←back to thread

349 points zdw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
foxglacier ◴[] No.45652693[source]
I wonder why the old advice was being given if it was so wrong? If nobody understood what to do, shouldn't there have been no advice instead of something harmful?
replies(9): >>45652756 #>>45652763 #>>45652768 #>>45652807 #>>45652849 #>>45652903 #>>45653509 #>>45653756 #>>45671594 #
ycombinete ◴[] No.45652903[source]
Bad advice that has a very long return on investment is quite sticky.

For instance the "cry it out method" did massive amounts of psychological damage to more than one generation, but it seemed to work in the short term as the babies eventually learned to "self-soothe".

Even now I still see parents and grandparents suggesting it in parenting groups; and taking extreme umbrage at the idea that it might have damaged them/their children.

replies(2): >>45656641 #>>45659509 #
1. IAmBroom ◴[] No.45656641[source]
And the variations on "a little spanking", "spare the rod", "dad would take us out behind the woodshed"...

Careful studies have shown that violence used with children percolates back out of them, in rather rapid fashion. Something like a great majority of them go on to use violence to interact with others in the next two weeks.

So, yes, as it turns out: a little spanking did hurt... specifically, it hurt innocent bystander kids.