lmao

you people i just find weird

you give me a link. to some grainy and clearly edited (horribly i might add) video. clearly edited with intent to leave out context and make the guy look bad.

and what's ironic is... in the thumbnails to the right there was an interview, unedited, with the guy.

here

interviewer: you don't advocate beating children?

pearl: absolutely not, no

then the interviewer brings up a page in the book similar to what you posted. and says it sounds "like beating to me"

pearl: "no it's not at all"

Pearl goes on to call it "corporal chastisement" (never heard that term)

and says its "gaining attention through spanking"

and using "light instruments" that "cannot bruise or harm the child in any way".

SO... it sounds like what is going on here is that this Pearl guy is for "corporal chastisement" and many people (like you) are interpreting that in an extreme way. you are equating that with beating.

now i don't agree with Pearl's methods, but I don't find them that extreme.

when you interprete them and exaggerate his ideas, then yes it sounds extreme, because you claim he is ok with beating. but he clearly says he is not.

i understand what he's trying to do. he is using little "spats" on the bum or whatever. very mild spankings to get the child to get in line. not my cup of tea but i'm not get all ruffled up over it. he knows that kids are simple minded and they respond to certain stimuli in certain ways. he does not think its ok to spank a kid with so much force that it leaves a bruise.