Texas Judge Beats Daughter with Belt

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:
Of for crying out loud, I never said that. Jeesus.[/quote]

Kinda like you never sent me those nudie photos, huh?[/quote]

Fucking cheap shot there, chief.[/quote]

You have no idea what you’re talking about. Time to crash some other party.[/quote]

Nah I read some of the drama, but never mind that then.

Let’s talk about hitting children instead. I mean as a style of instruction, nothing compares to some good old humiliation and pain, am I right? Why not bring back the cane to classrooms while we’re at it, get those kids behaving again. The whole notion of corporal punishment is archaic and outdated, and so is swatting your dog with a newspaper and “rubbing his nose in it” for that matter. There are better ways.

Thank you push. I firmly believe if spanking is done correctly you shouldn’t even have to do it more than a handful of times. The threat of getting spanked should suffice.

This is something I’ve been wondering awhile, and as I’m not a parent I have no idea what the answer is: is it possible to raise a child in such a way that physical discipline will never be necessary? Can you make them rational enough that you can explain what they did wrong and that they should never do it again? Don’t get me wrong, I took my whoopin’s, and in retrospect I’m glad that I did. At the same time I think every child is different and that some are more sensitive to those things than others. Fathers and mothers, help me out here.

[quote]Ambugaton wrote:
This is something I’ve been wondering awhile, and as I’m not a parent I have no idea what the answer is: is it possible to raise a child in such a way that physical discipline will never be necessary? Can you make them rational enough that you can explain what they did wrong and that they should never do it again? Don’t get me wrong, I took my whoopin’s, and in retrospect I’m glad that I did. At the same time I think every child is different and that some are more sensitive to those things than others. Fathers and mothers, help me out here.[/quote]

I am a father, although our daughter is still very young (2) and I also do some volunteering with kids (not at all the same as parenting but still somewhat relevant). Regarding “making” children rational, children (and most adults) are inherently irrational beings IMO, so while explaining the reasoning behind consequences etc. is essential, I believe that some system of reward and punishment will always be necessary. Logical discourse just won’t get it done.

Whether corporal punishment is necessary or even productive, I don’t know (although I am inclined against it myself). However one does need some way of creating “pain” for modifying behaviour but every child(person) is unique and will respond differently. There is a whole other thread about this where everyone (particularly TBG and HG) goes fairly in depth into both pro and con lines of reasoning. This thread is actually pretty redundant IMO, given the length/depth of the other (and yet I’m still reading/posting, go figure).

Judging from the last few pages, I might read the whole thread in order to learn something from push.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

If they didn’t drain parents patience, there would be no reason to use corporal punishment and child abuse would be virtually unheard of…

[/quote]

You don’t spank a child because your patience has been drained; you spank them for training purposes - to make them better human beings.

Good grief.
[/quote]

How does teaching a child violence result in a better human?[/quote]

The same way swatting a dog with a newspaper when it’s shitting on your carpet makes it a better dog.

The same way kneeing a dog in his chest to teach him not to jump on you makes him a better dog.

The same way using a bit in a horse’s mouth teaches him to be a better horse.

The same way grabbing a cat by the scruff of the neck who’s climbing your screen door makes him a better cat.

[/quote]

So you believe children are the same as animals?[/quote]

I believe when it comes to training children and animals a lot of similar tools and techniques are effective.

And I’ve trained both.

You’ve trained neither.[/quote]

You could write a book and call it : How to train your children like dogs. I’m sure it would be a hit.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Mettahl wrote:
“Lol” at adults without children being pseudo-adults. Are the many people that never want to be breeders forever confined to immaturity?[/quote]

It certainly contributes, yes. Obviously there are exceptions.

Mother Teresa, for an obvious one.

War heros, for others

But for those of us who aren neither saints and war heros, having the over-riding responsibility of childen — supplying their daily needs from feeding them, to wiping their rear ends, to teaching them to read, to keeping them safe, to providing for them financially, to teaching them to be responsible, to loving them — is THE daily ominipresent feature in a responsible parent.

There is no going out and getting drunk when the kids get up at 7:00 AM.

There is little but going to work, coming home, going to a store, going to Shul. Repeat.

This is especially true for a single parent.

The burden forces us to think 100% of someone else 100% of the time.

And, yes, that burden makes us better people.

Can someone be among the Righteous Among the Nations (not in the Shoa sense of the term, but as a responsible, giving adult who would be with G-d) without childen?

Sure.

But someone who calls parents “breeders” is almost certainly not among the Righteous, and likely never will be.[/quote]

A lot of breeders are pretty high and mighty, but this one takes the self-righteous cake.

Hardships that you go through make you a better person than hardships that someone else goes through. Take someone who remains child-less has more time to put into work, becomes successful in their job, and is promoted to a management or even executive level position. Does their daily life require less responsibility and hard work than the life of a parent?

And “lol” at the VERY common assumption that, just because you don’t have kids, you have the luxury of having the time to go out and get drunk.

Edit: Not all parents are breeders, by the way. I have plenty of friends who are just people that happen to have kids. Breeders are the holier-than-thou parents, who believe that their life experiences and their choices somehow make them a better person than those who are unlike them.

I found this, which should help explain what people mean when they say “breeder”: Urban Dictionary: Breeder

^
Personally I find that being a parent necessitates getting drunk, pretty much nightly. It just makes it much more difficult to go out to do so.

It’s hard to understand why people are reacting so strongly to the recent video showing a Judge beating his daughter. Over 90 percent of parents punish their kids by inflicting physical pain, so I’m not sure why everyone is pretending to be so, so shocked.

Is it because the girl in the video is a teenager? 85 percent of adolescents have been physically punished by their parents - and the video example is far less violent than most of the examples that have been shared with me.

Is it because a belt is used? 30% of parents openly admit to hitting their kids with a belt, a stick or some other “hard object.” (Imagine how many more do not openly admit it!)

Is it because the man is angry? More than half of parents admit to hitting their children out of frustration and anger.

Is it the hypocrisy? The Judge recently claimed that he apologized for losing his temper, so no harm was done. Did he accept apologies from the accused in his courtroom?

Naturally, the outrage is focused on the Judge; the girl’s mother, who supports and inflames her husband, hits her daughter as well and demands that she lie down and “take it like a woman,” is barely mentioned.

I can’t help but think that the ‘shocked’ reaction of the general public is just a little bit precious. It’s like the pompous posturing of a veteran politician who claims to be ‘shocked’ about a Congressman’s corruption, or the infamous Captain Renault in ‘Casablanca’:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money] Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much. [aloud] Everybody out at once!

Most parents hit their kids - and when the kids are much younger and more vulnerable than the poor girl in this video - so why is everyone so shocked? Are they pretending that such practices are somehow outside the norm? Statistically, when something is practiced by 90% of the population, claiming to be be shocked by it is ridiculous. I mean, 90% of Italians are Catholic - can any Italian claim to be ‘shocked’ when he runs into one?

Just about everyone knows someone who hits their kids. How many people have stood up for these poor beleaguered children? Have you? How many people have talked to parents about the civilized and civilizing alternatives to hitting defenseless little children? Have you? If you’re not exposing and opposing child abuse, you’re an accomplice.

I want to say to those who are ‘outraged’: please - don’t pretend to be shocked by the commonplace. You look ridiculous and guilty.

People are also upset because this man is a Judge. “How can this man be a Judge and use violence?” - to which a sensible person can only respond with: whuh-huh? I mean, for heaven’s sake - what do people think Judges do all day? They dispense violence, usually against peaceful people that no one is complaining about. Recreational drug users, sex workers, nudists, people with satisfied customers but without the right permits - victimless ‘criminals’ of every description. This is what Judges do:

  • More than 350,000 people are currently in US jails for consensual ‘crimes.’

  • An additional 1,500,000 are on parole or probation for such ‘crimes.’

  • More than 4 million will be arrested in any year for committing such ‘crimes.’

  • Governments spend more than $50 billion in punishing people for ?crimes’ that do not physically harm the person or property of another

What ‘crime’ is this Judge hitting his daughter for? He found her using an internet file sharing program. Most people view his assault as a violent overreaction. How so? Ask yourself this: if you were facing arrest for copyright violations, would you rather have a few minutes of being hit by a belt through your clothes, or an arrest, a trial, fines, jail time and a permament record? What this Judge does to his daughter for copyright violations seems almost civilized compared to the intellectual property laws Judges regularly enforce in their courtrooms.

Whenever you support a law against some peaceful activity, the results are a lot worse than what you see in this video - and they go on and on, for countless years, and for millions of people.

My guess is that there are two kinds of people who are reacting strongly to this video - the innocent - those who were hit by their parents - and the guilty, who hit their children, and see in this video a true reflection of their own brutality.

The anger of the victims is real, and just. The ‘shock’ of everyone else is fake - and as self-serving and manipulative as the original abuse.

This is what violence looks like. So let’s stop using it - as parents, citizens, and human beings striving for decency, reason and virtue.

[quote]Erasmus wrote:
Lots of numbers, percentages, & other statistics
[/quote]

  1. Where did you get those numbers?

  2. Why is it that when you read “physical punishment,” you seem to assume that all of those parents are doing this to their children? There’s physical punishment, then there’s abuse. There is a difference that I would think should be pretty obvious. Spanking =/= Beating. I’m not sure how that could be made any more clear, minus the fabrication of two scenarios.

  3. Why is it that when you read “hitting them with a belt,” you seem to assume that all of those parents are hitting as hard as in the video? Why do you seem to assume that they’re hitting as many times as in the video? Why do you seem to assume that they’re screaming phrases similar to “I’ll hit you in the fucking face,” or “bend over and take it like a woman?”

  4. If, when reading your stats, you can even begin to believe that behavior like in the video is common amongst parents, then you need to have those statistics explained to you a little better. Whatever study you read needs to include some comment lines describing what they’re referring to, such as “when we say that x% of parents use physical punishment, we are NOT referring to something akin to a rape scene minus the actual insertion of a dick. We do not suggest that parents navigate to the ‘fetish’ section of PornHub for learning materials in child discipline.”

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Ambugaton wrote:
This is something I’ve been wondering awhile, and as I’m not a parent I have no idea what the answer is: is it possible to raise a child in such a way that physical discipline will never be necessary? Can you make them rational enough that you can explain what they did wrong and that they should never do it again? Don’t get me wrong, I took my whoopin’s, and in retrospect I’m glad that I did. At the same time I think every child is different and that some are more sensitive to those things than others. Fathers and mothers, help me out here.[/quote]

The MAIN use of corporal punishment should be in response to defiance on the part of the child. Willful, blatant, disobedient defiance.

AND

Matters of personal safety (e.g., a child that continues to wander out in the street into traffic).[/quote]

Very well said.

I went back and forth on this subject (as you know) and struggle with it and frankly, although I’m horrified at the thought of using physical punishment out of anger, I have decided that defiance simply cannot be tolerated - for the child’s overall well-being and, potential safety issues.

Yep.[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Ambugaton wrote:
This is something I’ve been wondering awhile, and as I’m not a parent I have no idea what the answer is: is it possible to raise a child in such a way that physical discipline will never be necessary? Can you make them rational enough that you can explain what they did wrong and that they should never do it again? Don’t get me wrong, I took my whoopin’s, and in retrospect I’m glad that I did. At the same time I think every child is different and that some are more sensitive to those things than others. Fathers and mothers, help me out here.[/quote]

The MAIN use of corporal punishment should be in response to defiance on the part of the child. Willful, blatant, disobedient defiance.

AND

Matters of personal safety (e.g., a child that continues to wander out in the street into traffic).[/quote]

Very well said.

I went back and forth on this subject (as you know) and struggle with it and frankly, although I’m horrified at the thought of using physical punishment out of anger, I have decided that defiance simply cannot be tolerated - for the child’s overall well-being and, potential safety issues. [/quote]

[quote]Mettahl wrote:

[quote]Erasmus wrote:
Lots of numbers, percentages, & other statistics
[/quote]

  1. Where did you get those numbers?

  2. Why is it that when you read “physical punishment,” you seem to assume that all of those parents are doing this to their children? There’s physical punishment, then there’s abuse. There is a difference that I would think should be pretty obvious. Spanking =/= Beating. I’m not sure how that could be made any more clear, minus the fabrication of two scenarios.

  3. Why is it that when you read “hitting them with a belt,” you seem to assume that all of those parents are hitting as hard as in the video? Why do you seem to assume that they’re hitting as many times as in the video? Why do you seem to assume that they’re screaming phrases similar to “I’ll hit you in the fucking face,” or “bend over and take it like a woman?”

  4. If, when reading your stats, you can even begin to believe that behavior like in the video is common amongst parents, then you need to have those statistics explained to you a little better. Whatever study you read needs to include some comment lines describing what they’re referring to, such as “when we say that x% of parents use physical punishment, we are NOT referring to something akin to a rape scene minus the actual insertion of a dick. We do not suggest that parents navigate to the ‘fetish’ section of PornHub for learning materials in child discipline.”[/quote]

Sources:

this video makes a nice presentation about the subject (here is where I got my sources) highly recommended: - YouTube

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/pediatrics;101/4/723.pdf

http://www.themoneytimes.com/node/85300

http://www.repeal43.org/research.html

http://www.utexas.edu/know/2009/09/21/elizabeth_gershoff/

http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/spanked.html

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1926222,00.html

you might want to check out the series below, which talks about childhood trauma and the effect of that on the brain.

point 2 is explained to great extent in my sources,

point 3: if I rape a woman soflty, that’s not abuse?

[quote]Erasmus wrote:

point 3: if I rape a woman soflty, that’s not abuse?

[/quote]

it’s not rape then. especially if you paid for dinner and kissed her and shit. bitches need to man the fuck up. bad example.

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Ambugaton wrote:
This is something I’ve been wondering awhile, and as I’m not a parent I have no idea what the answer is: is it possible to raise a child in such a way that physical discipline will never be necessary? Can you make them rational enough that you can explain what they did wrong and that they should never do it again? Don’t get me wrong, I took my whoopin’s, and in retrospect I’m glad that I did. At the same time I think every child is different and that some are more sensitive to those things than others. Fathers and mothers, help me out here.[/quote]

The MAIN use of corporal punishment should be in response to defiance on the part of the child. Willful, blatant, disobedient defiance.

AND

Matters of personal safety (e.g., a child that continues to wander out in the street into traffic).[/quote]

Very well said.

I went back and forth on this subject (as you know) and struggle with it and frankly, although I’m horrified at the thought of using physical punishment out of anger, I have decided that defiance simply cannot be tolerated - for the child’s overall well-being and, potential safety issues. [/quote]

My wife and I have few rules for my daughter, listen to what we say is the biggie (respect other’s stuff is another). I will explain the reason for what I say afterwards but insist she responds first. “Stop” was the first one. After that “come here”. We explained that when we know she will listen and respond accordingly she will get more freedom.

One thing I have noticed, though in no way claim it is representative, is more dads working on short commands like “stop” with more vocal force than moms but getting better results than the “please stop honey” technique.

striking someone for defying you is an ethically-indefensible position
if the only harm is to your pride, all you are teaching them is that the world is a power-and-domination game of master-and-slave
the only wound is to your narcissistic ego
(the only scenario i can come up with that would allow for it would be one where they are distracting you from doing some necessary thing like running back into a burning building to get someone else and you can’t because they refuse to follow instructions and their disobedience is risking other lives)
if there is no sense of urgency, it doesn’t have to be resolved in 5 seconds
you should be able to think something up when you are cool-headed

is not defensible but understandable to lose temper if they do something negligent that could do great harm to others
but is a flaw and not something to brag about as though it were proof of responsible parenting

Krohdaddi has perfected the run-on sentence.

[quote]KrohDaddi wrote:
striking someone for defying you is an ethically-indefensible position
if the only harm is to your pride, all you are teaching them is that the world is a power-and-domination game of master-and-slave
the only wound is to your narcissistic ego
(the only scenario i can come up with that would allow for it would be one where they are distracting you from doing some necessary thing like running back into a burning building to get someone else and you can’t because they refuse to follow instructions and their disobedience is risking other lives)
if there is no sense of urgency, it doesn’t have to be resolved in 5 seconds
you should be able to think something up when you are cool-headed

is not defensible but understandable to lose temper if they do something negligent that could do great harm to others
but is a flaw and not something to brag about as though it were proof of responsible parenting[/quote]

you sir, are a babbling, incoherent wack job.

Wait, that was unfair. I apologize.

you sir, are a babbling, incoherent NUT job.

[quote]KrohDaddi wrote:
striking someone for defying you is an ethically-indefensible position
if the only harm is to your pride, all you are teaching them is that the world is a power-and-domination game of master-and-slave
the only wound is to your narcissistic ego
(the only scenario i can come up with that would allow for it would be one where they are distracting you from doing some necessary thing like running back into a burning building to get someone else and you can’t because they refuse to follow instructions and their disobedience is risking other lives)
if there is no sense of urgency, it doesn’t have to be resolved in 5 seconds
you should be able to think something up when you are cool-headed

is not defensible but understandable to lose temper if they do something negligent that could do great harm to others
but is a flaw and not something to brag about as though it were proof of responsible parenting[/quote]

at the risk of engaging you further, and having to skim thru yet another ranting of a lunatic, have you considered that a child needs to understand and obey “NO” for its own safety in many situations? and that outright defiance and my ego have no relation in the slightest.

are you taking your prescription medication? serious question. please answer.