Womens education

[Tribesman]

Too damn right, if they want a few extra shekels they should take on more cooking and cleaning .
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/808316.html
I like the exposure to heresy bit .:beam:

[Husar]

Now that is a position to support, don't let those heretic females grow too large, they may not cook your meal anymore. Until we have robotic servants, women belong in front of the oven, nowhere else.:whip:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Oy Vey! :dizzy2:

[Tribesman]

Oy Vey! :dizzy2:
I was going to go with the story that a council of Rabbis are now appointed(to avoid a boycott) to make a descision on if delayed scheduled passenger flights are allowed to fly or not , but this ones funnier .:2thumbsup:

[Mooks]

Sexism at its best.

[AntiochusIII]

Enslave Teh Women!!!!omglol1!!!

What the hell is the meaning of "Ultra-Orthodox," and don't we always complain about these kinds of things when it comes to topics like the Islamic laws and all those theocracies we all love to despise? How could the Israeli government tolerates what clearly is an authority beyond that of their own core functions? Or are they just admitting yet another level of glorious hypocrisy?

[Slyspy]

There are religious nutters everywhere.

[Mooks]

Enslave Teh Women!!!!omglol1!!!

What the hell is the meaning of "Ultra-Orthodox," and don't we always complain about these kinds of things when it comes to topics like the Islamic laws and all those theocracies we all love to despise? How could the Israeli government tolerates what clearly is an authority beyond that of their own core functions? Or are they just admitting yet another level of glorious hypocrisy?

Its the "holy land". There are so many religious views there its insane. Besides, the woman probaly arent being physically forced to stop teaching.

[Spetulhu]

Until we have robotic servants, women belong in front of the oven, nowhere else.

There's real evidence for that: women generally have smaller feet than men so that they can get closer to the oven and other kitchen features. :beam:

[Tribesman]

Besides, the woman probaly arent being physically forced to stop teaching.
Now then Bandit , glad you put probably in there since there was a recent topic on extremist orthodox haredi in this forum .
A pattern emerges .
It starts with nice little rulings , then it applies pressure politically ,economically and personally , then a bit morepressure ,then the threats of violence , then the violence itself .
I just wonder what the next target of this "religeous" purge by this small but very vocal and powerful minority is going to be . healthcare or the judiciary ?

[Papewaio]

Here I was thinking that religion was about answering questions not enforced ignorance. :book:


In recent years, the reforms in the continuing education programs have not pleased the rabbis, who object to women's "academic" studies. The conservatives warned of women's "career ambitions," fearing they would now be able to break out of the "teaching ghetto" and find other jobs than teaching. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv was quoted in Yated Neeman objecting to teachers' enrolling in "all kinds of other education programs without any supervision of rabbis on every detail".

A lot of oxygen theft going on here.



He warned that without close supervision and determining the content, "all manner of heresy can creep into those programs."

Nothing that is good will shrink from the light...



The rabbis were mostly infuriated by the psychological subjects in the teaching programs. Freud and Western psychology had always been a red rag to them.

They are in a league of giants there, other members being scientologists.



The absence of ultra-Orthodox lecturers with academic degrees in diagnostics and consulting required bringing in lecturers from "outside" the community. Yated Neeman's women's supplement, Bayit Neeman, blasted the trend of bringing in lecturers from the "Sephardi faction" and even "completely secular" ones, warning of the women students' defilement.

Another league of giants, this one includes fundamentalists the world over.

Brings joy to my heart to see that funamentalists can come together in their mutual hatred of secularists. Where there is unity in spirit, there is hope for mankind.

[Mooks]

This has very little to do with religion I think. Its blatant sexism.

[Tribesman]

This has very little to do with religion I think. Its blatant sexism.
Its not sexism at all , it is just very religious religeousness .
You do not understand this since you are not religeously religeous enough , shown by the fact that you are obviously using the heretical internet without an approved holy filter , plus if you are reading this and the sun has gone down where you are then you are truly damned for using electricity .:yes:

The clue to the religeousness of the topic is in the words "ultra-orthodox" .

[yesdachi]

The clue to the religeousness of the topic is in the words "ultra-orthodox" .
I thought that was some kind of detergent the women used to clean with.

[Don Corleone]

Enslave Teh Women!!!!omglol1!!!

What the hell is the meaning of "Ultra-Orthodox," and don't we always complain about these kinds of things when it comes to topics like the Islamic laws and all those theocracies we all love to despise? How could the Israeli government tolerates what clearly is an authority beyond that of their own core functions? Or are they just admitting yet another level of glorious hypocrisy?

When I see a Saudi national newspaper decrying the limited role of women in their society, then I'll concede you have a point. This was an article in a leading Israeli newspaper about a practice it described as intolerable. Personally, I think airing one's own dirty laundry in the hopes of fixing it is a sign that a democracy is working well.

But you go on ahead and fight those straw men, big guy. :boxing:

[Don Corleone]

The part I find interesting in this whole ordeal is that these sexist jackasses are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. None of these lazy louts work!!! Nope, that's too undignified for their holy selves. They sit around eating, lounging and reading holy texts all day. Their women, beyond domestic duties, also have to support the family financially. Not an easy task when you're not allowed to receive a continuing education...

[Kralizec]

Or they could just breed a lot. From what I heard Israeli child welfare payments are insanely high (for reasons you can guess if you don't know them)

In wich case, the women would still be the income providers.

[Mooks]

The bad thing about sarcasm is, that you never know when someone is actually doing it, you only suspect it.

[AntiochusIII]

When I see a Saudi national newspaper decrying the limited role of women in their society, then I'll concede you have a point. This was an article in a leading Israeli newspaper about a practice it described as intolerable. Personally, I think airing one's own dirty laundry in the hopes of fixing it is a sign that a democracy is working well.

But you go on ahead and fight those straw men, big guy. :boxing:Hey, I ain't picking fight with the Israelis. Merely questioning, which is always healthy, as you'd agree.

And where did I even imply that Saudi Arabia (or any Middle Eastern country, for that matter) is a bastion of human rights? Straw man :beam:

[Don Corleone]

Hey, I ain't picking fight with the Israelis. Merely questioning, which is always healthy, as you'd agree.

And where did I even imply that Saudi Arabia (or any Middle Eastern country, for that matter) is a bastion of human rights? Straw man :beam:

I'm not certain I understand your angle here. Your first post seemed to imply that there was hypocricy that when Islamic countries oppress women, we decry it, but it's okay when Israel does it.

I raise the point that actually, the mainstream in Israel are the ones leading the charge to change this practice. I also contrast this with the official stamp of approval this mistreatment of women receives in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, thus countering your charge of hypocricy.

And you argue that I'm putting up straw men? Sorry amigo, I didn't leave you very much to work with, did I? :help:

[Tribesman]

I'm not certain I understand your angle here. Your first post seemed to imply that there was hypocricy that when Islamic countries oppress women, we decry it, but it's okay when Israel does it.

I raise the point that actually, the mainstream in Israel are the ones leading the charge to change this practice. I also contrast this with the official stamp of approval this mistreatment of women receives in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, thus countering your charge of hypocricy.

Well the thing is Don the main stream are and have been objecting to just about all the moves for change the ultras have been making over the past couple of years , but the main stream is losing out overall , especially in Jerusalem .

BTW since you mentioned the Saudi press , just wondering if you have read any of the English languade editions lately ?
Condidering that they are either government approved or self censored to avoid getting a call from them men with whips and cattle prods .
Don't you find the approved news and editorials to be very very very not really friendly in the slightest to your country and government who strangely calls them allies .

[Don Corleone]

I don't consider Saudi Arabia as an ally, and I know they don't consider us as one.

Sorry, Tribesman, didn't realize this was another of your 'Israelis are devils' threads. I'll quit posting and join into a couple of threads where they're looking for actual dialogue.

[doc_bean]

The rabbis wives should have just told them that there ould be no dinner if they did something stupid like that, then we wouldn't have any of this nonsense ~D

[Tribesman]

Sorry, Tribesman, didn't realize this was another of your 'Israelis are devils' threads. I'll quit posting and join into a couple of threads where they're looking for actual dialogue.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
You know that statement you posted from Watchman in your topic ?
Are you going out of your way to prove it true ?

Here , let me be so bold as to make it easier for you to understand .:book:

Since the society concerned is Israeli and the mainstream that are losing out to a small but vocal and powerful minority are Israelis then it is a Israelis are getting screwed over by fundamentalist nutters especialy in Jerulsalem where the nutters are forcing them out and shuting their businesses down thread , not a 'Israelis are devils' thread.

Is that easier to understand now ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Major Robert Dump]

How does an unltra-orthodox female know when its time to go to school?

By the clock on the oven! YAAAAAAAR

[KukriKhan]

By way of "compare-and-contrast", we have The Amish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish#Education), a back-to-the-basics, essentially ultra-orthodox christian sub-culture, that allows no education beyond 8th grade (for boys or girls).

This often conflicts with local mandatory education regulations. SCOTUS decided that the free exercise of religion trumped the benefit of universal mandatory education.

So a case can be made for asserting that secular governments often make accomodation for religious 'fundies' in the areas of education, health, law, etc. And it isn't limited to Muslim, Jewish or other cultural milieux.

[Slyspy]

Yes, but the Amish don't dabble in politics. Plus the men work.

[KukriKhan]

Yes. They also don't pay into or receive benefits from, Social Security (the same as, oddly enough, Members of Congress).

There are many contrasts. However, my broader point is that many seemingly secular governments often make allowance for religiously-based practices of small slices of their citizenry, that would disadvantage that group's members in the wider environment; for example, not allowing education beyond the 8th grade would doom a non-Amish young man to a working life as a janitor or farm worker, with little chance of advancement.

[Tribesman]

Yes, but the Amish don't dabble in politics.
You have ben fooled .
See the truth about the evil Amish takeover .
http://sonoguy.tripod.com/aog.html

[Slyspy]

Yes. They also don't pay into or receive benefits from, Social Security (the same as, oddly enough, Members of Congress).

There are many contrasts. However, my broader point is that many seemingly secular governments often make allowance for religiously-based practices of small slices of their citizenry, that would disadvantage that group's members in the wider environment; for example, not allowing education beyond the 8th grade would doom a non-Amish young man to a working life as a janitor or farm worker, with little chance of advancement.

Yes, but the point is that it doesn't matter. The Amish are isolationist and generally withdrawn into self-contained communities. Ultra-Orthodox jews are not so isolated in Israeli society and have a political presence and agenda. They can also be rather militant.

[Red Peasant]

Ultra-Orthodox jews are not so isolated in Israeli society and have a political presence and agenda. They can also be rather militant.

There are also many militant, ultra-orthodox Jews who don't believe in the state of Israel and who have been known to support the Palestinians. Apparently because Israel and the Temple will only be re-established by the Messiah, and until 'he' does turn up the current state is a blasphemous construct doomed to destruction. Crazies eh?!

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

This often conflicts with local mandatory education regulations. SCOTUS decided that the free exercise of religion trumped the benefit of universal mandatory education.

That is absolutely obscene. How can your government sanction a parent deciding not to give their child an education?! If you tried doing the same over here you would be put in prison, I think.

[KukriKhan]

Yeah. That was kinda my point: despite prevailing social values, duly supported by tax money and enabling legislation, many western cultures (I include Israel) have and will allow religious minorities - especially fundamentalists - to opt out of what are mandatory requirements for every other citizen/group.

I don't like it either. And I only point out the pervasiveness of such policies to illuminate the futility of pointing fingers at countries that support or tolerate Muslim, Jewish, Hindu "fundie wing-nuts", because Christian fundies catch their share of breaks, too.; and in my own country.

[yesdachi]

...not allowing education beyond the 8th grade would...
...put a lot of high school teachers out of work. ~D

[GoreBag]

By way of "compare-and-contrast", we have The Amish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish#Education), a back-to-the-basics, essentially ultra-orthodox christian sub-culture, that allows no education beyond 8th grade (for boys or girls).

This often conflicts with local mandatory education regulations. SCOTUS decided that the free exercise of religion trumped the benefit of universal mandatory education.

So a case can be made for asserting that secular governments often make accomodation for religious 'fundies' in the areas of education, health, law, etc. And it isn't limited to Muslim, Jewish or other cultural milieux.

I was in the room, once, while my mother was watching Oprah, and I learned that the Amish kids have insane barn raves and and orgies of sex and recreational drug use.

Factoid over, everyone can now go back to gibbering about things that don't affect them.

[Mooks]

I was in the room, once, while my mother was watching Oprah, and I learned that the Amish kids have insane barn raves and and orgies of sex and recreational drug use.

Factoid over, everyone can now go back to gibbering about things that don't affect them.

Really...thats what was on Oprah?

[Tribesman]

I learned that the Amish kids have insane barn raves and and orgies of sex and recreational drug use.

For gods sake people think of the livestock .
It is utterly inhumane to expose livesock to this sort of filth in the barn .


I was in the room, once, while my mother was watching Oprah,
Don't try and wriggle out of it . you watched Opeah , you wrestled your poor defenceless mother for control of the remote so you could switch to Oprah . Your mothers only last gasp defense was to threaten to put you on Oprah , but you bamboozled her strategy by saying "Yes please"

[Crazed Rabbit]

That is absolutely obscene. How can your government sanction a parent deciding not to give their child an education?! If you tried doing the same over here you would be put in prison, I think.

That is obscene! ~;p
Seriously, what right does the government have to tell parents how to raise their children? What right does the government have to force you to abandon your religion - when freedom of religion is enshrined in the consitution - for some percieved social good?

Crazed Rabbit

[Kralizec]

That is obscene! ~;p
Seriously, what right does the government have to tell parents how to raise their children? What right does the government have to force you to abandon your religion - when freedom of religion is enshrined in the consitution - for some percieved social good?

Crazed Rabbit

Governments don't have rights - governments have authority.

I don't want to have peope forced into abandoning their religion, but I don't want parents denying their children basic human rights like education (like the Amish) or health care (other christian fringe groups). Religious pretexts are irrelevant.

[doc_bean]

That is obscene! ~;p
Seriously, what right does the government have to tell parents how to raise their children? What right does the government have to force you to abandon your religion - when freedom of religion is enshrined in the consitution - for some percieved social good?

Crazed Rabbit

Well, if my religion involved anally raping my kids in a religious ceremony when they turn 6 I'm pretty sure the government wouldn't allow me to do that.

I'd hope so at least.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Seriously, what right does the government have to tell parents how to raise their children? What right does the government have to force you to abandon your religion - when freedom of religion is enshrined in the consitution - for some percieved social good?


I can see your point, CR, even sympathise with it to some extent. However, the issue then is how far the child's rights should be compromised by the parents' and whether a parent has the right to impose their faith on a child. Does the child have a freedom of religion, or is this something that should be denied to a child, in the same way we deny freedom of adult actions?

More pertinent than doc's extreme example, several cases on this side of the pond have over-ridden the desire of Jehovah's Witnesses to deny medical treatment to their children - such as blood transfusions - on the basis that the child's right to life trumps the parents' beliefs.

Since education is fundamental to a child opportunities in future life, surely it is a right that should be supported by the state - because that child may decide it no longer wants to be religious when it is an adult?

There is clearly a role for government - where do you think the line should be drawn?

[Duke of Gloucester]

Clearly decisions must be made in the best interests of the child and it is highly presumptuous of the state to claim it cares more for the child's interest than its parents. Of course, the state might have a stronger argument if it claimed a better understanding of the child's needs rather than better care. Even so, many people, including me, will feel uncomfortable about this idea. Where would it stop? Will the state decide for me whether my children should be allowed to walk home in the dark, or ride a bicycle on the main road? We instinctively feel that, apart from extreme examples, parents are best placed to make decisions about their children's welfare and upbringing.

Talk of parents imposing their faith on the children is unreasonable. In fact we actually expect parents to inculcate their offspring with values and moral judgement and it would be ludicrous to ask parents to develop values and morals that are not their own. The alternative would be to have state values and morals that parents were expected to pass on whether they agreed with them or not. Does that sound appealing at all? When children become adult they can choose to accept or reject their upbringing.

In any case, it is wrong to say the Amish do not educate their children beyond 8th Grade. It might be closer to the truth to say that they do not school them beyond that age, but their education, which prepares them for their way of life continues after that age.

Kralizec is right. States have authority - but only the authority that the citizens allow them to have. If you allow the state authority to force Amish parents to educate their children in a particular way, you have also given them the authority to decide how your children should be educated too.

[Spetulhu]

Kralizec is right. States have authority - but only the authority that the citizens allow them to have. If you allow the state authority to force Amish parents to educate their children in a particular way, you have also given them the authority to decide how your children should be educated too.

I thought that was the point with mentioning the Amish? Other Americans have to get education beyond 8th grade, they don't.:inquisitive:

[GoreBag]

Don't try and wriggle out of it . you watched Opeah , you wrestled your poor defenceless mother for control of the remote so you could switch to Oprah . Your mothers only last gasp defense was to threaten to put you on Oprah , but you bamboozled her strategy by saying "Yes please"

Of course I watched it. It was about Amish kids having condomless gangbangs on E in barns to flashing lights and Rotterdam hardcore. A little credit, please.

[Don Corleone]

More pertinent than doc's extreme example, several cases on this side of the pond have over-ridden the desire of Jehovah's Witnesses to deny medical treatment to their children - such as blood transfusions - on the basis that the child's right to life trumps the parents' beliefs.

This has frequently been the finding in many American jurisdictions as well. In many jurisdictions, a simple pat on the bottom, let alone real corporal punishment, and the state will take your kids away from you. The days of America respecting parental rights are long gone, except in mythical places like Montana.

[Mooks]

This has frequently been the finding in many American jurisdictions as well. In many jurisdictions, a simple pat on the bottom, let alone real corporal punishment, and the state will take your kids away from you. The days of America respecting parental rights are long gone, except in mythical places like Montana.

You cant be serios right? When I was 8 years old and started cussing because I didnt know any better. My mom brought me into her room, got out the belt and started whipping the hell out of me. Very effective, stopped me from cussing. When I was screaming and throwing a fit in the car, she said when we got home she would whip me with the belt...the 30 minute car ride went from screaming to dead silence. And when I got caught shop-lifting, they did it again.
My school in oklahoma used corporal punishment also. I got a few in elementary (I was really really hyper). The high school got it also, but the principal was a female so it was more of a joke then anything else :laugh4: .
If I raise kids, im spanking them if they do wrong. Teach them to respect their superiors (Some of the parents I know, absolutely refused to touch their kids in punishment. They walk right over them like dirt.). Now my friend's dad; his dad made him go outside in the backyard, find a stick, and bring it back; then whipped him with it real hard, quite cruel.

[Duke of Gloucester]

I thought that was the point with mentioning the Amish? Other Americans have to get education beyond 8th grade, they don't.:inquisitive:

If the American judicial system works in the same way as in England, the judgement in favour of the Amish sets a precedent that applies to other religious groups. If the judgement was overturned or a new law passed laying down what children should learn beyond grade 8 that too would apply to everyone. In the US, the Amish are not being treated differently under the law. Also read the third paragraph in my post. You can argue that Amish children are being educated beyond grade 8. It is just that their education is different from their peers.

[Tribesman]

If I raise kids, im spanking them if they do wrong. Teach them to respect their superiors (Some of the parents I know, absolutely refused to touch their kids in punishment. They walk right over them like dirt.).
Never had to hit the kids , I can not see any event in the future where it would be needed either .
Creative punishment when it is neccesary is far more effective than giving the little buggers a slap .

[Mooks]

Never had to hit the kids , I can not see any event in the future where it would be needed either .
Creative punishment when it is neccesary is far more effective than giving the little buggers a slap .

Yes well. Have you ever seen the little girl/boy yelling over and over again that they WANT and NEED this toy? Very very annoying, espically when they start crying. Then the mom just stands there, and begs with them to leave.

[Tribesman]

Yes well. Have you ever seen the little girl/boy yelling over and over again that they WANT and NEED this toy? Very very annoying, espically when they start crying. Then the mom just stands there, and begs with them to leave.
Yep annoying , just as annoying as the parent who loses it and gives the kid a slap , or even worse the parent that gives the kid a slap and then buys the bloody toy anyway .
Consistancy and clarity of what is and is not acceptable is the key in avoiding turning your kids into brats .

[Mooks]

Yep annoying , just as annoying as the parent who loses it and gives the kid a slap , or even worse the parent that gives the kid a slap and then buys the bloody toy anyway .
Consistancy and clarity of what is and is not acceptable is the key in avoiding turning your kids into brats .

Ha, everyone was staring at them (Middle of a packed wal-mart). This big burly guy walks past me and says "Id slap the shit out of that child if that was my child". The girl didnt even say please.

[Don Corleone]

I'm not insisting on the right to physically discipline children. As two people who grew up in houses with fair amounts of it, my wife and I have a very simple rule about it... Jillian will only get spanked if she's in danger of injuring herself or somebody else. Temper tantrums in and of themselves are not a good reason (IMHO) for spanking.

My point was that regardless of what rationale I apply to the problem, local governments around the USA have already made the pronouncement that spanking and other forms of corporal punishment are grounds for removing children from parental custody. In some places, such as (I want to say Edison Township, but I'm not certain of the exact town) New Jersey, parents had their children removed for putting them into timeout.

But we are way, way, way off topic here, and for that I apologize. I just didn't want our European friends thinking we were falling behind in our duty to strip parents of their rights and make children wards of the state.

[doc_bean]

I'm not insisting on the right to physically discipline children. As two people who grew up in houses with fair amounts of it, my wife and I have a very simple rule about it... Jillian will only get spanked if she's in danger of injuring herself or somebody else. Temper tantrums in and of themselves are not a good reason (IMHO) for spanking.

My point was that regardless of what rationale I apply to the problem, local governments around the USA have already made the pronouncement that spanking and other forms of corporal punishment are grounds for removing children from parental custody. In some places, such as (I want to say Edison Township, but I'm not certain of the exact town) New Jersey, parents had their children removed for putting them into timeout.

But we are way, way, way off topic here, and for that I apologize. I just didn't want our European friends thinking we were falling behind in our duty to strip parents of their rights and make children wards of the state.

So..Supernanny is seen as a horror show in NJ ?

I know way too much about reality tv

[Don Corleone]

Ha, everyone was staring at them (Middle of a packed wal-mart). This big burly guy walks past me and says "Id slap the shit out of that child if that was my child". The girl didnt even say please.

First, you shouldn't spank your child in public. Beyond leaving witnesses, it's counterproductive. You're trying to get the child to comply with your wishes, not publicly humiliate them.

Second, you shouldn't spank your child when you're upset about the incident or they are. The worst whuppins I used to get weren't the ones when my Dad got angry. That was over way too quickly. The worst was when he'd take a deep breath and tell me to go up to my room and wait for him. An hour later, the door would open.... :sweatdrop: :sweatdrop: :sweatdrop:

Third, and this one is just my personal opinion, I don't think spanking over temper tantrums is particularly effective. Spanking should be done to reinforce a very poignant point. It's the ultimate tool in your toolbox as a parent. Every time you use it, it loses it's effectiveness, as the fear of a whipping is always worse than the whipping itself. Too many of them, and you start to develop a tolerance for them.

My mother, who wasn't so big on corporal punishment, had a much worse punishment for this sort of issue (throwing a tantrum over a toy). I would get 2 warnings. On the 3rd one, I'd be dragged out of the store and loaded into the car. She'd drive me home, march me up to my room, take my favorite toy or stuffed animal, then rebuckle me into the car and drive me off to Goodwill. Good-bye Teddy. ~:mecry: It was horrible, and it only had to happen twice. After I lost my stuffed Shamu at age 7, I didn't even need to get warned twice anymore. A simple "no, you can't have that today" was all I needed.

[Tribesman]

My mother, who wasn't so big on corporal punishment, had a much worse punishment for this sort of issue (throwing a tantrum over a toy). I would get 2 warnings. On the 3rd one, I'd be dragged out of the store and loaded into the car. She'd drive me home, march me up to my room, take my favorite toy or stuffed animal, then rebuckle me into the car and drive me off to Goodwill. Good-bye Teddy. It was horrible, and it only had to happen twice. After I lost my stuffed Shamu at age 7, I didn't even need to get warned twice anymore. A simple "no, you can't have that today" was all I needed.

Your mother was generous , I only give the kids one warning then its off to the charity shop (or if their favourite current toy is a piece of crap then throw it on the fire). It works very well .

Back to .....
This big burly guy walks past me and says "Id slap the shit out of that child if that was my child". he should have said "I'd slap the **** out of that woman if that was my child ".~;)