3 ms·
Any such topic would benefit greatly from adding the age of the children we talk about, because I feel many people talk about different topics and have misunder
by kaba0 4y ago
Any such topic would benefit greatly from adding the age of the children we talk about, because I feel many people talk about different topics and have misunderstandings because of that.
There is absolutely absolutely zero, nil reason to hit a small children (let’s say, below 8-10?), as they simply won’t understand the consequences and you are just assaulting the poor thing without any benefit. This is simply unforgivable and should be grounds to take away said child from the parents (depending on the degree), or press assault charges to non-parents.
What seems to be more commonly acceptable (and reason for disagreement) is a spank/slap for older children (e.g. teenagers), which is quite common in certain cultures. I’m not sure on the research on that, but it should be qualified because one is imo an absolutely evil view point, while I personally don’t agree with the second, it is at least open to discussion.
- WettowelReactor 4y agoBy this reasoning there is a magical window where a person is old enough to understand the consequences of their actions yet young enough for it not to be abuse. What happens at 18 to say that corporeal punishment is no longer effective and legal? By that reasoning should corpreal punishment be allowed in the workplace?
- kaba0 4y agoI explicitly mentioned that one is an absolutely indefensible case, the other is at least open to some form of discussion even though I disagree with any corporal punishment. But that is quite common in a wide range of countries (e.g. Mexican/Asian mothers with their slippers are infamous), so there is that.