Talk:Spanking

Orphaned references in Spanking

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Spanking's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "corpun":

• From Education in the United States: Farrell, Colin (February 2016). "Corporal punishment in US schools". World Corporal Punishment Research. Retrieved May 10, 2016. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
• From Judicial corporal punishment: "Section 13: The abolition of JCP". Judicial Corporal Punishment in South Africa. World Corporal Punishment Research. 2005. Retrieved 1 November 2011.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- Alarics (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Spanking infants in US

I was surprised to read that the article states the in the United States, spanking of infants is common. I think this sentence, if not the entire paragraph, needs to be reworded. First, the cited article is rather outdated (2010 publication of study completed in preceding years), and secondly, the article defines spanking as hitting of the hands of the infants; whereas this article in the introduction defines spanking differently. That makes the sentence about the spanking of infants in the US misleading and inaccurate. If references are going to be cited to back up statements in an article, those statements need to accurately reflect the content of the cited works. Jdevola (talk) 17:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

The 2010 Murray Straus article cited does not "define spanking as hitting of the hands of the infants". It says "In the United States "spank," and in the United Kingdom "smack," are used by parents and professionals for both the specific act of hitting a child on the buttocks and also, often in the more general sense, of hitting the child in other places to correct misbehavior." -- Alarics (talk) 18:55, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Horribly outdated

I am horrified by some of the content and tone in this article. Some of it reads like 1950s style attitude, regarding physical punishment as something perfectly normal. Encyclopedic neutrality should not go so far as to condone physical abuse.

To be more specific:

• "Parents commonly spank children or adolescents in response to undesired behavior."

"Spanking of children by their parents is a common form of corporal punishment used in families in the Western world."

These sentences - notwithstanding the fact that they are completely unsourced - make it sound like spanking is something completely normal. Is it? Is Wikipedia the institution to declare it to be so?

• "Some countries have outlawed the spanking of children in every setting, including homes, schools, and penal institutions, but most allow it when done by a parent or guardian."

This really needs to be sourced and updated. If you are going to have a picture of a spanking in Germany, you might at least in all fairness mention that any form of corporal punishment has been declared illegal in Germany in 2000; in Austria since the 1970s.

I can hardly believe that, by now, there isn't a great number of countries that have followed suit.

• "The use of corporal punishment by parents increases the likelihood that children will suffer physical abuse"

Excuse me... what kind of definition of "physical abuse" are we talking about here?

Wikipedia itself defines it as "any intentional act causing injury or trauma to another person or animal by way of bodily contact".

This sentence, on the contrary, implies that spanking or "corporal punishment" is something different from physical abuse. Wow. Haven't seen such bad POV in a long time.

"... any intentional act causing injury or trauma to another person or animal by way of bodily contact" - That's what spanking is all about, isn't it? Corporal punishment by parents doesn't "increase" the "likelihood that children will suffer physical abuse", corporal punishment by parents is physical abuse!

• The section "Adult spanking" starts out with a link to "Erotic spanking", making it look like this is somehow synonymous. This is outrageous. There are still enough people running around who believe that women find physical abuse erotic, so it's certainly not for Wikipedia to encourage this kind of thinking.
• "Spanking of a wife by her husband as a punishment also does occur in some instances"

This strangely vague and completely unsourced sentence absolutely needs to be rewritten. Of course it does occur, but what are "some instances"? And why is the article so terribly cautious to avoid the term "physical abuse"? This sentence, again, makes it sound like spanking is some kind of harmless and legitimate form of punishment.

• "often based on a literalist interpretation of the Bible"

I'd like to see some sources for this "often". You can't simply blame the (mis)interpretation of the Bible for everything without supplying some good sources on those alleged numbers. I am sure there is a lot of wife battering going on without the least attempt at justification on the grounds of Bible (mis)interpretation.

• The part on U.S. jurisdiction on wife abuse is completely unsourced.
  

--93.212.230.88 (talk) 11:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)