corporal punishment

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I was pulled up early in the debate for not knowing what "swatting" was. As I said before I genuinely have not come across it in this context before and can find no dictionary definition compatible with what is being that discussed.

So - has anyone got an online definition that we can all make use of so that we are talking about the same thing?

Until then I'll take the dictionary definitions.

I'm perfectly content to take the dictionary definitions as well.

It seems the likes of Bbarr and LJ insist on narrow definitions that fit whatever "argument" they're trying to make.

It's not at all uncommon for "swat" to be used as a euphemism for "hit" or "spank" here in the US.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I was pulled up early in the debate for not knowing what "swatting" was. As I said before I genuinely have not come across it in this context before and can find no dictionary definition compatible with what is being that discussed.

So - has anyone got an online definition that we can all make use of so that we are talking about the same thing?

Until then I'll take the dictionary definitions.

check out my reply to bbar, swatting and smacking are pretty much the same thing.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Unfortunately academia tends to attract those whose greatest skill is bullying students off of their positions, so that they can congratulate themselves on how "intelligently" they approached the argument. It would seem that bbarr is one such individual.

Once can only wonder from whence his need to bully arose.[/b]

ha! indeed. maybe he should have been smacked....i mean swatted a bit harder, maybe with a wall brick.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
LemonJello post 10th Nov.
"presumably, what you would need to provide is empricial evidence that shows that swatting is inferior, with respect to some appropriate rubric oriented at the child's proper care and wellbeing"

implicitly implying that "swatting" is as good or better than alternatives for the "child's proper care and wellbeing"

Perhaps you should follow the arguments better?

Wow, this thread is officially fubar.

Perhaps you're the one who should follow along better because my statement there "implicitly implied" no such thing.

Let me clear up your misconceptions here. If you had been following along and actually paying attention to what people are saying (instead of redescribing their statements in grotesque fashion), this would not be necessary, but alas.... I am not arguing that mild, infrequent, painless swatting (including the other conditions necessary for its justifiability, as outlined by bbarr and others) is better (or even as good) as alternatives. And nothing I have stated in this thread implies this, implicitly or otherwise. In fact, if you had actually bothered to read my offerings in this thread, you would know that I already took a stance of ignorance regarding whether or not the swatting at issue is as good, better, or worse, than alternatives.

Again, what I have been arguing is basically that neither you, nor ToO, have any actual argument against the swatting at issue here. If you're going to censure others for their use of it; if you're going to imply that such methods are "sickening" and the like; then you ought to have actual reasons why you assume such a stance. Unfortunately for you guys, you simply have none. You haven't even demonstrated that you understand bbarr's position well enough to even comment on it. And all you have done is demonstrate that you lack objectivity when it concerns the consideration of contrary positions. That is painfully obvious by the way you guys have distorted his view and have brought nothing to bear on it except question-begging offerings.

So now you should have no excuse for not understanding what my statement there was implying, implicitly or otherwise. It was not implying that swatting is as good or better than alternatives. It was implying that you ought to have actual evidence against it if you are going to censure others for implementing it. Duh!

The only thing that is "sickening" in this thread is the way folks like you and ToO lack objectivity when it comes to considering views that oppose your own. You guys really ought to be ashamed of yourselves. I have no actual allegiance to the 'swatting' methods at all, and you've still managed to irritate me with your non-arguments. It's offensive to those who actually take debate seriously.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
LemonJello post 10th Nov.
"presumably, what you would need to provide is empricial evidence that shows that swatting is inferior, with respect to some appropriate rubric oriented at the child's proper care and wellbeing"

implicitly implying that "swatting" is as good or better than alternatives for the "child's proper care and wellbeing"

Perhaps you should follow the arguments better?

You already pointed this out.

I cant see where Lemonjello or Bbarr or anyone else has said that swatting is good for children, as you have implied.
It is a deterent that should be used as a last resort. It is regrettable and possibly "saddening" for both parent and child. It is not "good" in any sense of the word.

Originally posted by LemonJello
Wow, this thread is officially fubar.

Perhaps you're the one who should follow along better because my statement there "implicitly implied" no such thing.

Let me clear up your misconceptions here. If you had been following along and actually paying attention to what people are saying (instead of redescribing their statements in grotesque fashion) ...[text shortened]... your non-arguments. It's offensive to those who actually take debate seriously.

You really can't follow a train of thought can you?
That post was not in response to you.

Originally posted by LemonJello
... you would know that I already took a stance of ignorance regarding whether or not the swatting at issue is as good, better, or worse, than alternatives.

Your stance of ignorance is duly noted.

Originally posted by LemonJello
Wow, this thread is officially fubar.

Perhaps you're the one who should follow along better because my statement there "implicitly implied" no such thing.

Let me clear up your misconceptions here. If you had been following along and actually paying attention to what people are saying (instead of redescribing their statements in grotesque fashion) ...[text shortened]... your non-arguments. It's offensive to those who actually take debate seriously.

Yep, this is a waste of time.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You really can't follow a train of thought can you?
That post was not in response to you.

I know it was not in response to me, you jacka$$. It was in response to KA.

But it was concerning something I wrote, which you willfully manipulated. And I found it incredibly ironic (not to mention lame) of you to chide KA about not following the arguments, when it is obviously you who hasn't been paying attention.

Bbarr is right, you're a waste of my time.

Originally posted by LemonJello
I know it was not in response to me, you jacka$$.

Have I, at any time, insulted you or been rude?
I don't think so.
I don't think this response is appropriate in this debate.

Originally posted by LemonJello
...it was concerning something I wrote, which you willfully manipulated.

I quoted your post exactly and in context, how is that manipulation?

Originally posted by LemonJello
Bbarr is right, you're a waste of my time.

I hope neither of you waste further time on this thread.

Originally posted by bbarr
... mild child-swatting, ....

I still don't understand (yeah call me names!) what this swatting is!!!

Previously "swatting" was defined as doing no harm and causing no pain.

Can you tell me the difference between "mild child-swatting" and moderate?
What did you mean in that post as "mild" ????????

Originally posted by bbarr
Yep, this is a waste of time.

If it wasn't such an important topic, I would agree.

But as far as the discourse between the two opposing views it has been less than satisfactory.

Me and ToO have tried to convince each other of our own views, me via some real life examples , ToO via some imploring for us to have a pause and some quotes by some 90's pediatricians.
I must say that the 90's were the height of political correctness for me.(the time when ToO's quotes were written)
The clinical approach to living that was advocated by feminists, race equalizers and no nonsense,(no fun), advocates ,(including things like no corporal punishment), were at it's height.
While we do now consider women equal , we recognize the differences.
While we know that races are now considered equally legally and otherwise, there is no taking away from the past and the racist policies that were the norm in the past. (a whitey cant claim to know what an indegenous person has been through in their past...in Australia anyway).
And now that we know corporal punishment , (as is understood traditionally), is essentially wrong, the realities of the world we live ,(and mainly through children like yourself), have reminded us that we are a long way from world and local peace. There is a long way to go for most people in understanding their roles for this life.

The role of a good father and mother is to understand the needs of their children. A good parent will understand inherently that the welfare of their child is their prime responsibility .
So I think that this debate , for me anyway, is not really about swatting children or not, but of the larger picture of the greater good for their child.
Unfortunately I think that a childs fate is USUALLY LARGELY DETERMINED BY THE PARENT.
Therefor if the parent is out of whack with what is the best for their child then these biases will be passed onto their children.
Whether a parent applies occasional swatting will not be of so much consequence as the overall message that the parent is giving to their child(ren).
The fact that people like ToO get so focused on the particulars of parenting while ignoring (or even dismissing) the whole picture is regrettable.
Either he has ignored my examples or just quietly ridiculed them.

I bet your Grandma was an exceptional child raiser. I bet she swatted you out of love and that her larger parental aspect was not defined by negativity or violence but by love and nurturing.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Have I, at any time, insulted you or been rude?
I don't think so.
I don't think this response is appropriate in this debate.

Dude, why not grow a pair.

I hardly think LemonJello has been insulting you the whole time.
It seems as if he has lost his patience, and rightly so, about your constant failure to understand the rudimentry points of his and others posts.