Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Disciplining Children AKA Back in my day they behaved.

Options
1…5678911»

Comments

  • Options
    #302
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,123 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I would agree a liar is indeed a liar, but I also believe in innocent until proven guilty. So the onus would be on you to show the person is, in fact, lying. This you have not done.

    Innocent until proven guilty in your head means the parent has to prove they didn't attack the child?

    Paging Logic, come in Logic.

    The accuser has to proven their accusation, I.e.:cool: The child or whatever prosecution service is effectively representing them.


  • Options
    #303
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Not what I said at all no.

    What I DID say was that if you are going to accuse a person of lying, then the onus is on you to prove their are lying.

    If you are going to accuse a person of assault, then the onus is on you to prove assault.

    And essentially saying "You are lying about being hit on the head with a cricket bat, because if you were you would be dead" is pretty poor logic. So page logic indeed, and send it his way when you find it.


  • Options
    #304
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    Yes, and You weren't able to go and blab to the social services about it.
    Why would I go to social services over another kid accidentally hitting me with a cricket bat? :confused:
    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The politically correct classes insist on allowing every little liar with a whinge, make an attack on family life with their superior smug "I know best" attitude. A liar is a liar.
    To be perfectly honest I get the feeling there's a personal history here that you've not brought up (and you don't have to!). You seem to really, really have an axe to grind when it comes to people "blabbing, squealing" etc on people for abusing kids.


  • Options
    #305
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,241 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The politically correct classes insist on allowing every little liar with a whinge, make an attack on family life with their superior smug "I know best" attitude. A liar is a liar.

    Sounds like you're saying that it shouldn't be investigated and that the child is automatically a liar. Interesting. Are you saying that every report of child abuse is lying whigers, or just this one?

    If the former, then you DO realise that that's what led to the biggest institutionalised child-abuse scandal in the nation's history. (And no, that's NOT a dig at the church, before someone uses THAT cop-out, it's a dig at people who think children shouldn't be believed when they report abuse) - but then the question is: why even have a child welfare board?

    If the later, then the question is: why this one? What factual information do you have that wasn't in the report? Were you there?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #306
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    Yes, and You weren't able to go and blab to the social services about it.

    Maybe he dodged and just caught the edge of it.If you saw a cricket bat swinging your way....And mum in a temper, who was threatening serious damage..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #307
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Maybe he dodged and just caught the edge of it.If you saw a cricket bat swinging your way....And mum in a temper, who was threatening serious damage..

    Nothing happened at all. The kid is a liar. If she missed the first time she would have made sure the second time.


  • Options
    #308
    lulu1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭lulu1


    wexford awake wrote: »
    Nothing wrong with giving children four to six slaps across the arse or back of legs. Europe and their crap has made it illegal to physically discipline children. Kids were happier in the 70s 80s and 90s because we were simply tougher because we got tough love at home. Moddle coddling is more harmful than a slap.

    So thats the reason all our prisons are overflowing. Too much moddie coddling in the 70s 80s 90s


  • Options
    #309
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,241 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

    ... What factual information do you have that wasn't in the report? Were you there?
    4ensic15 wrote: »
    Nothing happened at all. The kid is a liar. If she missed the first time she would have made sure the second time.

    I'm going to take a stab at answering my own question (seeing as you've declined) - are you, by any chance, the kid's mother?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #310
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    I'm going to take a stab at answering my own question (seeing as you've declined) - are you, by any chance, the kid's mother?
    I am not the kid's mother. It is obvious that it is all lies. These things don't happen, except in the imagination of the Social Services.


  • Options
    #311
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    I am not the kid's mother. It is obvious that it is all lies. These things don't happen, except in the imagination of the Social Services.

    :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #312
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,241 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    I am not the kid's mother. It is obvious that it is all lies. These things don't happen, except in the imagination of the Social Services.

    It's not obvious unless you were actually there, obviously.

    So yeah. Troll or kid's mother. And without any elaboration, I'm going to lean away from troll.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #313
    nigel_wilson
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 176 ✭✭nigel_wilson


    lulu1 wrote: »
    wexford awake wrote: »
    Nothing wrong with giving children four to six slaps across the arse or back of legs. Europe and their crap has made it illegal to physically discipline children. Kids were happier in the 70s 80s and 90s because we were simply tougher because we got tough love at home. Moddle coddling is more harmful than a slap.

    So thats the reason all our prisons are overflowing. Too much moddie coddling in the 70s 80s 90s

    I've never understood this argument really. If 'mollycoddling' results in bad behaviour then why is it that my former classmates many of whom have been called entitled by our teachers have never been in prison or been involved in delinquent acts? They were never beaten (we had a discussion).

    Could there be other factors at work? How do we know that the people who say "I was beaten as a child from a rough area and turned out okay" wouldn't have turned out fine regardless? Like a controlled variable in science. Perhaps population explosion explains this?

    Also what do you mean by tough love vs mollycoddling? And why do you think kids were tougher?


  • Options
    #314
    Hector Bellend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Little Johnny and Little Jenny will always need a good crack on the arse when needs be.


  • Options
    #315
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Eggs For Dinner wrote: »
    I never hit or smacked my kids, but I disciplined them all the time. They knew what was expected of them and knew the consequences of their actions. No football training, no TV, no sweets, no X Box. Once you explained what was happening and why, "hitting" never became a necessity

    Yup, grounding is a great tool. It neatly shows that actions have consequences.


  • Options
    #316
    jonnny68
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,670 ✭✭✭jonnny68


    donegaLroad wrote: »
    Spare the rod and spoil the child has long thought to be unture.

    Physically correcting children can lead to violent and aggressive behavior as the child grows older. (among other issues)


    is that right yeah, i was smacked as a child and it did me no harm whatsoever and i was never violent or aggressive so this is bull****.

    If it wasn't for millennial snowflakes these days, tragic tragic individuals, getting all offended at people who discipline their kids this would be a non-issue, kids thesedays are cheeky bastards and think they can do what they like knowing full well they will get away with not being smacked, it's plain wrongness.


  • Options
    #317
    nigel_wilson
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 176 ✭✭nigel_wilson


    jonnny68 wrote: »
    is that right yeah, i was smacked as a child and it did me no harm whatsoever and i was never violent or aggressive so this is bull****.

    If it wasn't for millennial snowflakes these days, tragic tragic individuals, getting all offended at people who discipline their kids this would be a non-issue, kids thesedays are cheeky bastards and think they can do what they like knowing full well they will get away with not being smacked, it's plain wrongness.

    And what about many others today who weren't smacked and turned out fine.


  • Options
    #318
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    jonnny68 wrote: »
    is that right yeah, i was smacked as a child and it did me no harm whatsoever and i was never violent or aggressive so this is bull****.

    Which is why we do not study things like that at the level of individual anecdote. Saying that "X is a risk factor towards later violent behavior" is in no way negated by a single person standing up saying "Well I had X, and I am perfectly ok".
    jonnny68 wrote: »
    If it wasn't for millennial snowflakes these days, tragic tragic individuals, getting all offended at people who discipline their kids this would be a non-issue, kids thesedays are cheeky bastards and think they can do what they like knowing full well they will get away with not being smacked, it's plain wrongness.

    I am not seeing much evidence that kids "these days" are any cheekier or more anti social over all that kids back when I myself was one 30 years ago. However even if I did see that, I would not be as quick as yourself to assume that the reason for it is as simplistic as a fall in violence based disciplinary methods. I think we could look at any number of other factors, up to and including high levels of stress and lower levels of quality family time that people have together.

    So there would be a lot of work left to do to show that A) your description of the situation is accurate and B) your explanation for that situation is either.


Advertisement