?? No, that is not the intent of spanking. Get educated before judging people. |
| Hitting is to strike with the intention to hurt. Spanking is to strike with the intention of getting a kids attention through surprise. 2 light swats on diaper covered buttocks don't hurt. |
"Swats"? You mean hitting? |
I don't spank and I feel compelled to separate beating from spanking. Because I believe that words have meanings. |
Me too. I also believe spanking is only swatting on the butt. Hitting to me implies the full-force of the hitter, whereas spanking doesn't mean an adult is putting all their weight into a hit. I don't spank. I also was a CPS and investigated a lot of beatings. While I disagree with spanking, there is no way a swat on the butt can be equated to what I saw. |
OK, that's fine. I own it. There are times when my kids' misbehavior or defiance leads to me putting them over my knee and hitting their bottoms. What else do you want to hear? |
NP here. I've noticed from these threads that people who hit their kids love to hide behind euphemisms like "swat," "pop," "tap," etc. |
Spanking is on butt only and the force is controlled. Hitting is much broader term. |
This. Really, OP just doesn't agree with spanking, and that's perfectly fine. Not everyone is going to parent the same way. But to pretend that she's found some logical inconsistency or hypocrisy is ludicrous. |
No. There is no evidence that suggest a handful of spankings in a child's lifetime produces psychological terror or lasting damaging effects. |
Would you be surprised to learn that you are dead wrong about that? And not through anecdotal stories, through peer-reviewed science? http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx |
| people doing these studies are crusaders in the OP mold. |
| They have no control groups. That is not research. (np) |