Spanking Raises Chances of Risky, Deviant Sexual Behavior

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Perhaps I misread this but it appears that the same guy does four different studies, each citing the others, that all come to the same conclusion? Is that what you read? And the social "sciences" want to know why the hard sciences laugh at them? Replicability of results seems to be lacking here, though that may be because I misread.

On the other hand, do we, as a group of Lit writers really consider spanking deviant?

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[rgraham666]

My first thought on seeing the thread title and the author was, "Need some help testing that hypothesis?"

 

[Guest]

Besides, I am not sure anyone here would work a sweat over what he calls deviancy...

I think.

Maharat

 

[Weird Harold]

Spanking Raises Chances of Risky, Deviant Sexual Behavior[/B]
Review found physical punishment of kids linked to unprotected, masochistic sex as adults

By Amanda Gardner
Posted 2/28/08

...
Straus, who was the author of all four studies, hopes the findings will raise awareness among child development experts.

"My hope is to convince my colleagues that they ought to put this in their textbooks," said Straus, co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire, in Durham. ...

Even the revered Dr. Spock, who was anti-spanking, never came right out and advised parents outright not to do it, he added. Instead, Spock advised "avoiding it if you can."
...

Yet another "child psychologist" who doesn't understand children and can't difrentiate between discipline and abuse.

Dr. Spock didn't advocate total elimination of corporal punishment because he knew that it is only one tool in a parent's arsenal to shape their child's behavior patterns -- he was against corporal punishment because when he wrote his book, it was more abuse than discipline (although not seen so by society) and, more importantly was not particularly effective as it was commonly used.

Dr. Strauss on the other hand has done four studies that surprisingly all support his initial thesis, "spanking is bad and must be eliminated." He wants his thesis elevated to the level of "Authoritative" and taught as "fact."

If Dr.Strauss' thesis and studies were about UFO's or the Kennedy Assassination, he'd be marginalized and laughed at, but because his thesis fits the preconceptions of "child psychologists" it's touted as an earth-shattering discovery.

Spanking Raises Chances of Risky, Deviant Sexual Behavior[/B]
Review found physical punishment of kids linked to unprotected, masochistic sex as adults

By Amanda Gardner
Posted 2/28/08

...
There is a "dose response" at work here. "The more parents spank, the higher the probability of harmful side effects," Straus noted.
...

Of course there's a "dose response" at work -- the closer corporal punishment comes to the level of chronic abuse, the more harmfull effects of generally bad parenting will be seen. The same can be said for bad-parenting that involves a total lack of discipline confrontation -- the "harmfull effects" aren't the same for a total lack of corporal punishment as they are for an excess of corporal punishment, but they're just as (if not more) harmful to the child and, eventually, to society.

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[3113]

You know, they're making the wrong sort of links. If they want Americans to stop spanking their kids they need to link spanking to being gay or fat

 

[voluptuary_manque]

You know, they're making the wrong sort of links. If they want Americans to stop spanking their kids they need to link spanking to being gay or fat

You know, that just might work.

 

[rgraham666]

Perv.

No, wait. Deviant!

(I know, I know. Takes one to know one.)

Indeed.

With that, I'm off to indulge in writing about deviant topics. Today, guiding fellatio through the use of nipple clamps.

A subject close to my heart.

 

[Guest]

wait, wait. Who here WASN'T spanked?

Maharat

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[LoquaciousLady]

Finally a side-effect of spanking that I can't rebut with "So? I was spanked as a child and it didn't do that to me..."

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The older kid didn't need it more than once or twice and the younger one wanted to fight back. Withholding toys was more effective.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

With me it was a spanking...'cuz sending me to my room just put me where I wanted to be in the first place. Lying in bed reading. So it was a spanking and then sent to my room.

And you know something...I'm not a rapist, a stalker, a murderer, a sadist or any other kind of nut job. I do believe in corporal punishment if that's all that works on a child.

Philosophy:

1. Warn. Warn the child that they are doing something they shouldn't.
2. Deprive. Deprive the child of some toy or activity they enjoy for doing something they shouldn't or for using poor judgment and doing something wrong again.
3. Spank. After the third time of doing something wrong it's a spanking. Not a beating, like I received several times, but a not to gentle whack on the butt with very little force.

JMHO - I think I turned out pretty good. To bad I didn't spank my son and daughter more, 'cuz I hate to say it they turned out rotten.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I tend to look askance on a study that agrees with the agenda of the person or group who conducts it. If the Ku lux Klan did some research that "proved" that African Americans were less intelligent than Caucasians, I dould distrust it. If the third grade class at the local elementary did a study that "proved" that candy was health food, I would distrust that also

I wonder if they considered that it's naughty children who get spanked, and that cildren who misbehave as children are often lawbreakers when they grow up. Well-behaved children, who don't get spanked, tend to become well-behaved adults, who do not break any laws.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

gasp!
Are you implying that behavior is inherited, not societally imposed? For shame, you, you Republican, you!

 

[ABSTRUSE]

I just want to know how one becomes a 'spanking expert'?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Practice, my child, practice!

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I always thought that the use of a "formal" spanking "ritual" was pretty weird, especially for older kids, and I can see how it could create some odd perturbations in a child's standard orbit. On the other hand a rare, quick, heat-of-the-moment whack on the butt of a toddler who is just way out of line, or insistently doing something very dangerous, always seemed to me to be a useful life lesson to give a kid: "OMG, nothing like this is supposed to happen to precious me, no matter what I do!" Think again, youngling.

IOW, context is everything.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

My son's godfather, a clinical psychologist, said much the same thing. I call it the difference between a spanking and a flogging.

 

[3113]

I wonder if they considered that it's naughty children who get spanked, and that cildren who misbehave as children are often lawbreakers when they grow up. Well-behaved children, who don't get spanked, tend to become well-behaved adults, who do not break any laws.

I understand your point and what you're asking, but I think your logic is faulty here. You presume that the child got spanked because they were naughty; thus, they were a naughty child who turned into a naughty adult. But that requires two conclusions that don't work:

1) That every child spanked was, indeed, naughty. I'm sorry, but I've seen parents spank children for things the didn't deserve. A child accidently spills something and gets spanked--they weren't naughty, didn't do it deliberately, and yet they're punished for it. Hence, you can't conclude that all parents spank children ONLY because they're naughty. Parents spank children because they've had a bad day, because they have bad tempers, because they get a sadistic thrill from it--all sorts of reasons.

So we can't assume that only naughty children get spanked. What we can assume--because we know it to be true--is that kids imitate behavior they see in the home, especially the behavior of their primary caregivers. If you hit a child, then you teach them that hitting is an acceptable way to express anger (as most parents who spank are angry at the time), and an acceptable way to solve a problem.

2) The argument in favor of spanking is that it deters naughty behavior. If a naughty child is spanked, but still becomes a lawbreaker, than spanking didn't work. So while your logic is correct in part--it was the nature of the child, not the spanking that made them bad--you don't undermine the argument that children shouldn't be spanked because this *supports* the idea that spanking does no good.

Which doesn't mean that I favor this study. It's badly done and it's conclusions are, as you point out, problematic. What's clearly missing here is a comparison. The study should have compared children who were given time-outs and such (other punishments) and how they turned out to those who were spanked. This would be an especially effective study if, say, separated twins were studied, one who was spanked and the other who wasn't--if they turned out the same, then spanking has no effect, if they turned out different than spanking might have an effect--good or bad depending on how they turned out.

 

[Boxlicker101]

gasp!
Are you implying that behavior is inherited, not societally imposed? For shame, you, you Republican, you!

I don't know if you are addressing me or not, but no, I am not. What I am saying is that children who do naughty things often grow up to be adults who are law breakers.

I don't believe behaviour is inherited, although some tendencies might be.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

And that's how you put the "science" in social science. Well spoken, that man.