Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
shull

The Fecking Naany State

Recommended Posts


On 10/6/2018 at 10:45 AM, TPAFKATS said:

You claimed it was based on their nanny state policies. There is no evidence for that.
Also you can't compare Scottish and Westminster Parliament elections as they are entirely different. One is first past the post, the other has an element of that and also a complex regional pr list.

I'm not saying it's specifically because of nanny state. I'm saying I would be massively surprised if there was zero correlation given the level of outcry on social media and that I physically know people that used it as a reason not to vote for them. 

You can compare drop in overall voting numbers which is what I have done. That has nothing to do with the voting structure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, oaksoft said:

What is obvious from discussions like this is that vulnerable young children need protection from a surprising number of adults who are quite openly prepared to use violence against them to enforce their will.

Apparently you can tell how civilised a society is by the way it treats its sick and its young.

It is very odd to see adults advocating publicly to be allowed to use violence against their own kids. The fact that these adults will use any word except violence to describe what they are doing should be telling them that what they are doing is wrong.

Like I say, I have my view on it, others have theirs. I'm not going to change mine based on what people say on here and I wouldn't expect others to. I think criminalising parents disciplining children by smacking is wrong, it's nothing to do with thinking child abuse is right, which I obviously don't. 

My point is and always has been regarding perception (nanny state) and the way it'll lose the SNP votes as recent evidence has backed up. 

Last point on your view, which like I say you're welcome to have. I am not advocating violence against children. Given an unruly child a smack on the a*se to bring them in line, something that's happened over thousands of years is not a sign of a violent person or someone acting violently, regardless if you want to use that word for dramatic effect for your viewpoint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2018 at 11:46 PM, faraway saint said:

Nice story............

I have 2 children, did I "smack" them if they done something that would endanger them or something that I thought was unacceptable, yes.

Did it have any long term effect, I believe so as they rarely repeated this behaviour. 

You are having a nightmare 

now run along:byebye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Another thought. Parents who use violence against their kids may be kidding themselves that it's "just a smack to keep them safe" and in their kids interests but it is highly likely that the kids themselves see their parents as people they cannot fully trust because when things get difficult their parents have shown themselves to be incapable of resolving problems without resorting to smacking the kid. When their kids therefore have problems such as depression etc they are therefore very unlikely to go to their parents for help. Instead, they withdraw into themselves or turn to their mates or alcohol or drugs. Kids are also much more likely to rebel when they reach teenage years and rightly want to be given more freedom because they don't trust the parent to be reasonable with them. Teenage tantrums have nothing to do with teenagers and everything to do with the inevitable breakdown in trust between them and shite parents who smacked them when they were younger.

This really should be starting to ring bells with people.

Of course, descent into depression or experimenting with alcohol and drugs could also be about difficulty coping with life as it is in Tory Britain, which you are a proponent of. But no, it's all because parents smacked their arse when they were wee.

You may have a point with your anti smacking stance, but you then ruin it with this pish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Like I say, I have my view on it, others have theirs. I'm not going to change mine based on what people say on here and I wouldn't expect others to. I think criminalising parents disciplining children by smacking is wrong, it's nothing to do with thinking child abuse is right, which I obviously don't. 

My point is and always has been regarding perception (nanny state) and the way it'll lose the SNP votes as recent evidence has backed up. 

Last point on your view, which like I say you're welcome to have. I am not advocating violence against children. Given an unruly child a smack on the a*se to bring them in line, something that's happened over thousands of years is not a sign of a violent person or someone acting violently, regardless if you want to use that word for dramatic effect for your viewpoint. 

Of course smacking a child is child abuse. Of course using physical force against a defenceless tiny human is violence and assault. How bizarre to think otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hendo said:

Of course, descent into depression or experimenting with alcohol and drugs could also be about difficulty coping with life as it is in Tory Britain, which you are a proponent of. But no, it's all because parents smacked their arse when they were wee.

You may have a point with your anti smacking stance, but you then ruin it with this pish.

You reckon one in 10 suffers from depression because of the Tories? 

Hilarious.

Back in the real world, psychologists know that people struggle in adulthood because of problems from their childhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Of course smacking a child is child abuse. Of course using physical force against a defenceless tiny human is violence and assault. How bizarre to think otherwise.

Well the vast majority of government bodies and it would appear a considerable number of people (including parents) in this country and beyond disagree with you. No one is talking about abusing a child or violently assaulting a child, they're of course wrong.

A smack for an unruly child as a last warning after being told several times not to act in a certain with for example, has been used throughout the whole of human history.  Nothing bizarre about that at all. Someone hitting a child with excessive force or if the child has done no wrong seems to be more what you're talking about. 

Sometimes you have to just accept people have a different opinion to yours. Smacking isn't a right/ wrong issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Of course smacking a child is child abuse. Of course using physical force against a defenceless tiny human is violence and assault. How bizarre to think otherwise.

 

Edited by bazil85
Posted twice in error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Well the vast majority of government bodies and it would appear a considerable number of people (including parents) in this country and beyond disagree with you. No one is talking about abusing a child or violently assaulting a child, they're of course wrong.

A smack for an unruly child as a last warning after being told several times not to act in a certain with for example, has been used throughout the whole of human history.  Nothing bizarre about that at all. Someone hitting a child with excessive force or if the child has done no wrong seems to be more what you're talking about. 

Sometimes you have to just accept people have a different opinion to yours. Smacking isn't a right/ wrong issue. 

Why on earth would it make any difference whether government bodies agree with me or not? Is that really what you are falling back on? I can use violence on my kid because it's not technically illegal?

Honestly baz, I really think you need to look up the definitions of violence and assault.

When you raise your hand and strike someone it is assault and an act of violence. That isn't a matter of opinion. It's a fact. You are defending the indefensible.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

You reckon one in 10 suffers from depression because of the Tories? 

Hilarious.

Back in the real world, psychologists know that people struggle in adulthood because of problems from their childhood.

And these are all related to smacking or, as usual, are you moving the goalposts? 

I do agree about the Tories idea right enough, that is funny. 

Edited by faraway saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

And these are all related to smacking or, as usual, are you moving the goalposts? 

I do agree about the Tories idea right enough, that is funny. 

And you enter the conversation with your usual blend of cynical deflection. Adding nothing of value but happy to stir the pot.  Classic

Edited by St.Ricky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Why on earth would it make any difference whether government bodies agree with me or not? Is that really what you are falling back on? I can use violence on my kid because it's not technically illegal?

Honestly baz, I really think you need to look up the definitions of violence and assault.

When you raise your hand and strike someone it is assault and an act of violence. That isn't a matter of opinion. It's a fact. You are defending the indefensible.

Like I say, not everyone has to agree with you on everything. Disciplining children by smacking is not a right/ wrong topic as much as you might want it to be. Different people have opinions and you'll just have to accept people have different ones to you. 

I know the definitions just fine and smacking a child as a means of discipline is not automatically assault or violence. If the adult used excessive force or wilfully went out to assault then it's a different story. 

Wrong, it's very much a matter of opinion. You seeming to think you know better than billions of people over human history doesn't change something from an opinion to a right or wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

You reckon one in 10 suffers from depression because of the Tories? 

Hilarious.

Back in the real world, psychologists know that people struggle in adulthood because of problems from their childhood.

I certainly don't think austerity, poverty, homelessness or underfunding of the NHS help anyone's mental health, no.

I am, of course, aware that most people's mental health difficulties are related to childhood trauma. Perhaps you should read up on trauma informed care, and the impact of adverse childhood events. Of course, most of the traumatic events a child can experience are things like bereavement of someone close, parents divorcing, or significant emotional, physical or sexual abuse. It does not include getting smacked for being naughty.

I agree with some of your arguments, but to try and claim that there's a whole generation of disaffected adults with depression because they were smacked is fecking ridiculous.

Time to put the keyboard away, you're having a 'mare. 

Edited by Hendo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like I say, not everyone has to agree with you on everything. Disciplining children by smacking is not a right/ wrong topic as much as you might want it to be. Different people have opinions and you'll just have to accept people have different ones to you. 
I know the definitions just fine and smacking a child as a means of discipline is not automatically assault or violence. If the adult used excessive force or wilfully went out to assault then it's a different story. 
Wrong, it's very much a matter of opinion. You seeming to think you know better than billions of people over human history doesn't change something from an opinion to a right or wrong.  
Your reply shows that you either don't know these definitions or are choosing to ignore them as they don't fit with your opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Of course smacking a child is child abuse. Of course using physical force against a defenceless tiny human is violence and assault. How bizarre to think otherwise.

Giving a child  Ritalin or Dexedrine is another form of abuse that now goes on in school's.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, saintnextlifetime said:

Giving a child  Ritalin or Dexedrine is another form of abuse that now goes on in school's.   

Agreed, too much medicalisation of children going on, though in my experience it's often parents wanting an explanation for behaviour that means they dont need to look at their own parenting. A lot of over diagnosis of things like ADHD, aspergers and autism, which then spreads resources too thinly and affects the amount of support to children who genuinely have conditions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Like I say, not everyone has to agree with you on everything. Disciplining children by smacking is not a right/ wrong topic as much as you might want it to be. Different people have opinions and you'll just have to accept people have different ones to you. 

I know the definitions just fine and smacking a child as a means of discipline is not automatically assault or violence. If the adult used excessive force or wilfully went out to assault then it's a different story. 

Wrong, it's very much a matter of opinion. You seeming to think you know better than billions of people over human history doesn't change something from an opinion to a right or wrong.  

You are in total denial over this.

Interesting that it's the second time you've invoked the "everyone else agrees with me" argument. It suggests you are not confident of your ground.

It used to be common practice to burn people as "witches". Didn't make them right.

MIllions of people in Germany thought it was morally right to rid the world of Jews. Didn't make them right.

It used to be popular opinion that homosexuality should result in jail time and this is still the prevalent view of most developing nations in the world. Doesn't make them right either.

The point is that you cannot assign everything to people's opinions. Sometimes people are just wrong and beating small defenceless children is an absolute wrong that any fully developed, functioning adult would agree should be rooted out and the pertpetrators of those acts of violence shamed into doing so.

Now the thing is, I actually don't believe you are advocating smacking children anyway.

I think your problem is simply being told what to do by another person as a basic principle.

You value your own independence and freedoms than you value doing things for the common good.

I do actually have a lot of sympathy for that view and it's one I hold myself.

You are backing the wrong horse on which to make that point clear though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hendo said:

I certainly don't think austerity, poverty, homelessness or underfunding of the NHS help anyone's mental health, no.

I am, of course, aware that most people's mental health difficulties are related to childhood trauma. Perhaps you should read up on trauma informed care, and the impact of adverse childhood events. Of course, most of the traumatic events a child can experience are things like bereavement of someone close, parents divorcing, or significant emotional, physical or sexual abuse. It does not include getting smacked for being naughty.

I agree with some of your arguments, but to try and claim that there's a whole generation of disaffected adults with depression because they were smacked is fecking ridiculous.

Time to put the keyboard away, you're having a 'mare. 

I might agree with you if I had actually said that bit in bold. No idea where you are going with that paragraph in red.

As for your first sentence, the Tories did not creat poverty or homelessness. Why people keep saying this sort of pish defies logic really. Neither did they create the banking mess from which austerity was needed. The problems with the NHS are not down to funding.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, St.Ricky said:

And you enter the conversation with your usual blend of cynical deflection. Adding nothing of value but happy to stir the pot.  Classic

Yep. It's easy to snipe at the opinions of others from the sidelines and yet not be willing to stick your own neck above the parapet and offer your own constructive thoughts.

I would rather be in the company of 1 person prepared to present their own constructive thoughts on a subject which were diametrically opposed to mine than live in a world of snipers with nothing to contribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:
4 hours ago, bazil85 said:
Like I say, not everyone has to agree with you on everything. Disciplining children by smacking is not a right/ wrong topic as much as you might want it to be. Different people have opinions and you'll just have to accept people have different ones to you. 
I know the definitions just fine and smacking a child as a means of discipline is not automatically assault or violence. If the adult used excessive force or wilfully went out to assault then it's a different story. 
Wrong, it's very much a matter of opinion. You seeming to think you know better than billions of people over human history doesn't change something from an opinion to a right or wrong.  

Your reply shows that you either don't know these definitions or are choosing to ignore them as they don't fit with your opinions.

No it shows that I don't believe smacking with little/ some force to be violence or assault. You can check laws on assault in other countries and before the law came into force here to confirm smacking was not and is not in other places considered assault.

Violence for me is the actual act of acting violent towards someone which I don't believe disciplining a child with reasonable force is. Again it isn't a right/ wrong debate or it's stating that dozens of nations the world over and millions if not billions of individuals are wrong and Oak is right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I might agree with you if I had actually said that bit in bold. No idea where you are going with that paragraph in red.

As for your first sentence, the Tories did not creat poverty or homelessness. Why people keep saying this sort of pish defies logic really. Neither did they create the banking mess from which austerity was needed. The problems with the NHS are not down to funding.

Where I am going with the paragraph in red is giving you an understanding of the trauma in childhood that can cause problems in adulthood, in response to you claiming that smacking was the cause of adult mental health problems.

As for your last paragraph, oh FFS is probably the only justifiable response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hendo said:

Agreed, too much medicalisation of children going on, though in my experience it's often parents wanting an explanation for behaviour that means they dont need to look at their own parenting. A lot of over diagnosis of things like ADHD, aspergers and autism, which then spreads resources too thinly and affects the amount of support to children who genuinely have conditions. 

Yeah when l was a kid l never heard of one kid having any of the ailments you mention.  Makes you wonder where the psychiatrist got them from . 

I saw a petition the other day to ban kids under 5yrs being diagnosed with anti-psychotic drugs ! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

You are in total denial over this.

Interesting that it's the second time you've invoked the "everyone else agrees with me" argument. It suggests you are not confident of your ground.

It used to be common practice to burn people as "witches". Didn't make them right.

MIllions of people in Germany thought it was morally right to rid the world of Jews. Didn't make them right.

It used to be popular opinion that homosexuality should result in jail time and this is still the prevalent view of most developing nations in the world. Doesn't make them right either.

The point is that you cannot assign everything to people's opinions. Sometimes people are just wrong and beating small defenceless children is an absolute wrong that any fully developed, functioning adult would agree should be rooted out and the pertpetrators of those acts of violence shamed into doing so.

Now the thing is, I actually don't believe you are advocating smacking children anyway.

I think your problem is simply being told what to do by another person as a basic principle.

You value your own independence and freedoms than you value doing things for the common good.

I do actually have a lot of sympathy for that view and it's one I hold myself.

You are backing the wrong horse on which to make that point clear though.

Again, not everyone needs to agree with you on every point, you have to accept that. 

I have not once said everyone agrees with me, I've said there are people that'll agree with me and agree with you likewise I'm sure, so that's just clear twisting. 

You're comparing apples and pears. I can do the same. Do you believe it is fundamentally wrong to have corporal punishment laws in this world? (not saying if I feel there should be or not) my point is, it's opinion, you can't have a right or wrong on such an subjective, emotive subject.

You can have right/ wrong for burning people alive and gassing people because of their faith. It is not comparable. We are a more developed, educated people and we know that was wrong because there's no such thing as witches and prejudice because of a religious faith is also wrong. If you think burning people alive and lightly smacking unruly children is the same, you seem to be beyond denial and just down right mad! Same goes on homophobic punishment, it's not comparable. 

Beating children is wrong of course it is. We aren't talking about that, we're talking about punishment. Many reports on the matter consider the main result of smacking is not through the pain (often it's not really all that sore from personal experience) it's the shock and consequences that gets the results. The shock that a parent takes that action 'I'm going to stop being bad' Often you get the same response from children through tone of voice or the introduction of another parent 'Keep it up and I'm telling your mum/ dad' You have to understand I have never once advocated for excessive pain or long-term abuse/ pain for kids 

As for being told what to do, I'm not sure what you mean. I have said several times you're entitled to your opinion as I am. Because you can't change someones opinion on this subject is something you'll just have to deal with. As much as you kick and scream it's still not a matter of right and wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...