Yes, exactly those exceptions.

Ben objects:

Try the beginning toddler, except with a wood stove he just chased a cat behind.

Big arm shoots in front of said toddler along with a very stern, No!

Been there. Done that. Don't think I could have scared the tot more completely with a spanking. Kids that age may not understand the words, but they recognize your tone of voice. And it doesn't take much force to redirect them.

"Been there, done that", too -- and Mom tells me the burns didn't go off my arse for *weeks*! I think your method is good for getting across the concept that "the adults don't want you to do that right now" -- but that's not quite the way I meant it. The problem is that "right now" bit; I'm not saying they are all mean sneaky little bastards, but that really small kids just don't *understand* that you mean you want them to avoid the hot stove, not just now that you're around, but *always*.

To that end, I still think you need to simply create an association in their mind between hot stoves and pain -- and then it's preferable that it be the, after all much milder and "more beneficial", transient pain of a slap than that of an actual burn.

As for serious disrespect, will it improve their respect that you can't come up with any better response than hitting a small child? And if they avoid showing disrespect because you scare them, what happens when they grow up and are no longer frightened of you?

Forget the "hitting a small child" bit -- your argumentation there positively *reeks* of "Protect the CHIIILLLDRRREEEENNNNN!!!"...

For one thing, I'm not necessarily talking about *small* children; not some four-year-old who's just learnt a new word and is trying it out, but a twelve-year-old (or teenager) who knows very well what he's saying, and is doing it (usually in the heat of anger, sure, but still) with the *knowing intent* to hurt. If that's not to be tolerated from another adult (and trust me, some things I'd slap *you* in the face if you said them to mine), then why should it be from him (or her)? On the contrary, you should be able to expect *more* respect from your kids than from some random stranger, shouldn't you?

Also, I'm not advocating any protracted spanking "session" -- just a short, sharp slap, as being the most appropriate *punctuation* to some utterances. (Punctuation is what *ends* an utterance... ;^) Some kinds of speech *do* sting enough that they can only be repaid with another kind of sting; again, as a reminder that "you just *don't do* that". Here, your "big arm and stern voice" just don't work any more -- well, for you and me, maybe. But not for some tiny woman who weighs less, and is shorter than, her fourteen-year-old son. But the shock value -- the "wake-up call effect", much more than any real pain per se -- of a slap may bring the sprog back to his senses.

Would *you* respect your wife any less if she slapped *you* if you called her something really nasty -- or would you perhaps actually respect her less if she *didn't*? Personally, I'm leaning toward the latter; and if it's good enough for me, why shouldn't it be for a kid? (For a pre-teen or teen, that is, who knows what he's saying. Again, the exception to this exception is that pre-schooler who's trying out a new word; for him, the stern look and "you do *not* use that word" works, even if you are a tiny Mom.)

PS You are engaged? Congrats. When is the wedding?

Heh -- I announced that at the watercooler back in February... But thanks for noticing, anyway! ;^)

No date set in stone yet, but it'll be sometime next year or, more probably, in 2004. (I am *not* going to leave it totally open-ended, turning into never-never, like last time...)

Christian opinions:

Ben objects:
Try the beginning toddler, except with a wood stove he just chased a cat behind.

Big arm shoots in front of said toddler along with a very stern, No!

Been there. Done that. Don't think I could have scared the tot more completely with a spanking. Kids that age may not understand the words, but they recognize your tone of voice. And it doesn't take much force to redirect them.
"Been there, done that", too -- and Mom tells me the burns didn't go off my arse for *weeks*! I think your method is good for getting across the concept that "the adults don't want you to do that right now" -- but that's not quite the way I meant it. The problem is that "right now" bit; I'm not saying they are all mean sneaky little bastards, but that really small kids just don't *understand* that you mean you want them to avoid the hot stove, not just now that you're around, but *always*.

And how, exactly, does hitting change what the kid learns?

Both ways the kid has a fast negative experience closely associated with the stove, but without serious injury. You assume that the kid will draw a different conclusion from one negative experience than another. But you offer no evidence behind this assertion, and I have not seen any either.

To that end, I still think you need to simply create an association in their mind between hot stoves and pain -- and then it's preferable that it be the, after all much milder and "more beneficial", transient pain of a slap than that of an actual burn.

And being frightened out of his wits isn't a negative association?

You have a theory that hitting is necessary for learning. Have you tested it? It sure doesn't match my experience.

As for serious disrespect, will it improve their respect that you can't come up with any better response than hitting a small child? And if they avoid showing disrespect because you scare them, what happens when they grow up and are no longer frightened of you?
Forget the "hitting a small child" bit -- your argumentation there positively *reeks* of "Protect the CHIIILLLDRRREEEENNNNN!!!"...

I call bullshit.

A parent is supposed to teach a child. Teaching children - by example - how to show and express displeasure without violence is a very good skill. Why would you not want to do it?

I, for one, am glad to have it.

For one thing, I'm not necessarily talking about *small* children; not some four-year-old who's just learnt a new word and is trying it out, but a twelve-year-old (or teenager) who knows very well what he's saying, and is doing it (usually in the heat of anger, sure, but still) with the *knowing intent* to hurt. If that's not to be tolerated from another adult (and trust me, some things I'd slap *you* in the face if you said them to mine), then why should it be from him (or her)? On the contrary, you should be able to expect *more* respect from your kids than from some random stranger, shouldn't you?

And this is the lesson that we want our kids to learn?

If I insulted you, you would slap me in the face. And you cannot think of any other response? Your imagination is really so pathetic that there is no other way you can think of to respond?

I pity you.

In almost 33 years of life I remember only one occasion where I initiated physical force to make a point. (And I wasn't very effective at it, but that is another story.) Furthermore where I have had a choice, which has included every friendship since I have been an adult and my marriage of 12.5 years, I do not tolerate others using force on me. Period.

Also, I'm not advocating any protracted spanking "session" -- just a short, sharp slap, as being the most appropriate *punctuation* to some utterances. (Punctuation is what *ends* an utterance... ;^) Some kinds of speech *do* sting enough that they can only be repaid with another kind of sting; again, as a reminder that "you just *don't do* that". Here, your "big arm and stern voice" just don't work any more -- well, for you and me, maybe. But not for some tiny woman who weighs less, and is shorter than, her fourteen-year-old son. But the shock value -- the "wake-up call effect", much more than any real pain per se -- of a slap may bring the sprog back to his senses.

Strangely enough I too was larger than my mother when I was 14. As was my rather independent-minded brother. (Due to an age gap various other siblings were out of the house then.) And strangely enough not once in my recollection did she feel it necessary to attempt to use physical force on her children, yet she was quite ready, willing, and able to let us know exactly what she thought when she got upset.

Huh. And somehow she managed to teach us to be rather better behaved than most kids I have seen before or since.

Double huh. And somehow my sister managed the same with her kids as well.

I think I see a pattern here. Apparently it is possible to get through to kids - even to teenagers - without using force.

Would *you* respect your wife any less if she slapped *you* if you called her something really nasty -- or would you perhaps actually respect her less if she *didn't*? Personally, I'm leaning toward the latter; and if it's good enough for me, why shouldn't it be for a kid? (For a pre-teen or teen, that is, who knows what he's saying. Again, the exception to this exception is that pre-schooler who's trying out a new word; for him, the stern look and "you do *not* use that word" works, even if you are a tiny Mom.)

Would I respect my wife less?

Yes!

She has better ways to make sure that I know when she is damned well serious. Hitting is not acceptable for me when good alternatives exist. Children are not a special instance of that.

(Change of topics...)

PS You are engaged? Congrats. When is the wedding?
Heh -- I announced that at the watercooler back in February... But thanks for noticing, anyway! ;^)

I may have heard, but it had (obviously) slipped my mind. Congrats anyways.

No date set in stone yet, but it'll be sometime next year or, more probably, in 2004. (I am *not* going to leave it totally open-ended, turning into never-never, like last time...)

Not totally open-ended, perhaps. But a lot longer than my engagement was. Before the month is out you will have been engaged longer than we spent going from boyfriend/girlfriend through engaged to a wedding! :-)

Cheers,
Ben

Welcome to IWETHEY!