Just don't use a hammer

I stopped idealizing so-called blue states when one of them elected as its governor an unconvicted sex criminal. And now we have a ruling from an appellate court in Connecticut that parents may whip their children with belts and leave bruises on them. When I checked the Hartford Courant poll a while ago, 56% of readers agreed with the ruling.

I do not understand hitting anyone for any reason ever. Hitting children--even if it does not leave a bruise--teaches them that hitting is the way to resolve conflict, and that hitting is a useful tactic in displaying power. Whipping with belts and leaving bruises, however, is child abuse, no matter how you slice it. If you whacked an adult with a belt or hit him hard enough to leave a bruise, you would be arrested for assault and battery and you would go to jail. But in Connecticut (and in all of the other states that are lax about enforcing child abuse laws), you are now considered a competent parent.

I have worked for years with both children who have been physically punished, and with adults who were physically punished as children. Every once in a while, I still run into one (always a man) who says "I deserved it." But that response is very rare these days. People now feel they make speak more openly, and when they do, they are deeply hurt and angered by having been whipped, punched, and humiliated by their parents. The ones who do not deal with their own anger and shame are generally the ones who, in turn, whip and punch their own children.

That a panel of judges in Connecticut would rule that what amounts to child abuse is acceptable is the placing of an official stamp on what is already a general practice in this country. Whacking children is so common, we even see people do it in public. Violence toward children, animals, and women escalates daily, as does violence among men. And given our current climate of "bring it on," we can expect to see even more glorification of violence.