-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Martin Freeman (The Hobbit, Fargo) openly discusses hitting his two children and referring to them as "little f**kers" [see staff post]
- Thread starter Kalmakov
- Start date
This is unfortunately a pretty common view in various parts, I find. A double-think of 'I know I shouldn't do it, but I did and it's totally fine' is still ingrained in this country, and typically even joked about. Same deal with the 'little fuckers' bit; it's common to frame children as unthinking gremlins, who exist purely to cause headaches for the parents who for some reason chose to bring them into the world. Thus then, the rationalisation comes in - they're incapable of critical thought, but they 'understand' pain. And while one smack may be a 'minor' incident of abuse, and most may think themselves to have come to terms with whatever they were subjected to, it's still what it is. That you can put up with it doesn't make it okay as a standard
I'm about to become a dad for the first time, if my child is in physical danger where a gentle don't do that etc is not enough to stop them causing harm to themselves or others then what does everyone suggest I do? I thought that rapping their arm or hand in that situation is okay but according to people in this thread it isn't and I should let them just walk out into traffic.
Well they would've subsequently hit their own children and adults hitting children is pretty much the definition of being a horrible person to me. Obviously there are many other ways to be a bad person but many of those can be a result from a violent childhood trauma and/or the idea that you can solve problems by brute force and fear instead of words.
Why would someone say they are "not proud" of something reprehensible and then right after that say that they'll do it again? Even if it were in jest it would be in poor taste.
Yeah you really need to think about this before you get kids. Because we all tend to fall back to what we know from our own parents. And in most cases that means yelling and hitting. You need to convince yourself that you will take a different approach to break the chain. And then you need to control yourself when your kids is a fucking asshole. It can be done. And no, you don't ever need to hit your kid.
Yeah that's it, people in the thread are wrong and not you for thinking physically assaulting your child is the only way to convey information to them.
Got smacked when I was a kid and it made me resent and hate my Dad for a long time.
Fucking vile way of disciplining your kids.
Fucking vile way of disciplining your kids.
Because the only way to stop a child from walking into traffic is to beat them.
It really is a shame that there are zero other options between hitting a child and letting them walk into traffic.
He's always struck me as an arrogant asshole. He just comes across that way literally all the time. His admission of this kind of vile behavior is totally in character for him.
I agree with this, there are other ways to asset dominance and authority without hitting a child
User Banned (2 weeks): Misrepresenting concerns of child abuse over multiple posts
Because the only way to stop a child from walking into traffic is to beat them.
Yes because I suggested beating my child.
Maybe I made my point poorly but some people in this thread seem to think that any kind of hitting or grabbing even when the child is in mortal danger or at risk of harming themselves is a bad thing.
If my child is about to walk into traffic or jam a fork where it doesn't belong I'll be using whatever force is necessary to remove that risk of harm.
Ah right, so you're such a poor parent already you need to use force with your child to make them do what you want. Good to know.
But you're adding the "or grabbing" part to make your point where no one would argue against grabbing them to remove them from dangerous circumstances. No one (except maybe the post above this one (edit: nevermind - they clarified below).
Last edited:
I've never struck my child but I would point out for Americans that "smack" on this context means "spank-" as in open hand slapping bottom through pants- that's maybe an irrelevant distinction for some people but it's a huge difference from my perspective as a parent and occasional recipient in my own childhood - versus "smacking" a kid in the face or worse.
Problem is that it's subjective too and there are a lot of bad parents with no sense of proportion or self restraint so even if science said a mild spank works (science doesn't say that) then you'd still have kids traumatized or hospitalized by violent parents who felt they had a legally and socially acceptable right to mete out that punishment.
We also had corporal punishment in school that was more or less unregulated- we had teachers who'd use a cane, a steel ruler, a belt. It worked in the sense that it would stop a disruptive kid - but of course now the teacher is disrupting his or her own class.
"I was spanked and I turned out ok" happens to be true in my case but certainly isn't always - but an angry teacher or parent doesn't know that because they're not clairvoyant. They're rolling the dice.And in my experience the kids who were spanked or caned the most did not turn out fine and likely had horrifying experiences at home- compounded by being humiliated in front of peers in class - bullies would be engaged in retaliatory vicious cycles of this - taking out their caning on their child bullying victims.
Anyway I'm assuming that's what he meant by "spank" but I don't know that for sure obviously.
Problem is that it's subjective too and there are a lot of bad parents with no sense of proportion or self restraint so even if science said a mild spank works (science doesn't say that) then you'd still have kids traumatized or hospitalized by violent parents who felt they had a legally and socially acceptable right to mete out that punishment.
We also had corporal punishment in school that was more or less unregulated- we had teachers who'd use a cane, a steel ruler, a belt. It worked in the sense that it would stop a disruptive kid - but of course now the teacher is disrupting his or her own class.
"I was spanked and I turned out ok" happens to be true in my case but certainly isn't always - but an angry teacher or parent doesn't know that because they're not clairvoyant. They're rolling the dice.And in my experience the kids who were spanked or caned the most did not turn out fine and likely had horrifying experiences at home- compounded by being humiliated in front of peers in class - bullies would be engaged in retaliatory vicious cycles of this - taking out their caning on their child bullying victims.
Anyway I'm assuming that's what he meant by "spank" but I don't know that for sure obviously.
Wait, surely you'd be okay with grabbing the kid to remove them from imminent danger, no? You're objecting to the notion of hitting, not the notion of physically removing the child, right?
Well yes. That poster said whatever force is necessary. There is no context in which hitting or assaulting your child is ok. Grabbing isn't the same.
Makes sense. Deaf Spacker, I've been a dad for 7 years now -- you're totally right that physically removing the kid from dangerous or harmful circumstances or to stop them from doing something wrong is many times necessary. But surely you'd agree that smacking them or hitting them to get them to comply is not the only other option you have as a parent, no?
You honestly can't think of any other way to stop your child walking into traffic except clouting them one?
Having been raised in a pretty conservative, old-fashioned family (ex-military dad etc etc) the occasional smack was normalised, but only in very VERY extreme circumstances. I'd always considered it an option of last resort growing up, and it was kinda normalised to me.
Then I had kids. In the last 4 years it's become absolutely clear to me how utterly ridiculous that position is.
There is simply no reason ever to strike a child, whatever the provocation. Physical intervention is occasionally warranted, but only in the form of restraint or removal from a dangerous situation; NEVER striking or smacking.
Maybe it's just my kids are quite well behaved, but a strong word and a clear disapproval (and withdrawal of treats/and or sending to room/naughty step) have proven completely effective, and actually improved our bond. They trust implicitly and to injure that can only lead to a more fractured relationship down the road.
Then I had kids. In the last 4 years it's become absolutely clear to me how utterly ridiculous that position is.
There is simply no reason ever to strike a child, whatever the provocation. Physical intervention is occasionally warranted, but only in the form of restraint or removal from a dangerous situation; NEVER striking or smacking.
Maybe it's just my kids are quite well behaved, but a strong word and a clear disapproval (and withdrawal of treats/and or sending to room/naughty step) have proven completely effective, and actually improved our bond. They trust implicitly and to injure that can only lead to a more fractured relationship down the road.
Pretty sure Martin Freeman is a problematic dude
Let me Google it... here
thegeekiary.com
Let me Google it... here
Martin Freeman’s Jokes: A Consistent Pattern of Offense - The Geekiary
TRIGGER WARNING: This article discusses rape, date rape, and other potentially triggery content. Image by ellaphon It's always difficult when an actor you like fumbles and says something completely horrible. It's even harder when that actor is in so many pieces of media that you adore that you...
thegeekiary.com
I had to take care of my 4 younger siblings and they were indeed little assholes. Did I ever beat them? Fuck no. They were toddlers. The worst I ever did was smack my younger brother's wrist on two occasions because 1) he was about to stick a fork in a socket and 2) played with the gas stove.
My mother on the other hand... I only have one toddler pic where I don't have a fat lip.
My mother on the other hand... I only have one toddler pic where I don't have a fat lip.
How would hitting them remove them from traffic or stop them from jamming a fork in a socket? Grabbing them and redirecting away would. If an adult is about to walk into traffic you wouldn't smack them.
Your post said nothing about grabbing them, but now suddenly everyone that called you out is against grabbing? Why the fuck must we always go though this shit with people in these smacking threads? They always start out saying something extreme then try and walk it back to play the victim.
i was totally fine with the idea of spanking and whatnot kids up to age 13 until i started seeing all these studies that show the negative mental effects
now im just going to take away whatever electronics the kids are using those days, since thats what used to really grind my gears
now im just going to take away whatever electronics the kids are using those days, since thats what used to really grind my gears
Smacking is literally physical violence.
And if they smack despite all evidence saying it doesn't produce desired effect and on the contrary even harms the child then how am I to assume the rest of parenting is on point?
Even if we take it as true (it's not) that a smack or two can cause no harm, (to trust, mental or physical health) that still doesn't change that there is no situation where you could use physical violence (a smack, by definition, is physical violence - it's done with the sole intent to reinforce a point through pain and fear) that wouldn't be better served by other methods.
This is one of the saddest sentences I've read on ERA in some time.
The one thing I will never ever ever ever ever do is raise my child in an environment where corporal punishment negatively affects the mental health, well-being and confidence of a young, growing and developing human-being. Where they will fear living in their own homes and only grow up with a constant sense of paranoia/fear/anxiety not to mention resentment towards their parents for the rest of their lives.
It's one thing to teach/educate your children about the dangers of life and do what you can to protect them. You damn right I'll do whatever it takes to prevent harm to my child from a car/criminal/whatever....but I certainly will not then violently discipline them afterwards "to teach them a lesson". Fuck no.
It's one thing to teach/educate your children about the dangers of life and do what you can to protect them. You damn right I'll do whatever it takes to prevent harm to my child from a car/criminal/whatever....but I certainly will not then violently discipline them afterwards "to teach them a lesson". Fuck no.
I was hit when I was a kid.
I was also asked if I would jump off a bridge if everyone else was doing it.
Hitting children is wrong regardless of how many people do it.
As a parent, it sometimes happens in the moment and you feel guilty afterwards.
It's important to make sure you talk to your child about why you lost control and apologize for it.
It's important to make sure you talk to your child about why you lost control and apologize for it.
I never have and never will lay a hand on my children. Physically lashing out at a child is just so... lazy. I have no doubt that it is the fastest and easiest way for parents to address particular situations, but it is almost a primal response and the absolute lowest of efforts. A parent that does this has put zero thought or consideration into their actions or the consequences. It's completely reactionary. I've said this before, "when your child is at their worst, you need to be at your best". You are the adult, the example, the role model, and their window into how to approach both the good and bad in life. When I have been in frustrating positions in my life I have often thought "How would I want my kids to handle this situation in a way that would make me proud" and that is how I proceed in resolving the issue. Lead by example. Physical violence should never be something they consider as a reasonable solution to a problem.
There is truly a defense force for everything. I was smacked around as a kid, I would never ever be able to hit my son. Never. The guilt would simply kill me.
This is very fucked up too. Holy shit.
This is very fucked up too. Holy shit.
Do you plan on drop kicking your kid across the street to avoid traffic or something?
So weird that you're about to have your first child and you're already coming up with scenarios on how to physically discipline your kid.
Don't. Hit. Children.
Remember that a child often does not view their behavior as problematic. We give their behaviors this label.
Talk to them. Make them understand how you feel about their behavior and why it makes you feel this way. Try and find a solution together. Negotiate.
Remember that a child often does not view their behavior as problematic. We give their behaviors this label.
Talk to them. Make them understand how you feel about their behavior and why it makes you feel this way. Try and find a solution together. Negotiate.
I thought "rapping" meant hitting in this context, but now I'm not so sure. Do you mean grab? You can grab your kid's hand if they're about to run into traffic. Why on earth would you need to hit your kid in this scenario?
You might want to reconsider that. This is abuse and depending on where you live, also illegal. I've worked in proximity to child protection services and this is definitely grounds for a home visit or the kid being pulled out of class for an interview if someone reported you for it. A kid locked in a room without supervision is at serious risk of injury, especially if they're upset and acting out.
"I do it so every parent does it"
you should work on your anger management issues instead of taking them out on your kids
