PDA

View Full Version : Physical punishment in schools?



the_GoDdEsS
04-13-2005, 11:40 AM
Over here we got rid of it approximately in the sixties. And just till recently I thought it was a good thing not to smack kids. Also from the point of view of parents I would be against anyone but myself smacking my child.

On the other hand if you actually experience teaching there are always problems with discipline. Yelling does not help, threats to contact parents do not help, detention does not help. Kids are getting worse and worse every year. And you wouldn’t believe how extremely exhausting it is to teach just one class with a few kids who are completely out of control or being idiots. You’re furious and what’s worse, you’re helpless.

I would say yes to physical punishment if teachers were objective. But most of them aren’t, they’re only human too. Also the classroom should make kids feel safe and not full of fear.

Suggestions?

RXP
04-13-2005, 12:12 PM
I'd love to have been spanked my some of my teachers. Oh my.

But it's too far gone now, no way can we reintroduce it. If a teacher hit me I'd knock him out.

Noodles is gay
04-13-2005, 12:24 PM
I'd love to have been spanked my some of my teachers. Oh my.

hehehe...*dreams of Melvin*


Yeah, i think they should be allowed to - there's nothing worst than having to put up with unruly kids when one is just trying to teach them; it's not fair on the teacher or the other kids.

Although methinks that some other form of punishment would work well, perhaps better than hitting them...my classics teacher makes kids put a dot in EVERY single square on a piece of graph paper or listen to classical music in detentions - things like that get people in shape because it's possible to get shouted at or hit without it bothering people and hence they don't learn from it, however if one bores the kids senseless they're more likely to learn.

the_GoDdEsS
04-13-2005, 12:29 PM
Although methinks that some other form of punishment would work well, perhaps better than hitting them...my classics teacher makes kids put a dot in EVERY single square on a piece of graph paper or listen to classical music in detentions - things like that get people in shape because it's possible to get shouted at or hit without it bothering people and hence they don't learn from it, however if one bores the kids senseless they're more likely to learn.

This might work with kids. Not teenagers.

Noodles is gay
04-13-2005, 12:34 PM
This might work with kids. Not teenagers.

I dunno, i wouldn't mind the classical music one but i wouldn't be able to stand the bordom of the graph paper exercise, argh! And it'd make your eyes hurt like fuck too.

i guess that one would need to find a way to actually make the people do this kind of punishment though - ie they wouldn't work on really unruly pupils who would merely refuse to do it...i need to think this through a bit more methinks.


Prefects should get to enforce physical punishment too if teachers could http://www.zroadster.net/forum/images/smiles/smilie-devil.gif, we're not allowed to do anything to those damn disrespectful kids except give them a 'school service' (either picking up litter in playground or wiping tables in dining room :(), sucks.

dirtybird
04-13-2005, 04:52 PM
Our school has a police officer if things get TOO out of hand... but you're right, and I was thinking about that too. I'd like to smack some of my classmates for being retards sometimes.

SicN Twisted
04-13-2005, 08:29 PM
That's ridiculous. Teachers shouldn't have arbitrary authority over students. They're supposed to bestow their knowledge on students, not discipline them. I guess I'd support corperal punishment if their could be student councils to vote on whether or not it was justified, and also, could vote on applying corperal punishment to teachers for being unfair. As far as schools go, I believe in quid pro quo.

SkunkIt
04-13-2005, 09:04 PM
....listen to classical music in detentions....
If that was a punishment, i'd get in trouble on purpose.

RXP
04-13-2005, 11:10 PM
That's ridiculous. Teachers shouldn't have arbitrary authority over students. They're supposed to bestow their knowledge on students, not discipline them. .

Depends on what you think teachers roles are. Not everyone thinks like you.

SicN Twisted
04-13-2005, 11:19 PM
I'm aware. In Afganistan, teachers can flog students with bladed whips. I guess I'm a minority everywhere.

RXP
04-14-2005, 01:44 AM
Get off your high horse.

Some think that a teachers role is to disapline. Not to that extreme sense, however.

T-6005
04-14-2005, 04:35 AM
I am against violence in schools, despite seeing the behavior in class spiral out of hand, leaving the teacher enraged and helpless.

Lucky for me, my school's not too bad at all. It's usually fairly placid.

Betty
04-14-2005, 08:57 AM
I support spanking from parents, but I think it would be just too much trouble for teachers to be allowed to do it, because as you said, they're not subjective enough. And if they were allowed, I think it would only be good for really young kids (kindergarden, grade 1 ish) because that's really the only time spanking/hand slapping is effective before kids don't fear it anymore.

the_GoDdEsS
04-14-2005, 10:17 AM
I think I'm with Betty on this one. Also I'm for spanking my own kids.

Maria, I am aware of that as a consequence. It happened before and is likely to happen especially when the kids are out of school they'll have their revenge.

The idea with the cop was quite interesting. Except maybe I wouldn't make it a cop. Just some security person or someone strong they'd respect.

SicN Twisted
04-14-2005, 10:33 AM
I think any parent who spanks his kids should be smacked in the head by someone four times their size, repeatedly. Parents should earn their kids respect, not scare kids into it.

Vera
04-14-2005, 10:43 AM
I'm against any form of physical punishment, apart from maybe holding a kid still if they're done something wrong and won't settle down, just keep screaming a kicking. You've got to show authority, but abusing a child usually does nothing but makes the child afraid of you and once they grow up, this might become hostility toward you.

Then again, you raise how you were raised, in many cases. I was never physically punished. I should've been told off more than I was, I think, sometimes my parents let me get away with too much and I know I'm a bit spoiled, but I don't think raising a child requires spanking or whipping or anything of that sort. Kids need borders, rules etc and if you enforce those rules with a stern, firm tone and establish that your kid is too young to know what is right yet and they shouldn't waste their time arguing with you as ultimately you know what's best for them and you only want their best, you don't need physical punishment.

Again, I think our own childhood has taught us our opinion about these things. I was raised like I was and therefore it seems natural to me that physical punishment is wrong. Some people were taught to believe otherwise as their parents didn't think like mine. Like, I can almost hear people going, "I was spanked as a kid and I turned out fine!". See, you can say that, but the fact is you don't know how you would've turned out if you hadn't been spanked. Better? Worse? No difference at all? It's the same with me. I might've not become the worst case scenario I think about when thinking about physical punishment in families, but I just can't know, can I?

That was re: parenting.

Kids are fucking bitches, I know. This is another question of culture and society and I know that a lot of teachers in junior high have trouble with obnoxious teenagers and again, I don't think physical punishment would do a fucking thing. At least not in here. Even if it was legal, I know kids wouldn't go to the classes of a teacher who'd been known to use physical punishment. I doubt parents in the Finnish society would allow it, either. They're sending their kids to school, thinking that is a safe environment. It's not that if the teacher is allowed to slap a misbehaving student. There are other methods of punishment.

Every teacher has to have this sense of their own authority. It's fucking tough for some, but some do it brilliantly and I tip my hat for those teachers. No one fucks with them. Not even the class badasses. They just know not to.

It's a difficult issue. I just know I'm against it. As a former student, as a (probable) future parent and even a possible future teacher.

Betty
04-14-2005, 10:45 AM
My parents have a million times my respect. They have earned it, big time. So screw that. And my daddy spanked me when I was a little girl. But barely ever because I was too fearful of their wrathful eyes to be bad. If anybody so much as looked at me with a hint of dissapointment, I would want to break down in tears... such a sensitive child.

Edit: This was posted before Vera's reply. Which I agree with. And the above reply just demonstrated what she said. "You raise how you were raised". The only thing is that some were raised better than others.

the_GoDdEsS
04-14-2005, 10:47 AM
I was spanked from the age of 2 till the age of 12 because I had no respect for my parents or anyone at home as an authority and I was being slightly violent and aggressive. And they're intelligent people, they knew they had to do it with me. I'm thankful they did it. At least I have discipline now and I demand discipline from my children too.

I'm against domestic violence or beating your children up. Spanking for discipline is different as long as you don’t really harm or seriously hurt your children.

RXP
04-14-2005, 10:48 AM
I think any parent who spanks his kids should be smacked in the head by someone four times their size, repeatedly. Parents should earn their kids respect, not scare kids into it.

Bad child hood experience?

the_GoDdEsS
04-14-2005, 10:50 AM
Every teacher has to have this sense of their own authority. It's fucking tough for some, but some do it brilliantly and I tip my hat for those teachers. No one fucks with them. Not even the class badasses. They just know not to.


I know. Some manage to do that and I really admire it.

All brilliant points, Vera. Thanks!

Vera
04-14-2005, 10:53 AM
Dum di dam, just what I said.

Most of those whose parents made the choise of using physical punishment end up believing it is acceptable, sometimes even in cases of extreme. And vice versa.

So it's really difficult to discuss this. Everyone has their own perceptions and very adamantly holding onto those.

re: Teachers, though, I do not think it's right for a teacher to discipline a child. It's not in the job description. It's just not.

the_GoDdEsS
04-14-2005, 10:57 AM
I agree discipline should not be the duty of teachers. It's a problem that usually has its roots at home. Teachers are there to educate but their own students make them discipline them.

Also with the spanking. It was not the fear of getting spanked that made me respect my parents. Not at all, I was never scared of that. It was the fact that it was the only way they could demostrate they are stronger than I am and I respected that. Telling me off or actually talking to me would NOT work.

Betty
04-14-2005, 11:07 AM
I think my parents were like those teachers... that you just know not to mess with. I don't know exactly why, but somehow they managed to pull it off. Seriously, I don't remember, but my parents probably only spanked me like two or three times ever, and I'm sure I must have really deserved it at the time. But that's how it should be. Physical punishment often can't be good. But if it's something that can be used as leverage, and not as an empty thread, that the child truly does not want to have happen, it is a good way to keep them in check.

I agree Vera, it's impossible to discuss parenting. That's why it's gotta be hard when people get married and have to parent together. But you don't necessarily want to be like your parents, unless you feel it worked out for you. Some people want to be different than their parents so that their kids can have what they never did.

SicN Twisted
04-14-2005, 12:48 PM
I think the essential problem with spanking is the root of the problem with parental discipline in general. Parents use fear as a tactic to demand their child's respect, like some sort of power trip. Respect is something that's earned, not owed, and parents need to make their kids trust them as role models, not make their kids fear them as wrathful disciplinarians. This only causes children to see the parents as oppressors and end up being really rebellious.

RXP
04-14-2005, 12:53 PM
Sic, when you become a parent (if) you rant all this to me. k?

SicN Twisted
04-14-2005, 12:56 PM
I think the essential problem with spanking is the root of the problem with parental discipline in general. Parents use fear as a tactic to demand their child's respect, like some sort of power trip. Respect is something that's earned, not owed, and parents need to make their kids trust them as role models, not make their kids fear them as wrathful disciplinarians. This only causes children to see the parents as oppressors and end up being really rebellious.

RXP
04-14-2005, 12:57 PM
Holy fucking shit, your a dad?

Vera
04-14-2005, 01:00 PM
I agree with your point, Sic, but I think you're generalizing. Some parents can be sadistic bastards but others consider it a method of punishment just as harmless as telling your kid to go to his/her room. Not every case of physical punishment is an extreme one. My mum got spanked with a velvet soft toy once during her childhood. And that was the late 50's. That wasn't extreme and even though I don't approve of that, it didn't traumatize her or make her fear her father.

The fear thing really comes from the parent's personality/character more than actions. I know a friend who is still terrified of her dad even though he's never mentally or physically abused her. It's just the character who's so stern that she's afraid to step out of line.

SicN Twisted
04-14-2005, 01:04 PM
Well I think all forms of parental punishment are uncalled for. I'm a proponent of the incredibly radical belief that parents shouldn't discipline their children, because discipline usually has the opposite result then the one intended, it makes children fearful and rebellious, not respectful. I think young children act out of line as a natural faze that goes with finding one's identity, and they'll only truly grow out if it if they're allowed to get through the faze uninterupted.

You're right about the fear thing, and I think it's the biggest problem with parenting. Some parents, whether or not they physically abuse their children, act incredibly imposing and authoritarian in order to control their children, and it only ends up making their kids hate them.

Vera
04-14-2005, 01:25 PM
Kids need boundaries. Kids have to be told what not to and what they can do. Children of a very young age need that simply because they can't decide on their own, they don't know how to handle situations without parental control. Children also need boundaries and rules just for their own protection.

And the way a child learns what is right and what is wrong is sometimes through discipline. I don't know if you're radical enough to support that a parent shouldn't say "No" to a child.

I can't help but thinking there's something behind why you think like this. Because, you see, not all kids turn out rebellious. And a certain level of rebellion is only normal - it's a part of a kid developing an identity so they can grow up and fly out of their nest.

Noodles is gay
04-14-2005, 02:32 PM
Some parents can be sadistic bastards but others consider it a method of punishment just as harmless as telling your kid to go to his/her room. Not every case of physical punishment is an extreme one.

you reminded me; my parents used to hit me and my brother with a wooden spoon...:( owwww. Also my dad's slipper if we hadn't done anything quite bad enough for the spoon. God that hurt.

we didn't even do anything particularly wrong; maybe forgot to close the cupboard that the TV is kept in [stupid i know!] or ate in any room other than the kitchen...damn them.

Skate Rat 19
04-14-2005, 02:59 PM
I voted yes just so I could fight my teachers with rulers and yard sticks n stuff

Amanda
04-14-2005, 03:24 PM
I understand Sim's point of view, but i can't approve of physical punishment in schools. I mean, i get what a pain it can be for teachers who just wanna do their jobs,to have to put up with certain dumbasses who have no interest in learning and no respect for those who do. I myself have, plenty of times, felt the urge to stand up and slap the hell out of certain pricks in my classroom. But putting myself in the position of the parents, i'd never feel comfortable knowing that some stranger has been given the power to phisically hurt my child, without even being questioned about it. It just seems too dangerous, and impossible to control. Specially if were talking about small children. My sister was punished like that in her school, back in kindengarden. They'd slap a ruler against the kids who wouldn't behave or broke the rules. She used to have nightmares and wake up crying because she didnt wanna go to school. When my mom found out she was really pissed, said that they'd abused her daughter. She eventually got taken out of that school and moved to another one, but for years she didnt wanna go to school again, she'd be afraid of other adults and my mom had to hire a shrink. All that, just because some woman couldnt find a better way to get the kids to shut up? No, im against it. The humiliation and emotional scarring is too high a price to be payed.

The Goth Guy
04-14-2005, 03:42 PM
If by punishment you mean ass slapping and hardcore sex then yes.There are so many teachers having sex with students,students having sex with students,its insane,fuckin every damn day ya see something new about a 47 year old english teacher having sex with a 8 year old,OH WAIT that was Michael Jackson sorry wrong story,but on the other hand that does happen constantly.Im just waiting ti'll the day I see on the news "Teacher tries to have sex with student and student stabs her" now that would be a smart kid,cause i mean nobody wants old lady pussy -shivers-.

Betty
04-14-2005, 03:45 PM
Sic, I agree with RXP on this one...

When you're a dad, and your child is running wild and free destroying your house and killing people because he/she doesn't know any better, you can restate your opinion on child discipline.

I think this is an extreme example of you being in your dream world again.

Do you think parents should raise kids? Provide shelter and food and clothing for them? Because as soon as you're living with someone, there needs to be rules. People can't just get along with everybody doing whatever the hell they want. Take for example housework. Honestly, the most of my discipline as a child and teenager has had to do with housework. To have a functional household, people need to pitch in. Now, maybe you don't care if you live in chaos, but I like there to be a certain degree of cleanliness... it's only sanitary my god. I don't think parents should be the only ones responsible for this, especially if kids make messes purposely constantly. So you tell the kid to clean up his mess? What if he doesn't do it? You just don't care? What if your child hits you? You just don't care? I'm not going to sacrifice my well being so that my child can have "ultimate freedom". It's not even necessarily that you're disciplining the kid for his own good, it can simply be so that you can function together as a household, and they are too young to understand the importance of that.

nieh
04-14-2005, 03:54 PM
The purpose of a teacher is to prepare you for the real world. If you won't shut the hell up and you ruin their ability to prepare you as well as the rest of your class, they should have every right to smack you. That being said, there's too many teachers in the world that are just stupid and bitter and who don't genuinely care about where you end up. So if they revamp the school system so only decent teachers get the jobs, then I'd be all for it. Until then, it's not a good idea.

SicN Twisted
04-14-2005, 09:04 PM
I'm very much radical enough to believe that a parent shouldn't say no to a child, short of a five year old running onto the highway or a young child who would do something drastic and destructive. When it comes to trivial things, I don't think parents should have any authority. I don't think kids learn anything through discipline except how to be complacent and empty. Parents use of discipline hinders a child developement and causes them never to rely on their parents insight, rather only to submit to the parent's authority. Also, Vera, I don't agree with you that it's a parent's duty to teach children right and wrong, since certain parents may view right and wrong completely differently then another set of parents. Right and wrong is totally subjective, and is something a child should develope naturally, haven't we learned by now that certain ethics shouldn't be forced on anyone? "Because I said so" is a horrible path to go on - blind adherence to authority is not a good trait to develope. Plus, kids need to learn from their mistakes first hand, so they no to think not to do things, they shouldn't just divide things into what they're allowed to do and what they aren't, then they'll never develope their own perceptions.

Nieh, bullshit it's a teachers role to prepare students for the real world. It's a teacher's role to teach students the subject of their expertise, school isn't a fucking convent. The real world is what should prepare kids for the real world, teachers can't possibly do it right. Teachers practicing discipline will only cause students to lose confidence and lose interest in their studies because they'll view the lessons as forced. Students should be able to follow their desires, not those of their elders.

For further elaboration on my views, check out the work of A.S Neill, namely "Summerhill." Summerhill is a boarding school in the UK founded on the principle of free and completely democratic education in the hands of the students, where rules are decided through votes, class is not compulsory, and children can pursue their studies freely. The headmaster wrote a book about it explaining his radical approach to child rearing that influenced me greatly.

EDIT - Betty, of course their should be rules, but they shouldn't be the arbitrary desisions of parents, cause why are parents fit to impose their rules? Rules should be decided mutually. Also, destructive phazes are natural for young children. Freud revealed that when growing boys and girls physically destroy things, it's a phase, they're simply exploring their abilities. I believe this phase should go un-obstructed, then the kids will eventually grow out of it. If the parents kindly tell their kids "please don't do that" but don't discipline them, once the phase is finished the kids will emerge unscarred by the humiliation of punishment.

sebaspunk
04-14-2005, 09:58 PM
Ill go against that kind of punishment
because in my high school the teachers used a lot with the students and of course i got hit several times by prepotent teachers and thats fuck up they used to hit us just because we didn't cut our hair
and my hair didn't reach my eyes
they used to hit us with this electric light cable and it leave a mark for about 4 weeks
Also the students were afraid to talk with the teachers to ask them for some kind of help with their grades or somethings like that
And the fucked up thing here is that it was a catholic highschool but the teachers had this military trauma and if they were not pleased with just hitting us the motherfuckers made us run for about 5 hours and then they showered us with cold water I don't agree with this kind of punishment it's just so fucked up :mad: :mad:

Vera
04-15-2005, 02:37 AM
I saw a programme on TV once. There was this family where a three-year-old was running the show, totally uncontrolled and often just hysterical, wouldn't eat his dinner, would turn off the TV if one of his siblings were trying to watch it, wouldn't get dressed, wouldn't go to bed on time... He was just a little tyrant and it would be a job that would take hours and hours to calm him down.

This is what I mean about setting boundaries and rules for a child. A child shouldn't be underestimated but the simple psychological fact is that a 3 yo can't decide on their own, what is good for them and what they want. The problem with the kid on TV, called Charlie, was that he was given too many options by his mother. He was confused by the amount of choices and ended up being frustrated.

Children require routines. They can't be allowed endless amounts of freedom simply because they don't know how to operate in the situation. They don't have the knowledge yet. If you give your child the freedom to choose their own dinner, will they choose to eat lasagne or a Mars bar? Probably the latter. So then you try to advice them to eat the lasagne. Decide these things together with them. You try to explain a 5 year old nutritional facts, how the Mars bar isn't going to make him grow up big and healthy. Your kid probably won't care and will go for the Mars bar. Have trouble sleeping, wake up tired and moody the next day, slowly become overweight, hyperactive, a complete pain in the arse...

It seems to me like you're looking at this very black-and-white. There's not Raising Your Kid with Discipline versus Raising Your Kid with Freedom and Love. There are things in between. There are multiple fantastic methods. It's not about "submitting to a parent's authority". It's about living in a family. The parents don't have absolute freedom, either. That's not why they're setting up the rules. The rules will ultimately benefit the child. It doesn't feel fair to the kid that he can't have that Mars bar but maybe if he eats his lasagne, he can have it as a dessert. That will probably sound agreeable to the child. All well ends well.

Your theory might work with teenagers. I'd want to discuss things with my teenage children instead of just saying "You will be home every night at 9pm and that's that of that! End of discussion!". Teenagers, if rationed, are usually wise enough to agree to a reasonable compromise.

I'm not speaking about moral as in "killing is wrong / abortion is wrong / religion is good". I'm talking about why you shouldn't shove a nail in a plug socket or climb onto the top book shelf. I'm talking about moral as in "what to do and what not to do". Things that aren't safe, things that are safe and just simple things that are nice, like saying thank you when leaving the table or helping mum with the dishes.

Moral is often influenced by parents whether they try to or not. Society's a big factor, as well. All people, who communicate with a child throughout his/her growing stages, are. And if moral is subjective (because I do not want to say anything about that, it's an extremely difficult argument), I don't think it can be taught to a child because ultimately the child lives in a different world than the one you lived a child and will see it differently than you.

SicN Twisted
04-15-2005, 02:49 AM
When I say children, I'm generally not talking about toddlers. Seven is the age of reason, so for semantics sake, let's limit this discussion to seven plus. A three year old barely knows how to walk, I don't think it would be reasonable that a three year old plays a part of setting up family rules. Children, who walk, talk, attend school, but don't fuck, do drugs, or cheat on math tests are the age group in question at the moment. This is the age where children really need to discover their self identity, and I think it's a bit ridiculous to blindly impose rules on them. You tell your kid that if he stays up all night, he'll feel like shit the next day, so please, take it from me, go to bed early. The kid will probably stay up all night for awhile, but after day in and day out of feeling like shit, "listen to daddy" will become part of the game plan. If the parent says "Go to bed on time or else," the child will probably be bewildered, stay up out of rebellion, and continue doing so in order not to appease the mean, tyranical daddy figure. Children really need to trust their parents. My dad and I always had mutual trust, wheras my mom was always power tripping. Now my dad's the only living human being who can get me out of trouble, besides Mags of course. My best friends could tell me something's a stupid idea and I'll do it anyway, but if my dad tells me so, I'll listen to him because he always dealt with me on a human level and explained his reasoning rather then forced it on me. Of course we can't take our views on child rearing example by example, but you get what I mean, right?

Vera
04-15-2005, 03:01 AM
I do. And I agree to a certain level.

Betty
04-15-2005, 09:50 AM
Sic, you still never addressed my concern (as per usual) regarding living together with the child. If you didn't force the child to do anything, and he/she was a total slob and left toys everywhere, bikes in the driveway, food rotting under furniture, garbage not in the garbage, how could you live with that? If the kid routinely physically abused his parents, how could you live with that? If the kid blasted music at 4AM, how could you live with that if you have to get up at 6 to work? You MUST impose rules to LIVE TOGETHER. That is the absolute most basic set of rules. The kid does not understand the responsibility of taking care of a household, so must be disciplined to understand.

Regarding things like watching porn on TV, staying out late, hanging around with such and such friends, eating such and such unhealthy food, maybe the parents don't have to discipline the kids. I don't know how that would turn out and how fucked up they might end up... 7 is still pretty young to think for yourself regarding such things.

The fact of the matter is that you're trying to help the child "discover his own sense of right and wrong", etc. but the way that they discover that is through influences in the world. There are rules and discipline everywhere. There is law and police to keep them in check. There are teachers at schools. There are peers. Why can the parents not play a role, but all these other factors can? Granted the parents play the biggest role, but that is only because they spend the most time with them. As soon as kids start going to school, it pretty much gets split up between schools and parents and peers.

Also, I think you're very much speaking from your own experiences (as Vera said!). Children don't necessarily want to rebel against their parent's discipline. Like, Vera said, you're being too black and white about it. You can still discipline your child while being rational and fair about it, and involving your child in the decision to come to COMPROMISES.

I was barely disciplined as a child. I never got sent to my room. Never was grounded. Nothing. The only thing I'd get was the occasional yelling at or sometimes the "family talk". This involved "Okay kids, your father and I work very hard and we just cannot do it all by ourselves. You have to start helping out more around the house. Etc, etc." I guess we had some rules, but generally we were never disciplined because they were followed willingly. Most of the time the rules weren't irrational. My parents treated us maturely. We had jobs at a young age to develop responsibility, not unwillingly. I was allowed to drink with the grownups after about age 15. Even the kids are allowed to have a few drinks with the grownups, and they are maybe 12. We were allowed to stay out to a reasonable hour, and could compromise for an even later hour if it was deemed a good occasion. If I ever did something my parents wouldn't approve of, they just never found out about it and it worked out beautifully. (e.g. sneaking older boys into my room in the middle of the night, drug-related activities, etc.)

Anyway, the moral is you can impose rules while not being a "tyrant". And I'd like to think this benefits the child. I think I turned out great (sure everybody might think that about themselve, but I have a superiority complex and think that I am correct) and I attribute a lot of that to how I was raised. Some of my strongest beliefs or nonbeliefs (religious, political, etc.) don't really have anything to do with my parents.

Jimbob2005
04-15-2005, 01:57 PM
Only the year 10 scallies and chavs need it - some do need a fucking slap they think they are so hard and big by calling my sister a chink and disru[ting lessons consequently affecting her science grade (and possibly everyone else's)

Jimbob2005
04-15-2005, 02:04 PM
When I say children, I'm generally not talking about toddlers. Seven is the age of reason, so for semantics sake, let's limit this discussion to seven plus. A three year old barely knows how to walk, I don't think it would be reasonable that a three year old plays a part of setting up family rules. Children, who walk, talk, attend school, but don't fuck, do drugs, or cheat on math tests are the age group in question at the moment. This is the age where children really need to discover their self identity, and I think it's a bit ridiculous to blindly impose rules on them. You tell your kid that if he stays up all night, he'll feel like shit the next day, so please, take it from me, go to bed early. The kid will probably stay up all night for awhile, but after day in and day out of feeling like shit, "listen to daddy" will become part of the game plan. If the parent says "Go to bed on time or else," the child will probably be bewildered, stay up out of rebellion, and continue doing so in order not to appease the mean, tyranical daddy figure. Children really need to trust their parents. My dad and I always had mutual trust, wheras my mom was always power tripping. Now my dad's the only living human being who can get me out of trouble, besides Mags of course. My best friends could tell me something's a stupid idea and I'll do it anyway, but if my dad tells me so, I'll listen to him because he always dealt with me on a human level and explained his reasoning rather then forced it on me. Of course we can't take our views on child rearing example by example, but you get what I mean, right?
Smart guy - good points - my dad was too strict when i was young. He kept me from watching films and getting out cos i was insane, and consequently, I am not very smart socially, in terms of common sense and other stuff everyday people know or have heard of from famous people (e.g. "have you ever heard this band before? No? You are soooo sad", although it is related to all that teeny bopper crap) - I learned sexual education the difficult way (e.g. "you dont know what a 69-ner is hahaha") and as a rsult of that my high school life (and in fact most of it) was pretty shit. My dad still smacked me when I started high school when I was 11. I think it is OK to smack young children if they badly misbehave, and should be brought back to schools - see the year 10s at my school? Hard-nut retards, the lot of them, or scallies who will get pregnant in the next few months. However, even though I have so much going for me, I never thank my dad for it, only myself - I don't hate my dad, he isnt evil, but could have been a better father, and I never thank him for how he brought me up. I do hate him from keeping me from social and entertaining parts of life, for being such a PRICK in my upbringing, and that really gets to me.

Vera
04-17-2005, 05:43 AM
...

Wow, you seriously lost it, didn't you?

Vera
04-17-2005, 09:17 AM
Baaaaaaaaatshit.

Milk-Man
04-18-2005, 02:12 PM
I voted "Yes" because if a teacher had ever hit me, that'll be the last of his
physicality, I'd then save his corpes for the high school immunity. I mean
graduation. I mean, to show the instituionalist what sort of masscare I'v
caused.