Just In
for Super Nanny the Child Abuser

12/30/2009 c1 1FalseExpectations
Admitably, your right, if not taking things over the top slightly. Honestly, I don't see how the bean bag technique is needed because I was never treated like that, and I'm totally OCD when it comes to having my pens in the right places. Honestly, I think the parents on this show are all idiots and shouldn't be allowed children in the first place if they don't know how to get their kids to do as there told. I was never like that! Although, with the whole sex thing, it's much easier to buy a Lets Talk About Sex book, with lots of different cartoons.

But I do agree with you,slightly. I don't like the bean bag thing but I think you are exaggerating slightly about the 'false imprisonment' deal. A child would be able to leave in case of an emergancy. Think of it like they are in prison. A person has commited a crime (a child wouldn't put her folder away, they are sent to prison (bean bag), they try to escape and they are put back in prison, their imprisonment time extended (the child has to re-do the 3 mininues, or whatever the time is). Every culture needs a hierarchy and needs justice. Sadly, I don't believe their is suchj a thing as justice, but thats just me.

Well done for putting your point of view on this site, though.
2/10/2009 c1 18Silver Tears of a Child
Ok, I don't really see how it's wrong. It doesn't restrict their freedom because if their was an emergency the child can get up and run. I understand where you're coming from and trust me I know people who would agree with you (my father being on of them) but their are times where I believe children need to learn to behave. Have you ever taken care of a child? I've helped my teen mother cousins with their children since I was ten and sometimes you can't help these types of actions.
4/1/2008 c1 mtg2192
This thing is a load of bullshit. You can say all of the "this is abuse" shit you want, but the great majority of children that have their parents' values imposed on them grow up to be successful or at least law-abiding members of society. It is proven by the U.S. Census that kids without supervision and values end up committing crimes much more often and sooner than kids with supervision and values. While it is true that child abuse victims (especially boys) sometimes grow up to be abusers, it has never been and will never be enough people to justify your case.

In my opinion, you are simply a pathetic, probably spoiled person who doesn't realize that society needs rules, laws, and values to maintain peace. I'm not saying everybody has to conform to stereotypes, but I am saying that laws need to be followed. Due to the democratic nature of many countries these days, laws are chosen and accepted by the people or representatives of the people, and a law abiding citizen of a country will always hold more power than a wannabe hacker/anarchist with some grudge against government.
2/9/2008 c1 Nikki
This is a load of shit. I feel sorry for your kids because, first off, you're their parent. Secondly, you'll probably beat them with branches and extension cords. My sister uses the bean bag chair. Maybe if your bastard ass actually used it, you would have known it works. This essay is a piece of shit and if I were your teacher/professor, I'd fail you in a minute. Once again, this essay is a load of shit and so are you. Lesbian.
1/3/2007 c1 rose.tinted.lies
I just wanted to point something out. I don't mean any offense by it, but it really annoys me.

You say that the bean bag technique is a form of imprisonment? How is it? If the child is placed in clear view of an adult, with nothing restraining them and nothing, technically, doing them any harm, how are they being "imprisoned"?

Some could argue that this, "Time-out", may cause phsycological (sp?) problems later in life. But really, all it is teaching is that all things have consequences, be they good or bad.

Say the child does something bad, but then gets away with it. Say then the child continues to do bad things, knowing they aren't going to get into any trouble for doing them. Then the child grows up thinking they can do whatever they want. The child goes to school and becomes a bully, not knowing there is anything wrong with that.

Then the child could grow up and become a felon, simply because they weren't taught the consequences of their actions when they were younger. I'm just using that as a made-up scenario.

Isn't it better the child is taught that actions have consequences, rather than get away with everything for their entire childhood. How would the child be ready for the real world when it grows up?

I have another question. How would you prefer the child punished? Would you prefer the child to be ranted and raved at? Perhaps the parent should yell and scream to get the message across. Or maybe the child should be hit? Maybe whenever the child does something bad, they should be beaten, rather than given a simple "time-out"?

I for one, if I was the child, would prefer to be given a "time-out" sitting on a comfortable bean-bag, than the alternatives.

I'm sorry if I've offended you. I simply cannot see the sense in your argument.

1/1/2007 c1 26Siriusly James
Why is the beanbag chair time-out okay? Because:

1) It teaches the child that the parents are consequent ("Put the folder away, or you will have to sit in the chair") and therefore, the small child learns that the parents are not something to be doubted - they stand by what they say.

2) The child is not locked up somewhere - the parents can see, hear and protect the child, should something happen.

3) Nothing physically hurts the child.

In this case, you talk about organization skills and sex. Telling a small child to tidy up after playing is good because:

1) The child needs to know that it is important and expected to finish a project that has been started (later on = homework, education, papers, etc.)

2) The child learns that if s/he tidies up him/herself, the parents won't have to. The child helps - the child is needed. ("This family would be worse off without me. It's good I'm here to tidy up")

Your example with the father teaching his young daughter sex is wrong and just plain stupid. Incest teaches the child that she cannot trust the adults who are supposed to protect her - they hurt her physically, that much she knows.

I have no idea how ou can even begin to draw this parallel, it's simply disgusting.
8/30/2006 c1 MrFlames
It isn't child abuse to subject a household to a two week TV shoot that invades the privacy of their home, rooms, and inter-familial relations?
8/29/2006 c1 8Hyacinthe Wing
Oh, for heaven's sake. You've clearly never studied basic psychology, OR the psychology of paedophilia, so I'll spare you the really intelligent lecture. However, allow me to inform you that making a child have a time-out as punishment for misbehavior is not in any way an attempt to instill values. It is a way of teaching children that their actions have consequences.

The flaw in your (admittedly ridiculous) argument is this: Sexual maturity does not in any way equate to organizational skills. Organizational skills are an extraordinarily useful thing to learn at any age, and are completely necessary for a person's academic/work-related success and their ability to manage their own lives and time. But sexuality is not useful for persons of any age; it is only useful for persons of the age of sexual maturity, and even then, it is in no way a necessary, inevitable thing. People choose whether or not to engage in sexual behavior; not behaving sexually should not and does not negatively affect one's life or one's scholarly pursuits. IT IS NOT A SKILL THAT CHILDREN NEED TO DEVELOP IN ORDER TO BE SUCCESSFUL. Organizational skills ARE needed, whatever the age, in order to be successful.

By your logic, teaching a child organizational skills is equivalent to sexual abuse. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU? You might as well say that it's also equivalent to teaching an infant to weld metal. Then you would say that this is wrong because the infant might want to be a carpenter! The reason parents do not "teach" sexuality to their children is:

1. Introduction to sexuality in children who are not themselves physically or mentally mature causes, in all cases, lasting psychological harm and impedes their ability to function healthily in society. The teaching of organizational skills is beneficial to children in their ability to function as human beings.

2. Sexuality is not a system of values; it cannot be "instilled" by the parent. Sexuality, though dormant, is something determined before birth. Organizational skills, on the other hand, are rarely if ever innate, and must be used in a disciplined and controlled manner.

3. A person who is sexually attracted to children or who wants to engage in sexual behavior with children is known as a paedophile, and is, by consensus of the psychological community, known to be in an unhealthy or disturbed mental state. No mentally healthy parent would want to "teach" their children sexual behavior. Being organized is not a mental disorder. It is, rather, a useful mental discipline to learn; and the ability to control one's organizational skills must be learned from someone. Who better than one's parents?

As to the methods of teaching, you claim that making a child have a time-out is a terrible form of imprisonment, is child abuse, and you compare it to whipping and mutilation. Again: WHAT THE HELL? Do you understand the meaning of "abuse"? Look it up before you do anything else. Now. Okay? Having a child put in a time-out is NOT ABUSE, because it does not have the potential for lasting physical or psychological harm. In order for something to be recognized as abuse, it must have the potential to do lasting physical or psychological damage. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE?

Christ. I hope to god that this was just some idiot trolling. In any case, whatever your intention - whether you actualy believe any of this or just wanted to annoy people - you're wrong. End of story. Goodbye.
8/28/2006 c1 2LaSombra
So, following your logic a little more, what if someone used the reasoning that all children will grow up to die, then killed them? What if they realized that the dead body would eventually be consumed by insects and such, so they ate the body to speed up the consumption process? Man, that's taking it to the EXTREME!

No wait! That's exactly the point! If you take any scenerio to the extreme then it will seem a lot worse. Of course making a kid sit on a bean bag chair seems horrible when likened to rape and murder; however, for those of us living in reality, it is a refreshing alternative to making a child stay in their room or on their bed for x amount of time.

Also: Teaching organization can not be paralleled to teaching sex. First of all, organization is something that you'd use on a day to day basis at most jobs and in most every day life styles. Sex? Well, the job market is a little more limited there, and that life style lends itself to quick learning. Organization holds such risks as: Paper cuts. Sex, on the other hand, can provide: Unwanted children, STDs, and the inablility to get someone to leave your apartment.

All in all, pretty well written. Few grammer/spellings, but other people already nagged you about that so I'll leave it alone.
8/27/2006 c1 SilentBlueRose
Ah damn it, I didn't even realize it was you. I really should read screen names before I review things... Oh well.
8/27/2006 c1 6SilentBlueRose
The nanny lady did that to teach the kid to respect and obey authority. Her mother asked her to do something, she didn't, she was punished. The same things happen when she grows up, if she doesn't obey those in authority (those being now, say, the police), she gets punished (aka, can go to prison). Personally, I'd rather learn early by the bean bag method than have my parents spoil me and I end up in jail. Ever hear the proverb 'Spare the rod and spoil the child'? That's what she was talking about.

And yes, there is a huge difference between the sex senario and the folder senario. But of course bleeding heart liberals like yourself can't admit to that. Well, if your kids end up in jail, just remember, at least they didn't have to be 'imprisoned' on a bean bag for a whole torturous two minutes.

Oh, and you had a couple spelling errors, but otherwise the writing was good.

Have a nice day.
8/27/2006 c1 22Kohlomere
Okay, your grammar was pretty good. Now let me see if I get this one thing straight-time out is false imprisonment? How are parents going to teach their children how to function in society if they cannot enforce punishment that will demonstrate what will happen if the children go against the authority? In addition, I don't see what mail organization has to do with your argument. Think about it, E.
8/27/2006 c1 50Arael the 15th
Your logic is shotty. Discipline is needed for children who misbehave, albeit not in extreme cases. Parenting is also something you cannot simply write a standard for, as there are different standards for how to raise a child. A perfect example can be Johnny Cash's song 'A Boy Named Sue'.
8/27/2006 c1 1Formerly
This one is pretty good, actually. Just the other day I was trying to come up with a good example of sophistic reasoning. I enjoyed this essay more than most of your stuff.
8/27/2006 c1 plok
I have to admit I laughed when I read the summary. This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on this site.

Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service