NationStates Jolt Archive

The Issue

The Nitro Records S.P.C.C. has launched a fresh campaign to stop parents from smacking their children. They demand that the government introduce laws to ban this form of 'corporal punishment'.
The Debate

1. Child Psychiatrist, Dr. Falala McGuffin, speaks at a press conference on the matter: "Parents and teachers must realise that smacking children increases aggressiveness, lowers their self-esteem, and can cause long-term emotional trauma! How can anybody think that it is anything but child abuse? Parents who resort to smacking their children are obviously unfit to be parents at all! We must ban this horrible practice at once!"

This is the position your government is preparing to adopt.

2. "What are these lunatics on about?!" yells Chastity McAlpin, a concerned parent. "Smacking children has been an effective form of punishment since the dawn of mankind! Outlaw it and I guarantee you the next generation will be a disorderly disaster! Children need, nay CRAVE discipline! Sometimes the only language they understand is the cane, and the government has to respect that!"
[Accept]

Alright, I really don't see any reason to pick the second option. Child abuse is among the worst experiences you can ever have. Anyone who did pick the second option, please explain your reasons for being a heartless sadist, becuase that's what child abusers are.

Maybe it reduces crime?

Probably because there's a difference between swatting a child on the ass, and beating them to within an inch of their life. Spanking (or "smacking") is hardly a new thing. Parents have spanked kids for generations, the second option is the government saying that it won't step in and classify spanking as "child abuse".

It isn't advocating locking children in closets, denying them food, punching them in the face, throwing them down the stairs, burning them with cigarettes, or any of the other various and sundry horrors that are usually associated with child abuse.

Now, there are certainly people that feel that any forum of physical negative reinforcement is the same as child abuse (you appear to be in that camp). However, there are numerous people who feel that, when used sparingly and with a cool head, it can have benifits. Of course, since this is NationStates things will be extreme. Picking the second option mentions record sales of "child whacking sticks", but that's an artifact of NS's tendancy to skew issue choices to the absurd.

There was a little bit of discussion in the Mod Channel about using the term "smacking" or "spanking". It largely came down to an issue of using Ameri-centric of Euro-centric phrasing. As you can see, the Euro-centric choice won, which is why the term "smacking" is used. It certainly can cause confusion to American players who view "smacking" as something more along the lines of an open-handed hit across the face, as opposed to a more traditional method of corporal punishment. Which, by the way, is why we made sure to include the phrase "corporal punishment" in the issue description; hopefully it mitigated the confusion.

Also, please keep in mind that intrinsic biases are purposefully written into issues, which is part of why the second option seems so outlandish. The person forwarding it is something of a nutter. However, the person pushing option one is a touch extreme too. When one adds intentional bias, NS's basic wackiness, and unintentional bias on the part of the writer and editor(s), you can see why options seem so extreme. Granted, judging by your comments, you probably think the first option is perfectly rational. Just remember that to a person who believes in corporal punishment, the first option sounds quite extreme.

Finally, not everyone runs their country based on their own political views. Some run to increase certain rankings. Some run parodies (I have extreme left- and right-wing nations, myself), and some shoot for certain UN rankings. And, some roleplay extremely sadistic nations who's mythical leaders would consider the second option "not going far enough".