So I was reading answers to another question about spanking here, and saw the 'best' answer choosen was to spank your kids on the bare bottom. That sounds crazy to me, yes spank the kid if he/she is seriously misbehaving, but why do you have to touch your kids' *** lol, what is wrong with these people? Does one layer of clothing really make much difference when it could be the thin line between good old discipline and potential sexual abuse?
2007-12-12 01:28:03 · 36 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
The "bare" bottom adds humiliation to the punishment and I think that's a miserable way to treat a child.
Under very limited circumstances, a spanking may be necessary, but never humiliation - that's just sick.
2007-12-12 01:40:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 11⤋
Most people who talk about bare bottom spankings on here are perverts/trolls with spanking fetishes. I don't know anyone who actually does that. I do believe that spanking can be necessary for children at a certain age (about 2-5). For a child that young though, the punishment should be right after the fact or else it's ineffective because they have such a short attention span, so taking time to undress them seems pretty stupid. With an older child, I don't think you should be spanking at all because they are old enough to be self conscious about their bodies, plus they should know the rules and listen to you for the most part of you were consistent with discipline from the time they were young. And they're old enough to lose privileges or get grounded. But again, by a certain age it's very humiliating and degrading to smack a child on the bottom, and doing it bare would just be 10 times worse. I agree that it's sick, but that person you're talking about probably was a troll.
2014-11-08 14:54:53 · answer #2 · answered by Hannah 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Bare Bottom Smacking
2016-11-16 13:06:28 · answer #3 · answered by pasely 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have never spanked at all much less bare bottomed. My children (ages 6 and 13) are very well disciplined without ever needing to physically punish them. I'm not passing judgment here, you raise your children the way you see fit. I don't think it's perverted unless you become sexually aroused by spanking your children.
2016-04-08 22:35:33 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's a mixed bag. First, I'm against routine spanking. The standing joke among spankees seems to be that a pair of thick corduroys makes spankings pretty much sensation-free. So bare bottoms are the only sure way to be sure the "message" was gotten across. However, for many parents, moms as well as dads, spanking bare bottoms is just a socially acceptable way of being intimate with one's own kids, bordering on true sadism. But not for all, so it's best not to read too much into it. It obviously is more painful that way. But loss of privileges nearly always works as well and avoids questions of motivation and abuse.
2007-12-12 03:00:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 6⤋
spanking on bare bottom or when with a layer of clothing feel same for the kid, as what is more prominent and effective for the kid's mentality is the kid's instant shock/fear to find out that he/she is going to be spanked this moment. Overall I think parents shouldn't touch the kid's body for punishing purposes until he/she reaches certain maturity like until 13-14 , imean adoloscence. Kid is a person who learns every damn thing in life first-hand. Parent should be a visionary or a kind guardian/guidance rather than a punisher.
2007-12-12 01:38:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
Spanking on the bare bottom is an essential form of punishment for a child. It definitely teaches them a lesson on that they did something wrong and will more then likely never do it again. I plan on spanking my children and no one will tell me that I can't. Even thinking that this is a form of sexual abuse is a complete joke! What planet are you on?
2007-12-12 04:43:03 · answer #7 · answered by Steven R 6 · 14⤊ 4⤋
I agree with the Clinster 120% I got it when I misbehaved as will my kids. it is people like you that make those of us who belive in spaniking have a hard time. FYI it is not sexual assult because the parents don't get pleasure out of spanking their child.
2007-12-12 04:38:47 · answer #8 · answered by beauty_tells_all 3 · 9⤊ 2⤋
Hell yes get your point across bare is best
2014-08-16 01:04:53 · answer #9 · answered by Bill H 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't necessarily agree with spanking on the bare bottom but its not sexual abuse at all. Maybe you need to look up what sexual abuse is.
2007-12-12 01:36:41 · answer #10 · answered by anjelahoy 5 · 9⤊ 2⤋
Smacking children here in the uk is against the law but I was smacked as a child and (mainly my dad funnily enough) would smack my bare bum but he would leave a whole handprint and wouldnt even take his ring off so i would have that imprinted too. I dont personally agree with smacking because it never taught me anything (except to fear and hate my mother and father) and dont agree with smacking on bare skin. Even a thin layer of clothes can lessen the sting. I dont think many people smack their childrens bare bums so they can feel them though. They didnt ban smacking bcoz of worry of sexual abuse they banned it because in some cases it leads to physical abuse (beatings etc).
2007-12-12 02:04:21 · answer #11 · answered by Natz 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋