Would Jesus condone corporal punishment?

[+Sherapy]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

Metaphorically speaking yes. 

Interesting a metaphorical mosquito, lol 

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Interesting a metaphorical mosquito, lol 

Gnats would probably be better, but yeah, blood suckers might work as well. 

[+joc]

6 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Gnats would probably be better, but yeah, blood suckers might work as well. 

Some genius...probably in the military...invented Deet.  It repels any of a number of vampires...gnats, flies, mosquitos...

One of the Three greatest inventions of all time.

 

[jypsijemini]

On 1/7/2020 at 5:09 AM, Sherapy said:

I decided to start a thread on this and would like to continue exploring the pros and cons of corporal punishment as outlined biblically.

Would Jesus if he existed condone corporal punishment? Why and Why not? 

 

What are your thoughts? What about Jesus would he condone this? 
 

All comments welcome.

Corporal punishment serves some and not others.

My father received it regularly and it really never seemed to shape him, at least that's the impression that I get from his stories. His mischeviousness and rebelliousness never dwindled until he matured later in life, became a husband and father and started to take responsibility for his own actions. He copped corporal punishment at home and at school but it never seemed to stop him from acting out as a boy. Dad's father was an elder in the Dutch Reformed Church.

My partner echoes this. He wasn't brought up in a spiritual or religious household. His single mother had three boys to raise and to this day, they all describe the middle son as the devil. No-one has anything good to say about him. No matter how many times she punished her boys physically, it didn't seem to deter them from repeating their behaviour or doing any worse. My partner has even described times that he and his brother would laugh at her when she'd be swinging belts and spoons at their backsides.

And then you've got me. I was only ever threatened with punishment from a wooden spoon. I was brought up in a God-fearing, Christian household. My mother never wanted my brother and I to fear the hand. They never wanted to escalate into using a belt or anything harder or sharper than a wooden spoon. They never smacked us while they were frustrated, angry or emotional. Between the offence and the punishment, there was always a cooling down period so that the discipline was delivered calmly and quickly and decisively.

I feared that damn spoon so bad that I did whatever I had to in order to avoid it. I dreaded that as my punishment so I tried my hardest to behave and control myself in order to avoid that particular fate. It didn't stop me from having fun - but the manner in which it was delivered made me respect that particular punishment and I never feared or resented the people who delivered it. And it stopped when I was about 9 or 10. I was never grounded. We always used communication and calm words to work out our issues and to address my behaviour. Things were taken away or withheld, more chores were temporarily added as punishment - but this was all on the foundation of childhood where I had always tried to do the right thing to avoid corporal punishment.

Therefore, it works for some and not others. I think the way in which it was used on me worked well, and I don't resent it at all. I can't even really remember how many times it happened - and almost every time it was because of deliberate disobedience in situations where I knew exactly what I was doing and chose to disobey anyway. I think many other parents over-use corporal punishment because they're angry and they think it'll snap and scare their kid into obeying. It's retaliation, not discipline when it's done in anger. It's like instantly socking someone in the mouth for insulting you.

Would Jesus have condoned it?

I'm pretty sure the Bible condones it - or at least, that's what I was led to believe

But Jesus? I personally think that he would understand why it is used - that it could deter a lot of crime if it was still being used rather than just fines, incarceration, community service or in some countries, capital punishment. I think he'd be against capital, but more lenient toward corporal. However in terms of using this as a child-rearing method, I think it depends on the circumstances. He wouldn't condone the parents who regularly and emotionally deliver corporal punishment to their children - but I don't think he'd have any problem with the way my brother and I were disciplined. Every other avenue was exhausted before it came to that - and there were very few offences that warranted corporal punishment. We were so scared of the wooden spoon that we never physically harmed one another (which would have been one reason for a smack) and really, the only other one was direct, intentional disobedience. Or lying. Every other example of poor behaviour was dealt with some other way and punished accordingly - but not everything warranted three sharp smacks with the spoon. I think Jesus could have respected that, as I do.

At the end of the day, there's no manual for parenting. Most parents are doing the best they know how with the experience and knowledge they have at the time. Some people shouldn't even be parents and they don't try to do better and some don't even try at all. Some believe it's necessary to smack and others were able to avoid it altogether. Punishing your children physically isn't always wrong - just as refraining from doing so isn't always the best option for the individual and their behaviour. It depends on how it is delivered and what it is being done for or because of. It depends on the parent. Sometimes it even depends on the child. Back in the day, children with undiagnosed mental illnesses would have been whooped and whipped most days without anyone ever trying to understand what was going on.

Each situation is completely unique and subjective. I think Jesus would be able to understand that.

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Of course not.  Why it's almost like they have a litmus test or two built in there somewhere, speaking of the obvious being incongruous.

The point is--a support group providing a safe place or safe haven for someone harassed, marginalized or otherwise discriminated against, is not the same as gatherings of like-minded individuals indulging in the freedom of choice of  whom they wish to associate with. Equating the one with the other is a false dichotomy.

[+Hammerclaw]

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

Interesting a metaphorical mosquito, lol 

The deep south is notorious for it's bugs and snakes and the mosquitos breed profusely in all the standing water from frequent rain.

[+Sherapy]

44 minutes ago, jypsijemini said:

Corporal punishment serves some and not others.

My father received it regularly and it really never seemed to shape him, at least that's the impression that I get from his stories. His mischeviousness and rebelliousness never dwindled until he matured later in life, became a husband and father and started to take responsibility for his own actions. He copped corporal punishment at home and at school but it never seemed to stop him from acting out as a boy. Dad's father was an elder in the Dutch Reformed Church.

My partner echoes this. He wasn't brought up in a spiritual or religious household. His single mother had three boys to raise and to this day, they all describe the middle son as the devil. No-one has anything good to say about him. No matter how many times she punished her boys physically, it didn't seem to deter them from repeating their behaviour or doing any worse. My partner has even described times that he and his brother would laugh at her when she'd be swinging belts and spoons at their backsides.

And then you've got me. I was only ever threatened with punishment from a wooden spoon. I was brought up in a God-fearing, Christian household. My mother never wanted my brother and I to fear the hand. They never wanted to escalate into using a belt or anything harder or sharper than a wooden spoon. They never smacked us while they were frustrated, angry or emotional. Between the offence and the punishment, there was always a cooling down period so that the discipline was delivered calmly and quickly and decisively.

I feared that damn spoon so bad that I did whatever I had to in order to avoid it. I dreaded that as my punishment so I tried my hardest to behave and control myself in order to avoid that particular fate. It didn't stop me from having fun - but the manner in which it was delivered made me respect that particular punishment and I never feared or resented the people who delivered it. And it stopped when I was about 9 or 10. I was never grounded. We always used communication and calm words to work out our issues and to address my behaviour. Things were taken away or withheld, more chores were temporarily added as punishment - but this was all on the foundation of childhood where I had always tried to do the right thing to avoid corporal punishment.

Therefore, it works for some and not others. I think the way in which it was used on me worked well, and I don't resent it at all. I can't even really remember how many times it happened - and almost every time it was because of deliberate disobedience in situations where I knew exactly what I was doing and chose to disobey anyway. I think many other parents over-use corporal punishment because they're angry and they think it'll snap and scare their kid into obeying. It's retaliation, not discipline when it's done in anger. It's like instantly socking someone in the mouth for insulting you.

Would Jesus have condoned it?

I'm pretty sure the Bible condones it - or at least, that's what I was led to believe

But Jesus? I personally think that he would understand why it is used - that it could deter a lot of crime if it was still being used rather than just fines, incarceration, community service or in some countries, capital punishment. I think he'd be against capital, but more lenient toward corporal. However in terms of using this as a child-rearing method, I think it depends on the circumstances. He wouldn't condone the parents who regularly and emotionally deliver corporal punishment to their children - but I don't think he'd have any problem with the way my brother and I were disciplined. Every other avenue was exhausted before it came to that - and there were very few offences that warranted corporal punishment. We were so scared of the wooden spoon that we never physically harmed one another (which would have been one reason for a smack) and really, the only other one was direct, intentional disobedience. Or lying. Every other example of poor behaviour was dealt with some other way and punished accordingly - but not everything warranted three sharp smacks with the spoon. I think Jesus could have respected that, as I do.

At the end of the day, there's no manual for parenting. Most parents are doing the best they know how with the experience and knowledge they have at the time. Some people shouldn't even be parents and they don't try to do better and some don't even try at all. Some believe it's necessary to smack and others were able to avoid it altogether. Punishing your children physically isn't always wrong - just as refraining from doing so isn't always the best option for the individual and their behaviour. It depends on how it is delivered and what it is being done for or because of. It depends on the parent. Sometimes it even depends on the child. Back in the day, children with undiagnosed mental illnesses would have been whooped and whipped most days without anyone ever trying to understand what was going on.

Each situation is completely unique and subjective. I think Jesus would be able to understand that.

Thank you for sharing. 
 

What are your thoughts on not using corporal punishment as the main stay of parenting? 
 

I personally don’t advocate hitting kids at all, and raised 3 boys each different, for me, I would have rather cut my arms off then to fear parent with violence or the threat of it, my heart felt so sad that you were so scared of that wooden spoon,I just wanted to hug that little girl and tell her she was safe.  I wouldn’t have felt okay with scaring you like that you strike me as a good person who could have easily been reached other ways, for the life of me, I can't fathom why if a parent is only going to hit as an absolute last resort, why not put that kind of resolve into finding solutions that didn’t require hitting at all. I didn’t have good reasons ever to hit a defenseless child. But that was me.  
 

What kind of behaviors are we talking about. I can remember being so small I could get in places my mom couldn’t reach me and I would not come out till she promised to not hit me. I felt I had the right then to not be hit.  

Please don’t take this as harsh, how you think of your parents is your call I make no judgement. I am just asking questions. 
 

I on the other hand concluded very young that my mom was not equipped to raise kids, yet, she was my mom. I came to understand the mindset of my mom and extend compassion and understanding. She did eventually get help, for which I was so proud of her and she was very vocal about how she dropped the ball and thankful her daughter had more sense and a grandmother that was wise. 
 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Sherapy

[jmccr8]

10 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

I`m against bringing children up to be sensitive and I know some of you here will disagree.

The danger of creating someone ruled by their emotions is that they cannot identify a harmful emotion and snap themselves out of it. We shouldn't be reactive creatures ruled by our monkey-minds, we need to know how to disengage from negative emotions to stop ourselves being led by them.

I think children also need a chat about their identity. They need to realise that other people and society do not dictate to them who they are. If they derive their identity from the opinion of others then whenever they encounter negative people telling them they are a failure the danger is they might believe in it. Children benefit more from knowing that negative people exist and that they try to undermine (intentionally or unintentionally) the identities of people around them.

In fact its helpful for a child to be able to spot a negative person who is led by their emotions as a potential threat. We dont want them to avoid such people, we want them to see and understand how their cogs go around so they are wised up about such people. Then they can stop negative people spreading their negativity too them.

Hi RapidMongoose

Not really sure why you quoted me or what relevance it has to my post but what ever floats your boat I guess.

jmccr8

[jypsijemini]

59 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Thank you for sharing. 

What are your thoughts on not using corporal punishment as the main stay of parenting?

I personally don’t advocate hitting kids at all, and raised 3 boys each different, for me, I would have rather cut my arms off then to fear parent with violence or the threat of it, my heart felt so sad that you were so scared of that wooden spoon,I just wanted to hug that little girl and tell her she was safe.  I wouldn’t have felt okay with scaring you like that you strike me as a good person who could have easily been reached other ways, for the life of me, I can't fathom why if a parent is only going to hit as an absolute last resort, why not put that kind of resolve into finding solutions that didn’t require hitting at all. I didn’t have good reasons ever to hit a defenseless child. But that was me. 

What kind of behaviors are we talking about. I can remember being so small I could get in places my mom couldn’t reach me and I would not come out till she promised to not hit me. I felt I had the right then to not be hit.  

Please don’t take this as harsh, how you think of your parents is your call I make no judgement. I am just asking questions.

I on the other hand concluded very young that my mom was not equipped to raise kids, yet, she was my mom. I came to understand the mindset of my mom and extend compassion and understanding. She did eventually get help, for which I was so proud of her and she was very vocal about how she dropped the ball and thankful her daughter had more sense and a grandmother that was wise.

It's been eye-opening to work in child care and to have been an aunty to a few kids (taking on each partner's nephews and nieces as my own over the years).

I've been heartbroken at the way that verbal, mental and emotional punishment are used more often these days than corporal punishment and how this has a longer-lasting and far worse effect on children than I'd argue corporal punishment (as opposed to physical abuse) would have.

In fact, much of it is bordering on verbal, mental and emotional abuse. And most people (myself included) feel so awkward in telling parents to back off and watch what they're saying to their children because "it's not my place" and "they're not my kids".

Without ever having been a mother myself, I still think it's possible to raise a child without ever having to hit them or scream at them or insult them.

I may have been smacked as a child, but I was never yelled at or called names.

Some are never smacked, but they're told to "shut up", to "stop being f-ing stupid", to "grow up" etc - and far worse.

Just recently, I noticed myself lose control with my 4 year old niece who was having a melt-down because she got in trouble for hurting her brother. As the only girl in the family (4 brothers), she tends to use the tears and whining to escape reprimand and punishment. She can usually manipulate the situation and make it look like her brothers antagonised her into it. I reacted, rather than choosing how to respond, and propped her up firmly in the chair and demanded that she stop crying, to listen to me and wanted to tell her sternly that it was wrong of her to hurt her brother.

She wouldn't listen, wouldn't comply so I chose to walk away and calm down before I tried again. This time, with my control back in order, I spoke softly, calmly and expressed to her that she's allowed to feel every type of feeling. That she's even allowed to feel angry with me. That she doesn't have to agree with me. I stroked her shoulder rather than gripping it like I had before.

The change in the situation was phenomenal. She calmed down very quickly. She listened quietly to every word. She gave me a huge hug afterwards and was more than happy to apologise to her brother - and she wanted my attention and input in everything she did afterwards.

I found the very same in child care - and I worked with a very wide range of children - from the incredibly wealthy and spoilt to the abused, neglected and mentally ill children in the poorest parts of the state. The children tended to respond the same way - particularly the ones that nobody else bothered to make effort with because they were 'too difficult". Other staff members would either lose their minds or they'd ignore them completely. I made it my mission to love them, bond with them and understand them. It was tough because I had to leave everything I thought I knew at the door and start a fresh - but it was worth it.

Some parents even expressed that they were set on pulling their children out of the centre but noticed that I had time for their kids and genuinely loved and cared about them and that I was the only reason why they'd stayed.

Children are only ever trying to meet their own needs. They're not trying to be malicious, vindictive, manipulative - these are all traits we've learned and perfected as adults. Children mimic, imitate and they experiement with their behaviour to see what results it will produce. Even their 'bad' behaviour is satisfying their needs in a way. Sometimes all children get is negative attention because they're always acting out - but they're still getting attention and any attention is better than being completely ignored. Sometimes they're just having innocent, honest fun and they don't really care that they're not allowed to do it. Lying is often a social attempt to protect the relationship and not always just to get away with whatever they've done or to avoid punishment.

There were many times in child care where I admit I wished that I could talk the parent into smacking their child. A fellow co-worker sat by idly and watched as her son bit, scratched, punched and abused me physically, almost daily. She told the managers that it was all my own fault - I was too much of a friend to the kids. When in reality, she was just a bad mum that wasn't spending enough time with her sons and wasn't encouraging age-appropriate interests, activities and hobbies but instead projecting her own adult life onto her preschool children. Her son was almost impossible to deal with - but I found that whenever I offered him one-on-one time and attention, he revelled in it and we'd share moments of bliss. All he wanted was to feel special and important. All he wanted was some attention. He'd grown up in a child care centre watching his mother give all her time and attention to hundreds of other children - to know she was in another room with everyone else's kids and not to understand why she couldn't be with him in his classroom all day. She'd be exhausted by the end of the day and wouldn't be able to offer the excitement, attention and fun that he craved from her. It wasn't his fault. I don't know why he targeted me as an outlet for his anger and frustration - but it taught me a lot about how even the most difficult, violent and disturbed children are just trying to meet their own needs - and that there is a gentle, loving way to break through to each and every one of them.

You just need to be dedicated, controlled and patient.

Edited January 13, 2020 by jypsijemini

[+Sherapy]

50 minutes ago, jypsijemini said:

It's been eye-opening to work in child care and to have been an aunty to a few kids (taking on each partner's nephews and nieces as my own over the years).

I've been heartbroken at the way that verbal, mental and emotional punishment are used more often these days than corporal punishment and how this has a longer-lasting and far worse effect on children than I'd argue corporal punishment (as opposed to physical abuse) would have.

In fact, much of it is bordering on verbal, mental and emotional abuse. And most people (myself included) feel so awkward in telling parents to back off and watch what they're saying to their children because "it's not my place" and "they're not my kids".

Without ever having been a mother myself, I still think it's possible to raise a child without ever having to hit them or scream at them or insult them.

I may have been smacked as a child, but I was never yelled at or called names.

Some are never smacked, but they're told to "shut up", to "stop being f-ing stupid", to "grow up" etc - and far worse.

Just recently, I noticed myself lose control with my 4 year old niece who was having a melt-down because she got in trouble for hurting her brother. As the only girl in the family (4 brothers), she tends to use the tears and whining to escape reprimand and punishment. She can usually manipulate the situation and make it look like her brothers antagonised her into it. I reacted, rather than choosing how to respond, and propped her up firmly in the chair and demanded that she stop crying, to listen to me and wanted to tell her sternly that it was wrong of her to hurt her brother.

She wouldn't listen, wouldn't comply so I chose to walk away and calm down before I tried again. This time, with my control back in order, I spoke softly, calmly and expressed to her that she's allowed to feel every type of feeling. That she's even allowed to feel angry with me. That she doesn't have to agree with me. I stroked her shoulder rather than gripping it like I had before.

The change in the situation was phenomenal. She calmed down very quickly. She listened quietly to every word. She gave me a huge hug afterwards and was more than happy to apologise to her brother - and she wanted my attention and input in everything she did afterwards.

I found the very same in child care - and I worked with a very wide range of children - from the incredibly wealthy and spoilt to the abused, neglected and mentally ill children in the poorest parts of the state. The children tended to respond the same way - particularly the ones that nobody else bothered to make effort with because they were 'too difficult". Other staff members would either lose their minds or they'd ignore them completely. I made it my mission to love them, bond with them and understand them. It was tough because I had to leave everything I thought I knew at the door and start a fresh - but it was worth it.

Some parents even expressed that they were set on pulling their children out of the centre but noticed that I had time for their kids and genuinely loved and cared about them and that I was the only reason why they'd stayed.

Children are only ever trying to meet their own needs. They're not trying to be malicious, vindictive, manipulative - these are all traits we've learned and perfected as adults. Children mimic, imitate and they experiement with their behaviour to see what results it will produce. Even their 'bad' behaviour is satisfying their needs in a way. Sometimes all children get is negative attention because they're always acting out - but they're still getting attention and any attention is better than being completely ignored. Sometimes they're just having innocent, honest fun and they don't really care that they're not allowed to do it. Lying is often a social attempt to protect the relationship and not always just to get away with whatever they've done or to avoid punishment.

There were many times in child care where I admit I wished that I could talk the parent into smacking their child. A fellow co-worker sat by idly and watched as her son bit, scratched, punched and abused me physically, almost daily. She told the managers that it was all my own fault - I was too much of a friend to the kids. When in reality, she was just a bad mum that wasn't spending enough time with her sons and wasn't encouraging age-appropriate interests, activities and hobbies but instead projecting her own adult life onto her preschool children. Her son was almost impossible to deal with - but I found that whenever I offered him one-on-one time and attention, he revelled in it and we'd share moments of bliss. All he wanted was to feel special and important. All he wanted was some attention. He'd grown up in a child care centre watching his mother give all her time and attention to hundreds of other children - to know she was in another room with everyone else's kids and not to understand why she couldn't be with him in his classroom all day. She'd be exhausted by the end of the day and wouldn't be able to offer the excitement, attention and fun that he craved from her. It wasn't his fault. I don't know why he targeted me as an outlet for his anger and frustration - but it taught me a lot about how even the most difficult, violent and disturbed children are just trying to meet their own needs - and that there is a gentle, loving way to break through to each and every one of them.

You just need to be dedicated, controlled and patient.

I am glad I asked you, this is a post from a very wise woman who can think for herself and had the humility to make an error and learn from it. 
You will be a wonderful mother. I don’t say this lightly. I agree kids require unending patience and unwavering compassion.

As you so beautifully pointed out every interaction with a child is an opportunity for the adult and the child to bring out our best and the child is showing what they are getting out of the exchange. Kids are pure in this way.
 

It sounds like you are versed in understanding children, getting into their reality. Due to my abusive childhood I got a degree in Child Psychology and learned a better way. I used the ideas to great success.  This doesn’t mean my kids went to college and got great jobs well they did, but when I say success I mean they are respectful, compassionate, humble, self correcting, honest, guided by integrity, my middle son the one who didn’t think he could stick to never hitting kids, grew up and now  helps kids, loves them and listens to them.  
 

I tutored kids for years they taught me so much about what it meant to be a kid and a teen and I listened. 

There isn’t a kid I couldn’t reach sooner or later. I had one teen a girl that taught me the value of patience by way of testing mine, lol once I broke thru she is still a big part of my life and getting married soon. She is incredible one of my hero’s.

I venture to guess you have always been a very wise person. 
 

The wisest thing I have ever heard came from my son, he said that he didn’t know if he could stick to never hitting his kids, he was an annoyed with everything teen at the time, but he was going to try. I told him he might be surprised at how just trying was 99 percent of it. 
 

Thank you for sharing doll. Your parents did a lot right. 

 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker]

On 1/12/2020 at 4:08 AM, XenoFish said:

After skimming some of this thread apparently the conversation is about "men can't have emotions" I beg to differ. If a man (or anyone) actively strives to deny what they feel, then they are afraid to feel. Afraid to be emotional. Suppressing any emotions is never good. Controlling them is fine, but trying to deaden yourself towards life never works out well. 

Choosing your emotional responses  for the most constructive outcome is the best option.

Anything which strengthens you, builds your resilience etc., is good Anything which weakens you, or prevents you functioning a t an optimal level, is not so good 

There are some seemingly negative emotional reactions which actually have biological and psychological purposes and serve a constructive outcome.

Tears are often one of these. Catharsis purges the system and allows our body and mind to move on. 

However, crying also has other physical benefits.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319631.php#benefits-of-crying

 

[Mr Walker]

On 1/12/2020 at 6:37 AM, XenoFish said:

How you program your kids will help to create or destroy their lives. Simple as that. 

Teach them how to reprogramme themselves, by  teaching them the nature of human programming, and they will be fine   

[Mr Walker]

On 1/12/2020 at 7:34 AM, XenoFish said:

2 out of 3 in my case. Middle kid decided to take a less that optimal path in life, but as an adult, it's her life. As for my oldest and youngest, both have a level head. Make well thought out choices. My youngest is like myself. Won't do anything that would inconvenience her. While that might sound lazy on the surface, but it revolves around dealing with life and people. If I took out my anger on people, being put in jail would inconvenience me. Something like that. It's a lot like asking yourself "will this benefit me now or later, not at all?", you start asking yourself questions like that you begin to think about your choices. Which if you're not careful can be crippling. 

Brilliant post, and so clear and simple. 

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Teach them how to reprogramme themselves, by  teaching them the nature of human programming, and they will be fine   

This doesn’t make any sense. Can you expand.

[+Hammerclaw]

Wow. Exactly how do you teach a rowdy, rebellious adolescent to reprogram him/herself to not be a rowdy rebellious adolescent? I mean, he/she may not exactly be an Einstein, so how do you motivate them to even want to? Assuming you even know how, of course. What if you don't, use the Force? If they've reached that stage, you've already dropped the ball, somewhere along way. Now, raging hormones are coursing through the veins and natural impulses are yanking them every which way. How do you get a handle on it, realistically without any idealistic obfuscation? Time for an experience voice to step and give their take on it. This requires the actual, not the hypothetical.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Hammerclaw

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi RapidMongoose

Not really sure why you quoted me or what relevance it has to my post but what ever floats your boat I guess.

jmccr8

That makes perfect sense, well said.

peace

[+Link of Hyrule]

On 1/12/2020 at 4:20 AM, Liquid Gardens said:

I am aware of that, and part of the reason I referred to 'the' argument instead of 'your' argument.  You are not the only one to make the 'toughen up' argument, and I recognize there are gradients to what that actually means.

Ha, yea, agreed; it's almost like the rule 'don't extend my comment beyond its intended use' didn't even last one sentence.

Telling someone to 'toughen up' is patronizing, it's what parents tell children, with justification in many cases.  I'm sure you can think of lots of examples of people who have been harmed or oppressed where telling them to 'toughen up' is insulting and dismissive.  You and I cannot comprehend fully the plight of minorities, that's a fact.  Whether you and I can know enough to support a rational basis for make possibly patronizing statements about what they should do is unknown, because again, you and I cannot comprehend fully their plight.  It's not that we have no valid opinion in this debate, it's that logically our opinion should be weighted based on the evidence basis for it, which in your and my case is extremely limited. 

Because of my lack of comprehension I try to err on the side of compassion and most importantly humility; the latter there seems to be the most logical given the lack of comprehension us white dudes typically have. That's what the rest of my post actually 'basically reads', although to be clear I realize you are using 'toughen up' narrowly, so this discussion of this aspect of this argument may not apply specifically to you.

1- Thanks for the clarification. If it helps for further reference, think of this as advice on a Product Disclosure Statement ("this information is general only and should not be considered alone - consult your health care professional to see if this information is right for you"). What I am saying is a generalised statement about young people being sheltered. In general, my comment is true and statistics back me up on it. So offering general advice - get out there and stop being afraid of conflict - is warranted. Whether or not this is individually the best advice to give to a person will depend greatly on a lot of things, and like you say it can be patronising. Which is why I I'm sure you've noticed that in all of my posts on this thread I have not pointed a finger at a single person and told them to toughen up. 

2- Considering the only people I've referred to are "young people" (whether they be boys, girls, black, white, gay, straight, it doesn't matter), whether I am a straight white male is irrelevant. I get the point, though - "our opinion should be weighted based on the evidence basis for it". My comments are based on a lecture by Professor Jonathan Haidt, who quotes evidence and statistics repeatedly throughout his lecture and which I linked to a post several pages ago, and on which my comment to "toughen up" was based on. As such, my point of view is weighted based on the evidence basis for it. You're the one who chose to expand my comment to individual minorities, and then brought up my straight white maleness to ask me to rethink my position. 

Reminds me a little of this video, actually:

 

Like I said, my girlfriend is even more extreme than I am when it comes to this. If anything, what I am saying is less radical than what she thinks. She'd be the type of person who would come in to this thread and lay it out simply - these people are snowflakes who need to skoal glass of cement and harden up (I'm pretty sure she's used this exact phrase to describe such an individual when we were watching a YouTube clip together on a related subject). Because a woman said this, then that makes her opinion on other women more valid?

On that note, do people have to be something in order to comment on it? I see women and gays and blacks comment negatively on straight white men all the time. I've never seen someone say to these women/blacks/gays/etc "you're not a straight white man, you can't understand what it's like to be them". But I see it ALL THE TIME in reverse. 

[Habitat]

3 hours ago, Sherapy said:

This doesn’t make any sense. Can you expand.

Water-boarding ?

[+Desertrat56]

19 hours ago, Sherapy said:

I think Los Angeles is absolutely the worse. I travel a lot and was recently in Texas, and Denver while there was traffic it didn’t seem at the level we have here in the beach cities on PCH during rush hour it can take 45 minutes to go a few miles, UGH. 
 

The 405 is a nitemare. 
 

https://www.google.com/search?q=405+freeway+during+rush+hour&client=safari&hl=en-us&sxsrf=ACYBGNR5TT-J3E1uYQiQdwIScaTBh2E_wQ:1578863330402&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiMldSf_P7mAhXEXc0KHYxsC-YQ_AUoA3oECA4QBQ&biw=1112&bih=717#imgrc=gVHvecb652hOuM:

The difference I saw in the california highway driving and everywhere else is that everyone drives faster but if you use your turn signal to pull in to another lane a spot opens up immediately.  Some people in other states speed up and keep others from changing lanes instead of slowing or at least maintaining their speed.  The traffic is heavy but it moves.  I think the Dallas area the traffic is heavy but it usually moves, unless there is a flood or an accident.  And the non-texan drivers in the Dallas area are the most impolite, dangerous, in a hurry drivers I have ever seen.  We have those in Albuquerque, but they are a few here and there, and we don't usually have heavy traffic except at 4:30 to 6:00 when every drives home from work.

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

The difference I saw in the california highway driving and everywhere else is that everyone drives faster but if you use your turn signal to pull in to another lane a spot opens up immediately.  Some people in other states speed up and keep others from changing lanes instead of slowing or at least maintaining their speed.  The traffic is heavy but it moves.  I think the Dallas area the traffic is heavy but it usually moves, unless there is a flood or an accident.  And the non-texan drivers in the Dallas area are the most impolite, dangerous, in a hurry drivers I have ever seen.  We have those in Albuquerque, but they are a few here and there, and we don't usually have heavy traffic except at 4:30 to 6:00 when every drives home from work.

Interesting, I have not been to NM yet, I have an uncle that lives  there and loves it, he moved there from LA. 
 

In LA, there are just places it doesn’t matter about time of day etc. etc. it is so congested and busy it just wears you out.  3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica is one such place. A girlfriend and I went recently we had to park in a beach parking lot a few miles away, waited 45 minutes in a line to get a sticker for the car, then we had to deal with so many people ushering along packed in like cattle. I love Santa Monica but will not live there and it looks as as if my trips there are going to be few and far between.

What we typically do if we want to hang out at the beach or go to dinner, ride bikes, etc.  (it is about 4 miles) from where I live we stay in a hotel on the beach, it is just easier, this way we can park with ease and hop on our bikes and ride to Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach or Manhattan Beach whatever we feel like and this way we enjoy our time without the stress of driving, parking, timed meters, etc. And, we UBER to LAX airport when we travel it is so much easier. 

[+Desertrat56]

2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Interesting, I have not been to NM yet, I have an uncle that lives  there and loves it, he moved there from LA. 
 

In LA, there are just places it doesn’t matter about time of day etc. etc. it is so congested and busy it just wears you out.  3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica is one such place. A girlfriend and I went recently we had to park in a beach parking lot a few miles away, waited 45 minutes in a line to get a sticker for the car, then we had to deal with so many people ushering along packed in like cattle. I love Santa Monica but will not live there and it looks as as if my trips there are going to be few and far between.

What we typically do if we want to hang out at the beach or go to dinner, ride bikes, etc.  (it is about 4 miles) from where I live we stay in a hotel on the beach, it is just easier, this way we can park with ease and hop on our bikes and ride to Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach or Manhattan Beach whatever we feel like and this way we enjoy our time without the stress of driving, parking, timed meters, etc. And, we UBER to LAX airport when we travel it is so much easier. 

When we visited relatives in Carlsbad my daughter wanted to take the boys to an amusement park on a beach between Carlsbad and San Diego.  I drove around 30 minutes looking for a place to park.  Finally I let my daughter and the boys out and said I would be back in an hour.  I drove 10 miles up the beach highway through several towns before I found a fast food restaraunt that had a parking place.  I went in and got some food for the boys and drove back to the park, texted my daughter that I would be coming around the block until I saw them.  It was so packed they did not enjoy the park at all.  We like our open spaces and more sheep & cattle than people.

[+Sherapy]

20 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

When we visited relatives in Carlsbad my daughter wanted to take the boys to an amusement park on a beach between Carlsbad and San Diego.  I drove around 30 minutes looking for a place to park.  Finally I let my daughter and the boys out and said I would be back in an hour.  I drove 10 miles up the beach highway through several towns before I found a fast food restaraunt that had a parking place.  I went in and got some food for the boys and drove back to the park, texted my daughter that I would be coming around the block until I saw them.  It was so packed they did not enjoy the park at all.  We like our open spaces and more sheep & cattle than people.

Sounds like Legoland. LOL

Exactly, sorry to hear of your experiences but it is the norm here, geez, I love California and feel very blessed to have grew up here, and be able to afford it ( which is a whole other consideration) we have everything etc. but like you point out parking and crowding can and does affect the overall experience ( it gets old) that is why we rarely do same day trips we always rent a hotel, it is more expensive but it is worth it to have memories that are hassle free.

I recently did a rode trip with my son he was at University in Kansas, I flew there and we drove back to California together, it was so nice, rarely any traffic other than in Denver and Las Vegas, mainly, wide open spaces then we hit LA and UGH back to the grind. Lol 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Sherapy

[+Desertrat56]

2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Sounds like Legoland. LOL

Exactly, sorry to hear of your experiences but it is the norm here, geez, I love California and feel very blessed to have grew up here, and be able to afford it ( which is a whole other consideration) we have everything etc. but like you point out parking and crowding can and does affect the overall experience ( it gets old) that is why we rarely do same day trips we always rent a hotel, it is more expensive but it is worth it to have memories that are hassle free.

I recently did a ride trip with my son he was at University in Kansas, I flew there and we drove back to California together, it was so nice, rarely any traffic other than in Denver and Las Vegas, then we hit LA and UGH. Lol 

It wasn't Legoland, we tried that but it was almost 400.00 for 4 people so we left, could not get my parking lot fee back either!

No, the park was an old one on the beach, can't remember the name.

[+Liquid Gardens]

20 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

The point is--a support group providing a safe place or safe haven for someone harassed, marginalized or otherwise discriminated against, is not the same as gatherings of like-minded individuals indulging in the freedom of choice of  whom they wish to associate with. Equating the one with the other is a false dichotomy.

No, a false dichotomy is when someone argues there are only 2 (or more) alternatives when there are other alternatives; "you take the bus to work so you must either be poor or don't have a driver's license" is a false dichotomy, as there are other valid reasons someone may take the bus to work.  "Jesus was either the Lord or a liar" is another example.  I think you meant to say that you think my analogy is invalid.

[+Hammerclaw]

14 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

No, a false dichotomy is when someone argues there are only 2 (or more) alternatives when there are other alternatives; "you take the bus to work so you must either be poor or don't have a driver's license" is a false dichotomy, as there are other valid reasons someone may take the bus to work.  "Jesus was either the Lord or a liar" is another example.  I think you meant to say that you think my analogy is invalid.

That's one definition. If you delve deeper, it's also a failure of reasoning, which could be blindly promoting an either/or argument or eschewing common sense for the sake of argument. Such an argument could be equating a glee club with a support group providing a safe space for the sexually abused or raped. It's like saying an apple is the same as an orange because they're both fruits.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Hammerclaw