i'm going to leave this alone; but first i want to point out one more thing.
as an example:
i remember when i poured my koolaid on my cereal when the milk was in front of me. my mum was is such shock; she called me a dumbass without even thinking. after the innitial shock wore off; we all laughed.
now that's a funny memory.
saying i don't remember what happened but my mum called me a dumbass and i laughed at her; is an underlying hurt.
that's why i asked if you've ever heard of gallow laugh.
anyway; we all deal with things differently so the subject is closed in my book. i hope it is a fond memory.
It is a fond memory. It wasn't hurtful because it never crossed my mind that she actually meant it. She thought that I was a sneaky and disobedient little smart-ass (she was right about that), but I knew she didn't think I was stupid. She may have thought I was acting pretty stupid at the moment (and I probably was), but there's a big difference between thinking someone has done a dumb thing and that they are actually dumb.
That's the only point I've been trying to make ... that you can't pinpoint one isolated incident and call it "child abuse," because by that standard we are all abused, and we are all abusers, which is nonsense. Everything that takes place in a family takes place in a context. A very healthy and loving relationship can easily withstand the occasional, inevitable mistakes. In a disfunctional relationship, those same mistakes are much more damaging.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Personal experience is not everything. When we are talking about the effects of having homosexual parents or homosexuality in general, or child development in general, personal experience amounts to squat.
it may not be statistically significant for scientific purposes, but it's ridiculous to say that it is not reality.
Main Entry: 1dy·nam·ic
Pronunciation: dI-'na-mik
Function: adjective
Etymology: French dynamique, from Greek dynamikos powerful, from dynamis power, from dynasthai to be able
1 also dy·nam·i·cal /-mi-k&l/ a : of or relating to physical force or energy b : of or relating to dynamics
2 a : marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change <a dynamic city> b : ENERGETIC, FORCEFUL <a dynamic personality>
3 of random-access memory : requiring periodic refreshment of charge in order to retain data
- dy·nam·i·cal·ly /-mi-k(&-)lE/ adverb http://m-w.com/dictionary/dynamical
Man, why do you even say this crap?
i stand corrected. ive simply never in my life heard it used. seems to me it would be just as appropriate to have used dynamic in that sentence. i wonder why dynamical even exists. it sounds like something george bush would say.
I have a son.hes a good kid.nobody i know down here is gay.not to my knowledge. why would he turn out like that.no history of it in the family, or his mother's. if he DID turn out a faggot ide be pissed,sure i would.but hes still my son.
i guarantee you know somebody who is gay, they just probly havent told you cos of shit like what you spew around here.
gay parents does not equal gay kids. likewise, straight parents doesn't always equal straight kids.
would you refuse to talk to your kid and tell him he's disgusting? would you treat him differently than you would other gay people? dick cheney used to hate "fairys" like you do. funny thing happens when someone close to you turns out to be one though... you suddenly get a lot more reasonable and realize they're human too.
lastly, im not a violent man. but if i was the local prosecutor and someone laid the hurt on dino, im pretty sure id look the other way.
It is a fond memory. It wasn't hurtful because it never crossed my mind that she actually meant it. She thought that I was a sneaky and disobedient little smart-ass (she was right about that), but I knew she didn't think I was stupid. She may have thought I was acting pretty stupid at the moment (and I probably was), but there's a big difference between thinking someone has done a dumb thing and that they are actually dumb.
That's the only point I've been trying to make ... that you can't pinpoint one isolated incident and call it "child abuse," because by that standard we are all abused, and we are all abusers, which is nonsense. Everything that takes place in a family takes place in a context. A very healthy and loving relationship can easily withstand the occasional, inevitable mistakes. In a disfunctional relationship, those same mistakes are much more damaging.
i can agree with that. very much so. i remember a time when i was accused of something i didn't do; but my father took the other side. now this may not be abuse; but it's hurtful that he didn't stand by me. i went and did something similar since i was punished for it anyway; but he should have stood by me and heard out the evidence. looking back it is petty and hasn't ruined my life; but to a 9 year old it was devastating. i knew then my father wouldn't stand by me. it took a lot of years for him to prove to me he would; but i lashed out because of it. the girl i've been calling my baby has lashed out at everyone but me because of what her mother did to her. i believe that remembering that hurtful incident is the reason i can reach the kids noone else can. i not only see the emptiness inside them but can understand it.
i do see and understand what you're saying; and i believe you are right in your case; but you're one in a billion.
it may not be statistically significant for scientific purposes, but it's ridiculous to say that it is not reality.
Not to mention that it's ludicrous to imply that people on message boards--a forum for sharing, expressing and developing opinions--refrain from sharing, expressing and developing opinions. I'm all for an informed opinion, and it's great that sometimes we all learn on message boards. But to disdain people just being where they are with their opinions, I do not support. I support people getting their opinions on the table and into the light of reason where they CAN and DO evolve. This goes for any opinion within the range from completely unreasonable to highly reasoned.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
it may not be statistically significant for scientific purposes, but it's ridiculous to say that it is not reality.
science is done in a controlled enviornment; real life is not. for example; in high school a study was done about the number of student who smoked pot. everyone i knew said no even though we were the schools biggest stoners. the study showed 45% smoked; but because of the size of the school and those i knew said no; it should've been doubled.
Not to mention that it's ludicrous to imply that people on message boards--a forum for sharing, expressing and developing opinions--refrain from sharing, expressing and developing opinions. I'm all for an informed opinion, and it's great that sometimes we all learn on message boards. But to disdain people just being where they are with their opinions, I do not support. I support people getting their opinions on the table and into the light of reason where they CAN and DO evolve. This goes for any opinion within the range from completely unreasonable to highly reasoned.
going a step further; i've had several opinions changed by listening to the others on this board.
i can agree with that. very much so. i remember a time when i was accused of something i didn't do; but my father took the other side. now this may not be abuse; but it's hurtful that he didn't stand by me. i went and did something similar since i was punished for it anyway; but he should have stood by me and heard out the evidence. looking back it is petty and hasn't ruined my life; but to a 9 year old it was devastating. i knew then my father wouldn't stand by me. it took a lot of years for him to prove to me he would; but i lashed out because of it. the girl i've been calling my baby has lashed out at everyone but me because of what her mother did to her. i believe that remembering that hurtful incident is the reason i can reach the kids noone else can. i not only see the emptiness inside them but can understand it.
i do see and understand what you're saying; and i believe you are right in your case; but you're one in a billion.
Life is not all rosy and wonderful all of the time, and there's really nothing wrong with that. Thinking of your experience, I would guess you probably learned something from it. Perhaps you are not the type of person who is quick to assume that someone is guilty, because you learned firsthand how hurtful that is, and that things are not always the way they initially appear to be. One of the things we need to learn in life is how to get through adversity and find something positive in each of our experiences. I'm not suggesting that parents go out of their way to teach these lessons the hard way ... they don't have to, because they will do it accidentally when they are trying to do the right thing. I don't see anything terribly wrong with a child learning that everyone makes mistakes, that they won't always be believed, and how it feels to be falsely accused. It's a tough lesson, as most valuable ones are, but it's reality.
I'm guessing that the girl you're caring for has had to deal with many, many such incidents over years and years, which is an entirely different ballgame. I only took issue with your initial statement because I don't like to see every mistake a parent makes labeled "abuse." That takes the power away from that word and it becomes sort of a politically correct thing that people roll their eyes at. REAL child abuse is the worst crime there is, in my opinion, and shouldn't be confused with other, lesser offenses.
Lastly, I very much doubt that I am one of only six or seven people on the planet who can blow off parental mistakes
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Life is not all rosy and wonderful all of the time, and there's really nothing wrong with that. Thinking of your experience, I would guess you probably learned something from it. Perhaps you are not the type of person who is quick to assume that someone is guilty, because you learned firsthand how hurtful that is, and that things are not always the way they initially appear to be. One of the things we need to learn in life is how to get through adversity and find something positive in each of our experiences. I'm not suggesting that parents go out of their way to teach these lessons the hard way ... they don't have to, because they will do it accidentally when they are trying to do the right thing. I don't see anything terribly wrong with a child learning that everyone makes mistakes, that they won't always be believed, and how it feels to be falsely accused. It's a tough lesson, as most valuable ones are, but it's reality.
I'm guessing that the girl you're caring for has had to deal with many, many such incidents over years and years, which is an entirely different ballgame. I only took issue with your initial statement because I don't like to see every mistake a parent makes labeled "abuse." That takes the power away from that word and it becomes sort of a politically correct thing that people roll their eyes at. REAL child abuse is the worst crime there is, in my opinion, and shouldn't be confused with other, lesser offenses.
Lastly, I very much doubt that I am one of only six or seven people on the planet who can blow off parental mistakes
agreed; and very well put. but again; what a child considers abuse is what forms them as adults. not what society considers abuse.
I know a girl which mother is now lesbian and the father is gay. And I can't understand this crap people are saying that it is insane or when they are saying that it is impossible to raise a child in such conditions. She is like all the other 12years old girl. I think that there are a lot of children who lives in average families were they don't get the love they deserve, where dad is drunken all day and mom is depressiv all the time and the children are beaten.
Beavis : Is this Pearl Jam?
Butt-head: This guy makes faces like Eddie Vedder.
Beavis: No, Eddie Vedder makes faces like this guy.
Butt-head: I heard these guys, like, came first and Pearl Jam ripped them off.
Beavis: No, Pearl Jam came first.
Butt-head: Well, they both suck.
No I don't. It's just who a person is attracted too. For instance, if you're attracted to slender, dark skinned, dark haired women...that's no a disease. It's a matter of preference and not something you really choose.
Also, homosexuality exists outside of humans so I don't think you can really call it a disease of the mind. Or unnatural for that matter.
science is done in a controlled enviornment; real life is not. for example; in high school a study was done about the number of student who smoked pot. everyone i knew said no even though we were the schools biggest stoners. the study showed 45% smoked; but because of the size of the school and those i knew said no; it should've been doubled.
That isn't a controlled environment, or a scientific study.
For example, the study of wether or not genetics are related to sexual orientation uses a very specific control. monozygous twins (Identical) share the same genes so they are polled, as a control dizygous (fraternal) twins are also polled. If genetics contributes to sexual orientation, there should be a significant difference between the two, which there is.
Paul J Zak, performed an experiment to see if Oxytocin had anything to do with social trust. During that experiment all participants were anonymous and had no contact with each other. There were some other controls as well, I can't remember all the details of the experiment. But Oxytocin is attributable for social trust. His experiment showed that pregnant women are less trusting , and men that aren't trusted have a surge of testosterone and get upset.
Statistics aren't a good measure of the individual. But when you are talking about something like this "Is homosexuality a disease?" or "Do homosexual parents raise homosexual kids?" or "Do kids raised by homosexual parents have more difficulty?" you can't simply look at the individual level for a broad answer to the question.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Statistics aren't a good measure of the individual. But when you are talking about something like this "Is homosexuality a disease?" or "Do homosexual parents raise homosexual kids?" or "Do kids raised by homosexual parents have more difficulty?" you can't simply look at the individual level for a broad answer to the question.
Anyway, the answer to those questions is no, no, and no.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
i guarantee you know somebody who is gay, they just probly havent told you cos of shit like what you spew around here.
gay parents does not equal gay kids. likewise, straight parents doesn't always equal straight kids.
would you refuse to talk to your kid and tell him he's disgusting? would you treat him differently than you would other gay people? dick cheney used to hate "fairys" like you do. funny thing happens when someone close to you turns out to be one though... you suddenly get a lot more reasonable and realize they're human too.
lastly, im not a violent man. but if i was the local prosecutor and someone laid the hurt on dino, im pretty sure id look the other way.
i will not discuss somethin like this.i would not speak of any of you're kid's dying or somethin. that's how strong i feel about that.so dont try an make me change my opinion's.
That's the diffrence between V.P.Cheney and me.who know's. may be Ide change my mind if that ever happend.but until then i stnad by my belief's and value's.fag's have no place in society.and you motherfuckers tellin me that my son could be a fuckin fag can go to hell.
I’d thank my lucky stars,
to be livin here today.
‘Cause the flag still stands for freedom,
and they can’t take that away.
And I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
i will not discuss somethin like this.i would not speak of any of you're kid's dying or somethin. that's how strong i feel about that.so dont try an make me change my opinion's.
That's the diffrence between V.P.Cheney and me.who know's. may be Ide change my mind if that ever happend.but until then i stnad by my belief's and value's.fag's have no place in society.and you motherfuckers tellin me that my son could be a fuckin fag can go to hell.
Google. "Mr. Bergis"
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
agreed; and very well put. but again; what a child considers abuse is what forms them as adults. not what society considers abuse.
my dad used to whack us with a belt when we wouldnt go to bed. i dont consider myself abused, nor do i resent him for it. i never carried around this sense of hurt and unlovedness. i knew id get in trouble if i didnt go to bed when i was told and i did. not all kids consider any act of antagonism abuse. you have to set boundaries and enforce them. not necessarily by hitting them with a belt, but you cant be all touchy-feely all the time or they will grow up feeling they can do whatever they want.
i will not discuss somethin like this.i would not speak of any of you're kid's dying or somethin. that's how strong i feel about that.so dont try an make me change my opinion's.
That's the diffrence between V.P.Cheney and me.who know's. may be Ide change my mind if that ever happend.but until then i stnad by my belief's and value's.fag's have no place in society.and you motherfuckers tellin me that my son could be a fuckin fag can go to hell.
you shoulda seen what he was doing with my roomate last night...
ever see american beauty? perhaps you feel the same... rather see your son dead than be a fuckin faggot?
my dad used to whack us with a belt when we wouldnt go to bed. i dont consider myself abused, nor do i resent him for it. i never carried around this sense of hurt and unlovedness. i knew id get in trouble if i didnt go to bed when i was told and i did. not all kids consider any act of antagonism abuse. you have to set boundaries and enforce them. not necessarily by hitting them with a belt, but you cant be all touchy-feely all the time or they will grow up feeling they can do whatever they want.
That's mostly correct, though it seems like an over-simplification, IMO.
For example:
If a child kicks and screams and you attend to it by giving it what it wants; You reinforce the act of kicking and screaming. So let's say you don't give in to the child's desires, but rather punish the child, effectively suppressing the act of kicking and screaming.
Later, your child makes something out of macaroni for you, you say "I'm busy I'll look at it later." or "That's nice, now go do something productive." you are effectively suppressing the child's attempts to get your attention through positive means.
So, now you have a child that kicks and screams and doesn't make things out of macaroni. It's important that when your child smiles at you, that you acknowledge that as a positive form of attention-grabbing and provide them the attention they require. Attending to a child when they do this, is not spoiling the child by any means. Simply reinforcing positive behavior.
Many parents will suppress bad behavior and ignore good behavior. probably because good behavior doesn't grab their attention as well as positive behavior. So they end up with a kicking and screaming kid, and can't understand why their child doesn't make things out of macaroni.
It should also be considered that a young child is similar to a dog. If you wait to punish the child later, or to reward the child later, you confuse the child. The child will not fully understand the correlation between the behavior and the punishment/reward. You may be able to work around this by having a heart-heart talk about the reasons for punishment or reward. However, children younger than 6 - 7 years old have difficulty understanding that kind of delayed explanation.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
No I don't. It's just who a person is attracted too. For instance, if you're attracted to slender, dark skinned, dark haired women...that's no a disease. It's a matter of preference and not something you really choose.
Also, homosexuality exists outside of humans so I don't think you can really call it a disease of the mind. Or unnatural for that matter.
(Sorry if any of that has been said)
You raise a great miss-conception that I was trying to point out about homosexuality. It is unlike people who may have green or blue eyes, are short or tall, fat or skinny, etc...... These are genetic variants, but they are non-essential to the continuation of the species.
But those that are gay cannot procreate naturally. Two women would have to get a sperm donor. Two men are just shit out of luck.
Therefore, if everyone were gay - the human race would go extinct. But if we were all tall/fat or had different colored hair - that makes no difference.
That is how homosexuality is a disease. Sorry if that is a bad term. I'll try to think of something else. How about it is not normal.
You raise a great miss-conception that I was trying to point out about homosexuality. It is unlike people who may have green or blue eyes, are short or tall, fat or skinny, etc...... These are genetic variants, but they are non-essential to the continuation of the species.
But those that are gay cannot procreate naturally. Two women would have to get a sperm donor. Two men are just shit out of luck.
Therefore, if everyone were gay - the human race would go extinct. But if we were all tall/fat or had different colored hair - that makes no difference.
That is how homosexuality is a disease. Sorry if that is a bad term. I'll try to think of something else. How about it is not normal.
So it's a disease because they can't create babies? I'm not trying to bait you, i'm seeing if that's what you meant
You raise a great miss-conception that I was trying to point out about homosexuality. It is unlike people who may have green or blue eyes, are short or tall, fat or skinny, etc...... These are genetic variants, but they are non-essential to the continuation of the species.
But those that are gay cannot procreate naturally. Two women would have to get a sperm donor. Two men are just shit out of luck.
Therefore, if everyone were gay - the human race would go extinct. But if we were all tall/fat or had different colored hair - that makes no difference.
That is how homosexuality is a disease. Sorry if that is a bad term. I'll try to think of something else. How about it is not normal.
if we were all infertile, we would not procreate either. but we're not, nor are we all gay. so who cares?
perhaps nature intended for homosexuality. perhaps the apparent rise of it is a reflection of the fact that humans are over-populated and the heteros are producing more babies than they can provide for. so there's is a rise in homosexuals to help with the rearing of such children without adding to the problem?
So it's a disease because they can't create babies? I'm not trying to bait you, i'm seeing if that's what you meant
Yes. All organisms pro-create. I would say that if somewhere along the line someone's genetic makeup results in them not being able to pro-create, then that is an anomally. A species is not supposed to be that way. If it were, it wouldn't last very long.
if we were all infertile, we would not procreate either. but we're not, nor are we all gay. so who cares?
perhaps nature intended for homosexuality. perhaps the apparent rise of it is a reflection of the fact that humans are over-populated and the heteros are producing more babies than they can provide for. so there's is a rise in homosexuals to help with the rearing of such children without adding to the problem?
It's the principle... but you raised a neat hypothesis there at the end. That's interesting!
Yes. All organisms pro-create. I would say that if somewhere along the line someone's genetic makeup results in them not being able to pro-create, then that is an anomally. A species is not supposed to be that way. If it were, it wouldn't last very long.
Oh, yea, I see what youre saying. What about infertile men and women though? Would you consider that a disease also? Or just a fluke?
Comments
That's the only point I've been trying to make ... that you can't pinpoint one isolated incident and call it "child abuse," because by that standard we are all abused, and we are all abusers, which is nonsense. Everything that takes place in a family takes place in a context. A very healthy and loving relationship can easily withstand the occasional, inevitable mistakes. In a disfunctional relationship, those same mistakes are much more damaging.
it may not be statistically significant for scientific purposes, but it's ridiculous to say that it is not reality.
i stand corrected. ive simply never in my life heard it used. seems to me it would be just as appropriate to have used dynamic in that sentence. i wonder why dynamical even exists. it sounds like something george bush would say.
i guarantee you know somebody who is gay, they just probly havent told you cos of shit like what you spew around here.
gay parents does not equal gay kids. likewise, straight parents doesn't always equal straight kids.
would you refuse to talk to your kid and tell him he's disgusting? would you treat him differently than you would other gay people? dick cheney used to hate "fairys" like you do. funny thing happens when someone close to you turns out to be one though... you suddenly get a lot more reasonable and realize they're human too.
lastly, im not a violent man. but if i was the local prosecutor and someone laid the hurt on dino, im pretty sure id look the other way.
i can agree with that. very much so. i remember a time when i was accused of something i didn't do; but my father took the other side. now this may not be abuse; but it's hurtful that he didn't stand by me. i went and did something similar since i was punished for it anyway; but he should have stood by me and heard out the evidence. looking back it is petty and hasn't ruined my life; but to a 9 year old it was devastating. i knew then my father wouldn't stand by me. it took a lot of years for him to prove to me he would; but i lashed out because of it. the girl i've been calling my baby has lashed out at everyone but me because of what her mother did to her. i believe that remembering that hurtful incident is the reason i can reach the kids noone else can. i not only see the emptiness inside them but can understand it.
i do see and understand what you're saying; and i believe you are right in your case; but you're one in a billion.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
science is done in a controlled enviornment; real life is not. for example; in high school a study was done about the number of student who smoked pot. everyone i knew said no even though we were the schools biggest stoners. the study showed 45% smoked; but because of the size of the school and those i knew said no; it should've been doubled.
going a step further; i've had several opinions changed by listening to the others on this board.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
that's funny, ive changed several opinions on this board... it's tough sometimes trying to talk sense into some of the folks around here
I'm guessing that the girl you're caring for has had to deal with many, many such incidents over years and years, which is an entirely different ballgame. I only took issue with your initial statement because I don't like to see every mistake a parent makes labeled "abuse." That takes the power away from that word and it becomes sort of a politically correct thing that people roll their eyes at. REAL child abuse is the worst crime there is, in my opinion, and shouldn't be confused with other, lesser offenses.
Lastly, I very much doubt that I am one of only six or seven people on the planet who can blow off parental mistakes
i call her mom.
Im not sure what this means
i was born however eating cheetos...i love them still today
agreed; and very well put. but again; what a child considers abuse is what forms them as adults. not what society considers abuse.
Butt-head: This guy makes faces like Eddie Vedder.
Beavis: No, Eddie Vedder makes faces like this guy.
Butt-head: I heard these guys, like, came first and Pearl Jam ripped them off.
Beavis: No, Pearl Jam came first.
Butt-head: Well, they both suck.
Also, homosexuality exists outside of humans so I don't think you can really call it a disease of the mind. Or unnatural for that matter.
(Sorry if any of that has been said)
That isn't a controlled environment, or a scientific study.
For example, the study of wether or not genetics are related to sexual orientation uses a very specific control. monozygous twins (Identical) share the same genes so they are polled, as a control dizygous (fraternal) twins are also polled. If genetics contributes to sexual orientation, there should be a significant difference between the two, which there is.
Paul J Zak, performed an experiment to see if Oxytocin had anything to do with social trust. During that experiment all participants were anonymous and had no contact with each other. There were some other controls as well, I can't remember all the details of the experiment. But Oxytocin is attributable for social trust. His experiment showed that pregnant women are less trusting , and men that aren't trusted have a surge of testosterone and get upset.
Statistics aren't a good measure of the individual. But when you are talking about something like this "Is homosexuality a disease?" or "Do homosexual parents raise homosexual kids?" or "Do kids raised by homosexual parents have more difficulty?" you can't simply look at the individual level for a broad answer to the question.
Anyway, the answer to those questions is no, no, and no.
That's the diffrence between V.P.Cheney and me.who know's. may be Ide change my mind if that ever happend.but until then i stnad by my belief's and value's.fag's have no place in society.and you motherfuckers tellin me that my son could be a fuckin fag can go to hell.
to be livin here today.
‘Cause the flag still stands for freedom,
and they can’t take that away.
And I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
Biggotry is a disease...
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
Google. "Mr. Bergis"
my dad used to whack us with a belt when we wouldnt go to bed. i dont consider myself abused, nor do i resent him for it. i never carried around this sense of hurt and unlovedness. i knew id get in trouble if i didnt go to bed when i was told and i did. not all kids consider any act of antagonism abuse. you have to set boundaries and enforce them. not necessarily by hitting them with a belt, but you cant be all touchy-feely all the time or they will grow up feeling they can do whatever they want.
you shoulda seen what he was doing with my roomate last night...
ever see american beauty? perhaps you feel the same... rather see your son dead than be a fuckin faggot?
That's mostly correct, though it seems like an over-simplification, IMO.
For example:
If a child kicks and screams and you attend to it by giving it what it wants; You reinforce the act of kicking and screaming. So let's say you don't give in to the child's desires, but rather punish the child, effectively suppressing the act of kicking and screaming.
Later, your child makes something out of macaroni for you, you say "I'm busy I'll look at it later." or "That's nice, now go do something productive." you are effectively suppressing the child's attempts to get your attention through positive means.
So, now you have a child that kicks and screams and doesn't make things out of macaroni. It's important that when your child smiles at you, that you acknowledge that as a positive form of attention-grabbing and provide them the attention they require. Attending to a child when they do this, is not spoiling the child by any means. Simply reinforcing positive behavior.
Many parents will suppress bad behavior and ignore good behavior. probably because good behavior doesn't grab their attention as well as positive behavior. So they end up with a kicking and screaming kid, and can't understand why their child doesn't make things out of macaroni.
It should also be considered that a young child is similar to a dog. If you wait to punish the child later, or to reward the child later, you confuse the child. The child will not fully understand the correlation between the behavior and the punishment/reward. You may be able to work around this by having a heart-heart talk about the reasons for punishment or reward. However, children younger than 6 - 7 years old have difficulty understanding that kind of delayed explanation.
You raise a great miss-conception that I was trying to point out about homosexuality. It is unlike people who may have green or blue eyes, are short or tall, fat or skinny, etc...... These are genetic variants, but they are non-essential to the continuation of the species.
But those that are gay cannot procreate naturally. Two women would have to get a sperm donor. Two men are just shit out of luck.
Therefore, if everyone were gay - the human race would go extinct. But if we were all tall/fat or had different colored hair - that makes no difference.
That is how homosexuality is a disease. Sorry if that is a bad term. I'll try to think of something else. How about it is not normal.
So it's a disease because they can't create babies? I'm not trying to bait you, i'm seeing if that's what you meant
if we were all infertile, we would not procreate either. but we're not, nor are we all gay. so who cares?
perhaps nature intended for homosexuality. perhaps the apparent rise of it is a reflection of the fact that humans are over-populated and the heteros are producing more babies than they can provide for. so there's is a rise in homosexuals to help with the rearing of such children without adding to the problem?
Yes. All organisms pro-create. I would say that if somewhere along the line someone's genetic makeup results in them not being able to pro-create, then that is an anomally. A species is not supposed to be that way. If it were, it wouldn't last very long.
It's the principle... but you raised a neat hypothesis there at the end. That's interesting!
Oh, yea, I see what youre saying. What about infertile men and women though? Would you consider that a disease also? Or just a fluke?