16-year-old girl arrested for hitting father who was spanking her
- Thread starter Flying Spaghetti Monster
- Start date
Aaannnd... naturally this devolves into a religious argument. Or extremes from both sides.
I don't think I am being extreme. If someone is going to justify child abuse by quoting the Bible I think I, and others, have the right to point out the flaws in doing so.
Aaannnd... naturally this devolves into a religious argument. Or extremes from both sides.
I don't think I am being extreme. If someone is going to justify child abuse by quoting the Bible I think I, and others, have the right to point out the flaws in doing so.
Sorry, Miss Chicken, the "extreme" part was not targeted at you, and you're right. It'd be nice if the loudest opinions weren't "Everything in the Bible is the only way" or "The Bible is hogwash and only good for justifying human rights abuses." I exaggerate, of course, and I don't think you're doing either of those.
Accusations of "child abuse" (like accusations of "incest" or "pedophilia") make me nervous when thrown about because they're too often emotionally-laden attack words without a lot of substance or careful discernment behind them.
The kid is a problem child. That's hard. But, why do some people still not realize that spanking with a belt is a sure way of making things worse? That you're not giving punishment but actually dominating the kid, thereby giving it no other option then to fight back harder? Especially when the kid has reached puberty; rebellion is in it's blood -- you don't want to turn that natural (and healthy) rebellion into unhealthy hatred.
Spanking with a belt: that's not giving a correctional slap; it's child abuse; the father should be arrested for it. If you need to physically punish your child, one slap should be enough.
Spanking with a belt: that's not giving a correctional slap; it's child abuse; the father should be arrested for it. If you need to physically punish your child, one slap should be enough.
As usual, insufficient details of events precludes "taking sides".
--Ted
--Ted
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
16 is way (WAY) too old to be spanking your kids. WAY TOO OLD.
Not to mention it's pretty normal for kids at that age to be rebellious. It's just a bad idea all around to try and spank a kid that age. Add to that the whole feeling of "my dad has a belt! My dad's about to abuse me!!!!" (regardless of if the kid started the whole thing).
I haven't even scratched the sexual connotation of a grown man spanking a 16 year old girl.
Not to mention it's pretty normal for kids at that age to be rebellious. It's just a bad idea all around to try and spank a kid that age. Add to that the whole feeling of "my dad has a belt! My dad's about to abuse me!!!!" (regardless of if the kid started the whole thing).
I haven't even scratched the sexual connotation of a grown man spanking a 16 year old girl.
Sorry, the only potentially "missing detail" that would make a difference in this case where the father's behavior is concerned - that of striking someone with an object - would be some evidence that he was physically defending himself or someone else. Interestingly enough, no one has suggested that.
Right? That's what you do to ten year olds, and only in the most drastic of situations.
This is what happens when you CONSTANTLY do it, and it gets out of hand. Lashing out.
I was eight when I first decided to fight back. Tried gouging my Dad's eyeball out. Almost had to go the the hospital.
Yet after that, knowing I disappointed him was punishment enough....
Wow... Things changed all the time in my family.
Without more facts you can't declare either side right or wrong. I do think spanking/belting a 16 year old will have little effect on changing behavior but that's not the point of contention. The question is why it was acceptable to arrest the 16 year old but not the father who admitted he was using a belt on his teenage daughter. Given the daughter has a probation, it's plausible that's why she was arrested but I still think that's a stretch to say why only she was arrested.
Edit: Another thought I had is when is it okay to arrest a child for striking back? If this were not because of her probation, then would they have arrested her if she was 12? or 8? At what age do you arrest a minor for hitting their parent that (might have) excessively punished them?
Edit: Another thought I had is when is it okay to arrest a child for striking back? If this were not because of her probation, then would they have arrested her if she was 12? or 8? At what age do you arrest a minor for hitting their parent that (might have) excessively punished them?
False. This was about respect for authority and she had none. You disrepect authority and you get punished. That's life.
This didn't teach nothing at all about respect, it's about power. You can teach respect of authority without assaulting a teenager with a belt. You're sort of supporting Miss Chicken's point, if it's about respect then how is it wrong for a husband to whip his wife in the mouth for not respecting him?
I was belted and whipped growing up, all it did was make me despise my mother and teach me that if I was going to break the rules either make sure I didn't get caught or that if I did do it big enough to make it worth the punishment.
haha, oh wow, this world has me laughing my ass off. What a backwords society we live in.
Anyways, I laugh at the people who complain about getting the belt. I got it as a kid and it made me a very respectable person. I was afraid of getting it so I straightened up and didn't step out of line. If I had just got yelled at, I would have just laughed and cruised on out the door to play with my friends and act like an idiot. The fear of a leather belt prevented that from happening.
Anyways, I laugh at the people who complain about getting the belt. I got it as a kid and it made me a very respectable person. I was afraid of getting it so I straightened up and didn't step out of line. If I had just got yelled at, I would have just laughed and cruised on out the door to play with my friends and act like an idiot. The fear of a leather belt prevented that from happening.
So if you disagree with your boss he can take a belt to you? He can't can he? If he did he would likely find himself being arrested for assault and likely sued. Miss Chicken is right but it's not even that specific, it's not teaching respect it's teaching that if someone doesn't do what you say, use violence to enforce your will. That's not how life works.
Also if this type of punishment is so effective, why does it only seem to apply to those under 18? It couldn't be because they have less rights and so can be treated as less than human could it?
Last edited:
I directly blame corporal punishment on my issues with authority. The only people I respected and listened to growing up were the ones that took the time to explain to me why it was wrong and took the time to talk me about why I did what I did. My mother and my grandfather-- both hardline, spare the rod spoil the child types-- I had no respect for and the more they spank/whipped the more I rebelled against just to show them they couldn't break me.
To put it another way: If it works, why isn't it used in prisons and jails as a correctional tool?
Others take the opposite as TheGallifreyanSith pointed out and become even more rebellious and anti-authority. So it is a tricky and difficult balance. If all that is done is verbal, that might be fine for some, others need more physical reinforcement.
Then there are that tiny minority who will never accept authority or behave in society properly. They are the ones born without a limit or inhibition and no amount of verbal or physical punishment or even abuse can alter them. Fortunately that's a rarity where a child is just impossible to discipline. Usually those types are sociopaths or whatever the current PC term for psychopath is these days.
The thinking that you must use only one form of punishment for every child is incredibly short sighted. Some children need to be kept more in line than others but it should never be to the point of abuse and the less physical action necessary the better. Even how you talk or physically punish can matter. Yelling probably won't work as well as talking and explaining at their level what they did wrong and reinforcing not to repeat. Sometimes it needs reinforced with a raised voice or maybe a swat with the hand. When you start smacking them in the face, whipping them with a belt (especially bare-skinned) then you're bordering on going too far.
I had plenty of belts when I was a kid. It didn't change my attitude and only made me worse by getting better at hiding anything I would get in trouble for. Eventually I sorted myself out but hitting me with a belt would not have worked and if anything made me worse by rebelling and doing exactly what I wasn't supposed to do.
Mum was the only one of my parents who bested me and never when my father was in the house.
We were better behaved when my father was around because we respected him and wanted to please him. We knew that there was no pleasing Mum, that she would always find a reason to hit us.
The most common reason that we got hit was for "picking" on our little brother. The most teagic thing in is we didn't even pick on him. He would order us to give him some toy, or candy we had bought etc and if we didn't he would run crying to my mother saying we had hit him even though we hadn't. Sometimes he would pinch us or kick us around the shins until we hit him and then he would run to our mother complaining that we had hit him.
When I was 17 and my brother was 14 I bought a pair of sneakers out of my wage so that I could play badminton with them. My brother decided to borrow them and took them to school. I asked him to bring them home. He wouldn't. He and I got into an argument over it. Mum came in a took his side and said as he needed the sneakers I would have to buy myself a new pair. These were brand new sneakers that I only got to wear once. After my mother left the room I hit my brother over the head with my badminton racket. MHe went running to my mother, she came in a was very threatening towards me poking me, screaming at me and pushing me around.
Should my mother have been allowed to take a belt to me to teach me to respect her?
According to my mother my brother was a well-behaved child who never gave her any trouble while her daughters were rebellious and who got into trouble. I admit I was taken home by the police one day very drunk I also dropped out of school against my parents' wishes etc.
We were better behaved when my father was around because we respected him and wanted to please him. We knew that there was no pleasing Mum, that she would always find a reason to hit us.
The most common reason that we got hit was for "picking" on our little brother. The most teagic thing in is we didn't even pick on him. He would order us to give him some toy, or candy we had bought etc and if we didn't he would run crying to my mother saying we had hit him even though we hadn't. Sometimes he would pinch us or kick us around the shins until we hit him and then he would run to our mother complaining that we had hit him.
When I was 17 and my brother was 14 I bought a pair of sneakers out of my wage so that I could play badminton with them. My brother decided to borrow them and took them to school. I asked him to bring them home. He wouldn't. He and I got into an argument over it. Mum came in a took his side and said as he needed the sneakers I would have to buy myself a new pair. These were brand new sneakers that I only got to wear once. After my mother left the room I hit my brother over the head with my badminton racket. MHe went running to my mother, she came in a was very threatening towards me poking me, screaming at me and pushing me around.
Should my mother have been allowed to take a belt to me to teach me to respect her?
According to my mother my brother was a well-behaved child who never gave her any trouble while her daughters were rebellious and who got into trouble. I admit I was taken home by the police one day very drunk I also dropped out of school against my parents' wishes etc.
It was used for thousands of years. its only been within recent times where people have stopped using by saying it was inhumane
Rii
Rear Admiral
Do you jerk off to footage of protesters getting beat down by cops, or does your heart condition preclude that?
wow, what a bunch of pricks on this board, other than (cherrypicked) bible quotes, what excuse, ANY excuse, would make rational sense(well, rational for someone TRYING to be rational, it's obvoius that some people here see children as property) for justifying something like that? "well, the kid was a brat and had it coming" yes, the child grew up in a bubble, she became trouble all by herself, it wasn't the constant beatings with a belt (you KNOW this wasn't an isolated incident), it wasn't the fact that she lives in a depressing shithole (I used to live there), the apple allways falls miles away from the tree
Similar threads
