Peterson charged with reckless or negligent injury to a child? (1 Viewer)

[Neofight]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

Bravo

 

[VaTerp]

The part I was referring to was clearly spelled out.

Well you seem to think I took your words out of context, so I was offering you a chance to clarify. But if you're that quick to abandon whatever point you were trying to make, then sure, let's move on.

Thanks for the offer but I'm good. And my point is still there for people to read and discuss or dismiss as they see fit. I'm not abandoning my point simply because I choose not to repeat it or further engage with you on a pretty clear statement.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Says someone who has never walked in Peterson's shoes. That's the point, you've had education/life experiences where you've learned what he is doing is wrong - he hasn't.

He could have learned from his own experiences as a child- he failed. He could have learned from teammates and those around him in Minnesota that have children- he failed. He could have learned from the Vikings organization- they failed to deliver any meaningful message.What lesson do you honestly believe Adrian Peterson is going to take from this? You ask for empathy for Adrian Peterson. Empathy requires understanding; most of those reading this forum aren't going to have that empirically. Logically, it's pretty damn easy to see that what he is doing is wrong though, and that his level of empathy for his own kids is sorely lacking.

So what's it going to take, for a man who hasn't figured out how to use a condom in his 29 years, for Peterson to learn that beating his kids systematically is wrong?

There are two ways a person can learn from being abused - the first is that's it wrong and harmful and the other is that it worked for them and should be used on their own kids. Peterson learned the latter.

He's seeing a psychologist now to deal with his issues and learn to be a better parent. My hope is that he attends parenting classes on top of that.

He did learn from not using a condom - he admitted he was not living his life right and is now married.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

I pretty much agree with all of this except the bolded. The law should not necessarily be the standard used. To use your own examples, the law once said that women couldn't vote, that blacks and whites couldn't go to the same schools, etc. Eventually the culture changed enough that the laws were changed.

In this case, Peterson may be acquitted of any wrongdoing by the Texas legal system. If he is, there will be those who use that to justify their belief that what he did was ok. For those of us who believe it's not ok, we can't merely tell parents to rely on the laws to delineate what is and isn't acceptable parenting.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

I can't believe how many of you grew up in a Beaver Cleaver household as well as being Physic Psychiatrists. I feel it sad as to where our world has become. Did I get the switch as a kid, hell yeah, and I deformed? NO. I raised 3 kids, all in college and I'm still surviving. Is there a line, sure, you you tree hugger idiots think the world runs like this. How's your philosophy working overseas?.

Sweden has banned spanking since 1979 and they seem to be doing fine without it.

One of many things I see wrong with this thread is people trying to use this situation as a way to justify their stance on physical punishment of children, one way or the other. In reality, there are different parenting styles that work for different children and different families. Adrian Peterson was raised with a parenting style that heavily involved physical punishment. He's emulating that with his kids. To extent to which he did this in one specific instance was wrong, and potentially criminally wrong. The Texas legal system will determine that. But spankings and whoopings, in and of themselves, are not illegal.

People who seemingly disagree with that want to automatically call a man they don't know a P.O.S., throw him out of the league, send him to jail, and jump to the worst possible assumptions. I'm glad these people arent making decisions of consequence here.

Do believe kids are running wild in Sweden because they've banned spanking? How about Delaware or the other countries that have made spanking illegal?

Physical punishment is a short-term way to stop a behavior, but leads to even worse problems down the road.

Why spanking doesn't work

 

[Da Guru]

‏

@SteveRushin

Vikings: "We feel strongly as an organization that this is about disciplining a child."

What a nauseating statement.

I'm sure they'd feel the same way if the accused was a backup guard instead of Peterson.

Funny you should say that. In 2011 Vikings cornerback Chris Cook was charged with choking his girlfriend. Ultimately Cook was acquitted of all charges, but the Vikings suspended him indefinitely without pay while allowing "due process" to be carried out.There is NO concept of justice in the NFL. It doesn't exist. They always do what is best for themselves and their wallet. That is why people need to bang the drum and be so obnoxious about voicing their displeasure here.

If you can play there is due process, if you are borderline player you are suspended or cut right away with the team making a statement like "We will not tolerate this kind of behavior"

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

And my point is still there for people to read and discuss or dismiss as they see fit.

That's what I was doing. You said I was "cherry picking quotes out of context."

Defend your statements or don't, it doesn't especially matter, but let's not pretend it's me who's not interested in having the discussion.

 

[massraider]

How can people defend Peterson? Seriously? How can you?

How can you condemn a man before you walk a mile in his shoes?

Its all part of the wussification of america. The greatest generation in America all grew up with whoopings, and it seemed to work out fine for them. America now has a soft underbelly, and it will be our downfall.

because he beat a bare 4 year olds ### legs and scrotum with a stick

the greatest generation also grew up thinking blacks and women were lesser citizens

if you think not allowing people to beat children's bare ### legs and scrotum till bloody makes america soft then we simply are not living in the same country. The innocent here that needs protected is the child not the abuser

nothing about beating a child makes you tough, and nothing about protecting them makes you a wuss

I have not seen the stick - real question - has it been seen or described? The reason I ask, is that, based on the pictures of the injuries, I would guess that the "stick" would not look very imposing - it sounds more sinister when you say stick, and we all picture a thick tree branch.

In reality, these injures could have just as easily been caused by a belt - the injuries are generally cause by the whipping motion, and not the rigidity or thickness of the "switch" the thinner the branch, the more likely to cause these injuries.

None of this is to say that we want to see any child disciplined in a manner where whipping is involved. But, it is a bit of a straw man to focus on the tool here - the stick - and not on the form of punishment itself - the whipping. Also don't think people realize how easy it would be to hit a male in the scrotum, if they are being whipped - again the focus on the injury ignores the issue that is you don't like/condone whipping.

Really, the discussion should center around the limits of corporal punishment - I doubt you are going to outlaw it any time soon. But certainly prohibiting the use of anything other than the hand itself would be a step in the right direction.

Everything he said, and you are wondering, well, how big a stick was it?

The greatest generation wasn't as great as you think it was, and this 'wussification' you speak of (truly in the message board dumb### hall of fame) has been happening for 60 years.

 

[Neofight]

Says someone who has never walked in Peterson's shoes. That's the point, you've had education/life experiences where you've learned what he is doing is wrong - he hasn't.

He could have learned from his own experiences as a child- he failed. He could have learned from teammates and those around him in Minnesota that have children- he failed. He could have learned from the Vikings organization- they failed to deliver any meaningful message.What lesson do you honestly believe Adrian Peterson is going to take from this? You ask for empathy for Adrian Peterson. Empathy requires understanding; most of those reading this forum aren't going to have that empirically. Logically, it's pretty damn easy to see that what he is doing is wrong though, and that his level of empathy for his own kids is sorely lacking.

So what's it going to take, for a man who hasn't figured out how to use a condom in his 29 years, for Peterson to learn that beating his kids systematically is wrong?

There are two ways a person can learn from being abused - the first is that's it wrong and harmful and the other is that it worked for them and should be used on their own kids. Peterson learned the latter.

He's seeing a psychologist now to deal with his issues and learn to be a better parent. My hope is that he attends parenting classes on top of that.

He did learn from not using a condom - he admitted he was not living his life right and is now married.

The last two items are good news, but those other kids might be better off without him in their lives if he doesn't get his anger in check. They might learn the wrong lesson as well and take it a step or two further.

Let's hope AP's new wife is a strong, sensible woman.

 

[Tanton]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

 

[VaTerp]

Fellas, why are you showing us polls from sports related websites regarding AP's fate? Do you think you'd see the same results at parenting.com? What about womensday.com or catholic.org?

Ok, maybe not that last one. But seriously, what do you expect or think this means?

I shared the ESPN poll because many here previously suggested that public opinion among among sports fans would be heavily in favor of Peterson not being allowed to play. According to a poll conducted by the most popular sports website, that's not the case.

Sure the poll may be different on other websites but last I checked Peterson was a football player and the question was about agreeing with the Vikings decision to let him play football. If the poll was about whether or not Adrian Peterson should be babysitting or teaching parenting classes then maybe those websites should host it and I, for one, would have voted differently.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

In an election year, I'm surprised a politician would take a tough stance against an accused child abuser.

 

[KellysHeroes]

‏

@SteveRushin

Vikings: "We feel strongly as an organization that this is about disciplining a child."

What a nauseating statement.

I'm sure they'd feel the same way if the accused was a backup guard instead of Peterson.

Funny you should say that. In 2011 Vikings cornerback Chris Cook was charged with choking his girlfriend. Ultimately Cook was acquitted of all charges, but the Vikings suspended him indefinitely without pay while allowing "due process" to be carried out.There is NO concept of justice in the NFL. It doesn't exist. They always do what is best for themselves and their wallet. That is why people need to bang the drum and be so obnoxious about voicing their displeasure here.

Cook was a below avg player and below avg players get chopped.

 

[KellysHeroes]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

so if you suspend 6 games and hes found not guilty hes sues you. You suspend now and then hes found guilty do you suspend him again?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

In an election year, I'm surprised a politician would take a tough stance against an accused child abuser.

Perhaps this indicates that those ESPN polls aren't an accurate reflection of the general sentiment about this case. Surely in an election year, a politician wouldn't take a stance that 63% of his constituents disagrees with, right?

Like the Ray Rice incident, this isn't merely a sports story, it's a news story. It wasn't just football fans flying "Goodell Must Go" banners over NFL stadiums last weekend, it was organizations like NOW. It's not enough for Joe Sportsfan to think Peterson should play on Sunday. If Mrs. Sportsfan gets upset that he's playing, that starts to become a real concern for the NFL.

I could certainly be wrong, but I choose to believe that despite apparently large regional differences in culture, the majority of Americans are disgusted by what they've seen, and don't believe that Peterson went "just a little too far" with an otherwise acceptable form of parenting. It's been argued that this case is not nearly as black-and-white as the Rice case - that everyone agrees punching a woman is wrong, but there's nowhere near a consensus that beating a 4 year old is wrong. I think that's the thing that's most mindboggling and frightening to me about this whole story.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Perhaps this indicates that those ESPN polls aren't an accurate reflection of the general sentiment about this case. Surely in an election year, a politician wouldn't take a stance that 63% of his constituents disagrees with, right?

He's giving lip service to the whole issue and conveniently waited until the Vikings reinstated him to say anything. This gives him a chance to look tough on child abusers while changing nothing.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

‏

@SteveRushin

Vikings: "We feel strongly as an organization that this is about disciplining a child."

What a nauseating statement.

I'm sure they'd feel the same way if the accused was a backup guard instead of Peterson.

Funny you should say that. In 2011 Vikings cornerback Chris Cook was charged with choking his girlfriend. Ultimately Cook was acquitted of all charges, but the Vikings suspended him indefinitely without pay while allowing "due process" to be carried out.There is NO concept of justice in the NFL. It doesn't exist. They always do what is best for themselves and their wallet. That is why people need to bang the drum and be so obnoxious about voicing their displeasure here.

Cook was a below avg player and below avg players get chopped.

There were also choke marks on his girlfriend and he couldn't claim he was disciplining her.

 

[Neofight]

‏

@SteveRushin

Vikings: "We feel strongly as an organization that this is about disciplining a child."

What a nauseating statement.

I'm sure they'd feel the same way if the accused was a backup guard instead of Peterson.

Funny you should say that. In 2011 Vikings cornerback Chris Cook was charged with choking his girlfriend. Ultimately Cook was acquitted of all charges, but the Vikings suspended him indefinitely without pay while allowing "due process" to be carried out.There is NO concept of justice in the NFL. It doesn't exist. They always do what is best for themselves and their wallet. That is why people need to bang the drum and be so obnoxious about voicing their displeasure here.

Cook was a below avg player and below avg players get chopped.

There were also choke marks on his girlfriend and he couldn't claim he was disciplining her.

That's where the discipline argument falls apart. The laws most definitely are archaic relating to child abuse. Only slightly less so on domestic abuse.

 

[chinawildman]

Yeah, the justice system likely failed that kid. This really isn't a hard concept to grasp. As a direct result of the "whooping" AP gave that kid, he now has a permanent scar above his right eye. I don't give a #### if the kid got it trying to avoid a back hand from his 6'1 220 lb "dad", it was still the direct result of AP's archaic view of discipline. I feel bad for him (AP), because I truly think he thinks there's some strong correlation between beating the #### out of your kids and them becoming a man. Regardless, it doesn't excuse any of it. It's all is so obviously wrong it boggles my mind that anyone could defend it.

Sounded like his dad beat the crap out of him. And it's likely he feels that somehow contributed to him becoming a beast of a running back.

I still don't think you get it. Nobody is defending Peterson the person or his actions. Speaking for myself I am defending the tenets of due process, trying to correct factual inaccuracies that are being propagated in this thread, and speaking out against irresponsible journalism and the mob frenzy it creates. That it so happens to rebut the assertions of people denouncing Peterson has nothing to do with how I feel personally about his actions, which I find repugnant.

Yet you find fault with others that have the same view you just posted. How is it that you can come to this conclusion but you call out others? After all, he hasn't had his day in court. All we have are shoddy internet accounts of what may have happened. So how can you find his actions repugnant?

Because...

I feel like the course of rehabilitation is more beneficial for him than punishment.

I feel like he should and will be given a second chance by not only the Vikings, but the NFL.

I feel this issue encompasses a myriad of issues from religion to race and is not as simple and cut and dry as some seem to believe.

I feel the mob mentality, encouraged by shoddy journalism, has gone a bit overboard in this thread.

I feel the demonization of public figures also says a lot about the accusers.

I feel like emotion and not logic is driving much of the "analysis" in this thread.

I feel like false consensus and false confirmation biases are running rampant in this thread.

Just as the same jury can find a man guilty and then differ on opinions for sentencing, I can be disgusted at the photos and articles I've read, yet maintain the above opinions which seem to differ from yours. Don't insist that because I don't support his personal actions, I have to agree with the antipeterson crowd on everything else.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Perhaps this indicates that those ESPN polls aren't an accurate reflection of the general sentiment about this case. Surely in an election year, a politician wouldn't take a stance that 63% of his constituents disagrees with, right?

He's giving lip service to the whole issue and conveniently waited until the Vikings reinstated him to say anything. This gives him a chance to look tough on child abusers while changing nothing.

I'm a little surprised he weighed in at all if he wasn't compelled to. I'm not sure how it's convenient that he "waited" until Peterson was reinstated, though. He's reacting to the reinstatement. When else would he have made this statement?

Your last statement is what gives me hope, though. "Looking tough on child abusers" implies that a solid majority agrees that what occurred here was, in fact, child abuse. Reading this thread and elsewhere, you almost get the impression that there is a large portion of the population that believes this is how you're supposed to discipline children (though they may qualify that by saying Peterson went a little overboard), which I genuinely hope is not the case. IMO what we've seen in the pictures is not "a little over the line," or whatever. This looks nothing at all like parenting.

 

[VaTerp]

Yeah, the justice system likely failed that kid. This really isn't a hard concept to grasp. As a direct result of the "whooping" AP gave that kid, he now has a permanent scar above his right eye. I don't give a #### if the kid got it trying to avoid a back hand from his 6'1 220 lb "dad", it was still the direct result of AP's archaic view of discipline. I feel bad for him (AP), because I truly think he thinks there's some strong correlation between beating the #### out of your kids and them becoming a man. Regardless, it doesn't excuse any of it. It's all is so obviously wrong it boggles my mind that anyone could defend it.

Sounded like his dad beat the crap out of him. And it's likely he feels that somehow contributed to him becoming a beast of a running back.

I still don't think you get it. Nobody is defending Peterson the person or his actions. Speaking for myself I am defending the tenets of due process, trying to correct factual inaccuracies that are being propagated in this thread, and speaking out against irresponsible journalism and the mob frenzy it creates. That it so happens to rebut the assertions of people denouncing Peterson has nothing to do with how I feel personally about his actions, which I find repugnant.

Yet you find fault with others that have the same view you just posted. How is it that you can come to this conclusion but you call out others? After all, he hasn't had his day in court. All we have are shoddy internet accounts of what may have happened. So how can you find his actions repugnant?

Because...

I feel like the course of rehabilitation is more beneficial for him than punishment.

I feel like he should and will be given a second chance by not only the Vikings, but the NFL.

I feel this issue encompasses a myriad of issues from religion to race and is not as simple and cut and dry as some seem to believe.

I feel the mob mentality, encouraged by shoddy journalism, has gone a bit overboard in this thread.

I feel the demonization of public figures also says a lot about the accusers.

I feel like emotion and not logic is driving much of the "analysis" in this thread.

I feel like false consensus and false confirmation biases are running rampant in this thread.

Just as the same jury can find a man guilty and then differ on opinions for sentencing, I can be disgusted at the photos and articles I've read, yet maintain the above opinions which seem to differ from yours. Don't insist that because I don't support his personal actions, I have to agree with the antipeterson crowd on everything else.

Well said.

Unfortunately it's now cooler to shout from our keyboards that, "I hope that P.O.S. never plays again and ends up penniless" and further sensationalize the "facts" that have been shared on the internet. Pointing the finger at the bad guy makes people feel better about themselves.

 

[dparker713]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

 

[dparker713]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

In discussions about this kind if thing with people at work I've brought up an alternative idea. Try waiting 15-30 minutes and then do it. It takes all emotion out of it. If it's about discipline, then waiting a few should not matter. I think in many (I'd say most but I don't have data on it, just a feeling) instances, the act of physical punishment of a child is just as much about getting rid of your own anger as it is correcting something that a child does wrong. If you believe physical punishment is a viable parenting choice to correct behaviors (ie a child learns a specific long term lesson from a spanking/whipping) then just waiting until you're calm shouldn't matter right?

But wouldn't the longer you wait to discipline a child make it less likely that they associate the physical punishment with the unwanted behavior?

 

[VaTerp]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

 

[cvnpoka]

The part I was referring to was clearly spelled out.

Well you seem to think I took your words out of context, so I was offering you a chance to clarify. But if you're that quick to abandon whatever point you were trying to make, then sure, let's move on.

im pretty sure his point was that he is glad that people who think peterson is a child abuser are not in a position to make important decisions regarding this situation. he doesnt elaborate on why that is but if it was for some selfish reason like he has peterson on a ton of his fantasy teams or has a large bet riding on the viking, then i would understand. otherwise, i am not sure why he believes that an absentee father with a closet full of belts for his "whoopin room" who prides himself on dishing out physical punishment until the child crys, doesnt deserve any sort of punishment.

 

[Grateful Parrot]

Yeah, the justice system likely failed that kid. This really isn't a hard concept to grasp. As a direct result of the "whooping" AP gave that kid, he now has a permanent scar above his right eye. I don't give a #### if the kid got it trying to avoid a back hand from his 6'1 220 lb "dad", it was still the direct result of AP's archaic view of discipline. I feel bad for him (AP), because I truly think he thinks there's some strong correlation between beating the #### out of your kids and them becoming a man. Regardless, it doesn't excuse any of it. It's all is so obviously wrong it boggles my mind that anyone could defend it.

Sounded like his dad beat the crap out of him. And it's likely he feels that somehow contributed to him becoming a beast of a running back.

I still don't think you get it. Nobody is defending Peterson the person or his actions. Speaking for myself I am defending the tenets of due process, trying to correct factual inaccuracies that are being propagated in this thread, and speaking out against irresponsible journalism and the mob frenzy it creates. That it so happens to rebut the assertions of people denouncing Peterson has nothing to do with how I feel personally about his actions, which I find repugnant.

Yet you find fault with others that have the same view you just posted. How is it that you can come to this conclusion but you call out others? After all, he hasn't had his day in court. All we have are shoddy internet accounts of what may have happened. So how can you find his actions repugnant?

Because...

I feel like the course of rehabilitation is more beneficial for him than punishment.

I feel like he should and will be given a second chance by not only the Vikings, but the NFL.

I feel this issue encompasses a myriad of issues from religion to race and is not as simple and cut and dry as some seem to believe.

I feel the mob mentality, encouraged by shoddy journalism, has gone a bit overboard in this thread.

I feel the demonization of public figures also says a lot about the accusers.

I feel like emotion and not logic is driving much of the "analysis" in this thread.

I feel like false consensus and false confirmation biases are running rampant in this thread.

Just as the same jury can find a man guilty and then differ on opinions for sentencing, I can be disgusted at the photos and articles I've read, yet maintain the above opinions which seem to differ from yours. Don't insist that because I don't support his personal actions, I have to agree with the antipeterson crowd on everything else.

Well said.

Unfortunately it's now cooler to shout from our keyboards that, "I hope that P.O.S. never plays again and ends up penniless" and further sensationalize the "facts" that have been shared on the internet. Pointing the finger at the bad guy makes people feel better about themselves.

Also well said.

 

[chinawildman]

That's where the discipline argument falls apart. The laws most definitely are archaic relating to child abuse. Only slightly less so on domestic abuse.

Some would say your belief that one should "never hit a woman" is archaic as well. In fact the majority of laws are archaic in the literal sense... "thou shalt not kill" for instance.

Sometimes the tides of society ebbs and flows instead of merely moving in one direction. New law sometimes does not necessarily equal good law. When I see people refer to laws as "archaic" it reminds me of how the word "freedom" is used in republican campaigns. Buzzwords that hold little inherent meaning but seem to rally specific factions to their cause. But I digress... the point is just because some laws are old doesn't make them obsolete or any less valid.

 

[dparker713]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

Someone should let the governor know Peterson was never suspended.

 

[dparker713]

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/fe350286d8a74631b269471fd92f8b6c/FBN--Peterson-Dayton

Minnesota Governor speaks out.

"ST. PAUL, Minnesota Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton says Vikings running back Adrian Peterson should have stayed suspended until an accusation of child abuse was resolved in the legal system."

so if you suspend 6 games and hes found not guilty hes sues you. You suspend now and then hes found guilty do you suspend him again?

That's basically what the NLF did with Vick.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Yeah, the justice system likely failed that kid. This really isn't a hard concept to grasp. As a direct result of the "whooping" AP gave that kid, he now has a permanent scar above his right eye. I don't give a #### if the kid got it trying to avoid a back hand from his 6'1 220 lb "dad", it was still the direct result of AP's archaic view of discipline. I feel bad for him (AP), because I truly think he thinks there's some strong correlation between beating the #### out of your kids and them becoming a man. Regardless, it doesn't excuse any of it. It's all is so obviously wrong it boggles my mind that anyone could defend it.

Sounded like his dad beat the crap out of him. And it's likely he feels that somehow contributed to him becoming a beast of a running back.

I still don't think you get it. Nobody is defending Peterson the person or his actions. Speaking for myself I am defending the tenets of due process, trying to correct factual inaccuracies that are being propagated in this thread, and speaking out against irresponsible journalism and the mob frenzy it creates. That it so happens to rebut the assertions of people denouncing Peterson has nothing to do with how I feel personally about his actions, which I find repugnant.

Yet you find fault with others that have the same view you just posted. How is it that you can come to this conclusion but you call out others? After all, he hasn't had his day in court. All we have are shoddy internet accounts of what may have happened. So how can you find his actions repugnant?

Because...

I feel like the course of rehabilitation is more beneficial for him than punishment.

I feel like he should and will be given a second chance by not only the Vikings, but the NFL.

I feel this issue encompasses a myriad of issues from religion to race and is not as simple and cut and dry as some seem to believe.

I feel the mob mentality, encouraged by shoddy journalism, has gone a bit overboard in this thread.

I feel the demonization of public figures also says a lot about the accusers.

I feel like emotion and not logic is driving much of the "analysis" in this thread.

I feel like false consensus and false confirmation biases are running rampant in this thread.

Just as the same jury can find a man guilty and then differ on opinions for sentencing, I can be disgusted at the photos and articles I've read, yet maintain the above opinions which seem to differ from yours. Don't insist that because I don't support his personal actions, I have to agree with the antipeterson crowd on everything else.

Well said.

Unfortunately it's now cooler to shout from our keyboards that, "I hope that P.O.S. never plays again and ends up penniless" and further sensationalize the "facts" that have been shared on the internet. Pointing the finger at the bad guy makes people feel better about themselves.

Or, you know, people are just expressing their opinions. But don't let that stop you from pretending to be the bigger person or something. If chinawildman says:

- I feel like the course of rehabilitation is more beneficial for him than punishment.

- I feel like he should and will be given a second chance by not only the Vikings, but the NFL.

that's "well said," but if someone says,

- I feel like Peterson should be puninshed for abusing his child.

- I feel like he should and will be suspended by the NFL.

somehow that's just people trying to be cool and feel better about themselves.

And here's the reality: There's no need to put "facts" in quotes. They're facts. The pictures are real, the texts are real, this actually happened. Pretending like that's really in doubt just weakens your point (chinawildman was guilty of the same exact thing earlier in the thread). The debate isn't whether or not this happened, the debate is what happens next. Maybe all this information shouldn't have leaked to the media and the internet, but it did. Trivializing it or acting like this might just all be a big misunderstanding just detracts from whatever other valid points you're trying to make.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

I think it's completely abnormal. Any sane person understands that a 4 year old is barely cognizant of his world and able to grasp only the most basic ideas of right and wrong. I hate to be insensitive but beating up a 4 year old kid isn't so diffferent than beating up a developmentally disabled adult. They don't have the ability to understand right from wrong. Now, to be fair, the kid will eventually learn, but needs some time and parental guidance. To think you can beat some sense into a 4 year old is as abnormal as shouting at a collicky baby for crying. Adult operator error. Go read the parent manual. Beating up kids is crazy. Crazy is abnormal.

 

[massraider]

Great post.

 

[VaTerp]

The part I was referring to was clearly spelled out.

Well you seem to think I took your words out of context, so I was offering you a chance to clarify. But if you're that quick to abandon whatever point you were trying to make, then sure, let's move on.

im pretty sure his point was that he is glad that people who think peterson is a child abuser are not in a position to make important decisions regarding this situation. he doesnt elaborate on why that is but if it was for some selfish reason like he has peterson on a ton of his fantasy teams or has a large bet riding on the viking, then i would understand. otherwise, i am not sure why he believes that an absentee father with a closet full of belts for his "whoopin room" who prides himself on dishing out physical punishment until the child crys, doesnt deserve any sort of punishment.

Sigh.

This is so off base that I don't even know where to begin. So I won't really. I'll just say that you are completely wrong on my point, which I guess is what happens sometimes when people use partial quotes and take things out of context.

And I have never stated that Peterson "doesn't deserve any sort of punishment." But this thread is full of people reading into things and creating their own reality. So carry on.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Lol at negotiating what mong on means.

 

[cvnpoka]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

In discussions about this kind if thing with people at work I've brought up an alternative idea. Try waiting 15-30 minutes and then do it. It takes all emotion out of it. If it's about discipline, then waiting a few should not matter. I think in many (I'd say most but I don't have data on it, just a feeling) instances, the act of physical punishment of a child is just as much about getting rid of your own anger as it is correcting something that a child does wrong. If you believe physical punishment is a viable parenting choice to correct behaviors (ie a child learns a specific long term lesson from a spanking/whipping) then just waiting until you're calm shouldn't matter right?

But wouldn't the longer you wait to discipline a child make it less likely that they associate the physical punishment with the unwanted behavior?

then perhaps the child is way too young to be physically punished.

 

[VaTerp]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

I think it's completely abnormal. Any sane person understands that a 4 year old is barely cognizant of his world and able to grasp only the most basic ideas of right and wrong. I hate to be insensitive but beating up a 4 year old kid isn't so diffferent than beating up a developmentally disabled adult. They don't have the ability to understand right from wrong. Now, to be fair, the kid will eventually learn, but needs some time and parental guidance. To think you can beat some sense into a 4 year old is as abnormal as shouting at a collicky baby for crying. Adult operator error. Go read the parent manual. Beating up kids is crazy. Crazy is abnormal.

Misguided yes, abnormal no IMO.

 

[Neofight]

That's where the discipline argument falls apart. The laws most definitely are archaic relating to child abuse. Only slightly less so on domestic abuse.

Some would say your belief that one should "never hit a woman" is archaic as well. In fact the majority of laws are archaic in the literal sense... "thou shalt not kill" for instance.

Sometimes the tides of society ebbs and flows instead of merely moving in one direction. New law sometimes does not necessarily equal good law. When I see people refer to laws as "archaic" it reminds me of how the word "freedom" is used in republican campaigns. Buzzwords that hold little inherent meaning but seem to rally specific factions to their cause. But I digress... the point is just because some laws are old doesn't make them obsolete or any less valid.

Some would say I never made the statement quoted, and they'd be right.

This post is the type of post that gets you in so much trouble on this board. Misquoting and proselytizing make poor dance partners. Especially when they are enveloped in philosophical nonsense that comes across as self-contradictory (sure, it ok for me to use a word to make a point, but it holds little when others use it to make one).

Honestly, you are more capable at dialogue (or monologue, as is sometimes the case) than this. Most certainly, you can make more sense of things. The post you made prior to this was a decent one. You were honest and relatively reflective; though again a bit self-contradictory and narrow.

 

[cvnpoka]

The part I was referring to was clearly spelled out.

Well you seem to think I took your words out of context, so I was offering you a chance to clarify. But if you're that quick to abandon whatever point you were trying to make, then sure, let's move on.

im pretty sure his point was that he is glad that people who think peterson is a child abuser are not in a position to make important decisions regarding this situation. he doesnt elaborate on why that is but if it was for some selfish reason like he has peterson on a ton of his fantasy teams or has a large bet riding on the viking, then i would understand. otherwise, i am not sure why he believes that an absentee father with a closet full of belts for his "whoopin room" who prides himself on dishing out physical punishment until the child crys, doesnt deserve any sort of punishment.

Sigh.

This is so off base that I don't even know where to begin. So I won't really. I'll just say that you are completely wrong on my point, which I guess is what happens sometimes when people use partial quotes and take things out of context.

And I have never stated that Peterson "doesn't deserve any sort of punishment." But this thread is full of people reading into things and creating their own reality. So carry on.

your words:

One of many things I see wrong with this thread is people trying to use this situation as a way to justify their stance on physical punishment of children, one way or the other. In reality, there are different parenting styles that work for different children and different families. Adrian Peterson was raised with a parenting style that heavily involved physical punishment. He's emulating that with his kids. To extent to which he did this in one specific instance was wrong, and potentially criminally wrong. The Texas legal system will determine that. But spankings and whoopings, in and of themselves, are not illegal.

People who seemingly disagree with that want to automatically call a man they don't know a P.O.S., throw him out of the league, send him to jail, and jump to the worst possible assumptions. I'm glad these people arent making decisions of consequence here.

sorry, but "context" doesnt change anything. your statement is quite clear. here it is in full, with one of the points bolded.

as for people "creating their own reality," well, i think those are the ppl who are trying to argue that peterson "meant well," or just "went a little too far," or the "the car seat did it," or thinking this isnt routine behavior for peterson, or referring to the well documented circumstances as "facts" as if the situation is not quite clear.

 

[Grateful Parrot]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

I think it's completely abnormal. Any sane person understands that a 4 year old is barely cognizant of his world and able to grasp only the most basic ideas of right and wrong. I hate to be insensitive but beating up a 4 year old kid isn't so diffferent than beating up a developmentally disabled adult. They don't have the ability to understand right from wrong. Now, to be fair, the kid will eventually learn, but needs some time and parental guidance. To think you can beat some sense into a 4 year old is as abnormal as shouting at a collicky baby for crying. Adult operator error. Go read the parent manual. Beating up kids is crazy. Crazy is abnormal.

And some could also say that the lack of discipline in our kids has brought on more suicides, gender questioning, alcohol and drug abuse. Not implying that's what your saying, but book knowledge doesn't lead to good parenting. Again, I got spanked as a kid and I think I turned out alright. Have I ever spanked my kids, no, but it's mostly due to it being 3 daughters, at least that's what I tell myself. Frankly I'm having a harder time dealing with technology that kids have access too, but that's another topic.I'm 6'4", around 275. Have I intimidated my girls, hell yes..are they emotionally scarred, no because as they grew older, they learned who dad really is. We know nothing about the family structure or how good or bad AP is, your basing his whole existence on this one (that we know of) instance.

I don't feel bad that AP spanked his kid, but do feel bad for the kid that AP went overboard, especially given his size and strength. He needs to find a way to temper that

 

[VaTerp]

The part I was referring to was clearly spelled out.

Well you seem to think I took your words out of context, so I was offering you a chance to clarify. But if you're that quick to abandon whatever point you were trying to make, then sure, let's move on.

im pretty sure his point was that he is glad that people who think peterson is a child abuser are not in a position to make important decisions regarding this situation. he doesnt elaborate on why that is but if it was for some selfish reason like he has peterson on a ton of his fantasy teams or has a large bet riding on the viking, then i would understand. otherwise, i am not sure why he believes that an absentee father with a closet full of belts for his "whoopin room" who prides himself on dishing out physical punishment until the child crys, doesnt deserve any sort of punishment.

Sigh.

This is so off base that I don't even know where to begin. So I won't really. I'll just say that you are completely wrong on my point, which I guess is what happens sometimes when people use partial quotes and take things out of context.

And I have never stated that Peterson "doesn't deserve any sort of punishment." But this thread is full of people reading into things and creating their own reality. So carry on.

your words:

One of many things I see wrong with this thread is people trying to use this situation as a way to justify their stance on physical punishment of children, one way or the other. In reality, there are different parenting styles that work for different children and different families. Adrian Peterson was raised with a parenting style that heavily involved physical punishment. He's emulating that with his kids. To extent to which he did this in one specific instance was wrong, and potentially criminally wrong. The Texas legal system will determine that. But spankings and whoopings, in and of themselves, are not illegal.

People who seemingly disagree with that want to automatically call a man they don't know a P.O.S., throw him out of the league, send him to jail, and jump to the worst possible assumptions. I'm glad these people arent making decisions of consequence here.

sorry, but "context" doesnt change anything. your statement is quite clear. here it is in full, with one of the points bolded.

as for people "creating their own reality," well, i think those are the ppl who are trying to argue that peterson "meant well," or just "went a little too far," or the "the car seat did it," or thinking this isnt routine behavior for peterson, or referring to the well documented circumstances as "facts" as if the situation is not quite clear.

Fail.

The point you are talking about is not the point that Ignoratio was talking about. You jumped in to try and speak for me using a completely different post than the one I was referencing when I said it was clearly spelled out.

 

[chinawildman]

And here's the reality: There's no need to put "facts" in quotes. They're facts. The pictures are real, the texts are real, this actually happened. Pretending like that's really in doubt just weakens your point (chinawildman was guilty of the same exact thing earlier in the thread). The debate isn't whether or not this happened, the debate is what happens next. Maybe all this information shouldn't have leaked to the media and the internet, but it did. Trivializing it or acting like this might just all be a big misunderstanding just detracts from whatever other valid points you're trying to make.

I advocated that people should consume information, with an inclination towards critical analysis rather than just wholesale buying into whatever it is they read. What's wrong with that? Throughout this thread, I've seen people cite the following:

1) Peterson showed no remorse

2) Peterson took pleasure in "whoopin" his kids

3) Peterson in now under investigation for a 2nd child

4) Peterson hit his kid against a car

None of this is true or based on any facts. And according to you, because I am against the dissemination of inaccurate reporting, I am "guilty" of what exactly Mr. Grand Inquisitor?

Initial reports thought the kid was 11 for at least an hour before they got that straightened out. You think with this kind of reliablility we shouldn't read the news more closely and examine reported facts under a microscope?

 

[Neofight]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

I think it's completely abnormal. Any sane person understands that a 4 year old is barely cognizant of his world and able to grasp only the most basic ideas of right and wrong. I hate to be insensitive but beating up a 4 year old kid isn't so diffferent than beating up a developmentally disabled adult. They don't have the ability to understand right from wrong. Now, to be fair, the kid will eventually learn, but needs some time and parental guidance. To think you can beat some sense into a 4 year old is as abnormal as shouting at a collicky baby for crying. Adult operator error. Go read the parent manual. Beating up kids is crazy. Crazy is abnormal.

And some could also say that the lack of discipline in our kids has brought on more suicides, gender questioning, alcohol and drug abuse. Not implying that's what your saying, but book knowledge doesn't lead to good parenting. Again, I got spanked as a kid and I think I turned out alright. Have I ever spanked my kids, no, but it's mostly due to it being 3 daughters, at least that's what I tell myself. Frankly I'm having a harder time dealing with technology that kids have access too, but that's another topic.I'm 6'4", around 275. Have I intimidated my girls, hell yes..are they emotionally scarred, no because as they grew older, they learned who dad really is. We know nothing about the family structure or how good or bad AP is, your basing his whole existence on this one (that we know of) instance.I don't feel bad that AP spanked his kid, but do feel bad for the kid that AP went overboard, especially given his size and strength. He needs to find a way to temper that

A lot here. Just that first sentence is loaded. Can you start by just explaining what all that means (i.e., how lack of discipline contributes to suicide and "gender questioning")?

 

[chinawildman]

Some would say I never made the statement quoted, and they'd be right.This post is the type of post that gets you in so much trouble on this board. Misquoting and proselytizing make poor dance partners. Especially when they are enveloped in philosophical nonsense that comes across as self-contradictory (sure, it ok for me to use a word to make a point, but it holds little when others use it to make one).

Honestly, you are more capable at dialogue (or monologue, as is sometimes the case) than this. Most certainly, you can make more sense of things. The post you made prior to this was a decent one. You were honest and relatively reflective; though again a bit self-contradictory and narrow.

I'm flattered, nothing I said was intended to be philosophical by any means. If nonsense and self-contradictory is all you got, then please by all means illustrate your points instead of resorting to criticizing my manner of discourse, it makes you appear lazy.

If I jumped to conclusions about your stance on hitting women, then my apologies. But in your answer to my hypothetical of "how many times can a woman hit a man before he can hit back", you never gave an answer as to when it IS justified. So I can only assume that you think: 1) It's never ok to hit a woman 2) It could be ok in some instances, but you just didn't want to write it for fear of coming off as a wifebeater "apologist". Am I getting warm?

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

And some could also say that the lack of discipline in our kids has brought on more suicides, gender questioning, alcohol and drug abuse. Not implying that's what your saying, but book knowledge doesn't lead to good parenting. Again, I got spanked as a kid and I think I turned out alright. Have I ever spanked my kids, no, but it's mostly due to it being 3 daughters, at least that's what I tell myself. Frankly I'm having a harder time dealing with technology that kids have access too, but that's another topic.I'm 6'4", around 275. Have I intimidated my girls, hell yes..are they emotionally scarred, no because as they grew older, they learned who dad really is. We know nothing about the family structure or how good or bad AP is, your basing his whole existence on this one (that we know of) instance.I don't feel bad that AP spanked his kid, but do feel bad for the kid that AP went overboard, especially given his size and strength. He needs to find a way to temper that

A lot here. Just that first sentence is loaded. Can you start by just explaining what all that means (i.e., how lack of discipline contributes to suicide and "gender questioning")?

You can beat the gay out of kids, dontcha know.

 

[dparker713]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

How is that abnormal? Humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

As a parent I agree with everything raiderfan said except that. It may be misguided but it's certainly not abnormal for people to think they can "knock some sense into em."

I think it's completely abnormal. Any sane person understands that a 4 year old is barely cognizant of his world and able to grasp only the most basic ideas of right and wrong. I hate to be insensitive but beating up a 4 year old kid isn't so diffferent than beating up a developmentally disabled adult. They don't have the ability to understand right from wrong. Now, to be fair, the kid will eventually learn, but needs some time and parental guidance. To think you can beat some sense into a 4 year old is as abnormal as shouting at a collicky baby for crying. Adult operator error. Go read the parent manual. Beating up kids is crazy. Crazy is abnormal.

Kid tries to touch the stove. You smack their hand away, they don't touch the stove. Now, they may try again a little while later, but you can certainly change behavior immediately. Also, if they don't understand much of anything, they certainly understand pain.

 

[treat88]

I think its fair to acknowledge that what Peterson did was morally reprehensible but yet not the worst possible form of behavior.

I think its fair too to acknowledge that even though I think that behavior is morally reprehensible there is a fanning of the flames due to social media turning Peterson into an archetype villian rather than a simply misguided, brutal father.

I think too, that even though I cannot fathom treating any child, let alone my own, that way that there are likely multiple effective outcomes here rather than just indefinite suspension.

I can believe that the behavior is absolutely wrong but that there is a middle ground in terms of the consequence to that behavior.

Justice and mercy can coexist.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

What an absolute disaster for the NFL (and the Vikings). They can't come out this looking good. Suspend him, and he doesn't get his "day in court". There is a "rush to judgement". DON'T suspend him, and you are enabling a superstar, because it's all about the mighty buck. It seem like 65% of the people are pissed off either way. Doesn't seem possible, but it seems strangely true.

As for Peterson, to me it's pretty clear cut. Culture is no excuse for injuring your 4 year old child. Some things are just wrong, sorry. Yeah, I judge him and I judge that culture. I can't even believe people are still tossing out the "other people are doing it so it's OK" mantra. That should stop working in grade school. LOT's of things used to be OK that aren't any more. In many ways we are are "softer" culture than we used to be, but in this case, that's not a bad thing.

There are cultures overseas that think it's OK to stone women for the clothes they wear (or a million other dumb things), and behead people that don't share the culture's religion. It's OK to say those things are wrong, and it's OK say beating your child with a stick hard enough to give him lacerations that last over a week is wrong too.

All that said, I can totally see both sides of the suspension argument. I don't believe any organization HAS to wait for a legal process to play out before taking action on an employee, but it might make things a lot simpler in many cases.

 

[Neofight]

Some would say I never made the statement quoted, and they'd be right.

This post is the type of post that gets you in so much trouble on this board. Misquoting and proselytizing make poor dance partners. Especially when they are enveloped in philosophical nonsense that comes across as self-contradictory (sure, it ok for me to use a word to make a point, but it holds little when others use it to make one).

Honestly, you are more capable at dialogue (or monologue, as is sometimes the case) than this. Most certainly, you can make more sense of things. The post you made prior to this was a decent one. You were honest and relatively reflective; though again a bit self-contradictory and narrow.

I'm flattered, nothing I said was intended to be philosophical by any means. If nonsense and self-contradictory is all you got, then please by all means illustrate your points instead of resorting to criticizing my manner of discourse, it makes you appear lazy.

If I jumped to conclusions about your stance on hitting women, then my apologies. But in your answer to my hypothetical of "how many times can a woman hit a man before he can hit back", you never gave an answer as to when it IS justified. So I can only assume that you think: 1) It's never ok to hit a woman 2) It could be ok in some instances, but you just didn't want to write it for fear of coming off as a wifebeater "apologist". Am I getting warm?

Assuming and misquoting. Then chastising me for things you do in the same sentence. It's ironic and charming.

I was giving you honest feedback. The lazy approach would be not to take it.

 

[dparker713]

I'm a parent of 4. Seen and heard things my kids have done that made my internal outrage meter go off. As the most pissed off and physically strongest person in the room, sometimes it's hard to channel that anger and focus your energy into a constructive, patient, lesson learning punishment. That brute animal instinct at the moment the #### hits the fan can make you twitch in anger thinking you need to unload your frustrations. Then you look down at your small child who you love...who cannot in any way defend him or herself from you and you remind yourself that the point of discipline is to right your child. It's not to inflict pain or release personal frustrations. That is not your right as a parent. The line you draw between abuse and discipline is a fine line, but you need to know that there are laws that delineate what you can and cannot do. Throw out cultural bias, that's a worthless crutch that enables domestic violence. The same kind of cultural bias was once used to justify segregation and women's suffrage.

A four year old child cannot even understand half the time what it is they are being punished for. They are very inquisitive at that age, and naturally get themselves in situations that get them into trouble. It's in their nature to push the boundaries. And it's completely normal. What's abnormal is to be a grown (yet immature) man of Adrian Peterson's might that believes he can somehow knock some sense into them. Hiding behind cultural upbringing is buying into the same cycle of violence and the chain never breaks. PSA to future parents, If you don't have patience, then don't get into the parenting business. It's not for everybody.

In discussions about this kind if thing with people at work I've brought up an alternative idea. Try waiting 15-30 minutes and then do it. It takes all emotion out of it. If it's about discipline, then waiting a few should not matter. I think in many (I'd say most but I don't have data on it, just a feeling) instances, the act of physical punishment of a child is just as much about getting rid of your own anger as it is correcting something that a child does wrong. If you believe physical punishment is a viable parenting choice to correct behaviors (ie a child learns a specific long term lesson from a spanking/whipping) then just waiting until you're calm shouldn't matter right?

But wouldn't the longer you wait to discipline a child make it less likely that they associate the physical punishment with the unwanted behavior?

then perhaps the child is way too young to be physically punished.

maybe the less they're able to communicate the more sense it makes to physically punish.

 

[CalBear]

And some could also say that the lack of discipline in our kids has brought on more suicides, gender questioning, alcohol and drug abuse.

Drug use among teens is actually far lower than it was in the 70s. Alcohol use is at "historically low" levels, down 30% just since the 1990s. Suicide rates are the same as they were in the 80s (though they'd dropped in the late 90s). Gender questioning, well, yes, that's happening more often now since it's less likely to get you killed than it used to be. You think that's a bad thing?