to Peter Jh

"Learned domestic violence" from getting a whack in the shed ?

Well the current crop of secondary and primary schoolers were pretty much brought up in the 'no smacking/don't say NO' miellieu and look at the fantastic result. Assaults against teachers and violent disrespect at an all time high. (according to teachers)

Lack of respect for authority, willingness to try to king hit a teacher of foul mouth him/her with impugnity.. except probably as South Park indicated in Team America that if Kim Jong Ill will not cease his Nuclear program "Our president will write you a strongly worded letter !" there !...take that. Thats about the strength of school discipline these days.

So, we have a generation of teenagers which include many who are confused, assertive unstable and violent.

I lived in fear of Mr Lee at secondary and '6 of the best'...but only fear of doing WRONG... The pain to the hand was quite sobering on the mind, and heck.. I don't recall ever being willing to be 'violent' to others except in cases of defending them from predators or thugs. I never even hated Mr Lee. The only time I resented it was when I got it and was innocent.

Punishment from Authority figures, when rightly administered to those who KNOW they will 'get it' if they play up.. does NOT re-inforce 'violence as a solution to disputes' it reinforces the fear of doing wrong, and rightly so.

Your argument falls in a total heap, when we consider that our ultimate social sanction is..FORCE and VIOLENCE administered by the Police force against those who refuse to comply with socially acceptable behavior and embark on armed robberies, Rapes, assaults and other crimes.

The presupposition underpinning your argument is flawed, on both a theoretical and experiential level, it just makes a good sound bite "Don't resolve disputes with violence" is probably one of the shallowest, slogunist, incomplete and biased statements that has gained currency in todays misguided social faculties.

Earlier in the year, the NonTeritory government unleashed seven hard-core socialist, GFN into the school community. They were brought up from down south. They were given political schooling in house at NT gov, and then released with the disguise of being 'school councillors'. There task is to 'help' the kids who are suffering under Labors 'Bring back the biff' regime in schools. The kiddies are to be brought in and debreifed until they are turned to Labor, after which school will be much easier for them.

I wonder if people are satisfied with this strong-arm tactic of the state agaisnt our kiddies. Are the parents? Or would it be best left to the 'expert' political officers of the Left who are the NTG. Should teaching by teachers be banned, in that case? Should we adults all volunteer to go to the countryside?

Is the NT becoming a nanny state? ala Singapore. The NTG announced last week (Demanded) that the NT become more like Singapore, so perhaps it is all coming true.

Boys need diversions and most do not have fathers.

They do not have diversions readily available to get rid of energy and to test themselves and risk-take in reasonably safe ways.

Boys are also victimised and sledged by some zealots and professional whingers in the community. To take an example, if a few young boys on cycles appear in a park they are immediately regarded with suspicion by any thirty something year old woman nearby. That is because the lie that boys are somehow dangerous has been spread by the lesbian dominated feminist movement.

However, boys also have absent fathers. Even where their father is at home, he more likely to be surfing the Net than engaging in activities of interest to his son.

I strongly disagree that boys were well served by their fathers in the post WW2 years. I very strongly disagree that the solution is more work and more beltings. I very very strongly disagree that boys should be coerced into the unthinking obedience and kow towing to authority that the RSL and other authoritarians see as a solution for everything.

It is simple really:

- boys need to be validated as boys by society and we should never allow ratbag radical feminists to demonise them though the media and through a skewed school curriculum;

- boys need their dads to take and interest and do something with them. They should also join them up with the local Scouts where they can take advantage of an outdoor adventure program under good supervision;

- boys are vulnerable and need an arm around the shoulder from older youths and men, which is regrettably uncommon in a society where the family and the extended family are being dumped on and destroyed through social change that has been implemented without any attempt at community consultation and consensus.

Boys are the canaries who are showing us through their frequency of suicide, depression and withdrawal that all is not well in the community. Blaming and belting them is just more of victimising the victim that we see in politics these days.

I don't think Peter was saying that we should belt anyone regardless. Just that some careful rethinking of this idea might be needed, making sure that kids and adults were protected.

I am cautious about saying "it's all the fault of the feminists" - the Muslims, the Christians,or of anyone, really.

It is true that boys are scary for many teachers and many parents and their boisterous energy frightens people into blaming them, suspending them and expelling them.
Years ago a boy got the cane for misbehaviour. If used in moderation, yes some harm was done on occasions, especially at the hands of sadistic teachers.

Today a boy who misbehaves is suspended and expelled from school. Permanently. And he learns no more at school and is kicked onto the street. Is he better off with this approach?

Likewise, parents are scared of giving a kid a very occasional short smack; or putting a child in his room, or doing SOMETHING to tell him (or her) NO.
Instead we have kids out of control. They can go on and on and take drugs, cause crime, and parents don't know how to discipline them.

Can't we find a better way of managing boys' energy? There has to be a better way than what we have at present. Come on, guys, suggest some improvements.

A photo in the newspaper of a police riot squad PRACTISING their routine for the coming summer to cope with drunken teenagers out of control rubbishing the streets, rubbishing other's homes and gatecrashing other's parties.
Teenagers being given enough dole money to leave home after a spat with parents who insist on good behaviour. This was in my family, it happened.
I have seen underage children openly carrying cartons of grog through the streets. Where are the police?
I feel sorry for these young people, by the time they really grow up, they are going to be dead beats, alcoholics with no future.
It doesn't have to be that way.

Cornflower... you very VERY disagreee with ..? :)

Ok..point taken. Your passion is duly noted.
Lets not misunderstand that 'smacking' or a belting is a substitute for all the things you mentioned. No way. In fact.. if fathers can achieve those things, corporal punishment would seldom be needed. In fact its usually only needed when they are in the 2s and 3s unless exceptional circumstances arise.

Most powers stuggles are worked out when the kids are around 2-3 I feel.

Radical feminists are a sorry bunch.. must be just about the loneliest people in the world.

BONDI PETE.. how are things there as the warmer weather comes ?
any evidence of car loads of thuggish louts cruising looking for trouble yet ? Please keep us informed. If you have any connection with the junior footy/rugby clubs, might be an idea to work out some very effective communications procedures and some basic self defense skills. (Happy to help there if you need) jjjdrmot@yahoo.com.au

GENERAL we need to get away from a number of things in debate.
1/ "If they disagree with me they hate me" Or hate others.
2/ "Just because one course of action is mentioned, it does not mean taken to the extreme or to the exclusion of other means."