


Dad was a spanker, and very inconsistent. He would react in different
ways to the same thing on different days, I still don't know what

that
depended on. Mom was a non-spanker, she talked with (not just "to) us
a lot and explained, and listened a lot. She did things with us,
taught us to cooperate in the house, gave us options (thing to do as
opposed to things she didn't want us to do).

I have much more memories of mom than I have of dad. And nicer
feelings towards her, too.


Who do you think you learned the most important lessons from?

Also, I have a profound respect for *people*, no matter the age.

Also, I have worked with children, and know first hand that they

think
and understand a lot more than some spankers are willing to believe.


Well, not according to the spankers that have come here to "debate."

Although just when they claim that they have to "teach" children they
describe some motive of the child they must curb that children cannot
have enough knowledge or development to even have such a motive.

Also, I would hate to hurt my child :-)


They don't mind doing that. They seem to think that pain is a great
teacher...forgetting that life has ample random exposure to pain for
we humans to suffice for all the lessons pain can teach.

Instead they take areas were pain is a very poor teacher, and in fact
a diversion, and apply pain to those. Kind of dumb.

Have you read Dodson? If so, what do you think?


Oh yes. Frankly his methods if used on an animal (which he has done
without witnesses apparently) would result in an arrest and charge

of
animal abuse and cruelty. He has a social disease. It's the one

that
assumes humans are evil by nature, and their behaviors, if you

don't
like those behaviors, are evil by intent.

Dobson's isn't much of a way to view the world, is it?


Um, I think we are talking about different persons here. I meant
DoDson, Dr. Fitzhugh Dodson.


Oh, I missed without the first name. We have so often discuss James
Dobson here that I didn't notice your spelling.

That, according to Droany, constitutes a "lie" on my part.

I don't know if he still lives. Was a
psychologist and wrote books about parenting, mom bought me one: "How
to parent". He supports non coersive parenting a lot, using

techniques
such as positive reinforcement, reflecting the child's feelings,
providing a child secure environment, etc.. He is an oldie (mom read
him while raising ME), but still very interesting.

Now, Dr. Dodson says there are only 2 cases in which it's ok to spank
a child: one, when you are absolutley "fed up" and loose control. He
says it is just as important for an adult than it is for a child to
vent and express feelings, and you can always tell the child you're
sorry later. I disagree with him, while it is no doubt important to

be
able to express feelings, I think we as adults must have enough
control on our actions (moreso if that is what we intend to teach the
child to do), and if we know we don't have such control, then we
should seek help in order to aquire it.

The second case in which Dodson says it's ok to spank, is when you
can't let natural consecuences of his actions teach him, because the
child's physical integrity would be in danger. Example: to prevent

him
from running into the street. I would love to disagree with him on
that one too, and that is where my interest on the Embry study
originated.


Alina, on the off chance that I'm being scammed, a common occurance
when folks try to debate honestly with Doan, (he thinks "play" is
debate apparently) I request you ask him for the study.

If he will email it to you I have two simple questions I'd like to ask
that will establish if it is the same study I have, or simply some
commentary by others, or even just a summary by Embry.

Would you be willing to do that?

Thanks in advance.

If it turns out to not be the study, or after a reasonable time he
doesn't provide anything, I'll be happy then to supply you with the
one I have...the complete study report on outcomes and methodology.

Alina.


Regards,

Kane
  #2  
Old April 6th 04, 05:53 PM
Doan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kaneprovide Jerry with the Embry study?


On 6 Apr 2004, Kane wrote:

Alina, on the off chance that I'm being scammed, a common occurance
when folks try to debate honestly with Doan, (he thinks "play" is
debate apparently) I request you ask him for the study.

LOL! Alina, just tell Kane that you are me and get it over with.
It wouldn't be nice to "scam" Kane like this, would it?

If he will email it to you I have two simple questions I'd like to ask
that will establish if it is the same study I have, or simply some
commentary by others, or even just a summary by Embry.

LOL! Why all this trouble, Kane? Why not just send her the study when
she asked for it in the first place?

Would you be willing to do that?

Thanks in advance.

If it turns out to not be the study, or after a reasonable time he
doesn't provide anything, I'll be happy then to supply you with the
one I have...the complete study report on outcomes and methodology.

This I like to see. Alina, please ask Kane for the study again. He can
email it to you and it will be faster. You can't trust me. I am evil!
I might send you a FAKE ONE! ;-)

Doan


  #3  
Old April 7th 04, 02:59 AM
Alina
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment wouldn't be very large.


You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com

The arguement that amuses me the most is the one that says, "because
the world is that way and the child must learn that."


Has anybody actually told you THAT? It's sick.

Basically I don't find punishment of any kind very useful. At least
not deliberately applied punishment. Children know the difference
between intended harm and natural human reactions.


So you agree with DoDson when he says it's ok if you loose control
once in a while?

The former confuses and frightens them,


And seriously mines their initiative and self-esteem, and their sense
of security.

Who do you think you learned the most important lessons from?


Mom.

Well, not according to the spankers that have come here to "debate."


Although just when they claim that they have to "teach" children they
describe some motive of the child they must curb that children cannot
have enough knowledge or development to even have such a motive.


I guess they don't even try to *know* their children. Maybe they
forget children are persons, too.

They don't mind doing that. They seem to think that pain is a great
teacher...forgetting that life has ample random exposure to pain for
we humans to suffice for all the lessons pain can teach.


Pain in the form of corporal punishment is an inhibitor, not a
teacher.

Alina, on the off chance that I'm being scammed, a common occurance
when folks try to debate honestly with Doan, (he thinks "play" is
debate apparently) I request you ask him for the study.


If he will email it to you I have two simple questions I'd like to ask
that will establish if it is the same study I have, or simply some
commentary by others, or even just a summary by Embry.

Would you be willing to do that?


I don't want to be rude, but I am not interested in your ongoing
online argument with Doan, or to scam either of you two.
I have, however, asked him for that study. It is ME that is taking
long now, because he has asked that I send an envelope so he can snail
mail it back. Baby is still a little sick so I have not gone out or
done much.
If it helps you in any way, yes, I will let you know when I have it.

Thanks in advance.


No problem.

If it turns out to not be the study, or after a reasonable time he
doesn't provide anything, I'll be happy then to supply you with the
one I have...the complete study report on outcomes and methodology.


Thanks. I hope it will not be necessary.

Best regards,

Alina.
  #4  
Old April 7th 04, 05:56 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?

On 6 Apr 2004 18:59:34 -0700, (Alina) wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment

wouldn't be very large.

You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com


Yep, and 80 pages in a text document, even with some simple charts
would hardly be a load for an e-mail.

I had made the offer to anyone he and I both knew in the ng. That's
why I was questioning sending it to you. He could know you, or even be
you, and intercept it and pretend all along he had it. His veracity
has been questioned many times here.

The arguement that amuses me the most is the one that says,

"because
the world is that way and the child must learn that."


Has anybody actually told you THAT? It's sick.


Sometimes it pays to browse through a ng history of posting. Yes and
more than once. In fact it's practically a standard whenever a new
spanking compulsive shows up here to "debate."

They respond with that when ever asked "why spank?"

Basically I don't find punishment of any kind very useful. At least
not deliberately applied punishment. Children know the difference
between intended harm and natural human reactions.


So you agree with DoDson when he says it's ok if you loose control
once in a while?


Not what I said at all. Losing control and expressing one's natural
reactions are not mutually inclusive. Children don't need to see a
parent hurt, injure, or break things. The very low level negative
reactions, even a tiny change in facial expression, or body language,
a slight turning away; it ALL registers with the child. I've tested it
repeatedly.

Work with horses taught me that long before I had children to raise.
The more subtle the cues the more attention is paid to it if there are
outcomes. Babies probably have a built in unconscious tracking of
cause and effect. Sadly it's damaged by drug and alcohol exposure in
utero.

The former confuses and frightens them,


And seriously mines their initiative and self-esteem, and their sense
of security.


I assume you mean under"mines?"

The assumption of spanking complusives appear to be conflicted. On the
one hand they claim that the world is like that and the sooner
children learn it the better, with the parent being the best, most
informed, and safest conveyor of this "fact."

Where the conflict comes in is that they also claim that the child
feels safer and more secure if you firmly and painfully "correct"
unwanted behavior...even in the infant, and some believe pain should
be used there as well. Bad animal training, and very bad child
rearing.

Animals will either become cowed and withdrawn and afraid and/or
eventually will fight back violently.

Who do you think you learned the most important lessons from?


Mom.

Well, not according to the spankers that have come here to

"debate."

Although just when they claim that they have to "teach" children

they
describe some motive of the child they must curb that children

cannot
have enough knowledge or development to even have such a motive.


I guess they don't even try to *know* their children. Maybe they
forget children are persons, too.


It wouldn't matter even if they were puppies. The risk of unwanted
reactions and outcomes is extremely high when pain is used to teach.
Unintentional pain from the environment is a low risk because children
can pretty easily see and even control it themselves directly.

Intended pain from the protector, the caregiver is very confusing.
Children don't know that animals, for instance, aren't just like them
or like humans....that is why the first time they get nipped by a dog
or scratch or bitten by a cat they are terribly shocked. We see it
easily.

Some of us have trouble noting it when we are the parent who has just
hurt the child.

They don't mind doing that. They seem to think that pain is a great
teacher...forgetting that life has ample random exposure to pain

for
we humans to suffice for all the lessons pain can teach.


Pain in the form of corporal punishment is an inhibitor, not a
teacher.


Well even as an inhibitor not only does it have liimits but it can
quickly become sought after as "natural" in the child's world.

Alina, on the off chance that I'm being scammed, a common occurance
when folks try to debate honestly with Doan, (he thinks "play" is
debate apparently) I request you ask him for the study.


If he will email it to you I have two simple questions I'd like to

ask
that will establish if it is the same study I have, or simply some
commentary by others, or even just a summary by Embry.

Would you be willing to do that?


I don't want to be rude, but I am not interested in your ongoing
online argument with Doan, or to scam either of you two.


You might be interested in googling on our post archives.

But then I don't believe you are scamming and certainly not rude. I
did say on the off chance.

I have, however, asked him for that study. It is ME that is taking
long now, because he has asked that I send an envelope so he can

snail
mail it back.


He wants you to send an envelope? That's odd. He must be terribly
poor. Did he ask you to affix postage as well?

Baby is still a little sick so I have not gone out or
done much.


Okay. All in good time. It's no longer an issue for debate in any
case. I'm just curious.

Hope baby gets well soon.

If it helps you in any way, yes, I will let you know when I have it.


Thanks.

Thanks in advance.


No problem.

If it turns out to not be the study, or after a reasonable time he
doesn't provide anything, I'll be happy then to supply you with the
one I have...the complete study report on outcomes and methodology.


Thanks. I hope it will not be necessary.

Best regards,

Alina.


Best, Kane
  #5  
Old April 7th 04, 06:43 AM
Doan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kane9 Kan't Kontinues... Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry

On 6 Apr 2004, Alina wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment wouldn't be very large.


You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com

Oops! Kane0 got caught with his lies once again. ;-) Here is the quote:

"I hope Gerald and "Alina" have a high speed connection to the
internet. That's a lot of graphics to send."

And here are more of Kane0's lies in the past:

Dec 2, 2003

"I never stated that I had read it. I've only quoted the article on his
study and cited his quotes in that article as to his findings. You
want the study, you are free to get it and challenge his findings, but
until then, you are obviously flapping your arms and pretending you
are flying."


Dec 5, 2003
"The Embry study. You haven't gotten it yet, have you? I have. Long
long ago."


Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! :-)

Doan

  #6  
Old April 7th 04, 06:51 AM
Doan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kane9 Kaught lying again!



On 6 Apr 2004, Kane wrote:

On 6 Apr 2004 18:59:34 -0700, (Alina) wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment

wouldn't be very large.

You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com


Yep, and 80 pages in a text document, even with some simple charts
would hardly be a load for an e-mail.

This is a 180 degrees turn from:

"I hope Gerald and "Alina" have a high speed connection to the
internet. That's a lot of graphics to send."

I had made the offer to anyone he and I both knew in the ng. That's
why I was questioning sending it to you. He could know you, or even be
you, and intercept it and pretend all along he had it. His veracity
has been questioned many times here.


LOL! This is a contradiction to the claim by Kane:

"My research skills are formidable, as some twits here have found out the
hard way."

Come on, Kane! You are either a very bad LIAR or very STUPID! ;-)

Doan


  #7  
Old April 7th 04, 07:46 PM
Greg Hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kane9 Kaught lying again!

Doan:
Did you notice that time months ago when
Doug caught Kane in a LIE about something,
and Kane acknowledged his own deviousness
by saying (yes but they don't know that!)?

He has no qualms about playing games of
misdirection and sophistry.

He's like a therapist using LIES to
manipulate somebody, with no ethical qualms.
What do you think the target feels like
when they realize he duped them?

Kane actually seems to think he is
superior to everybody, except the few
""experts"" he is a groupie of.
  #9  
Old April 8th 04, 12:11 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kane9 Kaught lying again!

On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 22:43:24 -0700, Doan wrote:

On 6 Apr 2004, Alina wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment

wouldn't be very large.

You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com

Oops! Kane0 got caught with his lies once again. ;-) Here is the

quote:

All I said was I forgot if I mentioned the size, not that I didn't
mention the size.

Forgetting and stating one has forgotten is now lying?

YOu need language lessons again.

You are assigned, on penalty if you do not, as being recognized as the
liar YOU are, to look up "lie," "lying," and "liar" and provide us
with any authority that supports your claim that fogetting and saying
so constitutes in itself, lying.

"I hope Gerald and "Alina" have a high speed connection to the
internet. That's a lot of graphics to send."


Yep, and I forgot I said that. That IS why I said I forgot IF I said
anything about the size.

Now show us were I lied again.

And here are more of Kane0's lies in the past:

Dec 2, 2003

"I never stated that I had read it.


Yep, I never stated I read it. That doesn't say I read it or not.
Notice the date. Have you a reference to a date prior to Dec 2, 03
where I said I had read it?

I've only quoted the article on his
study and cited his quotes in that article as to his findings.


No lie there, and plenty of evidence I and others have quoted the
magazine article, not the study.

You
want the study, you are free to get it and challenge his findings,

but
until then, you are obviously flapping your arms and pretending you
are flying."


And certainly no lie there, or if there is please point it out to me.


Dec 5, 2003
"The Embry study. You haven't gotten it yet, have you? I have. Long
long ago."


Yep. Had it for ages. But I never said so on this ng, which of course
would make it obvious I never said I read it either. I simply said I'd
only quoted the magazine who quoted Embry.

Let me see now. Dec 5 comes after Dec 2.


Having and "stating" I had it are two different things, now aren't
they?

Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! :-)


You need to sit in pail of water little boy.

Show me where I lied. R R R R R R

I never said I had the study or read it before we had that
conversation you site. How could I possibly be lying saying I never
said I had it?

All you need to do is find someplace prior to Dec 2nd where I said I
had it or READ it to make me a liar. Want to try again?

The same old Droaning lies. While calling others liars.

I find you absolutely fascinating to watch in your public exhibitions.


Doan



Silly boy.

Stop spanking your monkey in public.

Kane
  #10  
Old April 8th 04, 12:21 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kane9 Kan't Kontinues... Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?

On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 22:43:24 -0700, Doan wrote:

On 6 Apr 2004, Alina wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message om...

I do? I forget if I mentioned the size in the ng. text attachment

wouldn't be very large.

You did :-)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com

Oops! Kane0 got caught with his lies once again. ;-) Here is the

quote:

Let me see now. I say I forgot, and Alina shows me where I did say it,
and that makes me a liar? Hmmmm...interesting take on the language
there.

Did you see me at any point deny I had mentioned the size of the
study?

Forgetting isn't lying, even when you do it, or don't you forget
anything?

When you do, remember, according to your view, you are lying.

"I hope Gerald and "Alina" have a high speed connection to the
internet. That's a lot of graphics to send."


Yep, I said that and I remember it upon seeing it. Forgetting I said
it isn't a lie, unless you wish to conclude that when you forget
something it's automatically a lie.


And here are more of Kane0's lies in the past:

Dec 2, 2003

"I never stated that I had read it. I've only quoted the article on

his
study and cited his quotes in that article as to his findings. You
want the study, you are free to get it and challenge his findings,

but
until then, you are obviously flapping your arms and pretending you
are flying."


Dec 5, 2003
"The Embry study. You haven't gotten it yet, have you? I have. Long
long ago."


Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! :-)


You still can't read english.

Here, I'll help. Let's parse together: From above.

"I never stated that I had read it."

Show me where I ever said I had read it? I may have read it, but I
never stated I had. (Of course I had) Still, if you are going to call
my saying I never stated that I had read it you are going to have to
show where I DID say I had read it prior to the time you are
referencing, no? So?

"I've only quoted the article on his study and cited his quotes in
that article as to his findings.

Which is exactly true. Notice there is no mention of me having read
the study or not?

"You want the study, you are free to get it and challenge his
findings, but until then, you are obviously flapping your arms and
pretending you are flying."

Now if you wish to suggest an ad hom, a funny visual one, is a lie,
you go right ahead, then we'll crank up some of your posts.

Doan


You are still lying, you sad pathetic little boy.

Kane
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kids should work... Doan Spanking 33 December 10th 03 09:05 PM
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
| | Kids should work... Kane Spanking 12 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
Kids should work. ChrisScaife Spanking 16 December 7th 03 05:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.