Sp*nking, Kids, Teens, God
Posted on | November 28, 2007 at 10:50 pm | 14 Comments
Update: Due to web searches from individuals looking for some questionable kinky thrills constantly landing on this blog entry, I have edited it and the comments to replace a letter in a particular word (in all its forms) with an asterisk (*). I think you can still figure out the word.
So, Massachusetts is considering a Sp*nking Ban, making it illegal to sp*nk your kids. Now I don’t condone child abuse, and I think that people who abuse children are just about the lowest form of scum on the planet. However, there is that voice inside of me that thinks there are some circumstances when parents should be allowed to administer that kind of punishment to the little buggers. Heck, my parents sp*nked me, and look at how I turned out! Okay, bad example, since I’m so emotionally stunted it’s unbelievable. But anyway… I mean… I draw the line at waterboarding and electric shocks and all, but a little light sp*nking for misbehaving might occasionally be beneficial to the child’s development. It certainly made me want to be more of a boy scout. But I’m not a psychologist and I don’t have any kids, so don’t give any validity to my opinion. I’m curious about what you parents out there think. Is sp*nking ever justified? InfK and Fahey, does little Spikey ever get his behind paddled for drinking too much hard cider?
In other news, God told Sonny Lubick to resign as the CSU football coach. Oh wait, I’m confused. God was busy that day telling Richard Roberts to resign as president of Oral Roberts University. God once told me to eat more vegetables and not pick on my little sister. Oh wait, that was my parents. Right before they sp*nked me.
In still more news, astronomers have discovered “teenager galaxies”. However, the scientists were not able to communicate with them since the young galaxies were busy text messaging that pretty nebula next door. And they’re hard to see in the daytime, since they keep sleeping in.
They’ve removed the anti-religion references in the movie version of The Golden Compass, yet Catholics are still up in arms about the movie because it could lead impressionable Christian kids to read the book the movie is based on, where they would encounter those anti-religion sentiments and might begin to question things. I don’t quite understand why it’s okay for one fantasy movie like Narnia to subtly promote Christianity to kids, while it’s not okay to have the opposing viewpoint subtly portrayed in another fantasy movie. I didn’t see athiests boycotting or picketing Narnia. Why can’t kids make up their own minds about what to believe? It’s the old double standard. Tolerance should go both ways. Ah well. Christians and atheists alike sp*nk their kids, so at least there is some common ground there to build on.
Jogged Today: No, it was snowing.
Today’s Weight: 163.2 lbs
Lunch Yesterday: Cheesy Beefy Melt combo at Taco Bell. (The post-Thanksgiving bad-eating binge continues.)
Pet Peeve of the Day: My DVR said it was going to record Pushing Daises tonight, even though it was on at a different time than usual, but it really didn’t.
Latre.
Comments
14 Responses to “Sp*nking, Kids, Teens, God”
November 29th, 2007 @ 9:38 am
For me at least, it’s not a matter of long-term psychological harm so much as it is, what you’re teaching them. Sp*nking and other means of corporal punishment are at best unimaginative, a sign that you have no better argument than “might makes right”, and that message comes through implicitly or otherwise.
I’m certainly not experienced or seasoned as a parent so I don’t know what’ll actually happen with Spike – the wife and I haven’t even discussed the matter much yet. But I hope we can come up with forms of discipline that convey our message in a firm, clear and above all consistent fashion, rather than just making him wonder “why are they hitting me?” After all, it’s been proven time and again that you can train puppies without smacking them – so why not children?
(Excuse me, the boy is fiddling with the stove knobs again, gotta run over and try to explain combustion to him again…)
November 29th, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
InfK is right on, and furthermore, sp*nking is a tempting emotional outlet for an angry, frustrated parent. If you’re sp*nking (a) to demonstrate that “might makes right”, it’s a crummy message but at least you have a message for your child, something to make sp*nking coherent. Sort of. If you’re sp*nking (b) because you’re pissed off at your kid’s behavior and it offers a release, you’re one scary parent. And if you’re sp*nking at all, take a long honest look at your motivation, because there’s probably more (b) in it than you’re willing to admit.
Now when I was a kid, my dad kept a wooden paddle, on a loop of rope, hung up on a hook in the basement. It was mostly for show, and worked as such, the threat of violence being enough to keep my sister and me in check. Let me tell ya, when Susy or I actually got sent down to retrieve The Paddle we knew we were in big, big trouble. Now I never got the humor of this until about three or four years ago, but my dad had written on one side in Sharpie: “Janet’s paddle – this side up” and on the other: “Susy’s paddle – this side up”. His motivation for the use of corporal punishment being (c), apparently.
November 29th, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
And on the other point – I don’t think sp*nking should be illegal. I think child abuse is a moral issue and since reasonable people can draw the line between discipline and abuse at different points, writing it into legislation is the wrong approach. Then again, most of the time that seems to be what legislators DO – pick the wrong approach…
I’m already filing away compromising photos, stories and ideas for future non-corporal – psychological! – punishment, for when he’s a teenager and far too big to sp*nk (with anything less than an automobile). Imagine bringing your first girlfriend home and she’s greeted with “Hi, I’m Spike’s dad, I gave him his first bath – want to hear how he cried? I’ve had the tape cued up ever since he broke the dishwasher when he was 10…”
November 29th, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
God talks to Sonny Lubick? Phht. Alabama football coach Nick Saban said that his team’s recent losses were comperable to the tragedies of 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. And all Lubick can offer us is hearing voices?!
As for Golden Compass, I don’t think it should have been changed. Anyone who is secure in their beliefs should be able to accept that not everyone thinks as they do. As for religious symbolism in in Narnia, there are two things a kid could say about Aslan. 1: Could that lion be a symbolic representation of the prophet and philosopher believed by some to be the founder of their faith? and 2: Wow! A talking lion! If your child voices the former, have him drug-tested before he starts contemplating potential tiny universes in his fingernail.
November 29th, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
So, who’s the Big Bad in the new, non-God version of The Golden Compass? Bono? As for “combustion”…ah yes, the snazzy stylings of Miss Lily Banquette and The Millionaire…a kid’s never too young.
November 29th, 2007 @ 8:19 pm
I think child abuse is a moral issue and since reasonable people can draw the line between discipline and abuse at different points, writing it into legislation is the wrong approach.
I don’t think parenting should be legislated either. Or, if it were, it should be in the form of potential parents having to get certified (like an Oracle DBA) before they can rear offspring.
November 29th, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
According to the article about the Catholic group opposing Golden Compass, it is headed by Bill Donohue. You may remember that he was parodied in the Easter episode of Southpark, where he had Jesus thrown in the Vatican prison for not being Christian enough.
November 29th, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
re: “not Christian enough” – When Jerry Falwell died, I tried to put a t-shirt up on CafePress:
“Jerry Falwell, 1933-2007 – the Earth just got a little more Christian…”
They yanked it for using a celebrity name without permission.
November 30th, 2007 @ 4:00 am
My man put it more eloquently than I. I dont want to sp*nk the baby. Then there’s the abhorrent task of ‘reasoning/deflecting/otherwise-amusing’ the small boy child/whirlwind who runs at the stove a million miles an hour with a lance in one hand a flaming poi in the other…
Fun!
Spike’s Mum! xxxx
December 13th, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
Yes sp*nking should be around, my 5 year old daughter thought it was okay to pull a scene and when i didnt get her a toy she screamed. I told her when we get home you are going to recieve a sp*nking. She never did it again.
December 13th, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
Dam right, these people that agrees sp*nking should not be around there wrong! I sp*nk my kids at least once a day. Each time they pull a scene there buts get wacked, and they have to say sorry
December 14th, 2007 @ 4:12 am
Gee Dana, if you only have to do it once on some days, sounds like it’s pretty effective.
December 14th, 2007 @ 5:57 am
I wish to note that both “brooke” and “Dana” came from the same IP address, and that “they” found the site by searching for “sp*nking should be allowed”. Note the repeated use of the phrase “pull a scene”.
I must say that this uncovers the best eloquent argument against sp*nking that I’ve seen yet.
March 20th, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
There is absolutely nothing wrong with sp*nking. I used to get a strapping on my bare butt when I acted up and I deserved it. Kids who are coddled and never experience real punishments never learn how to cope with real life adversity.