cat is a bully

KellyH wrote:

It wasn't abuse in the "CPS would have taken me away" sense, but it's just
what you "that child needs an ass-whuppin" types advocate. I spilled
something at dinner, I got spanked and sent away from the table. That type
of thing. I wasn't bleeding or bruised, but it's enough to make a child
scared.

--
-Kelly

Kelly, there is a balance. I do not say, slap your child for spilling
milk?

That's crazy! That is out of control. I can see why you was scared.
If you think for one minute that I advocate this; then I will take the
blame and say I have not communicated myself very well. This is not at
all what I'm talking about.

How many posts have come through here and I suggest a spanking, one or
two.
How many posts come through here where on the surface it appears to be
behavior, but really it's possibly a brain tumor. I say that to say; I
am not one of those, "That child needs a spanking" type.

Your trying so hard to put me in some place, here or there, be done
with me, hate me like me...why does it have to be this way at all?

"KellyH" wrote in message
...
"bigbadbarry" wrote
You may have had an abusive father.

You have not heard me suggest one ounce of abuse, but it's easier for
your little mind to just throw it all, rather than consider any of it.


It wasn't abuse in the "CPS would have taken me away" sense, but it's just
what you "that child needs an ass-whuppin" types advocate. I spilled
something at dinner, I got spanked and sent away from the table. That
type
of thing. I wasn't bleeding or bruised, but it's enough to make a child
scared.

It's not the pain that causes the damage... as anyone who has ever been
through childbirth can testify, pain is quickly forgotten (or there would
never be a mother with more than one child except for the mothers of twins).
It's the *fear* that causes the damage. Whenever someone who is three or
four times your size and even more multiples your strength loses control of
themselves and commits violence it is so frightening that it can cause
permanent damage. Spanking isn't about correcting behavior just like rape
is not about sex - it's a control issue and enforcing your will upon
anotherby brute strength and bullying when you can't enforce your opinions
and beliefs by dint of logic or ethics.

Hugs,

CatNipped

--
-Kelly

"bigbadbarry" wrote
Kelly, there is a balance. I do not say, slap your child for spilling
milk?


OK, so what type of behavior does merit a spanking?

That's crazy! That is out of control. I can see why you was scared.
If you think for one minute that I advocate this; then I will take the
blame and say I have not communicated myself very well. This is not at
all what I'm talking about.

You kept saying "Bust the cat's ass". That sounds pretty violent to me.

--
-Kelly

On 2005-06-10 17:10:36 -0700, Diane Schirf
said:

In article ,
John Doe wrote:

... that particular position is not defensive, it is completely submissive

Actually, it's not -- depending on other factors, it can be an attack
position. (Trust me -- I've seen this many times.)

With our cats we interpret some rolling on the back as asking to play
either with us or with each other.

Our feral will roll over on her back and present her tummy to us
frequently. She waves her feet and it sure looks like she's inviting
play (but humans are just too scary, still, to actually play with). Her
kittens do the same and will roll over as an invitation and eventually
the one on her back will get pounced by momma or her sister.

We've (inadvertantly) taught the kittens "silent ninja cat fighting."
When they were younger and wrestling we would break it up when someone
squealed. Now that they're older they play completely silently, unless
one or the other is losing and then someone will yelp and we'll break
it up. We didn't mean to teach this to them, it just happened.

b

Catnipped wrote:

OK, think of it like this. When a child (or animal) misbehaves and "causes"
you to lose your temper and resort to violence, then *they* are controlling
*you*.

Agreed, a person is controlled by anger. Tic for a tac, your assuming
that all spankers do it from being out of control, what if that spanker
believes this is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you.
They are not angry but feel that by *not* spanking they are actually
doing more damage than good. One of the wisest men who ever lived King
Solomon, said, "Spare the rod, spoil the child". in another place he
said, " Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of
correction shall drive it far from him.

I'm not trying to quote scripture, I just happen to agree, and I don't
want to take credit for the writing.


My children could do whatever they chose to "get a rise" out of me,
but they *never* "got a rise" out of me. *I* chose how I would react, and
what I chose was to address their behavior, and change it. When you react
with anger and perpetrate violence (and how in the world can anyone state
that hitting is *not* voilent??!), you are allowing womeone else to control
you instead of being in control of a situation.


I gather that this would be good reading for an abuser. One who
habitually out of anger resorts to violence in an attempt to change the
other. Right?

For every action and deed that can be done under the sun, there are
people who are extreme. I recently was invited to a March Against
Violence. Initially I said yes, and was planning on going, I got a call
from a customer, and this knocked me out of the March.

I am against violence. I hardly call a swat on the behind violent.
(This has nothing to do with anger; in fact, I tell parents don't
decide punishments while you are angry, wait till you cool off).

However, if you paint a picture of a 235 Lb man, coming down on a cat
with a rolled up Sunday paper, and use words like, strike and hit, and
dominate through violence, sure...it's going to raise a brow. As I say,
there are extremes and what I am reading from you addresses the
extremes. This writing is clean and so far I agree with you! Hands
down. (Except for all hitting being violent). There is no pretty word
for a swat, it is a hit, but why does that "hit" need to fall into the
category of an un-intelligent raging lunatic who is out of control
coming down on a poor weak lightweight cat?

Really Barry, when you hit someone, at the *best* you are simply teaching
them to be afraid of you (and thereby try harder not to get *caught*) - and
at worse you are teaching them to *be* violent. Does the world really need
more violence????!

I am against the man who covers his wife with violence. Show me a man
that slaps his wife or animals around and I will show you a weaker man.


When you teach someone to behave well because they are
getting rewarded for behaving well you are setting up this changes their
feelings about behaving well and not just to behave well out of fear.

I have never loved my parents any less for correcting me, I have never
been afraid of either of them. I did wrong CN. My Dad told me don't
mess with the heater, and he even educated me and told me I could burn
the house down. I really understood this, and I really did not mean to
almost burn the house down. I sure did! I stoked that buck stove so
hard, that the doors and the handles on it had turned glowing red. They
had the brick facade all around it, made it look like a fireplace; I
got it so hot that the bricks began to slide down the wall. My neighbor
saw flames coming out of the vent pipe on the roof.
I got my butt whooped.

I took my uncles truck out in the middle of the night ( I was 9 years
old)
I didn't know his reverse gear didn't work. I was backing towards a
huge concrete drain (we call it a cull berth) luckily my uncle showed
up at 4 o'clock in the morning, and rescued his truck. I got my butt
whooped. There was no yelling, no screaming; in fact the spanking came
the next evening. Wow. They was not angry. But they owed me a spanking.

I could go on down the page...one deed after another. Call me hard
headed or whatever, but foolishness was in my heart to do what I
thought, but my parents love compelled them to drive it from me.

You talk about rewarding good behavior. I like that, but on the other
hand, I am good to my loved ones all the time; they don't have to earn
my goodness. I am creative in ways that I can be good to them. And when
they fail me? I do not withdraw my goodness from them.


If you're interested, here is some commentary I wrote on parenting that
explaines the "Three Cs" in more depth:

"C1 - Control, and this means control of yourself first! No screaming or
hitting in reaction to what your child does, that gives HIM control over YOU
(HE does act A, YOU have reaction B - he controls you!). It's very easy to
lose your temper and threaten or spank the child, but this only strengthens
his knowledge that he can control your actions with his. You'll usually calm
down later and regret grounding him or hitting him and then rescind the
punishment or apologize, again this puts him in control - he got his way
with no, or amended consequences.

I agree here, discipline should not administered if one is under the
influence of anger.

In retro: There is an anger that is good, there is a fear that is good.
Had I not known anger, I would not know love, had I not known fear I
would not know respect.

**I am against the man that covers his wife with violence, I am against
the ogar that rules his house with a fist, and strikes fear in the
hearts of his children this is a travesty this is wrong.


C2 - Consequences, both good and bad as in, "If you choose to finish your
homework you'll get an extra fifteen minutes of TV tonight, if you choose to
not finish your homework you will be given two extra chores to do". ALWAYS
put it in that manner - that he is the one who is choosing his fate, not you
or anyone else. Remember to keep both the rewards and punishments
reasonable. Don't make rewards or punishments you can't keep. Don't promise
a new bike if you can't afford one, and don't threaten to "ground him for
the rest of his life" when you know that's not conceivable. Keep all things
"child-sized" - an ice cream cone is precious to a three-year-old, and a
fifteen minute time-out works better than a week's grounding, and it still
gets the point across. For older children and teenagers larger rewards or
punishments are necessary. AND CONCENTRATE ON THE REWARDS! It's long been
known that positive reinforcement is much more effective (although it may
take longer) than negative reinforcement. Always tell him the results of
EVERYTHING he may choose to do, before hand. [Side note, this was especially
hard to do with my very creative son - who would have thought to say to the
boy, before hand, "If you choose to shave the cat, you'll be given a 15
minute "time-out"??!??] Always let the child know that HE has the choice of
what will happen to him as a consequence of the way he acts. This teaches
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. It lets the child know that whatever consequences
fall upon him are the result of HIS actions (this is mostly true in
society). Always let him know that it is HIS choice and HIS actions that
receive the reward or punishment, not you arbitrarily deciding his fate or
"just being mean." Put the responsibility on HIS back, and let him learn it
well. When he whines about a punishment, calmly say, "I'm sorry, but this is
what YOU CHOSE to happen." When he is thrilled with rewards, say to him,
"You earned this yourself with YOUR CHOICE of good behavior." Remember, the
more praise he gets for his good behavior, the harder he will strive to be
good - it's human nature to want to be praised and we will work VERY hard to
achieve it.

I agree, parents should not give choices they or the other parent
cannot live with.

C3 - Consistency, consistency, consistency - CUBED!! Once you set the
consequences, carry through, IMMEDIATELY, EVERY TIME, with both the rewards
and the punishment (the immediate part is especially essential, because
children have a different concept of time than we do). After you have this
working for a bit and the child is behaving like a little angel for weeks,
you might be tempted to let him get by with a little misbehavior just this
once - BIG MISTAKE! This will scrap all the work you've done and you'll have
to start all over again. Children will always test the limits. My
pediatrician put it like this "Parents are safety rails for a child. If you
were on an unfamiliar balcony, wouldn't you reach out and shake the railings
to see if they were sturdy and dependable before leaning your weight on
them?" When he learns that there is a consequence to his every action, EVERY
SINGLE TIME, then it will stop being a performance and become a part of his
mentality. Think about it in the adult world. If a many-times-convicted
thief has not stolen for three years then steals again, do we say, "Well,
you've been so good for three years, we'll just let you go on this one." NO
WAY, he gets convicted and sent to jail yet again!
All of this seems very simple, condensed down this way, but there was a lot
more we had to learn along with the Three Cs. The program lasted two years,
going to three-hour "classes", four times a week. It was very hard to change
MY behavior (it is so hard to look at your prized antique vase shattered on
the floor and not scream just a little!)

I think we have all felt this way, I pride myself in having control
which is really meekness, and meekness means controlled strength. In
the roman army years ago, when they trained horses for battle, they
would pass a torch under the horses belly, (not burn him) but he would
feel the heat, if the horse flinched, he was not fit for the army. If
the horse stayed at attention, he was considered meek.

I was also working against
everything I'd learned from "the way I was raised," - early learning goes
very deep. I think four years of high school training might be enough for
most teens (if they were taught well when they were younger).

I read once that 80% of everything a child will ever learn, they learn
before they are 4 years old.

[Another side note... The Three Cs works just as well on another adult as it
does on a child. It's human nature to want and work for good strokes and to
avoid what hurts. Try it on your spouse or boss! ; ] "

I just think were talking about two different types of people here.
Please don't take me for an oger.

On Fri 10 Jun 2005 07:52:13p, KellyH wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
):

"Mary" wrote
No it isn't, unless she is a dog. A submissive cat crouches low
to the ground and cries.


Correct. There is a difference for a cat between laying around
the house on your back and assuming the on-your-back defensive
position. I think in the OP's case, Zena is probably assuming
the defensive position prematurely and this entices Brak to come
attack her. Rolling on the back for a cat does not mean "I give
up".


The tables have turned in this house. Shamrock has always been the
aggressor, the target has had to be the one on his/her back to
fight him off. Tonight for the first time I witnessed Shamrock on
*his* back when Rhett initiated a wrestling session. Shamrock
obviously felt the need to defend himself and this is a first! Like
I said - the tables have turned here. Rhett has Shamrock by a
couple of pounds and a couple of years of youth.

I agree with your assession here because living in a household full
of cats (currently 4) with one hugely aggressive one[1], I've seen
the defensive behavior time and time again.


[1] I see another aggressive one on the horizon in Rhett. But, he's
still a kitten, (9 months) though an impressive-sized one at that.


--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields

Mary wrote:

No, Kelly, I don't. I do like Barry but here he is wrong. And this nonsense
about a difference between households run by men and women is really
scary. Marriage is a partnership. Some work better than others, but any
time any single person is dominating, what we have is something the ****
out of Deliverance--the dark ages--the Bad Old Days. It is ignorant
and dangerous. It is a dangerous product of ignorance. And a man who has
to raise his hand to anything weaker than himself is not a man at all.

You are wrong about me.

You seem so desperate to turn me into a brute retneck or something.
Your jumping on a bandwagon headed to nowhere because Barry is not any
of them things, neither do you find it in my writing.

You use words like ignorance, dark ages, deliverance, bad boys, what is
all this, who are you describing? It ain't me sista! And I tell ya, I
ain't taking the blame for your judgement call, if you extracted this
from what I wrote, then you was on a with hunt from the moment you saw
the words, bust that ass.

I got new for you, everybody that chastises a child or pet is not a
character from deliverance, or ignorant either. I don't use treats and
rewards. Treats are for dogs doing parlor tricks, cat's walking high
wires. I am good all the time, or at least I try. This is no
motivation, this is...how you train an animal.

There is no way, you read my words. It is impossible to write a hurtful
post like you did, having read what I wrote. I know you didn't.

Don't tell me, we're reading the same things, yeah, you all saw the
words bust that ass..then anger kicked in...and you took from there.

It's alright, it's not the first time I've ever been misunderstood.
Everybody I know, they love me. Animals, children, parents, women, all
of em. Because I handle my business, I don't put nobody down, I do
good, and good comes back. I have never beat my cat. I have never beat
any animal. I have swatted my cat, to save his life. yeah

Swatting my cat does not justify you calling me or making reference to
my beliefs as something out of ignorance.

To be swift in judgement about something you don't know about, well,
now what is this?

"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
oups.com...


Mary wrote:

No, Kelly, I don't. I do like Barry but here he is wrong. And this
nonsense
about a difference between households run by men and women is really
scary. Marriage is a partnership. Some work better than others, but any
time any single person is dominating, what we have is something the ****
out of Deliverance--the dark ages--the Bad Old Days. It is ignorant
and dangerous. It is a dangerous product of ignorance. And a man who has
to raise his hand to anything weaker than himself is not a man at all.

You are wrong about me.

You seem so desperate to turn me into a brute retneck or something.
Your jumping on a bandwagon headed to nowhere because Barry is not any
of them things, neither do you find it in my writing.

YES, I do. So do many others. If this is not the impression you
want to give, then re-examine your words.


You use words like ignorance, dark ages, deliverance, bad boys, what is
all this, who are you describing? It ain't me sista! And I tell ya, I
ain't taking the blame for your judgement call, if you extracted this
from what I wrote, then you was on a with hunt from the moment you saw
the words, bust that ass.


You post carelessly. Period. Don't want to be misunderstood?
Then learn to express yourself more accurately.

"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
ups.com...


Catnipped wrote:

OK, think of it like this. When a child (or animal) misbehaves and
"causes"
you to lose your temper and resort to violence, then *they* are
controlling
*you*.

Agreed, a person is controlled by anger. Tic for a tac, your assuming
that all spankers do it from being out of control, what if that spanker
believes this is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you.


Then they are even worse than the people who choose violence
against those who are smaller and dependent upon them due to
losing their temper. Much worse because it is intentional intimidation.
Such behavior is beneath good people. It is that simple.

To make it more complicated than that is to simply keep mouthing
off belligerantly because you want to "win."

Do what you do if you have to. But please do not advocate
that others do things that hurt OR frighten the creatures that
depend upon them.

"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
ups.com...

I just think were talking about two different types of people here.
Please don't take me for an oger.

Barry, I am not accusing you of being an ogre, and I'm not accusing you of
being abusive. But I think that spanking, or any other type of hitting or
pain- (and especially fear-) inducing behavior is never a good thing. All
it teaches is fear. Avoiding behavior that results in being spanked is a
short-term solution. Teaching good behavior and positive social skills
lasts a lifetime and reaps its own rewards. I don't know about you, but I
don't want my children to behave well because they're afraid of what I'll do
to them, I want them to behave well because it results in good things
happening to them (as it does in real life - e.g. work hard = earn money and
promotions, socialize well (or "play nicely") = become popular and make
friends. If you don't steal because you're afraid of jail, then will you
steal if you think you won't get caught??? I want my children to know that
if they don't steal, even if they *KNOW* they won't get caught, it will make
them feel proud of themselves and feel good. *THAT'S* the difference in
teaching by good example / rewards versus teaching fear.

Basically it's called behaviorism. Have you ever read any of B. F.
Skinner's research results? It's real and it's well documented.

Try this sometimes...

You know that since you were a baby you were "taught" (by the example of the
adults you loved and emulated) to smile when you felt good or happy. In
fact every time you felt good or were happy you smiled. That behavior
(smiling) got so closely associated with the feeling of wellness and
happiness that the behavior can *precede* the feeling and the association
still works.

The next time you feel sad or down, *FORCE* yourself to smile and keep
smiling for at least 5 or 10 minutes. You'll notice that despite whatever
is going on that has made you unhappy, at the end of that 15 minutes you
*will* feel happier. Just the physical act of contracting the muscles you
use when you smile will cause your brain to release endorphins that will
make you feel better.

That's what's behind the "reward" method of discipline. You make good
behavior so closely associated with rewards that just the act of good
behavior becomes its own reward.

By using the pain, or punishment method, all you're doing is teaching the
avoidance of pain - and the person you're teaching starts to associate pain
and fear with the person causing the pain and fear. I don't know about you,
but I *NEVER* want someone I love to associate me with pain and fear - not
*EVER*!