I disagree. While the alpha male terminology seems a bit oversimplified, the fact remains that all sorts of violence, be it physical, verbal, or social (e.g. pr

I disagree. While the alpha male terminology seems a bit oversimplified, the fact remains that all sorts of violence, be it physical, verbal, or social (e.g. preventing someone from joining in the play) is a tool people use in varying degrees to influence relationships. It's a dangerous tool, because it's so stupid. Beating someone is effectively saying "I don't care how well reasoned your arguments are, now you pretend to listen to me instead." But this stupidity is both its weakness and its strength. Violence is a very complicated tool, and I think people need some exposure to it (on both sides of it) to understand when its appropriate and (more frequently) when it's uncalled for. This does not mean it's tolerated or encouraged -- quite the opposite! It's important to be the role model that teaches children all the circumstances in which it's wrong! But pretending it serves no social function makes, I think, you a worse teacher. By completely denying the upsides of violence you become less trustworthy as a teacher, because even children can see the obvious short-term upsides!