Dad uses Facebook to teach daughter a lesson.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 . . . 20 NEXT
 

Owyn_Merrilin:
Edit: Also, I'm not advocating guilty until proven innocent.

Owyn_Merrilin:
The point is whether or not the man is an abuser -- and he's certainly shown signs of it. A sane parent never would have done what he did in this video, especially not with something as benign as his daughter's "rant" as the reason. It's not armchair psychology to say what I said about how you can't trust the word of the criminal when it comes to the crime. And that's what child abuse is: a crime.

So you're not advocating presuming the man to be guilty, but we can't trust him because he's a child-abusing criminal.

Right.

Also, it's good to know that you're the sole determiner of what a "sane parent" would and would not do in any given situation, no matter how little insight into said situation you have.

As far as I'm concerned, your statements so far in this thread have demonstrated a shocking degree of disconnection with the realities of parenting, and willful ignorance combined with numerous logical fallacies when confronted with the arguments of more grounded posters. However, that's just my opinion, and you will certainly discard that without a moment of introspection, I'm sure.

So if you absorb just one thing, please consider this: erreoneous allegations of child abuse can be seriously damaging to people's lives (parents and children alike). When you're next in the real world, consider that a superficial glance at one facet of one brief scenario does not constitute sufficient evidence to produce a thorough psycho-analysis and make leading accusations of abusiveness.

---

And as a small bynote for some of the other posters here, guns and ammunition are not made from minced kittens and the tears of tortured babies. Using a gun to destroy one's own property in a non-erratic manner is not something to get disturbed about.

Mortai Gravesend:

Cyfu:

and this was not the first time she did this. and when she was busted last time the dad said that if she ever did something like this again it would be much worse than being grounded.
she made her choice and she paid the price.

Not the first time she did something so horrible as to rant at some friends about her parents? Good Lord, what is the world coming to when kids rant to their friends? Doesn't make much sense to just say "She made her choice and she paid the price". Does it make much sense to punish her for something so trivial anyway? I'd say that it doesn't. People vent to their friends about things that are bothering them, that isn't something worthy of punishment.

this, in my opinion, is brilliant. if she doesn't get the picture now she has to be REALLY stupid.

That if she shows any dissent her dad will break stuff? Because that's what this says. It doesn't say "Oh you were wrong, you should be more grateful", it says "Oh if you don't act grateful I'll break your shit"

Trivial to say horrible things about their parent? i don't know what home you come from, but if i did what she did i would have grounded for months. you're supposed to respect your parents. what she did is disrespectful and shows that she is a spoiled brat who thinks doing some chores is slavery.

and it's not like "if you don't act grateful i'll brake your stuff". cause the first time she did this she was grounded for a couple of months. that obviously didn't work so the father tried something different, and hopefully this will work. we don't need more spoiled brats in the world.

I have absolutely no problem with the fact that he used a gun. No problem at all, he did it safely and wasn't drunk or anything like that.
I do however have a problem with the pointless destruction of a laptop. Why not just give it away? Sell it? Anything but destroy it. I could use a laptop right now...

Mikodite:

Dramerc:
Last Statement by me cause i'm fucking sick of the liberal toss pots saying normal teenager

I'M 17 and i fucking hate my generation you that defend them for thier outbursts re-enforces the reason i fucking hate my generation beat them tell them off warn them but dont let them get away with it too soft too fucking cowardly only the extreme right and extreme left would know what to do you all make me sick to the stomach for my nation to even defeat the nazis or stand up to the CCCP thats the USSR to all you brain dead scum fucks so thank you for making the world a shiter place

News Flash: EVERY GENERATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE ARE DISRESPECTFUL TO THEIR PARENTS. This has nothing to do with the post millennial generation being different somehow. Evolutionarily biologists even have an explanation as to why this is.

And thanks for proving that the American Education system is shit.

your last sentance is invalid I'm British XD

Pandabearparade:

Dramerc:
Last Statement by me cause i'm fucking sick of the liberal toss pots saying normal teenager

I'M 17 and i fucking hate my generation you that defend them for thier outbursts re-enforces the reason i fucking hate my generation beat them tell them off warn them but dont let them get away with it too soft too fucking cowardly only the extreme right and extreme left would know what to do you all make me sick to the stomach for my nation to even defeat the nazis or stand up to the CCCP thats the USSR to all you brain dead scum fucks so thank you for making the world a shiter place

If you're actually seventeen I would suggest working on your communication skills.

One product that I'd give a hearty recommendation is:

image

I'd suggest getting your head out of the gutter and thats an insult cause i'm disabled and they are damaged you twat I'm standing up for morals and all you can do is attack my social skills

Sentox6:

Owyn_Merrilin:
Edit: Also, I'm not advocating guilty until proven innocent.

Owyn_Merrilin:
The point is whether or not the man is an abuser -- and he's certainly shown signs of it. A sane parent never would have done what he did in this video, especially not with something as benign as his daughter's "rant" as the reason. It's not armchair psychology to say what I said about how you can't trust the word of the criminal when it comes to the crime. And that's what child abuse is: a crime.

So you're not advocating presuming the man to be guilty, but we can't trust him because he's a child-abusing criminal.

Right.

Also, it's good to know that you're the sole determiner of what a "sane parent" would and would not do in any given situation, no matter how little insight into said situation you have.

As far as I'm concerned, your statements so far in this thread have demonstrated a shocking degree of disconnection with the realities of parenting, and willful ignorance combined with numerous logical fallacies when confronted with the arguments of more grounded posters. However, that's just my opinion, and you will certainly discard that without a moment of introspection, I'm sure.

So if you absorb just one thing, please consider this: erreoneous allegations of child abuse can be seriously damaging to people's lives (parents and children alike). When you're next in the real world, consider that a superficial glance at one facet of one brief scenario does not constitute sufficient evidence to produce a thorough psycho-analysis and make leading accusations of abusiveness.

---

And as a small bynote for some of the other posters here, guns and ammunition are not made from minced kittens and the tears of tortured babies. Using a gun to destroy one's own property in a non-erratic manner is not something to get disturbed about.

You haven't heard one word I've said, so I'm going to say it again: even in a court of law, "No, I didn't do it" is not enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt on a piece of evidence that shows you committing a crime. Now, if that was an isolated incident, you might make a case that it wasn't child abuse. But we can't just take his word that it was, let alone that his daughter was happy with it. I guess in your world, accused murderers, rapists, and thieves can get away with pulling a knife on the victim, grabbing the victim and dragging him/her off to a car, or using the item known to be stolen, on camera, just by saying "no, I didn't do it." Because that's all that has happened here: we've got the buildup to, if not the actual commission of a crime on camera, and you're going "well, he says everything's alright, we can trust him!" That's not how innocent until proven guilty works.

I agree with everything except the gun part

The fact that he decided to use a gun to solve his anger and discipline her is whats worrying. I mean theres strict and then theres anger management issues. I mean he could easily have sold it or confiscated it if he wanted to but he decided to shoot it up. Hardly a sign of a stable temper.Oh and guns are freaking dangerous weapons. They should not be used for anything other than self defence and hunting by civilians.

This man is robbing his daughter of her need to express her frustration in a safe judgement free zone.

Does he actually expect her to be the sweet little girl behind their backs when they make her feel mistreated? At the very least, she seems to be respect to their faces or this discovered/invasion of privacy wouldn't have hit this man so hard.

I think it's insanely retarded of this man to expect his daughter to than also pay for the laptop and it's parts and labor he invested into it the day before, as he claims, because he decided to destroy it in his own act of mimed outrageous behavior.

He could easily have just SOLD the damn thing for $130 or MORE.

Doesn't he say he works for IT? Yeah, probably the customer service idiot who doesn't know what the hell is going on. He probably called in to one of his Indian co-workers to figure out how to 'hack' into his daughters facebook. (For me, it doesn't log OUT of facebook, even if I close the window so you just need to type in the http or click the bookmark to get into my account.)

If she's anything like the typical teenager she's portrayed as, she's going to do one of three things;
1) Have sex and maybe get pregnant.
2) Rebel harder, further, more outrageous in sheer defiance to the excessive treatment she feels unjustly imposed upon herself.
3) Being nice becomes a feigned effort around her parents as she develops emotional detachments to her parents and other 'loved ones' who'll punish her natural behavior if she should so act like herself and become sneaky and manipulative.

In instances where 2 or 3 fail, the process repeats indefinitely or switches.
In instances 1 fails, it results in abortion/miscarriage and the options or 1, 2 or 3 emerge again.

I like this guy! Instead of talking it out with his daughter about WHY she posted something like that on facebook and discussing the feelings that she felt, he just grounded her for possibly years and destroyed her property with a firearm. What a swell guy!

Honestly, why are people rallying around this guy like he's the parent version of batman dishing out street justice? Maybe she shouldn't have posted something like that on facebook, but there are so many other worse ways that she could have vented her emotions. And that's all she was doing, venting, it's not like she had done anything wrong before posting the status. Imagine living with a guy like that, it's got to be terrifying.

Oh boy. A controversial thread in which I can already see on the first page that people are getting nasty with their comments against each other.

I'm not touching this one with a 50-foot pole.

FelixG:

A Raging Emo:
The father definitely has the right idea, but the problem is he's just made his daughter absolutely despise him, now.

If you read the response you would find that she doesn't despise him, she even wanted him to shoot her phone and put it on youtube so they could make money by selling the casings.

Someone claimed that the video is completely false. There was no teenage rebellion in the household, no facebook post at all. This Tommy dude was using the attention to direct people to his web enterprise on facebook. And after reading that quote you posted, I feel more convinced that it is so. How convenient! The girl is asking for money for the family.

Why the hell would I want to buy casings just because weasel "Tommy" posted a viral video, that gained 18 million views. A piece of disgusting shit. Using his family to make money like this.

Xanthious:

mellemhund:
If you think broadcasting a theatrical revenge on your kids is parenting, then I hope you neither have nor will ever have any kids. Parents who get their methods from the worst dictators is not fit to be parents.

You know why people use public humiliation? Because it's a damn effective form of punishment. If you beat someone the pain subsides. If you lock someone up in their room eventually they adapt and make due. However if you publicly humiliate someone that gets their attention and gives them a Hell of an incentive to keep from fucking up in the future. Psychologically punishing someone works in ways that cuts them to the quick and goes far beyond what your typical punishments will ever accomplish
image

Do you know why public humiliation is forbidden in the declaration of human rights? because it's an inappropriate and ineffective way of punishing.

The girl told her friends on face book. The dad was blocked but gained access somehow. He's the one doing something he shouldn't. Then he gets mad and act like a drama queen. How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

Whats this the escapist is once again taking something that's not that big of a deal and taking it to the extreme.

mellemhund:

Xanthious:
[quote="mellemhund" post="18.348003.13856936"]If you think broadcasting a theatrical revenge on your kids is parenting, then I hope you neither have nor will ever have any kids. Parents who get their methods from the worst dictators is not fit to be parents.

Do you know why public humiliation is forbidden in the declaration of human rights? because it's an inappropriate and ineffective way of punishing.

The girl told her friends on face book. The dad was blocked but gained access somehow. He's the one doing something he shouldn't. Then he gets mad and act like a drama queen. How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

Mellemhund, you are damm right! Put a gun to my head, and I'd most likely grovel and lick your shoes per your commands because I don't want to die. But do you really think it'd change my beliefs? Hell no! The only thing it does, is to greatly minimize my want to act out on it, because of the risk involved. Give me a chance to aid someone carrying the same ideals as I, in a less riskier game? I'd do it! Because the belief stays in my heart!

That's why you can't buy nor force REAL Love, real loyalty and real respect. People will either respect you or they don't. And they will change their views only of their own accord.

Dastardly:

mellemhund:
I don't think I can argue this with you. The man is stumbling over words because of the adrenaline he got running from acting out his revenge on a daughter he feels slighted him in public. Then he goes theatrical (yay, more great parenting there) and destroys something. whether it would be don't with hammer, hands or guns is irrelevant it a violent action.

This destruction of property is not "violent." Now, if he were smashing something of hers in front of her in an effort to scare her? Yes, that would be an act of violence. But you can see, if you watch, that she is not present. He isn't yelling or stomping or pounding his chest. He is very calm in his presentation. And, above all, he is destroying HIS OWN PROPERTY. Since he's recording it and showing it to her, this point is moot. She's show the violence and I would like for you to concede that point.

Dastardly:

What he is doing does not damage (or seek to damage his child) in any way. Nowhere does he demonstrate an unsafe or unloving home environment. In fact, he demonstrates a clear interest in her betterment as a person. He targets the undesirable behavior directly, makes the punishment "fit the crime," and explains his reasoning very clearly.

How does he want to better her? He just punished her in public. And with a "you will respect my authority" attitude. Why didn't he take the laptop away from her and explain why? Instead he makes a video he even admits she'll not be able to see. He demands respect, which is the wrong way to go about it.

[quote]
He is her father. He is the guy that pays all of her bills and is responsible for her upbringing. If she was just saying, "Man, I really hate these chores. These chores suck. I wish I didn't have to do these chores," I could agree with you. Instead, she:

1. Directly insulted her parents, calling them "lazy" and several other names.
2. Insulted a friend of the family, treating her like hired help.
3. Claimed to be assigned chores that, as we learned in the video, actually weren't assigned -- she was just trying to make the situation look worse with lies.
4. Grossly overstated her responsibilities and understated her current privileges.

Basically, she spouted insults and lies, and demonstrated a gross misunderstanding of how her home (and her place in it) actually works.

And this is what teenagers do. They vent their "the world is hard" to their friends. If every parent got just as upset as this one, no teenagers would have any laptops. Imo it's the same as grounding for not doing choirs. Explaining it to her would've helped alot more than him trying to save face online.

I laughed so goddamn hard when he unloaded his gun into her laptop. When I was a kid and I did shitty things to my parents they took all my stuff away or broke the offending object so I would have to do without. I like to think that I might have learned something or another from that, as this girl should learn from this.

I like this man.

Funny as hell.

mellemhund:
How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

The problem, then, might be your capability, if it's really that far "beyond you" that people might think differently.

mellemhund:
And this is what teenagers do. They vent their "the world is hard" to their friends.

Yes, they do. Every child also tries to hit other kids to get his/her way. Every child also tries to lie and steal. EVERY. SINGLE. CHILD. Is it because they're evil? No. It's just human nature to try these things, until you learn not to. Just because we expect a teenager to do these things doesn't obligate us to excuse them for doing it.

If every parent got just as upset as this one, no teenagers would have any laptops. Imo it's the same as grounding for not doing choirs. Explaining it to her would've helped alot more than him trying to save face online.

You're still overstating how "upset" he was. He was disappointed in her, and he clearly felt that she needed some strong convincing. There's nothing about what this guy is doing that gives off the impression that he's upset about what her friends think of him. He's upset that she thinks so little of her family and home. That's 150% justifiable.

Grounding for not doing chores also makes complete sense in the way that every parent I've ever known explains it: You get freedom by being responsible. Chores are how to take responsibility for your part in this household. If you don't take that responsibility, you don't get the freedom that comes with it. Chores = Responsibility. Ability to Go Out = Freedom.

"Explaining" it is part of the process. It's not the entire process. Just like how "time outs" exploded ten years ago, with everyone using them as the "doctor-approved punishment"... only to have the doctors come out and say, "Um, that's not what we meant. Time outs are part of the process, not the whole damned thing."

He explained it to her. Twice, apparently. Since, clearly, just explaining didn't get the job done the first time, he had to follow it up with something more. He did.

I think you're still among those people in a complete irrational panic because oh-my-god-a-gun. If you grow up in a family that handles guns responsibly, you learn to respect them without having to be absolutely terrified of them. So I doubt that anyone in this family reacts with abject horror every time they see a gun.

Or maybe you're part of the, "Any time someone gets loud or anything gets broken, it must only be a result of pure, uncontrollable rage, and that person is dangerous." Good luck with kids one day, if that's the case.

In this thread you should have to state your age at the beginning of your post. I have a feeling that those saying the dad is crazy is very young.

Owyn_Merrilin:
You haven't heard one word I've said, so I'm going to say it again: even in a court of law, "No, I didn't do it" is not enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt on a piece of evidence that shows you committing a crime.

What crime? Where is the crime? You haven't demonstrated this, yet you still base your entire case on it. It's called "begging the question," and you're aaaaaall over it.

Now, if that was an isolated incident, you might make a case that it wasn't child abuse. But we can't just take his word that it was, let alone that his daughter was happy with it.

So... because we don't have any evidence of abuse, we can't not accuse him of being a child abuser.... wait, what? And what do you mean about his daughter being "happy" with it? What child is "happy" being punished or corrected? Ridiculous.

I guess in your world, accused murderers, rapists, and thieves can get away with pulling a knife on the victim, grabbing the victim and dragging him/her off to a car, or using the item known to be stolen, on camera, just by saying "no, I didn't do it."

No. In our world, people who are accused of murder, rape, or theft are not CALLED murderers, rapists, or thieves until they are convicted by weight of evidence in a court of law. Because until such determination is made, in the eyes of the law, they are not one.

Because that's all that has happened here: we've got the buildup to, if not the actual commission of a crime on camera, and you're going "well, he says everything's alright, we can trust him!" That's not how innocent until proven guilty works.

Again, what crime? Destruction of (his own) property? Discharging a firearm in the city limits? -- oh wait, no, by your estimation, we're clearly out "in the sticks." Abusing a child (who does not appear on camera being abused in any way, nor is there any admission or indication of abuse on the part of the father, except what you're fabricating to create your point)?

You are saying things that are not true. You are saying things for which you have no evidence. And then you are saying other things based on those things.

Dastardly:

Owyn_Merrilin:
You haven't heard one word I've said, so I'm going to say it again: even in a court of law, "No, I didn't do it" is not enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt on a piece of evidence that shows you committing a crime.

What crime? Where is the crime? You haven't demonstrated this, yet you still base your entire case on it. It's called "begging the question," and you're aaaaaall over it.

Now, if that was an isolated incident, you might make a case that it wasn't child abuse. But we can't just take his word that it was, let alone that his daughter was happy with it.

So... because we don't have any evidence of abuse, we can't not accuse him of being a child abuser.... wait, what? And what do you mean about his daughter being "happy" with it? What child is "happy" being punished or corrected? Ridiculous.

I guess in your world, accused murderers, rapists, and thieves can get away with pulling a knife on the victim, grabbing the victim and dragging him/her off to a car, or using the item known to be stolen, on camera, just by saying "no, I didn't do it."

No. In our world, people who are accused of murder, rape, or theft are not CALLED murderers, rapists, or thieves until they are convicted by weight of evidence in a court of law. Because until such determination is made, in the eyes of the law, they are not one.

Because that's all that has happened here: we've got the buildup to, if not the actual commission of a crime on camera, and you're going "well, he says everything's alright, we can trust him!" That's not how innocent until proven guilty works.

Again, what crime? Destruction of (his own) property? Discharging a firearm in the city limits? -- oh wait, no, by your estimation, we're clearly out "in the sticks." Abusing a child (who does not appear on camera being abused in any way, nor is there any admission or indication of abuse on the part of the father, except what you're fabricating to create your point)?

You are saying things that are not true. You are saying things for which you have no evidence. And then you are saying other things based on those things.

Actually, I made a separate thread that explains exactly what I mean. To wit:

Owyn_Merrilin:
Read this:

The National Abuse Hotline:

AM I BEING ABUSED?

Does your partner:

embarrasses the other person with put-downs
looks or acts in ways that are frightening
tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
tries to stop the other person from seeing friends or family members
tries to take the other person's money or Social Security check
makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared
makes all of the decisions
threatens to take away or hurt the children
prevents the other person from working or attending school
acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused
destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets

intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons
shoves,slaps, chokes or hits the other person
forces the other person to try and drop charges
threatens to commit suicide
threatens to kill the other person
If you answered 'yes' to even one of these questions,you may be in an abusive relationship.For support and more information please call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or at TTY 1-800-787-3224.

Bold text mine.

Now, for discusion, do you still think this man is awesome??

And here's the link to the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.348986-For-all-those-who-think-Tommy-Jordan-is-a-great-dad#comment_form

People actually agree with this? She was venting a teenage girls rage and used a few minor swear words. LETS ALL GET WORKED UP ABOUT HER USING THE WORDS "ASS", "SHIT" AND "BULLSHIT!" Christ, if my kids had said that, I'd have laughed, confronted them, then talked about it like a civilized adult.

What is the harm in pocket money for doing a weeks chores? I used to get 5 a week when I was younger, it gave me an incentive to get a job later on (hits on another point.) Why would she want to work if doing a weeks worth of chores doesn't give her anything back. Sure, the house is tidy but what teenager gives a fuck about that?

She called the cleaner the cleaner lady. Wow, she doesn't know the woman's name, big deal.

People who agree with this are just idiots.

Thomas Guy:
In this thread you should have to state your age at the beginning of your post. I have a feeling that those saying the dad is crazy is very young.

My guess? High school juniors through College sophomores.

Old enough to have taken an Introductory Psych course, maybe even Developmental if they're education majors. So they've learned the fancy words and phrases.

Young enough to still harbor the bitterness of teenage angst. They still have a burning desire to "unseat" every authority figure they can, believing that each idea they're just now discovering is entirely new and original, and they're going to "change the world" with it.

Old enough to believe they know it all. Young enough to lack practical experience or humility. It's a Perfect Storm of "informed ignorance."

So...he destroyed his daughter's laptop and humiliated her on facebook so that she would learn not to humiilate him on facebook? You know why she's a self-entitled bitch? Because he's a self-entitled asshole.

Owyn_Merrilin:
And here's the link to the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.348986-For-all-those-who-think-Tommy-Jordan-is-a-great-dad#comment_form

It's a list of potential signs of spousal/partner abuse. For you to use this to "diagnose" this man would be like you linking to WebMD and pretending to be a gastroenterologist.

But, heck, it's the internet, so I'll humor you:

embarrasses the other person with put-downs
Example? Where did he "put her down?" She was insulting him and her mother. Maybe she's being abusive here?

looks or acts in ways that are frightening
Again, you're projecting. I don't see anything "frightening" about this man. He isn't yelling or frothing at the mouth, he isn't even using threatening body language (like finger-thrusting or slamming fists).

makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared
Try to process this: HE IS HER FATHER. Not her boyfriend or spouse. It isn't "their money." It's HIS MONEY. Not because of some weird control thing, but because HE WORKED THE JOB THAT EARNED IT. There is no "supposed to be shared." He, as a parent, is choosing to give her things she needs/wants rather than giving her the money directly. And that's his perfectly valid choice.

makes all of the decisions
Clearly he doesn't. He didn't DECIDE she would have a job. He ENCOURAGED her to get one, but obviously didn't make her do it. But beyond that, again, and I'll type this s.l.o.w.l.y -- HE IS HER FATHER. PARENT. Not friend, buddy, partner. Of course he's going to make a ton of the decisions. He's an adult and she's a child.

tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
Evidence? He let her use the laptop -- I've seen abusive households, and that's a BIG no-no. The children of abuse do not get laptops or cell phones, because those are mobile, hidden avenues of communication with "the outside world." But I digress... She is allowed to use facebook (as long as she's not using it to spread lies about the people giving her the laptop). We see no evidence of abnormal control here, just normal parental control.

acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused
Unrelated. This is apparently just bolded to, what, make it look like a bigger deal? You have not yet established that there is abuse, so you can't claim he's "denying" it. Begging the question. Again.

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets
What property? HIS laptop? What pets? Again, it's different between spouses, because the property is SHARED. This is parent-child. Any responsible psychology professional will tell you that you can't just run around applying this list to the wrong situations. You're being irresponsible with this information.

intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons
HA! Wow! There it is, I guess, huh? He's "intimidating" her? I didn't hear him threaten, imply a threat, or in any way try to intimidate her. He "threatened" to ground her, not harm her.

So... out of what, sixteen possible symptoms, you've successfully attributed.... none? It's none, right? Zero out of sixteen.

Dastardly:

Owyn_Merrilin:
And here's the link to the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.348986-For-all-those-who-think-Tommy-Jordan-is-a-great-dad#comment_form

It's a list of potential signs of spousal/partner abuse. For you to use this to "diagnose" this man would be like you linking to WebMD and pretending to be a gastroenterologist.

But, heck, it's the internet, so I'll humor you:

embarrasses the other person with put-downs
Example? Where did he "put her down?" She was insulting him and her mother. Maybe she's being abusive here?

looks or acts in ways that are frightening
Again, you're projecting. I don't see anything "frightening" about this man. He isn't yelling or frothing at the mouth, he isn't even using threatening body language (like finger-thrusting or slamming fists).

makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared
Try to process this: HE IS HER FATHER. Not her boyfriend or spouse. It isn't "their money." It's HIS MONEY. Not because of some weird control thing, but because HE WORKED THE JOB THAT EARNED IT. There is no "supposed to be shared." He, as a parent, is choosing to give her things she needs/wants rather than giving her the money directly. And that's his perfectly valid choice.

makes all of the decisions
Clearly he doesn't. He didn't DECIDE she would have a job. He ENCOURAGED her to get one, but obviously didn't make her do it. But beyond that, again, and I'll type this s.l.o.w.l.y -- HE IS HER FATHER. PARENT. Not friend, buddy, partner. Of course he's going to make a ton of the decisions. He's an adult and she's a child.

tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
Evidence? He let her use the laptop -- I've seen abusive households, and that's a BIG no-no. The children of abuse do not get laptops or cell phones, because those are mobile, hidden avenues of communication with "the outside world." But I digress... She is allowed to use facebook (as long as she's not using it to spread lies about the people giving her the laptop). We see no evidence of abnormal control here, just normal parental control.

acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused
Unrelated. This is apparently just bolded to, what, make it look like a bigger deal? You have not yet established that there is abuse, so you can't claim he's "denying" it. Begging the question. Again.

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets
What property? HIS laptop? What pets? Again, it's different between spouses, because the property is SHARED. This is parent-child. Any responsible psychology professional will tell you that you can't just run around applying this list to the wrong situations. You're being irresponsible with this information.

intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons
HA! Wow! There it is, I guess, huh? He's "intimidating" her? I didn't hear him threaten, imply a threat, or in any way try to intimidate her. He "threatened" to ground her, not harm her.

So... out of what, sixteen possible symptoms, you've successfully attributed.... none? It's none, right? Zero out of sixteen.

Good god man, and you call /me/ dense?

Edit: To add more content, your post doesn't need a response. This quote is more to preserve it for posterity in case of an edit, because it really speaks for itself.

Owyn_Merrilin:

Dastardly:

Owyn_Merrilin:
And here's the link to the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.348986-For-all-those-who-think-Tommy-Jordan-is-a-great-dad#comment_form

It's a list of potential signs of spousal/partner abuse. For you to use this to "diagnose" this man would be like you linking to WebMD and pretending to be a gastroenterologist.

But, heck, it's the internet, so I'll humor you:

embarrasses the other person with put-downs
Example? Where did he "put her down?" She was insulting him and her mother. Maybe she's being abusive here?

looks or acts in ways that are frightening
Again, you're projecting. I don't see anything "frightening" about this man. He isn't yelling or frothing at the mouth, he isn't even using threatening body language (like finger-thrusting or slamming fists).

makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared
Try to process this: HE IS HER FATHER. Not her boyfriend or spouse. It isn't "their money." It's HIS MONEY. Not because of some weird control thing, but because HE WORKED THE JOB THAT EARNED IT. There is no "supposed to be shared." He, as a parent, is choosing to give her things she needs/wants rather than giving her the money directly. And that's his perfectly valid choice.

makes all of the decisions
Clearly he doesn't. He didn't DECIDE she would have a job. He ENCOURAGED her to get one, but obviously didn't make her do it. But beyond that, again, and I'll type this s.l.o.w.l.y -- HE IS HER FATHER. PARENT. Not friend, buddy, partner. Of course he's going to make a ton of the decisions. He's an adult and she's a child.

tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
Evidence? He let her use the laptop -- I've seen abusive households, and that's a BIG no-no. The children of abuse do not get laptops or cell phones, because those are mobile, hidden avenues of communication with "the outside world." But I digress... She is allowed to use facebook (as long as she's not using it to spread lies about the people giving her the laptop). We see no evidence of abnormal control here, just normal parental control.

acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused
Unrelated. This is apparently just bolded to, what, make it look like a bigger deal? You have not yet established that there is abuse, so you can't claim he's "denying" it. Begging the question. Again.

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets
What property? HIS laptop? What pets? Again, it's different between spouses, because the property is SHARED. This is parent-child. Any responsible psychology professional will tell you that you can't just run around applying this list to the wrong situations. You're being irresponsible with this information.

intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons
HA! Wow! There it is, I guess, huh? He's "intimidating" her? I didn't hear him threaten, imply a threat, or in any way try to intimidate her. He "threatened" to ground her, not harm her.

So... out of what, sixteen possible symptoms, you've successfully attributed.... none? It's none, right? Zero out of sixteen.

Good god man, and you call /me/ dense?

And avoidant, yes. You've made a habit so far out of not answering questions. You just restate your previous answer, ignoring evidence to the contrary, but you do it in an increasingly sarcastic and arrogant tone. Heck, I get increasingly sarcastic, but at least I specifically answer the question.

Your reply here? It completely ignores valid points. You're basically just hoping to play on your "audiences's" good graces, by pointing my way with a sort of, "C'mon... this guy, amirite, folks?"

I don't have a problem with him using a gun, and I agree his daughter needed some punishing.

But I don't think it was a very effective way of dealing with the problem. She won't really respect him anymore, she will just resent him more.

Also I don't think he should randomly peer though his daughters personal stuff. He, most likely, is making her feel like she doesn't have a place for herself.
I take that as him trying to control her feelings, he simply can't make her dislike the fact that she has to do those things.

Owyn_Merrilin:

Dastardly:

Owyn_Merrilin:
And here's the link to the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.348986-For-all-those-who-think-Tommy-Jordan-is-a-great-dad#comment_form

It's a list of potential signs of spousal/partner abuse. For you to use this to "diagnose" this man would be like you linking to WebMD and pretending to be a gastroenterologist.

But, heck, it's the internet, so I'll humor you:

embarrasses the other person with put-downs
Example? Where did he "put her down?" She was insulting him and her mother. Maybe she's being abusive here?

looks or acts in ways that are frightening
Again, you're projecting. I don't see anything "frightening" about this man. He isn't yelling or frothing at the mouth, he isn't even using threatening body language (like finger-thrusting or slamming fists).

makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared
Try to process this: HE IS HER FATHER. Not her boyfriend or spouse. It isn't "their money." It's HIS MONEY. Not because of some weird control thing, but because HE WORKED THE JOB THAT EARNED IT. There is no "supposed to be shared." He, as a parent, is choosing to give her things she needs/wants rather than giving her the money directly. And that's his perfectly valid choice.

makes all of the decisions
Clearly he doesn't. He didn't DECIDE she would have a job. He ENCOURAGED her to get one, but obviously didn't make her do it. But beyond that, again, and I'll type this s.l.o.w.l.y -- HE IS HER FATHER. PARENT. Not friend, buddy, partner. Of course he's going to make a ton of the decisions. He's an adult and she's a child.

tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
Evidence? He let her use the laptop -- I've seen abusive households, and that's a BIG no-no. The children of abuse do not get laptops or cell phones, because those are mobile, hidden avenues of communication with "the outside world." But I digress... She is allowed to use facebook (as long as she's not using it to spread lies about the people giving her the laptop). We see no evidence of abnormal control here, just normal parental control.

acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused
Unrelated. This is apparently just bolded to, what, make it look like a bigger deal? You have not yet established that there is abuse, so you can't claim he's "denying" it. Begging the question. Again.

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets
What property? HIS laptop? What pets? Again, it's different between spouses, because the property is SHARED. This is parent-child. Any responsible psychology professional will tell you that you can't just run around applying this list to the wrong situations. You're being irresponsible with this information.

intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons
HA! Wow! There it is, I guess, huh? He's "intimidating" her? I didn't hear him threaten, imply a threat, or in any way try to intimidate her. He "threatened" to ground her, not harm her.

So... out of what, sixteen possible symptoms, you've successfully attributed.... none? It's none, right? Zero out of sixteen.

Good god man, and you call /me/ dense?

Aren't you? The guy just put you down on every non argument you've had, and this is the best you can come up with. Accept it, move on, stop making a big deal out of nothing.

Shawn MacDonald:

ChocoFace:

Shawn MacDonald:
Is he an asshole for shooting the laptop, sure. He is also my hero for teaching his self entitled bitch of a daughter a lesson.

Put yourself in his daughter's position. Are you going to think "gee, i guess i was wrong, i'd better clean up my act. Thanks, dad" or would you pretty much resent him for the rest of your life?

The lesson here is that swooping to lower than a kids' level of immaturity to fix your problems is not something you'd want to do.

Hey maybe she won't act like a self entitled bitch and stop taking her parents for granted. All things will heal in time. Literally think she will be mad at him forever, fuck no. She will be moody and pissed off because that is what you do at that age. Probably think to herself, hey maybe I should not slander my folks on the internet. All I got to say is that it is his property, he can do what he wants with it. Really affected by this then maybe you should man up. Can't stand this bullshit anymore with soft parenting. Say grow a pair and get ready for the outside world because it will mess you up faster than you can say wet blanket.

1. I wasn't defending the girl's dumb actions. I think we've all established she was pretty much a bitch.

2. Watch the video again and see all the punishment the dad is going to lay on his daughter. Anyone who's learned an ounce of dealing with children knows that this is not the way to go: children learn from observing their elders (parents) and this time the child learned anything but what the dad was trying to teach him.

mellemhund:
Do you know why public humiliation is forbidden in the declaration of human rights? because it's an inappropriate and ineffective way of punishing.

The girl told her friends on face book. The dad was blocked but gained access somehow. He's the one doing something he shouldn't. Then he gets mad and act like a drama queen. How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

Ya know how the fella saw the note? He was posting pictures of the family dog on the dog's facebook account, which wasn't blocked, and saw it by happenstance.

Even if it would have happened by far more nefarious means the father would still be free of any wrong doing. As long as she is living under her parents roof and under the age of 18 she neither deserves nor is entitled to the smallest bit of privacy as far as her parents are concerned. As the parents of a minor they have a full pass to find out any information they like about her life by any means they deem necessary.

You see kids shouldn't enjoy the luxury of being able to block their parents from their facebook account. Hell if I had children and they blocked me from their Facebook account they would soon find themselves stripped of ANY way of connecting to said account in a time period that would be measured in months or years rather than weeks.

mellemhund:

The girl told her friends on face book. The dad was blocked but gained access somehow. He's the one doing something he shouldn't. Then he gets mad and act like a drama queen. How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

Well, he did actually nothing. He logged into an account the daughter forgot to block - the one of the dog.

Owyn_Merrilin:
You haven't heard one word I've said, so I'm going to say it again: even in a court of law, "No, I didn't do it" is not enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt on a piece of evidence that shows you committing a crime. Now, if that was an isolated incident, you might make a case that it wasn't child abuse. But we can't just take his word that it was, let alone that his daughter was happy with it.

I really don't know whether to laugh or cry.

But here we are, coming back to the same fundamental point that you seem to be hell-bent on ignoring. This video is not a piece of evidence that shows someone committing a crime. Nowhere in this video does the father abuse his daughter by any known lawful metric. You can do all the painfully far-fatched contortions to want to suspect him of child abuse, but you are going much further than that: you're reaching the point of slander and defamation.

I just genuinely don't understand why you're so desperate to believe this man must be a child-abuser.

I guess in your world, accused murderers, rapists, and thieves can get away with pulling a knife on the victim, grabbing the victim and dragging him/her off to a car, or using the item known to be stolen, on camera, just by saying "no, I didn't do it."

Yes, because clearly my reluctance to convict someone for child abuse on the basis of zero evidence means I believe an oral refusal of guilt should be sufficient cause for reasonable doubt.

You just broke my hyperbole meter. I hope you're happy.

Because that's all that has happened here: we've got the buildup to, if not the actual commission of a crime on camera, and you're going "well, he says everything's alright, we can trust him!" That's not how innocent until proven guilty works.

He destroyed the laptop he provided to his daughter as a privilege, clearly this is the build-up to child abuse!

He used a gun safely on his own property, clearly this is the build-up to first-degree murder with a firearm!

I want to believe that you're not serious, or that you're just trying to troll people, but sadly I doubt that's the case.

Owyn_Merrilin:

The National Abuse Hotline:

AM I BEING ABUSED?

Does your partner:

If his daughter is his partner, then we have some bigger issues. Otherwise, I don't think your list is entirely relevant to a parent-child relationship. Maybe that's the fundamental issue with your thinking: you believe parent-child relationships should demonstrate the same dynamics as those between independent or co-dependent peers. That is absolutely erroneous, however: a parent carries infinitely more responsibility. Their job is not only to provide for physical needs but also to shape a child emotionally, develop their character, and prepare them for independent life.

Your list is especially hilarious because some of the "abusive behaviours" it includes would actually be expected from a good parent. I.e.:

tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes
makes the other person ask for money
makes all of the decisions

Oh, look, being a parent.

destroys the other person's property
intimidates the other person with guns, knives or other weapons

Reality check: neither of those things happened in this video.

This man could be a child abuser, I don't know. If he is, though, it has nothing to do with destroying the laptop he gave to his daughter and recording it. You might murder young women and make meat products out of their corpses, I don't know. Clearly, you're a serial killer because your irrational reasoning and projection mean you must be unbalanced, and are clear indicators of psychopathic behaviour (Google told me so). I may not have direct evidence of a crime, but obviously your posts are just a build-up to one.

I know you're just going to ignore the bulk of what I've said in favour of your own interpretation, though. Maybe if you copy-paste some more alarmist material out of context I'll change my mind.

Pff, EFF-ing rednecks. See, America? This is why the rest of the world thinks you're stupid.

mad825:
Eh, I would've done a similar thing. I would clout a few arrow/bolts into it and I'll be more indiscriminate by using broad-tips. Even if I didn't have a bow/crossbow, I would've used a sledgehammer or similar hitting tool.

I honestly don't see your point and comes across as zealous. He got angry and used his method to destroy the object like anybody would have.

Destroy a perfectly good and expensive laptop? You sir, do not realize the value of money. He could have given it away or something, but destroying it seems rather wasteful.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 . . . 20 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked