Iâm also not a child abuse apologist, Iâm also just not in the business of pretending that every single possible situation where a parent hits their kid is exactly the same.
Since you seem to have difficulty distinguishing between what is and isnât child abuse (physical abuse is presumably whatâs being discussed here, so Iâm not going to touch on emotional/mental abuse), Iâll help you out.
âDoesnât matter why you do it.â
That right there is why you are wrong. Youâre trying to say that every instance of hitting someone is exactly the same, regardless of intention or surrounding circumstances, which is obviously not true, and I think you know that.Â
Abuse requires IMPROPER use of force. It requires CRUELTY.
Proper uses of force: removing someone from a dangerous situation; as punishment for an action (discipline). Possibly more, but I canât think of any right now.
Use of force is only proper as long as it is not excessive (does the punishment fit the crime, so to speak) and has a basis in one of the reasons listed above. Proper uses of force are therefore not common, everyday occurrences. In fact, if a parent FREQUENTLY hits their children, then the possibility of abuse increases greatly based on that frequency alone. Itâs also important to remember, when it comes to proper uses of force, that parents are adults and significantly bigger and stronger than their children as a result. That means that they have to be VERY CAREFUL WITH HOW MUCH FORCE THEY USE. What might not seem like a lot of force to an adult can actually be a lot of force to a kid. If a parent hits their kid as hard as they can, that is very much child abuse.
Here are examples of proper use of force: a child is about to wander directly into the path of an oncoming car. Their parent pulls/pushes them out of the way. That is necessary force to remove that child from a dangerous situation. That is NOT child abuse. Another example: a kid calls their mother something like a âgoddamn motherfucking cunt.â Their mom slaps them (once and not as hard as she can). That is punishment for an action. That is NOT child abuse.
Improper uses of force would then be things like hitting someone for no reason and not as a result of something that that person did or a situation that that person was in. It could also be going overboard even if there WAS a reason behind hitting them. For example, a kid is regularly beaten by their parent(s) every day regardless of that childâs actions. That is unfounded use of force. THAT IS CHILD ABUSE. Another example: a kid stays up an hour past their bedtime, and their parent(s) beat them with a belt as a result. That is excessive use of force. THAT IS CHILD ABUSE.
This is NOT to say that parents hitting their children is NEVER child abuse because that idea is flawed in the same way that your statement was flawed: a disregard for circumstances. This is also not to say that white people are incapable of abusing their children or that only PoC are capable of abusing their children. Child abuse does not discriminate based on race. However, in my experience, DISCIPLINE is very much a not white person thing, which is why I made my original comment on this post: because not understanding the difference between discipline and child abuse is a very common thing for white people to do.
âDoesnât matter how you choose to interpret your own childhood experiences.â
So what youâre saying is that you are the final authority on every single personâs childhood experiences and therefore are capable of determining if someone was abused without ever knowing any of the circumstances or information surrounding those experiences. In other words, you know better than anyone else, and even if someone doesnât think they were abused, your incredibly misinformed opinion overrides and invalidates their lived experiences. So congrats; in addition to being wrong, you also succeeded in being gross.
gummygunk
2087
turnnoffyourmind
stormborns
