I never meant to state opinions as facts; I apologise if it came off as such. The very nature of science means that you can never conclusively "prove" anything, especially for a subject such as this. Because it would be unethical to assign some children to be spanked and some not, the only studies that can be done are correlational. Meaning that we can't say that spanking causes problems, only that problems seem to be associated with spanking. So we have to look at the body of research as a whole and see that there are more dangers than benefits associated with physical punishment.

As much as I love debating, I know that many people won't just take a stranger's word for it. My anecdotes mean as little as yours compared to empirical, peer-reviewed research. So I'm urging you guys to look into it yourself, read the relevant research, and see what science has to say. There is a pretty strong consensus that spanking is at best ineffective and at worst harmful. This is a divisive issue, even among scientists, because nobody wants to admit that theirs' or their parents' parenting style may have been wrong and it's impossible to remember our experiences from childhood with 100% accuracy. Anyway, please look into it yourselves because I strongly believe it's important that we all understand what's best for children.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-science-says-and-doesn-t-about-spanking/

I have a 5 year old and a 2 year old and I've never had to hit or raise my voice to either. While I was pregnant I read much of the research literature on parenting. I also taught a rehabilitation and training class for parents who abused their children. So for every story you have of spanking helping you learn a lesson, I can tell one where it led to pretty severe abuse because it didn't help control the child's behaviour.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Children don't understand the connection between the punishment and their previous behaviour. Many parents don't explain why the punishment is being given. My suggestion included having a dialogue with the child where they can ask questions and have things explained to them in a mutually calm situation. Again, sorry, and I hope that clears it up.

Research shows that physical punishment is harmful to children of all ages. It may work temporarily to stop the behaviour, but is not an effective deterrent in the long run because children don't understand the punishment's connection to their behaviour and don't know other ways of behaving. Because physical punishment isn't effective long term, parents may resort to more and more severe methods. The best strategy is to talk to children about why you don't want that behaviour, give them alternative ways to do it, and use time outs/cool downs if necessary. Elizabeth Gershoff is a leading researcher on physical punishment if you're interested in more info.

A child doesn't know the difference. They don't understand that the punishment is caused by their behaviour, and it's likely the most pain they've ever felt in their young lives. It doesn't teach them a lesson or correct their behaviour, it shows them that people they love and trust will hurt them for reasons that don't make sense to them. Spanking is abuse because a child cannot developmentally comprehend the difference.

Massaging them every day may stimulate growth and is also a great time to check for lumps!

This comment is ignorant as hell, but the phrase "other assorted flavors of freaks and weirdos" is really tickling me right now.

His name is actually Johnny "Joey" Jones, but it's real.
http://johnnyjoeyjones.com/about/

Rusty pipes.

Some texts mention her (written way after), and we can see where hieroglyphs have been scratched off and written over. Also, a later pharaoh destroyed her temple, but used the wall pieces as filler to support the walls of his temple (recycling ftw) so we have chunks of hieroglyphs she commissioned.

Make the recipe the same except bake (or microwave) the flour before adding and use a few spoons of milk instead of eggs. Safe and yummy cookie dough!

I know! But every time I feel that surge of social anxiety I try to remember that everyone else is wayyy too concerned about their own lives to notice silly little me!

I used "masculine" and "feminine" to refer to a set of traits usually interchangeable with "man" and "woman." And someone who enjoys masculine things doesn't have to identify as masculine, because what you like and what you are can be separate. I was trying to be as non-definite as possible when describing non-binary people because there is a paucity of research in that area and I don't want to make unsupported claims about peoples' identities. I wasn't trying to use my job as a "gotcha," but rather setting myself up as someone qualified to synthesize research for a wider audience. Anyone is welcome to do this research for themselves but psychology journals tend to be inaccessible for the public (behind paywalls, overly-complex language, etc).

I'm a psychologist and here's what research on gender says: gender is a social construct, based on how an individual reacts to the roles, expectations, and norms in their society. It's on a spectrum (many things in psychology are now considered to be on a spectrum because humans are rarely black and white). Where you are on the gender spectrum can change from day to day. People who are non-binary can fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, feeling like they are neither masculine or feminine but having traits of both.