Spank Me Please Mommy and Daddy!

[Adrian]

Spank me, please

Social psychologists and financial analysts continue to look for the critical personal characteristics that lead a person to be a CEO or successful entrepreneur. Much to the dismay of child psychologists, there is one thing they all seem to have in common.

As children, they were paddled, belted, switched or swatted.

The frustrated child psychologists wince at such a finding and warn that spanking “slows mental development and hinders achievement.” Of course they are confident that a corrective spanking opens the door to physical abuse and permanent emotional scaring.

However, it appears that a smack here and there is a part of every CEO’s history. USA Today interviewed CEOs over a three month period and could not find a single one that had been spared a spanking now and then as a child. And those business leaders tend to express more appreciation for their parents than those from correction-free households.

Sara Blakely says she was "spanked and spanked often," so much that she would wear all of her days-of-the-week underwear at the same time to soften the blow. Today, she is the founder and owner of a women's undergarment manufacturer that has passed $100 million in retail sales this year. Blakely says she thought of a name for her company while sitting in Atlanta traffic. It's a name that nobody seems to forget. Spanx. Now there's a case study that will drive a Freudian psychoanalyst crazy.

Full Story

That good ole' Biblical wisdom.

Corporations draw attention from the small business, thus leaving said small business to rot in bankruptcy. It's a cold-hearted way of doing business if you ask me. I like to use the cancer analogy. Stealing nutrients from healthy cells in an egotistical, sociopathic way. Eventually killing the entire body. How decieving of those CEOs to do that to people. Especially Nike, moving to Indonesia where they only have to pay their workers 2 cents a day, leaving American workers unemployed, just to make a few extra bucks. Which they obviously don't need. That doesn't seem very Christian. More Satanic. Self righteous and justified only in greed.
If you're going to justify spanking with examples of succesful people, don't use the avarice dwelling, demeening, business *******.

[memmy]

Please watch your choice of words Adrian.

Don't forget this is a Christian board, ok?

You seem very bitter about this matter.

I believe the point was that these CEOs have grown up to be self disciplined people now. I don't believe they are are so evil, as you seem to portray them. Some, no doubt are, but you find that in all walks of life, no matter where you look around.

That's why we need Jesus.

Blessings, Memmy

[Adrian]

Please watch your choice of words Adrian.

Don't forget this is a Christian board, ok?

You seem very bitter about this matter.

I believe the point was that these CEOs have grown up to be self disciplined people now. I don't believe they are are so evil, as you seem to portray them. Some, no doubt are, but you find that in all walks of life, no matter where you look around.

That's why we need Jesus.

Blessings, Memmy

Selfishly taking one's business to idiotic measures by competively trying to create an unnecessary monopoly, despite the downfall of fellow companies, in order to get an uncomprehensible amount of cash that is completely supererogatory is not "self-discipline". Quite the opposite on the contrary. Especially when one person is taking all that money when the US is over 8 billion dollars in debt.

And when does someone have to be a CEO to be succesful to begin with? It's obviously not the correct choice for everyone. There are many other opportunities in "lesser" jobs that are just as, perhaps more satisfying.

[Adrian]

While your points on CEO's and business certainly have merit,From what I understand, this article and discussion is about spanking and discipline in the family. Let's try to keep the thread on topic.

Thanks! 

I was trying to point out that using CEOs as an example of succesful "spanked" people was not the best idea.

[janine]

Um... Adrian?  Ever thought of kidnapping and torturing CEO's?

[janine]

Or blowing up their headquarters, burning all their profits and giving their Boards of Directors wedgies.

Nasty ol' evil corporations.

Must've been spanked as  children.

[Bon Voyage]

Please watch your choice of words Adrian.

Don't forget this is a Christian board, ok?

You seem very bitter about this matter.

I believe the point was that these CEOs have grown up to be self disciplined people now. I don't believe they are are so evil, as you seem to portray them. Some, no doubt are, but you find that in all walks of life, no matter where you look around.

That's why we need Jesus.

Blessings, Memmy

Selfishly taking one's business to idiotic measures by competively trying to create an unnecessary monopoly, despite the downfall of fellow companies, in order to get an uncomprehensible amount of cash that is completely supererogatory is not "self-discipline". Quite the opposite on the contrary. Especially when one person is taking all that money when the US is over 8 billion dollars in debt.

And when does someone have to be a CEO to be succesful to begin with? It's obviously not the correct choice for everyone. There are many other opportunities in "lesser" jobs that are just as, perhaps more satisfying.

Not all CEO's are bloodthirsty savages bent on world domination.  There are a few out that are greedy, but not all.

Our yearly budget deficit for the federal government has been in the billions the last few years, and our National Debt is over 8 Trillion.

[Adrian]

Um... Adrian?  Ever thought of kidnapping and torturing CEO's?

Torturing, I've done. Kidnapping is illegal. I prefer the psychological torturing method which is completely legal. Unless it's a child.

[Richard]

Spank me, please

Social psychologists and financial analysts continue to look for the critical personal characteristics that lead a person to be a CEO or successful entrepreneur. Much to the dismay of child psychologists, there is one thing they all seem to have in common.

As children, they were paddled, belted, switched or swatted.

Worldly success is not the standard by which to judge a successful life.  CEOs and successful entrepenuers often work 80-100 hours per week, ignore their children, and live empty, frustrating lives.  Of course this is not always the case.
My hope for my my daughter is that she grows up to be a happy, healthy servant of God.  I don't care if she does that from a boardroom or a class room.

Just my two cents.

[meejo]

Perhaps that explains the abundance of moraly bankrupt CEOs.

[janine]

And also the abundance of morally bankrupt bus drivers, newspaper reporters, high school teachers...?

[chosenone]

I have three kids  now all adults. They got the VERY VERY occasional smack if I really got cross with them but I could NEVER have cold bloodedly hit them when I was calm and 'in control'. The thought makes me cringe inside and makes my blood run cold even thinking about it.
People were always commenting on how well bahaved and lovely they all were, and that was without corporal punishment, or hitting(and certainly not with a stick or belt or suchlike), just the usual tellings off and occasionally being sent to their rooms.
You only have to watch such programmes as super nanny now to see that all you need is consistency, and loving firmness to change even the most difficult child.  You dont need physical pnishment, she has proved that time and time again with the most naughty children you could imagine.

My husband was hit with the buckle end of a belt and he was a very sensitive child, and I am sure this has affected him badly and he still has some issues with his mum (who did the hitting) and they have a very poor relationship.
She even told a neighbour that they should shut their daughter in the chicken house for being naughty, when this poor little girl was really really scared of chickens. Well they did as she said.......goodness knows what happened the the little girl or how this affected her.
I guess if you want your children to obey out of fear, then go ahead, hit them with sticks, belts or whatever you want, but that isnt what I wanted for my children. I wanted them to bahave because it was the right thing to do and not because they were so scared and afraid of the punishment.

[Bon Voyage]

I have three kids  now all adults. They got the VERY VERY occasional smack if I really got cross with them but I could NEVER have cold bloodedly hit them when I was calm and 'in control'. The thought makes me cringe inside and makes my blood run cold even thinking about it.
People were always commenting on how well bahaved and lovely they all were, and that was without corporal punishment, or hitting(and certainly not with a stick or belt or suchlike), just the usual tellings off and occasionally being sent to their rooms.
You only have to watch such programmes as super nanny now to see that all you need is consistency, and loving firmness to change even the most difficult child.  You dont need physical pnishment, she has proved that time and time again with the most naughty children you could imagine.

My husband was hit with the buckle end of a belt and he was a very sensitive child, and I am sure this has affected him badly and he still has some issues with his mum (who did the hitting) and they have a very poor relationship.
She even told a neighbour that they should shut their daughter in the chicken house for being naughty, when this poor little girl was really really scared of chickens. Well they did as she said.......goodness knows what happened the the little girl or how this affected her.
I guess if you want your children to obey out of fear, then go ahead, hit them with sticks, belts or whatever you want, but that isnt what I wanted for my children. I wanted them to bahave because it was the right thing to do and not because they were so scared and afraid of the punishment.

Should I take the word of the Super Nanny or the Word of God?

[chosenone]

I have three kids  now all adults. They got the VERY VERY occasional smack if I really got cross with them but I could NEVER have cold bloodedly hit them when I was calm and 'in control'. The thought makes me cringe inside and makes my blood run cold even thinking about it.
People were always commenting on how well bahaved and lovely they all were, and that was without corporal punishment, or hitting(and certainly not with a stick or belt or suchlike), just the usual tellings off and occasionally being sent to their rooms.
You only have to watch such programmes as super nanny now to see that all you need is consistency, and loving firmness to change even the most difficult child.  You dont need physical pnishment, she has proved that time and time again with the most naughty children you could imagine.

My husband was hit with the buckle end of a belt and he was a very sensitive child, and I am sure this has affected him badly and he still has some issues with his mum (who did the hitting) and they have a very poor relationship.
She even told a neighbour that they should shut their daughter in the chicken house for being naughty, when this poor little girl was really really scared of chickens. Well they did as she said.......goodness knows what happened the the little girl or how this affected her.
I guess if you want your children to obey out of fear, then go ahead, hit them with sticks, belts or whatever you want, but that isnt what I wanted for my children. I wanted them to bahave because it was the right thing to do and not because they were so scared and afraid of the punishment.

Should I take the word of the Super Nanny or the Word of God?

Its debatable  and many have debated it, whether the word says that we should hit our children, but the point I was trying to make is that you actually dont need to beat/hit your children to get them to beome nice people. If other non violent methods work, then what an earth is the point of using violent ones? I know many people, Christians and otherwise who dont use violent methods and have lovely children. The point that I was making about supernanny is that she is called in to deal with REALLY badly behaved children and the methods she uses, which are widely used today, really work.
I am not saying we dont need to be firm and discipline our children, but why use violent methods if we dont have to?
Some children who are hit a lot can become resentful fearful and angry and this will stay inside until at some pont it may well emerge and cause lots of problems for them and those around them.

[Bon Voyage]

I have three kids  now all adults. They got the VERY VERY occasional smack if I really got cross with them but I could NEVER have cold bloodedly hit them when I was calm and 'in control'. The thought makes me cringe inside and makes my blood run cold even thinking about it.
People were always commenting on how well bahaved and lovely they all were, and that was without corporal punishment, or hitting(and certainly not with a stick or belt or suchlike), just the usual tellings off and occasionally being sent to their rooms.
You only have to watch such programmes as super nanny now to see that all you need is consistency, and loving firmness to change even the most difficult child.  You dont need physical pnishment, she has proved that time and time again with the most naughty children you could imagine.

My husband was hit with the buckle end of a belt and he was a very sensitive child, and I am sure this has affected him badly and he still has some issues with his mum (who did the hitting) and they have a very poor relationship.
She even told a neighbour that they should shut their daughter in the chicken house for being naughty, when this poor little girl was really really scared of chickens. Well they did as she said.......goodness knows what happened the the little girl or how this affected her.
I guess if you want your children to obey out of fear, then go ahead, hit them with sticks, belts or whatever you want, but that isnt what I wanted for my children. I wanted them to bahave because it was the right thing to do and not because they were so scared and afraid of the punishment.

Should I take the word of the Super Nanny or the Word of God?

Its debatable  and many have debated it, whether the word says that we should hit our children, but the point I was trying to make is that you actually dont need to beat/hit your children to get them to beome nice people. If other non violent methods work, then what an earth is the point of using violent ones? I know many people, Christians and otherwise who dont use violent methods and have lovely children. The point that I was making about supernanny is that she is called in to deal with REALLY badly behaved children and the methods she uses, which are widely used today, really work.
I am not saying we dont need to be firm and discipline our children, but why use violent methods if we dont have to?
Some children who are hit a lot can become resentful fearful and angry and this will stay inside until at some pont it may well emerge and cause lots of problems for them and those around them.

Spanking isn't violent, abuse is violent.  It is discipline and it is mentioned favorably in God's Word.  My children are small.  I can't reason with them with words.  They understand a good swat.  I'll take God's Word over Super Nanny.  I don't want to spank my children when I'm cross, I want to do it without being angry, crossing the line happens when one is too angry.