I can weed through the rest of your fringe theory comments but I take issue with this: > We are squeamish about it today, but children have not yet developed t

I can weed through the rest of your fringe theory comments but I take issue with this: > We are squeamish about it today, but children have not yet developed their reasoning faculties well, and they haven't learned impulse control or disciplining their desires. This means punishment for obstinate bona fide bad behavior must rely on licit means of producing unpleasantness, as these are readily perceived by children and taken to counteract indulgence. What exactly are you advocating for? Corporeal punishment? If children haven't developed their reasoning faculties well, as you say, and "haven't learned impulse control or to discipline their desires" then what effect do you think any sort of punishment achieves? This is some real third rate logic here. ADHD is so obviously predominantly genetic that it makes me sick. Get out of here with this "indulgence and softness" nonsense. If you're trying to say that there isn't a one size fits all way to bring up a child, I will certainly agree with you there. But you're clearly not saying that. Instead you're articulating seemingly smug insight that's actually, and obviously, a thin veil for your endorsement of the beating of children. Your comment makes me feel quite literally sick.