This really shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Even 2 year old children can understand authority, power dynamics, and contests of will. For that matter, a 6 month old puppy will understand the same.
I pretty strongly disagree with the rest of what you said about state curriculum.
Hear hear! If your kids turn out good, they'll say you are lucky.If they don't, they'll say you messed up as a parent. Either way, the parent never gets any credit.
So I mostly just try to model the behavior I want to see.
It does not mean children can do whatever they like.
You might find it difficult to find alternatives, but better alternatives than violence exists.
Save your children the costs of therapy as adults, and focus on real emotional health.
Does every dog / chimp / giraffe that got nipped by mom for being a brat need therapy?
I'm genuinely curious about this worldview, because I personally cannot empathize with this. It's abhorrent to me and my values.
If you walk out your door start groping people or try to run off someone's child, you will encounter violence pretty fast.
You couldnt make a post on HN if it werent for violence, or the threat of it. you have a computer to type on because if someone were to take it, they would risk beating or death. someone built the computer because threat of violence makes them work for a living instead of taking what they want. sometimes you can be minding your own business at a desert rave and violence comes for you anyways.
im saying all order, justice, and authority is based on violence. the only difference between an extrajudicial vigilante and a sanctioned enforcer, is that the enforcer is on the side generally considered more threating.
If you are sufficiently transgressive, violence is always a possible consequence, for children and adults. it is a simple fact of life.
Also we let/cause lots of things to happen to animals that would likely need therapy if they were humans, so this comparison really doesn't work.
I'm not saying you should spank your kids. I'm only questioning whether it actually causes any problems. I was spanked, my sister was spanked. All my cousins etc. None of us have any issues. We love our parents and loved that they loved us enough to punish us when we were bad.
If the answer is no: why do you think it's appropriate to do so when dealing with children?
(If the answer is yes, then consider anger management classes, I guess)
The reason why corporal punishment isn't used privately man to man is because we've delegated that to government, who happily sends men with guns to drag people violently in for reform. Spanking a child before they get to that point would be a favor.
And when you say "drag people violently in" I feel like very different definitions of "violence" are getting conflated here. Forcibly moving a child is needed sometimes, and is not corporal punishment.
There are tons of situations where violence is appropriate for interpersonal conflict, usually when someone won't listen to reason.
If I went into your house, ignored what you were saying, and then started smashing things or molesting your children, would you just sit there and protest politely?
The earlier poster was arguing that corporal punishment is never appropriate. When they said "better alternatives than violence", they were speaking in the context of punishment.
A scenario about an urgent intervention can't prove them wrong, because it's not related to what they were saying.
> Doubly so when they include a bunch of condescension about how anyone who thinks violence has a place should seek therapy.
Are you actually reading their comments, or are you too busy being righteously mad at them?
They didn't ask if you think violence "has a place". They asked if it's what normally happens for your interpersonal conflicts.
Those two ideas are not at all close.
>They didn't ask if you think violence "has a place". They asked if it's what normally happens for your interpersonal conflicts. Those two ideas are not at all close.
I think it was an intentionally loaded and insulting question. yeah, im sure the poster normally resorts to violence interpersonal conflicts when they cant agree on a move with their partner.
Plus, it is just a crappy argument. The parent wasn't arguing that corporal punishment should normally be the tool to resolve issues, so it is a faulty comparison.
This does not prove that violence is sometimes necessary as a punishment. Punishments are very different from urgent situations.
You very much should be drawing a distinction.
Generally speaking, corporal punishment as such is not abuse, either. We've just become very sentimental, operating with a flawed understanding of human nature. It shouldn't be used lightly, but it shouldn't be demonized categorically.
It really doesn't.
> Even worse, grotesque "medical" procedures and treatments against which that swat pales in comparison.
Ahh, I see what you've got going on here...
If you're actually interested in an answer here, it's pretty easy to find people for whom it did cause problems.
If you say it works great in your family, fine. For you to extrapolate and say it's okay for everyone is not fine.
In my own experience, my parents reached for violence instead of taking the time to connect and understand. Now I know I cannot trust them to listen or to take time to try to understand where I'm coming from.
It is super easy to find people whose lives were greatly negatively impacted by domestic violence, especially coming in the form of "loving punishment." That can fuck a person up even more, leading them to believe violence is a part of love.
children can be raised to do the right thing without fear/pain/trauma.
Or do you believe that every single teacher in California should be deciding how to teach what verbs are, or how dividing works, in their own way however they choose?
Is that really better than finding the best explanation, worksheets, and using that? Because right now there's a classroom in California being taught the worst possible way how to divide, out of all the other classrooms in California. Why? Because why not, freedom!
Second, teachers aren't fungible robots. They are humans with personalities, interests, and passions. Education works best when teachers are engaged. I think you underestimate the value provided by flexibility. you might be able to reduce variation through standardization, but that doesnt mean you improve the mean. My very best teachers went off script, teaching more valuable information, like a 5th grade teacher that decided to teach business, html, and the scientific method.
Last, it isn't exactly anarchy. Many subjects can be taught from texts, which are organized along standardized approaches.
Do you expect better outcomes if they quit and you replace them with training videos?
Call me a skeptic, but I dont think standard lesson plans will move the needle for a shitty teacher that doesn't give a shit. They probably wont even engage with that standard lesson plan.
Yes
> Do you expect better outcomes if they quit and you replace them with training videos?
You still need someone to enforce the kids are actually doing what they've been instructed to but yes I'd expect an equal or better outcome.
Another simple fact is, that despite all that effort and forced curriculum and years of attending - most people don't understand even basic science. So I question, that the current system is working efficiently at all.
There is no "best explanation, best worksheet" any more than there's a "best shoe size, best cut/style of pants".
Hire good teachers who care about their students, and let them figure out how to best address the needs of their students in that particular classroom.
Well, yes. Relationships don’t do well when one of the partners has this much contempt for the other. There’s a difference between knowing in your own mind she’s not the best at her job, and calling her a “ditzy” “illogical” “girl” in public.
Let's say she was a damn genius. Do you expect her to have Google alerts setup for non official spellings of her school districts name? Is a genius supposed to be checking my browser history on my phone?
How smart would she have to be to find what I wrote?
>>>> Well, yes. Relationships don’t do well when one of the partners has this much contempt for the other. There’s a difference between knowing in your own mind she’s not the best at her job, and calling her a “ditzy” “illogical” “girl” in public.
>>> I don't call her that in public.
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38524596 is a publicly accessible URL. That’s what I meant. You’re assuming it doesn’t matter because she’s not smart enough to find it and recognize herself.
> Lol you're talking about having respect for someone I assume, but then you assume there's 'intelligence' in finding a random link in the world?
> Let's say she was a damn genius. Do you expect her to have Google alerts setup for non official spellings of her school districts name? Is a genius supposed to be checking my browser history on my phone?
> How smart would she have to be to find what I wrote?
How **** do you have to be to fail to realize "in public" does not mean "to her face?"
This is a public forum. Everything posted here is in public.
You're not as clever as you think you are.
2. Come on, you can figure out what they meant by "public". It's not in the broader spheres of influence that connect to her. She doesn't see this site, this site doesn't see her.
It should be obvious: that's the comment I was replying to.
> and even explicitly quote the stuff that has nothing to do with the "in public" you're responding to?
To preserve the context, because the original comment was deleted while the OP continued to defend it.
> 2. Come on, you can figure out what they meant by "public". It's not in the broader spheres of influence that connect to her. She doesn't see this site, this site doesn't see her.
Yeah, I did figure it out. But we're not Humpty Dumptys here, so we don't get to redefine words on a whim.
In short: that's what he meant, but that's not what "public" means.
Going by what you wrote, you were replying to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38524906
You didn't say a single word about the next two comments in the chain. So I don't see how they act as context.
> Yeah, I did figure it out. But we're not Humpty Dumptys here, so we don't get to redefine words on a whim.
> In short: that's what he meant, but that's not what "public" means.
It's close enough.
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize."
The strongest plausible interpretation is that you would use a different word than "public", but it's a pointless quibble. Not "How **** do you have to be", "You're not as clever".
Those insults are wildly unfitting for a complaint about wording.
Oh. Right. We're at Hackernews.
For example, I don't argue with every person I meet in public. I was actually a top 0.1% salesperson for 10 years nationwide in my industry. I do great meeting women and have fun on bars. In public I'm great. On a random website, not in public, I'm different.
And what do you want her to do? Stop the lesson until the student respects her? Remove the student from the classroom?
Two, I expect her to put a lot of personal effort into becoming at expert in motivation, behavior management, discipline for kids. I expect her to at least read ONE book about this. She complains for 2+ years about this that I've known her. I recommend books, she gets insulted and explains why it's not relevant.
IMO a teacher being paid $90k a year for 7 hours a day of work, 10 months a year, should be working hard to improve. But instead it's just a cushy job that no one gets fired from no matter how average (or below) they are.
Ps, I have never seen her take work home once in 2 years. So don't say the hours are long.
Tldr; I'd like her to do whatever other teachers that have better control of their classrooms do. Unless you're going to tell me there's zero variation in that amongst teachers.
I don't disagree that she should work to improve, but you are using $90K as if it were a lot of money. According to census data [1], the median household income in San Ramon is $173,519/year and the median rent is $2,557/month.
In San Ramon, you can get paid $65,000/year as an assistant manager at Starbucks without getting a 4 year degree plus teaching credentials.
Plus, how is she earning so much? The San Ramon teacher salary schedule is public: [2]
[1] https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sanramoncitycal...
[2] https://www.srvusd.net/documents/Employment/Employment-Resou...
Based on what you've said about your soon-to-be-ex girlfriend, she isn't either of those things.
What does she teach? One of my best friends is a foreign language teacher that leaves home for work around 6AM and is never back home until around 7-8PM. Partially because they have to coach for sporting events because the paycheck for just teaching is ridiculously low; less than $50k/yr last I asked. Fairly middle class area in a suburb of Chicago, by the way.
But yes, if what you've said is halfway accurate, it sounds like her and her coworkers are fairly underqualified and/or under-driven.
That sucks your hard working teacher is only making $50k. They should move to the San Ramon area and sit around teaching the kids of middle management of SV.
That said, school folks I know value credentials and authority toooons so recommending books without being "certified" somehow and having it eye rolled doesn't shock me.
Teacher salaries for San Ramon (and California generally) are publicly accessible (by band, and for some counties like San Ramon by name), so I doubt very much your soon-to-be-ex girlfriend is making $90k as a sixth grade teacher. She'd have to be fairly old and well-established as a teacher, or have multiple graduate-level credentials in multiple subjects (in which case she wouldn't be teaching 6th grade).
That would be out-of-band, especially considering what you claim to be extremely subpart performance on her part.
Indeed, it sounds like you're making this up to try and claim that teachers are overpaid and underworked. They're not, and it's especially rich coming from someone who is clearly an overpaid, underworked tech employee with enough free time this afternoon to devote all of it to commenting in this thread instead of doing valuable work.