Why are child spankers running away from debate?

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 53
#31
DavidAZZ
DavidAZZ's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 95
0
1
2
DavidAZZ's avatar
DavidAZZ
0
1
2
-->
@Best.Korea
There are plenty of punishments which are not spanking nor words nor yelling.
I agree.  I was stating there are other options besides spanking.  Like I said, spanking should not be your first course of punishment.

Now to talk about your original post:

Child spankers are the group of people in society that rejects all science and statistics about spanking, and goes against them.
On the contrary, real "child spankers" read the science to make a proper judgement about how and when to spank your child.

It seems to me that you are confusing discipline with abuse.
Topic's author
#32
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@DavidAZZ
On the contrary, real "child spankers" read the science to make a proper judgement about how and when to spank your child.
Good joke.

#33
DavidAZZ
DavidAZZ's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 95
0
1
2
DavidAZZ's avatar
DavidAZZ
0
1
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Having children is immoral, so best parents are indeed the ones who never have children.
Kind of a catch 22 here.  If you have no children, then you are not a parent.  

The cool thing about people like you is that you will never propagate your ideas through a new generation.

Since you mentioned your children and how you beat them, therefore personal example, personal attack would also be warranted, but you are new to the site, so I will pass on the personal attack opportunity.
Attack on. :) But referring to me beating my children is ignorant on your part.  What is your definition of "spanking" and how does that translate into "beating"?  I thought I got got whooped pretty bad when I was a kid when my dad would belt me 3 times for bad behavior until I met the guy that would get 20 or 30 at one time when he was a kid.

Topic's author
#34
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@DavidAZZ
If you have no children, then you are not a parent
True.

The cool thing about people like you is that you will never propagate your ideas through a new generation.
True.

Attack on. :) But referring to me beating my children is ignorant on your part.  What is your definition of "spanking" and how does that translate into "beating"?  I thought I got got whooped pretty bad when I was a kid when my dad would belt me 3 times for bad behavior until I met the guy that would get 20 or 30 at one time when he was a kid.
One case of abuse justifies another?

Since you are not presenting any arguments for spanking, I dont see what is it that you are looking for here.
#35
DavidAZZ
DavidAZZ's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 95
0
1
2
DavidAZZ's avatar
DavidAZZ
0
1
2
-->
@Best.Korea
One case of abuse justifies another?

Since you are not presenting any arguments for spanking, I dont see what is it that you are looking for here.
My point is that you state any kind of spanking as abuse.  I'm saying that you are ignorant in thinking that spanking of any kind is abuse and that a corrective action, whether its words,  grounding or spanking will help a child in helping them learn rules and how to obey authority.

It seems that spanking get a bad rap for a few reasons:

1. It physically hurts while other way options don't get the physical sting or pain
2. It can turn VERY abusive and such abuse can be covered by "discipline"
3. It's biblical

Have you considered that any type of discipline can be abusive when brought out of context or brought to extremes?  Why only spanking?

Topic's author
#36
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@DavidAZZ
So, still not a single argument for spanking?

I am curious, do you know what is an argument?

"It physically hurts while other way options don't get the physical sting or pain"

Good job making an argument against spanking.

Now try to make an argument for spanking.

Let me give you a few hints so you dont wonder around anymore:

1. Argument must have facts as premises, not assumptions as premises.

2. Your argument must explain why spanking is a better option than any other punishment.

So you must prove that not only spanking achieves some of your goals, but that its better for well being of a child than non-spanking.

It must be proven to be better, since it involves physical pain and fear where many non-spank punishments dont.

3. Your argument must not be based on specific fantasy cases which you assume exist, but overall cases of spanking which are supported  by statistics and data.

4. Now, you may claim that without spanking, you would find it more difficult to raise your children, but thats not an argument, as child's well being comes as priority over your little difficulties.

With all these hints I gave you, I am sure you will be able to form some argument.
#37
DavidAZZ
DavidAZZ's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 95
0
1
2
DavidAZZ's avatar
DavidAZZ
0
1
2
-->
@Best.Korea
I will concede to say that my posts are not an argument to your standards.

So to try to be more compliant to your standards:

1. Argument must have facts as premises, not assumptions as premises.
This is completely arbitrary, meaning I can bring whatever I want as "facts".  I would state that my experience is the most fact that I can bring in, but in your opinion, what can be considered a fact in this argument?  Science study?  Some guy's book and his notes?  Do they have to have a degree?  Please define.

2. Your argument must explain why spanking is a better option than any other punishment.
I will clarify that spanking is not THE BEST option in every situation. It is necessary in some situations.  You seem to think that parents that spank are hauling off and beating their children for every infraction.

3. Your argument must not be based on specific fantasy cases which you assume exist, but overall cases of spanking which are supported  by statistics and data.
Again, arbitrary.  My experiences and books I have read make my words the best statistics and data I have ever accumulated.

So now typing all of this, I believe you are grasping at straws for a fight that I cannot bring.  So I'll just leave this here, that your OP comment about us not believing science is ignorant and coming from a non-parent like you, makes it sound very silly.  All the data that I don't and do bring will be useless unless you know how it is applied.

Topic's author
#38
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@DavidAZZ
This is completely arbitrary, meaning I can bring whatever I want as "facts".
No, facts are usually scientific studies.

I would state that my experience is the most fact that I can bring in
Well, you would think, but no, not even close to truth.

Your experience is irrelevant, as you cannot prove it.

Now, I gave you an opportunity to make an argument.

I even went as far to give you a detailed explanation of what an argument is and how it works.

I will not try anymore.

I dont have that much patience.
#39
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,290
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
The problem is.

For some.

"Spanking"

Is a positively connotative word.


Abuse can also have connotations.

Though more inclined towards the negative.


Just saying.

Spanking has both arguments and rhymes.


Whereas.

What rhymes with abuse?


Also.

Avoid beat and whip.

6. To make a smooth or frothy mixture.


Mousse for sure.

Is a smooth or frothy mixture.




#40
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,135
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

OMG, is that why Trump won't debate?
#41
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,236
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
For all those parents that are having problems with their children, I suggest you to send your misbehaving child to the military school if you dont want to become a spanker. There the officers will not just beat the shit out of these unfits but also they will instill values, discipline and knowledge.

My uncle still thanks my granpa for having sent him to the military school. He could have ended up being a gangster but instead he's a proud father of five children today thanks to the military life he went through. 
#42
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
You would have to compare studies on properly spanked kids vs non spanked and usually studies will mix abusive parents with the spanners and skew the results. The burden of proof is shared in the debate but voters aren't very smart and are usually biased against the spanking position. Given actual studies that show harm in apanking and zero studies showing benefits (due to obvious constraints ts on measuring this), it puts an unfair burden on the debater, debating in favor of spanking children. 

I will say that YYW now known as coal did a debate on corporal punishment against one of the best if not the best debater on the site and absolutely wiped the floor taking a pro spanking position. You should try to defeat his arguments and then reconsider your position if you can't, because despite the disadvantage the position gave him, he won. This means that he is most likely correct Given the following

1. He defeated a top debater 
2. His position gave him an immediate disadvantage in the debate
3. He still came out on top
Topic's author
#43
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
You would have to compare studies on properly spanked kids vs non spanked
You would think, but no.

"Properly spanked kids" cannot come without "non-properly spanked kids".

Basically, any time you have one in society, you also have the other.

Topic's author
#44
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
I will say that YYW now known as coal did a debate on corporal punishment against one of the best if not the best debater on the site and absolutely wiped the floor taking a pro spanking position.
Coal has already lost that debate against me and athias in the forum section long ago.

I dont see the point in reading his cherry picked nonsense.

Studies are not done by cherry picking, where you only take cases of spanking where children turned out fine to conclude that spanked children turn out fine.

Thats circular reasoning.

The reality is that

Spanking includes:
1. Children who are spanked non-properly
2. Children who are spanked properly.

You cannot have spanking in society without both of these cases happening.

Additionally,

Non-spanking includes:
1. Children who werent spanked but were abused in other non-physical ways.
2. Children who werent spanked and werent abused in other ways.

Since we see that non-spanking outweighs spanking by mere deduction,

as non-spanking also means no physical abuse, where spanking includes physical abuse and also any abuse which is also included in non-spanking,

One can only conclude that spanking is harmful.
#45
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
I think that's a lot like showing studies on parents who use a pillow to another their kid to death mixed with parents who have pillows in their home for their kid and compare that study to one where parents have no pillows in the house and then saying. 

"Hey look pillow having parents are more likely to have kids who are smothered to death"

I dont think it's a fair comparison. You could respond that parents who don't have pillows in the house may also smother their children with other objects or engage in other forms of abuse,  but the comparison won't be fair. What you want to do is have non abusive spanking vs non abusive timeouts and compare them. 

You do make a good point, if I am representing your intention correctly. I think you state that allowing spanking would also empower not just non abusive parents but parents who would take the practice too far, either using it when inappropriate or by using it too roughly. 

I would cou ter that in most cases of abusive parenting, these are parents who don't obey the law anyway. It still leaves out abusive parents who are unintentionally abusive and believe they are merely disciplining. 

In that case I would say that the cost to freedom in how you discipline your child needs to be weighed against the excess children abused and I would argue that freedom is more important than the slight impact you would have preventing abuse. 

I think most debate judges would also value freedom over an extremely slight reduction in child abuse.
Topic's author
#46
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
I would cou ter that in most cases of abusive parenting, these are parents who don't obey the law anyway.
You would assume that, but no.

Studies clearly say that parents who give up on spanking are on average less abusive, 

As their children turn out better on average,

therefore making spanking more abusive on average,

As persons who practice spanking are more abusive on average.

So one can say its still preferable to give up on spanking, as spanking is related to more abuse.

The only counter argument possible is that those who spank would, if they give up on spanking, abuse children in some other equal or worse way.

However, countries that banned spanking disprove that assumption.

I think most debate judges would also value freedom over an extremely slight reduction in child abuse
I would say that defending the point that "causing pain to child's butt is freedom" would indeed be a complete nonsense.

Maybe you could say that it gives more freedom to parents in terms of free time.
#47
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
You are defining spanking as abuse in and if itself to give yourself an easier argument. You'll need to fix that before there is anything worth responding to in that regard. 

I would say that defending the point that "causing pain to child's butt is freedom" would indeed be a complete nonsense
That's a bad argument. I could easily say you shouldn't for a kid to get vaccinated because it causes pain to stick a needle in their arm. 

You have to do a cost benefit analysis.

Does causing a negative association with behavior that if continued into adulthood will create a very rough life for a child cause more pain than them becoming the type of person to have that terrible life?

Associating immediate pain with harmful decisions Is a more effective tool than getting timeout when the kid gets home from the store and has already forgotten what he did wrong. 

There is obviously a type of bell curve. For example if a kid is reaching for a pan of boiling water on a stove that can permanently disgigure him than yelling timeout because you don't believe in hitting them, will likely not save them from pulling the boiling water on their head. A quick smack will have them associate pain with the behavior and immediately stop it, keeping them safer in the future and then there is spanking them enough to make their ass welt, which would accomplish would a quick behind smack would do but leave the child fearing you, sowing distrust and having harmful psychological impacts.

The problem with a lot of these spanking studies is that it conflate different types of spankings. Most parents who spank are probably only doing it from like the window of about 4 and 7 years old before moving to time outs because now the child is in the age of reason. You are co floating parents who do it correctly with those who don't. 

The same issue would be unfair if I looked at the impact of neglectful parents who never punish their child for any reason and conflated them with non spanjers, especially if the sample study I used was mostly neglectful parents, as is the biased sample studies of spanners. 

You are just not going to have enough to fulfill your burden of proof. The data doesn't exist to do so and you'll have to adjust your argument. 

You probably have enough to defeat a poor debater, but your argument is going g to be better if you just concedes that properly spanked kids probably have equal or superior outcomes to other forms of punishment but since so few parents can manage to do it correctly that iT benefits society more to just ban it outright. 

In debate you can gain a lot by co ceding some points. In fact if you find yourself in a debate where you concede zero points, it is a good indicator you are losing and should reconsider your approach. 
Topic's author
#48
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
if you just concedes that properly spanked kids probably have equal or superior outcomes to other forms of punishment but since so few parents can manage to do it correctly that iT benefits society more to just ban it outright
There is no reason to concede to an assumption.

Only an idiot concedes to an assumption.


For example if a kid is reaching for a pan of boiling water on a stove that can permanently disgigure him than yelling timeout because you don't believe in hitting them, will likely not save them from pulling the boiling water on their head.
It amazes me how you cant imagine more than two options in that situation, or any other solution.

A quick smack will have them associate pain with the behavior and immediately stop it, keeping them safer in the future and then there is spanking them enough to make their ass welt, which would accomplish would a quick behind smack would do but leave the child fearing you, sowing distrust and having harmful psychological impacts.
Or you could just not let a child reach a pan of boiling water by reaching out for the child.

There is no situation in which you can hit a child faster than reaching out for the child, since the first is included in second.

You do have ability to prevent a child from doing something without hitting a child.

Its called prediction and prevention.

I dont know how is this a mystery to you.

Additionally, any situation where you leave boiling water in same room where 3 year old is alone just makes you extremely retarded parent.

And extremely retarded parents cant tell when spanking is beneficial and when not.

And really, the idea that you think spanking works better than time out in that situation is amazing, but I really have no time to deal with whatever is going on in your head.

You are co floating parents who do it correctly with those who don't. 
I have already explained to you that even if there were parents who do it correctly, there would be also those who do it incorrectly, and they cannot be avoided when spanking is legal.

And banning it completely is better than allowing it, so your assumptions of some "correct spanking" dont work even if true.

They also have no any proof of being true, because statistically, you cannot even account for them.

So your "proof" is reduced to assumption which has no proof to support it.
Topic's author
#49
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
Associating immediate pain with harmful decisions Is a more effective tool than getting timeout when the kid gets home from the store and has already forgotten what he did wrong. 
Thats your assumption, which is unsupported by any evidence.

Also, you have an incorrect assumption that a child needs to be punished for every bad behavior.

I dont even know how does one develop such a mentality where he treats children as criminals who dont even get fair trial, but yes your world view raises criminals.
#50
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Thats your assumption, which is unsupported by any evidence.
I guess I am done talking to you since you are at the point where you think it is an assumption that negative reinforcement works to curb behavior. 

You are just looking to contradict me for the sake of contradicting me, because if you didn't believe spanking effected behavior in any way than you would literally destroy the o ly premise you presented for banning spanking.
Topic's author
#51
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
where you think it is an assumption that negative reinforcement works to curb behavior. 
I already stated proof that it turns children into criminals on average.

I guess we are just supposed to trust you that some of your imaginary way of spanking works better than other ways, so that you can feel better about not being able to give actual evidence.

if you didn't believe spanking effected behavior in any way than you would literally destroy the o ly premise you presented for banning spanking.
Am I speaking Chinese?

I clearly said that spanking effected behavior... in a negative way, not in effective way.

I dont see why you feel such an overwhelming urge to rationalize hitting child's butt as a rational human behavior and deny all studies and all alternative methods.
#52
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
I already stated proof that it turns children into criminals on average.
Theb why did you directly state that spanking curbing negative behavior was an assumption?

Are you even keeping track of your premises and conclusions?

Are you keeping track of mine?

I dont see why you feel such an overwhelming urge to rationalize hitting child's butt as a rational human behavior and deny all studies and all alternative methods

We are just examining your arguments not anybody beliefs here. You created a burden where you have to either prove that all forms of spanking are inferior to all forms of non spanking or you have to acknowledge that you poorly formulated your argument. 

Appeals to emotion aren't going to work here because it goes both ways. A oarent who lightly smacks their child's bottom and inflicts a tiny amount of pain can easily argue that the emotional torture of a timeout is worse for a child, or since you haven't actually chosen a position to defend but merely attack spanking they could maybe argue that corporal punishment is superior to never teaching your kids their are consequences for their actions. 

Of course you can argue that there are better alternatives to spanking but it would be on you to prove the alternatives are better as you accepted the burden of proof and that the alternative is better than all forms of spanking.

Clearly you would agree that not all forms of time out are the same? You would recognize forcing your kid to stare at a wall for 10 minutes is not the same as having them stare at it without sleep or food or water for 48 hours. You need to prove your position or moreclearly state it . 
Topic's author
#53
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,711
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
I already stated proof that it turns children into criminals on average.
Theb why did you directly state that spanking curbing negative behavior was an assumption?
I dont see what you dont understand about the above statement,

but I am not exactly payed to teach you.