I have no idea what you even mean by this. You are welcome to put it into actual words instead of "x if y", and we can go through it. My position is "it might be worth a shot", not "it is definitely worth a shot". You seem to want to portray it as definitive. It is not.

No it's not. I don't need rapid-fire questions thrown my way. That's why I put Bladesman on ignore. Answering question after question (which is the usual form or arguing here) isn't fun and it's a waste of time. If you haven't noticed, there is a reason why that form or arguing is used almost exclusively here.

You can tell when I'm drunk? When was the last time I was drunk? Please, you are welcome to point out which ones are when I've been drinking and I'll answer honestly. I try to avoid posting drunk, and went long periods not posting when inebriated lately.

Your infatuation with my, while bizarre, is amusing. Am I your favorite person on 2p2? Come on sam, admit it. You love me.

****ing weirdo.

This does not surprise me.

Should have left it as you're done talking to me.

It really isn't difficult. Put it into actual terms, and we can debunk your idiocy. You put it into equation form for a reason, didn't you?

Put it into actual statements (that I've made), and let's prove or disprove your assertion, we can leave it to others to decide.

Uh, we started with the actual terms and you got confused. But, sure, what the hell. We can try again.

X = 'use physical force for punishing children'.
Y = 'physical force is the best punishment for the child'.

So we both agree with the statement 'It's ok to use physical force to punish a child if its the best punishment for them.'

To be super duper explicit this is not us both agreeing that physical punishment is ok.

I have a condition there. It would need to be shown to me that physical force is the best option.

If you remember WAY back I said I've never been given an example where physical force was used as punishment where it was the best option. Hence, I do not actually know of a situation where physical punishment is appropriate.

You and TS tried to give examples where you thought physical force was the most appropriate punishment. But they were bad examples and even you disavowed some of them.

So... Hopefully that clears stuff up for you.

Your statement of 'It's ok to use physical force to punish a child if its the best punishment for them.' isn't exactly clear when you say "for them".

My position has been "if it's in their best interest". There are also some situations where I think it may need to be done for someone else's sake and the behavior must not occur again, as in the example of a teenage boy punching his mother in the face.

If you were in a situation where your son punched your wife for a second time after having a long conversation the first time and explaining to him how that can't happen again, what would be the best course of action?

In an easier scenario : what if you witnessed your son chase a ball into the street without stopping to look for oncoming traffic? What if he did it multiple times?

The 1st scenario is based more on the idea of "this can never happen again". The 2nd scenario is more along the lines of "I'll take the risk of the repercussions of giving them a spanking over them being killed by a car".

I don't think your semantic changes are meaningful. Part of punishment (at least in how I think we've been using it) is in stopping the behaviour from happening again. In all cases I assume there are negative consequences to the behaviour happening again.

I suspect in neither of your situations is spanking the kid the right answer.

I'm not sure why you think that spanking the kid has a higher EV (if you will) of stopping the behaviour in the future. Do you have anything to support this?

Let's pick the chasing the ball into the street without looking for traffic.

First, a big part of this is knowing your kid and making sure they are developed enough to be able to understand and carry out the concept. If they aren't it doesn't matter what punishment you use its not going to be effective.

Second, is being a proactive parent. If your kid can't control themselves they shouldn't be out there. If they're still learning you should be out there prompting them on what they need to do and offerings positive reinforcement when they obey the rule.

Third, if it happens and punishment is necessary it seems like there are lots of options: the talk, stopping the game immediately, removing privileges, whatever. Different things work for different kids.

At no point does it seem like hitting them is the only or best option.

I guess to at least somewhat address the teenage boy punching his mother - this is a significantly more complex issue. The right course of action depends on history and what happened.

But it's a very serious problem and using physical force back is almost certainly NOT the right answer because it's not addressing the underlying problem and it's reinforcing that it's ok to hit people. And teenage boys that are hitting their mothers have an underlying problem that needs to be addressed.

Edit: Not to mention that the amount of force necessary to actually have an effect on a teenage boy is almost certainly classified as assault by the majority of the western world. We're not talking a spanking on the bum.

Your last two posts are complete nonsense.

As I've said, discussing any meaningful topic with people like you is worthless. I asked you a direct question and you answered me with word salads. I have better things to do with my time.

Lol, that's what I get for trying. I answered your question about what I'd do. Sorry it's not simple

Like you asked me what I'd do in this situation and I laid out an answer explaining some of the variables that need to be considered. Sorry it wasn't just '**** yeah! Smoke the little **** in the head!'

Edit: Ugh, congratulations. You actually managed to annoy me ITT. Well played tricking me into thinking you were serious even after pulling **** like 'schools don't discipline kids'.

Dude, you are a complete moron, and I don't believe you actually have children. Everything you say reeks of some 27 year old dude who wants to throw his opinion out there and denounce someone else because they want to feel better about themselves. Like, when you say something incredibly stupid as this :


I have to question where this is coming from? What sort of logic is this? A child may only go out and play if the parent "knows their kid"? How is that even possible when a child, by nature, doesn't know themselves yet? What if I know my kid is reckless? Should I keep them tied up in the house until they are 23?

You are incredibly disingenuous here. I've never met ANY parent who would say what you just said. Either you are a liar or one of the biggest idiots I've ever come across.

lol @ "knowing your kid". GTFO with this complete and utter bull****. Kids are called kids for a ****ing reason - because they do irrational **** and don't know better! I call many people stupid on these boards, but you are TRULY ****ing stupid.

If your kid does irrational **** they shouldn't be playing somewhere where they can run out in front of traffic. They don't have the capability to obey the rule you're setting for them. Which, by the way, makes hitting them for breaking the rule extremely unfair.

You are a ****ty parent. That's my take away from your last post. Or perhaps you're the one without kids?

It's worth noting that this is another one of Wil's efforts to rewrite posting history, even when history is well documented.

The post he blocked me for was because I called him a bigot. It contained two questions, both of which were clearly rhetorical as I answered them myself.

Anyway, congrats. You've managed what few people have managed. It's time to put you on ignore. Because your stupidity is now annoying me and I'm getting mad at how gleefully ignorant you are as a parent.

Someone please quote Wil if he wants to bet me on my parental or financial status. But it's not going to happen.

I can prove easily that I have children. I've sent Chez proof of my status in the past, it wouldn't take much to ask him if I'm actually a parent or not. You apparently can not or refuse to.

I have my suspicions why.

Don't do me any favors! It's hilarious how you are the one attacking me and then get all bitchy about being proven a moron.

Go take a midol, bitch. Later!

It's amazing that Wil openly admits he can't understand statements like "x if y" and then calls people morons.

What happened to adios? This seems like it might count as "nothing more than trying to embarrass/humiliate/demean someone who has a point of view you don't agree with and you don't like". I wonder if wil will get called out for his incessant bullying behavior? Just kidding, we all know wil is an innocent doe-eyed victim of persecution around here, never having done a single thing to merit the negative attention he receives. It's just one of those unsolved mysteries of the universe.

He started it, and even then almost all of my insults were in retaliation. Shrug. Believe what you will, let others decide.

I'll prove it to you : please quote when I have ever insulted anyone without being insulted first in this forum?

By the way, I saw these two stories next to each other on salon and couldn't help but think of wil:

Me for one. Do we really need to play the quote game?

Wait, so it's cyber bullying to waste your time and patience trying to explain a concept to someone while they constantly show zero attempt to understand it and verbally assault you in response?


lol? guess I learned something today.

The good old "But he started it" defense

Hate to break the news to you but your posts seeth contempt. But go ahead, quote the post where I came out and insulted you first. What makes this really amusing is that you are the master of quotes.

Its been working since I was 7. On a serious note, I just don't walk around insulting people. I'm an adult, I work in a professional setting, and I'm generally an easy going, nice person. That being said, I treat people like how they treat me. You treat me cordially, I respond in kind. If you insult and berate me, I'll do the same. It's a basic rule in life.

This is the internet so we must assume the majority of people are socially ******ed. Most of you post with the same mannerisms and style as the idiots you look up to. It's not a coincidence so many people are carbon copies of Fly or LG. I guess that works on the internet, but in real life it's a bad way to be.

To even have to explain this is pretty pathetic, but again, this is the internet.