Spanking is when hit them repeatedly. Beating is when you hit people repeatedly.

The only difference is rituál around it.

Spanking specifically means open-palm slaps on the ass, though. It's done in such a way as to inflict pain without injury (as opposed to beating).

Belt spanking is spanking. Paddle spanking is spanking.

It was literally never true that the word would refer to beating a kid by open hand only. The books that teach parents to spank also give advice to use instruments and call it spanking.

Old books that contain spanking use the word beating as synonyms. It started to be used as different word when people started to take issue with it more often.

I agree with you that paddles or switches can be used for "spanking", and that "spanking" is a form of "beating", but still the words are different. "Spanking" strongly implies that it is done to cause pain without serious or permanent injury. "Beating" has no such limitation.

I agree that it is not the right way to discipline a child, but I can recognize this distinction in meaning.

I find this interesting, actually, as a form of argument. The annihilation of semantic categories. It's like argument via Sapir-Whorf.

It's a little absurd that this needs to be explained to adults.

It's because the only people conflating the two are deliberately doing so in bad faith to score political points.

Spankings are beatings

Sure, would you rather get a spanking from your mother, or a beating from a drug lord or a CIA interrogator at a black site? It's not the same.

As a matter of language and connotations, you're right.

I assume people are so appalled by the concept of physical punishment (which, let's be clear, I don't do and barely experienced either), that they don't want to acknowledge... how English works.

"Spanking" implies an open palm or maybe a belt or thin switch, on the rump. It hurts; it may leave a bruise; it may be barbaric -- but it doesn't involve serious injury (say, to internal organs). The point is to inflict pain without serious injury.

"Beating" carries no such connotations of limited harm. It can be done with fists or blunt objects; it can target the face or internal organs like the kidneys; it can be severe enough to lead to death.

This difference in meaning is as much about connotation as denotation, but the connotational differences are very large. You might say that, logically, a spanking is a kind of limited beating, but not all beatings are spankings.

So, as a matter of language, you're right.

This is beyond bad faith. Would you rather get a beating from your mother or a spanking from a drug lord?

>This is beyond bad faith. Would you rather get a beating from your mother or a spanking from a drug lord?

This is in bad faith, a drug lord won't give you a spanking unless it's sexual in nature. I assume you know the difference between a sexual spanking and a beating in the street. Perhaps not. A parent can give a beating, but that is different from a spanking.

I think trying to equivocate a spanking with a beating is intellectually dishonest. If you can't tell the difference in both intent and intensity, I have no idea where you are coming from. You might be against spankings but to argue the words spanking and beating are synonyms is simply wrong, and quite honestly, juvenile in the level of reasoning. As the OP said, words matter.

This might be the all-time worse comment I’ve seen on HN.

That's very dramatic. Maybe if people would stop being so comfortable with meaningless hyperbole such as yours, we'd re-learn how to communicate better.