The Baltimore Mom

[Koala]

I just wish some of the people defending her beating her kid in the head/face would address the fact that she has admitted to doing this before.

[Mama Mia]

I just wish some of the people defending her beating her kid in the head/face would address the fact that she has admitted to doing this before.

I'll address it. I don't care. I think smacking your teenager in the face is a stupid way to parent. For a lot of reasons.

I still think she's a far better parent than someone who would try reasoning with their kid IN THAT EXACT SITUATION and give up if it came down to a choice between getting physical and getting killed.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I just wish some of the people defending her beating her kid in the head/face would address the fact that she has admitted to doing this before.

Her fears for her son likely started way before that riot.

African-American parents in the United States have legitimate reasons to fear that their sons will end up in conflict with police, in jail or dead, and that drives a lot of the parenting culture.

I'm not saying that physical discipline is good or effective. It's not. I'm saying that it tends to be more prevalent for a reason, and that I can't simply say "hey, my positive parenting techniques resulted in great outcomes for my kids so it will work for you too". To be honest, I can't take most of the credit for the fact that my kids are doing well. They are growing up in an environment where the odds are totally in their favor. The odds of them ever ending up in jail are extremely low (some people in the extended family who did some pretty big crimes somehow avoided jail). I just need to avoid doing anything to fuck them up.

[Mama Mia]

Who here is saying it's only poor folks who need to stop hitting their fucking kids. Everyone needs to stop hitting their fucking kids. And as for finger wagging, that night be nice if none of us never had the urge to whack a little brat, or hadn't been raised being hit ourselves. Go and have a look at any thread on here where someone has shown a shred of interest in stopping hitting their kids, there is an abundance of good practical advice, given non-judgementally. All the people I know IRL who hit their children are wealthy, middle lazy lazy people who just can't be arsed doing it the hard way.

People are talking about poverty because that's been part of this particular discussion. Because people in poverty are more likely to use spanking as a primary method. And well, because of all those other reasons D. Gayle listed. But studies are kind of a loopty loop because is it that kids who are spanked are more likely to be aggressive or depressed because of being hit---or becaue of the poverty--- and the huge amountb of stress that goes with it. Or are aggressive, impulsive kids more likely to be hit.

And yes, people have lots of great tips for how to deal with unwanted behaviors in toddlers and young children. But those tips aren't going to do a whole lot of good when you spot your teen - who already promised you they would stay away from the riots - has on a mask, and a rock in his hand, running from you so he can do asomething that could get him killed, or permanently disabled or imprisoned- with a record that will ruin his chances at a ecent life. What 1-2-3 Logic, or Natural; Consequences or other parenting tips would YOU use in that situation?

[Koala]

I am going to say this, and then I am going to back very far away from this thread, because it is seriously making me question humanity.

What this woman did was IN NO WAY discipline. It was a beating. It was abuse.

She did it because she was angry, and when she gets angry she hits her son about the head and face. She has stated clearly that she has done this before.

And you know, maybe, just maybe if beating the everlasting shit out of her kid wasn't her default position he wouldn't have been on the street (rock in hand) ready to hurt someone else. Maybe he would have realized that violence doesn't solve problems. He chose violence because that's what he's been raised with.

Beating your kid in the face doesn't make you a fucking hero. It makes you an abuser.

[HoneyBunny]

What do you know? This isn't the first time she's beaten him :o Who'd have guessed it? :roll:

Gayle King- "The way that you were striking him- you opened up a can of whoop ass on him the way I was looking at it. That clearly was not the first time you've had that interaction with him is it?"

Mom- *laughs* "No."

Yeah...hero mom.

Edited to add link:

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/baltimore ... t-lost-it/

Exactly. Hitting is wrong. Doesn't make a difference whether it's Michael Pearl or Lori Alexander or this mom. Most parents who hit say they do it to save their child's life (physical, spiritual) in the future. I don't buy it for a second.

[VelociRapture]

I am going to say this, and then I am going to back very far away from this thread, because it is seriously making me question humanity.

What this woman did was IN NO WAY discipline. It was a beating. It was abuse.

She did it because she was angry, and when she gets angry she hits her son about the head and face. She has stated clearly that she has done this before.

And you know, maybe, just maybe if beating the everlasting shit out of her kid wasn't her default position he wouldn't have been on the street (rock in hand) ready to hurt someone else. Maybe he would have realized that violence doesn't solve problems. He chose violence because that's what he's been raised with.

Beating your kid in the face doesn't make you a fucking hero. It makes you an abuser.

To start I want to say that I agree that using physical force for punishment is never right.

However, watching that video I don't get the sense that she was purposely attempting to punish him for misbehaving. Yes she was angry that he disobeyed her. . . But the fact remains that he was in a highly charged and potentially dangerous situation at that moment in time and she reacted in a manner meant to grab his attention quickly. Had she not done so her son very well could have been arrested, injured, or killed. She reacted in a way that wasn't ideal - but we live in a world where men who look like her son are killed and injured by police at a rate much higher than men with light complexions.

Speaking bluntly, this mother didn't have the luxury of sitting her son down at that exact moment to explain what he was doing was incredibly dangerous; all she had time for was to make a massive impression on him as quickly as possible and then take time to explain when he was safely home. This wasn't a case of a mother hitting her child so they learn not to leave a blanket - this was a mother attempting to protect her child the only way she could.

Speaking as a young white female I can never understand the terror she must have felt seeing her child in that situation - a situation he was specifically raised to avoid at all costs because his race makes him a target for bad cops. This situation is far more complex than simply saying she was angry and beat him for disobeying her. That may very well be true, but it ignores the much larger problem of why she reacted with so much fear and desperation. White parents don't have to think about their children being killed by police officers in the way that African Ametican parents do and I think that's the reason why there is such a disconnect in this story; some people are having trouble understanding why she reacted that way because they don't get why she would be scared in the first place.

Here's an article I found. It's written from the point of view of an African American journalist who covered the riots and maybe it can explain things better than I ever could:

salon.com/2015/04/29/the_hideous_white_hypocrisy_behind_the_baltimore_“hero_momâ€_hype_how_clueless

_media_applause_excuses_police_brutality/

!	{TEXT1}:
	I had to insert a line break into the url.

[notsocommon]

All I have to say is that is is seriously delusional to think that people riot because they were spanked and 'violence' is all they know. Seriously fucking delusional.

I can assure you that there were plenty of people rioting that have never been spanked in their lives. I can also assure you that there were plenty of people who got their asses handed to them on the regular who were trying to be peace makers, cleaning up, lining up to protect the police, etc.

[DaRealMVP]

To start I want to say that I agree that using physical force for punishment is never right.

However, watching that video I don't get the sense that she was purposely attempting to punish him for misbehaving. Yes she was angry that he disobeyed her. . . But the fact remains that he was in a highly charged and potentially dangerous situation at that moment in time and she reacted in a manner meant to grab his attention quickly. Had she not done so her son very well could have been arrested, injured, or killed. She reacted in a way that wasn't ideal - but we live in a world where men who look like her son are killed and injured by police at a rate much higher than men with light complexions.

Speaking bluntly, this mother didn't have the luxury of sitting her son down at that exact moment to explain what he was doing was incredibly dangerous; all she had time for was to make a massive impression on him as quickly as possible and then take time to explain when he was safely home. This wasn't a case of a mother hitting her child so they learn not to leave a blanket - this was a mother attempting to protect her child the only way she could.

Speaking as a young white female I can never understand the terror she must have felt seeing her child in that situation - a situation he was specifically raised to avoid at all costs because his race makes him a target for bad cops. This situation is far more complex than simply saying she was angry and beat him for disobeying her. That may very well be true, but it ignores the much larger problem of why she reacted with so much fear and desperation. White parents don't have to think about their children being killed by police officers in the way that African Ametican parents do and I think that's the reason why there is such a disconnect in this story; some people are having trouble understanding why she reacted that way because they don't get why she would be scared in the first place.

Here's an article I found. It's written from the point of view of an African American journalist who covered the riots and maybe it can explain things better than I ever could:

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/29/the_hid ... baltimore_

“hero_momâ€_hype_how_clueless_media_applause_excuses_police_brutality

There's not much else I can add that everyone else hasn't already said. I agree that she should have tried to get his attention in a way that didn't involve smacking him several times in the head.

To the bolded, I agree with this statement. If any kid can respond positively to that, I say good for the parent and child. However, if the young man is anything like some of the teenagers I went to high school with, if his/her parent came up to them in the heat of the moment and tried to give them and hug and say "let's go home and discuss this", the teenager would probably either (a) laugh in their face or (b) give them a hearty "Piss off" (in way more colorful terms). I know if my mom were to try to approach me like that when I'm not thinking straight, I would probably give her the "what the hell are you doing?" look (and my mom is the affectionate type who would maybe try to do something like that).

Hopefully that made sense. I'm bad with words :embarrassed:

[Mama Mia]

I have some serious, non- snarky, genuine questions for the posters who say this was abusive and there is no excuse for violence towards your child, ever. I am truly curious as to your responses:

1) Have you raised teenage boys ? --fyi -- yes, specifically male children- we could debate if sex/gender matters all day long --but the culkture and outcomes and risks or young men in these situations is different than young women- it just is. Even if you haven't -theoretically- pretend you have a 16 year old son.

2) What is the biggest fear you had for your son, that was the possible result of his bad choices? Did it seem like a realistic fear at the time? Did it involve death and/or life destroying consequences for an impulsive choice?

3) If your biggest fear was about to come true-- What would you do? If it didn't work and he was going to do it anyway - what would you do? Assume he is too big for you to physically restrain. What are your lines?

I'm really curious. Put aside your assumption that well-mannered, bright, loving, respectful son will listen to you because of the perfect foundation you've laid down----- maybe he's drunk. Maybe he's had a sudden hormone surge. Maybe he's having a psychotic break or is in the throes of depression from his first big break up---whatever--put aside your ideal world and assume-- not cooperating - about to wreck his life and/or possibly die -- What would you do?

[DGayle]

I am going to say this, and then I am going to back very far away from this thread, because it is seriously making me question humanity.

What this woman did was IN NO WAY discipline. It was a beating. It was abuse.

She did it because she was angry, and when she gets angry she hits her son about the head and face. She has stated clearly that she has done this before.

And you know, maybe, just maybe if beating the everlasting shit out of her kid wasn't her default position he wouldn't have been on the street (rock in hand) ready to hurt someone else. Maybe he would have realized that violence doesn't solve problems. He chose violence because that's what he's been raised with.

Beating your kid in the face doesn't make you a fucking hero. It makes you an abuser.

You are seriously showing your white privilege. If you really can't, for even a single second, understand how doing what the fuck you have to do to get your kid out of a situation where he could die, isn't abuse then you really need to thank your lucky stars for being white. I can't believe you seriously think the better alternative for this woman, in that moment, would have been for her to keep pleading with him to leave the riots, and just hope he doesn't get killed.

What YOU are advocating, that she just ask him to go home and leave it at that, is closer to abuse in this situation. She did what she had to, in that moment, to keep him alive. Their past doesn't matter. All that does is that, in that moment, he had a rock, and was about to destroy his life, and she did what the fuck she had to to save him.

[feministxtian]

I have some serious, non- snarky, genuine questions for the posters who say this was abusive and there is no excuse for violence towards your child, ever. I am truly curious as to your responses:

1) Have you raised teenage boys ? --fyi -- yes, specifically male children- we could debate if sex/gender matters all day long --but the culkture and outcomes and risks or young men in these situations is different than young women- it just is. Even if you haven't -theoretically- pretend you have a 16 year old son.

2) What is the biggest fear you had for your son, that was the possible result of his bad choices? Did it seem like a realistic fear at the time? Did it involve death and/or life destroying consequences for an impulsive choice?

3) If your biggest fear was about to come true-- What would you do? If it didn't work and he was going to do it anyway - what would you do? Assume he is too big for you to physically restrain. What are your lines?

I'm really curious. Put aside your assumption that well-mannered, bright, loving, respectful son will listen to you because of the perfect foundation you've laid down----- maybe he's drunk. Maybe he's had a sudden hormone surge. Maybe he's having a psychotic break or is in the throes of depression from his first big break up---whatever--put aside your ideal world and assume-- not cooperating - about to wreck his life and/or possibly die -- What would you do?

BOTH my boys chose to challenge me physically. BOTH of them. They got their asses handed to them. They figured out REAL DAMN QUICK to not fuck with mama anymore and mama meant business. And guess what...NEITHER ONE OF THEM is an abuser, is violent, has ever hit their significant other, wife or child. They developed a healthy respect for mama after they found out she wasn't going to take their shit. So...as a mother of now grown sons, I can tell you that teenaged boys can be stupid, or was said in my neighborhood, "smelling themselves". They want to act like they're so big and bad...and they chose to challenge me. I was a single mom at the time and they wanted to be the alpha male...until they ran slam into the alpha female who put them back in their places.

Now...all of you who are fussing about how this mama slapped the crap out of the kid...well...sometimes that's how you get the message through...when they understand that they are NOT the alpha, they back down. It's not "politically correct" or anything else but you can either have a testosterone fueled teenager who thinks his shit don't stink or you can demonstrate that you will not have that in your house by whatever means necessary.

[DGayle]

I agree that she should have tried to get his attention in a way that didn't involve smacking him several times in the head.

She did. He ignored her.

[DGayle]

I have some serious, non- snarky, genuine questions for the posters who say this was abusive and there is no excuse for violence towards your child, ever. I am truly curious as to your responses:

1) Have you raised teenage boys ? --fyi -- yes, specifically male children- we could debate if sex/gender matters all day long --but the culkture and outcomes and risks or young men in these situations is different than young women- it just is. Even if you haven't -theoretically- pretend you have a 16 year old son.

2) What is the biggest fear you had for your son, that was the possible result of his bad choices? Did it seem like a realistic fear at the time? Did it involve death and/or life destroying consequences for an impulsive choice?

3) If your biggest fear was about to come true-- What would you do? If it didn't work and he was going to do it anyway - what would you do? Assume he is too big for you to physically restrain. What are your lines?

I'm really curious. Put aside your assumption that well-mannered, bright, loving, respectful son will listen to you because of the perfect foundation you've laid down----- maybe he's drunk. Maybe he's had a sudden hormone surge. Maybe he's having a psychotic break or is in the throes of depression from his first big break up---whatever--put aside your ideal world and assume-- not cooperating - about to wreck his life and/or possibly die -- What would you do?

If I had a teenaged son, my biggest fear would be that he'd get a girl pregnant and have to figure out how to support a baby while still a kid himself.

But I'm also a white woman married to a white man, and our white son could probably get an easier sentence for killing someone than a black teen for some petty vandalism. Every black person with a teen boy has a fear that is something I never have to think about. They have the very real fear their sons will get killed for just walking down a street.

I'm also curious what the people who say they's just hug their son and go get ice cream would do.

I also think that people are delusional if they think there's no possible way their teens could ever act up. Ever, ever, because they did it all right, so there's no possible way a good kid from a good home could still turn and do the wrong thing.

My husband and I were talking last night, and he told me something I didn't think about before. You know how we women, when we were teens and our bodies were going haywire, would have hormone surges that could make us pissed at the world 1 second, and want to cry the next? If you're unlucky, PMS might still be like that. We don't feel in control, and it can be hard to hold on to control.

He said that, as a teen boy, his hormones were in a state of chaos, and his scariest times were when he would feel a sudden rush of aggression, probably testosterone. Teen boys can't control that, and being gendered a girl doesn't matter here. Boys can't control this.

Take a teen boy whose got those rushes he can't control, and hasn't learned to take control over. In the ideal situation, he can go get pissed off in his room. But take that boy and make him a black boy in a time when his peers are getting killed for the color of their skin, since kill first and ask questions later is okay as long as you're black. Put him in an area where there's a riot, and he's emotionally charged because of how deeply wrong it all is, and he's scared he could be next, so what does he have to lose? Better go down trying to be heard than while walking down a quiet street, right? Make death mean something? And then toss in that teenaged boy surge of testosterone to give him the aggressive push. And now put him out there following the storm in his body, and dump on a dose of adrenaline. What do you have?

[Toothfairy]

I am going to say this, and then I am going to back very far away from this thread, because it is seriously making me question humanity.

What this woman did was IN NO WAY discipline. It was a beating. It was abuse.

She did it because she was angry, and when she gets angry she hits her son about the head and face. She has stated clearly that she has done this before.

And you know, maybe, just maybe if beating the everlasting shit out of her kid wasn't her default position he wouldn't have been on the street (rock in hand) ready to hurt someone else. Maybe he would have realized that violence doesn't solve problems. He chose violence because that's what he's been raised with.

Beating your kid in the face doesn't make you a fucking hero. It makes you an abuser.

How the heck was it abuse? What if the cops decided to shot him or arrest him for throwing rocks at them? Then what? People would ask where we're his parents. Maybe next time this kid will think before he does something stupid.

[Toothfairy]

I have some serious, non- snarky, genuine questions for the posters who say this was abusive and there is no excuse for violence towards your child, ever. I am truly curious as to your responses:

1) Have you raised teenage boys ? --fyi -- yes, specifically male children- we could debate if sex/gender matters all day long --but the culkture and outcomes and risks or young men in these situations is different than young women- it just is. Even if you haven't -theoretically- pretend you have a 16 year old son.

2) What is the biggest fear you had for your son, that was the possible result of his bad choices? Did it seem like a realistic fear at the time? Did it involve death and/or life destroying consequences for an impulsive choice?

3) If your biggest fear was about to come true-- What would you do? If it didn't work and he was going to do it anyway - what would you do? Assume he is too big for you to physically restrain. What are your lines?

I'm really curious. Put aside your assumption that well-mannered, bright, loving, respectful son will listen to you because of the perfect foundation you've laid down----- maybe he's drunk. Maybe he's had a sudden hormone surge. Maybe he's having a psychotic break or is in the throes of depression from his first big break up---whatever--put aside your ideal world and assume-- not cooperating - about to wreck his life and/or possibly die -- What would you do?

If my kids ever disrespected me or their father, trust and believe they will get it. I would rather correct the behavior in the privacy of my own home than let the streets or someone else get to them. I have spanked my own children. They're not violent. They all get good grades, are responsible, respectful, kind to others.

Now here in America black men are a target. A person would rather shoot a black man then asks questions later. The tension between the cops and the black community are real. I won't call this mom a hero, but she did do the right thing.

[Anny Nym]

All I have to say is that is is seriously delusional to think that people riot because they were spanked and 'violence' is all they know. Seriously fucking delusional.

I can assure you that there were plenty of people rioting that have never been spanked in their lives. I can also assure you that there were plenty of people who got their asses handed to them on the regular who were trying to be peace makers, cleaning up, lining up to protect the police, etc.

Agree, I find it very odd how many people seem to think someone who riots must be from a very violent and/or broken home enviroment.

Really folks, have you never heard of the "black bloc"/"autonomes"?

Alot of the participants were and are from a middle-class background, a loving home, have academic parents.

Still they act like violent assholes because they don´t know better and are caught up in the heath of supposedly doing something among the lines of "we against the system!" when in reality they commit awful, senseless and CONTRAPRODUCTIVE crimes. Or, even worse, just ARE violent assholes by character. Because sometimes people are just possesing a violent character regardless of their upbringing and like to take every excuse to act on it*.

And their parents at home are devastated, because they tried to do everything right. Or they don´t even know what their child is up to, when she/he is supposed to hitting the books at Uni.

*This I want NOT to be seen as refered to Baltimore Mom´s son. At the end of the video, when he takes down his ski mask, one could see how confused he looks. And that he is very young, probably around 14-15? I think he was caught up in the heath. And the Baltimore Riots are also a waaaaaay different and more serious topic than what the average black bloc idiot is up to.

edited for proper translation.

[mpheels]

I am going to say this, and then I am going to back very far away from this thread, because it is seriously making me question humanity.

What this woman did was IN NO WAY discipline. It was a beating. It was abuse.

She did it because she was angry, and when she gets angry she hits her son about the head and face. She has stated clearly that she has done this before.

And you know, maybe, just maybe if beating the everlasting shit out of her kid wasn't her default position he wouldn't have been on the street (rock in hand) ready to hurt someone else. Maybe he would have realized that violence doesn't solve problems. He chose violence because that's what he's been raised with.

Beating your kid in the face doesn't make you a fucking hero. It makes you an abuser.

You clearly don't realize how really fucking terrifying it was to be in Baltimore on Monday.

[morfydd]

A few people have stated something like, "If he hadn't been hit growing up maybe he wouldn't have been in the riot". It's possible that he saw the excitement going on, and headed there to cause a problem. HOWEVER, there were a lot of kids there only because a) school was over, sending hundreds of kids onto the street, then b) they were PULLED OFF the buses by Baltimore PD and told to find their own way home, and c) the transit system was SHUT DOWN, by request of the Baltimore PD.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... wmin-purge

(Ok, so MJ is as lefty as they come, but I've seen this reported other places as well.) The kids were set up.

[Kailash]

Something that occurred to me last night is that I assumed I would have a husband to turn to in this sort of situation. That's because I'm white, and have been married almost half my life to a white man, who is physically capable of picking up a 16 year old male and bodily removing him from a dangerous situation without having to resort to hitting him in the face. According to this article : http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015 ... 0002&abg=1 most of the kids in Baltimore don't have a father figure present.

Personally, I don't think this mom is a hero. I just don't. I agree that she was abusing her son in this video. Do the circumstances warrant abuse? Many here seem to think so. Do I think she was wrong to do this? I don't feel like I can judge her, never having lived in her shoes. Her son will live another day and that IS a victory for her.

[August]

People are talking about poverty because that's been part of this particular discussion. Because people in poverty are more likely to use spanking as a primary method. And well, because of all those other reasons D. Gayle listed. But studies are kind of a loopty loop because is it that kids who are spanked are more likely to be aggressive or depressed because of being hit---or becaue of the poverty--- and the huge amountb of stress that goes with it. Or are aggressive, impulsive kids more likely to be hit.

And yes, people have lots of great tips for how to deal with unwanted behaviors in toddlers and young children. But those tips aren't going to do a whole lot of good when you spot your teen - who already promised you they would stay away from the riots - has on a mask, and a rock in his hand, running from you so he can do asomething that could get him killed, or permanently disabled or imprisoned- with a record that will ruin his chances at a ecent life. What 1-2-3 Logic, or Natural; Consequences or other parenting tips would YOU use in that situation?

So, because people in poverty are somehow dumber than richer people, or stupider or just all around not worth bothering with, we should just walk away and save good parenting for the more worthy (=richer) families?

Poor people aren't dumb, or worth less, they're just poor. Yes, that brings increased levels of stress, but they're still perfectly worthwhile human beings who are just as capable of doing better as someone with more money. It's patronising as FUCK to say they just can't posibly be good parents like we rich folk can.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Exactly. Hitting is wrong. Doesn't make a difference whether it's Michael Pearl or Lori Alexander or this mom. Most parents who hit say they do it to save their child's life (physical, spiritual) in the future. I don't buy it for a second.

I'm posting this as someone who is opposed to physical discipline, period, and who has argued repeatedly, both online and in my day job, that it is never acceptable.

With that out of the way - no, I don't see this as being the same as Michael Pearl or Lori Alexander.

They advocate striking very young children with objects, and argue that you need to "hit harder" if you don't immediately get the result you want. It's a deliberate, premeditated program of child abuse. Michael Pearl is an older, white male, using physical discipline to show children that he's the alpha male authority figure. They use physical pain to deal with situations that are trivial and where they is no clear need for punishment. Michael has actually stood their urging a father to spank his child: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

From a child's POV, these physical punishments could be seen as sadistic, done by someone who is quite calm even as more and more pain is inflicted, who doesn't seem bothered at all by the child's pain.

One thing that has struck me, as a parent who does not spank at all, is how some fairly intelligent, thoughtful people in the African-American community considered physical discipline from parents to be a genuinely loving act. I think that children often react to the emotional message behind a parent's words or actions. I've possible for a child to recognize that a parent loves them, wants the best for them, and is scared shitless by dangers in this world that are out of their control, and that this would have a different effect than something that Lori Alexander or Michael Pearl would do to a child. [The flip side is that it can make it harder to break the pattern, if someone associates their mother's love and their current success with physical discipline.]

[apandaaries]

I'm posting this as someone who is opposed to physical discipline, period, and who has argued repeatedly, both online and in my day job, that it is never acceptable.

With that out of the way - no, I don't see this as being the same as Michael Pearl or Lori Alexander.

They advocate striking very young children with objects, and argue that you need to "hit harder" if you don't immediately get the result you want. It's a deliberate, premeditated program of child abuse. Michael Pearl is an older, white male, using physical discipline to show children that he's the alpha male authority figure. They use physical pain to deal with situations that are trivial and where they is no clear need for punishment. Michael has actually stood their urging a father to spank his child: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

From a child's POV, these physical punishments could be seen as sadistic, done by someone who is quite calm even as more and more pain is inflicted, who doesn't seem bothered at all by the child's pain.

One thing that has struck me, as a parent who does not spank at all, is how some fairly intelligent, thoughtful people in the African-American community considered physical discipline from parents to be a genuinely loving act. I think that children often react to the emotional message behind a parent's words or actions. I've possible for a child to recognize that a parent loves them, wants the best for them, and is scared shitless by dangers in this world that are out of their control, and that this would have a different effect than something that Lori Alexander or Michael Pearl would do to a child. [The flip side is that it can make it harder to break the pattern, if someone associates their mother's love and their current success with physical discipline.]

What I have often heard from part of the Black community is that parents think they have to raise their children to function in a white-dominated world. Most know that if they don't get that message across to their children, then the white community will teach them. Historically and to the present day, lessons from white folks could and do kill Black kids, teens, and adults. The message Black parents took home was that they needed to teach their kids, and teach them fast.

There is an overarching fear which drives these acts, like some Black parents beating their kids into submission. Fundies, too, have a pervasive fear of their kids dying and going to hell because of poor parenting and a drive to "teach" their kids how to behave. But only one of these fears is real, tangible, measurable. The latter is purely conjecture (and quite likely based off the understanding of a narcissistic spiritual "leader," rather than lived experience).

It disturbs me to see so many people laughing at the situation, or saying that the entire problem of the Black community is a f'ed up family structure. No. The problems are structural inequality and racism in the United States. This is worth protesting.

[Did anyone hear about this? A teenager who was likely lynched in North Carolina in 2014? http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ennon-lacy (Guardian links, so not broken) Or this, about how the Jim Crow era killed EVEN MORE people of color than previously imagined: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/f ... o-haunt-us ]

But it's not worth violence, looting, and further exacerbating the problems of Baltimore. The system needs to change, but wrecking the system entirely hasn't worked out well, historically.

I also want to add that I do know Black families where they choose NOT to hit their kids. Even if they were raised that way, they've decided to take another path. But in the heat of that Baltimore moment, there's no way I'm going to judge that mama. She kept her baby safe. She recognized him WITH THAT MASK ON and went out to find him. That's some serious mama love, even if she lashed out when he ignored her. Truth be told, if I saw my child dancing toward danger, maybe even taunting danger, I would haul her ass home, too, however necessary.

I want to leave one last link here, which shows images of primarily white people looting and rioting after sports events, and compares those images visually with Baltimore's present day: http://mic.com/articles/116680/11-stunn ... -baltimore (another news source, so link still unbroken)

[VelociRapture]

I'm posting this as someone who is opposed to physical discipline, period, and who has argued repeatedly, both online and in my day job, that it is never acceptable.

With that out of the way - no, I don't see this as being the same as Michael Pearl or Lori Alexander.

They advocate striking very young children with objects, and argue that you need to "hit harder" if you don't immediately get the result you want. It's a deliberate, premeditated program of child abuse. Michael Pearl is an older, white male, using physical discipline to show children that he's the alpha male authority figure. They use physical pain to deal with situations that are trivial and where they is no clear need for punishment. Michael has actually stood their urging a father to spank his child: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

From a child's POV, these physical punishments could be seen as sadistic, done by someone who is quite calm even as more and more pain is inflicted, who doesn't seem bothered at all by the child's pain.

One thing that has struck me, as a parent who does not spank at all, is how some fairly intelligent, thoughtful people in the African-American community considered physical discipline from parents to be a genuinely loving act. I think that children often react to the emotional message behind a parent's words or actions. I've possible for a child to recognize that a parent loves them, wants the best for them, and is scared shitless by dangers in this world that are out of their control, and that this would have a different effect than something that Lori Alexander or Michael Pearl would do to a child. [The flip side is that it can make it harder to break the pattern, if someone associates their mother's love and their current success with physical discipline.]

What I have often heard from part of the Black community is that parents think they have to raise their children to function in a white-dominated world. Most know that if they don't get that message across to their children, then the white community will teach them. Historically and to the present day, lessons from white folks could and do kill Black kids, teens, and adults. The message Black parents took home was that they needed to teach their kids, and teach them fast.

There is an overarching fear which drives these acts, like some Black parents beating their kids into submission. Fundies, too, have a pervasive fear of their kids dying and going to hell because of poor parenting and a drive to "teach" their kids how to behave. But only one of these fears is real, tangible, measurable. The latter is purely conjecture (and quite likely based off the understanding of a narcissistic spiritual "leader," rather than lived experience).

It disturbs me to see so many people laughing at the situation, or saying that the entire problem of the Black community is a f'ed up family structure. No. The problems are structural inequality and racism in the United States. This is worth protesting.

[Did anyone hear about this? A teenager who was likely lynched in North Carolina in 2014? http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ennon-lacy (Guardian links, so not broken) Or this, about how the Jim Crow era killed EVEN MORE people of color than previously imagined: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/f ... o-haunt-us ]

But it's not worth violence, looting, and further exacerbating the problems of Baltimore. The system needs to change, but wrecking the system entirely hasn't worked out well, historically.

I also want to add that I do know Black families where they choose NOT to hit their kids. Even if they were raised that way, they've decided to take another path. But in the heat of that Baltimore moment, there's no way I'm going to judge that mama. She kept her baby safe. She recognized him WITH THAT MASK ON and went out to find him. That's some serious mama love, even if she lashed out when he ignored her. Truth be told, if I saw my child dancing toward danger, maybe even taunting danger, I would haul her ass home, too, however necessary.

I want to leave one last link here, which shows images of primarily white people looting and rioting after sports events, and compares those images visually with Baltimore's present day: http://mic.com/articles/116680/11-stunn ... -baltimore (another news source, so link still unbroken)

Just want to thank both of you for your thoughtful responses. You worded how I feel about the situation much better than I could.

I've been thinking about this for a while and thinking about the various reactions this particular story has generated. I've come to the following conclusions:

1. No one wants to see a child get hit like that. Even when it's deemed necessary, it's difficult to watch his mother smack him in that manner.

2. No one wants to see that young man ruin his life by joining in the violent riots either. His mother went looking for him in order to keep him out of trouble and did what she felt was needed at the time.

3. My only conclusion is this: if you want to solve the problem of this mother hitting her child then you need to first solve the bigger problem of racism. That means fixing problems within the country's infrastructure, training police on how to handle various situations and build trust in their communities, make education a major priority by adequately funding all schools, fixing the economy so that decent paying jobs are generated, etc.

4. If someone is not willing to put in the work to make the changes (and numerous others) I listed above then they have no right to complain about the consequences.

It will take people of all colors and all walks of life to fix these problems and it will not happen over night. We are only fifty years removed from the end of the Jim Crow era - many people alive today remember those days and it has left a legacy of distrust in many communities. We all need to work together in order to see change happen.

[Mama Mia]

So, because people in poverty are somehow dumber than richer people, or stupider or just all around not worth bothering with, we should just walk away and save good parenting for the more worthy (=richer) families?

Poor people aren't dumb, or worth less, they're just poor. Yes, that brings increased levels of stress, but they're still perfectly worthwhile human beings who are just as capable of doing better as someone with more money. It's patronising as FUCK to say they just can't posibly be good parents like we rich folk can.

Well, to start with, for a significant portion of the time my children were growing up I was poor. Taking several trips for little things to the overpriced store across the street so there would be enough change collected from the foodstamps to have enough cash to buy toilet paper and soap poor. (Obviously this was awhile ago--back when food stamps were paper.). Walking the three miles to the big supermarket, for the one big shopping tripping trip a month - with the double stroller filled to the brim- with a baby in the front pack, toddler in the back pack and two older kids hanging on to he side ---just to save a few bucks--because if I didn't, I wouldnt have enough to make it through the month.

When I got a job, especially during the summer , having my kids shuffled through an incredibly complex and precarious system of childcare among various friends, relatives and free activities . Where if one tiny piece of the puzzle fell through, I missed work. Which also meant that my kids were home alone from a very young age. Because I could pay childcare or keep a roof over their heads- but not both. And that was when I no longer even fit the definition of poor. Unfortunately being home after school was horrible situation for my youngest kids who were of the impulsive, danger seeking type. Totally different than their more easy going, cooperative siblings.

And in an area where there are gangs and drugs easily accessible. If I could go back I would of stayed on welfare so I could be home and keep them out of trouble.

I wasn't a hitter but I lost my temper and yelled horrible, horrible things at those kids when they were teens. Abusive things Those are moments I'm horribly ashamed of. Despite having been the positive parenting, never hit a kid, try every currently approved method type of parent.

I was frustrated. I was fearful. They were making scary, terrifying, life altering choices-- and they didn't listen worth shit . I was scared out of my mind.

They didn't give a damn about taking away privleges or grounding - they'd go out through their windows at night. I still had to go to work all day. Stressful is such a completely inadequate word.

You know what's patronizing as fuck --acting like dealing with poverty, or racism, or gangs or crime or impulsive don't give a fuck teens is "just an added stress".