Discipline and Abuse

    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      I got beat today for playing football in my mums room despite being told last week not to do so. My dad went way overboard trying to throw me to the floor and gouge out my eyes, punch me etc, so i floored him and wtfpwnt him.

      That was out of anger, not in the hope of disiplining me. Theres a difference.
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      i guess it'll be kinda sorta not really okay but whatever to be spanked like when it's serious, and bad... and only spanked not like HARD or anything. i mean i dont wanna do that to my kids but i rather be spanked then thrown outta the house or something ..
      i feel like a hypocrite when i said i would never hit my kid, even though i grew up that way, but in the back of my mind i do think it sadly may happen once when i flip a shizznat..
      otherwise, i feel like if it's random spanking or any other sort of hitting it's abuse.
      i'm pretty sure most people have been spanked before, esp when we were little kids. :/

      The post was edited 1 time, last by lisaa ().

    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      People say they got spanked and turned out fine. People say they never got spanked and turned out fine. Personal experience is all well and good but it doesn't strike me as enough to settle this argument.

      LOLFag wrote:

      They know no discipline. They can't handle priorities. They believe their social lives are more important than their academics. They drink, smoke, drive, and party. This is the end of civilization as we know it.

      Is it? Forgive me for sounding a bit like a romanticist, but the idea of us all drinking, smoking, driving and partying doesn't strike me as too bad an idea considering that being 'enlightened' for a long time hasn't really got us anywhere good - and I'm of an academic persuasion.

      I think that overall you make a massive generalisation of teenagers today. If you took a real section of teenage society I expect that you would find a more positive image than you paint. Sure there are those who don't work, but then they are the ones who will pay for that by working at the fast food chain, and if they don't, who will? It's not a nice thought, but we need people short on grey matter to man the jobs that we don't want to do but that we expect to be manned. There are intelligent people who'll do them, but not enough.

      LOLFag wrote:

      Of course, in Asia, we get beaten. And we should. Our parents raised us with high expectations, and if we don't reach them, we should be punished. How else are we to succeed in this world?

      Strikes me that success is a very weird thing to be able to categorise into an objective basket. Why should you have to conform to your parents' standards of success, when yours could be wildly different? Is it right that we end up making all these Clever-Earn-Lotsa-Money driven robot kids just by beating it into them?
      Of course, if Asian culture is that, then so be it - Societies arrive at solutions differently, and there's a lot of good behind working kids hard so that they at least have the opportunity to make the best of their lives. But that doesn't make it a blueprint for the world, because other places might have different priorities.

      LOLFag wrote:

      I remember as a kid that I was beaten severely for every test score that's lower than 90%. And I applaud my parents for such discipline because when I look at my class right now, I stand much higher than everyone else. While everyone else is having difficulty with Pre-Calculus, I look at them and think, man, I did this shit in 9th grade. And I know damn well that I'm only superior to the rest of the class because of the discipline I receive.

      Did you not feel real fear and anxiety before tests because of the threat of beating? I know I would. Fear is not a good atmosphere for cultivating a young mind. To learn self-discipline through making mistakes down to lack of discipline is much better, and I think makes much more for a ride of life.

      To throw in a non-retaliatory point, I'm not actually against spanking. I had the occasional, rather lame in retrospect, spank as a small child. (If I remember rightly, it was for pissing myself :rolleyes:) but as someone who's witnessed the spanking of a friend I think a problem with a lot of spanking is that it's not done right, in that the parent shows a lot of outward and uncontrollable-looking anger. If you're going to do spanking it should be done firmly but with a degree of distand coldishness. That way it seems there's less resentment. Of course, there's also a lot to be said for other non-violent techniques, especially the ones that bore and tire a child.
      [CENTER]


      [RIGHT]Ta-ta
      [/RIGHT]
      [/CENTER]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Esmo ().

    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      Esmo wrote:


      Is it? Forgive me for sounding a bit like a romanticist, but the idea of us all drinking, smoking, driving and partying doesn't strike me as too bad an idea considering that being 'enlightened' for a long time hasn't really got us anywhere good - and I'm of an academic persuasion.


      Well, yes, I believe in a scenario like that, depending on such a generation is a really degenerative thought. Of course, there are plenty that don't adhere to this stereotype, as you mention later on, but the thought that a big portion of society does truly troubles me. At least, in America.

      I think that overall you make a massive generalisation of teenagers today. If you took a real section of teenage society I expect that you would find a more positive image than you paint. Sure there are those who don't work, but then they are the ones who will pay for that by working at the fast food chain, and if they don't, who will? It's not a nice thought, but we need people short on grey matter to man the jobs that we don't want to do but that we expect to be manned. There are intelligent people who'll do them, but not enough.


      While the thought that the average teenager would eventually be working at Wal-Mart or a low white collar job is truly appealing, it's shocking to me that they don't realize how dim a future they have. Of course, it all depends on how they were raised, and one method of avoiding such a dreadful consequence is condoning spanking.

      Strikes me that success is a very weird thing to be able to categorise into an objective basket. Why should you have to conform to your parents' standards of success, when yours could be wildly different? Is it right that we end up making all these Clever-Earn-Lotsa-Money driven robot kids just by beating it into them?
      Of course, if Asian culture is that, then so be it - Societies arrive at solutions differently, and there's a lot of good behind working kids hard so that they at least have the opportunity to make the best of their lives. But that doesn't make it a blueprint for the world, because other places might have different priorities.
      Did you not feel real fear and anxiety before tests because of the threat of beating? I know I would. Fear is not a good atmosphere for cultivating a young mind. To learn self-discipline through making mistakes down to lack of discipline is much better, and I think makes much more for a ride of life.


      I certainly agree that your idea of success may clash with that of your parents. It certainly seems prevalent in the Asian culture to adhere to what your parents think is best for you, which isn't necessarily bad, but with the evolution of our society, it may be difficult to survive under such conditions.

      And actually, I didn't feel much fear during any test, partly because they were easy (for me). And while fear is not a good atmosphere for anything, it is the most basic and primal emotion we feel, and if all hope is lost, it communicates rather effectively, especially to children. While long-term effects such as psychological trauma and etc. may occur, that's because all hope was lost and that this was the last resort. Besides, my parents created such a rule because, not trying to sound proud but I was born rather gifted and that I could absorb information faster and process it more efficiently than most people. Hence, the rule didn't inflict much terror.

      To throw in a non-retaliatory point, I'm not actually against spanking. I had the occasional, rather lame in retrospect, spank as a small child. (If I remember rightly, it was for pissing myself :rolleyes:) but as someone who's witnessed the spanking of a friend I think a problem with a lot of spanking is that it's not done right, in that the parent shows a lot of outward and uncontrollable-looking anger. If you're going to do spanking it should be done firmly but with a degree of distand coldishness. That way it seems there's less resentment. Of course, there's also a lot to be said for other non-violent techniques, especially the ones that bore and tire a child.


      Indeed, many people nowadays view spanking as a horrendous crime because of the negative connotations associated with it. A drunken father, a simple mistake, this story is commonly repeated among those who protest spanking. And I stand firm that this is not the type of spanking I'm referring to. I'm talking about getting hit because of a rational reason. And I'm all in for this.
      [CENTER].::ANIME is DOPAMINE to me::.

      [/CENTER]
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      LOLFag wrote:

      Well, yes, I believe in a scenario like that, depending on such a generation is a really degenerative thought. Of course, there are plenty that don't adhere to this stereotype, as you mention later on, but the thought that a big portion of society does truly troubles me. At least, in America.

      Personally I think a little less worry and maybe a little more hedonism wouldn't go amiss in the world. If everyone relaxed a little more life wouldn't be so bad.

      LOLFag wrote:

      While the thought that the average teenager would eventually be working at Wal-Mart or a low white collar job is truly appealing, it's shocking to me that they don't realize how dim a future they have. Of course, it all depends on how they were raised, and one method of avoiding such a dreadful consequence is condoning spanking.

      Why do they have a dim future if they don't realise it? Sure, that looks like a dim future because of your outlook on life, but it's not exactly like dumb people aspire to be professors. Many don't even want to go to university. These people have a hostile opinion of education and learning. A dim future for them is exactly what you think they should be wanting. Again, it all comes down to everyone's personal ambitions and views of success.

      LOLFag wrote:

      I certainly agree that your idea of success may clash with that of your parents. It certainly seems prevalent in the Asian culture to adhere to what your parents think is best for you, which isn't necessarily bad, but with the evolution of our society, it may be difficult to survive under such conditions.

      It isn't necessarily bad, but it seems far from good to presume that a parent's designs on their child are best pushed through without giving the child space to breathe. I'm a little confused by your point on the evolution of society, could you elaborate?

      LOLFag wrote:

      And actually, I didn't feel much fear during any test, partly because they were easy (for me). And while fear is not a good atmosphere for anything, it is the most basic and primal emotion we feel, and if all hope is lost, it communicates rather effectively, especially to children. While long-term effects such as psychological trauma and etc. may occur, that's because all hope was lost and that this was the last resort. Besides, my parents created such a rule because, not trying to sound proud but I was born rather gifted and that I could absorb information faster and process it more efficiently than most people. Hence, the rule didn't inflict much terror.

      So how come you got beaten if you found them easy? I'm talking about fear of not getting above 90%, not fear of failing by most people's standards.

      At any rate, you've made the point yourself that much of the reason why the rule did not break you was because of your personality and ability. Now, taking into mind the broad spectrum of intelligent personalities out there, is it not clear that a large part of the success in spanking to encourage academic success is down to the individual personality of the child, which may or may not work well under such pressure? Even if you could then take the approach that 'spanking to punish poor academia works if you have the right child' how do you then qualify and identify the 'right child'? Parents considering spanking are probably very pushy to begin with and will easily come to the conclusion that it would be OK, and there's nobody to stop them because it's a decision only they can make. So then you have children that could well undergo trauma, simply because they, to take your self-example, are not so gifted.

      LOLFag wrote:

      Indeed, many people nowadays view spanking as a horrendous crime because of the negative connotations associated with it. A drunken father, a simple mistake, this story is commonly repeated among those who protest spanking. And I stand firm that this is not the type of spanking I'm referring to. I'm talking about getting hit because of a rational reason. And I'm all in for this.

      Those negative connotations exist because so often it goes wrong instead of right, and it is unfortunately very difficult to change that because this is an issue of the home and of the personal drivings of families, parents and children.

      On further reflection, perhaps a good dose of lefty tears goes into them as well, but as a Guardian reader, I wouldn't readily admit to that. ;)
      [CENTER]


      [RIGHT]Ta-ta
      [/RIGHT]
      [/CENTER]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Esmo ().

    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      Esmo wrote:

      Personally I think a little less worry and maybe a little more hedonism wouldn't go amiss in the world. If everyone relaxed a little more life wouldn't be so bad.


      LOL, my thoughts run opposite! It's just that there's so much self-satisfaction in the world that I thought it would be better if there was a little less.

      Why do they have a dim future if they don't realise it? Sure, that looks like a dim future because of your outlook on life, but it's not exactly like dumb people aspire to be professors. Many don't even want to go to university. These people have a hostile opinion of education and learning. A dim future for them is exactly what you think they should be wanting. Again, it all comes down to everyone's personal ambitions and views of success.


      I guess it all does depend on what they want their future to be. Some people, like the ones aforementioned, may not want a very successful and endeavoring future. I guess it wouldn't be dim for them, but rather, undesirable, to hold a very difficult job.

      It isn't necessarily bad, but it seems far from good to presume that a parent's designs on their child are best pushed through without giving the child space to breathe. I'm a little confused by your point on the evolution of society, could you elaborate?


      What I meant was that sometimes the media feeds us things that really run us aground. MTV, Disney, etc., they all give teenagers a false lull of reality, that everything should be, as you said before, hedonistic, and that having fun in high school is the most important thing in your teenage years. In that scenario, it may be better that the parents exercise some degree of control, not suffocating, but some degree, over the children. And what I meant by the evolution of society is the growing influence of individuality in society. Indeed, we are extremely free compared to society centuries back. Hence, kids may clash with parents who live in the past, therefore surviving in such a controlling condition may be impossible. Thus, a compromise between the freedom-loving kids and the parents who think they know what's best must be made.

      So how come you got beaten if you found them easy? I'm talking about fear of not getting above 90%, not fear of failing by most people's standards.


      It's more like the very occasional beating, and even those beatings weren't so severe, at least in my eyes because I personally thought the beatings were justified. So I guess people view beatings differently because of whether or not they accept such punishment. Thus, occasionally I dip below 90%, but the reason is usually due to lack of studying or too much gaming. Then, in my eyes, I deserve such punishment. No, I'm not a masochist :P

      At any rate, you've made the point yourself that much of the reason why the rule did not break you was because of your personality and ability. Now, taking into mind the broad spectrum of intelligent personalities out there, is it not clear that a large part of the success in spanking to encourage academic success is down to the individual personality of the child, which may or may not work well under such pressure? Even if you could then take the approach that 'spanking to punish poor academia works if you have the right child' how do you then qualify and identify the 'right child'? Parents considering spanking are probably very pushy to begin with and will easily come to the conclusion that it would be OK, and there's nobody to stop them because it's a decision only they can make. So then you have children that could well undergo trauma, simply because they, to take your self-example, are not so gifted.


      This clearly outlines the problem in Asia, which expects all children to be gifted in areas such as math and science. And I agree that this is a problem. There are plenty out there who are regularly beaten and can't help it, and I do not condone such cases. Of course, this is the extremities, and happens very occasionally. Similarly, as far as I can tell, most teenagers raised in Western societies aren't too hedonistic, but, like in Asia, there are extreme cases of excessive hedonism, such as the 11-year old British girl who is showered with name brands despite the fact that her family isn't wealthy. Thus, in those cases, I strongly believe stricter punishments should be in effect. As with moderate cases, I believe moderate beatings should be in effect as well.

      Those negative connotations exist because so often it goes wrong instead of right, and it is unfortunately very difficult to change that because this is an issue of the home and of the personal drivings of families, parents and children.

      On further reflection, perhaps a good dose of lefty tears goes into them as well, but as a Guardian reader, I wouldn't readily admit to that. ;)


      And my point in this thread is to try and eliminate the negative connotations associated with beatings. I am absolutely certain that the majority of all beatings are not excessive and do not follow my scenario mentioned before. And yet, beatings still have such a negative reputation. In my opinion, people often exaggerate the beatings, and another factor that adds to the negative connotations is that people nowadays can't really tolerate much pain, therefore beatings that parents tolerated when they were kids might feel excessive to kids nowadays. It is indeed true that this is such a case; I myself have witnessed a case like this in which a beating is severely exaggerated. So really, we can't base how severe and appropriate a beating is, for parents may think it's alright since they've tolerated such severity but kids nowadays may feel it;s wrong because of our, say, lessening in pain tolerance. So really, it's hard to say whether the beating is right or wrong; we have no other arbiter but society, and this is bad because society is not always correct. In any case, I do not condone excessive punishment, but the occasional appropriate beating should be allowed without negative attention.

      Anyway, sorry for the digression. As I do not live in England, I didn't catch your Guardian reference. Do you mind rephrasing?
      [CENTER].::ANIME is DOPAMINE to me::.

      [/CENTER]
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      I'm quite tired from this last week so perhaps I won't be so watertight but I didn't want to let this thread go unreplied for too long and therefore to drop this blissful embodiment of what I think the D&D board should be about.

      LOLFag wrote:

      LOL, my thoughts run opposite! It's just that there's so much self-satisfaction in the world that I thought it would be better if there was a little less.

      The word 'self-satisfaction' puts a negative slant on it, as it makes out that people are out doing stuff for themselves with no care for others. That's not what I'm about, because a society that fundamentally pleasure-loving would not be a good place to live in. But I think that if people were more relaxed and recognised that there's more to life than sheer success that life could be better for them. Of course I can't intrude that much on people's personal choices.

      LOLFag wrote:

      I guess it all does depend on what they want their future to be. Some people, like the ones aforementioned, may not want a very successful and endeavoring future. I guess it wouldn't be dim for them, but rather, undesirable, to hold a very difficult job.

      Exaactly.

      LOLFag wrote:

      What I meant was that sometimes the media feeds us things that really run us aground. MTV, Disney, etc., they all give teenagers a false lull of reality, that everything should be, as you said before, hedonistic, and that having fun in high school is the most important thing in your teenage years. In that scenario, it may be better that the parents exercise some degree of control, not suffocating, but some degree, over the children. And what I meant by the evolution of society is the growing influence of individuality in society. Indeed, we are extremely free compared to society centuries back. Hence, kids may clash with parents who live in the past, therefore surviving in such a controlling condition may be impossible. Thus, a compromise between the freedom-loving kids and the parents who think they know what's best must be made.

      So if a compromise is the best way forward (I agree) then is something as off-centre as beating really a compromise? If you beat your child over academia where is their freedom end of the deal?

      LOLFag wrote:

      It's more like the very occasional beating, and even those beatings weren't so severe, at least in my eyes because I personally thought the beatings were justified. So I guess people view beatings differently because of whether or not they accept such punishment. Thus, occasionally I dip below 90%, but the reason is usually due to lack of studying or too much gaming. Then, in my eyes, I deserve such punishment. No, I'm not a masochist :P

      If you look back on your beatings grateful, then there's nothing I can really say that condemns your parents for their actions. The right/wrong of beating children all hangs on the short and long term effects on the child and whether they'd be happier with or without beating. Most of which I reckon are hard to predict in the child at the time.

      LOLFag wrote:

      There are plenty out there who are regularly beaten and can't help it, and I do not condone such cases. Of course, this is the extremities, and happens very occasionally.

      What do you mean :P?

      LOLFag wrote:

      there are extreme cases of excessive hedonism, such as the 11-year old British girl who is showered with name brands despite the fact that her family isn't wealthy. Thus, in those cases, I strongly believe stricter punishments should be in effect. As with moderate cases, I believe moderate beatings should be in effect as well.

      The issue with the 11 year old British girl is an issue of poor parenting way beyond just an absence of beating being the problem. Not to mention that beating the girl probably would do little good anyway, such spoiling this far would render a sudden beating programme even more harmful.

      LOLFag wrote:

      And my point in this thread is to try and eliminate the negative connotations associated with beatings. I am absolutely certain that the majority of all beatings are not excessive and do not follow my scenario mentioned before.

      Where does that conclusion come from?

      LOLFag wrote:

      And yet, beatings still have such a negative reputation. In my opinion, people often exaggerate the beatings, and another factor that adds to the negative connotations is that people nowadays can't really tolerate much pain, therefore beatings that parents tolerated when they were kids might feel excessive to kids nowadays. It is indeed true that this is such a case; I myself have witnessed a case like this in which a beating is severely exaggerated. So really, we can't base how severe and appropriate a beating is, for parents may think it's alright since they've tolerated such severity but kids nowadays may feel it;s wrong because of our, say, lessening in pain tolerance. So really, it's hard to say whether the beating is right or wrong; we have no other arbiter but society, and this is bad because society is not always correct.

      This leads into a more philosophical issue that's been rolling around in my head for quite a while now, and that I'll probably start a thread on some time this week, over whether there are fundamental objective values in society that a minority should maintain in the face of change or whether society is absolutely fluid and change is always for the good of the changing needs of society. But I still feel inconclusive on the matter, so I can't reply too much. But I'd agree that there are beatings that are exaggerated (why the dramas around a mother slapping her teenage child once in anger in soaps?) though I think simply pinning a change in pain tolerance on a changing perception of the morality in child beating is too crude and too simplistic in itself.

      LOLFag wrote:

      In any case, I do not condone excessive punishment, but the occasional appropriate beating should be allowed without negative attention.

      There's something refreshingly moderate about this that appeals to me. But it depends what you mean by 'appropriate' and 'occasional' :P.

      LOLFag wrote:

      Anyway, sorry for the digression. As I do not live in England, I didn't catch your Guardian reference. Do you mind rephrasing?

      The main (and only, if you discount the crappy Independent) centre-left quality daily paper in the UK.
      [CENTER]


      [RIGHT]Ta-ta
      [/RIGHT]
      [/CENTER]
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      Esmo wrote:

      The word 'self-satisfaction' puts a negative slant on it, as it makes out that people are out doing stuff for themselves with no care for others. That's not what I'm about, because a society that fundamentally pleasure-loving would not be a good place to live in. But I think that if people were more relaxed and recognised that there's more to life than sheer success that life could be better for them. Of course I can't intrude that much on people's personal choices.


      But in order to have a satisfying life, you need money. And the more success in life you have, the more money you get. Unless you win the lottery or inherit a massive fortune, pleasure and work increase proportionally.

      So if a compromise is the best way forward (I agree) then is something as off-centre as beating really a compromise? If you beat your child over academia where is their freedom end of the deal?


      It depends on the severity of the beatings, I guess. I can't really indulge in information because I'm currently very hungry haha.


      If you look back on your beatings grateful, then there's nothing I can really say that condemns your parents for their actions. The right/wrong of beating children all hangs on the short and long term effects on the child and whether they'd be happier with or without beating. Most of which I reckon are hard to predict in the child at the time.


      What do you mean :P?


      I mean, by the way of an example, 10000 people would be regarded as a fairly large amount of people, but proportionally, it's not that big.

      The issue with the 11 year old British girl is an issue of poor parenting way beyond just an absence of beating being the problem. Not to mention that beating the girl probably would do little good anyway, such spoiling this far would render a sudden beating programme even more harmful.


      When I gave this example, I was meaning to give an example of the lack of proper parenting nowadays, and beatings seem to be a useful tool in proper parenting. And anyway, this was an example considering the extremities, therefore when I ask for severe beating, I was referring to punishments for drug usage, excessive partying, etc., where grounding really doesn't cut it.


      Where does that conclusion come from?


      Which one?


      This leads into a more philosophical issue that's been rolling around in my head for quite a while now, and that I'll probably start a thread on some time this week, over whether there are fundamental objective values in society that a minority should maintain in the face of change or whether society is absolutely fluid and change is always for the good of the changing needs of society. But I still feel inconclusive on the matter, so I can't reply too much. But I'd agree that there are beatings that are exaggerated (why the dramas around a mother slapping her teenage child once in anger in soaps?) though I think simply pinning a change in pain tolerance on a changing perception of the morality in child beating is too crude and too simplistic in itself.


      Ah well, this is a complicated matter that I cannot answer fully, at least not when I'm hungry.


      There's something refreshingly moderate about this that appeals to me. But it depends what you mean by 'appropriate' and 'occasional' :P.


      That depends on the culture and individual being.


      The main (and only, if you discount the crappy Independent) centre-left quality daily paper in the UK.


      I'll just nod and pretend I understand the reference.
      [CENTER].::ANIME is DOPAMINE to me::.

      [/CENTER]
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      british law says if the parents leave a mark on the child's body it is illegal

      i say it isnt right and should only be used in the most severe cases
      we all got troubles, we all got pain, we try to hang onto love, try to keep it the same, we all got issues, i put mine in my songs, sometimes im not fine but im carrying on
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      LOLFag wrote:

      But in order to have a satisfying life, you need money. And the more success in life you have, the more money you get. Unless you win the lottery or inherit a massive fortune, pleasure and work increase proportionally.

      But as we've already established, money is only an aid for satisfaction in life, and only then if money-based pleasure is your focus. Pleasure and work are also just as subjective. People have different views of pleasure, and how does one measure work? Just basing it off hours is a little crude. It all adds up to a complicated world where money is not necessarily a fundamental pivot of life.

      LOLFag wrote:

      It depends on the severity of the beatings, I guess. I can't really indulge in information because I'm currently very hungry haha.

      Go eat!
      But beating by nature is overtly forceful, even if it's not extremely severe, thereby still uncompromising.

      LOLFag wrote:

      When I gave this example, I was meaning to give an example of the lack of proper parenting nowadays, and beatings seem to be a useful tool in proper parenting. And anyway, this was an example considering the extremities, therefore when I ask for severe beating, I was referring to punishments for drug usage, excessive partying, etc., where grounding really doesn't cut it.

      I wouldn't really know whether beating has a better effect on extreme rule-breaking, but I suppose that I can certainly agree I don't think grounding has much meaningful effect.

      LOLFag wrote:

      Which one?

      "I am absolutely certain that the majority of all beatings are not excessive and do not follow my scenario mentioned before."
      [CENTER]


      [RIGHT]Ta-ta
      [/RIGHT]
      [/CENTER]
    • Re: Discipline and Abuse

      DamnImGood wrote:

      I'm all for spanking my kids. There are way too many undisciplined kids and teenagers out there that it's disgusting.

      I don't support beating, but I don't think spanking is wrong, but it must be used in moderation; you can't spank for everything.

      My parents spanked me and I turned out fine. I applaud the way they raised me.


      This.
      [CENTER]

      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]


      [/CENTER]