Beating of kids or threating them with light violence
-
Peace all,
Personally I'm very much against using any violence against children. Growing up I was very sensitive. I was the good kid because I always wanted to please my parents and make them happy with me. Even getting yelled at was something I didn't handle well, so I just made sure it never happened. I don't believe violence is at all necessary to raise a child well.
Now my partner was raised with physical punishments and does think that light violence can be good for kids. We haven't had many talks about it, but it worries me a bit. But anyways. That's a different topic.
-
You can be firm with a child without inflicting physical pain. And a child that has not been reared properly from the beginning is harder to handle so if one later feel they have to use physical methods it means they did wrong to begin with. Often many children also grow a distant relationship to their parent when the child is exposed to abuse.
Usually the best method is to make ways to have the child face consequences for their deeds. Sanctions is one way, but parental guidance is also required in explaining the error to the child and explicitly telling why the error is wrong. If the child is taught empathy early on it will help making the child more tranquil, empathy is a great key. On top of that, it is important as a parent to act as a role model since the child will simply imitate your behavior and if you have a lousy appearance you cannot expect your own child to behave any better. You must be well aware of what kind of things in your surroundings that you give approval of, even if it is in fiction.
Being kind to your child and having a moderate amount of "treats" (not candy) helps both showing correct behavior and also leaves room for sanctions when needed as you have something to deprive them of as a consequence of their actions. The children will not do bad things without influence from peers, their own desire and their instinct, so making them aware of such affections early on in life may help too.
Wellness to you
Amenuel -
Each child is each child. To have the same rule for all children is to ignore that they are persons. And each adult is alo each adult.
Children feel mistreated when people do not even get angry with them when they, the children behave in such a way as it would be logical for anybody to be angry. And it is false that they are encouraged to be angry themselves because of that. Some children do try and defy their parents and opush them to the limit, because they want to test them. If I can puh my mother or my father to the limit and she or he accepts it and does not do anything to me, how on earth are they going to protect me from harm if push come to shove. If they are that meek with me I just cannot trust this parent to protect me.
If they get reassured in that way not only they wont be angry with their parents but will love them more and will trust them more and will rely on them more. A parent who is too meek when she or he should be firm is of no use to a child.
I agree that beating on the face is inadmissible. not because of the pain or what but because it is humilliating. No person at no age. But I have never seen any child to bear scars because at some time the mother gave him or her a spanking. It is definitely bettr than to be cold or indifferet to them.
I was in a boarding school when I was a child younger than ten and none of the ladies teachers ever put her hand on anybody. Just one of them, when she really got fed up and ost her temper. She did it on the spur of the moment but none of the children disliked her. May be she was a little feared but not disliked. She was also the one who used to give us bear hugs and we really felt that she cared for us, and she did care. But she was human and I never resented her nor remember that any other children resented her. I guess now she would be thrown out of the school right away.
Coldness is far more damaging than spanking. Up to a certain age, spanking does not do any damage to a child. After that age, of course it is out of place. What damages them at any age and causes them pain that lasts forever is injustice even if there is no spanking or any physical violence. Injustice is far more damaging and a tragedy for children. It would be better if parents got lectures on that rather than on spanking when the kids get impossible.
Salaam
What I have seen is that the missing ingredient is mostly love. It seems that people mix spanking with beating. Those who beat their children, in the way that is not good, does so nopt out of love but out of mental misery. It seems that too often beating goes hand in hand with lack of love. So the problem is not spanking, but lack of love and especially when lack of love is accompanied by oppressive beating.
The amount of spanking will not determine the effect on the child as much as the amount of love will. Lack of love is horrible. Lack of love plus demeaning beating is even worse. Some spanking (with sanity) but with lots of love, won't have that bad effect on the children. Beating (abuse) is not done with sanity. Spanking and beating are different things.
as far as I see it right now at least
-
That is what I mean there is no "lack of violence" that can replace love, affection, fondness. If we love the children and show it and do not make them starve for nearness, God willing, they will grow to be sane people.
And as Zulf says, there is a big, very very big difference between beating and spanking. I can't conceive of really beating a creature neither big nor small, but beating a woman or a child is such an ugly thing as to make instantaneously hell on earth with such a thing.
People are not perfect, parents are not God' that never make mistakes, who are immune to tiredness or have no limits to their capacity or their patience. Parents commit errors, have shortcomings.
To read some of the things that people write about what parents should do or not do seem to spring from a belief that parents are omnipotent people who are above all failings and limits of human nature just by virtue of their being parents.
Parents are human and have limits ad have shortcomings and have failings. Children know it and accept it if they know they are loved. A child can forgive mistakes even if they get a punshiment which was not fair if the parent acknowledges it and says so. At that point the child is happy because she or he can do something for the parent forgive him or her if the parent lost temper or was unfair to the child. That far from bringing children and parents apart in fact brings them closer.
Children do not want perfect parents but parents who love them and show it. That is the whole thing.
Nice that you reminded us of it, Zulf.
Salaam
-
- Beating of kids (or adult) has been outlawed in some countries today.
Thus parent who think that they can still do as such must check with the governing law on where he or she lives in.
Yes.. especially you Abraham... sacrificing your own son is not considered as a heroic act now.. kapish?
- Threatening somebody (including children) with violence has been considered as an act of harassment, a penal offense in some countries today.
- Beating of kids (or adult) has been outlawed in some countries today.
-
Hi,
Beating a healthy strong man is not ugly? hmm
I can't conceive of really beating a creature neither big nor small,
I think there is difference between agression to somebody who is able to defend himself and somebody who may attempt to defend him or herself, but is not a match for the agressor.
And I do not mind being called sexist for it, but I do consider that being both things ugly, it is much uglier that a man should beat a woman, and I think I am not the only one to think so, but rather many people do, not that I need company for that, but what I mea is that it is not a fashion or posturing but omething which is in the fitra.
Salaam
-
I can't conceive of really beating a creature neither big nor small,
Hi,
sorry missed this quote.
I think there is difference between agression to somebody who is able to defend himself and somebody who may attempt to defend him or herself, but is not a match for the agressor.
And I do not mind being called sexist for it, but I do consider that being both things ugly, it is much uglier that a man should beat a woman, and I think I am not the only one to think so, but rather many people do, not that I need company for that, but what I mea is that it is not a fashion or posturing but omething which is in the fitra.
Salaam
I think you say this because men are in general stronger then women.
I think it's better to say that it's uglier when a stronger person beats a weaker person. -
Peace
I could give many examples of when to reward your children materially/spiritually while avoiding making them think that they are your masters, because that is a fine line that they often cross, and you notice it by the tone of their voice when they talk to you.
when can you turn a blind eye to your misbehaving children, and how many times.
when to warn and punish psychologically.
when to warn of physical punishment, and how many warnings to give depending on how unacceptable is the action.
when to punish and the degree of the punishment, depending on the bad your children made.
However, it is not on me to give you understanding. I will have to fill many pages from what I have gathered throughout my life. Whatever you do is part of your test. Our children is the only case where we have the opportunity to be witness, judge, and executioner, and we will be judge for it.remember that nobody can be punished if he/she acted in ignorance. Therefore, children must have a certain age/level of understanding to begin to receive punishments. If you are not of those who fear God, and are not patient, you will be most likely to go beyond the limits. The only advice I can give you is that if you are angry do not punish your children, but intil you are calm again.
Forget the stupid idea that you should treat your children as equals, for they are not, they are your children and you are their parents, and there is a line that they shall never cross. You can be their friend, their partner, etc, but you should never allow them to feel that they are above you, and they shall honor you no matter how decrepit you have become. Discipline is the best way to show that you care/love to your children, and nobody hates it except the ungrateful ones.
Do not feel bad to tell your children that you will not tolerate disobedience, and that if they grow up to be rebellious, they will not be worthy of being called your sons/daughters. Read the Holy books, pray God for wisdom.
1145And Noah called to his Lord and said, "My Lord, indeed my son is of my family; and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges!"
1146He said, "O Noah, indeed he is not of your family; indeed, he is work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant."proverbs 29
15 The rod and reproof give wisdom but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.
17 Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul.
18 Where there is no vision, the people perish but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.As for those that only speak because they have mouth
20 Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? there is more hope of a fool than of him.may God increase our knowledge and give us wisdom.
-
I think you say this because men are in general stronger then women.
Yes probably.
I think it's better to say that it's uglier when a stronger person beats a weaker person.
It's not necessarily better. It is perhaps true, in a theoretical and philosophical way, but when looking at reality, everyday life across the world, we see that it is in fact women, and children, who are being beaten up. The men who are being beaten and oppressed by women are a small minority, and an "anomaly" if you wish. The oppressive women and the subjugated men will probably remain lika that even when publiv opinion and culture changes. An anomaly is an exception. The real issue is the physical abuse that happens in the majority of cases.
Ok, since men will always be larger and stronger, physically, than women, the beating will never go away completely. The beating will always be there because it is the consequence of two factors that will remain constant forever 1) difference in phsical strength, and 2) the corruptness/weakness of the human mind. Just like men beat up women, dominant groups tend to oppress minority groups. The big bully in school will harass the weaker kids. A more powerful nation will boss around with weaker nations. This is what happens on an animal level, and it is quite natural. But human beings are not supposed to be animals. So, we should try to change general public opinion, while realizing that the extreme exceptions will always be there, and perhaps law enforcement will have to teach them a lesson.
So, I think it is better to stress that it is women who are victims of physical abuse, simply because this is reality. It serves no purpose to take it to a too philosohpical and mathematically correct level. Big vs small is too general and doesn't adress the ground level reality, even though it may be true.
Actually, violence against women and children (domestic violence) is a subset of general violence, but should not be hidden and forgotten inside general violence. The reason is that there are different mechanics at play. Like we don't call all illness by the same name and we don't treat all illness with the same medicine, yet all illness is illness.
Peace
O0 -
Yes probably.
It's not necessarily better. It is perhaps true, in a theoretical and philosophical way, but when looking at reality, everyday life across the world, we see that it is in fact women, and children, who are being beaten up. The men who are being beaten and oppressed by women are a small minority, and an "anomaly" if you wish. The oppressive women and the subjugated men will probably remain lika that even when publiv opinion and culture changes. An anomaly is an exception. The real issue is the physical abuse that happens in the majority of cases.Ok, since men will always be larger and stronger, physically, than women, the beating will never go away completely. The beating will always be there because it is the consequence of two factors that will remain constant forever 1) difference in phsical strength, and 2) the corruptness/weakness of the human mind. Just like men beat up women, dominant groups tend to oppress minority groups. The big bully in school will harass the weaker kids. A more powerful nation will boss around with weaker nations. This is what happens on an animal level, and it is quite natural. But human beings are not supposed to be animals. So, we should try to change general public opinion, while realizing that the extreme exceptions will always be there, and perhaps law enforcement will have to teach them a lesson.
So, I think it is better to stress that it is women who are victims of physical abuse, simply because this is reality. It serves no purpose to take it to a too philosohpical and mathematically correct level. Big vs small is too general and doesn't adress the ground level reality, even though it may be true.
Actually, violence against women and children (domestic violence) is a subset of general violence, but should not be hidden and forgotten inside general violence. The reason is that there are different mechanics at play. Like we don't call all illness by the same name and we don't treat all illness with the same medicine, yet all illness is illness.
Peace
O0Hi,
RED But I like to be mathematically correct >
It feels to me as injustice to others who are also victim of abuse to ignore them or give them less attention, only because they are men.BLUE I think we only use the word abuse/beating when it's an abuse/beating for that person.
My slap would be an abuse for a child, but it would be a tickle for mike tyson, but mike tyson also has his limits and can also get a slap which can be defined as abuse and then he deserves imho as much attention as the child.
So yes we should give the most attention to children because they are weakest (physically and mentally), but mike tyson has priority over a child who just got a slap from me if he is about to get dismembered.
What I try to say is that abuse is a relative concept because it differs for every person no matter age, gender, psychological condition, etc.
So when the line of abuse is reached for a person we have to give it equal priority, so for children this line can already trespassed very early because they are not only the weakest physical but also mentally as it can destroy their whole future lives.peace
-
Hi,
RED But I like to be mathematically correct >(
It feels to me as injustice to others who are also victim of abuse to ignore them or give them less attention, only because they are men.Who says they would be ignored? Abusive violence is always a crime.
Men are not ignored just because there is an attempt to highlight and reduce domestic violence against women. The only reason why women are mentioned here is that they are the victims in the vast majority of cases. We are talking about Domestic violence here. Not focussing on them would be unfair and also a waste of time. Outside the home, mostly men are involved in violence. I think that gets quite it's fair attention.Like I said, it there is no need for people to get worried just because the plight of women is talked about in open words. Physical violence is still a crime no matter who committs it and no matter who the victim is. The problem of domestic violence though is a structural one, a societal one... and it should be addressed as such.
BLUE I think we only use the word abuse/beating when it's an abuse/beating for that person.
My slap would be an abuse for a child, but it would be a tickle for mike tyson, but mike tyson also has his limits and can also get a slap which can be defined as abuse and then he deserves imho as much attention as the child.
So yes we should give the most attention to children because they are weakest (physically and mentally), but mike tyson has priority over a child who just got a slap from me if he is about to get dismembered.
What I try to say is that abuse is a relative concept because it differs for every person no matter age, gender, psychological condition, etc.
So when the line of abuse is reached for a person we have to give it equal priority, so for children this line can already trespassed very early because they are not only the weakest physical but also mentally as it can destroy their whole future lives.peace
Yes. Mike Tyson will get help if he gets beaten down outside sports. So will children, and women. Who is being beaten up mostly?
Peace bro
-
I think Zulf is right. Anybody who gets agresed gets attention, but the fact that violence against women gets, deservedly attntion a such is becaue it is not an individual things but like we would say, a class act. Thy are beaten because they ar women, not because they are any individual or a particular individual. Like rape, women are raped becaue they are women. Men are also raped by other men, but I do not think as a class act, except in Lut's city, or in child porn events which of course should get , and I do not think anybody disagrees with that, I do not know if enough attention, but attention as such, not as an individual event.
Women, within certain mentality are considered as territory, something on which to exert souveraignty. I definitel think there i something very characeristic in violence against women which makes it different from any chance or individual beating of which of course women can also be the victims, like being assaulted for money by drugaddicts or events like that. In that case they ar agressed by reason alien to their being women, and as a male could also be agessed.
Salaam
-
Who says they would be ignored? Abusive violence is always a crime.
Men are not ignored just because there is an attempt to highlight and reduce domestic violence against women. The only reason why women are mentioned here is that they are the victims in the vast majority of cases. We are talking about Domestic violence here. Not focussing on them would be unfair and also a waste of time. Outside the home, mostly men are involved in violence. I think that gets quite it's fair attention.Like I said, it there is no need for people to get worried just because the plight of women is talked about in open words. Physical violence is still a crime no matter who committs it and no matter who the victim is. The problem of domestic violence though is a structural one, a societal one... and it should be addressed as such.
Yes. Mike Tyson will get help if he gets beaten down outside sports. So will children, and women. Who is being beaten up mostly?
Peace bro
Hi Bro,
Green You are a man of quantity
The problem imho with this approach is that the minority gets forgotten and/or are not taken seriously.The next scenario happens to often, not only in abuse/violence, but in general
"911 can I help you?"
"Hi, I am a man an my wife is abusing me"
"rotfl ok thank you for calling and have a nice day, bye" beep beep beep.
(911=society in general)My campaign for president of the world, would be like this
"domestic violence will have the highest priority"
and not
"domestic violence, especially against women, will have the highest priority"
It just does not feel right to me, no matter what the statistics say.If I am going to give a group extra privileges then it would be for sure not women just because they are women or because of statistics.
The ones who deserve in my view extra privileges are children,disabled people and elderly because they are not only physically weak but also mentally. -
I think Zulf is right. Anybody who gets agresed gets attention, but the fact that violence against women gets, deservedly attntion a such is becaue it is not an individual things but like we would say, a class act. Thy are beaten because they ar women, not because they are any individual or a particular individual. Like rape, women are raped becaue they are women. Men are also raped by other men, but I do not think as a class act, except in Lut's city, or in child porn events which of course should get , and I do not think anybody disagrees with that, I do not know if enough attention, but attention as such, not as an individual event.
Women, within certain mentality are considered as territory, something on which to exert souveraignty. I definitel think there i something very characeristic in violence against women which makes it different from any chance or individual beating of which of course women can also be the victims, like being assaulted for money by drugaddicts or events like that. In that case they ar agressed by reason alien to their being women, and as a male could also be agessed.
Salaam
GREEN >
RED Sorry but I can not agree with this. This is maybe true in some places or whatever, but that is imo not the reason.
I think the reason of abuse/violence is simply because the party who get's oppressed is weaker.
I am stronger then him or her so I can give that one a beating without fearing for myself.I just did some googling.
According to some paper, in 2005 76% of the victims of domestic violence in The Netherlands was a female.
So this leaves us with 24 % of the victims as males.
So you think those male victims were only victim because they are male?
I do not think so, I think they were victim because they were weaker (and weaker does not always have to be in physical aspect).I think the whole issue is not about genders but about oppression of the weaker party.
I think if you put in a island 100 women and 100 men, and all women are stronger then the strongest man there, then the women will oppress the men.
Not because they are men but because they are weaker then them.But of course I did not do any study on it this, it is just what my mind is telling me.
-
Peace,
But why only on an island? hmm
Is there no place on earth except islands? hmmbrickwall
If I did not know that you were bigger then me then I would jump in plane right now, to oppress you very brutally yes
But for my own safety I have decided to stay home. -
Peace,
GREEN >(
RED Sorry but I can not agree with this. This is maybe true in some places or whatever, but that is imo not the reason.
I think the reason of abuse/violence is simply because the party who get's oppressed is weaker.
I am stronger then him or her so I can give that one a beating without fearing for myself.I just did some googling.
According to some paper, in 2005 76% of the victims of domestic violence in The Netherlands was a female.
So this leaves us with 24 % of the victims as males.
So you think those male victims were only victim because they are male?
I do not think so, I think they were victim because they were weaker (and weaker does not always have to be in physical aspect).I think the whole issue is not about genders but about oppression of the weaker party.
I think if you put in a island 100 women and 100 men, and all women are stronger then the strongest man there, then the women will oppress the men.
Not because they are men but because they are weaker then them.But of course I did not do any study on it this, it is just what my mind is telling me.
I agree with you.
peace
Sajda.
-
llcrimes ar ecommitted because the criminal thinks his victim is weaker, because they can get away with it. That isan enabling factor, but not the cause.
In most cases of abuse and beating of children and women it is inside the family, obviously too where they can get aeay with it because of lack of witnesses or fear of worse thing, but that i an enabling factor not the cause. Women may beat up other women or may abuse them also because they can get away with it. Because they do not get along or because they ursue some interest. But the cause of the violence against women and children may be similar and it is not the fact that they are stronger, although that may bea factor, and please do not say that other violence does not get attention it doe get it. It hs always got it and it continues to be so, but what did not get attention till very recen9tly was the domestic violence andmost domestic if not all violence has been exerted against women and children. That is, it starts with the women and may carry on with the children and sometimes the couple is violent together wit the children. But violence against childrne got earlier attention that violence against women. Somehow it ws understood that in a way it was logical.
S it i false that onlyviolence gainst women is getting attention, in fact it goes on and again the reason is not being stronger that is just the enabling factor, when it is. There is somethign else at work which different from other violence and it is, like Zulf said, a different thing. And if it is getting attention then it was high time it got it.
And musr add if it is becuse some are stronger thn the others ll men or almost would commit violence against women and children but they do not. Far from it, so it is not a question of being weaker or stronger butof having certai compulsions unchecked. It is not a question of men or women, but of certain traits that some men ar prone to with women just because they are women.
Why do you think we get the biblical tale of paradise where God formed the woman FOR the man and then made her subservient to him and the snake annd all that.
There is a mentality, a mental construct behind all that. o to see it is to be blinded.
It is not that victims of either sex are to be neglected, that is not that and it is not hapenning at any rate if it is happening it is not because now the beating of wome is getting attention, and not as much as it believed. It is talked a lot about and ued as logan to get votes but it doe ot get as much as would be thought.
Wome are also vicims of general violence, not of ciolence against women, but the complaint is not bout that because that kind of aggressionmore or less has been attended to always. But the terror for many years suffered by wome within four walls that is somethign else.
You say that men get that too, I do not deny it, but although it is very much dished out as a counter attack against the ight against violence against women it is being handled in communications as a kind of claiing that wome should not get much attention. I have not seen personnlly that kind of abuse of men, but I have seenso many cases against women...I do not say it does not exist because I have not seen it, no I do not say that, but rather that it should be handled properly not as a cause to ubdue the violence specific against women but as its own cause, because probably, it is reallywidespread there should be some cause, specific to it. In that case, abused men and women should be solidarity cause, ot a competing cause, but it is the kind of thing like th emiseries of some countries people only think of them when some eople speak for Palestine, they are bothered by the fact that eople speak about Palestine, not by the miseries of other countries, but the use those miseries to counter Palestine, ?ee what I mean? Each cause its treatment and struggle, but to use a cause to neglect another cause is not a hlep.
o may be the domestic mistratment of males should be handled as such.
Salaam
-
The next scenario happens to often, not only in abuse/violence, but in general
"911 can I help you?"
"Hi, I am a man an my wife is abusing me"
"rotfl ok thank you for calling and have a nice day, bye" beep beep beep.
(911=society in general)Well, if the man had said "chasing me with a knife" or "beating me with a hammer" perhaps the response would be proper. Just "abusing" sounds like she is hurling insults towards him.
If I am going to give a group extra privileges then it would be for sure not women just because they are women or because of statistics.
The ones who deserve in my view extra privileges are children,disabled people and elderly because they are not only physically weak but also mentally.I don't see how highlighting a common problem and trying to change people's mind is to give undue privileges to someone.
Peace bro Bender O0