🔥 Popular | Latest

galexion: absolxguardian: dkpsyhog: biscuit-tornado: I think people forget that most satanic churches are mostly just focused on being nice in all the ways that Christians aren’t Yeah. The Church of Satan proper (which doesn’t let minors join) is actually an atheist-ish activist group mainly about defending the establishment clause. By creating a formal church and borrowing satanic imagery, they get around the “atheism is just a lack of religion” rebuttal. Whenever the government is showing favor to Christianity (it’s always Christianity) by allowing bibles to be distributed at public schools or erecting a 10 commandments display on public land, the Church of Satan roles up. To avoiding violating the constitution, they’d have to allow the satanists to do something similar to the Christians, to show the government isn’t favoring Christianity over other religions. So a satanic bible is passed out with the christian ones. A statue of Bapmophet joins the 10 commandments. The Christian group or church advocating for their displays are usually so afraid of satanism that they back down. 👀 : galexion: absolxguardian: dkpsyhog: biscuit-tornado: I think people forget that most satanic churches are mostly just focused on being nice in all the ways that Christians aren’t Yeah. The Church of Satan proper (which doesn’t let minors join) is actually an atheist-ish activist group mainly about defending the establishment clause. By creating a formal church and borrowing satanic imagery, they get around the “atheism is just a lack of religion” rebuttal. Whenever the government is showing favor to Christianity (it’s always Christianity) by allowing bibles to be distributed at public schools or erecting a 10 commandments display on public land, the Church of Satan roles up. To avoiding violating the constitution, they’d have to allow the satanists to do something similar to the Christians, to show the government isn’t favoring Christianity over other religions. So a satanic bible is passed out with the christian ones. A statue of Bapmophet joins the 10 commandments. The Christian group or church advocating for their displays are usually so afraid of satanism that they back down. 👀

galexion: absolxguardian: dkpsyhog: biscuit-tornado: I think people forget that most satanic churches are mostly just focused on b...

Save
ups-dogs: The Bandanna of Betrayal.The Shawl of Shame.The Horrible Hankie of Hunger.The Do-Rag of Dietary Deprivation and Despair.Upon my arrival at the Patricia Green Winery in Newberg Oregon, I was confronted with a horrific sight that left me with an awful and impossible dilemma; I could either respect the cruel and inexplicable demands of the customer by denying biscuits to their dog Maggie, or I could break their rules and yield to the almost hypnotic, yearning gaze of her pleading eyes as she beseeched me to proffer her daily treats.I considered my options carefully as I looked around to see if anyone was watching. Their wishes were clear, but what harm could *one* biscuit possibly do? What kind of barbaric monster would force their sweet dog to wear a sign around her neck prohibiting treats? How could I possibly be expected to withhold her daily Milk Bone? What had she done to deserve such barbaric treatment? And how many biscuits could I sneak to her without getting busted?Fortunately, my questions were soon answered by the arrival of her owner who graciously explained the reason for this seemingly abusive act. It turns out that the vineyard had been hosting their annual fall wine tasting all week long, and was providing the guests with salami, prosciutto, breads, and various types of gourmet cheeses to be paired with the wines. And in her role as official tasting room mascot, Maggie was allowed to circulate freely amongst the guests, who of course were rendered as powerless as I by her beseeching gaze. The result of their copious offerings of such rich meats and sharp cheeses upon her digestive system are best left to the imagination, and her humans were left with no alternative but to take drastic action in order to prevent Miss Maggie the Manipulative and Malodorous Moocher from rendering the tasting room uninhabitable.Fortunately for her, however, the feeding ban did NOT apply to ordinary dog biscuits, thus leaving me free to be the hero and ease her pangs of hunger on what turned out to be Quadruple Biscuit Friday. All was right with the world once again!By Scott Hodges.: ups-dogs: The Bandanna of Betrayal.The Shawl of Shame.The Horrible Hankie of Hunger.The Do-Rag of Dietary Deprivation and Despair.Upon my arrival at the Patricia Green Winery in Newberg Oregon, I was confronted with a horrific sight that left me with an awful and impossible dilemma; I could either respect the cruel and inexplicable demands of the customer by denying biscuits to their dog Maggie, or I could break their rules and yield to the almost hypnotic, yearning gaze of her pleading eyes as she beseeched me to proffer her daily treats.I considered my options carefully as I looked around to see if anyone was watching. Their wishes were clear, but what harm could *one* biscuit possibly do? What kind of barbaric monster would force their sweet dog to wear a sign around her neck prohibiting treats? How could I possibly be expected to withhold her daily Milk Bone? What had she done to deserve such barbaric treatment? And how many biscuits could I sneak to her without getting busted?Fortunately, my questions were soon answered by the arrival of her owner who graciously explained the reason for this seemingly abusive act. It turns out that the vineyard had been hosting their annual fall wine tasting all week long, and was providing the guests with salami, prosciutto, breads, and various types of gourmet cheeses to be paired with the wines. And in her role as official tasting room mascot, Maggie was allowed to circulate freely amongst the guests, who of course were rendered as powerless as I by her beseeching gaze. The result of their copious offerings of such rich meats and sharp cheeses upon her digestive system are best left to the imagination, and her humans were left with no alternative but to take drastic action in order to prevent Miss Maggie the Manipulative and Malodorous Moocher from rendering the tasting room uninhabitable.Fortunately for her, however, the feeding ban did NOT apply to ordinary dog biscuits, thus leaving me free to be the hero and ease her pangs of hunger on what turned out to be Quadruple Biscuit Friday. All was right with the world once again!By Scott Hodges.

ups-dogs: The Bandanna of Betrayal.The Shawl of Shame.The Horrible Hankie of Hunger.The Do-Rag of Dietary Deprivation and Despair.Upon m...

Save
ups-dogs:On a dark and lonely night in the hills outside of Newberg, Oregon…a forlorn, feeble, famished, freezing, four-legged figure falters slowly towards my truck, trembling gingerly on arthritic limbs in the icy winter air.His grey muzzle and sorrowful eyes tell a sad tale of many years of hunger, pain and despair. A faint and sorrowful whimper emits from his throat as he gazes beseechingly at my bountiful box of biscuits, hoping against hope that I might ease his pangs of hunger and grant him one more night of survival by sharing a small morsel of sustenance with him.My heartstrings taut with compassion, I dig deep into my biscuit box and gently place 4 biscuits into his quivering jowls, praying with all my might that I have arrived in time to prevent his imminent starvation.And then…the magic happens.Like Popeye eating his can of spinach, an incredible transformation suddenly takes place. He is cured! The pain in his limbs is gone! His eyes sparkle! In less than a second, strength and vigor have returned to his formerly weak and malnourished body! In one bound he leaps from the steps of the truck and proceeds to to zoomies all about the yard like a puppy 12 years his junior, his speed turning him into a veritable blur, before running into the house thru his dog door. Through the living room window I see him leap up onto his spot on the couch next to the woodstove, a veritable blizzard of biscuit crumbs flying all over the lap of his human as he chomps happily away at the bounty of goodness that I have bestowed upon him. With tears of joy in my eyes I proceed to drive away, feeling a solemn pride in the knowledge that my generosity has saved this once-suffering dog from what was most certainly an imminent death from starvation. And to those of you who claim that I have merely been bamboozled and bewitched out of biscuits by a canine con artist, I say this; I am a trained professional with years of experience. Do I REALLY look like a guy who could get manipulated out of treats by a mere dog?By Scott Hodges: ups-dogs:On a dark and lonely night in the hills outside of Newberg, Oregon…a forlorn, feeble, famished, freezing, four-legged figure falters slowly towards my truck, trembling gingerly on arthritic limbs in the icy winter air.His grey muzzle and sorrowful eyes tell a sad tale of many years of hunger, pain and despair. A faint and sorrowful whimper emits from his throat as he gazes beseechingly at my bountiful box of biscuits, hoping against hope that I might ease his pangs of hunger and grant him one more night of survival by sharing a small morsel of sustenance with him.My heartstrings taut with compassion, I dig deep into my biscuit box and gently place 4 biscuits into his quivering jowls, praying with all my might that I have arrived in time to prevent his imminent starvation.And then…the magic happens.Like Popeye eating his can of spinach, an incredible transformation suddenly takes place. He is cured! The pain in his limbs is gone! His eyes sparkle! In less than a second, strength and vigor have returned to his formerly weak and malnourished body! In one bound he leaps from the steps of the truck and proceeds to to zoomies all about the yard like a puppy 12 years his junior, his speed turning him into a veritable blur, before running into the house thru his dog door. Through the living room window I see him leap up onto his spot on the couch next to the woodstove, a veritable blizzard of biscuit crumbs flying all over the lap of his human as he chomps happily away at the bounty of goodness that I have bestowed upon him. With tears of joy in my eyes I proceed to drive away, feeling a solemn pride in the knowledge that my generosity has saved this once-suffering dog from what was most certainly an imminent death from starvation. And to those of you who claim that I have merely been bamboozled and bewitched out of biscuits by a canine con artist, I say this; I am a trained professional with years of experience. Do I REALLY look like a guy who could get manipulated out of treats by a mere dog?By Scott Hodges

ups-dogs:On a dark and lonely night in the hills outside of Newberg, Oregon…a forlorn, feeble, famished, freezing, four-legged figure fal...

Save
thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. : thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves.
Save
imfemalewarrior: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. We need to listen to the professionals telling us what is actively harmful to our children and what is actually effective in helping them learn how to grow up and navigate each new stage of their development.  Children are people and you need to Respect them, part of that is learning how to help them and what harms them and not doing the thing that harms them.  -FemaleWarrior, She/They  i think it’s  a societal perversion to acknowledge that hitting your mother, your friend, your grandma if they did something “wrong” is not okay, yet for some strange reason this same correct logic is never used on children the irony is that children are objectively less culpable for their actions than adults yet we use the most violent methods available to “correct” their actions. I find this a disgusting paradox. : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes imfemalewarrior: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. We need to listen to the professionals telling us what is actively harmful to our children and what is actually effective in helping them learn how to grow up and navigate each new stage of their development.  Children are people and you need to Respect them, part of that is learning how to help them and what harms them and not doing the thing that harms them.  -FemaleWarrior, She/They  i think it’s  a societal perversion to acknowledge that hitting your mother, your friend, your grandma if they did something “wrong” is not okay, yet for some strange reason this same correct logic is never used on children the irony is that children are objectively less culpable for their actions than adults yet we use the most violent methods available to “correct” their actions. I find this a disgusting paradox. 
Save
holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid. : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid.
Save
leupagus: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Parents do it because it makes them feel good.  : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes leupagus: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. 
Save
holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid. : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid.
Save
holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid. : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid.
Save
estfortis: holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid. IIRC there was a recent-ish study showing that corporal punishment has similar long term effects as domestic violence and other recognized forms of abuse. : Thread Zachary Fox and 3 others liked A$MR Rocky @ChristianMingel Trained psychologists: "Hitting your kids can cause them to be violent adults" Twitter genius: "l was hit and I never turned out violent. That's why l can't wait to hit my own kids when l get them" 1/4/18, 2:44 PM 19.2K Retweets 55.4K Likes estfortis: holyfuckabear: thebaconsandwichofregret: asexual-not-asexual-detective: Am I the only one who thinks that hitting a kid and abuse are different things? Like, if I ever had a kid, I wouldn’t spank their ass raw or something like that. But a bop on the mouth or the ear pull or a smack upside the head? Yea. Those are behavior modifiers. Except they’re not. The studies done by the trained psychologists in this joke show that little kids don’t associate being hit with the thing they’ve done wrong. Very small children only understand consequences that are directly caused by the thing they did. Steal a biscuit, biscuit tastes good. Then for no reason mummy hit me. Very different to stole a biscuit, now no biscuit after dinner because I stole a biscuit. And they also show that when a child is old enough to understand why they are being hit that non-physical punishment is equally as effective and less mentally harmful in the long run. Do you know who benefits the most from hitting as a punishment? The parent. It gives a satisfaction rush. Parents do it because it makes them feel good. Basically kids have two stages: too young to understand why they are being hit so physical punishment is useless for anything other than teaching a child that bigger stronger people can hit you whenever they like (Which sounds like the same lesson you would learn from abuse) And the second stage is old enough to be reasoned with so many punishment options are available and you chose physical violence because it makes *you* feel better, which is an abusive action. The only time a person should ever use violence against another human being, of any age, is to stop that person from being violent themselves. Hitting a stranger is a crime. Hitting someone small who relies on you for food, love, and shelter should be as well. Don’t hit your fucking kid. IIRC there was a recent-ish study showing that corporal punishment has similar long term effects as domestic violence and other recognized forms of abuse.
Save