According to a recent report by World Vision, more than three-quarters of Cambodian parents use physical punishment to discipline their kids. Physical discipline is rapidly becoming morally, and sometimes legally, unacceptable in western countries, however many western parents still smack their kids.
Do you think this report reveals part of Cambodia's violent dark side, or is it just an Asian cultural thing ? If it is cultural, does that mean that it's acceptable ?
In your Khmer family and among your friends, do you think there is a tendency to use physical punishment on children?
[Note that the subject of parental punishment is just one part of a report studying abuse against children in general.]
Curb physical discipline: charity
9 June 2017
More than two thirds of parents still use physical punishment against their children, according to research by the charity World Vision.
The organisation said the well-being of children and young people in the country has improved in recent years, but there is still much to be done.

“Physical, emotional and sexual violence against children in Cambodia is still common both within and without households, with 77 percent of parents using physical punishment against their children,” a statement from the charity said.

It added that research shows children who experience violence sustain injuries that are physical, mental and emotional.

This means they are more likely to suffer from alcoholism, inflict violence on others, and even commit suicide, it said. Aimylee Gabriel, child protection manager at World Vision, said violence against children remains a huge barrier to them realising their potential...
http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/39181/ ... --charity/

I'm expecting pushback on this, but I see nothing wrong with hitting out of line children. Just my opinion, but there are some lessons I really didn't learn until I got my ass handed to me in a fight after shooting my mouth off, so I don't buy into this zero aggression parenting.

When I say hit though, I don't mean hitting to cause harm as some parent do when they're overly frustrated with their children. I think there is a big difference between spanking, rulers on the hand or a smack upside the head vs. punches, hard slaps, kicking, choking, etc. Clearly there are limits, but some wild unruly kids (like myself) really needed a good hit to knock some sense into.

For me it has nothing to do with culture as I never had parents around and my mother never disciplined me for anything. Could be inherent in my East Asian brain though.

Username Taken wrote:It's not just in the home. Two of my kids have told me that the teacher smacks them on their legs with a stick or ruler.

And you don't say anything to the school?

If my kids told me that I'd go ballistic. If I choose to discipline my kids (I don't in anyway fyi, maybe idle threats but I have never smacked my kids) that way it's my choice, a teacher has no right to lay a finger, or ruler, or stick on my child.

AE86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 6:41 pm I'm expecting pushback on this, but I see nothing wrong with hitting out of line children. Just my opinion, but there are some lessons I really didn't learn until I got my ass handed to me in a fight after shooting my mouth off, so I don't buy into this zero aggression parenting.

When I say hit though, I don't mean hitting to cause harm as some parent do when they're overly frustrated with their children. I think there is a big difference between spanking, rulers on the hand or a smack upside the head vs. punches, hard slaps, kicking, choking, etc. Clearly there are limits, but some wild unruly kids (like myself) really needed a good hit to knock some sense into.

For me it has nothing to do with culture as I never had parents around and my mother never disciplined me for anything. Could be inherent in my East Asian brain though.

I was brought up in the 1950's in England, "physical punishment was the norm" so its not an Asian thing per se.


Consequences of Discipline in the '50s

Today, many look back at the '50s and see the corporal punishments that adults inflicted on children as unnecessary and unfair. However, elders who look back at what life was like in the '50s see a lack of morals in today's society that affects how children grow up. Negative influences on children that did not exist in the '50s, such as violent video games and movies, are of continued concern. It logically follows that we can choose to pick out the "good" parts about what it was like to be a child in the 1950s and avoid the "bad" parts and integrate them into what it means to be a child today. A healthy dose of discipline and structure and a general respect toward society are all important lessons we can take from the discipline of the 1950s.


Discipline at Home in the '50s

Children had to stand up on any occasion when an adult would enter the room, even if that adult was the child's parent. On the bus, it was expected that boys would give up their seat for a woman or anyone senior in age and also give up their places in line for the bus. You could never leave the table at dinner time without asking permission first. Children had to say "please" and "thank you," and if they didn't use these words correctly, they would be informed by adults that they were being rude. When wearing a hat, it would be suitable etiquette to take it off when going indoors, into a shop or when talking to a lady on the street. A child would be taught to say, "I would like," and was taught never to say the words, "I want." Opening the door for someone, especially a woman or an adult, was necessary, as was letting her exit before the child did so.
http://peopleof.oureverydaylife.com/dis ... -9201.html

Kuroneko wrote,
'' When wearing a hat, it would be suitable etiquette to take it off when going indoors, into a shop or when talking to a lady on the street.

Wondering why this is. Any ideas where it originated.

My mum would say this to me too (removing my hat indoors). Told me it was disrespectful to the homeowner because it was implying the house was not a hospitable place to the point of still needing one's hat. She also received somewhat of a British education as well if that matters.

Luigi wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:11 pm Kuroneko wrote,
'' When wearing a hat, it would be suitable etiquette to take it off when going indoors, into a shop or when talking to a lady on the street.

Wondering why this is. Any ideas where it originated.

Heres a couple of reasons:

“A relic of the ancient custom of taking off the helmet when no danger
is nigh. A man takes off his hat to show that he dares stand unarmed
in your presence.”

In the 16th to the 18th centuries in England, the donning and doffing of hats was governed by a code of etiquette and custom that it is hard for us now to appreciate. Every man of standing wore a hat, and the form of hat and the rules governing when it could be removed or for whom it should be raised in acknowledgement were bewilderingly complex. Hat doffing was an accompaniment to bowing and the depth of the bow determined how far the hat was lifted.

A bit like five versions of performing Sampeah in Cambodia

Edit: Highly relevant I think

AE86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:31 pm My mum would say this to me too (removing my hat indoors). Told me it was disrespectful to the homeowner because it was implying the house was not a hospitable place to the point of still needing one's hat. She also received somewhat of a British education as well if that matters.

You could never leave the table at dinner time without asking permission first. Children had to say "please" and "thank you," and if they didn't use these words correctly, they would be informed by adults that they were being rude.

In my friends' families, this is still normal etiquette for children.[This goes for every continent except the US. ]They are polite to adults, and they ask to be excused when they leave the table if we are eating together. But AFAIK the children are never beaten, threatened or physically punished. It's just called teaching your kids good manners.

So, do you think that Khmer parents physically punish their kids as a disciplinary measure more than in your home country ? I haven't noticed this myself with my own friends, but that's only my experience, and so it doesn't mean that this is how most families behave.

Kuroneko wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:35 pm

Luigi wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:11 pm Kuroneko wrote,
'' When wearing a hat, it would be suitable etiquette to take it off when going indoors, into a shop or when talking to a lady on the street.

Wondering why this is. Any ideas where it originated.

Heres a couple of reasons:

“A relic of the ancient custom of taking off the helmet when no danger
is nigh. A man takes off his hat to show that he dares stand unarmed
in your presence.”

In the 16th to the 18th centuries in England, the donning and doffing of hats was governed by a code of etiquette and custom that it is hard for us now to appreciate. Every man of standing wore a hat, and the form of hat and the rules governing when it could be removed or for whom it should be raised in acknowledgement were bewilderingly complex. Hat doffing was an accompaniment to bowing and the depth of the bow determined how far the hat was lifted.

A bit like five versions of performing Sampeah in Cambodia

Edit: Highly relevant I think

AE86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:31 pm My mum would say this to me too (removing my hat indoors). Told me it was disrespectful to the homeowner because it was implying the house was not a hospitable place to the point of still needing one's hat. She also received somewhat of a British education as well if that matters.

Thanks for that. Interesting.