Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Anti Spanking Law - Ridiculous by BenDaImmortal Anti Spanking Law - Ridiculous by BenDaImmortal
Notice that the button does not call anti-spankers ridiculoous, JUST the law. As in I do respect those who are anti-spankers in home discipline, but I think that it was ridiculous to make it downright illegal. In this matter it is not justified to force everyone to go your way.

Take the time to read the rest of this with thought, and you may understand why. I know it's boatloads of text, but then again this is a complex and highly debated issue.

One thing I want to add first, is that the law I speak of prohbits ANY form of corporal punishment, which in my opinion is even more ridiculous than if it prohbited only spanking...Because any normative form of corporal punishment when reasonably given is not that harmful if at all. But the thing is, the law is often talked about as an "anti-spanking law" because spanking is the most common form of cp in the world. And in my opinion, the least harmful form. Therefore that is what I'm going to address here.

A law that prohibits parents from spanking their own children is useless and harmful though that's not the only reason why the law is ridiculous. But let me dig into this useless/harmful point first anyway.

Please realize how we already have laws to enable reporting and preventing child abuse, so we don't need a prohibition of corporal discipline that only seemingly surpasses the concept and is not harmful in it's most common way of use. As for it being in order to prevent child abuse...If a child does not feel abused by getting spanked, the child will not start feeling so just because some men in power wrote words on paper. If a child feels abused by getting spanked, it shows and would be reported and prevented even without a law against all corporal punishment or spanking in particular.
Also, the practice has ancient origins and tons of positive results, so those who really believe in spanking and see it works on their kid, will not give it up. The law is useless.

On the contrary, the law's existence may cause trouble to happy families or even break them, because children are not capable of considering/understanding the full consequenses of their actions and can now report their parents for giving an appropriate spanking or milder corporal punishment for a good reason. They're children; they do stuff to see what happens and they push their boundries for the fun of it – they don't necessarely feel abused or seek any real revenge. The law just gives them another possibility to cause serious trouble by being brats. Also the law enables an anti-spanker neighbour to break a happy family by reporting a pro-spanking family even if the children don't suffer of it and don't want to be seperated or any trouble for their parents. Also, those who do spank their child in abusive way, will now try to covert it, making it that much harder to be revealed than it was when they thought they could do it rather openly. The law is harmful.

These studies were not made to encourage people to CP their children, but to point out that the law against it is not justified.

Here, let me point out quotes from this…
article on recent researches:

"Gunnoe’s findings, announced this week: “The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data.”

Those who were physically disciplined performed better than those who weren’t in a whole series of categories, including school grades, an optimistic outlook on life, the willingness to perform volunteer work, and the ambition to attend college, Gunnoe found. And they performed no worse than those who weren’t spanked in areas like early sexual activity, getting into fights, and becoming depressed. She found little difference between the sexes or races."

"Another study published in the Akron Law Review last year examined criminal records and found that children raised where a legal ban on parental corporal punishment is in effect are much more likely to be involved in crime."

"Since the spanking ban, child abuse rates in Sweden have exploded over 500 percent, according to police reports. Even just one year after the ban took effect, and after a massive government public education campaign, Fuller found that “not only were Swedish parents resorting to pushing, grabbing, and shoving more than U.S. parents, but they were also beating their children twice as often.”

After a decade of the ban, “rates of physical child abuse in Sweden had risen to three times the U.S. rate” and “from 1979 to 1994, Swedish children under seven endured an almost six-fold increase in physical abuse,” Fuller’s analysis revealed."

"“Swedish teen violence skyrocketed in the early 1990s, when children that had grown up entirely under the spanking ban first became teenagers,” Fuller noted. “Preadolescents and teenagers under fifteen started becoming even more violent toward their peers. By 1994, the number of youth criminal assaults had increased by six times the 1984 rate.”"

"Gunnoe’s findings are being largely ignored by the U.S. media, but made a splash in British newspapers. It is not the first time her work has been bypassed by the press. Her 1997 work showing that customary spanking reduced aggression also went largely unreported."

"Nor is she alone in her conclusions. Dr. Diana Baumrind of the University of California, Berkeley and her teams of professional researchers over a decade conducted what is considered the most extensive and methodologically thorough child development study yet done. They examined 164 families, tracking their children from age four to 14. Baumrind found that spanking can be helpful in certain contexts and discovered “no evidence for unique detrimental effects of normative physical punishment.”"

"She also found that children who were never spanked tended to have behavioral problems, and were not more competent than their peers.

As in climate change, politicians all over the world seem out of touch with the most rigorous science regarding parental discipline. The newest research could constitute powerful ammunition to parents rights activists seeking to reverse the global trend of intrusive governments muscling themselves between the rod and the child."

Now, do you STILL have the nerve to claim that anti-spanking law prevents child abuse, spanking is nothing but harmful and prohibtion law ís the right way to go?

In some countries the law isn't even enforced justly. So the law evidently exists only because powerful people who are wrong, love they just LOVE their power! I mean, not only do they keep the law up though barely anything gets reported, and judge the reported in utterly unjust way, but also - those new pro-studies have not been regarded by the goverments. You see why this law has been called "blanket injunction", and that's exactly what it is propably in all countries with a ban. Add to this the revealations of the recent pro-spanking studies. THE LAW IS RIDICULOUS!

So yay for countries who keep telling off those silly old "childrens' rights" activists with their prohibition desires, who obviously have no interest in children's welfare. If they did, they wouldn't demand goverments to prohibit corporal punishment just because it sounds nice, but instead they would demand them to work on their child protection services.

EDITION ON 27/5/2012:
The reason why some children suffer actual abuse was and still is the disfunction of child protection services and lack of education for parents.
There was no call for a cp-prohibition law that could never work as anything but a blanket injunction. And by being that, it's also distracting the world's high and mighty from approaching the actual problem through actually effective way.

As in, now it's like "Oh, we don't need to throw money, energy and time into improving our child protection services because we have this brillilantly costless (or at least cheaper) prohibition law!!!11 YAY!!!11"
Hell. NO.
The law is doing nothing in the big picture, the key is the child protection services' quality and in education campaigns.

---> There are statistics on rates of child mortality by abuse.
Some countries that don't prohibit cp of children, have lower rate than those with the prohibition law. In other cases it's the other way around. This goes proving that this ridiculous cp-prohibbition law does NOT affect child wellfare, at all. It depends on child protection services and educational campaigns.

But of course the goverments have and are going to ignore that factual proof and tons of other just like it, because:
- Money rules the world.
- It's all about power with human beings.
- Trends are prefered over sense.
- Believing in fantasy is easier than facing reality.

Thank higher power for cultural differences. Like France not going for this law at all, Britain staying away from prohibition stage, and Finland signing in with the law but failing to carry it out in numerous ways. Like even after 30 years large number of children didn't even know that they've had new rights.

I mean, I'm convinced that less children would suffer and die if that blanket injunction of a law did not exsist to blind people from seeing where the real problems lie. But seeing to the cultural situation described in the above paragraph, maybe this world isn't completely doomed.

Here's why else the law is ridiculous:


I'm fully aware that any kind of hitting is technically classified as abuse. But we must think further than that and in a more complex way when the question is about discipline and something so crucial as what becomes of an individual human being. In those matters nothing should be thought of in a black-and-white manner.

Spanking or any corporal punishment should not be the right of anyone but a child's parent or guardian who have the most intimate relationship with the child and most authority over him/her anyway. Which is likely why it was at one point banned from schools but allowed at home. And it should be common sense that spanking should not be the first solution because we should not want to hit those we love. As in, we should first try other methods.

'To hit' is the base from which the words 'to beat' and 'to scmak' branch from, yet because there are those different definitons there is a fine line between what they are in practical level and thus thinkin all hitting is equally bad seems somewhat black-and-white thinking. They're both hitting but have a different affect, physically and through that mentally. Beating someone with a fist has a much angrier tone and feel to it than smacking the person, and it's also far more potential to cause serious injury than a smack is. Thus whereas both can be classified as abuse on practical terms, they are NOT exactly the same thing.

And when we take this to the extent of beating a child with a fist in the face or with an object all over his/her body VS. taking a child over one's knee and smackin their butt with an open hand...Those two are NOT The same thing. Also the first mentioned can never be done out of love, whereas the last mentioned can.

There was a time when spanking was delievered on the back (too) but eventually it became more traditional to be only on the buttlocks in order to avoid serious injury.

In those senses there is a fine line between spanking and abuse..

"Modern psychology imagines itself superior to tried-n-true ancient wisdom when advoating to painless child-rearing. They "cleverly" overlook the numerous benefits of teaching children to associate pain with wrongdoing.

The following film clip demonstrates the use of spanking in the wrong way followed by the right way.

Please note:
1.) The boy's father stands up for his son's right to fair treatment.
2.) The boy recognizes that his father loves and respects him.
3.) The boy knows his father punished him justly."


I was spanked as a very young child (3 or 4 years old), by my parents, but I'm emotionally and physically totally OK and love my parents to bits. And for centuries spanking children at home was allowed yet the world is not full of emotionally crippled, abusive, drunken or disturbed people who claim their problems sourcing from childhood spankings. How could this be if spanking was oh-so-traumatizing, harmful and useless for every human being? The answer: because there IS a way to spank a child without emotionally abusing them or causeing them emotional problems, but on the contrary do the child good.

So, seriosuly; it's not the spanking that is a problem. It's the way some people do it.

Some argue 'you tell your child not to hit people and yet you hit your child (if he/she hits people)'...

...I do see where that's coming from but again here comes the cruciality of explaining to your child that the world is not a black-and-white place, the society doesn't work in a black-and-white way. That a legal authority figure - the parent - to give a spanking as a punishment for a wrongdoing that could harm the child or his/her future (as in do an act of protection, 'tough love'), is not the same as to go around hitting people just because you're angry for not getting your way at the playground (as in to do an act of selfish violence.)

Naturally, chidren of just any age could not possibly understand such things so it would be pointless to explain them to them, which is why, first of all, you should not spank a 2-year old or so but wait until the child'sstarted to understand the concept of right and wrong and show signs of knowing when he/she has done wrong.

And I doubt there is a child who hsan't been hit by another child once or twice in their young life. So they know how it feels, and if the parent hits in a spanking manner appropriately and with love, it does not feel the same. Hence, there's a different feel to a thing done with love than it done with pure anger. And it makes a difference in emotional level. If a child is incapable of feeling a difference between tones of voice or touch, or incapable of feeling love where it exists, he or she may have some emotional disabilities and have more troubles in life. (No offense intended to anyone.)

Let's also remark that the first thing that happens to a human being only seconds after birth, is being hit. So that we would breathe. ← Point when combined to how billions of children been spanked are not messed up: Not all hitting is of evil. Not all tears are of evil. Which means that not all pain is of evil.

But regardless of what's done to a new-born, it is NOT reasonable to smack an infant! Seriously, I heard someone has spanked (more or less) her 6-months old infant and I say that is insanity. A new-born was hit to make him/her breathe - there was no other way, and it happened at the moment when it did not yet have much sense of physical existence thus it didn't negatively affect it. But from that moment on, no hitting a living creature who has not yet developed a sense of self nor ability to understand!

I think customary spanking becomes abuse only if used on children way too young (such as infants), too often (like daily), or for minor offenses. But then, those kind of uses would no longer even be normative and reasonable spanking. And normative, reasonable spanking is all I'm supporting with all this. And against those kind of unreasonable, as in abusive levels we alredy had laws for. A prohibition was not needed.

In a matter such as this that is utterly individual all the way to the results of which most proven positive, people shouldn't put their personal feelings into a law and robb other people off the right to openly ptactice their own personal feelings and belief. Spanking is not like stealing or killing which practices can have only negative consequences.

I've always loved United Kingdom as a country and culture. Them not trying to force everyone to believe in modern psychology but instead sticking to the respect of individuality and the rights to practice ancient wisdom if an individual so wishes, makes me love the country and culture all the more. Not to mention that UK recognized and spread those highly important recent researches all over their newspapers. Even if currently UK considers only very mild spanking/cp legal, the point is it at least is legal instead of prohibited. UK is trying to be constructive and remains respctive to family affairs and more or less to individuality. I think they're a good example to the world although I may not view the matter exactly their way.

Now follows my personal views and beliefs that goverments around the world currently may or may not agree with:


Over-the-knee, yes, as the position creates the most sense of security in every way as it passes also the warmth and some degree of gentelness from the parent to the child, instead of just the firmness and pain. Also, there's a lot of physical abuse in life done out of hatred for no good reason that happens in relatively distant contact with the person who hits you, so the close physical contact as an entity when spanked with love for a protective/educational purpose, is important.

As for baring the bottom, I would not say 'should' because it's not as if everything depended on that. But would not prohibit it either unlike many would, claiming that it would embarass/humiliate the child. Generally spoken, a child under 11-12 probably won't think of it as embarrassing because they don't have the sense of or as deeply rooted mindset about nudity as preteens and teenagers do. In fact, in a NORMAL parent/child relationship that nudity theme should not be an issue anyway because no child/pre-teen/teen should be thinking about it in any sexual manner when the spanker is his/her parent.

As for baring the bottom being humiliating for a child? I don't think that either when it comes to a child not yet a pre-teen/teen. Because for all I've understood the humiliation sense usually sources from not wishing to be treated like a child. And again, a child under 11-12 usually does feel like a child anyway, sometimes even pre-teens do. Their hormones and mindset haven't yet developed that crucially.

Sexually developed or not, the "rules" of nudity have never said that a parent seeing you naked is embarassing/taboo. Heck, it would be insane if they did; your parent saw you naked when you were born, when they bathed you, when they helped you undress and dress, and when they wiped your butt/between your legs untill you learned to do it yourself... Even after those skills were learned your parents likely have needed you completely or partially naked to take care of an illness or a wound.

As in, in a healthy parent/child relationship any amount of nudity in front of each other should not cause feelings of embarassement, to a child who's too young to associate nudity with anything else but a parental act of caring and is not yet confused with a changing body. A pre-teen or a teen might get embarrased by full nudity because of the confusion with changing body and to some degree because their brain connects nudity with sexuality, but again in a healthy parent/child relationship merely baring the buttlocks should not be embarrassing to a (pre)-teen either. Especially when in the over-the-knee position which I strongly encourage as the only position used, the changing/sexual-themed genital area is not exposed much if at all.

In a normal parent/child relationship a punishment spanking on the bare bottom is an act of parental caring the same as all those others from the past and current times which usually have imprinted into the child's emotional system in the sense that nudity+parent(+touch) is natural and OK, and not embarrassing.

That's why to begin with a bare-bottom spanking should not be a no-no. Just important to remember that your child is an individual and knowing him/her is the key to knowing if baring that butt is harmful or not. Usually it should not be.

So, just make your choice by whatever you think gets the message through without causing bruises or other long-lasting wounds, or psychological damage to your child.

But if the child won't mind, what's the point? See, I said they probably don't mind in a negatively affecting sense. But they prefer clothed because on the bare it will hurt so much more, and thus likely feel it as part of that authority the parent tries to remind them of with the spanking. Hence, you punish your child for a purpose, your child should not get to decide how much it should hurt. And the only reason I can think of for anyone want to spank the bare bottom is exactly that it will sting much more. And that, I think should come relative to the seriousness of the offense; the amount of pain you think is necessary for the child to associate with the offense in question.

With teenagers, I would generally not recommend baring their bottom but only if the offense has been particularly childish. Because I believe a child deserves to be treated whatever age they behave like. If the spanking-worthy offense was a typical teenage bs they pulled, there is no reason to degrade them with a flashback from a childhood. Teenagers after all are seeking independence and often imagine themselves as oh-so-grown-up. But if the spanking-worthy offense was incredibly childish, there is a reason to give that flashback to childhood punishments. Chances are they won't repeat that childish offense when they know it's gonna lead to extremely unpleasent consequence - in other words they actually matured a little inside.

So I would strongly advice using only and only the over-the-knee position even if using belt and no matter what the age of the child, and I generally speaking support the bare-bottom extent but advice to consider it individually because such a detail can not be automatically applied to be good for everyone. Knowing your child is the key while it is important to remember that the main goal should not be the amount of pain and the point of spanking is not to humiliate your child but to redirect and educate them with love and respect.

Which leads me to my final statement: NEVER in front of siblings/their friends/other people in general or so that others can hear it. I mean the spanking as it is. Because human nature is in essence about power and taking control - which is why children who aren't disciplined or have weak parents end up becoming tyrants in the household, in worst cases to the extent of kicking their parents if they don't do what the child demands. ("Nanny 911" anyone?)

So, a human of age at which he/she has reached somewhat developed sense of self (which starts forming at as early as the age of 1,5 years) will start desiring power, and thus does feel humiliated if others wittness them crying and squirming in extremely submissive situation - especially if it's about punishment. Even knowing that others may receive the same treatment does not make a difference. It's bad enough that others will find out about it by noticing the discomfort of sitting down. Hence my point that spanking should not be about humiliating but of teaching with love and respect.
Add a Comment:
shark235 Featured By Owner Edited Jan 22, 2016  New Deviant Hobbyist Traditional Artist
And about the part on kids and nudity kids start developing modesty at the age of five or six, but increase at puberty.…
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Jan 23, 2016
Even if, a child that minds their parent seeing that stuff is rare - before puberty when the body starts to go through changes and causing confusion.
shark235 Featured By Owner Jan 23, 2016  New Deviant Hobbyist Traditional Artist
That's why by puberty spank on the butt should be illegal.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2016
I disagree. That'd be overkill and utterly unconstructive, in my opinion.
Chances are most parents don't pull down their teenage kids pants, at least not all pants. And those who constantly do even if their child clerly opposes to it, likely have also other questionable parenting techniques and with them run into problems with the law anyway. They would be better off attending parenting classes and being educated on how to do what they need to do without causing unnecessary mental distress to the child.

I see no need or sense to illegalize an entire practice that is not harmful in itself. Prohibitions and illegalizations of matters that are strictly tied to individual beliefs and needs, is never the best way to go. I consider doing so to be incredibly arrogant and narrow-minded. As this kind of laws are basically government people abusing their power, forcing their personal opinions and beliefs on everyone else to follow.

Spanking is not and should not be put in the same category with stealing, rape, murder or other such things that are surely nothing but harmful to anyone.
shark235 Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2016  New Deviant Hobbyist Traditional Artist
shark235 Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2015  New Deviant Hobbyist Traditional Artist
A person who thinks that spanking is abuse.…
Linarel Featured By Owner May 10, 2015
I´m generally against corporal punishments for children.

I was never spanked yet I grew up normal respectful adult.

If my boss cannot spank me as adult for not doing my job, why should children be allowed to spanked. Are children less important than adults then?

Just a thought.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner May 10, 2015
No, it's because they're more important than adults. With what children being the world's future.

If wishing to be state a valid argument, no one should use themselves or any one person as an argument for this topic matter on either side - because every child is an individual.
Also, the relationship (dynamic) & emotional bond between a boss and an employee is utterly and entirely different from that of a parent and their child. I actually can't think of any relationship in the world that could be validly compared to a relationship between a parent and their child. Already in itself, but also because of the very different world views between an adult person and a child.
Linarel Featured By Owner May 10, 2015
I disagree, everybody is important on daily level. In life threatening situations child would more important.

So I will use other examples.

Should it be possible to spank someone who mentally a child despite being officially adult? Why would only age suddenly allow bodily integrity?

Should police be allowed spank people as it is form of punishment?

Where would You draw the line where corporal punishment would be abuse?
"everybody is important on daily level. In life threatening situations child would more important."

Of course everyone is important on daily bases, and I agree about the second statement too. But the topic is about discipline and shaping a person into a decent human being. In my opinion children are more important also in those situations because when everything needes is done when the individual is a child, the chances of certain type of adult life problem situations are minimized.

"Should it be possible to spank someone who mentally a child despite being officially adult?"

No. Because such person would more than likely be so because of a brain injury or birth defect / defelopmental defect, as in be retaeded & often does not develop beyond certain age no matter what. (Retarded is a medical term, not an offensive word.) As in such person is not the same as a genuine child.
A genuine child = a person who is immature but has all the tools for maturing. As in has the capability and capacity to constantly grow his/her understanding & reach new emotional levels and tools for his/her own choices and their consequenses, as well as the world and life in general. And gain better and better memory while maturing.
In short; someone who is to remain ie. a 7-year old for the rest of his/her life would not benefit from corporal discipline because he/she will never mature past that mental and emotional stage and thus would likely end up repeating the offense sooner or later because they remain immature and relatively forgetful.

"Should police be allowed spank people as it is form of punishment?"

No. Because this matter is not simply about an authority figure delievering a punishment for an offense, but also about relationship dynamics and emotional bonds. Again, I refer to my point about a relationship dynamic between two adults being entirely different from that between an adult & child, and especially how I, again, can't think of any relationship in the world that could be compared to that between a parent and their own child.
I would like to put emphasis on that I think this law is ridiculous basically because it prohibits even parents from spanking/corporally dsciplining their own children. I do not support, at all, corporal discipline in schools or by any strangers.

"Where would You draw the line where corporal punishment would be abuse?"

* Dragging/carrying by the hair, or causing bruises, or drawing blood = abuse.
* Corporal punishment in front of or within hearing distance of other people (especially if doing something big, on purpose, and the other people are not close family) = abuse, as there's the intentionally added element of humiliation.
* Corporal punishment already in itsel if used nearly every day = abuse.
* Corporal punishment for even the smallest of offenses = abuse.
Linarel Featured By Owner May 12, 2015
Thank You for reply.

It is nice too some one offer more insight to debate than "I was spanked as child and now I am good citizen" and "who spares the rod spoils the child".
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner May 12, 2015
Yeah, I'd rather debate with valid study/research results done by appropriate professionals, and with my personal beliefs and back them up with real reasoning rather than just parrot someone else's opinion from a story-collection book. :) I mean, in my view, using Bible scripture is just about as pointless as using any one person as an argument. Because a life philosophy/advice from the Bible really is only the opinion or belief of whoever wrote it and they certainly did not do any studies and researches 2000+ years ago.
Plus, that particular one I see actually as the polar opposite of the prohibition trend but equally brainless. The law thinks that completely keeping from corporal discipline is the only right way to go while that Bible philosophy thinks that using it tons is the only right way to go. Both forget the grey areas in between which are very important for individuality and life in general.
chinangel Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2015
but there are many, MANY parents who have proven time and time again they do NOT know how to spank a child properly. Many children have had terrible childhoods and even physical or psychological scars from terrible experiences with it (like myself).

Many, MANY parents simply beat the child as a way of getting through due to anger and frustration, and there is a long history of this.

THAT is why it's against the law; because parents have proven incapable of delivering a spanking that doesn't cross a line.
Mina-Foxkey-Star Featured By Owner Sep 14, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Kids should deserve it if they have been super-duper naughty. I mean really, it's a shame many European countries outlawed spanking. There is truly a DIFFERENCE between a spanking and a beating.
ChippingChart66 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2015
Yes! This should definitely be an example of the adage "no pain, no gain!"
TMNTFAN85 Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
kids have been given too much power these days. whhick leads them to disrespect parents.
ThePersianGod Featured By Owner Aug 24, 2014

Making it illegal to attack people isn't forcing them to go your own way. What you're saying is like "I don't think you're dumb if you're against killing people, but you are dumb if you're for murder being illegal."
QueenMarine Featured By Owner Mar 10, 2014
I think spanking is fine, so long as it's done properly and it's not just a mindless butt-beating
DaBair Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Some kids these days would really need a good old-fashioned spanking.
ChippingChart66 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2015
Yes! Kids need to be as brave as lions rather than yell, "YOWCH! DAT HURTZ!!"
oliska Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2013
Well, I respet your opinion, but I completely disagree with you.
Many pro-spanking parents confused the lack of education with "GENTLE DISCIPLINE" , the fact that parents don't spank doesn't mean they let children do everything they want. I have never been spanked by my parents, and I grew up perfectly fine : I'm responsible and inteligent.

DragonGirl4835 Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I agree completely. Exactly!
I come from a very "country" and "old fashioned" town. Spanking or switches (I was never switched but I know my friends have been) is so common, I can hardly believe some places are against it. Spanking is discipline and every kid needs discipline, fussing is just not going to work all the time. I know I backed out of doing things, knowing I'd get a spanking for it. 
Abuse is one thing, spanking is another. You're not striving to hurt the kid, just to show them what happens when they do something that they're not supposed to.  
SailorStarMiracle Featured By Owner Sep 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
FINALLY SOMEONE MAKES THE POINT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO. I plan to spank my kids when I have them because it worked on me. Yes I do have depression but it has nothing to do with punishments I deserved. Hell, my ex has spanked me a few times and I'm almost 17! I asked him to, but I felt I needed it. Yes I still feel that way sometimes. Back to my point. The closest thing to spanking I planned to get to before 4/5 was maybe a smack on the hand if they kept trying to touch/grab something that they knew they weren't supposed to. (And when they're older, in the joking "don't touch the food I'm cooking!" way, or just jokingly threaten to) As they would get older I would slightly increase how harsh the spanking would be, so they know that as they get older, the punishments will get "worse" (in their eyes) and they'd behave. What I would do first if saying "no" or whatever is needed for the situation, I'd threaten to. They still don't listen, I swat them. They keep at it, they've earned a good spanking. And I'd never do it if I didn't think it was needed. I will admit I got a lot of spankings from my mother's husband, who unfortunately is legally and genetically my father *shudders*, but he's a complete ass and should've have been allowed to "father" children. Sure he was nice to my sister but not me. He mostly yelled at me for nothing. The "punishments" I got from him, mixed with a lack of love/care being shown from him and bullying, is what kickstarted my depression. When my mom did it, I knew I did something wrong and was being punished. Whe her husband did it, (at the time I was too young to really understand what abuse was and that might possibly be what he's done to me) I just thought he hated me and always tried to think of what I did wrong, and only once or twice that I can remember I actually did something to get in trouble for. I apologize that this sorta goes everywhere, my mind works like that.
MarpMarps17 Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Law against Spanking? PFFFBBBTTT HELL NO. tell my mom that she used le fucking cane!
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013
It's usually against all corporal punishment what-so-ever, no matter how mild and little, the goverment might be freaking out on you if found out.
MarpMarps17 Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013
Well, I see you're from United States. This law doesn't currently exist in USA in any way. Not for home life, school nor penal system.
This site is very helpful in finding out where and how this law exists...And I daresay it keeps itself up-to-date pretty well.

And that site makes me nearly want to cry in desperation.
Fortunately 2/3 of the world seems to still be in its senses enough to let reasonable cp be practiced at home, as in not going along with that idiotic outlawing fantasy-trend...But that site in general is just...GOOD GOD someone should perform a brain surgery on those people who REALLY think that universal cp prohibition would lead to a perfect world where children grow up happy and succesful or that such prohibition is a solution to anything. (And note, we are talking about a prohibition of any and all corporal punishment, not just spanking. Although, I do think spanking is the least harmful form of cp when done reasonably and appropriately.)
I mean, those people don't pay attention to thorough and professionally conducted studies when they provide proof against their beliefs and even less attention to statistics that prove that their prohibition view and dream indeed is nothing but a fantasy with zero reality base what-so-ever!!!
I can just hear them saying to each other "Fuck professional child psychology! Fuck scientific statistics! What do they know, how could people studying children's development and psychology and comparing real life situation get anything right? OUR PERSONAL BELIEF AND FANTASY IS SOOO MUCH MORE PLEASENT THEREFORE IT MUST BE RIGHT AND THE ONLY WAY TO GO!!!!11"

..........If there is a God, this law trend will some day blow over and be gone, as in the goverments realize what a load of horseshit it is and always was AND start working on the real problems.

I'm sorry if your mother used a cane, I personally don't support such impliments. Even belts I would discourage although wouldn't judge if used, 'cause they're less likely to cause injuries. I would never use any impliments on my children.
MarpMarps17 Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
<---- has major pain and spanking fetish, and incredibly high pain tolerance

And this is why when I have any damn money Imma move to Russia
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2013
Okay then. It's just that most people who leave comments like that on this stamp/topic did not enjoy spankings as a child, so I assumed you're among them.
MarpMarps17 Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
oh HA no I am not one of them
Donakiko Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
I was never spanked before, honestly my mum saying that she was disappointed in me or even just raising her voice was enough to put me in near tears when I was younger. I didn't know there was a law against it though.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2013
Well, as I think I stated in the beginning of the author's comments, it's not actually simply against stpanking but any and all corporal punishment what-so-ever. (I chose to talk about spanking specifically because it's the one part of CP that is highly debated.)

I read somewhere that in some country it's actually illegal to take your child by the hand and force him to walk somewhere he/she doesn't want to. I'm not sure how true that was or if it is anymore, but...good grief.
HammedFox Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Meh I think it's just as outdated as corpral punishment in schools.
merpyfrost Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2013  Student Filmographer
You know, I used to be highly averse to corporal punishment, but this has really changed my opinion. Either way, I came in thinking a law like that was ridiculous! I agree; it's their choice, children have different needs, and the government shouldn't take that right away from people! I love everything you've said, because the more I've mulled over it, the more I've discovered you've put my opinion into words. Everything. Your replies to comments, too. You seem very knowledgeable on this topic. I've been to a pro-spanking stamp that alienated the hell out of me; the stamp maker continually insulted and generalized non-spanking parents, was a general bigot, and had that "you don't agree with me, you're an idiot" mindset. Thank you for being a rational person, so I could actually take you seriously.

I think I was probably spanked a bit too early, if I think about it. My mom was never mean or cruel, and always very loving, but it still gives me a really uncomfortable twinge. I did need something to tell me that biting my little brother all over his body was wrong, though. I also have ADD, so it makes me wonder how that was an influence. I know you mentioned that in a comment somewhere, too.

I definitely agree with the idea of love and respect being involved in it, too. Recalling my experiences, there was one time when I'd done something, and when the punishment was over, my mom let me hug her and sit on an ice pack. I really do love my mom. If you're getting on some high horse and using a whip, a belt, or a paddle, it strikes me as sick, more or less. Children should be given a punishment like a spanking with respect, not intimidation.

Thanks for your rant. I'd use the stamp if it were smaller, like this [link] ...
Maybe I'll make a smaller version and link it back to you.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2013
Yeah, I think I mentioned that I think for ADD/ADHD and such children corporal punishment may not be the best way to go because their problems are at least partially medical and not out of atttitude. And therefore I think with them cp should at least be used with even more consideration and so on.

Thank you for the feedback.
And yep, feel free to make a smaller version of this stamp and yes I'd appreciate a link back to me if you do. :)
Rule404 Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
I've actually had a couple therapy sessions because of my parents spanking. It would have been classified as abuse probably, however, my parents were not trying to be abusive. They were trying to discipline. Early in life my mom spanked me a little too high once, and it damaged my kidneys. Permanently. Almost 3 decades later I still enjoy frequent urinary tract infections and kidney infections because of it. The doctor told her she had hit my kidneys, they had damage. So my mom decided to not stop spanking, just spank me lower.

From then on out I was spanked full across my privates. Now whenever I'm intimate with my husband I feel like I'm in trouble. I don't like to be touched at all. We don't cuddle, relations are brief. I'm like the man. Let's get strait to business and get it over with. I didn't trust my mom with my oldest for a long time. She also has Autism, and my mom acted like my child "knew better." Now my mom knows better.

There were other things, though. She didn't always mind where the buckle was on the belt. There would be hair pulling, belittling.

My brother was spanked daily growing up. He just seemed to be so out of control. We're both either near or in our 30's now, and in just the past 5-6 years we've both been diagnosed with Autism. No wonder they had no CLUE about what to do. We weren't normal. I mean we made good grades, we talked on time, but we were little freaks of nature. Sad thing is my mom was abused. She didn't end it. My dad also has Autism, but he had absent parents. He didn't get all that.

I don't spank. I refuse. If I were to hit an adult, I would be charged with assault. But I'm allowed to hit a person that can't defend themselves against me? How does that work? But I've also been a teacher before a parent. I've handled classes of 25+ without having to lay a finger on them. Other teachers would send their problems to me cause I have a kickass big girl voice. I scared the shit out of kids. I can make my own cry with a look and one word.

My dad also teaches. He no longer spanks. The last time he did, he noticed the child wasn't upset. He asked him, "Didn't that hurt? Aren't you going to cry?"

"At home my mom spanks me with an iron cord."

That was it for him. My dad's spankings weren't bad. If only he disciplined, I wouldn't be against spanking, honestly. We did something, he immediately gave three swats in the proper not kidney, not private parts area. My mom ritualized it. Made us wait so long sometimes we'd forget why we were being beaten. We'd get spankings 12 hours after the fact in the middle of cartoons the next morning. I found out just a few years ago he didn't realize how my mom disciplined. He's Autistic, and like many, like me, he went off on his own a lot. Just in his own world, leaving mom to deal with us. I'm sure it was a lot on her, and I think she may even have some sort of anxiety disorder.

Anyway, that's my two cents on it. I'm not going to judge others because I'm sure many others do it right. Immediate, not too hard, not in anger, not in the wrong place, spankings. I wouldn't spank, though. I'm ending my mom's family's cycle of abuse.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2013
Thank you for sharing. That is a very interesting and tragic life walk you come from, and I can totally respect your choices.

"I don't spank. I refuse. If I were to hit an adult, I would be charged with assault. But I'm allowed to hit a person that can't defend themselves against me? How does that work?"

That is an age old anti-cp argument, and my answer as for how does that work, is this:

There's a very significant difference in the relationship dynamic and emotional interraction between a parent and his/her child, compared to those between two independent adults. The same difference is likely also the reason why physically disciplining someone else's child is considered an assault and likely to cause emotional trauma where the same discipline from one's parent would not.

And, children are living with an entirely different mind-set on pretty much everything, than adults. They interpret and handle things in their very own way.

As in, the way I see it is that while children are physically defensless against adults, their emotional life and mind-set being entirely different from those of an adult's makes them perfectly able to survive a and very possibly even benefit from an appropriately and reasonably done corporal discipline. And again, it coming from the people with the most intimate relationship with the child and not from someone else, is of course also crucial.

Now, that was my view of the matter in general.
As in I of course acknowledge that not all children respond the same way to things, some kids may be much more sensitive to stuff than others, that's why I've kept putting emphasis on that a parent should know their child before resorting to use of corporal discipline (and have the first time be mild.)
And, of course there are those with special needs and problems, such as the said autism, or ADD/ADHD or other such emotional/development disorders. Those children naturally might not benefit from the same things than an average child would, in fact cp would likely be useless on them and in a long-run cause emotional damage. This leads me back to knowing your child before resorting to any extreme up-bringing methods.

But of course, all loving parents can only do the best they can with the knowledge they have and are capable of collecting.

"But I've also been a teacher before a parent. I've handled classes of 25+ without having to lay a finger on them. Other teachers would send their problems to me cause I have a kickass big girl voice. I scared the shit out of kids. I can make my own cry with a look and one word."

Please believe me, I do not mean to judge you or anything. At this point I'd only wish to remind people that anything can be over-done, not just physical things - and that intense emotional discipline can cause the same emotional distress and damage than corporal discipline. The last mentioned is simply including also temporary physical marks.
GoreyPsychoChick Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
I actually agree, and my mother would spank me sometimes when I was younger if I disobeyed. Taking away privilages didn't seem to work for me.
I was born during the late 1990's, when spanking wasn't against the law, and I didn't like getting spanked, but it DID teach me to behave, and I do like THAT.
You probably expected me to disagree, especially since I've been spanked before, but no. It taught me to behave, and ever since it became a law to NOT spank children, I've had trouble behaving/focusing. I honestly think this law is ridiculous. Child abuse is if you're BEATING your child and leaving cuts and bruises on them. Spanking just leans a red hand print on your butt that stings for a bit and eventually goes away, and it helps kids teach a lesson that isn't too hard to bear.
I hope I explained myself good enough.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2013
You did. Thank you. :)

I should try and count how many have so far agreed and disagreed. Maybe some day. =P
GoreyPsychoChick Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
You're welcome. :)

LOL Okay. XD
BisexualMarshMallow Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2013  Student Digital Artist
I don't agree with spanking. I think it's cop-out when teaching kids that they're in the wrong. It's lazy parenting, to me.

What my mom did with me when I was bad was take away my privileges. Drawings on the walls? Time out and then take away the crayons and markers. Break something expensive? Take away a toy. Hit my sister? Time out, and no TV for a week.

It's easy to hit. It's harder to teach.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2013
Spanking is teaching. Just in an intense and tough level which is why, in my opinion, it shouldn't be used easily or too often. But rather as a last resort if all else fails, or if the child responds to it the best then perhaps after a really dangerous stunt they've pulled.
And I think people should keep in mind that spanking does not automatically mean a minutes long, hard one, but it can be a quick and mild one and still work as wished.

I think people should also remember that the law in debate here is prohibiting any and all corporal punishment whatsoever.
And I'm sorry but that's just not realistic path when it comes to the human nature as it is, and child psychology, and all the different unique little souls that come to this world to be raised.

Plus, one of my main points in calling this law ridiculous is that it doesn't even solve anything, because:

- it blinds people from seeing that the actual problem is disfunctional child protection services and lack of educational programmes. (Should be common sense but has also been proven by statistics comparing countries with and without the prohibition law. But apparently this doesn't matter to goverments.)

- it's sometimes taken to ridiculous degrees, (in some country you would get in trouble if you took your child by the hand and forced him/her to go where he/she refuses to go.)

- Generally it's just not executed fairly. Hence the example I gave from my country.

So, to me it seems the law exists for three reasons:

1.) Children's Rights activists prefer to believe in fantasy rather than in realism, ignoring screaming evidence or even proof of that they're wrong. Others too, but that group started it in this case.

2.) People are slaves to trends, this one being the kind for goverments.

3.) Generally speaking, humans desire power and if they have it, they're not easily letting it go by admitting that they're wrong, even if they're proven the current way is harmful and useless. (This is also why hitting the climate change at its worst is unavoidable. It can only be delayed.)

Again, I'm not saying everyone should cp their children, and I'm not saying that it would be the ultimate best way to go. Just that appropriately done it's not harmful, can be useful, may be needed with some kids, and should not be prohibited. And that fuck the ill-motived prohibition law that is not really solving anything, is probably causing harm, and is causing people to ignore the real problems.
NightshadeLies Featured By Owner Dec 17, 2012
I completely agree. I do think that the laws should be a bit more clear on what is considered abuse and what is corporal punishment. Some people are just too extreme.
CaptainRouge Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012  Student Writer
I understand your point of view, but I also understand the reason for making the law- there are some times when it has gone farther than abuse. There was a criminal case in Missouri in which a father beat his three year old with a belt as a 'spanking' but took it WAY too far- the boy ended up dying, and most of the fat on his body was liquidated.

I get that this was only one instant, and that normally this doesn't happen. I'm not taking sides, just saying I understand the reasoning behind the law.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Dec 5, 2012
I understand your view, but I must disagree. Especially as the law prohibits any corporal punishment level what-so-ever - even the slightest - and not just spanking.

I think cases like that of which you told, simply call for fixing the local child protection services' functioning. After all, cases that severe do not come out of the blue, they just can't happen without clear warnings. Seriously, I had chills go up and down my spine when you described the child's body (and of course the fact that he'd died.) I mean, that's not just unreasonable, accidentally out-of-hands parenting. No. That's sick. No one takes it that far without having some serious mental issues. I mean, chances are that the father had earlier shown serious self-control problems and/or an alarming lack of ability to consider where to draw a line. And thus, the dicipline method wasn't to blame but the people around the family who didn't make sure the child would be safe.

So I think that cases like that are the poorest argument in defense of the CP prohibition law, because those sad cases aren't happening by normal parents, and therefore the practice isn't universally bad unlike stealing or other such prohibition outlawed practices that any avarage Joe in their right mind could do and is doing.
And the much better way to go about preventing those abuse cases is to pay attention before the worst happens and raise awerness, and of course report to child protection services.

No one needs a prohibition law to be able of doing all that.

But that's of course only my opinion.

Thank you so much for the comment! :)
PegasusFantasy2000 Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
There is a "proper" way to spank a child. A lot of parents just do it wrong and sometimes it turns into an abusive situation.

I'm not against spanking; I actually think sometimes a child needs it. But I don't condone spanking a child for every little thing.

Anyway, good rant!
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012
Thanks! :)
neko-neko-nyan Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2012
i think that the law is a veary well put law, yes parents have a right to do this, but it ocmes with a price, Almost anyone i know that was spanked as a punishment is a bully, has a low self estem, cant speak up for themselves, or has paranoia, this law has a well writen place.
BenDaImmortal Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2012
I must disagree. Those mentioned problems are far too deep to be blamed on a simple punsihment method in itself. Those problems source from emotional interraction gone wrong, values taught gone wrong, and home life issues all in all, and paranooia possibly from life experiences that have nothing to do with home life. If cp/spanking has anything to do with those problems, it's because the parent delievered it the wrong way.

Please don't let the concept of a law blind you from the real causes. Corporal punishment is not the be-all-end-all of anything, therefore it shouldn't be treated as if it was an invention from hell that causes every problem in a child's soul life, any more than as a miracle cure. Because it's neither. It's simply something that's harmless and can be useful when delievered approriately and within reason as the most professional and through studies have shown, in addition to what history has shown. The prohibition law is ridiculous and unjustified.
neko-neko-nyan Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2012
They had a veary well life besides spanking as punishment, and wernt picked on. I turned out fine, no spanking as punishment, try using things like grounding or privliges being taken away. Spanking only leads to hate, tharipist, and other stuff.
Add a Comment:

:iconbendaimmortal: More from BenDaImmortal


Submitted on
September 25, 2011
Image Size
19.0 KB


6,283 (1 today)
121 (who?)