Poll: If you were spanked as a child, do you think it made you a better person?
- Thread starter Nyaliva
- Start date
I wasnt often spanked, my parents are very patient (i learned from them), everytime, i was spanked, i earned it and understood why it was necessary, because i acted so, that there was no other way, to bring me to correct thinking.
Best thing my father EVER did for me was give me a spank when I misbehaved. It taught me there are consequences to my actions. Anyone that thinks its wrong is an idiot, heck even animals will disipline their cubs, and its no wonder there are so many kids out of control that never learned how to behave.Nyaliva said:
...Wait what?Blitzwing said:
Seriously, you have no responsibility to prove your side where as we have all of it? So what, you're automatically right until we can provide evidence? That's extremely egotist and a MAJOR dick move. And besides, there's more circumstantial evidence to support our side than yours so if the burden lies with anyone it should lie with the rebuttal, YOU have to prove that it IS only circumstantial. Oh wait, I forgot, you're the amazing statistics guy so you know how this whole thing works so we should just do what you say. You know what? Let's just forget this whole debate and agree with you, you do, after all, have statistics. Then we might as well worship you and your powers of secondary knowledge.
No seriously, just stop being a statistical jerk.
One of the things that I am seeing reoccur is the word "beaten". This bothers me because it implies that the parents were angry when disciplining their child and used unnecessary force. I may be wrong, but I often work with children and teens who have been abused and this word is a key one that we look for in spotting abusive behavior.
That being said, I was spanked as a child. It was a very formal discipline with a clear routine. After being caught in whatever infraction I was sent to my parents room. A little while later my mother or father would come in and have me explain to them why I was being punished. After this I was then spanked. We then talked about how to avoid committing the infraction in the future.
Consistent discipline like this is key to raising children who are not little hellions. It also prevents abuse and helps establish a respect for authority and command structure, which pays off big time in the work force.
So, does spanking make you a better person? Maybe. But I think the better phrase would be "Consistent discipline" made me a better person.
That being said, I was spanked as a child. It was a very formal discipline with a clear routine. After being caught in whatever infraction I was sent to my parents room. A little while later my mother or father would come in and have me explain to them why I was being punished. After this I was then spanked. We then talked about how to avoid committing the infraction in the future.
Consistent discipline like this is key to raising children who are not little hellions. It also prevents abuse and helps establish a respect for authority and command structure, which pays off big time in the work force.
So, does spanking make you a better person? Maybe. But I think the better phrase would be "Consistent discipline" made me a better person.
I've seen this from more than one person here:
"Spanking clearly increases the propensity for violence, since people who were spanked are far more likely (than those who weren't) to be in favor of spanking themselves."
This is a circular argument! Let's see if I can come up with a similar one:
"Playing violent video games clearly increases the propensity for violence, since people who play violent video games are far more likely (than those who don't) to approve of letting their children play violent video games."
What is that, "begging the question"? You're already assuming that spanking equals violence, whereas those of us on the opposite side of the fence are not assuming this fact. If we can't come to an agreement of terms, this discussion becomes inherently nonsensical and meaningless.
I think the "promotes violent behavior" thing could be answered by getting some proper statistical data, thusly:
Survey a large cross-section of the adults in the U.S. and divide it into those who were given physical punishment and those who weren't. Divide the physical into "merely swatted, spanked, or occasionally slapped" and "beaten or abused". Divide the non-physical into "permissive parenting" and "strict parenting".
Determine, compared to the national average, where the stats fall on the frequency of violent acts and the severity of violent acts. By which I mean those punishable by law, and not including swats/spanks/slaps to own children (in locations where even that is punishable by law).
I really don't think these numbers are available to us, because the very act of trying to gather this data presupposes certain definitions (such as "spanking gets lumped in with beating") that undermine the usefulness of the data. I've never seen a survey of physical discipline that was meaningful in this way.
"Spanking clearly increases the propensity for violence, since people who were spanked are far more likely (than those who weren't) to be in favor of spanking themselves."
This is a circular argument! Let's see if I can come up with a similar one:
"Playing violent video games clearly increases the propensity for violence, since people who play violent video games are far more likely (than those who don't) to approve of letting their children play violent video games."
What is that, "begging the question"? You're already assuming that spanking equals violence, whereas those of us on the opposite side of the fence are not assuming this fact. If we can't come to an agreement of terms, this discussion becomes inherently nonsensical and meaningless.
I think the "promotes violent behavior" thing could be answered by getting some proper statistical data, thusly:
Survey a large cross-section of the adults in the U.S. and divide it into those who were given physical punishment and those who weren't. Divide the physical into "merely swatted, spanked, or occasionally slapped" and "beaten or abused". Divide the non-physical into "permissive parenting" and "strict parenting".
Determine, compared to the national average, where the stats fall on the frequency of violent acts and the severity of violent acts. By which I mean those punishable by law, and not including swats/spanks/slaps to own children (in locations where even that is punishable by law).
I really don't think these numbers are available to us, because the very act of trying to gather this data presupposes certain definitions (such as "spanking gets lumped in with beating") that undermine the usefulness of the data. I've never seen a survey of physical discipline that was meaningful in this way.
I was still smacked as a teenager occasionally, when I went really far out of line, and I would never think of raising a hand against either of my parents (well, maybe slapping my dad when he makes a -really- horrible pun, but not hard or anything). Because my parents taught me respect as I was growing up, both when disciplining me and just in general. And no, it is not always done by angry parents who don't know how to parent or whatever you were saying. My dad would -always- make sure he wasn't angry anymore before smacking any of us.AndyFromMonday said:
I remember every punishment I ever got, especially the spankings. I remember every deed that I did to earn said spankings. I don't do those things anymore because I was spanked. I associated "doing bad things" with "discomfort and embarrassment." Simple as that. Every punishment I've ever received was fair, even if it didn't seem so at the time.
Now, my parents never beat me. They never raised their hands against me in anger (save for once with my father, but I was fully grown by that time, over the age of 18). I can understand that there are people who are not capable of punishing their child rationally and evenhandedly. These people need to not be parents and, if they become parents, need to have the children removed from their care as soon as is feasible. As one of my friends pointed out to me (he was a foster child): "The foster system sucks. But a mother with a bottle in one fist and the other raised to backhand you for crying too loudly is worse."
Now, my parents never beat me. They never raised their hands against me in anger (save for once with my father, but I was fully grown by that time, over the age of 18). I can understand that there are people who are not capable of punishing their child rationally and evenhandedly. These people need to not be parents and, if they become parents, need to have the children removed from their care as soon as is feasible. As one of my friends pointed out to me (he was a foster child): "The foster system sucks. But a mother with a bottle in one fist and the other raised to backhand you for crying too loudly is worse."
Okay well, we?ve had 1010 responses and if anyone knows what this poll was born out of, they?d know 1000 is all I asked for. I will now be presenting the findings of the study. Firstly, the statistical analysis:
I?ve broken down the poll into two groups, spanked and not spanked. These results are correct as at the time of writing. Of the 747 who were spanked, 520 felt it benefited there learning and helped them become better people, giving a 70% support from those who were spanked, beating the 30% opposition.
Two other interesting facts popped up from this survey:
74% of people polled were spanked as a kid and;
210 people who weren?t spanked as kids do not approve, 4 times as many as those who weren?t and do.
What do these statistics show?
Bugger all really considering the group size and type of people polled. But if the people polled were the only people in existence, the majority of people who were spanked understand what their parents did and support their decision (But then the people who made the poll possible wouldn?t exist so the poll couldn?t exist and then the people who spanked the people who were polled wouldn?t exist and so no one would have been spanked or even have been given birth to?).
The reason I divided people up into spanked and not spanked was for two reasons:
Firstly, because the only people who really get a say in this type of debate are those who?ve experienced it firsthand (your psychological tests are actually included here because it takes into account actual people?s states rather than assumes what?s best for them). Judging by the results, as well as taking into account comments, the majority of people who were spanked believe it taught them right from wrong and they believe it is an effective method to deal with young children. However, many people who were spanked still don?t support it. Judging from the comments, most of these people were actually abused, rather than just spanked. Many people contest that the two are one and the same but we?ve had many definitions of the two and many who contest they are the same make very general definitions, opening the door to whatever they want, but then the people who oppose this provide very narrow definitions, ensuring that spanking is kept apart from abuse. For the purposes of this study, I?ll have to go with the latter group as many people who agree to being spanked described it as being hit on the bottom during times of extreme childish behaviour (whether it was with objects or just a hand differs between people), while many who disagree with spanking describe theirs as being beaten on a regular basis, hit in various places where bruises were left and even going so far as having broken arms. Then there were a small group who were spanked normally and had harboured resentment towards their parents for it or developed emotional problems because of regular spanking. This shows that spanking, when done merely as a method of teaching younger children right from wrong by a short sharp slap on the bum, mostly has positive effects and rarely causes mental trauma. This in fact contests psychological tests which say the exact opposite which forces me to ask the following:
What age groups did they test?
What methods were tested?
How long did the tests run?
What was the control?
What non-spanking methods were tested?
How exactly did they rate?
What types of children did they test (gender, race, etc.)?
But I digress. For those who say that violence begets violence, those who said yes are proof this is false however, I do believe this statement, I simply don?t believe spanking falls into this category, nor do many of those who were spanked, and they can even show how non-violent they are to prove that it?s false. It only seems to be people weren?t spanked who believe spanking is violence, which brings me to my next point.
The second reason I divided the people is to see how many people who weren?t spanked believe it?s wrong. A few people picked up on the trend along the way which was that most people who weren?t spanked don?t believe in it. This can be divided into two groups: people who know they were brought up fine without spanking and so know it is unnecessary and those who believe it is wrong because it seems so traumatising and the psychological societies say so. To the former: kudos to your parents. If you can raise your children without resorting to spanking as your parents did then perhaps we could make it unnecessary rather than just frowning upon it. To the latter, anyone who said yes will tell you it?s not that bad and it can actually be beneficial. Don?t believe everything various groups of scientists tell you, however, if you are undecided on the issue they can be a good guide. For the love of your children don?t yell and scream at others about how smacking their children is immoral and stupid because your kid could very well be pulling down shelves behind you. What I?m saying is, parenting is hard, different people have different methods, some smack, others simply scold, others do nothing. Better to be one of the former two than the latter, no?
Here?s my final word, spanking is an effective disciplinary method, it teaches younger children in an easily understandable, immediate way. Some children don?t need this kind of punishment, they just need a good scold or a disappointing nod for them to realise right from wrong. Spanking is not intended to be violence, it?s a way to teach children consequences, not that violence is the answer. For this reason, a smack should not be used for trivial things such as a child whining that he wants his toy out of the car while you?re at the shops. In these sorts of situations, you must reason first, then use any other tactic to get the child to be quiet. Never get angry, get stern. If you must spank, ensure they are warned it is coming and be sure to explain why you did it. When they finally do what you want reward them but stay stern. And always, ALWAYS, I mean every day, let them know you love them. The age at which spanking should end is determined by the parent, however it should be somewhere around the time they start to understand things better so you can use different methods such as grounding or removal of privileges. Finally, parenting is hard so keep calm and never handle your child?s mental state rashly, it is fragile but it CAN survive a smack or two.
Now, about the state of society, I don?t think spanking will have a magical effect on the state of the world but we do need harsher punishments for minors. People argue that they?re still learning and don?t know what they?re doing but most of the time they do and even if not, they need to be taught what they should do. But that?s a topic for another day?
Well, that concludes my major involvement in this poll. This study is by no means concluded (or legitimate for that matter so why does anyone care?) but the trend has been pretty consistent so it should remain so. I will check back intermittently so if it changes, I?ll correct my findings. However, I hope everyone?s learned something, mostly that spanking can work and has for many years but it can go VERY wrong so always try other methods first and save spanking for extreme cases, if used at all. If there?s one thing we can agree on it?s that children need SOME form of discipline, whether it?s spanking or otherwise, just ensure that there IS discipline. For the love of society, PLEASE ensure there?s discipline?
I?ve broken down the poll into two groups, spanked and not spanked. These results are correct as at the time of writing. Of the 747 who were spanked, 520 felt it benefited there learning and helped them become better people, giving a 70% support from those who were spanked, beating the 30% opposition.
Two other interesting facts popped up from this survey:
74% of people polled were spanked as a kid and;
210 people who weren?t spanked as kids do not approve, 4 times as many as those who weren?t and do.
What do these statistics show?
Bugger all really considering the group size and type of people polled. But if the people polled were the only people in existence, the majority of people who were spanked understand what their parents did and support their decision (But then the people who made the poll possible wouldn?t exist so the poll couldn?t exist and then the people who spanked the people who were polled wouldn?t exist and so no one would have been spanked or even have been given birth to?).
The reason I divided people up into spanked and not spanked was for two reasons:
Firstly, because the only people who really get a say in this type of debate are those who?ve experienced it firsthand (your psychological tests are actually included here because it takes into account actual people?s states rather than assumes what?s best for them). Judging by the results, as well as taking into account comments, the majority of people who were spanked believe it taught them right from wrong and they believe it is an effective method to deal with young children. However, many people who were spanked still don?t support it. Judging from the comments, most of these people were actually abused, rather than just spanked. Many people contest that the two are one and the same but we?ve had many definitions of the two and many who contest they are the same make very general definitions, opening the door to whatever they want, but then the people who oppose this provide very narrow definitions, ensuring that spanking is kept apart from abuse. For the purposes of this study, I?ll have to go with the latter group as many people who agree to being spanked described it as being hit on the bottom during times of extreme childish behaviour (whether it was with objects or just a hand differs between people), while many who disagree with spanking describe theirs as being beaten on a regular basis, hit in various places where bruises were left and even going so far as having broken arms. Then there were a small group who were spanked normally and had harboured resentment towards their parents for it or developed emotional problems because of regular spanking. This shows that spanking, when done merely as a method of teaching younger children right from wrong by a short sharp slap on the bum, mostly has positive effects and rarely causes mental trauma. This in fact contests psychological tests which say the exact opposite which forces me to ask the following:
What age groups did they test?
What methods were tested?
How long did the tests run?
What was the control?
What non-spanking methods were tested?
How exactly did they rate?
What types of children did they test (gender, race, etc.)?
But I digress. For those who say that violence begets violence, those who said yes are proof this is false however, I do believe this statement, I simply don?t believe spanking falls into this category, nor do many of those who were spanked, and they can even show how non-violent they are to prove that it?s false. It only seems to be people weren?t spanked who believe spanking is violence, which brings me to my next point.
The second reason I divided the people is to see how many people who weren?t spanked believe it?s wrong. A few people picked up on the trend along the way which was that most people who weren?t spanked don?t believe in it. This can be divided into two groups: people who know they were brought up fine without spanking and so know it is unnecessary and those who believe it is wrong because it seems so traumatising and the psychological societies say so. To the former: kudos to your parents. If you can raise your children without resorting to spanking as your parents did then perhaps we could make it unnecessary rather than just frowning upon it. To the latter, anyone who said yes will tell you it?s not that bad and it can actually be beneficial. Don?t believe everything various groups of scientists tell you, however, if you are undecided on the issue they can be a good guide. For the love of your children don?t yell and scream at others about how smacking their children is immoral and stupid because your kid could very well be pulling down shelves behind you. What I?m saying is, parenting is hard, different people have different methods, some smack, others simply scold, others do nothing. Better to be one of the former two than the latter, no?
Here?s my final word, spanking is an effective disciplinary method, it teaches younger children in an easily understandable, immediate way. Some children don?t need this kind of punishment, they just need a good scold or a disappointing nod for them to realise right from wrong. Spanking is not intended to be violence, it?s a way to teach children consequences, not that violence is the answer. For this reason, a smack should not be used for trivial things such as a child whining that he wants his toy out of the car while you?re at the shops. In these sorts of situations, you must reason first, then use any other tactic to get the child to be quiet. Never get angry, get stern. If you must spank, ensure they are warned it is coming and be sure to explain why you did it. When they finally do what you want reward them but stay stern. And always, ALWAYS, I mean every day, let them know you love them. The age at which spanking should end is determined by the parent, however it should be somewhere around the time they start to understand things better so you can use different methods such as grounding or removal of privileges. Finally, parenting is hard so keep calm and never handle your child?s mental state rashly, it is fragile but it CAN survive a smack or two.
Now, about the state of society, I don?t think spanking will have a magical effect on the state of the world but we do need harsher punishments for minors. People argue that they?re still learning and don?t know what they?re doing but most of the time they do and even if not, they need to be taught what they should do. But that?s a topic for another day?
Well, that concludes my major involvement in this poll. This study is by no means concluded (or legitimate for that matter so why does anyone care?) but the trend has been pretty consistent so it should remain so. I will check back intermittently so if it changes, I?ll correct my findings. However, I hope everyone?s learned something, mostly that spanking can work and has for many years but it can go VERY wrong so always try other methods first and save spanking for extreme cases, if used at all. If there?s one thing we can agree on it?s that children need SOME form of discipline, whether it?s spanking or otherwise, just ensure that there IS discipline. For the love of society, PLEASE ensure there?s discipline?
No, i was never really hit but my dad would get angry and stern, that was all i needed.
See if you hit kids, they just fear you.
Sitting them down and making them feel like shit works much better, they learn to respect you.
From personal experience hitting just makes the kid that much worse off.
I had a group of friends going up, two of them had parents who would hit them.
They were also the two of the most violent people I've ever met. One is in prison, the other is a fuck up. Hitting didn't do them any good.
See if you hit kids, they just fear you.
Sitting them down and making them feel like shit works much better, they learn to respect you.
From personal experience hitting just makes the kid that much worse off.
I had a group of friends going up, two of them had parents who would hit them.
They were also the two of the most violent people I've ever met. One is in prison, the other is a fuck up. Hitting didn't do them any good.
I wish I had said it as well, good sir. And from the research I've done, I'd say consistent, non-abusive spankings don't seem to cause psychological harm.alandavidson said:
[That being said, my books are all at home in America...so I can't quote them here...so feel free to not believe a word I say as I haven't properly backed up my case.]
I would ask those people who thought they weren't spanked to check with their parents. Most children of our age were spanked and the chance of remembering it is tiny. I have no memory of being spanked and only know that I was occasionally because my parents have told me so.
While correlation doesn't equal causation, I have grown up to be what I consider a good and moral person and I was spanked, this suggests a relation between the two.
While correlation doesn't equal causation, I have grown up to be what I consider a good and moral person and I was spanked, this suggests a relation between the two.
Oh, I'm so terribly sorry. I should never have dared think that I could possibly know myself, let alone my father, better than you do. It's so clear to me now, you're so right! Obviously every family is the same as your own, and no one can have any different experiences than yours. I had to be just kidding myself up to this point, how could I have classified a single slap to the back of my leg as anything other than an abusive father taking his rage out on his child?AndyFromMonday said: