Did I Really Just See That.....in Disney World?????

[Mr Bill]

Oh, I agree with you here. But what the heck is a "fupa"?

Edit: OK, just googled it and got to fupahunter.blogspot.com. Sorry I asked!! (although what is the origin of that word, I wonder - please don't answer - it's meant to be a rhetorical question!) Edit*2: OK, just found the answer to that, too

:hurl::hurl::hurl:

 

[WildLodgeFan]

That's a pretty big generalization. Just because I don't spank my kids doesn't mean I fit into your generalization. My kids take full responsibility for their actions and get punished if they do something wrong with an age appropriate time out or getting something taken away. Then we discuss what they did and why it was wrong so they can start to understand.

Oops, my bad. I didn't mean to imply that spanking had anything to do with responsibility. What I was trying to say, is that I see many kids who do not receive any guidance or punishment (corporeal or none corporeal, because I believe both ways work) for doing wrong from their parents or adult role models. That is NOT to say or imply all kids are that way, but it seems more prevalent to me than say 20 years ago.

 

[eliezrah]

Oops, my bad. I didn't mean to imply that spanking had anything to do with responsibility. What I was trying to say, is that I see many kids who do not receive any guidance or punishment (corporeal or none corporeal, because I believe both ways work) for doing wrong from their parents or adult role models. That is NOT to say or imply all kids are that way, but it seems more prevalent to me than say 20 years ago.

That I agree with. In general, there does seem to be less discipline now than when I was growing up. Parents do seem to let their kids get away with more. I've seen kids run down my kids and knock them over and I get yelled at by the parents when I said something to their kid about knocking my baby over. They could care less what their kid did or if their kid hurt someone. It's sad to see and it is nice to see that there are still parents out there who care about teaching their kids right from wrong, however they do it!

 

[tinktoo]

I'm sorry, but I find no common sense in taking a potty chair to WDW so your child can take a dump behind a trash can. It's disgusting and unsanitary and most laws of this nature are based on that fact.

Yuck - that is disgusting! :hurl:

Whilst visiting Epcot in 2002 with our then 1 year old daughter, I was told that changing a diaper in public is illegal in Florida. Back then, I believe the fine was around $1,000. This was not only for the unsanitary practice but also for endangering the child by exposing them in public.

For the record, I was changing her top as she'd got in a right mess while chewing on a piece of one of those large Tollhouse cookies NOT changing her diaper!

 

[wdwfan100]

So if all kids are hit by their parents, there would be no crimes? There's logic at work for ya!

Certainly not. I don't think anyone said that.

The references above are from experts in their fields. Search some more and you would see the vast majority saying that hitting your kids is not acceptable (except in extraordinary cirumstances). As you mention there are laws protecting the kids, maybe there might even be a reason for that.

We have a tendancy to put to much faith in "experts". There is not a concensus on the issue. It usually boils down to how the dicipline is administered. You can lovingly "spank" your kids. It does not have to be a beating and a shunning there after. I think that is the big misconception here. There is a difference between diciplining your child and beating your child.

Once again, in my opinion, there are better methods of parenting. Hitting kids to me just sends the message that to get your point across you must hit someone. How can you discipline your kid for getting into a fight in school if this was the behavior you instilled in your kid?

Most parents I know use corporal punishment. It is not the whole of their dicipline philosophy. Time outs, early bedtime, no TV or Computer time etc. is where most people begin. Corporal punishment can teach children that there are lines that should not be crossed. There is dicipline coming that excedes all others. Much like society has jail. First there are fines and community service. Then if offenses get repeated, Jail. Dicipline systems with out escalation are not effective.

This is my last comment on this subject. People definitely have different opinions, and one side will not change the other's mind.

Interesting discussion I must say. I never knew so many people were passionate about the opposite side of the spectrum when it comes to corporal punishment.

I agree it is very interesting. I find it interesting also that the parents that I have read thus far have had children that are still quite young. As kids get older they tend to seek there independance. They seek to push their boundries out further and further. Defying what they feel are "stupid" Rules. So what do you do when kids don't care about being in time out and refuse to go when you send them there? Put them in a double time out they won't go in. Usually parents who do not spank there child, negotiate with them. Eventually the children learn this and slowly erode what rules they have. Parents then start avoiding confrontations instead of administering the rules.

 

[wdwfan100]

While I'm not saying that this is the way I would deal with my child's urgent potty needs, this really doesn't seem like the horrible thing that you make it out to be. If I had seen that, I probably wouldn't have thought too much of it, to be honest.

And I think the laws against public defication are more intended towards responsible adults deliberately acting like jackasses, and not to parents making a quick judgement call when nature suddenly calls on their kids. Just as there is a difference between a woman whipping out her to flash around vs whipping it out in public to feed her child. That's why we need to use a little common sense in knowing when a law applies and when it doesn't, rather than being so black and white that we leave no room for any common sense.

:hammer::brick::hammer:

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

So if all kids are hit by their parents, there would be no crimes? There's logic at work for ya!

The references above are from experts in their fields. Search some more and you would see the vast majority saying that hitting your kids is not acceptable (except in extraordinary cirumstances). As you mention there are laws protecting the kids, maybe there might even be a reason for that.

Once again, in my opinion, there are better methods of parenting. Hitting kids to me just sends the message that to get your point across you must hit someone. How can you discipline your kid for getting into a fight in school if this was the behavior you instilled in your kid?

This is my last comment on this subject. People definitely have different opinions, and one side will not change the other's mind.

Interesting discussion I must say. I never knew so many people were passionate about the opposite side of the spectrum when it comes to corporal punishment.

Yes, theres a reason for it, there's a huge industry out there all contradicting each other while the scrotes run wild.

However,its easy to take the tone of a post on a board as implying condemnation of others values.

 

[EpcoTim]

While I'm not saying that this is the way I would deal with my child's urgent potty needs, this really doesn't seem like the horrible thing that you make it out to be. If I had seen that, I probably wouldn't have thought too much of it, to be honest.

And I think the laws against public defication are more intended towards responsible adults deliberately acting like jackasses, and not to parents making a quick judgement call when nature suddenly calls on their kids. Just as there is a difference between a woman whipping out her to flash around vs whipping it out in public to feed her child. That's why we need to use a little common sense in knowing when a law applies and when it doesn't, rather than being so black and white that we leave no room for any common sense.

Your kidding, right? You took notice of Buddhists, but you wouldn't take notice of a kid taking a numero dos OUTSIDE a bathroom? Even if it was in a portable toilet.....thats just wrong to everyone around. Not to mention what signals it's sending the kid.

 

[fosse76]

youth crime is increasing because all too often, the youths know that society is not going to punish them because they are too young to know better. If they know they won't get punished, they know they are doing wrong and should be punished.

First, it is NOT society's responsibility to raise your child. You chose to have the child, so you deal with it. Second, if children aren't disciplined correctly from the start, then obviously it will be tougher to get them to listen to you. Third, to act as though children who aren't hit as a form of punishment end up as criminals or have behavioral issues as they get older is nonsense. Most criminals endured corporal punishment as children. Some of the most infamous criminals of all time have that trait in common. By hitting the child, you are associating pain with doing something "wrong" but not instilling the morality of what is wrong. The children you see on tv or out in the parks who don't get hit by their parents while constantly misbehaving are the exception...the parents aren't punishing their children at all nor reinforcing any punishment. Do those of you who support coporal punishment ever watch those nanny shows? Never once does hitting the child enter into the equation, yet they manage to turn the children around. To attempt to demean someone by calling them a "tree hugger" is ridiculous, as if caring about the well-being and health of a child or the earth for that matter) is stupid. People who hit their children seem to have a selfish mentality about it. It's a quick temporary fix that makes YOU (the parent) feel better, that does nothing for the child except cause resentment and more often than not a streak of rebellion.

 

[eliezrah]

First, it is NOT society's responsibility to raise your child. You chose to have the child, so you deal with it. Second, if children aren't disciplined correctly from the start, then obviously it will be tougher to get them to listen to you. Third, to act as though children who aren't hit as a form of punishment end up as criminals or have behavioral issues as they get older is nonsense. Most criminals endured corporal punishment as children. Some of the most infamous criminals of all time have that trait in common. By hitting the child, you are associating pain with doing something "wrong" but not instilling the morality of what is wrong. The children you see on tv or out in the parks who don't get hit by their parents while constantly misbehaving are the exception...the parents aren't punishing their children at all nor reinforcing any punishment. Do those of you who support coporal punishment ever watch those nanny shows? Never once does hitting the child enter into the equation, yet they manage to turn the children around. To attempt to demean someone by calling them a "tree hugger" is ridiculous, as if caring about the well-being and health of a child or the earth for that matter) is stupid. People who hit their children seem to have a selfish mentality about it. It's a quick temporary fix that makes YOU (the parent) feel better, that does nothing for the child except cause resentment and more often than not a streak of rebellion.

Very well said!! And I like that you mentioned children need to learn from the start...

People have asked me why I had my 12 month old help clean up her toys if she didn't understand the concept of cleaning and if it was easier to do it myself. I told them it was to teach her about keeping things clean from the start. Now that she's 4 1/2 all I have to do (and sometimes I don't have to do it at all) is say please clean and she will w/o question. I instilled that value into her before she even knew what it was, as I did with my first son and will with my second once he's old enough. My kids also know the consequences of not cleaning if we have to ask them over and over is the toy being taken away or possibly thrown out (which we never had to get to since just the threat of that gets them to clean and they know we follow through on what we say).

 

[fosse76]

Certainly not. I don't think anyone said that.

We have a tendancy to put to much faith in "experts". There is not a concensus on the issue. It usually boils down to how the dicipline is administered. You can lovingly "spank" your kids. It does not have to be a beating and a shunning there after. I think that is the big misconception here. There is a difference between diciplining your child and beating your child.

No concensus? While it's true that there are always exceptions, the concensus among experts is that there are better methods for punishing children other than corporal punishment. These are highly educated people who study actual people. Just because you think you know better than experts doesn't mean you are right. If I were building a treehouse I would certainly listen more to my frind with a degree in engineering than my neighbor who merely tinkers around with construction.

Most parents I know use corporal punishment. It is not the whole of their dicipline philosophy. Time outs, early bedtime, no TV or Computer time etc. is where most people begin. Corporal punishment can teach children that there are lines that should not be crossed. There is dicipline coming that excedes all others. Much like society has jail. First there are fines and community service. Then if offenses get repeated, Jail. Dicipline systems with out escalation are not effective.

If children become defiant of your authority, then you didn't do your job. Hitting a child is lazy parenting, it shows you haven't invested the time in your child's develpmental welfare to care what they are doing, only that when they do something that annoys you that you will hit them. Most people hit their children for absolutely nonsensical reasons. Being deprived of television and going on trips with friends and loss of cell phone, etc. are proven to be much more effective than corporal punishment. Unless you absolutely beat your child, he or she won't even remember it in a few days/weeks...but will definitely remember missing a trip to Six Flags or the loss of communication with friends for a few weeks.

I agree it is very interesting. I find it interesting also that the parents that I have read thus far have had children that are still quite young. As kids get older they tend to seek there independance. They seek to push their boundries out further and further. Defying what they feel are "stupid" Rules. So what do you do when kids don't care about being in time out and refuse to go when you send them there? Put them in a double time out they won't go in. Usually parents who do not spank there child, negotiate with them. Eventually the children learn this and slowly erode what rules they have. Parents then start avoiding confrontations instead of administering the rules.

Nonsense. The younger they are when the discipline begins, the less likely they are to start challenging your authorityas they get older. Are there parents who don't support their own punishments? Absolutely. Just as there are parents who beat their children into unconsciousness. You act as if if a parent doesn't hit their child, they are more likely to rebel or defy authority. It's actually the opposite. The children who are hit as children will push the boundaries, knowing they are safe until you decide to hit them. And even then they don't know WHY something is wrong, only that you deem it necessary to hit them for doing it. And also, what is wrong with a child challenging your authority from time to time. You act as if you are always right and the child will always be wrong. No matter how much you try, children are going to be true to themselves and not to you. It's usually parents who stifle this development that find themselves with disciplinary problems. And as children develop personalities, you are going to have to agree to disagree. Set boundaries for their safety and well-being, but as they get older those boundaries will have to change; that is life.

 

[sublimesting]

People, for the most part aren't strict with their kids and give in because it's easier. You have to set boundaries and limits and clear punishments. once the rule is broken you MUST stick to the punishment, even if it ruins YOUR day. Such as if a kid is throwing a tantrum at Disney and won't let up, the better method is to say "If it doesn't stop NOW, we go back to the room." Then if they keep it up, you leave. You don't spank them, you stick to a rigid method and show control. it sucks for ou but it shows who is in charge. The secret is KIDS WANT SOMEONE TO BE IN CONTROL! Not the opposite. If they feel they have any control then they don't trust your decisions. here is the HARD part. You HAVE to give them control over SOME things, so they don't feel like you are a dictator and they can make decision too. Such as give them outfits they can choose to wear that day. They have a choice, you see, but it's actually only an option. When they scream that they want to dress like a martian that day, you tell them that isn't appropriate but they can choose something else.

 

[eliezrah]

People, for the most part aren't strict with their kids and give in because it's easier. You have to set boundaries and limits and clear punishments. once the rule is broken you MUST stick to the punishment, even if it ruins YOUR day. Such as if a kid is throwing a tantrum at Disney and won't let up, the better method is to say "If it doesn't stop NOW, we go back to the room." Then if they keep it up, you leave. You don't spank them, you stick to a rigid method and show control. it sucks for ou but it shows who is in charge. The secret is KIDS WANT SOMEONE TO BE IN CONTROL! Not the opposite. If they feel they have any control then they don't trust your decisions. here is the HARD part. You HAVE to give them control over SOME things, so they don't feel like you are a dictator and they can make decision too. Such as give them outfits they can choose to wear that day. They have a choice, you see, but it's actually only an option. When they scream that they want to dress like a martian that day, you tell them that isn't appropriate but they can choose something else.

:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy: Well put!!!!

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I just hope that none of those who are pontificating have to deal with problem teens in future years, after all that would clearly indicate that they are total failures as parents.

Going by the views expressed in their posts at least.

 

[Eyorefan]

This Feburary we were waiting to be seated at Tony's for our 8:30 pm ADR and the place was full of tired and cranky kids. It was so bad that it will be a really long time before we eat at Tony's again (bad food aside).

The thing that really got me though was when this one dad brought his daughter who was prbably 6 or 7 and his son who could not have been much over 2 over by the TV that had cartoons playing and told the daughter to watch her brother and that he would be right back. So while he was gone, the fireworks started. The little girl saw that people were going outside to watch then and she got up and went outside too. Leaving the little brother by himself. At this point my mom said, "keep an eye on the girl and I'll watch the boy." So I casually got up and went outside to see where the girl was. She was right on the porch, not far from the door. About 10 minutes later her dad came out, found the girl and yelled at her for leaving her brother, "You needed to be watching him! Some thing could have happened to him!"

My mom heard him and just said, "I'm sorry, but some thing could have happened to both of them, a 6 year old is not a babysitter." The dad didn't say anything, he just took his kids and moved to another part of the waiting area and we were seated a few minutes later.

Honestly though, that guy is lucky that he has two well behaved kids. The boy just sat and watched cartoons the whole time, and while the girl did wonder off, she didn't walk completely away from the resturant. Both of them could have gone anywhere (or been taken anywhere).

 

[eliezrah]

OMG that's horrible!!!!!!

 

[wdwfan100]

No concensus? While it's true that there are always exceptions, the concensus among experts is that there are better methods for punishing children other than corporal punishment. These are highly educated people who study actual people. Just because you think you know better than experts doesn't mean you are right. If I were building a treehouse I would certainly listen more to my frind with a degree in engineering than my neighbor who merely tinkers around with construction.

I actually paraphrased an expert in my previous post. It is how the discipline is administered more than the type that is of significance. Big difference between an engineer and architect and a sociologist. The priciples of engineering have been well established. Sociologist have been following the air of political correctness for quite a while. It helps them get the grants that they need to be sociologists. I have no problem listening to the talking head experts. I just don't agree with everything they say. "Highly Educated elitists or not. Its a free thought thing, sorry.


If children become defiant of your authority, then you didn't do your job.

I am sure you are the perfect person to judge if I am a poor parent or not. After all you read books by experts. Children become defiant because as they grow up, they try to establish their independance. The try to establish themselves as individuals. It is a natural progression seen all across nature.

Hitting a child is lazy parenting, it shows you haven't invested the time in your child's develpmental welfare to care what they are doing, only that when they do something that annoys you that you will hit them.

You seem to want to imply that people who choose to spank their children are mindless dolts that sit on the couch and drink and just get ed when the kid walks in front of the TV. I invested my life into my children. I resent any implication to the contrary. I sincerly doubt there are many people out there that spent more time than I did with their kids. I love them dearly and always will.

Most people hit their children for absolutely nonsensical reasons. Being deprived of television and going on trips with friends and loss of cell phone, etc. are proven to be much more effective than corporal punishment.

Proven. Not in my experience. I will freely admit that spanking should not be the primary means of discpline. It is part of an escalation of discipline. What do you do if your child refuses to go to time out? Ask pretty please? Then pretty, pretty please? No, You escalate. That does not mean you jump right to spanking, but you do escalate.

Unless you absolutely beat your child, he or she won't even remember it in a few days/weeks...but will definitely remember missing a trip to Six Flags or the loss of communication with friends for a few weeks.


Again you keep implying since someone spanks their kids, they beat their kids. There is a difference. I am not talking about beating children. I am talking about spanking, Slapping hands, Physically picking up and bringing to a location. I will say it again. Physical discipline is not the only method used.



Nonsense. The younger they are when the discipline begins, the less likely they are to start challenging your authorityas they get older. Are there parents who don't support their own punishments? Absolutely. Just as there are parents who beat their children into unconsciousness.

Sorry again. My experience is a little different. Children become independant with age and with that defy authority to some extreme or another. Younger children are the easiest to discipline because they respond to 1st tier disciplinary methods.

You act as if if a parent doesn't hit their child, they are more likely to rebel or defy authority. It's actually the opposite. The children who are hit as children will push the boundaries, knowing they are safe until you decide to hit them. And even then they don't know WHY something is wrong, only that you deem it necessary to hit them for doing it.

To clarify what I said, it was that parents who do not have an escalation of discipline, end up negotiating with the defiant kids in order to avoid conflict. Kids pick up on a parents willingness to negotiate and will manipulate that to their advantage. Kids who know that a parent will escalate are aware of it and push boundries less frequently.

And also, what is wrong with a child challenging your authority from time to time. You act as if you are always right and the child will always be wrong.

Once again, you know very little about me. I always made time for my kids. No subject was off limits. If they wanted to discuss the fairness of rules then that would be fine. If they had a valid point then we could adjust the rules. There is a time and place for those discussions and open defiance is not something that is tolerable.

No matter how much you try, children are going to be true to themselves and not to you. It's usually parents who stifle this development that find themselves with disciplinary problems.

Seems to me that I made this point as a reason for them pushing their boundries. I thought you disagreed with it.

And as children develop personalities, you are going to have to agree to disagree. Set boundaries for their safety and well-being, but as they get older those boundaries will have to change; that is life.

Certainly, agree to disagree. But, the rules are still in place. Regardless of if they agree or not. I am not saying you make your 17 year old go to bed at 7pm, but there are still curfew that are in place. The house rules are the house rules. There are rules in society also. We call them laws. We have to follow them agree or not. It is the kids that are able to negotiate the rules away that find problem in society. The can't understand why the rules are not as flexible as mom and dad made them.

As horrible as I must seem for having spanked my kids, they seemed to have survived the experience and flouished. They are both 20 and doing extremely well in college. They are not afraid to come home, in fact the love it.

 

[fosse76]

Certainly, agree to disagree. But, the rules are still in place. Regardless of if they agree or not. I am not saying you make your 17 year old go to bed at 7pm, but there are still curfew that are in place. The house rules are the house rules. There are rules in society also. We call them laws. We have to follow them agree or not. It is the kids that are able to negotiate the rules away that find problem in society. The can't understand why the rules are not as flexible as mom and dad made them.

If people followed laws as obediently as you want your children to listen to you, women wouldn't be allowed to vote and Blacks would still be sitting in the back of the bus, to name just a few examples. If you don't agree with something, then you have to stand up and fight for what you think is right. And our government doesn't punish lawbreakers with physical punishment (with the exception of the death penalty, which I think is safe to say we shouldn't discuss). If you park illegally the police aren't going to smack you.

As horrible as I must seem for having spanked my kids, they seemed to have survived the experience and flouished. They are both 20 and doing extremely well in college. They are not afraid to come home, in fact the love it.

Well I wasn't spanked and not only do I have a law degree but also a Ph.D., so I'm not sure what your point is.

And I didn't mean to imply that you beat your kids...there just isn't any value in hitting them at all, even if they grow up to be productive citizens.

 

[WildLodgeFan]

Great thing about America - we can all agree to disgree. So, perhaps we can get back on subject about outrageous things at the World, that perhaps don't involve corporeal punishment or breastfeeding?

 

[wdwfan100]

If people followed laws as obediently as you want your children to listen to you, women wouldn't be allowed to vote and Blacks would still be sitting in the back of the bus, to name just a few examples. If you don't agree with something, then you have to stand up and fight for what you think is right. And our government doesn't punish lawbreakers with physical punishment (with the exception of the death penalty, which I think is safe to say we shouldn't discuss). If you park illegally the police aren't going to smack you.


That is a pretty ridiculous statement. There is a means for laws to change. There is a means for kids to protest against what they feel is unfair. It is the collectives responsibility to obey the laws until such a time as the current ones are changed. What a radical concept. Wanting people to not pick and choose which laws they feel apply to them. As for our current justice system, you know as well as I do that we do not exclude the death penalty, nor do we exclude things like solitary confinement. For parking tickets we, eventually, if you keep getting them and you refuse to pay them. They punishment, guess what, escalates. Same with all crimes. Eventually fines, turn to jail. Repeat offenses lead to stiffer penalties



Well I wasn't spanked and not only do I have a law degree but also a Ph.D., so I'm not sure what your point is.

My point is that in spite of the implied duress I put my kids through, they were some how were able to not only fit into the society with out exhibiting any anti social behavior. They have even been able to excel.

And I didn't mean to imply that you beat your kids...there just isn't any value in hitting them at all, even if they grow up to be productive citizens.

Though I would say spank and not hit. I see here is a chance for us to agree to disagree. I enjoyed the discourse.