Heads up OP, on Windows if you press Windows+Shift+S, it opens the snipping tool which lets you select a portion of your desktop to screenshot. Saves it to your clipboard too.
I've been clutching so hard, the pearls fused into my flesh years ago. I've bankrupted myself buying more pearls, inserted one by one into my clenched fist.
Luckily the mere sight of me - a lurching pearlescent beast with glinting pearls for eyes - causes clams to voluntarily offer their own in reverance, my own unending supply.
The vastvast majority of scientific research proves that hitting children only results in negative outcomes, not only in child development, but it's constantly shown to not reduce the undesired behaviour.
If a child can't be reasoned with for why it's actions were wrong, they can't reason why their loving parent strikes them.
If you choose to ignore what's essentially scientific fact and continue hitting children, then the adage "I was hit as a kid and I turned out okay" might be plain wrong.
Furthermore, suggesting that an action is okay because the child "turned out fine" can be used to justify any objectionable behaviour. "I was molested and I turned out okay, therefore molestation is justifiable". If your child did indeed turn out okay, that is despite you choosing to assault them, as ALL research shows you were in the wrong.
There's more than two choices here for you and your father that don't boil down to logic puzzles or child abuse.
It sounds like his heart was in the right place, but without understanding your mental capabilities.
At that ages, punishments need to be clearly established and actionable. The child is behaving badly, the parent demonstrates "if you keep doing that, you'll lose out on (Xbox, free time, family game night etc etc), then following through. If that fails, then removing the child to isolate for a while. Once they've calmed down, then following through with the aforementioned punishment.
Your father's punishments would probably start working around 9-10 years old according to research.
Finally, the "I got hit and I turned out okay" is terrible logic. That justifies any behaviour that someone can survive through. Just glance at the research to see why smacking is a wholly negative ordeal with no upsides for the child.
I'll start with the wholly negative effects of hitting children, specifically the section on Effects on Behaviour and Development. Time and time again, scientific studies prove there is literally no benefit to hitting children, with only poor outcomes.
My understanding is the most effective means of punishment involve first establishing an environment of rich support and love for the child. Then when there's poor behaviour, short time outs.
You remember that episode of The Simpsons when Bart steals the game cartridge, and what upsets him most is Marge's total loss of attention?
A secondary strong punishment is removal of positives, like revoking video game access etc.
It's hard to critique whatever parents you mention without knowing specifics, but it often comes down to:
Poor follow through, with parents threatening punishment but rarely enacting
Limited positive attention given to the child, likely due to "no time"
Poor communication of reward/punishment system, or poorly established system.
Finally, sometimes children and just little shits with bad temperament. It's vital to understand that countless studies show physical abuse does not result in corrective behaviour, with only negative developmental outcomes.
Smacking children and how it literally has no benefit to the child whatsoever, and makes you a bad parent if you still do it.
I used to be a strong supporter of smacking kids, I even signed a government petition to revoke the NZ anti-smacking bill, but after studying it at uni and then keeping abreast of the research afterwards, it has only negative effects, and yet bad parents still defend it.
Hard to talk about because people get weirdly defensive even when there's NO evidence that smacking kids is either beneficial or effective.
BeReal was a neat idea, you'd get a random notification with a short timer asking to show both cameras. It was meant to cut down on manufactured posting - the random notification to try catch you in more boring times, and the short timer to stop you prettying yourself up.
I guess it was trying to be a more authentic social media, but maybe that doesn't appeal to the Instagram generation.
There was a bizarre transition to "other page" content on Facebook. It realised nobody posts there anymore, and tried to transition to a quasi Reddit. But the content it displays is pure garbage.
threeduck @ threeduck @aussie.zone Posts 6Comments 321Joined 2 yr. ago
Oh it's a reference to a comic strip where the main character runs to a hospital to find his wife has miscarried.
The strip gained infamy for changing the tone of the comic so adruptly. Look up "loss comic".
The joke here is that the shapes represent the different characters in the strip, there's a lot of abstract jokes in the same vein