View Full Version : Did you get the cane at school?
timwilky
06-09-10, 03:40 PM
Well based on another thread about Asbo/Birch and a few coming forward to say it never did me any harm. who was battered in submission/compliance, who was simply battered and refused to conform? and who was subjected to a discussion about their issues and problems?
My early years was a brutal regime where nuns ruled the roost. One sadistic bitch would use a 3' rule on the back of the knuckle, thin edge for boys, flat edge for girls. We 6 year old lived in fear of her. Years later my mother said she never knew we had been beaten by her. We were forced to eat disgusting food, one time somebody threw theirs on the floor and it was decided it must have been me. I was forced to eat it off the floor like a dog being told to think about the starving babies in Africa
At secondary school a public flogging in front of the school was regularly administered. My misdemeanour's were never that serious in the early years to warrant the assembly caning. So got private ones yes bent over on the backside. but the git would always get a few low ones in on the backs of the legs that would invariably bleed.
I was invited to leave when I told my head of year that if he tried to use that thing (cane) on me I would shove it up his ****. As the whole form took that attitude there was a governors inquiry where it was decided that senior pupils would no longer be caned, we were allowed back to resit our public examines.
Caning didn't change my attitude, just made me more resentful. But I despair for modern teachers who have no sanction for unruly pupils.
where do i start about SCHOOL.
tigersaw
06-09-10, 03:44 PM
We had an RE teacher who could hit you on the ear with a bible from anywhere in the classroom, similar our physics teacher with a blackboard rubber.
Milky Bar Kid
06-09-10, 03:45 PM
No, being a young pup, that had all been stopped by the time I started school, which was probably 1992.
timwilky
06-09-10, 03:45 PM
We had an RE teacher who could hit you on the ear with a bible from anywhere in the classroom, similar our physics teacher with a blackboard rubber.
Blackboard cleaners don't count as that was standard wake up boy instrumentation, even if they did knock your eye/front teeth out if aimed properly.
Thankfully we live in more enlightened times...
We had an RE teacher who could hit you on the ear with a bible from anywhere in the classroom, similar our physics teacher with a blackboard rubber.
we had an RE teacher who played pocket billiards.
benji106
06-09-10, 03:57 PM
Cane was out by the time I was in school, head teacher used to wave it around going on about how we would have got a good seeing to back in the good old days. used to get a smack off the parents every now and again, but to be honest much prefered that to other forms of punishment, i.e. not being allowed to go out with my mates.
Luckypants
06-09-10, 03:59 PM
Yes, at primary school, one time, one stroke of cane to palm of hand. I was framed by some of the other kids (aka bullies) but knew that the cane was the punishment for the 'crime' I was 'convicted' of. I don't think it affected me, except to get even with the bullies, which I did when they weren't in their gang and it was 1 on 1. My Dad gave me a smacked **** for getting the cane, as I was obviously in the wrong.
I also got slapped round the face by the music teacher when I was about 13, who lost his rag when he thought I was talking in class. (It was the guy behind me talking). I went to the head as that was unacceptable, no warning, just blam. He got dressing down from head and apology to my parents.
Caning didn't change my attitude, just made me more resentful. But I despair for modern teachers who have no sanction for unruly pupils.
So it didn't 'work' when applied to you, but you still think teachers should be able to apply it?
So it didn't 'work' when applied to you, but you still think teachers should be able to apply it?
it worked for a lot of kids at the schools i was at. there were the occasional few who actually enjoyed it.
punyXpress
06-09-10, 04:06 PM
Oh Yes indeedy !
Most savage was 12 ' strokes ' with a fencing foil bound with insulting tape.
That smarts. :(
? why do they call them strokes when they're nothing of the sort ?
Milky Bar Kid
06-09-10, 04:06 PM
So it didn't 'work' when applied to you, but you still think teachers should be able to apply it?
Where did he say that exactly?
Where did he say that exactly?
It's what I inferred from this:
Caning didn't change my attitude, just made me more resentful. But I despair for modern teachers who have no sanction for unruly pupils.
The primary sanction not available to teachers these days is beatings. Maybe I got the wrong end of the stick...
BigBaddad
06-09-10, 04:10 PM
At Catholic school, if your bad does the priest bend you over and give you 12 strokes of the rod.
But I despair for modern teachers who have no sanction for unruly pupils.
Then they need training to be better teachers, or find themselves another job.
From 1976 to 1987 I attended 9 different schools. There was no corporal punishment. At all these schools the situation was exactly the same. Some teachers were very strict and made your life uncomfortable if you misbehaved, some were good teachers who enthused the kids and got them engaged, and a minority were just weak individuals who couldn't control a class of kids.
Specialone
06-09-10, 04:46 PM
So it didn't 'work' when applied to you, but you still think teachers should be able to apply it?
Hope you don't mind me saying but from this comment and other posts of yours you don't half come across as a bit righteous. Are you a tree hugger by any chance ?
It attitudes like yours is why society has lost all control and there is no discipline anymore.
We all can't be perfect you know.
Hope you don't mind me saying but from this comment and other posts of yours you don't half come across as a bit righteous. Are you a tree hugger by any chance ?
It attitudes like yours is why society has lost all control and there is no discipline anymore.
Don't mind at all, but it is not my intention to come across that way. I am liberal, but not a tree hugger. I know it is unfashionable around here at the mo, but I just don't believe that violence is appropriate punishment in a modern society. I appear to be in a minority.
Specialone
06-09-10, 05:15 PM
Don't mind at all, but it is not my intention to come across that way. I am liberal, but not a tree hugger. I know it is unfashionable around here at the mo, but I just don't believe that violence is appropriate punishment in a modern society. I appear to be in a minority.
As it happens I don't agree that violent punishment for adults would have a great affect tbh, but I do think we need a deterrent better than we have at present.
But I believe if you committ murder, not manslaughter it should carry a death sentence.
Don't mind at all, but it is not my intention to come across that way. I am liberal, but not a tree hugger. I know it is unfashionable around here at the mo, but I just don't believe that violence is appropriate punishment in a modern society. I appear to be in a minority.
what would you suggest then. psychology? treating them to days out?
what would you suggest then. psychology? treating them to days out?
I don't think there is a 'right' answer. Many things have been tried over the centuries from deportation through capital punishment but nothing seems to stop people committing crime.
I do think that the answer lies in providing a way out of crime, but nothing in this is straightforward. The 'bad lads army' was mentioned in the other thread and it worked (for most of that group) because it gave them something to strive for.
Greater minds than mine have been put to this but we are not getting any closer to a decent result. I would actually suggest that society is becoming more polarised down the punish/rehabilitate divide.
dirtydog
06-09-10, 05:26 PM
The cane was a thing of the past when I started school back in 1984 ish. Although I regularly had chalk/board rubbers thrown at me and later on in my schooling was constantly in trouble and had to get each teacher to sign my "report" to prove I had turned up to the lesson and then head of year to sign it everyday and the head to sign it at the end of week. Wouldve been expelled if it wasn't done
squirrel_hunter
06-09-10, 05:32 PM
Never got caned at school, but got stonned once...
Nah...no cane for me, I just got sent to a "remove room" so I couldn't distract other students! :)
MisterTommyH
06-09-10, 05:36 PM
Yup.
Primary school teacher got a bit carried away during 'Victorian Week'.
Probably was a propper thrashing like you lot, but it still left a mark for a few days.
No, because i went to school in these modern times where you cant so much as frown at a child without getting sacked
Caned two or three times. Yes I was in the wrong. Yes it was the accepted punishment for what I did. No it didn't do me any harm.
However, the Physics teacher used the rubber hose off a Bunsen Burner. It was extrememly painful, and only succeeded in generating resentment towards that teacher. Respect he didn't get, either in class, in the playground or out of school.
The best teachers controlled a class without the need for corporal punishment. Their lessons were interesting, fun and I have huge respect for them and their ability as teachers. And those that couldn't achieve that without recourse to the cane were cr@p at their job.
i'm of the age where violence, drink, dope, acid and solvents were prolific in school. it was half way threw my education they decided to ban the belt. within a couple of months there were about 5 people left in my class. everyone just went completly mental as the only punishment was to get suspended or better still expelled. so i wonder if the 'belt' was a deterrent.
Nah...no cane for me, I just got sent to a "remove room" so I couldn't distract other students! :)
Likewise. Too many times to mention in high school. But if they'd caned (in our school it was a 1 meter wooden ruler) me it wouldn't have happened again! It stopped when I was in Middle school.
Hell, I used to go an put myself in the "Remove room" if it was raining. what kind of punishment is not as bad as going out in the rain, for gods sake?
I got dragged across the room by my hair and thrown out of the window by Mr White When I was 12. I never worked my ticket in his class again! I got hit by a text book across the knuckes by Mr Penter when I was 14. Didn't **** around in his class any more.
The cane (or similar) was the ultimate line in the sand. Cross it if you dare. I don't know of anyone who crossed the line more than twice.
C
maviczap
06-09-10, 07:32 PM
Had to stand outside the headmasters office at lunchtime, for a month in primary school, after the boys who played footie in the playground got caught once to often retrieving the ball from the coalyard next door. We'd been warned, but boys will be boys
No one got the cane there, but in Secondary school I remember a sadistic RE teacher who caned two lads in front of the class, and he didn't hold back with his swing.
I'm afraid I was too much of a goody two shoes to ever get threatend with the cane, there were a lot of badasses in my school.
I was more scared of what my Dad might do if I ever got into trouble
Of all places, school is a place where you should feel safe and secure.
So, how sad that so many of us have memories of violence and intimidation:(
beabert
06-09-10, 07:53 PM
Its bad parenting from an early age, i dont nessecarily think teachers need the right to strike a child if it is disciplined at home properly and close contact is kept with the school staff. there are always exceptions to any rule.
If you tell your child they wont get 'this and that' if they mis behave then please stick to it, and not let them have things 10 minutes later. They need to learn there are consequences. I see parents doing this all the time.
timwilky
06-09-10, 08:01 PM
When my lad seriously P'eed me off, I cut the plugs off everything in his bedroom.
No Telly, play station etc for a month was my order.
After about 3 months the wife asked when I was going to put them back on for him. (He being about 16 at the time)
I was even more disappointed in him as I had left the plugs on the floor by the socket. I had expected he would have refitted them within the hour. Seems he didn't know how.
Schools don't even tell kids the basics such as how to wire a plug these days. I thought technology was compulsory for all.
maviczap
06-09-10, 08:06 PM
Of all places, school is a place where you should feel safe and secure.
So, how sad that so many of us have memories of violence and intimidation:(
My teachers were fine, and most of my school mates were fine. But going from a nice primary school, I learned rather quickly who to fear and stay well clear off.
Lets just say my school was a rather mixed soup of social and ethernic backgrounds. :(
Luckily I knew what was right from wrong and was lucky in life
Of all places, school is a place where you should feel safe and secure.
So, how sad that so many of us have memories of violence and intimidation:(
FFS! I deserved it! I was being a P***K! I got what I deserved!
I have THOUSANDS of other memories that were fantastic at school!
I was PUNISHED for being bad.
Get a grip!
C
Milky Bar Kid
06-09-10, 08:22 PM
FFS! I deserved it! I was being a P***K! I got what I deserved!
I have THOUSANDS of other memories that were fantastic at school!
I was PUNISHED for being bad.
Get a grip!
C
:smt045
Wideboy
06-09-10, 08:25 PM
bring back the cane!! will sort these little feckers out nowerdays....... i wasnt in the cane era at school but my parents used to hit me and my brother when we stepped out of line and im glad of it, stopped me growing up into a complete **** head (well not 100% at least)... dad still does whack me if i get gobby
But this is circular, you are saying you got the cane or whatever because you deserved it, for being 'bad'. How do you know that you were 'bad', who told you? Whose norm is 'bad'? The real issue is whether being 'bad' justifies a caning. I say it doesn't. You say that you deserved it, so you assume the point. It's a self serving argument.
When I was 6, those vicious Catholic nuns tied me to the chair because I wouldn't sit still. Bad?
No, not bad. I can tell from your posts that there are underlying issues.
Taken to extremes its not good (as you have clearly experienced).
But then Catholicism seems to be very good at that.
I was bad, I know the difference between right and wrong and I was in the wrong. I crossed the line. I got punished. I didn't do it again.
Job Jobbed.
When I was good I got praise and house points.
Life goes on, ... and then you die (and there is no heaven so don't worry about it ;) )
C
BanannaMan
06-09-10, 08:33 PM
FFS! I deserved it! I was being a P***K! I got what I deserved!
I have THOUSANDS of other memories that were fantastic at school!
I was PUNISHED for being bad.
Get a grip!
C
+1
I think a lack of discipline both in schools and at home has greatly contributed to many of the problems we have in todays society.
I think a lack of discipline both in schools and at home has greatly contributed to many of the problems we have in todays society.
I agree to a point, and think it is the duty of parents (and schools to a lesser extent) to punish children for bad behaviour. Punishment is only effective if a child fears it (and they fear much else than simple pain), and learn why what they were doing is wrong.
Only in my first year of school were teachers able to administer spankings, and I was spanked once but I couldn't for the life of me tell you what for.
What is interesting (to me at least) is the number of people who seem to have been beaten numerous times. If it is such an effective deterrent, then one beating would be enough - the mere threat on subsequent occasions would have them shaking in their plimsolls.
There is little (if any) evidence that corporal punishment is effective against children (except folk saying it never did them no harm), and a small amount suggesting it can actually propagate violent and destructive behaviour.
maviczap
06-09-10, 08:42 PM
+1
I think a lack of discipline both in schools and at home has greatly contributed to many of the problems we have in todays society.
I think it starts at home, so if there's no discipline at home its only going to carry on at school.
My kids have been brought up to understand whats right & wrong, the same way I was.
I see numerous examples of badly behaved kids everyday who aren't disciplined by their parents and even my 5 year old knows its not right
How you fix it is an impossible question to answer
Discipline is absolutely the key. But that doesn't require administering physical punishment. I'm a strict parent and don't tolerate bad behaviour, but I've never smacked my daughter and don't intend to ever do so.
Other parents will do as they see fit and I certainly won't criticise them. I've got no special god-given skills when it comes to parenting. Most of us are just doing our best.
But adults hitting other peoples kids? That just doesn't sit well with me.
lukemillar
06-09-10, 10:12 PM
Don't mind at all, but it is not my intention to come across that way. I am liberal, but not a tree hugger. I know it is unfashionable around here at the mo, but I just don't believe that violence is appropriate punishment in a modern society. I appear to be in a minority.
I am with you in that minority.
I also love how if you oppose something like this, certain members of the .org brand you as a "tree hugger". If that is the case and by their own rational, it is safe to assume that they are right-wing fascists :rolleyes:
no_akira
06-09-10, 10:26 PM
I think we live in more enlightened times and realise that some adults gain sadistic (verging on sexual) pleasure from hitting a weaker human (child) without recourse. It goes against our own inbuilt moral codes to hit a more vulnerable person so often something else is going on (sadism). Especially a teacher. Doctors and the hippocratic oath and all that.
My father was schooled by Jesuit Brothers in the 1950's, he had maths beaten into him with a paddle for 3 years. There was one brother who was more feared, used more force, than the rest. He was basically, my dads words "a sadistic celibate" (sexual tension & violence again). However my dad did go on to be a nuclear physicist so perhaps their is another lesson about human nature (were all lazy *******s, who need a bit of the stick).
Also its a bit like the death penalty, the state doesn't want to be seen sanctioning child abuse.
we had the belt at school. was in the queue to have it in maths class, but the bell rang before it was my turn. I can still remember the sound of a blackboard duster flying thru the air, you always ducked as it might hit you, despite the target being the person behind you.
Also its a bit like the death penalty, the state doesn't want to be seen sanctioning child abuse.
Why is it that all the Nay sayers in this thread try to compare a quick whack to correct bad behaviour with Child abuse when they are CLEARLY entirely different things?
Yes, there are people that get a perverted kick out of caning, but they are in the absolute minority.
The whole idea of caning/belting/etc is that is supposed to be uncomfortable to both receive and watch. Its *punishment*.
Balanced human beings realise that its not a nice thing! Its not supposed to be a nice thing. Its supposed to be a horrible thing! Its a Punishment.
Being caned, hit with a slipper or a belt in a short burst as direct punishment for being bad is NOT the same as systematic abuse.
Thats why its called *abuse*.
The child MUST be made to realise that the punishment is a direct result of his/her actions or it is abuse. Caning someone without telling them why they have been caned IS abuse.
But thats not what we are talking about here.
I think its very easy to differentiate between a "short sharp shock" and "abuse" and those trying to blur the lines are doing so deliberately.
Those that suffered "Abuse" should not blanket dismiss a very effective method of behavioural correction [caning] simply because they were abused.
It is NOT the same.
C
widepants
07-09-10, 08:25 AM
Why is it that all the Nay sayers in this thread try to compare a quick whack to correct bad behaviour with Child abuse when they are CLEARLY entirely different things?
Yes, there are people that get a perverted kick out of caning, but they are in the absolute minority.
The whole idea of caning/belting/etc is that is supposed to be uncomfortable to both receive and watch. Its *punishment*.
Balanced human beings realise that its not a nice thing! Its not supposed to be a nice thing. Its supposed to be a horrible thing! Its a Punishment.
Being caned, hit with a slipper or a belt in a short burst as direct punishment for being bad is NOT the same as systematic abuse.
Thats why its called *abuse*.
The child MUST be made to realise that the punishment is a direct result of his/her actions or it is abuse. Caning someone without telling them why they have been caned IS abuse.
But thats not what we are talking about here.
I think its very easy to differentiate between a "short sharp shock" and "abuse" and those trying to blur the lines are doing so deliberately.
Those that suffered "Abuse" should not blanket dismiss a very effective method of behavioural correction [caning] simply because they were abused.
It is NOT the same.
C
+1
Those that suffered "Abuse" should not blanket dismiss a very effective method of behavioural correction [caning] simply because they were abused.
The problem is that there is little evidence to show that it is a very effective method of behavioural correction.
A bunch of adults standing round in the pub saying that a beating never did them no harm in their youth is not the same as proper scientific study. And the studies that have been done seem to be fairly inconclusive (some actually seem to show that it can start a pattern of violence and destructiveness)
Caning may effective for the punisher, because it is quick and easy to do and may allow them to vent some frustration with the child's behaviour. It is generally more time effective than actually dealing with the root issue. I'm yet to be convinced that it is effective for the child.
But caning should never be carried out when the person thats doing the caning is angry. In fact it should be conveyed to the person receiving the punishment that the person doing the caning DOES NOT enjoy the act either. That adds an emotional guilt that the person doing it has been made to do something unpleaseant too, as a direct result of the childs misbehaviour. it increased the effectiveness
That's why the pupil was sent to the headmaster for caning. The person administering the caning should be calm.
A professional Bircher was exactly that. Calm and dissacociated from the crime / Bad behaviour. He was imparetial and not affected by the events so wasn't seeking retribution or revenge.
Caning is not to get something off someones chest, it is it instill a pain/shock reflex to a bad behaviour.
and the shock is more important than the pain.
Its supposed to have the outcome of the person being caned to directly think" I'll not do that again"
Not to make the caner feel better.
When I was belted as a child it was in a set method. Upstairs, trousers down, "Now you know why you are getting this..." Mother present so I couldn't go off and seek sympathy and play one parent off against the other. Parents in Steadfast, united front.
WHACK, WHACK, WHACK.
Cry, apologise. Not do it again.
As I said in my second post in the original thrad. It would be very simple to see how effective this is. A 50/50 trial and see who re-offends.
I'd put a significant amount of the belt/cane being most effective.
I'm sick of our youngest coming home from school and saying "They're treating the bad lads again, they're going off on a trip to... XYX this time. How come we're good and don't get to go off and do XYZ"
Rewarding folks for being bad? Is that the answer? it certainly put the backs up of those being good.
C
As I said in my second post in the original thrad. It would be very simple to see how effective this is. A 50/50 trial and see who re-offends.
I'd put a significant amount of the belt/cane being most effective.
If your definition of effective is the re-offending rate, then expulsion is 100% effective. But that brings a different set up problems for society which nobody will be willing to face.
I'm with Berlin on this one and I believe there are numerous examples where appropriate physical punishment has resulted in the correct behavioural change. The police use physical means to control crowds for example. They alter the behaviour of a group by a physical presence alone. Why? Because people understand the consequences should they miss-behave.
We had the strap at school (similar to the belt). I received it once. I knew why and I never received it again. I was also smacked as a child (when appropriate). Again I knew why (and I never told my mum to sh_t up every again, lol)
I do not consider either of these abuse, neither do I consider the actions an inappropriate punishment.
Thus I do not see a problem with appropriate physical punishment if managed in the correct manner. Certainly the degree of "appropriate" is the issue here.
IMO, physically punishing a child without warning, providing chances for them to correct their behaviour, trying alternate methods or explaining to them why is not acceptable. Neither is it acceptable to continually use physical punishment esp when disproprotionate to the behaviour. I believe consistency is key.
I haven't any kids however, so not really qualified to comment I suppose.
widepants
07-09-10, 09:02 AM
I haven't any kids however, so not really qualified to comment I suppose.
you can sit for mine if you want mate.:-dd
Haha - I'm in no rush thanks mate.
widepants
07-09-10, 09:05 AM
derail I know ,but they do like u
I'm with Berlin on this one and I believe there are numerous examples where appropriate physical punishment has resulted in the correct behavioural change. The police use physical means to control crowds for example. They alter the behaviour of a group by a physical presence alone. Why? Because people understand the consequences should they miss-behave.
The police aren't 'punishing' crowds - the police aren't supposed to punish anybody. And even when they get a bit carried away there is a bit of a difference between retaliation and summary justice.
A question for Berlin; If your child can home today and said they had been beaten at school, am I to assume that you would complete support the school and not have any cause for complaint? Or would the beatings only happen to bad kids, and therefore not yours?
As with the other thread, nothing will convince me that caning is the answer. I don't share your view Carl that a caning is not abuse. Of course it is.
Out.
If your definition of effective is the re-offending rate, then expulsion is 100% effective. But that brings a different set up problems for society which nobody will be willing to face.
No it isn't. Its completely ineffective. Is passing the buck. The child just carries on "Somewhere else".
The idea is to modify the pupils/childs/offenders behaviour. Sending them somehwere else just transfers the problem somehwere else.
No one seems to want to step up to the Oche any more. Its far too convenient to pass the buck. Let someone else sort it out.
And if the caning is done in front of the peer group of that person the humiliation is also a very important factor of the punishment. No one likes to be humiliated in front of their friends which is why caningw as down in front of an "audience" during morning assembly.
A question for Berlin; If your child can home today and said they had been beaten at school, am I to assume that you would complete support the school and not have any cause for complaint? Or would the beatings only happen to bad kids, and therefore not yours?
My (now ex) partner wouldn't let me hit her kids. They are completely spoilt and have no respect for their elders. Its a joke. It was impossible for me to instill "The look" which was my primary objective. I don't like belting people and I never wish to do it. However, I REALLY wanted to be able to use "The look".
If there was an issue at school and the were to be punished, (note, I didn't use the word "Beaten" because its not applicable).. If the cane was still in use I'd fully condone it but I'd want to be there to add my dissaproval to what they had done. It would also have to be justified. If I agreed with the justification then whack away. But I'd want it done in front of an assembly and I can gaurantee you they would never ever have done whatever it was again. They would have died of shame in front of their friends. Peer pressure is everything nowadays. Kids are like the Borg!
On several occasions I've drawn a VERY clear line in the sand with them and warned then what would happen if they stepped over it. They had three chances. They Always stepped over three times just to test me and my resolve. THAT is when the belt was deserved as they had deliberately not only tested the line but also showed a complete lack of respect for the rules, me, the family and the system we have in place at home.
All I was allowed to do (by their mother) was send them to their room where they would smash the place up, damage the landlords house and continue being a ****** for about an hour.
I could have fixed the situation in two minutes flat.
An example. In a teenage outburst the youngest one keyed the side of out Audi after I'd thrown him out of the house. £700 worth of damage becasue he was in a tempter.
I would have been black and blue for a week for that! I would never have done it in the first place because I'd have known that that was a belting offence. A BIG belting offence.
The youngest one laughed at me. I had to leave the house for three days to calm down.
I had the fix but couldn't use it.
So Back to you SimesSB.
What would you have done if your child keyed the side of your car in "Revenge" for a telling off?
C
Luckypants
07-09-10, 09:20 AM
I'm with Berlin on this one and I believe there are numerous examples where appropriate physical punishment has resulted in the correct behavioural change. The police use physical means to control crowds for example. They alter the behaviour of a group by a physical presence alone. Why? Because people understand the consequences should they miss-behave.
We had the strap at school (similar to the belt). I received it once. I knew why and I never received it again. I was also smacked as a child (when appropriate). Again I knew why (and I never told my mum to sh_t up every again, lol)
I do not consider either of these abuse, neither do I consider the actions an inappropriate punishment.
Thus I do not see a problem with appropriate physical punishment if managed in the correct manner. Certainly the degree of "appropriate" is the issue here.
IMO, physically punishing a child without warning, providing chances for them to correct their behaviour, trying alternate methods or explaining to them why is not acceptable. Neither is it acceptable to continually use physical punishment esp when disproprotionate to the behaviour. I believe consistency is key.
I haven't any kids however, so not really qualified to comment I suppose.
Good post and I totally agree with the point of consistency. It is one of the hardest things about being parent, because some days you may want to let things slide because you are in a good mood and other days you are in a bad mood... you do have to think about being consistent. If you are lucky enough to have a partner, you can moderate each other to present a consistent united front so the child always knows where they are.
I smacked both my kids, one of them twice and the other just once, when they were really naughty. They knew they had been really bad and received the ultimate sanction, we made sure they understood why they got a smack. For less serious breaches of standards other punishments were used, such as being kept in or sent to bed early. Berlin describes the process quite well, it is a deliberate thing, done rarely and never in temper. Once past a certain level of maturity, I don't think smacking works, other punishments would be more effective.
However, if the child has no respect for you, no punishment is going to correct the bad behaviour. I believe the respect comes from being a loving and supportive parent, being consistent (that word again) with everything and being able to talk to your kids.
The police aren't 'punishing' crowds - the police aren't supposed to punish anybody. And even when they get a bit carried away there is a bit of a difference between retaliation and summary justice.
"Punish" is the wrong terminology I agree, however please feel free to elaborate on why the police use physical means to control crowds for example.
IMO, they use physical means to change/remove the behaviour or state of the crowd. Such as the intention of a smack on a child. Certainly neither should be done without appropriate management/methods beforehand.
Using a batton to defend oneself is deemed acceptable in some circumstances, yet teachers aren't even allowed to defend themselves by restraining a child who's lashing out. My other half is a teacher who has been on the receiving end of this... thankfully she has not been injured - yet.
Is this acceptable?
Exclusion is certainly one means of punishment, yet as already mentioned this does not address the situation in all cases, in some individuals it either gives them want they want, i.e. a way out of taking responsibility for their actions and time off for it. Or it is the only option because schools and teachers no longer have the authority they once had, i.e. they have no other option.
Luckypants
07-09-10, 09:30 AM
A question for Berlin; If your child can home today and said they had been beaten at school, am I to assume that you would complete support the school and not have any cause for complaint? Or would the beatings only happen to bad kids, and therefore not yours?
I'll answer this as well, if I can. When I was a child, if I got in trouble at school, my Mum or Dad would tell me off as well. The time I got caned I also got a smacked bum. Now if my child had come home and told me they got the cane / slipper I'd want to know why. Now if they had done it, they would get punishment from me also but not another smack, to reinforce the school's stance. If I had reason to doubt that my child was guilty of the 'offence' for which they were punished, then I would fight the school over it until I got to the bottom matter. I would hope that my kids would not lie to me over such a thing and also that I know them well enough to be able to tell if they were lying - but if it turns out they said they didn't do it when they did then it would be a big punishment. What that punishment was depends on age and circumstance - missing the school trip for instance.
As my kids have grown up now it's a little moot, but that is how I would have handled it.
Paul the 6th
07-09-10, 09:31 AM
I know some lads who got caned at school... see also, stoned/high
I smacked both my kids, one of them twice and the other just once, when they were really naughty. They knew they had been really bad and received the ultimate sanction, we made sure they understood why they got a smack. For less serious breaches of standards other punishments were used, such as being kept in or sent to bed early. Berlin describes the process quite well, it is a deliberate thing, done rarely and never in temper. Once past a certain level of maturity, I don't think smacking works, other punishments would be more effective.
These are key aspects to my opinion.
widepants
07-09-10, 09:50 AM
I honestly think that most of the problems parents face come down to a lack of consistancey.I know someone who ,for example ,would continue to tell their child not to get the toys out,because it was close to bed time.Once I counted her saying it 15 times before she gave up with it ,and when questioned they said"well another 10 minutes wont do any harm."The problem is "yes" it does do harm.The child is now 12 yrs old and the mother in question has lost control over that childs actions.
If I was ever in charge of her,I would simple pick her up and put her in bed ammediatly,and not wait for her to gain control.
So what do we end up with?
1.When with me the child knows the boundaries and that what I say goes,and as long as within those boundaries then all is good.
2.When with the mother the child is out of control,knowing only too well that mothers word means nothing.and sooner rather than later the mum WILL give in.
All I have to do now is give her the look.
Quite a few on here have met my kids and hope that they come across as well rounded young people
no_akira
07-09-10, 10:09 AM
You have to put it in historical social context. Punishment was popular in the 50's because teachers where having to deal with lots of feral children with real social problems. Large families, fathers killed in war. Society stretched to breaking point after 5 years of war. The Krays in a way where an illustration of this. Perhaps there was more to the national service than first meets the eye.
My other point is that you are applying adult rationality / judgement to a child who doesn't understand the context of their misdeed and then going straight to physical violence for a resolution. This is only ever going to confuse a child.
My other point is that you are applying adult rationality / judgement to a child who doesn't understand the context of their misdeed and then going straight to physical violence for a resolution. This is only ever going to confuse a child.
And this is the mis-managment I refer to.
For example, it was more the threat of a smack (a quiet word in my ear) that made me alter my behaviour. Thus, resulting in less occassions of physical punishment and overall better behaviour...
I of course had to understand what a smack was and therefore what the threat meant for this to work.
Past a certain age punishment was usually a grounding, strict cerfew, increased chores, exclusion from social events etc.
So exactly the same as today then?
And how old is this confused child? because if they get passed three without knowing right and wrong the parents should be taken away from the child!
It would also have to be justified. If I agreed with the justification then whack away
If I had reason to doubt that my child was guilty of the 'offence' for which they were punished, then I would fight the school over it until I got to the bottom matter.
Apologies for taking small parts of reasoned replies, but does the rub not lie in the parts I have quoted? If schools are to beat pupils, and as parents you both seem to support the idea, do they not need total authority over it?
All parents want to think that their offspring are little darlings, and unfortunately some of them also believe it to be true. You two are much more realistic than that and realise that children you are responsible for are/were not perfect at all times, and yet you both have qualified your answers. 'If I agreed' and 'If I had reason to doubt'.
How can a school apply this fairly if they have to seek permission from parents before the fact, or risk have to fight "My Perfect Little Johnny's" mother after the fact? It is not a court of law with evidential standards, but more a case of summary justice; I'm sure in many cases where children were beaten that the teacher did not have any 'proof' that could be presented to the parent. If you support beating, you have to surrender your child to the whim of the teacher.
it was used as a threat as it had only just stopped being used to be honest the threat was enough
it was used as a threat as it had only just stopped being used to be honest the threat was enough
Sorry Tara that's confused me. Was that a reply to me?
For me the threat was enough to stop me misbehaving. Had I continued, which was pretty rare, then I expected a smack if told off again. This was all usually after previous verbal warnings and other exclusion methods...
Likewise in school, pupils were typically given verbal warnings to start with, then excluded from class, put on detention and/or excluded from school before a physical punishment was cautioned and then implemented if the behaviour continued. All the while the parents were kept informed and had the opportunity to object etc.
The punishment process was managed and the parents were included. I do not support giving teachers the ability to physically punish a child without such measures as decribed above.
Ah - I think i just got it. You meant the cane was used as a threat... d'oh.
If schools are to beat pupils, and as parents you both seem to support the idea, do they not need total authority over it?
You've done this again. I'm not sure whether you are doing it deliberately or subconsiously.
No one is being "Beaten"! The schools are not going the "Beat" the kids. Beatings are done with fists and out of Mallace and with emotion.
"Beating" and "beat" is not the word for what we are talking about.
.
An example. In a teenage outburst the youngest one keyed the side of out Audi after I'd thrown him out of the house. £700 worth of damage becasue he was in a tempter.
I would have been black and blue for a week for that! I would never have done it in the first place because I'd have known that that was a belting offence. A BIG belting offence.
The youngest one laughed at me. I had to leave the house for three days to calm down.
I had the fix but couldn't use it.
So Back to you SimesSB.
What would you have done if your child keyed the side of your car in "Revenge" for a telling off?
C
I'm still interested in hearing how you'd handle this.
C
Not old enough to get the cane...just. I was constatly bullied at school and it was horrible. The kids that done it got a telling off then carried on. Its a problem that schools just dont want to deal with thats for sure.
You've done this again. I'm not sure whether you are doing it deliberately or subconsiously.
Oh, absolutely deliberately.
transitive verb
1
: to strike repeatedly: a : to hit repeatedly so as to inflict pain
Seems to fit the definition quite well. One may like to call it something else to salve ones conscience, but it is still a beating.
As for the key thing? I don't know. I don't have all the answers, and have (luckily) never found myself in that position. I suspect that, like you, my first response would be to lash out. I hope I wouldn't. You were obviously in a difficult position where your position of authority was emasculated and there was probably no 'right' thing to do .
Owenski
07-09-10, 11:42 AM
When my lad seriously P'eed me off, I cut the plugs off everything in his bedroom.
No Telly, play station etc for a month was my order.
After about 3 months the wife asked when I was going to put them back on for him. (He being about 16 at the time)
I was even more disappointed in him as I had left the plugs on the floor by the socket. I had expected he would have refitted them within the hour. Seems he didn't know how.
Schools don't even tell kids the basics such as how to wire a plug these days. I thought technology was compulsory for all.
Made me laugh,
My dad did the same - only I had the nouse to re-fit them a week or so after the month term began he heard my TV on (I had once again fallen asleep with it left on which IIRC was the original offence). This time he used teh plug on the wire to tan my ass good, oddly I get quite annoyed if Abi leaves the TV on now if shes no longer watching it.
IMO if you do it right it'll deter the right people but some people just but up a block to it. The ones who despite knowing they're guilty blame the punisher for giving the cane rather than themselves for acting out of line in the first place. If your the latter then the pysical pain will be enough of a deterant to not do it again, if your the former then no amount of any help will help you until you decide to help your self.
Not old enough to get the cane...just. I was constatly bullied at school and it was horrible. The kids that done it got a telling off then carried on. Its a problem that schools just dont want to deal with thats for sure.
Sorry to hear that fella, but I disagree with your comment regarding schools. I don't think they wouldn't want to deal with it, but they perhaps lack the necessary punishment for continued issues. Or maybe the understanding of how to use the punishments at their disposal. Bearing in mind they have to deal with many different parenting techniques, opinions etc it might be that bully boy bob's folks wouldn't allow the school to punish their child although they were quite aware of the problem.
Well it seems you don't (or won't) understand what caning is. Caning is a distinct event.
Be it 1, 3, 6, or in the worst case 12 lashed, it is a singular event. A smack with a slipper or three whups with a belt. Distinct events.
It is not repeatedly hitting the child until the "beater" decides its enough. That is abuse. (and you know that fine well ;) )
We are not talking about "beating" here. I'm glad we've sorted that out.
A beating is something Keith D is responsible for around the back, which is why it was a separate choice in the other poll.
And we all know that. Thats why one can approve of a someone (an adult) who has done something truely horrendous "getting what he deserves".
See, we're back to deserving a punishment again.
A beating is the adult version of a child caning, slippering or belting except in the adult case, it is usually to release anger or to inflict revenge and administered by the agrieved party because no one else would be willing to do it. Its is doen to "teach them a lesson" that they obviously didn't learn in childhood. The difference from right and wrong and the consequenses of choosing wrong.
C
timwilky
07-09-10, 11:54 AM
About 18 months ago, I bumped into Pilky, the b'stard that used to cane the most.
Mr Pilkington! says I as I put my hand out to shake his. He jumps back in fright (Must be the best part of 80). In conversation in transpires numerous ex pupils in the past have seen him in the street walked over and thumped him. I know he more than likely deserved every single punch.
He told me that there was only the old Maths teacher from his/my era still there. He was currently suspended for shouting at a girl. My god, in my time we dreamt of girls and only ever saw them over the field at the girls school next door (not allowed to cross the invisible line between the schools). But to suspend a teacher for shouting at a kid, ridiculous.
punyXpress
07-09-10, 11:55 AM
[QUOTE=no_akira;2363187]You have to put it in historical social context. Punishment was popular in the 50's because teachers where having to deal with lots of feral children with real social problems. Large families, Society stretched to breaking point after 5 years of war.
in the 60's . . Ditto
in the 70's . . Ditto
in the 80's . . Ditto
in the 90's . . Ditto
in the 00's . . Ditto
And with apologies to all those parents single through no fault of their own: lack of a father figure?
The Krays in a way where an illustration of this. Perhaps there was more to the national service than first meets the eye. :confused:
Or was there? " National Service was meant to tame young thugs, but the twins were the most violent, mutinous soldiers the Army's ever known - and all it taught them was ... "
Well it seems you don't (or won't) understand what caning is. Caning is a distinct event.
It is not repeatedly hitting the child until the "beater" decides its enough. That is abuse. (and you know that fine well ;) )
It is semantics, but beating is a generic event - beat with a stick, fists, cane, baseball bat etc. Caning is beating with a cane. (and I do realise there is a big difference between corporal punishment and abuse)
Definition of CANE
1
: to beat with a cane
Regardless of the semantics, can you furnish any proof (scientifically accepted, not 'he did it, I beat him, he didn't do it again' type experiences) that corporal punishment is effective?
Sorry to hear that fella, but I disagree with your comment regarding schools. I don't think they wouldn't want to deal with it, but they perhaps lack the necessary punishment for continued issues. Or maybe the understanding of how to use the punishments at their disposal. Bearing in mind they have to deal with many different parenting techniques, opinions etc it might be that bully boy bob's folks wouldn't allow the school to punish their child although they were quite aware of the problem.
Really. then they have you suckered in. Bullying is a statistic and schools wat staistics quashed, so they sweep it under the carpet and if its mentioned to be bullying then its gets 'rebranded'. it still happens a lot and as i say it because schools do no want to hear about it. A close firends daughter gets bullied. She has been in 3 schools because of it. The Education authority have put her down as a problem child and it so is not her. I have spoken to her on a few occasions, and everything that she tells me screams of bullying. Schools dont want to know. FACT!
timwilky
07-09-10, 12:01 PM
Re bulling.
My nephew was repeated bullied. My brother and his wife went into school on numerous occasions. There was no bullying in the school as they had a policy on bullying. Yeah right tell that to the kid with the bruises and torn uniform.
In the end a meeting was arranged between my brother/sis in law/nephew and the bullies and their parents to sort out the issues.
As soon as parent of protagonist no 1 walks in. My brother grabs him by the throat and shoves him against the wall. "Now I know who you are, the next time my lad gets a bruise. You get one". Problem sorted.
I bet the time they got home, he grabbed his scroat kid and told him what was going to happen to him if my brother had to carry out his threat to thump the dad.
Some times parents have to be encouraged to do their job.
and going round in circles. Those that have posted to that effect and myself are proof. The kids I grew up with that got the belt are the proof.
And to prove the point, I can't actually remember what It was I did that got me the belt in the three circumstances it happened. I know I deserved them. (so I'm not emotionally scarred by it)
But the important thing is I can now list you at least 10 things that I KNOW I WOULD have got the belt for if I'd done them.
Or in other words, I knew *exactly* where the limits were and you can bet your granny I didn't overstep those limits ever again!
"I'll not do that because I'll get a belting".
Whats the modern equivalent? "I'll not do that because I'll get shouted at and my teacher will be suspended"?
C
punyXpress
07-09-10, 12:07 PM
" Regardless of the semantics, can you furnish any proof (scientifically accepted, not 'he did it, I beat him, he didn't do it again' type experiences) that corporal punishment is effective? "
Similarly, is there the remotest sign that substitutes for " corporal punishment " have had the slightest positive effect since the ' bleeding hearts ' introduced them ?
Who was it said " tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime " and then did f'all about it ?
Isn't the key point of punishment to affect/alter a behaviour so as to change that behaviour? i.e. you steal, you get caught, you are tried and you go to jail. There is a process to the managment of the punishment.
A beating typically does not have a process, it is a reaction to a behaviour or act that is deemed inappropriate to the beater. Corporal Punishment follows a process and the punishment is the ultimate charge for the behaviour or indiscretion.
In a school it is not permissable to beat a child. To punish a child for bad behaviour follows a process. If it did not the school would have very big issues to deal with.
and going round in circles. Those that have posted to that effect and myself are proof. The kids I grew up with that got the belt are the proof.
I'm sorry, but I can't accept that as 'proof.' Tim has just posted that people who were caned at school are now thumping the old ex-teacher in the street; hardly a ringing endorsement.
* There are people who were caned at school who have grown up to be well balanced individuals.
* There are people who were caned at school who are evil menaces to society and are/have been/should be in prison for serious offences.
* There are people who were NOT caned at school who have grown up to be well balanced individuals.
* There are people who were NOT caned at school who are evil menaces to society and are/have been/should be in prison for serious offences.
I was beaten and I'm alright is not a logical argument, when somebody of the same generation was beaten and isn't.
Really. then they have you suckered in. Bullying is a statistic and schools wat staistics quashed, so they sweep it under the carpet and if its mentioned to be bullying then its gets 'rebranded'. it still happens a lot and as i say it because schools do no want to hear about it. A close firends daughter gets bullied. She has been in 3 schools because of it. The Education authority have put her down as a problem child and it so is not her. I have spoken to her on a few occasions, and everything that she tells me screams of bullying. Schools dont want to know. FACT!
Ok mate - that's you ropinion and that's fine. I am not suckered in whatsoever, but in my experience schools tend to do everything they can.
My other half is a teacher and I know in her school they do absolutely everythig possible to deal with bullying, because if they don't they are "branded" in other ways.
It seems the authority, teachers etc are at a point where they have run out of options to stem the bullying??? Is that really their fault?
Similarly, is there the remotest sign that substitutes for " corporal punishment " have had the slightest positive effect since the ' bleeding hearts ' introduced them ?
No, I don't think there is. But I don't think that there is much evidence of it having a negative effect either.
Owenski
07-09-10, 12:18 PM
I'm sorry, but I can't accept that as 'proof.' Tim has just posted that people who were caned at school are now thumping the old ex-teacher in the street; hardly a ringing endorsement.
* There are people who were caned at school who have grown up to be well balanced individuals.
* There are people who were caned at school who are evil menaces to society and are/have been/should be in prison for serious offences.
* There are people who were NOT caned at school who have grown up to be well balanced individuals.
* There are people who were NOT caned at school who are evil menaces to society and are/have been/should be in prison for serious offences.
I was beaten and I'm alright is not a logical argument, when somebody of the same generation was beaten and isn't.
i see your point (well i see all four of them ;)) but isnt it a valid point that when the caning was happening the ratio of ratbags to solid ciitzens was greater than it has been since the expulsion of caning?
In years gone there was no requirement for Asbos because if "yoofs" misbehaved they got a kick/slap/clip from someone thier senior. Where as now if a yoof misbehaves, if someone thier senior approaches to deliver swift justice they themselves end up in the dock defending thier actions, or even worse they end up dead or in hospital when the yoof gets his group of friends to attack said senior.
but isnt it a valid point that when the caning was happening the ratio of ratbags to solid ciitzens was greater than it has been since the expulsion of caning?
Is it? The press would have you believe it is, but proof is somewhat thin on the ground. There have always been bad eggs, but the ratio is unknown.
even worse they end up dead or in hospital when the yoof gets his group of friends to attack said senior.
I'm not sure how beating at school will stop murder. In fact, most of the uk 'mass murderers' went to school at a time when beating was allowed.
In years gone there was no requirement for Asbos because if "yoofs" misbehaved they got a kick/slap/clip from someone thier senior. Where as now if a yoof misbehaves, if someone thier senior approaches to deliver swift justice they themselves end up in the dock defending thier actions, or even worse they end up dead or in hospital when the yoof gets his group of friends to attack said senior.
Therein lies the definitive answer.
As youngsters, albeit 40-odd years ago, if you misbehaved you could get a clip off just about anyone.
If you nicked apples, and got caught - ouch.
If you ragged someone else's garden and got caught - ouch.
And so on.
And today adults daren't even go outside their door if there's any agro. End result, agro continues, vandelism continues, bullying continues
40 years ago you didn't have to worry about how safe you were in school, and I went to an inner city school, because at the first sign of any problems it was dealt with. And sometimes 'fear' of punishment actually achieves what you want without having to resort to using it.
Some of the lads I went to school with were evil, and a few were locked up before they even got the chance to leave school. Although there was the odd rumble in school, and it was a rarity, the discipline in all its forms made it a good and safe school to be at.
I know from my children that the school of the 90's, and early 2000's wasn't as safe as I experienced. The good kids were still good kids but the scroats just ran riot without any worries.
A few questions for the tree huggers; how can you reason with a scroat? How can you stop the vandelism in schools? How do you stop the bullying in schools? "Please don't do that" just doesn't cut it.
I'm sorry, but I can't accept that as 'proof.'
...I was beaten and I'm alright is not a logical argument, when somebody of the same generation was beaten and isn't.
For the last time We WEREN'T BEATEN. :smt120
... actually I WAS beaten by my father once. Thats how I know the difference. It was a VERY CLEAR DIFFERENCE
Someone a lot wiser than me said " It matters not, how well you argue a case, if the other party isn't listening".
I'm sorry you CHOOSE not to accept the proof. Its there as plain as the nose on your face. You're just choosing not to see it. And that means this debate is now moot.
C
For the last time We WEREN'T BEATEN. :smt120
Someone a lot wiser than me said " It matters not, how well you argue a case, if the other party isn't listening".
I'm sorry you CHOOSE not to accept the proof. Its there as plain as the nose on your face. You're just choosing not to see it. And that means this debate is now moot.
C
Some are listening, and get where you are coming from. Sometimes its the generation thing. Those of us that grew up with the 'stronger' forms of discipline will understand it better than someone who is dealing with it on a theoretical level. We saw the before and after 1st hand and can equate with the process of bad/slap/good, as opposed to the bad/"don't do that"/"sorry miss I'm too busy being bad to hear you."
Biker Biggles
07-09-10, 01:07 PM
Theres a world of difference between the kind of sadistic abuse that went on in some places and corporal punishment used correctly and indeed rarely.The shame is that in order to get rid of the former we have banned the latter and we are the poorer for it.
Owenski
07-09-10, 01:12 PM
lol, are you a politition? the spin you put on things is awsome.
As you say "the press would have you belive" yes they would and so yes I do. my proof is that the media says so, without doing a personal survey of the stats which would require a time machine then all anyone can base they're assumtions on is the stories (note I didnt use the word "facts" :D) that the media provide.
I thought it had been agreed not to use the term "beating" we were on about the merit of a pre-determind physical punishment for a foul act. Lets for arguements sake assume there are 3 catagories of people:
Angels, Middle Ground, Bad Eggs.
I honestly belive that these 3 types are defined randomly and appear in all walks/races/class of life of those 3, some "angels" will never follow a path which is anything less than well behaved. The bad eggs will always be rotten - for these there is no hope, your John Venables/Jack the ripper if you will.
Then there are the middle ground, these are the ones where the types of punishment become critial in which overall path they take. If you cut them down early from a path of negativity then they will wlak on the angelic side, however if they see merit in thier misbehavoir then without punishment they will continue to stray towards rotten eggs.
My belief is that due to modern society and poor moral fibre, more of these people starting in the middle ground are drifting towards the bad egg side than has been in previous generations. This i belive is down to authority figures lacking the relevent authority to teach kids from an early age that if they do something wrong then they'll suffer for it too.
Someone a lot wiser than me said " It matters not, how well you argue a case, if the other party isn't listening".
I'm sorry you CHOOSE not to accept the proof. Its there as plain as the nose on your face. You're just choosing not to see it. And that means this debate is now moot.
C
A friend had an accident in their car when not wearing a seatbelt and survived. This is not proof that not wearing a seatbelt is safer than wearing one, only that in that particular instance it was. Statistical analysis on the other hand, shows that wearing a seatbelt is safer than not. I am sure that you follow that argument.
I CHOOSE not to accept your proof for corporal punishment, as you have failed to produce any statistical facts either way. My counter argument is that while you have obviously turned out as a well balanced member of society, others who are of a similar age and therefore possibly in receipt of corporal punishment at school have not. Why did corporal punishment 'work' on you, but not on them? I don't believe that you have met the burden of proof, so please explain...
I am totally agnostic on most subjects - but in this I have been arguing the side I believe in; If you can furnish more independent studies showing that corporal punishment is a net benefit than I can showing it isn't I will happily admit I am wrong.
Good Post! (Owenski)
As the subject of bullying has come up, I can use it to demonstrate the use of the word "Beating"
I was beaten by the bullies (a Lot! Daily basis, kidney punches, face back knees etc Even my jumper set of firte in the lunch queue).
After leaving school I went looking for them individually and gave them a "beating". I wasn't punishing them. I wasn't trying to teach them a lesson. I just knocked the living **** out of as many as I could find because they "beat" me. I was revenge, it was retribution, and it felt very, very good.
You couldn't touch them at school because there was never one by himself. But by god I made up for it later on.
And THAT is the correct use of the word beating.
C
Relative numbers of excluded/ suspended kids might give some sort of measure. Lack of education has to be a far more severe punishment long term.
Owenski
07-09-10, 01:32 PM
Im not out to proove your wrong, there is no one who can say I am right. My aim is to give you an understanding of my perspective on the discussion. Your seat belt analagy is a relevent one and echos that saying "the exception that proves the rule"
Im only 25 so I missed the caning or physical punishment which some member have stated, however domestically I can justify my viewpoint.
On my street growing up, there werent many houses and it was a respectable area all 4bed detached houses a typical 2kids 2parents 1 car and a dog to each house then around 1995 everyone got a 2nd car lol.
Anyway Im setting the scene for you here, 3 families - mine and 2 friends
Me (Matt), Ben and John (I know not the most belivable bunch of names but genuinely thats what the 3 of us are called. We grew up in the same school year, on the most part in the same classes, lived on the same street and went to the same scouts (until john was asked to leave).
The key difference was we had 3 different sets of parents,
Mine would kick my ass if I played up - doing the typical boy'ish things got a a varied physical response.
Bens, would wag a finger give him a grounding
Johns, well john never did anything wrong in their eyes.
So from 3 of the most similar childhoods you could imagine, 3 of the most vaired adults have emerged.
Im a respectable civil engineer, Ben is a window cleaner and Johns doing 8yrs for causing death by dangerous driving and been part of a police chase. (not his first time inside might I add).
i fully belive that its the punishment we all recived while growing up which has determind our paths and choices, we all started in the middle ground (from my previous post) Ben and I have edged towards the angelic, where as John counterbalances us 10fold and turned into a rotten egg.
This Sim is my proof, I just hope I conveyed it well enough and the convenient names dont lead you to belive its fiction.
(for some humor, had my dad hit me less I may have been able to spell too ;))
widepants
07-09-10, 01:35 PM
Relative numbers of excluded/ suspended kids might give some sort of measure.___ Lack of education has to be a far more severe punishment long term___.
but unfortunatley it is back to the old story of "lets have kids and sit on the dole ,whilst the idiots work"
As you say "the press would have you belive" yes they would and so yes I do.
No, don't do that. [-X
Newspapers, in particular, make stuff up all the time. It's more about entertainment than news and should be treated as such.
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.