For all those who think Tommy Jordan is a great dad...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

You consider her being abused? That is laughable. Oh snap he shot her labtop because he considered it a good punishment for his daughter.

Never before has the internet argued so much over something so little.

I feel sorry for the dude, he never expected his video to explode in the way it did.

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??

Since none of this applies to the situation in question, yes he's awesome. Although one could argue that carrying in condition 2 is a bad idea, there are arguments either way.

EcksTeaSea:
You consider her being abused? That is laughable. Oh snap he shot her labtop because he considered it a good punishment for his daughter.

Moreover, he shot the laptop not in front of her and originally wasn't even going to show her the video in question.

Apparently someone in this thread never had parents that cared enough to actually do anything

Yea, I don't think I'll be taking parenting advice from a 22 year old with no kids anytime soon. My kids won't get paid for their chores. They also won't be paying me to board or food.

OT - As most people have pointed out, the confusion you've made here is the difference between "partner" and "parent". The dynamic of a relationship between partners is very different to one between a parent and child.

I firmly disagree with the decision to involve a gun in any way to the realm of "parenting" and the original video made him seem like an obnoxious, macho douchebag. He made the decision to shoot the laptop that he had paid for and then broadcast it on Youtube for the world to see. There's a lot of ways that can go wrong.

But I respect him a lot more after reading his response to the media. I disagree with the method, but he has a lot of values I agree with and seems like a very well-meaning person.

ok, i do think that in some circumstances he might be seen as slightly strict but thats just to do with the fact that he's pissed off, wouldn't you be mad if your daughter was talking shit about you and your wife?

to be fair i can see your point of view but i'm gonna have to dissagree with you because he got his point across and controlled the situation by putting it to an end.

obviously your opinion is still valid but you need to look at it from his point of view.

Of course I think this man is awesome - he's given me valuable information to show my future children about the problems of posting personal information online, and how it can cause a massive uproar over the simplest of things. Rather then shooting up their laptops myself, I can just show them all the threads and video responses to all of this to get the point across.

Personally I think this whole thing is being blown out of proportion because he used a Gun to prove his point (Though he did say that he'd 'Put a bullet through her laptop' if she ever did it again... so at least he stays true to his word). 10 bucks says this wouldn't be as big an issue if he just drove over it with a car or smashed it with a hammer.

(Also, this isn't Abuse... it's certainly not Partner Abuse as you've claimed, as the kid is well... his daughter. Completely different ballpark there. If you posted up a list of Child Abuse points then you'd probably have something more to go on.)

It's already been pointed out several times now, but that list explains signs of an abusive marriage/adult relationship. I never do any of those things to my wife or treat her that way at all because she is not a child, you see. A healthy adult relationship is hinged on mutual respect and understanding that each partner is equal.

The realtionship of a parent and a child is completely different. Treating your child like a total equal adult, providing no structure and allowing them to run rampant/undisciplined is abusively neglectful. He punished her bad behavior, the same as a boss could someday fire her ass if she puts something that stupid about work on Facebook. Lesson learned.

The idea of treating my daughter like my wife is ludicrous and border line creepy, parents are bosses and need to set rules and enforce them with punishments and revocation of privileges.

His only mistake was putting it online, I'd prefer to discipline my child in private. He's still awesome though.

OP: Ahhh the nativity of youth.

I worry for you if you ever have a chance to have kids if you consider a 'partner' the same as a child.

The man is still awesome, the only purpose this thread has served is to make yourself look like a fool.

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??

embarrassed with put downs: never outright insults his daughter. However does explain throughouly what she had done was wrong, and expresses this in the same fashion she had,
Looks or acts in a way thats frightening: Made youtube video. horrifying.
Tried to control what other does: Parent? Im pretty sure he's allowed to do this for his 15 year old daughter
Refuses money: Ya know, the money HE makes. That he doesnt HAVE to give to his daughter.
Makes all decisions: Parent again? Damn, should let our children make the rules from now on.
Acts like no big deal: Youtube video are EVIL. Damn, the bruises are strong with this girl
Intimidates with guns: Well... the laptop may have been intimidated. Pretty sure he didnt threaten her

I love this man. he is an awesome father. I even love the fact he replied to further statements about how he would not be going on the television or doing interviews because he did not wish to profit off this or further shame his daughter. He is a good man, and a good father.

Plus the show kept me entertained for a few minutes. Job well done

Shanicus:

Personally I think this whole thing is being blown out of proportion because he used a Gun to prove his point (Though he did say that he'd 'Put a bullet through her laptop' if she ever did it again... so at least he stays true to his word). 10 bucks says this wouldn't be as big an issue if he just drove over it with a car or smashed it with a hammer.

Of course it wouldn't be as big of a deal if a gun wasn't involved. For some people, adding a gun instantly makes it a bad thing. Because as we all know, anything who's original purpose was to kill is an evil devise designed by Satan himself to corrupt mankind.

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Owyn_Merrilin:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:
Who the fuck is Tommy Jordan? Should I know? Should I care?

Next question to the parents around here: are you raising children, or older teens? Because authoritarian (As opposed to authoritative) parenting does work... up to about the age of 12. Once kids hit adolescence and start trying to forge an identity separate from their parents, it all goes to hell in a handbasket.

*ANOTHER EDIT: I just browsed his channel, and look what I found.

Awwww. So cute.*

That... was fucking adorable.

You know, what is it with people. Im sorry but the guy is an excellent father. If you want to use your list, thats fine. Just make certain that the person answering the questions in the list is not an erratic know it all teenage girl. (not withstanding that this list is for a spouse or girlfriend, not a parent)

So if someone can answer those questions in the affirmative on behalf of the teenage girl, such as an adult like the mother. then yes there is automatically more validity to the claim. When dealing with a spoiled erratic teenage girl like this, It is impossible to take them at their word because they are swearing human rights violations simply because they arent getting their way. Obviously not applicable to all teenage girls, but its certainly widespread that there are an abundance of tropes surrounding this behavior.

It really disturbs me that anyone could see this as anything BUT an example of heroic parenting, but knowing that its not explains why I see as many useless and ineffectual kids these days. Even if you are not religious, this is one adage that needs to be remembered, Because it seems that what was proven from generation to generation to be shared and accumulated wisdom has seemingly been blocked from memory, with absolutely nothing in its place. Spare the rod, spoil the child. For the good of all children, remember it, because nothing good comes of allowing your children to walk all over you. Not for them, Certainly not for you. By not using appropriate discipline your HURTING that child by allowing them to get by with something they knew they were not supposed to do. When you do anything that is insufficient to counteract the childs negative behavior, all you are doing is giving them license to do it again because they will see your weak attempts at curtailing their behavior and perform a risk vs reward analysis to evaluate if the punishment to them is worth enduring in order to do what they were not supposed to be doing.

The guy is a hero. What he was doing was done out of love. Even if the snot nosed brat has no clue how that could be done out of love, that is exactly why he did this. He is a father who loves his daughter enough that he would not sit idly by as his little girl becomes a hate filled little brat who would publically condemn her parents just because they did not let her have her way. He expects his daughter to be a better person than that, and he took what steps needed to be taken to help make that happen.

Its insane to me. We talk about how kids are raised in single parent homes. We talk about how its important to have a father in a kids life. But as soon as a father fills his role as a father we want to jump on his back for doing the exact thing hes supposed to be doing? Honestly, I think we need to be asking what is wrong with us that anyone could consider him doing anything but filling his role as a father. Not what is wrong with him because really we need more fathers like him in this world. Maybe, just maybe we wouldnt see a bunch of neck bearded college kids complaining about corporate greed as they slug back their 8$ a cup of icecream flavored coffee.

Owyn_Merrilin:

Lionsfan:
Maybe I'm missing something...but why couldn't this have gone into the other thread? It's not like that thread is dying or anything

It's likelier for people to see it as its own thread than as a random post in a 14+ pager. Besides, it actually is in there, as a response to Dastardly.

Thomas Guy:
Awesome, No. Correct, Yes. Also, this says PARTNER.

As for it saying "Partner:" I'd say it really doesn't make any difference whether it's your spouse or your daughter. Abuse is abuse.

Actually it makes all the difference in the world. It's domestic abuse if you try to control your partner into doing what you want. Is it child abuse when you try to make your kid use the potty?
You are supposed to assert control over your kids until they are able to make their own decisions and grown individuals. You also don't have to share your salary since kids aren't to be trusted with the house finances because they lack the abilities until they are taught about it.

I agree with you that this guy is batshit insane and that he might be abusive, but partner abuse and child abuse are two different things.

Well, this is one-sided.

You probably should have found a relevant list, Owyn. Child != Partner, and the difference between them is huge.

And yes, I think he's fantastic.

Who is Tommy Jordan?

I just find it funny that not even the daughter is making a big a deal of the situation as everyone else. Relax, it's over.

The problem as I see it is this.
The internet allows us to put forward much information on a unregulated medium, which (not specifically) todays youth seem to think its 'okay' to get a million peoples feedback, instead of simply getting the important peoples feedback. How many times do you see facebook/twitter/tumblr/google+/myspace/(insert social medium here) posts which you know the individual would most likely NEVER, EVER speak to the person the message was intended for. If you seriously need to vent something and don't want anyone to find it, write it on a piece of paper, get your frustrations out, then immediately shred it.

I wish that all the folks who think social media is the place to vent and write obscene comments like the letter she posted could learn the valuable lesson that she did. ANYTHING posted on a social medium (especially the internet) can be found by ANYONE accidentally or otherwise, and these documents are always, always backed up, and shared with other sites, etc. I will bet you anything she will think twice before she posts anything from this point forward.

For those who think this is abuse, that's your opinion. I for one believe that the gun was overboard, but if he destroyed it any other way, he would still get flack for it. As a teenager, she is trying to find her mark in the world, secretly abusing (verbally or otherwise) the people who support you and put a roof over your head is not the way to make your mark in the world. It is, however a great way to piss those people off and give them a reason to not give you the luxuries that life has to offer. Mind you, luxuries are anything that doesn't include shelter, food, education, or clothing. Even at that point, many many children in this world would like to have those great luxuries. 'Beg' for luxuries? sure, why not? I'd bet this guy makes about 25-40 / hour. I bet he pays over 75% of that to maintain their home, car, health insurance, put food on the table, clothes on their backs, etc. When you break that down, you really get about 5-10/ hour of 'disposable' income. Yes. I would make my children ask for luxury items. If I have to work 60 hours to get them a laptop, I will make sure they will take care of it, they will not abuse it, etc. Even $20 for a movie is 2 hours of my work time to give my child 2 hours of leisure, not a big deal, if they can prove to me that they are doing their part to ensure that the family's livelihood is being maintained. It's a respect thing. They respect my wishes to have a happy, clean home, and I respect their wishes to have some leisurely fun. It's as simple as that.

I am sickened by how many people think that she 'needs' a car because they live in a 'rural' area, or how she 'needs' a laptop to survive... A 15 year old does not need these things, they want these things. When it comes to things you want, you earn them, you do not abuse them, and you use them properly for the purpose they were intended.

I highly doubt the laptop was purchased with the intent to use facebook on it, much less to publicly slander her parents to all (400+?) friends on her facebook(minus family). In reading more about this story, he originally posted this story on her facebook page, which ended up going out to about 40 more people. Those people blew it up... Unfortunately, we also don't know that her tirade wasn't shared with many more folks as well, because as a society, we just brush off a teenagers blatant disregard for her parents as a teen being a teen. B******T. Being a teen isn't an excuse for being dumb.

As for putting it online, I half heartedly disagree with it, but only because he had already tried other means of fixing the problem. When that failed, he went to teach her a lesson in humility. He decided that reading the letter, and responding to her complaints, then showing her her punishment on the medium which she seemed to enjoy was the proper punishment, and I can't blame him. In my opinion, if it worked, good for him. She was not hurt in the process, and now she will either be smarter about her 'privacy' settings, or (hopefully) she will learn what constitutes a real issue and what is frustration and how to deal with it appropriately

OP = Win! For once it's good to see some common sense and decency on this site!

"22, and no, I am not a parent. Now, same question of you?"

41, and have 4 nephews, 1 niece, and I take care of them regularly.

"On the first statement what is public humiliation, if not embarrassment? Because that's what he did."

And what were her public statements about her Father? Why, public humiliation. But why aren't you saying that *she* abused *her father*?

"Begging for money: He won't pay her for her chores, and she's too young to reasonably be expected to get that job he's pushing her to get."

I disagree.

"She has to ask him for literally /anything/, and when she points that out, he goes "well, get a job, you lazy bum," ignoring the fact that you need a car to work in a rural area."

Really? There's nothing within *bicycle* or *walking* distance? Oh, I'm sure she doesn't want to do that much physical work and expects to be handed whatever she wants, but no, I sincerely doubt she 'needs' a car.

" As for the laptop being "his" property? Maybe in the eyes of the law. But it was a gift, which means by any other standard, it was hers."

So the house belongs to her, too? Because she gets to use it but did nothing to pay for it, pay for the upkeep, or anything at all?

And interesting that you bring in 'other standards', because by most common standards having toys taken away from a disobedient, disrespectful child is not only normal, it's recommended by most child rearing methods. What standards are you using?

"Hell, under the eyes of the law, even if she /had/ earned it with her own money, because she's underage, it would still belong to him."

Actually I'm not sure that's true, but it's also not germane.

"Does that make it right for him to destroy it? The damage isn't in the legal property damage. It's in the emotional pain of having someone destroy your property."

What amazes me is you completely, utterly ignore any responsibility on the girl's part. No matter what she does, she is Entitled to have the things her father worked to get money to pay for, and she *does nothing* to earn. He *provided* the use of a Laptop. He has every right to take that laptop away and do whatever he wants with it.

When *you* start talking about what responsibilities the *girl* had to live up to, you'll have some point worth listening to.

FallenMessiah88:
OP = Win! For once it's good to see some common sense and decency on this site!

Thank you. Sad that it's buried under so many wackos who think either that a 15 year old needs the same kind of parental relationship as a 3 year old (potty training comments, seriously?) or that turning 18 somehow magically changes the definition of abuse. It's about what it does to the emotional state of the individual being abused, not who is doing it to them. Also, why is everyone taking this guy's word at face value? The thought process seems to go "well, he says his daughter is spoiled, so she must be lying, and he must be telling the truth!" The only thing we can tell for sure is that one of them is lying and I'm not sure why anyone would even /suspect/ it was the daughter after watching that video.

Is this about the guy shooting the laptop? Yeah, that was a stupid thing to do.

Owyn_Merrilin:
embarrasses the other person with put-downs

You mean like how she did on Facebook?

Owyn_Merrilin:
looks or acts in ways that are frightening

You mean when he shot a gun when there was exactly no one near him?

Owyn_Merrilin:
tries to control what the other person does, who the other person sees or talks to, or where the other person goes

You mean like pretty much every parent in the history of ever? Are we really going to start considering grounding a child as abusing them?

Owyn_Merrilin:
makes the other person ask for money or refuses to give the other person money that is supposed to be shared

You mean how he paid $130 to upgrade her laptop? Or how he won't give her money for chores most kids do for free? Or how he PAID ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY DOLLARS UPGRADING HER LAPTOP!

Owyn_Merrilin:
makes all of the decisions

You mean like how parents have the right to? You live in your parents house, you live by your parent's rules. If you don't like it, move out. Get a job and try supporting yourself because you obviously know so much as a teenager.

Owyn_Merrilin:
acts like the abuse is no big deal, denies doing it, or blames something or someone else, even the person being abused

He hasn't abused anyone.

Owyn_Merrilin:
destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets

He paid for the laptop, he has the right to take it away from her. Now maybe he could have kept it away from her and given it to her when she was able to pay for it. Don't forget, this isn't the first time she's badmouthed her parents on Facebook.

Owyn_Merrilin:
intimidates the other personwith guns, knives or other weapons

Yeah initimidated her... by having her nowhere near when he fired the gun?

Owyn_Merrilin:

FallenMessiah88:
OP = Win! For once it's good to see some common sense and decency on this site!

Thank you. Sad that it's buried under so many wackos who think either that a 15 year old needs the same kind of parental relationship as a 3 year old (potty training comments, seriously?) or that turning 18 somehow magically changes the definition of abuse. It's about what it does to the emotional state of the individual being abused, not who is doing it to them. Also, why is everyone taking this guy's word at face value? The thought process seems to go "well, he says his daughter is spoiled, so she must be lying, and he must be telling the truth!" The only thing we can tell for sure is that one of them is lying and I'm not sure why anyone would even /suspect/ it was the daughter after watching that video.

Seriously? Everyone who disagrees is a wacko?

Move on, people. Your time is wasted on this thread.

Irridium:

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets

He bought the laptop, it's his property. It may be a gift, and that would be a dick thing to destroy it. But if all gifts are now you're property, then any parent who tries to take something from a child would be considered theft. So where exactly is the line with this?

OK, look, I see this argument over and over again in one variation or another, but in any other context it makes no sense whatsoever.

(I don't have children, so references to this are hypothetical)
If I give my child a gift, by your logic it's still my property, and I can do whatever I like with it.

If I give my best friend a gift... Are you seriously implying I can walk into their house and destroy it, because I was the one that gave it to them in the first place?

How about if a shop gives me something for free? Since I didn't technically pay for it, it's clearly a gift of some kind.
But, does that mean the shop technically still owns it? No. I do. Because they gave it to me.

if you give someone a gift, it is generally understood that you relinquish ownership of it, and the person who received it is now it's rightful owner.

So... On what grounds does the parent/child relationship otherwise undermine this basic concept of gifts and ownership?

CrystalShadow:

Irridium:

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets

He bought the laptop, it's his property. It may be a gift, and that would be a dick thing to destroy it. But if all gifts are now you're property, then any parent who tries to take something from a child would be considered theft. So where exactly is the line with this?

OK, look, I see this argument over and over again in one variation or another, but in any other context it makes no sense whatsoever.

(I don't have children, so references to this are hypothetical)
If I give my child a gift, by your logic it's still my property, and I can do whatever I like with it.

If I give my best friend a gift... Are you seriously implying I can walk into their house and destroy it, because I was the one that gave it to them in the first place?

How about if a shop gives me something for free? Since I didn't technically pay for it, it's clearly a gift of some kind.
But, does that mean the shop technically still owns it? No. I do. Because they gave it to me.

if you give someone a gift, it is generally understood that you relinquish ownership of it, and the person who received it is now it's rightful owner.

So... On what grounds does the parent/child relationship otherwise undermine this basic concept of gifts and ownership?

NEWFLASH: THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES FOR INTERACTING WITH YOUR CHILDREN, THE SHOPS YOU GO TO, AND YOUR BEST FRIENDS!!!

I can't believe I have to point that out...

Kaulen Fuhs:

Owyn_Merrilin:

FallenMessiah88:
OP = Win! For once it's good to see some common sense and decency on this site!

Thank you. Sad that it's buried under so many wackos who think either that a 15 year old needs the same kind of parental relationship as a 3 year old (potty training comments, seriously?) or that turning 18 somehow magically changes the definition of abuse. It's about what it does to the emotional state of the individual being abused, not who is doing it to them. Also, why is everyone taking this guy's word at face value? The thought process seems to go "well, he says his daughter is spoiled, so she must be lying, and he must be telling the truth!" The only thing we can tell for sure is that one of them is lying and I'm not sure why anyone would even /suspect/ it was the daughter after watching that video.

Seriously? Everyone who disagrees is a wacko?

Move on, people. Your time is wasted on this thread.

^^ This guy right here.

Move on people, this is a troll thread. Speaking as a hypocrite, bumping this thread serves no purpose.

MasochisticAvenger:

CrystalShadow:

Irridium:

destroys the other person's property or threatens to kill pets

He bought the laptop, it's his property. It may be a gift, and that would be a dick thing to destroy it. But if all gifts are now you're property, then any parent who tries to take something from a child would be considered theft. So where exactly is the line with this?

OK, look, I see this argument over and over again in one variation or another, but in any other context it makes no sense whatsoever.

(I don't have children, so references to this are hypothetical)
If I give my child a gift, by your logic it's still my property, and I can do whatever I like with it.

If I give my best friend a gift... Are you seriously implying I can walk into their house and destroy it, because I was the one that gave it to them in the first place?

How about if a shop gives me something for free? Since I didn't technically pay for it, it's clearly a gift of some kind.
But, does that mean the shop technically still owns it? No. I do. Because they gave it to me.

if you give someone a gift, it is generally understood that you relinquish ownership of it, and the person who received it is now it's rightful owner.

So... On what grounds does the parent/child relationship otherwise undermine this basic concept of gifts and ownership?

NEWFLASH: THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES FOR INTERACTING WITH YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR BEST FRIENDS!!!

I can't believe I have to point that out...

Oh really? Derp.

That still doesn't explain the basic principle here.

What is the justification for treating your child like they don't have even an approximation of the basic rights of an adult?

Do you really think ownership is that trivial a consideration?

But I think your reaction says it all really. You seem to think there's some implicit difference. (Or that this is a strawman argument. Gotta love message notifications and edits.)
Yet you give no actual justification for why there should be a difference.

You DO realise the justification being given that I'm taking issue with is that it's OK for this guy to shoot his daughter's laptop is as follows:

"It's his property, he can do what he likes with it."

If it had to do with some issue surrounding parenting, then the above is a bullshit justification for the simple reason that under any other circumstances it wouldn't be considered his property, and what he did to it would be considered destroying another person's property. (and possibly theft too, amongst other things.)

Therefore, if there is a justification for why this is OK, saying it's his property is not it!

This is for a partner. As in romantic relationship.

The girl he was angry at in the video was his daughter. As in most of the things you've put in bold do not apply one bit.

Loosely applying some of this logic to the video, my opinion has still not changed. I agree with what he did.

Taking it public for the world to see? Maybe. If I was the kid of that guy, I'd be mortified. Still doesn't change my opinion of his tactics. The only reason I think people are freaking out about it is because they've never seen a kid punished like that before.

If the kid was getting beaten or screamed at constantly, you'd have every right to flip a bitch. But I have a feeling that that was as angry as that guy gets, and he was keeping it in check. He knew how to handle himself. And damn, did he handle himself.

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Awwww. So cute.*

D'AWWWWW!!!!

The partner relationship is meant to be an equal one. The parent-child relationship is not.

To spell it out: If one partner in a relationship between two adults "makes all of the decisions" then that can be seen as (at the very least) an unhealthy relationship. Between a father and daughter, we call that parenting. If a parent does not make decisions for their child, they can be accused of negligence.

CrystalShadow:

MasochisticAvenger:

CrystalShadow:

OK, look, I see this argument over and over again in one variation or another, but in any other context it makes no sense whatsoever.

(I don't have children, so references to this are hypothetical)
If I give my child a gift, by your logic it's still my property, and I can do whatever I like with it.

If I give my best friend a gift... Are you seriously implying I can walk into their house and destroy it, because I was the one that gave it to them in the first place?

How about if a shop gives me something for free? Since I didn't technically pay for it, it's clearly a gift of some kind.
But, does that mean the shop technically still owns it? No. I do. Because they gave it to me.

if you give someone a gift, it is generally understood that you relinquish ownership of it, and the person who received it is now it's rightful owner.

So... On what grounds does the parent/child relationship otherwise undermine this basic concept of gifts and ownership?

NEWFLASH: THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES FOR INTERACTING WITH YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR BEST FRIENDS!!!

I can't believe I have to point that out...

Oh really? Derp.

That still doesn't explain the basic principle here.

What is the justification for treating your child like they don't have even an approximation of the basic rights of an adult?

Do you really think ownership is that trivial a consideration?

But I think your reaction says it all really. You seem to think there's some implicit difference. (Or that this is a strawman argument. Gotta love message notifications and edits.)
Yet you give no actual justification for why there should be a difference.

You DO realise the justification being given that I'm taking issue with is that it's OK for this guy to shoot his daughter's laptop is as follows:

"It's his property, he can do what he likes with it."

If it had to do with some issue surrounding parenting, then the above is a bullshit justification for the simple reason that under any other circumstances it wouldn't be considered his property, and what he did to it would be considered destroying another person's property. (and possibly theft too, amongst other things.)

Therefore, if there is a justification for why this is OK, saying it's his property is not it!

Especially when we're talking about a 15 year old young adult, not a 5 year old child. The only justification that makes sense is for the child to be a part of the parents' property herself -- in which case, why exactly are we shaming Hannah for pointing out that she's a slave?

To those who think I'm a troll: hah, you wish. Check my health bar and post count. Usually even normal posters are almost in the yellow by the time they've been here as long as I have. Trolls are pushing the red.

CrystalShadow:

MasochisticAvenger:

CrystalShadow:

OK, look, I see this argument over and over again in one variation or another, but in any other context it makes no sense whatsoever.

(I don't have children, so references to this are hypothetical)
If I give my child a gift, by your logic it's still my property, and I can do whatever I like with it.

If I give my best friend a gift... Are you seriously implying I can walk into their house and destroy it, because I was the one that gave it to them in the first place?

How about if a shop gives me something for free? Since I didn't technically pay for it, it's clearly a gift of some kind.
But, does that mean the shop technically still owns it? No. I do. Because they gave it to me.

if you give someone a gift, it is generally understood that you relinquish ownership of it, and the person who received it is now it's rightful owner.

So... On what grounds does the parent/child relationship otherwise undermine this basic concept of gifts and ownership?

NEWFLASH: THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES FOR INTERACTING WITH YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR BEST FRIENDS!!!

I can't believe I have to point that out...

Oh really? Derp.

That still doesn't explain the basic principle here.

What is the justification for treating your child like they don't have even an approximation of the basic rights of an adult?

Do you really think ownership is that trivial a consideration?

But I think your reaction says it all really. You seem to think there's some implicit difference. (Or that this is a strawman argument. Gotta love message notifications and edits.)
Yet you give no actual justification for why there should be a difference.

You DO realise the justification being given that I'm taking issue with is that it's OK for this guy to shoot his daughter's laptop is as follows:

"It's his property, he can do what he likes with it."

If it had to do with some issue surrounding parenting, then the above is a bullshit justification for the simple reason that under any other circumstances it wouldn't be considered his property, and what he did to it would be considered destroying another person's property. (and possibly theft too, amongst other things.)

Therefore, if there is a justification for why this is OK, saying it's his property is not it!

Alright, I think I owe you a bit of an apology. First of all, I removed the bit about the strawman argument because I realized it was incorrect. I am sorry about that.

Second of all, I mistook your argument of "a child's property is not their parent's property" as "a parent taking something of their kids away as punishment is wrong". Again, I'm sorry about that.

Third of all, yeah... my post made me come off as a huge doucebag. You didn't deserve that for simply posting an opinion. I'm sorry about that.

Now, as for whether or not shooting her laptop was justified in my opinion. I agree that it being his property is faulty logic. No question about that. However, as to whether or not he should be considered a bad person for shooting her laptop I'm a little more iffy. She complained how he never gives her anything, so he takes away something he paid quite a bit of money on. Maybe it was a little extreme to shoot the laptop, but don't forget this wasn't the first time she had badmouthed her parents on Facebook. The first time, if I recall correctly, he simply took away her cell-phone and laptop for a little while. Apparently that didn't work, so he needed to up the ante so to speak. As with most forms of punishment, it's largely a form of opinion whether or not the punishment was reasonable.

As to the difference between interacting with your child and your best friend, you don't have the responsibility or even the right to punish your best friend when they do something wrong. I mean, I'm guessing... If you can possibly believe it, I've never actually had a best friend :P.

At any rate, I am sorry about my previous post. I was wrong.

That just indicates that you're a good troll.

...and to prove it, I'll bite.

She is *his* daughter; until she decides to be otherwise, or the law takes her away. There is an ownership there. To be blunt, it is also that ownership that makes it OK for him to destroy his laptop.

If you really think that 14-year-olds are emotionally, mentally, or physically mature enough to be acting on their own without authoritative parenting, then you know nothing of child and teenage psychology.

He taught her the lesson that actions have consequences. She gets to experience that yes, her words will have repercussions while also seeing that his do as well through the media attention and bile spewed his way by the self-righteous like you.

Seriously, I'm 22 and I wish my parents had been half as hard on me. I'd be in a better place and certainly wouldn't have had to learn some of those hard lessons in areas that it really matters.

Damien Black:
That just indicates that you're a good troll.

...and to prove it, I'll bite.

She is *his* daughter; until she decides to be otherwise, or the law takes her away. There is an ownership there. To be blunt, it is also that ownership that makes it OK for him to destroy his laptop.

If you really think that 14-year-olds are emotionally, mentally, or physically mature enough to be acting on their own without authoritative parenting, then you know nothing of child and teenage psychology.

He taught her the lesson that actions have consequences. She gets to experience that yes, her words will have repercussions while also seeing that his do as well through the media attention and bile spewed his way by the self-righteous like you.

Seriously, I'm 22 and I wish my parents had been half as hard on me. I'd be in a better place and certainly wouldn't have had to learn some of those hard lessons in areas that it really matters.

Operative word: Authoritative. The video showed Authoritarian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting_styles

Edit: Seriously, if you're going to talk child psychology, you need to understand the difference between these two terms. It could, quite literally, save a child's life.

wikipedia:
Authoritative parenting, also called 'assertive democratic'[14] or 'balanced' parenting,[15] is characterized by a child-centered approach that holds high expectations of maturity. Authoritative parents can understand their children's feelings and teach them how to regulate them. They often help them to find appropriate outlets to solve problems. "Authoritative parenting encourages children to be independent but still places limits and controls on their actions." [1] "Extensive verbal give-and-take is allowed, and parents are warm and nurturant toward the child."[1] Authoritative parents are not usually as controlling, allowing the child to explore more freely, thus having them make their own decisions based upon their own reasoning.[16]

Authoritative parents set limits and demand maturity, but when punishing a child, the parent will explain his or her motive for their punishment. "Their punishments are measured and consistent in discipline, not harsh or arbitrary. Parents will set clear standards for their children, monitor limits that they set, and also allow children to develop autonomy. They also expect mature, independent, and age-appropriate behavior of children."[1] They are attentive to their children's needs and concerns, and will typically forgive and teach instead of punishing if a child falls short.[17] This is supposed to result in children having a higher self esteem and independence because of the democratic give-take nature of the authoritative parenting style. This is the most recommended style of parenting by child-rearing experts.
[edit] Authoritarian parenting

Authoritarian parenting

The parent is demanding but not responsive. Elaborate becomes totalitarian parenting.

Authoritarian parenting, also called strict parenting,[15] is characterized by high expectations of conformity and compliance to parental rules and directions, while allowing little open dialogue between parent and child. "Authoritarian parenting is a restrictive, punitive style in which parents advise the child to follow their directions and to respect their work and effort."[1] Authoritarian parents expect much of their child but generally do not explain the reasoning for the rules or boundaries.[18] Authoritarian parents are less responsive to their children's needs, and are more likely to spank a child rather than discuss the problem.[19]

Children resulting from this type of parenting may have less social competence because the parent generally tells the child what to do instead of allowing the child to choose by him or herself.[20] Nonetheless, researchers have found that in some cultures and ethnic groups, aspects of authoritarian style may be associated with more positive child outcomes than Baumrind expects. "Aspects of traditional Asian child-rearing practices are often continued by Asian American families. In some cases, these practices have been described as authoritarian."[1] If the demands are pushed too forcefully upon the child, the child will break down, rebel, or run away.

As for the whole ownership thing: thank you for admitting that you support ownership of a human being. Underage or not, people are not property, either legally or morally. I mean, if she is his property, would you support him shooting her just like he shot her laptop? Afterall, she's his property, he can do what he wants with her.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked