Adrian Peterson and the Pearl method of abuse

[Hane]

The worst thing about these horrifying news stories is the comments thread, which is chock-full of CP apologia. It's taught me to stay the HELL out of the comments, which are extremely triggery.

[lemonhead]

The worst thing about these horrifying news stories is the comments thread, which is chock-full of CP apologia. It's taught me to stay the HELL out of the comments, which are extremely triggery.

Me too, I know exactly what you mean. And I try to tell myself that it must be a minority of people who feel that way by now, that surely we are a progressive enough society that CP is falling out of favor...then I read about the studies that show 70-90% of Americans still support CP :cry: it's so discouraging and disheartening.

[ViolaSebastian]

Me too, I know exactly what you mean. And I try to tell myself that it must be a minority of people who feel that way by now, that surely we are a progressive enough society that CP is falling out of favor...then I read about the studies that show 70-90% of Americans still support CP :cry: it's so discouraging and disheartening.

Oh, man. I was thinking CP stood for child porn and was so confused and incensed for a few moments before I realized it was corporal punishment...it's been a long day.

[lemonhead]

Oh, man. I was thinking CP stood for child porn and was so confused and incensed for a few moments before I realized it was corporal punishment...it's been a long day.

Oy :shock: sorry about that!

Either way, CP= bad, but I can understand your confusion!

[Mecca]

Yep, I'm another who broke the cycle without much more than "I will never treat my kids the way my mother treated me." What I don't understand is people who claim not to see anything wrong with the way they we're abused as kids, as though the fact that they're not serial killers means they have good mental health. Or whatever.

It is perplexing, isn't it? I think many just don't want to come to terms that their parents had problems and those issues could have been passed down to them. Just look at some of the comments on this story on various sites. Some of the most aggressive, angry people defending this are the ones that claim to be OK from getting abused. Their tone indicates something different. It is hard to come to terms with the realization of abuse. The people that were suppose to protect us the most ended up hurting us. That can mess with your head.

I am a good person that has been successful in life, but it had nothing to do with my parents. They won't get credit for that. I will not allow it. It had everything to do with me and my will to not let them take away my life and make me into the angry people they were. It was a hard road, but it can be done.

[It'sFunToRun]

Me too, I know exactly what you mean. And I try to tell myself that it must be a minority of people who feel that way by now, that surely we are a progressive enough society that CP is falling out of favor...then I read about the studies that show 70-90% of Americans still support CP :cry: it's so discouraging and disheartening.

Everyone thinks of spanking/hitting or even shoving soap in a kid's mouth when they think of corporal punishment, and I am totally against those.

I have a soft spot for push-ups or running as punishment though, and technically that's also corporal punishment. I don't think I'd use it on my kids, because I don't think it's very effective unless the reason the kid is being "punished" is because they have too much energy, and then it's not "punishment" as much as a method of helping them deal with their energy. Some stupid parents have killed their kids by making them run way too much or in heat or without water, so it can be dangerous if the person applying it is an idiot. It's still my favorite punishment to receive though :)

[Mecca]

The worst thing about these horrifying news stories is the comments thread, which is chock-full of CP apologia. It's taught me to stay the HELL out of the comments, which are extremely triggery.

I agree. I find it disturbing that my same friends and family that were rightfully horrified about the Rice case are seeing the Peterson case different. I have not been shy about taking people to task on their comments. I know people are finding me annoying by my outspoken view on this, but it needs to be said. This is not OK.

[thoughtful]

Colbert weighs in, including more of the totally bizarre Hannity clip:

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/w ... n-peterson

:shock:

[lemonhead]

Colbert weighs in, including more of the totally bizarre Hannity clip:

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/w ... n-peterson

:shock:

I'll see your :shock: and raise you :pink-shock: :pink-shock:

[thoughtful]

I'll see your :shock: and raise you :pink-shock: :pink-shock:

Yeah, if there was ever a person who was a shitty example of "I had the crap beaten out of me and I turned out just great," it's Hannity.

He snaps that belt just like the PP.

[Mama Mia]

Me too, I know exactly what you mean. And I try to tell myself that it must be a minority of people who feel that way by now, that surely we are a progressive enough society that CP is falling out of favor...then I read about the studies that show 70-90% of Americans still support CP :cry: it's so discouraging and disheartening.

But I think part of the problem is that it's all lumped in together. 70-90% of Americans may say

" I have used corporeal punishment on my child" or " I don't think spanking should be illegal" -- but that covers such a huge range.

Everything from the parent who uses other methods 99.9% of the time but has once or twice given a light smack on the hand or covered butt when a kid reaches for the stove or is completely frustrated -- through parents who occasionally use a few light smacks with an open hand as regular method of discipline, to parents who use paddles and belts and it's their main go to method -- through parents who apparently justify drawing blood on a small child as a-ok because culture :roll: .

I think if you lump it all together you're going to continue to get high numbers saying they either support it, or at least understand it. I know in the past we had members here who would absolutely hound anyone who admitted to ever giving so much as a light swat, once, to a kid running into the street - and would berate them for being an abuser.

Plus you have the huge issue, that somehow isn't being discussed in the media as part of this-- that corporeal punishment, with implements, that leaves bruises and injuries, is still legal in public schools in many states. If that's legal in a government sponsored institution it's a big stretch to then say a smack on the hand of a kid reaching for a hot stove by a parent is unacceptable.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I was listening to the radio earlier, and a woman was justifying it thus:

"It's because of what you white people did to us black people during the days of slavery. Whipping our kids is mild compared to what you put us through, so it's not his fault! And when you tell dads to step up and raise their kids, well he's just raising his kid!"

The poor interview person was trying to get in a word edgewise.

I've heard a lot of bad justification for what Peterson did, but blaming his actions on the actions of white people 150 years ago as if the people alive today are the ones who beat, raped, and killed, the black people of today is ludicrous.

Adrian Peterson whipped the hell out of his son. This wasn't a spanking. This was an out-and-out whipping, and there is no justification for it. Anyone trying to make excuses are a part of the problem.

On Love, Joy, Feminism, Libby Anne pulled together some thought-provoking essays.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfem ... nting.html

It looks like both a reaction to racism, and a way of perpetuating racism.

As a white parent, I can point out that my kids are turning out great with no corporal punishment. That's true, but I can't take all the credit personally. They are growing up in a setting where people simply expect them to do well, where they are permitted a certain amount of freedom, where teachers assume that they will get good grades, and where police officers are seen as friendly. It's possible to screw up a bit or have some issues, and still manage to straighten out and do well in life.

I don't worry that teachers will assume that my kids are stupid and lower their expectations or direct them into a lower stream. I don't worry that my kids will get into trouble at school. I don't worry that police will constantly stop my child. I don't worry that innocent activities will trigger violent suspicion. My kids won't get shot while carrying Skittles and wearing a hoddie, or walking in the middle of the road. In my community, the odds of a girl having a baby before graduating high school or a boy going to jail are tiny. So, I have the freedom to relax a bit in my parenting, because the odds are in my favor, and I'm free from overwhelming fear that something bad will happen to my kids if they aren't under perfect control.

At the same time - when a white child who does the same thing as a black child is less likely to be physically punished, that's racism. If kids grow up constantly hearing that their parents fear that they are going to screw up, that's also a sort of internalized racism.

[GeoBQn]

I was talking about this with my dad last night. He was spanked by my grandmother. She would chase him into a narrow hallway where he couldn't escape, then swat his but with an open hand. One time, after he bit his brother, my grandmother shouted, "This is why you don't bite people--see how you like it!" And she bit him on the arm, though not hard enough to leave marks. My dad was laughing while describing this, and said that he wasn't traumatized by the experience (though he probably should have been). And yet, when he had kids and he spanked me and my brother one time, he immediately felt horrible about it and never did it again. We grew up to be productive, law-abiding citizens without corporal punishment.

[Mama Mia]

On Love, Joy, Feminism, Libby Anne pulled together some thought-provoking essays.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfem ... nting.html

It looks like both a reaction to racism, and a way of perpetuating racism.

As a white parent, I can point out that my kids are turning out great with no corporal punishment. That's true, but I can't take all the credit personally. They are growing up in a setting where people simply expect them to do well, where they are permitted a certain amount of freedom, where teachers assume that they will get good grades, and where police officers are seen as friendly. It's possible to screw up a bit or have some issues, and still manage to straighten out and do well in life.

I don't worry that teachers will assume that my kids are stupid and lower their expectations or direct them into a lower stream. I don't worry that my kids will get into trouble at school. I don't worry that police will constantly stop my child. I don't worry that innocent activities will trigger violent suspicion. My kids won't get shot while carrying Skittles and wearing a hoddie, or walking in the middle of the road. In my community, the odds of a girl having a baby before graduating high school or a boy going to jail are tiny. So, I have the freedom to relax a bit in my parenting, because the odds are in my favor, and I'm free from overwhelming fear that something bad will happen to my kids if they aren't under perfect control.

At the same time - when a white child who does the same thing as a black child is less likely to be physically punished, that's racism. If kids grow up constantly hearing that their parents fear that they are going to screw up, that's also a sort of internalized racism.

The cultural justification of continual beating of children is also an idiotic, self-defeating excuse to raise kids who are more likely to be violent and have no internal controls or view of right and wrong that isn't governed by an authority figure.

I was lucky in that I wasn't beat as a child. I didn't beat my kids. But I know soooo many

( primarily) Latino parents who use that same justification that beating their kids is somehow cultural and needed to keep them in line. Yet how many of those kids are in gangs? Yes, a huge part of it is racism and classism, A huge part of the problem is that cops and authority figures target black and brown and poor kids. A huge part of it is that there aren't the opportunities and consequences for black/brown/poor kids are vastly different than those of higher socio-economic status kids- particularly white kids.

BUT -- a huge part of the problem is also that routinely beating your kids teaches them to try to avoid getting caught- not to avoid the activities that got you in trouble, that authority figures aren't there to help you -- you might love them, and know they love you -- but they aren't who you turn to for help if you are in trouble. That a rigid hierarchy that involves violence is a good thing. And that you need someone else other than yourself to enforce " right" and " wrong" . It's stupid and self-defeating.

[Toothfairy]

I'm not against beating your kid if they really need it. Like an older child maybe pre teen teen years beating on their parents or acting like they're grown. I've seen it before. I think for a 4yo, using a switch was un nessasory. At that age a spanking or time out would've been fine. And you should never beat your kids when you're angry.

[thoughtful]

I'm not against beating your kid if they really need it.

Please tell me you are trolling, because I'd prefer that over knowing you are in favor of beating children. Age doesn't enter into it -- nobody should be beaten.

If you really believe this, tell me under what circumstances you think a beating would work better to teach and change behavior than a non-violent solution.

[Mecca]

I'm not against beating your kid if they really need it. Like an older child maybe pre teen teen years beating on their parents or acting like they're grown. I've seen it before. I think for a 4yo, using a switch was un nessasory. At that age a spanking or time out would've been fine. And you should never beat your kids when you're angry.

Are you serious or are you trying to get a raise out of people? Just so we are clear, you should never beat your kids, period.

It is amazing how many try to justify abuse by saying "you should never beat kids when angry." Bull Shit. You will never convince me that hitting your own flesh in blood is not an angry act no matter if you do it at the moment or count to ten. Hitting anyone is a violent, angry action, and it is WRONG. The End.

[GiGi_41]

I was listening to Fresh Air earlier this week and they had someone on talking about the negative consequences of spanking. One of the commenter's said "we don't allow adults to hit each other why do we think it's okay for adults to hit children". And I think at that moment it sunk in for me how correct that statement was in reflecting Americans view point.

I do not use corporal punishment because I have first hand knowledge of children whose parents "thought" they were justified in using corporal punishment.

ETA:Spelling

[ILoveJellybeans]

Not against beating your kid?????

Personally I am against beating any living being......why is it okay when its your kid?

If you hit an adult the way that Peterson, and countless others hit their kids, you would get arrested.

If you hit someone else's child in that way, you would be arrested.

If you hit your pet in that way, you would get arrested and have your pet taken away.

Why is it okay to hit a kid in a way that its looked down upon to do it to other human beings and to animals?

[Mama Mia]

Please tell me you are trolling, because I'd prefer that over knowing you are in favor of beating children. Age doesn't enter into it -- nobody should be beaten.

If you really believe this, tell me under what circumstances you think a beating would work better to teach and change behavior than a non-violent solution.

She ( he) has over a thousand post and has participated in a wide range of discussions. Often promoting the " correct" view. Do you really think it's useful to throw out the "troll!" line because someone holds an unpopular opinion?

[thoughtful]

She ( he) has over a thousand post and has participated in a wide range of discussions. Often promoting the " correct" view. Do you really think it's useful to throw out the "troll!" line because someone holds an unpopular opinion?

I know there is a history (mostly ancient history, I think, and I don't remember ever participating) on FJ of people calling someone "a troll" with very little provocation, so I can see how you might react to what I wrote with a "not that again" feeling. It may not have been the best choice of words, I admit that. Let me see if I can explain what I meant.

I used the word "troll" as a verb (which it was, originally, in this context, coming from the fishing term), * meaning, as Mecca said, trying to get a rise out of people, get under others' skin, by dragging some emotional bait.

Trolling (poking at people, being contrary just to cause anger, needling, whatever you want to call it) has nothing to do with post count, or opinions about other subjects. I do grant you that it is more common among people who have not been on a forum for a long time, and that some people do very little else, so they are easier to spot than those who go back and forth between serious and needling posts.

But that doesn't mean that long-time posters might not be doing it.

To me, asking someone if that is what they are doing does not mean "I am accusing you of being a totally unserious person who couldn't care less about anything we discuss here and only came to disrupt, and I will never believe anything you say ever again, so there!" :D

I admit I was being a bit sarcastic, but was also was trying to give her the benefit of the doubt that she was being contrary for whatever satisfaction it is that people get out of that, because it was a less horrible idea, to me, than that she thinks beating children is OK.

There is no one "correct" view that I know of about anything around here. People disagree all the time. I usually see both sides of a lot of the arguments that go on here, and shrug off a lot of the disagreements about minor things.

Hers is not an "unpopular opinion" about frumpers or home-cooked food or who's wearing too much makeup. It is a statement that it is OK to beat a human being. Not just any human being -- one's own child, who is under one's care. Not "a passing swat on the hand or a diapered butt," but beating.

Sorry, but that brings out the ire even in this "eh, whatever -- I see both sides" and "let's catch more flies with honey" type. I try to be civilized, but that really blindsided me.

My question about what would be solved or learned by beating that can't be taught any other way was sincere -- sometimes that leads to a conversation in which it is made clear, by many contributors, that there is always another, better choice.

* https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve ... ng%29.html

[Three and Done]

The cultural justification of continual beating of children is also an idiotic, self-defeating excuse to raise kids who are more likely to be violent and have no internal controls or view of right and wrong that isn't governed by an authority figure.

I was lucky in that I wasn't beat as a child. I didn't beat my kids. But I know soooo many

( primarily) Latino parents who use that same justification that beating their kids is somehow cultural and needed to keep them in line. Yet how many of those kids are in gangs? Yes, a huge part of it is racism and classism, A huge part of the problem is that cops and authority figures target black and brown and poor kids. A huge part of it is that there aren't the opportunities and consequences for black/brown/poor kids are vastly different than those of higher socio-economic status kids- particularly white kids.

BUT -- a huge part of the problem is also that routinely beating your kids teaches them to try to avoid getting caught- not to avoid the activities that got you in trouble, that authority figures aren't there to help you -- you might love them, and know they love you -- but they aren't who you turn to for help if you are in trouble. That a rigid hierarchy that involves violence is a good thing. And that you need someone else other than yourself to enforce " right" and " wrong" . It's stupid and self-defeating.

I have to take exception to this. Mr, Three is as Latino is anyone could be - he's from Puerto Rico, and Spanish is his first language. He also CHOSE to run the streets when he was growing up. However, he remembers exactly one time his father EVER hit him, and his mother never did. Neither does he hit my stepdaughter, nor does he believe that hitting children is ever appropriate.

Culture MAY be a factor, but please do not equate "non-white" with corporal punishment.

[DGayle]

Reporters found a 2nd child abuse case against Peterson from last year, involving a different son.

http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/09 ... buse-case/

Another son of his was abused to death last year. You'd think this would stop him from beating kids in the face and whipping them bloody.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nf ... n/2966015/

[DGayle]

I would like to believe that even post-divorce, most men are around for their children but I also have admin'd a stepfamily forum and its just rampant how many of these fathers are checked out of their kids life, and even when they are involved, their parenting skills are low and frankly, many divorced dads seem to toss the parenting right onto their own mother or their new girlfriend instead of parenting. The term is Disney Dad and it is rampant.

I think part of the problem is that it's very common for dads to go from being dads to being every other weekend visitors. If you get a couple weekends a month, do you want to be the fun parent and let someone else do the disciplining, or do you want to do it yourself and maybe be seen as the mean parent in the short time you have? Going by friends and family, the dads who get every other weekend foist the punishing on to someone else, and the ones who get about equal time are more into all of it, from fun to punishments.

I have some statements and articles about this issue with Adrian Peterson and I truly believe he thought that method of discipline was fine. Where did you expect him to learn any differently? Even if he had been mandated to attend some kind of parenting education class after the birth of a child, what's the chance that he'd listen? After all, he turned out fine, didn't he?

If he was molested as a child and told that's how parents show love, and he molested his son, even with good intentions, who would defend him as just doing what was done to him?

[DGayle]

It also sounds like he had some level of remorse. That's way better than someone like Kelly Crawford (did you ever read her smug, horrible book on discipline?)

So, while he is a child abuser, he seems a cut above some of the fundie child abusers we read about.

No, he's not a cut above. This isn't the first time he's been in trouble. Last time he just didn't get public attention. He's been shamed. Remorse now that he didn't feel for the other son whose face he scared is remorse that he's embarrassed and in trouble.