Comments | notemily: Writer's Block: Something to cry about

notemily

Writer's Block: Something to cry about

Sep 12, 2010 15:07

abuse, childhood, family, writer's block

Comments 13

arinwolfe September 12 2010, 20:14:09 UTC

Can i link back to this in my own entry on this sort of thing?

notemily September 12 2010, 20:31:38 UTC

of course. thanks for asking :)

flame_song September 12 2010, 21:57:10 UTC

Thanks. This thoughtful entry balances all that wannabe-funny blabbering over "corporal" and "corporeal".

You are totally right, about hitting children in general and your views on the title.
In my work as a psychotherapist, the "or I give you something to cry about" thing plus many other invalidating things to say in order to keep a child from displaying "negative" emotions is about as harmful as the punishment itself.
Who and what can you trust if your own emotional reactions are obviously "inappropriate"?

notemily September 13 2010, 03:57:13 UTC

Thanks for your comment!

My family is the kind where all strong emotion was belittled as over-reacting or being "ridiculous." I'm glad there are psychotherapists such as you who recognize how damaging that can be.

thisficklemob September 12 2010, 22:30:30 UTC

The question was a reasonable question to ask, but the title was incredibly shitty. For one thing, yes, I got the occasional spanking as a child, but my parents never but never would have said such a thing. I think it's the title that conflates corporal punishment and abuse, because they are not the same thing.

Although now that I look it up, it seems that "corporal punishment" = "physical punishment, such as caning or flogging; punishment under law that includes imprisonment and death."

So a swat on the butt that doesn't even hurt maybe isn't corporal punishment at all? So then, yeah, 100% against it. But I'm for locking up certain kinds of criminals.

The question is not specific enough, I think.

notemily September 13 2010, 04:03:13 UTC

Wikipedia says "Corporal punishment is the deliberate infliction of pain as retribution for an offence, or for the purpose of disciplining or reforming a wrongdoer, or to deter attitudes or behaviour deemed unacceptable. The term usually refers to methodically striking the offender with an implement, whether in judicial, domestic, or educational settings." So it covers a wide range of things ( ... )

thisficklemob September 13 2010, 18:22:04 UTC

Also, if the swat on the butt doesn't hurt, what's the point of it? I mean, isn't the point to cause pain, however brief, in order to keep the child from doing the same thing again?

I think it's the message, this was bad, don't do it. Like swatting a dog with a rolled up newspaper (which I don't do, but the same idea). It's not to make it hurt, but to make a point.

I also think "on the butt" is a bad place to hit a kid. I know it's popular, but pulling a kid's pants down in order to deliver punishment just adds humiliation and violation of privacy to the whole ordeal.

Oh, they didn't pull our pants down! Pants stayed up. I think they swatted us on the butt precisely because it wouldn't hurt -- that area padded, no organs, etc. You could accidentally hurt a kid if you smacked them somewhere else.

P.S. thisficklemob September 13 2010, 18:23:13 UTC

I should have said initially, I'm so sorry that you had that experience in childhood. It was wrong. And there's no excuse for it.

bronnyelsp September 13 2010, 08:23:55 UTC

Hi, I'd also like to link back to this. I'm very sorry that they chose a title that triggered you, and very impressed you write so articulately and moderately in the face of it. And I agree with you 100%.

notemily September 13 2010, 17:48:30 UTC

Yes, linking is fine :) Thanks for your comment.

anonymous September 13 2010, 18:01:41 UTC

this this this.
thank you so much. it made me sick to my stomach how many people advocated violence on children in the comments.