ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:33 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:47 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
Translation: "Help I cant read, can someone read Cenwood's posts and maybe defend my point of view for me? Ok, thanks."

Half of that shit was quotes from your posts, funnily enough. I do agree that those parts of it are crap.

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:50 am 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
You have until I get up tomorrow morning to either explode in a rain of meaty fucktard chunks or be set upon by the others, saving me a job, or Im going to match your shit word for word in a war of attrition that will be painful to watch.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:58 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Cenwood wrote:
Buncha dumbasses. What you are basically saying amounts to "I know one kid who got smacked, and one kid who didn’t, and the former kid is better! Therefore, this is conclusively proof that hitting children always makes them good! IR A GUNIUS!"


To be fair, thats one more example than you've ever given. I'm sorry, but shouting that you're right loud enough does not translate into being right. Grow up, and provide some evidence other than "I said so!"

Cenwood wrote:
It does not always work like that. There are a squillion people in the world who weren’t hit as children and amount to fantastic individuals.


Uhm, I'm sorry, once again, not taking your word for it. Sorry, but "random fucker on the internet" isn't something I'd cite on a paper, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a "squillion people" in the world. Hell, I'm pretty sure that isn't a number.

Cenwood wrote:
Your examples include one child who was occasionally hit and is now a functioning member of society, and one child who is NEVER made to do ANYTHING by his parents. In the last case, the fact that he is not hit is totally irrelevant; his parents are a bunch of pussies.


Ahh, now we get into the beginning of an actual (though convoluted) arguement! Unfortunately, its incredibly vague. I'm assuming that my "never made to do anything" you mean never punished. A quick chat with Grey (which you could have done yourself but, as your "debate" style shows, you're a bit too lazy to actually check sources) shows that he was sent to his room as punishment. But he wouldn't stay there. So they barricadeded the door once, and gave up when the kid ruined the door with kicking on it an such. So he was indeed punished, just not hit. Assertion proven false; stop assuming bullshit and not checking.

Cenwood wrote:
I’m willing to bet hitting him would only make the brat scream more. If my kid ever behaved like that, he would be in the shit, and he'd know it.


Sentence 1 I want a source, verifiable evidence that a kid in that state will in fact just scream more. On 2, so did the little kid above: he simply did not care. Your first assertion has no evidence to back it up: I don't care if you would "bet on it," because I wouldn't put "this is true because Cenwood would bet on it" in a paper, either. PROOF, MOTHERFUCKER. DO YOU HAVE ANY?

Cenwood wrote:
But hopefully by then Id have built a relationship based on love and trust rather then "IM BIGGER THEN YOU SO WHAT I SAY IS RIGHT."


Ahh, the lovely innocence of a man who has never had to actually take care of a small human being. Lookie here, buddy, I may not be a dad but I know for a fact that love and trust go so far. You are not the only being in your child's life; there is all the other things, TV, books, friends etc that he or she will also get their value system from. (Source: Sociology in our Times, 115-117)

Not only this, but you're assuming your child is going to automatically obey your orders, or cooperate with your punishments when you do so. This is, as Grey's example showed, not exactly the safest bet in the world.

Cenwood wrote:
You also make smacking out to be such a well thought out, logical thing, whereas it clearly isn’t. What is actually the case is that the kid pisses the parent off, or the parent encounters a situation in which they aren’t sure what response is expected of them, or even if the parent is just pissed off from a bad day at work and the kid makes too much noise, and the kids gets hit.


Woah Cen, I am convinced. I mean, who would have thought you knew the EXACT REASON that ALL ADULTS who smack their kids EVERYWHERE actually smack their kids? I mean, with your credible testimony, I don't dare bring up that the above is child abuse, and what Grey was talking about is hitting to reinforce a lesson, rather than willy-nilly just for the hell of it. But with psychics like you on the job, you reached into everyone's mind and shut me down before I could even bring the point up.

Cenwood wrote:
Pain? Certainly. Humiliation? Definitely, it’s never nice to get completely pwned by someone larger then you, usually in front of people. NO kid then thinks "Well, I was kinda being a jerk and I deserved that", the kid thinks "FUCKING ASSHOLE, I HATE HIM".


More psychic powers in action. I won't bring up that psychologists and sociologists, and also several hundred years of child rearing and kids liking their parents just fine even though they hit him (ask some old folks around, I know its insane but they know some things, too.)

It should be noted, "child abuse" has only been identified as a social problem and hitting kids as a punishment has only begun to stop in the past 30 or so years (Sociology in Our Times, Ch 15.) If things were as you said, one would suppose that society would have fallen apart by now, or that a lot more kids would be devient then rather than now. There has been no such great fall in statistics that I can see (if you have any proof that child devience rates have dropped drastically since, say, the 50s or 30s, I'd be happy to see it.)

But see, all of the above is wrong, because your psychic powers have circumvented all those crazy 'fact' things. Way to go, I'm beat.

Cenwood wrote:
The actual moral lesson for that moment gets totally eclipsed in righteous indignation and outrage.


All of the people I know who've been raised by parents who hit (not abusive hit, but actually hit in a "you're bad" way) disagree with you there. If you can come up with some sort of servey, proof, etc etc., you know something besides "Well I said so!" to back up your assertion, that would be great, but this song and dance of "I need some proof Cenwood" is getting a bit tiring."

Cenwood wrote:
That’s the truth, whether or not all the poor bastards who have not only conditioned to have quick, short-fuse tempers, but ALSO conditioned to the fact that once you have kids its perfectly acceptable use them to vent your frustrations can accept it.


What you are describing not only not always happens, due to the fact that a lot more than parents socialize what is acceptable to do (Sociology in our Times, pg 115, "Agents of Socialization" for details on what else does) but also is in fact abuse, not just hitting. Apparently you're having trouble telling the difference between the two. Let me help you out here.

Abuse is hitting your child not because they did something wrong that you wish to show in a way nobody can doubt that it was indeed bad, but for being in the way, being in the wrong place when the parent is in a bad mood, etc etc. This is classified as child abuse.

Hitting is a method of child rearing where physical punishment (ie a smack on the backside) is applied to reinforce that what the child just did is bad.

Cenwood wrote:
So the allure of illicit substances is decreased, and your knowledge of the ill effects of said substances is magically increased by getting hit?


In short, no. The problem isn't knowledge; everyone I know who does drugs knows that they're "bad." The problem is lack of respect for authority, which is done by lack of proper reinforcement of "disobeying authority without a damn good reason = bad." Hitting does this, as evidence by the fact that kids were a lot more respectful, on the whole, about 50 years ago than they are now.

(I have no study to back this up, but I think we can all agree with that. If you have evidence showing that this view of how kids were back then was false, feel free to show it.)

Cenwood wrote:
I agree with you that somewhere along the line her parents have severely fucked up, probably in failing to educate her about sex and drugs, but I don’t think it’s hitting.


Knowledge has nothing to do with if children, who are not logical creatures all or even most of the time, will do this or that. I don't know a single junkie, gang member, etc etc who doesn't know and who hasn't known that what they are doing isn't in their best interest in a larger view. The problem is they don't care.

The problem is they refuse to obey their parents, or the parents just don't care. Assuming they participate, the parents need to get respect from their children. How do you get respect, or at the very least obedience? One way is, ubdoubtably, to hit your kids when they disobey you. Empirical evidence is, uhm, society up till about the 70s not falling apart. It may not be the way you like but it fails to produce a productive member of society a lot less than trying hands-off.

Cenwood wrote:
The reason the "Bleeding heart liberals" are often singled out for mockery by you "Completely retarded emotionally fucked psychos" is because the basic philosophy behind not smacking is not ONLY held by people who are really interested in raising their children, but also by the type of parents best depicted here:


Thats the end result of not disciplining your child at all. And its also true.

Cenwood wrote:
Please believe, not all people who don’t believe violence is some kind of 100% cure-all disciplinary action are like that, just as we bleeding hearts don’t believe all you fuckwits are all completely deprived maniacs who use heavy metal implements, cigarettes, and lit stoves to "make their children learn a lesson".


Woah, thats respect right there. Your utter contempt for anyone with disagrees with your loud, annoying assertions, demanding we believe you because you're of course right, I mean how could you be wrong, right?

Wait, isn't that the exact mentality that needs to be reined in by parents with some sort of disciplinary action?

Irony is so much more fun when the other guy doesn't know he's being ironic.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 12:19 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Double post

Cenwood wrote:
Failure to do....what? To try to get you to acknowledge that your beliefs have no basis in reality, and are born of a combination of wilful ignorance, stupidity, and childhood trauma, and that their is a miriad of other people with beliefs more intelligent and more thought out then yours?


Such as...? You know, you have yet to provide any evidence...at all...this entire time.

Cenwood wrote:
<strike>To convince you that you are a worthless waste of oxygen and should cease breathing immediately?</strike> OMFG I R INSULT U BC I HAF NO INFO 2 BAK M3 ^


Fixed it for you.

Cenwood wrote:
Both are worthy objectives, but the only way someone is going to change your mind is a with a lobotomy. Your so firmly set in your stupid beliefs that you arnt ever going to change your mind, and I wont try.


Since you never cited any actual information, I know you didn't want to try. All you wanted to do was shout "I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT IF YOU'RE WRONG YOU'RE A RACIST BIGOT GOATFUCKING MANWHORE." This isn't welcome in debate club. Please stop this, and cite some information, or don't post again.

Cenwood wrote:
Besides, its much more fun to make fun of you for your emotional mental and physical defiencies then it EVER will to try to fix them.


That sounds a bit psychologically abusive, which psychologists claim is much worse than physical abuse. (Source: Dr. Raya, Psychologist Md, Bellflower [I forget her address but I'll drag it up if you want to converse with her])

You're gonna be such a good parent. I can't wait to see your kids.

Cenwood wrote:
I DID make a mistake here. I made the mistake that you might actually have a valid opinion and be capable of rational thought. I considered, "How could this human being think what he does" and came up with the idea you had only seen the extremists of "the other side", and in your social isolation had never come across normal people, so you have somehow cultivated the belief that ALL kids who arnt hit are like the Marvin kid in the comic.


Or the problem might be that you made no logical arguements at all, and just said "well this is how it is!" over and over again. Grey had his own experiences, you had you shouting. Information, not assertions. I am going to repeat this another couple of times in response to your "points."

Cenwood wrote:
However, I didnt account for the fact that you are an illiterate fuckwit who didnt even read the whole post, so Ive given up trying to converse with you as a rational human being, and am instead going to patronise you.


Information, not assertions.

Cenwood wrote:
Because all the scientfic evidence the human race has reached thus far has concluded it logically must be. Plus the fact we have seen it from space and its round. Continue.


This is true. It is also true that you GAVE NONE OF IT IN YOUR POST.

Information, not assertions.

Cenwood wrote:
Not hitting your kids is far more then "crossing your fingers and hoping they grow up right". Its funny that you think that Iam a prime example of what comes off not hitting your kids (other then the fact that my dad does hit me, and it didnt actually assist me in growing up whatsoever): I think your a prime reason for NOT hitting kids. From the sound of things, you were beaten, and are now an unbalanced, mentally scarred person who has to justify his previous abuse because he is too narrow minded to raise his own kids differently, or indeed relate to ANYONE that isnt a psycho.


OMFG, ACTUAL EVIDENCE!

*creams pants*

I thought I'd never find it. Your dad hit you or...from your vehement arguements in your previous post he ABUSED you. See above for the difference between being abused and being hit.

Lastly, you are most definitely not a psychologist, and you cannot analyze someone from a post that not only mocks you, but completely goes over your head.

Sigh...back to the daily grind...

Information, not assertions.

Cenwood wrote:
The cat lacks the cognitive capacity for understanding anything else. And it ISNT necessary to hit them, Ive trained puppies by stopping them whenever I see them try it, and all you have to do is shout and not hit. Eventually they get housetrained simply to avoid pissing you off. But I dont think either way is better: as long as the animal doesnt shit in the house, its all good. Humans are more complex.


Thats physically restraining them and psychological abuse! You're training your puppies to be little dog-abusers when they grow up!

As to "humans are more complex," that is why you can teach children with things other than physical restraint and scaring them by yelling all the time. Because they can, at least sometimes, recognize that x is bad and won't do it on their own, because they believe its bad. The problem is, that isn't always true. If you have ever raised a child, you'd have known that. Or if you have ever seen a child who is beign raised without being hit.

It puts a human child above a dog or a cat. It does not eliminate the need to reinforce that x = bad when they do x and refuse to acknowledge it.

Cenwood wrote:
It did? It made my LMAO at how retarded you are, but not much else. You didnt actually prove anything I said wrong, you just spouted a load of pre-prebuscent 8 year old insults.


IRON

E


Cenwood wrote:
Ahh...uhh, You'll have to excuse me, Im not as good as decoding the puzzle of your fucked up brain as your shrink is. I assume you are referring to the hypercube theory, yes? And are comparing it to my sociological theory? Despite the fact you havnt yet proved me wrong in any way, shape or form?


Two things here rookie.

Private Doughnut? I think someo- wait, no.

a) Timecube reference. If you don't know it, you will die.

b) He can't prove you wrong because you never actually put out information. If I say "I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT PROVE ME WRONG," nobody can do it. Why? Because I never cited any sources, put out empirical evidence etc etc.

Sigh...

information, not assertions...this is getting old...

Cenwood wrote:
Im not going to even try to understand what the hell you are trying to convey here. Ill take a gamble that its retarded and not bother.


You insult timecube, and you don't put an "'" between the I and the M on "I'm." For these, you shall die.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:19 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2788
Location: Neo-Connecticut
ONLY EDUCATED STUPID INSULT TIME CUBE
SINGLE ROTATION GOD IS A LIE, FOUR DAYS SIMULTANEOUSLY
TIMECUBE IS LIFE TIMECUBE IS FACT
STOP CORRUPTING YOUTH WITH ONEDAY LIES


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 5:29 pm 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
I know what timecube is, even though I called it hypercube. Maybe I didn’t "get" it, but I don’t know what the fuck was going on with it.

MiB: Firstly, you seem to think his vague stereotype of a screwed up kid constitutes "proof". I don’t believe it does. I know fuckloads of very smart, very cool who arnt hit. What do you want? Links to livejournals of a few, or something? A poll perhaps?

I didn’t actually mean squillion to the nearest decimal, dumbass. I mean "a lot". I would go so far as to say at LEAST half the people in my school have never been hit by their parents. And they are for the most part doing well in their work and becoming great people.

And I reject your implication that non-smacking didn’t work. Maybe not with this kid, but if he was in the state where he was kicking down doors in a rage, then his parents have obviously not been good parents beforehand. Ive been sent to my room, and Ive never kicked the fucking door down. In fact, Id venture most people do not. I still claim his parents fail to effectively discipline him: The "pussies" theory was based on what grey actually said, re: the fact that his voice drowned out theirs.

So, you do actually believe that hitting the kid would instantly make him shut up, with a stunned expression on his face? I call bullshit on that. A kid that has been raised to have everything his way is NOT suddenly going to change simply because someone actually starts saying "No". Smacking isn’t the wonderful psychological cure all to everything. The kid needs (or needed) stable parents who are stern but fair, and who do not tolerate bullshit. He doesn’t just need to be hurt occasionally...shit, if that was all, we'd simply fit children with electro-shock collars.

I agree with that. I have seen relationships where the child trusts the parent implicitly and is willing to hell to the adult’s demands simply out of trust, love, or a desire not to disappoint. Ive seen it happy...a girl I work with at work was talking about the time she was trying to prohibit her daughter to meet up with a guy she'd met over the Internet...there was a massive argument, and not once did she (the mother) ever use violence or threats of such. The girl went out and stood at the side of the house for a minute, then went back in. I put it to you, that in your family, you'd hit her the moment she flatly refused to do what you said, and then the girl would leave the house anyway just to spite you. Unless you manage to be brainwashed by authoritarian crap, hitting does not earn respect from anyone. And no, the child isn’t always going to listen to you. You can physically stop them from doing something without injuring them.

Oh, come ON. Are you telling me, that every time you make a decision to hit your child, anger does not come into play? That you are completely impartial, and the criteria the misbehavior must reach is EXACTLY the same each time, with no element of randomness depending on your mood? That you never hit a child before finding out the facts? ("I know I shouldn’t hit girls, but she was pulling my hair and the 'hit' simply constituted me pushing her away") If that’s how you raise your kids, then maybe I can see your point. Maybe. If smacking is administered almost automatically, in light doses, and treated just as any other punishment, and issued with complete lack of emotion and impartiality, then I don’t see how the factors of humiliation, degradation, and mental scarring come into play. I put it to you that this would never happen, ever. In any family. A contributing factor to this is that the father that smacks has usually been smacked himself, and therefore has all the psychological mindfuckage and inner anger affecting his judgment.

"Psychic powers?" I felt all these things when being hit. Yes, I can read my own mind. Fucking hell, I bet I could do pyrokinesis with the limitless power under my command. This isn’t the first conversation Ive had about this...almost all people my age report the same feelings and emotions, although in varying degrees. Once these kids grow up, they will either be unable to offer any other model of parenting to their children due to temperament or inexperience, or they go completely the other side of the fence and say "Smacking is wrong, cause I know how it feels, and I wont ever do it."

You cannot ask someone who was smacked 30 years ago whether it was bad or not. They probably hit their kids now, and will deny the negative effects of smacking to the death. You need to ask the actual children who have been smacked. Do they fucking say "Yep, I deserved that, I’m a bad boy" or do they say "FUCK no, I didn’t do shit, my dads a psycho and he totally overreacted because..." And yes, this comes from people beside me. I know I’m not the only one who felt that way about being hit, usually in front of people.

Hmmm...really? Letting emotion spill into it, and using smacking as anything other then a convenient punishment, constitutes abuse? I never thought of that aspect of it. I’m not convinced the "Hitting" method you describe is common practice enough to count as a reasonable argument, and in fact I think that the line between that and what you ascribe to be "Abuse" is too thin.

I reel against any kind of "Respect for authority" bullshit, by claiming that doubting authority, cross examining authority and making authority EARN respect is the 100% successful way to ensure that those with authority have earned it and will use it wisely.

I do not take drugs. I do not take drugs because of the education I have received that has convinced me that drugs, on the whole, and for a number of reasons, are "bahd, M'kay". I’m not refraining from taking drugs simply because some fucker told me not to take them. Give me some credit, here. Simply telling kids not to do something, and threatening them that if they DO do it, they will receive punishment doesn’t work. Adam and Eve, and all. And that was just some kind of crappy apple, not something cool and alluring.

Disciplining...is this some kind of shielded term for "Whacking" or are you referring to disciplinary methods of any kind? The point I was trying to make there is that the use of such extreme examples doesn’t affect my argument one bit. I don’t say "Smacking is bad and here are some pictures of children being beaten with rods and being burned to prove it", do I? And those people are what constitute the extreme end of your view. I’m simply isolating the extremists of the people on MY end of the line, and saying "Don’t talk to me about these guys. I agree with you they suck, they don’t represent my viewpoint." I was granting you a point, rather then disagreeing with every damn thing you said.

And as for the last part, I don’t know what you’re getting at. You are objecting to my use of language in referring to you all as fuckwits, and so forth?

Grey: Whatever. Bring it on, bitch. At least MiB raised a valid point with the abuse/hitting thing that has given me cause for consideration, and provided an otherwise sane counterargument. You have yet to say anything valid, interesting or useful, about any subject ever. I predict having a war of words with you will be like outrunning a paraplegic kid after putting a stick in the spokes of his wheelchair. But still, bring it on.

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 5:40 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
I love the way you generate even more rivers of shit, but once again back it all up with assumptions and what you like to refer to as 'common sense' which is amusing as all fuck as 'Cenwood' and 'Sense' are about as distant as 'Taliban' and 'Freedom'. If your going to waste all out time with that crap... (Well, not all our time, I skimmed it, I dont have my entire mornings to watch you writhe aroun in pain from Mibby-stings) then you might as well Adress the fucking ISSUSES that were brought up against you like citing more than "OMG I R CORRECTU AND U = FAGG0T"

Alsom you friends are fucktards, matey. Lets face it, they talk to you. They are not good examples of well ajusted human beings. I await your next round of table-scraps with much the same inevitability as I await having to vist my grandparents or the dentist.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:01 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Cenwood wrote:
MiB: Firstly, you seem to think his vague stereotype of a screwed up kid constitutes "proof". I don’t believe it does. I know fuckloads of very smart, very cool who arnt hit. What do you want? Links to livejournals of a few, or something? A poll perhaps?


Yes. I am not saying not-hitting doesn't work, but hitting does work, which you are vehemently saying it doesn't. Since I have, you know, thousands and thousands of people who arn't fucked up who do that, I believe you can't really debate that.

I'll summarize the rest of your arguement as follows.

Cenwood wrote:
I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG NYAH NYAH


Back. It. Up. Mother. Fucker.

Do not post in response again without some citable proof - at least a LITTLE BIT - to back up your claims. YET AGAIN, you're just shouting at the top of your lungs what you believe and not backing it up.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:09 pm 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
The Man In Black wrote:
Double post

Such as...? You know, you have yet to provide any evidence...at all...this entire time.


I’m just insulting him here. My failure to change his mindset doesn’t surprise me in the least. And its not like he has provided me with any psychological report that says "As you can see from the graph, 60% of all children who run into problems with social services, were not hit as children".

Cenwood wrote:
Besides, its much more fun to make fun of you for your emotional mental and physical deficiencies then it EVER will to try to fix them.


Quote:
That sounds a bit psychologically abusive, which psychologists claim is much worse than physical abuse. (Source: Dr. Raya, Psychologist Md, Bellflower [I forget her address but I'll drag it up if you want to converse with her])

You're gonna be such a good parent. I can't wait to see your kids.


Do I sound like I’m trying to be nice to him? The guys an asshole, the validity or nonvalidity of his beliefs notwithstanding. I disliked him even before I started posting. And I daresay he'll survive...which is a shame, but I doubt I have the oractical skills to convince him to cease breathing.

Cenwood wrote:
I DID make a mistake here. I made the mistake that you might actually have a valid opinion and be capable of rational thought. I considered, "How could this human being think what he does" and came up with the idea you had only seen the extremists of "the other side", and in your social isolation had never come across normal people, so you have somehow cultivated the belief that ALL kids who arnt hit are like the Marvin kid in the comic.


Quote:
Or the problem might be that you made no logical arguments at all, and just said "well this is how it is!" over and over again. Grey had his own experiences, you had you shouting. Information, not assertions. I am going to repeat this another couple of times in response to your "points."


...You want evidence that not all kids who don’t receive smacking are completely fucked up? Shit, pick half the damn 100 kids you next see. Smacking is not nearly as commonplace as you believe.

Cenwood wrote:
However, I didn’t account for the fact that you are an illiterate fuckwit who didn’t even read the whole post, so Ive given up trying to converse with you as a rational human being, and am instead going to patronize you.


Quote:
Information, not assertions.


He clearly did not reads the points I was making. You did, you have even quoted the areas and specified what exactly your beef is with specific areas, and I respect you for that even if I do disagree with the crap you are spouting. I have no respect for someone that maintains his or her beliefs by close-mindedness

Cenwood wrote:
Because all the scientific evidence the human race has reached thus far has concluded it logically must be. Plus the fact we have seen it from space and its round. Continue.


Quote:
This is true. It is also true that you GAVE NONE OF IT IN YOUR POST.

Information, not assertions.


He hasn’t provided shit in the way of information, other then one personal experience with ONE child. I know several people, and I have my own personal experience to work on.

Cenwood wrote:
Not hitting your kids is far more then "crossing your fingers and hoping they grow up right". Its funny that you think that Iam a prime example of what comes off not hitting your kids (other then the fact that my dad does hit me, and it didn’t actually assist me in growing up whatsoever): I think your a prime reason for NOT hitting kids. From the sound of things, you were beaten, and are now an unbalanced, mentally scarred person who has to justify his previous abuse because he is too narrow minded to raise his own kids differently, or indeed relate to ANYONE that isn’t a psycho.


Quote:
OMFG, ACTUAL EVIDENCE!

*creams pants*

I thought I'd never find it. Your dad hit you or...from your vehement arguments in your previous post he ABUSED you. See above for the difference between being abused and being hit.

Lastly, you are most definitely not a psychologist, and you cannot analyze someone from a post that not only mocks you, but completely goes over your head.

Sigh...back to the daily grind...

Information, not assertions.


I’m working on the information I have. He seems typical of a an example I have observed over and over again in fathers that hit their children. Hell, I see it in my own father when he is busy trying to convince me that his father was MUCH worse. Thing that worries me is growing to be the same...I have a horrible temper now, and I hit my brother when he pisses me off all the time. By the time I’m my dads age, Ill probably begin rationalizing, that he wasn’t so bad, maybe smacking isn’t wrong, and I’m sure what I felt at the time is exaggerated, smacking wasn’t so bad...in fact, I often REGRETTED what I had done right after being hit! So smacking is ok! *Whacks nearest son or daughter for perceived wrong doing, all the while convincing myself that its a fantastic thing to do, and ignoring the rush and situational bias.*


Cenwood wrote:
The cat lacks the cognitive capacity for understanding anything else. And it ISNT necessary to hit them, Ive trained puppies by stopping them whenever I see them try it, and all you have to do is shout and not hit. Eventually they get housetrained simply to avoid pissing you off. But I don’t think either way is better: as long as the animal doesn’t shit in the house, it’s all good. Humans are more complex.


Quote:
Thats physically restraining them and psychological abuse!


So where did I say restraining them or disciplining them be showing them the wrong was abuse?

Quote:
You're training your puppies to be little dog-abusers when they grow up!


The don’t wont even remember. Dogs don’t remember like we do, intelligent, kickass creatures that they may be.

Quote:
As to "humans are more complex," that is why you can teach children with things other than physical restraint and scaring them by yelling all the time. Because they can, at least sometimes, recognize that x is bad and won't do it on their own, because they believe its bad. The problem is, that isn't always true. If you have ever raised a child, you'd have known that. Or if you have ever seen a child who is being raised without being hit.


Exactly. My point is, making a child realize that X is bad, and convincing them not to do X is approximate 400% more effective then punishing them for doing X. I HAVE seen children that have been raised without being hit, even if you havnt. I suppose you must look around at children and just assume that their parents hit them...but I can assure you, I talk to kids my own age, and it isn’t always the case.

Quote:
It puts a human child above a dog or a cat. It does not eliminate the need to reinforce that x = bad when they do x and refuse to acknowledge it.


Kickass. We agree on something, then. You perceive and understand the need for moral instruction, and recognize discipline is more complicated then "That child needs a whack. That would instantly turn him into a moral human being", and its cool you understand that. Gray doesn’t seem to, and neither does a host of crappy parents.

Cenwood wrote:
It did? It made my LMAO at how retarded you are, but not much else. You didn’t actually prove anything I said wrong, you just spouted a load of pre-prepubescent 8 year old insults.


Quote:
IRON

E


What?

Cenwood wrote:
Ahh...uhh, You'll have to excuse me, I’m not as good as decoding the puzzle of your fucked up brain as your shrink is. I assume you are referring to the hypercube theory, yes? And are comparing it to my sociological theory? Despite the fact you havnt yet proved me wrong in any way, shape or form?


Two things here rookie.

Quote:
Private Doughnut? I think someo- wait, no.


Again...what?

Quote:
a) Timecube reference. If you don't know it, you will die.


I get the reference. I still don’t find it funny or clever.

Quote:
b) He can't prove you wrong because you never actually put out information. If I say "I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT PROVE ME WRONG," nobody can do it. Why? Because I never cited any sources, put out empirical evidence etc etc.

Sigh...

information, not assertions...this is getting old...


Give me some damn evidence to the contrary other then the retarded belief that "All parents who don’t hit children have children like Marvin." And while we are talking about false suppositions, I want to reiterate what total bullshit that is. My belief is smacking doesn’t help: There is no useful study that shows "Percentage of fucked up children who were NOT spanked", because the idea of such a study is ludicrous. I’m simply working on experience that teaching kids that violence is the answer to everything is bullshit, and that smacking is not an effective punishment, for the following reasons. You have simply responded with "YES IT IS EFFECTIVE BECAUSE I SAY SO AND I WAS SMACKED AND IM CLEARLY STABLE. EVEN THOUGH IM NOT."

Cenwood wrote:
I’m not going to even try to understand what the hell you are trying to convey here. Ill take a gamble that its retarded and not bother.


Quote:
You insult timecube, and you don't put an "'" between the I and the M on "I'm." For these, you shall die.

-MiB


I mock the Timecube. I MOCK it. I stand in defiance of the timecube theory, and denounce it for the charlatanical, crazy theory that it is! YOU SUXX TIMECUBE! I could beat up the timecube theory with both hands tied behind my back, while blindfolded and in my sleep! Timecube is a pussy who cant even etc. etc. And you dont put " ' " between the t and the s in That's. Do we really want to play that card? Its rather annoying

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:21 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
Cenwood, heres a fuckin mirror.

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame63.html

Im inclinded to believe you have a bit of Pinko, too.. but this pretty much sums you up well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 2:35 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
[proof]I was spanked as a child. Spanked and punished IE, being sent to my room, ect. I've never been arrested. I've failed only one class because of my own inability to understand math, and I've been to detention once in my life.

My sister, however, was hardly touched or punished. She's been arrested for shoplifting, frequently cheats on her boyfriends and lost her virginity at 13.

I also watched a neighbor kid for the longest time. Her mother never spanked her or was firm with her. She believed in this "daily affirmation" shit too. This girl was held back twice in school, has been suspended at least six times for fighting and back talking teachers, and blatantly tells her mom to "screw off".

When watching my cousins, I wasn't allowed to spank them. Which is all well and good, I respect my aunt and uncle's beliefs. But they damn well needed it. I watched the 4 year old who would run up and smack me on the back of the legs and tell me, (Yes, TELL me) to get him a juice box, and I watched their 2 year old who, when mommy and daddy left, would not stop screaming for the entire six hours I watched him. I bathed him, talked to him, fed him, watched cartoons with him, sang to him, told him stories, took him on a walk, and yet, he wouldn't shut up. Why? Because mommy and daddy left, and I wouldn't give him a sugary popsicle before bed.

There is, however, a little kid named Lucus. Lucus is 6 now, and he is one of the most well behaved children I've seen. He roughhouses and everything just like any other kid does, but he says I'm sorry when he hurts you, he says please and thank you, and he doesn't even dare tell his mom and dad to "screw off". You know why? Because mommy and daddy were firm with him, and spanked him when it was appropriate.[/proof]

Now, that's not to say that beating your kid with no restraint is the answer. I think the answer is everything in moderation. A little bit of affirmation, and a firm swat on the ass works wonders for a kid. Mix that with a solid foundation and structure for the kid to grow by, and he should do fine. Coddle him too much, and he wont' respect anything. Beat him too much, and he'll hate everything. Seeing the point yet?

So if you're saying that I'm fucked up because my mom and dad gave me a swat on the ass when I screamed at them, or hit the dog when I was little, then I'm calling you an uninformed, ignorant fool.

Spanking kids worked for many, many hundreds of years. And it's just now when we stop doing it when we get spoiled fucksticks, like how about 90 percent of my highschool student body when I was in school. The same fucksticks who whine when they have to take responsibility for something, think it's fun to beat up on younger people, and do whatever the fuck they want, because mommy and daddy didnt' want to yell at Jr. too loudly, or enforce anything too harshly, because Jr. might hate them later on.

But what they didn't know was that Jr. might have ended up thanking them in the end for raising him with a stronger sense of responisbility.

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 3:01 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
And you are trying to say that you ARNT Compost? http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame50.html

You still havnt actually provided any kind of counterargument, and are just relying on other people to defend your retarded beliefs for you.

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Last edited by Cenwood on Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:00 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
The Man In Black wrote:
Yes. I am not saying not-hitting doesn't work, but hitting does work, which you are vehemently saying it doesn't. Since I have, you know, thousands and thousands of people who arn't fucked up who do that, I believe you can't really debate that.


Hmmm...so you acknowledge that children CAN and ARE raised to be good human beings, without being hit? Cool. My beef is mainly with the "SMACKING SOLVES EVERYTHING" school of thought, not with people who think that there is some kind of middle ground, and that children who are raised slightly left or right of this middle ground will probably grow up ok. By recognising that not everyone who isnt hit grows up to be a moron, your 100 times better then grey or most other pro-smacking morons.

I DO acknowledge that mild, unemotional physical discipline when administered impartially and without any element of "Roll a D-6 for parents mood to determine level of punishment" could be effective. My method would mainly entail withdrawing privileges, shouting, and disapproval, which is not always better then mild pain, IMO. But my belief is that this impartiality doesnt happen, and that people who smack their children smack them when they are angry at them, and the smacking itself is an emotionally charged activity. Ive no doubt that a huge percentage of people claim that they dont let emotion interfere when deciding whether to punish a child or not, but I call bullshit on most of them. Some, definitely, but generally, someone raised in that environment deals with their kids in much the same way. I call my dad in as evidence, I call the fathers of my friends, and I think we'll all agree that people who were hit as children are more likely to hit THEIR children. If smacking was little more then a short stab of mild pain administered whenever the child does something wrong, then Id be happy. It isnt, it never will be. Have you ever even SEEN a child get spanked? Do not try to tell me the smacker isnt acting on anger rather then moral code.


The Man In Black wrote:
Back. It. Up. Mother. Fucker.

Do not post in response again without some citable proof - at least a LITTLE BIT - to back up your claims. YET AGAIN, you're just shouting at the top of your lungs what you believe and not backing it up.

-MiB


So where is YOUR proof? So far you have said "I know loads of people who are smacked and are cool", which is exactly the same as my "evidence" except with the word "not" before the word "smacked". If your so fucking obsessed with evidence, provide some of your own.

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:27 am 
Offline
Tourist
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:15 am
Posts: 38
Location: A constantly shifting IP address.
Well, it appears you simply cannot be reasoned with. True to form you are impervous to logic. Nomally I would enjoy having human driftwood to play with, however unfortunatly I am distracted due to the fact that you are not the sole compeditor for Forums Greatest Fucktard.

You shout down referenced points, therfor declaring yourself to be above the combined intelligence of socioligists around the world and you seem to believe that your sheer textual lung-power and pissweak insults alone will win the day.

Well, actually you'd be on the right track, if only you were a Admin. That sorta of behavoir works well for those with power to abuse, however you are akin to a loud, barking dashhound nipping at peoples heels who should be thrown under a bus as soon as possible.

_________________
Meet new Grey. Same as old Grey. {GA: And just as banned.}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 5:17 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
Cenwood wrote:
The Man In Black wrote:
Yes. I am not saying not-hitting doesn't work, but hitting does work, which you are vehemently saying it doesn't. Since I have, you know, thousands and thousands of people who arn't fucked up who do that, I believe you can't really debate that.


Hmmm...so you acknowledge that children CAN and ARE raised to be good human beings, without being hit? Cool. My beef is mainly with the "SMACKING SOLVES EVERYTHING" school of thought, not with people who think that there is some kind of middle ground, and that children who are raised slightly left or right of this middle ground will probably grow up ok. By recognising that not everyone who isnt hit grows up to be a moron, your 100 times better then grey or most other pro-smacking morons.

I DO acknowledge that mild, unemotional physical discipline when administered impartially and without any element of "Roll a D-6 for parents mood to determine level of punishment" could be effective. My method would mainly entail withdrawing privileges, shouting, and disapproval, which is not always better then mild pain, IMO. But my belief is that this impartiality doesnt happen, and that people who smack their children smack them when they are angry at them, and the smacking itself is an emotionally charged activity. Ive no doubt that a huge percentage of people claim that they dont let emotion interfere when deciding whether to punish a child or not, but I call bullshit on most of them. Some, definitely, but generally, someone raised in that environment deals with their kids in much the same way. I call my dad in as evidence, I call the fathers of my friends, and I think we'll all agree that people who were hit as children are more likely to hit THEIR children. If smacking was little more then a short stab of mild pain administered whenever the child does something wrong, then Id be happy. It isnt, it never will be. Have you ever even SEEN a child get spanked? Do not try to tell me the smacker isnt acting on anger rather then moral code.


You're confusing responsible parents who spank and teach with child abusers. Gather your thoughts and come back later, please, so we don't have to argue in circles.

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:18 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:29 pm
Posts: 237
Location: Nellis AFB, Las Vegas
I think anyone who commits murder whould get the chair unless it was done so out of self defense. I think this shouldnt matter what age, and fuck pleading insanity, thats garbage. The only thing they should plead insanity for is when they shit there pants after seing me grab the switch and pull it.

_________________
Confuscious say: "baseball all wrong man with four balls cannot walk"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:38 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
Ryven, that is not enough to constitute child abuse. At least not in this country...does America have laws relating to the way hitting is administered, or does it leave it up the judgement of parents as long as the hitting isnt too severe? Ayup. Thought so. "Child Abuse" by legal definiton contitutes physical weals or bruises.

Forevergray...say something remotely reasonable, and we'll go from there.

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:40 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
Lothar Killaxe wrote:
and fuck pleading insanity, thats garbage.


How come? Do you believe that people are responsible for their actions even if they are insane? Or do you believe that mentally unstable people should be held just as accountable for their actions as sane people?

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 10:46 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2788
Location: Neo-Connecticut
Cenwood wrote:
Forevergray...say something remotely reasonable, and we'll go from there.


Cenwood, you lose at debate club. You're the one who's not being reasonable. Please get out of the forums, I don't want to have to share them with you anymore. ^^


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 3:05 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
Cenwood wrote:
Ryven, that is not enough to constitute child abuse. At least not in this country...does America have laws relating to the way hitting is administered, or does it leave it up the judgement of parents as long as the hitting isnt too severe? Ayup. Thought so. "Child Abuse" by legal definiton contitutes physical weals or bruises.

Forevergray...say something remotely reasonable, and we'll go from there.


And as long as the parent who spanks a child doesn't leave a mark, it's legal. Because it's a granted point that if you're spanking a kid hard enough to leave bruises that you're angry and it's not punishment anymore. That's what any person with half a brain and who doesn't like to argue somantics needlessly would come to the conclusion of.

If I spank Johnny once on the butt for kicking the cat, that's punishment. If I pull out a huge stick and beat Johnny several times on the butt and leave bruises, that's abuse. Duh.

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group