No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
I once came across a reddit thread where physical violence against children was seen as a normal and necessary means of parenting. And it was a mature thread in a mainstream subreddit with thousands of responses. This was the consensus and anyone disagreeing was downvoted into oblivion.
I don't believe this. You talk about scaring a kid with a belt or flip flop on reddit and everyone will call you a child abuser. Hell, you play a prank on your dog by jumping out behind a wall and they think you're an animal abuser and should not have pets.
I personally was raised with the occasional threat of physical discipline. Really I only got hit with the belt maybe 4 or 5 times in total growing up, all before the age of ~10. I don't really see it as that big of a deal. I probably wouldn't do it with my kids, but also I don't think it's traumatic or damages the kid.
I think there's a fundamental difference between hitting with the belt on the butt just to scare and then actually hitting the kid in anger with intention to cause pain. I think most non-psychopaths, even boomers, would agree with the first and not the second.
Every study done shows it's harmful either way, however "fine" you turned out.
From what I understand if it's done in the first manner it isn't harmful. This is according to the research I've read. The issue is that the majority of times parents hit their kids in anger. So it's generally advised to just avoid it altogether. Which I more or less agree with. Like I said, I probably won't use it with my kids.
What you understand is not consistent with what has been researched. That is to say, it's a belief rather than an understanding.
I'm going off of research. Physical punishment of the child is dangerous on a societal level because most parents end up getting emotional. For example read this
Vast majority of "abuse events" start with what was intended as simply corporal punishment. This is the crux of the problem. It's hard to separate the effect of mild and conscientious punishment versus what often ends in abuse.
Which is why it's easier just to say "corporal punishment is bad" because it will dramatically reduce the rates of abuse in society.
But there's more nuance to it. Corporal punishment tends to not be damaging depending on frequency & intention of the parent. If the frequency is low (<5 times a year) and there is a feeling of warmth between the parent and the child, the kid doesn't experience a meaningful mental health impact. However, in every other case (vast majority of cases) there are negative mental health impacts. Higher rates of ADHD, misbehavior, future addiction issues, etc.
Which is why the advice "don't spank your kids" is a good one because you simply can't trust every parent to be a fully rational actor with the long term perspective of their kids best interest in mind. Just safer not to do it.
I wouldn't do it either
I think there's a clear subjective difference between consciously spanking a child as a form of discipline, as a rational decision and with the absolute minimum force required for it to work, and hitting a child as a form of punishment guided by negative emotions. In the first case, you're doing it to improve the child's life in the long run. In the second, you're just being violent towards someone weaker than you because you're the lowest of the low.
It's like the difference between a tasteful nude photograph meant to highlight the beauty of the human body and porn, or between using dissonance in music to create tension and using it because you're a bad composer. There isn't a set of general, objective rules to distinguish the two, but if you see it, you immediately know which one it is.