Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Awesome post, dude.
-
You've just bought TVNZ for an excellent price. Now to business. What do you chuck overboard?
I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords.
-
I'm not going to hate him for the position he got himself into, I'm not going to adopt his behaviour either, and won't condone it but I'm not going to see it in black and white evil either. its about education,
As I've said before, my overwhelming interest in Mason going to court was the hope that he'd be ordered to anger management counselling.If that happens, I don't care if he's dscharged.
I don't hate him (although he seems fairly arrogant) but what he did was not cool at all -- even the research presented by the pro-smackers in this thread makes that clear.
As for the position he's got himself into, well, no one made him cultivate the news media the way he has. That exclusive deal he did with Sunday was a shabby look for that programme.
And face it Rob, you turning up just after someone said "Section 92A" was quite funny ...
-
Personally I think that the amendments to S92 will facilitate our transition into the 21st Century and .....
Oh wait. Wrong thread. Easy mistake, eh?You spake the curse. And now look who's turned up ...
-
not all researchers of your persuasion conclude in their research that light smacking leads to child abuse
Read the above Dave. Perhaps you'll understand my "persuasion" then.
-
Didn't I pull out of the smacking part of this discussion a while ago?
Sorry, hadn't realised you were that far out of it.
And, to be clear, I do understand your point. My personal preference would be for fewer laws, enforced as they're written down. To some extent, the removal of the Section 59 defence, fails that test.
But I've thought about it, and I cannot countenance the law saying the only people who can be assaulted are children. I cannot see a clear justification for that, certainly not because some adult claims it as a "right", and still less if that claim is made on the basis of some religious belief.
I'm also cognisant of the harm done by abusive physical punishment, and I am dubious as to the clear bright line between "smacking" and bad hitting. It seems to me that the only real way forward is for no one to hit children. Much of the civilised world seems to be taking the same view.
My resolve in this view has been strengthened by two things.
One is essentially a reaction: I am honestly appalled at the tendency by the likes of McCroskie to consistently take the side of abusive parents . His refusal to criticise the Masterton father was simply appalling. He was taking the side of a man who had thrown around his son with enough violence to leave bruises that the boy's mother felt the need to photograph, and leaving the boy, in the words of a senior policeman, "traumatised". That's why I call him an enabler of abuse against children, and I don't care of that offends him. In fact, I really hope it gets under his skin.
I'm similarly unimpressed by the equivocating and diversion around the Mason case.
The other reason is personal. Both my sons are Asperger Syndrome -- mildly autistic -- and the younger one has been prone to violent autistic meltdowns through his life. He has, at times, been what other people might see as a "brat".
It's been really, really hard over the years, but we have gradually established a good, happy and respectful family life without resorting to violence. I feel sick when I think of how it might have been if we'd done that. I feel sick when I think about other kids in his position being hit constantly for something they can't understand. That's why I feel so strongly about fucking Barbara Bishop being hailed as some sort of parenting hero for hitting her already disturbed son.
So that's where I'm at. Good to get it off my chest, really.
-
How about making it customer not Telecom-focussed. For example, "Your iphone might work but we can't guarantee it"
Fair call. That was an official answer, but there's no reason they can't be in human language.
-
@Nick:
Got this back from TVNZ regarding the promo with which you took issue:
We're going to do the following:
- Pull the 30" generic which includes the Hansen component.
- Keep running the 15" generic which doesn't have the reference in question.
- Continue to run the tonight 15" specifics you supply every Thursday.
- From this weekend we will be running a Media7/Back Benches website promo which will be up weighted. -
If you are going to link research, link some decent ones.
Most studies have weakneses. I didn't claim the study was definitive, but I don't believe it was as worthless as you say.
The association between frequency of smacking and abusive punishment seemed alarming to me.
As MedPage noted:
Dr. Zolotor and colleagues also found an association between frequency of spanking and reports of harsher abuse. For each additional spanking episode per year, they reported, there was a 3% increase (95% CI 1% to 6%) in the likelihood that stronger punishments were also used in the household.
It seems worthwhile to point out that not all researchers see the clear and obvious demarcation between smacking parents and abusive parents that you and Graeme saw in the longitudinal study.
I have to say, Chuck's "light punch" has rather ruined the phrase "light smack" for me ...
-
Just worked out what was wrong with that Geekzone FAQ link -- it was missing a character.
It's here.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 … 2279 Older→ First