The words covered in this article are maxim, reprimand, chasten and chastise, errant, nullify, repudiate and appease. Previously done words that will reoccur today are transgression, condone, explicit, figurative, metaphorical, perceive, ambiguous, qualify, mediation, and propitiate.
If a child steals a chocolate from a shop and his parents come to know but say nothing, he may think that what he did was not really so wrong after all and may continue lifting chocolates and his transgressions may gradually get worse. In truth, his parents may have been privately anguished by his behavior but their inner thoughts on the matter are less important than the (lack of) consequences to the child for his misbehavior, which led the child to believe that his parents condoned his crime.
The maxim ‘spare the rod and spoil the child’ speaks about how the lack of punishment increases offensive behavior.
Maxim
The noun maxim means a saying that expresses a general truth or a rule of conduct. It packs ‘maximum’ wisdom into just a few words. Some examples are:
- old is gold
- a stitch in time saves nine
- grass is greener on the other side
- out of sight is out of mind.
The maxim ‘spare the rod and spoil the child’ is likely inspired from the Bible, which contains the following proverb (Proverbs 29:15):
“A rod and a reprimand impart wisdom, but a child left undisciplined disgraces its mother.”
Reprimand
To reprimand somebody is to criticize and warn severely. The word is especially used in formal or official settings where the criticizer has authority over the criticized person.
Also related to the above two maxims about the beneficial effect of punishment are the words chasten and chastise.
Chasten and chastise
To chasten somebody is to correct by punishment or discipline.
To chastise a person is to scold, punish or discipline them for a wrongdoing.
Both words come from the Latin word castus, ‘pure’ and convey the idea of ‘purifying’ a person (of his moral faults) through strict correction.
It is because of the supposed purifying effects of punishment that some prison systems are alternatively called ‘correctional institutions.’
Consider the biblical quote below:
“Whom the Lord loves He chastens. . .If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten?. . . No chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.”
Hebrews 12
So, what may the parents of a child who steals a chocolate do upon discovering his wrongdoing? If they do not want him to think that they condone his stealing, they must explicitly express their disapproval, which they can do in two ways – the rod or a reprimand. They may punish the child physically or verbally.
A reprimand can be thought of as a figurative rod. Children do not always need to be beaten into good behavior; a much-admired parent’s saying that they were disappointed by his conduct can make as much, if not, more impression on the child.
So, while the maxim ‘spare the rod and spoil the child’ gives sound advice, parents would do well to remember that the ‘rod’ it refers to need not be an actual rod but can be understood metaphorically as well.
*
The parent-child relationship is not the only one in a family in which the use of physical punishment as a means of correcting wrong behavior has traditionally been condoned. Spousal violence, particularly that of husbands towards wives, too has been similarly accepted and deemed legitimate. Till the late nineteenth century, the Anglo-American common law allowed a husband, as master of his household, to physically chastise an errant wife so long as he did not inflict permanent injury or death on her.
Errant
The adjective errant means:
- wandering, aimlessly or in search of an adventure
- wandering from the morally righteous path or from the accepted social standards.
If a husband perceived that his wife had erred in her responsibilities, he could beat her into obedience and proper behavior. And since perceptions are not always accurate, this provision effectively resulted in women having no legal protection from abusive husbands.
Here is how feminist and lesbian activist Del Martin describes the customary condonement of spousal violence in America:
A husband was permitted to beat his wife so long as he did not use a switch any bigger around than his thumb.
In 1874 the North Carolina Supreme Court nullified the husband’s right to chastise his wife “under any circumstances.” But the court’s ruling became ambiguous when it added,
“If no permanent injury has been inflicted, nor malice, cruelty, nor dangerous violence shown by the husband, it is better to draw the curtain, shut out the public gaze, and leave the parties to forgive and forget.”
The latter qualifying statement has become the basis of the American legal system.
Laws against assault and battery are rarely invoked against husbands because the criminal justice system (which is male dominated) and victims of domestic violence (who are primarily female) differ in their interpretations of “serious injury,” “malice,” “cruelty,” and “danger.”
The police, mental health practitioners, emergency room attendants, prosecutors, and judges deal with isolated cases and the interrelationship of a particular couple. In this light it is not surprising that they tend to view wife abuse as a personal dispute in which one or both individuals are to blame. This attitude, coupled with the concept of family as the basic unit of society which must be preserved at all cost, fosters the belief that mediation or professional counseling will restore peace and harmony and thus enforcement of laws against assault and battery will serve no useful purpose.
Del Martin, Overview – Scope of the problem (of wife battering)
Nullify
The verb nullify means to make legally void; to make invalid.
The Latin word nullus means ‘none’, ‘zero.’ When the Supreme Court nullifies a law, it is making its legal standing to be ‘none.’ When you declare a contract to be null and void, you are saying that it is no longer valid.
It was as a consequence of feminist agitation in the nineteenth century for reform of marriage law that the English and American courts repudiated the husbands’ right of chastisement.
Repudiate
To repudiate means to reject or disown.
This word comes from the Latin word repudium, which meant ‘divorce’. In ancient Rome, if one party in a married or engaged couple wanted out of the relationship, they sent a letter of repudiation to the other person; this written notice, called the ‘repudium’, conveyed their intention in terms that could not be misunderstood and was a necessary and sufficient condition to end the union. Merely moving on into another relationship or marriage was not deemed enough to denote the legal end of the previous relationship.
Though the Anglo-American legal system may have long repudiated the husband’s right of chastisement, domestic abuse continues to be a major problem in these countries (as also in most countries around the world). A 1989 survey by the U.S. Surgeon General found that “battering of women by husbands, ex-husbands or lovers ‘[is] the single largest cause of injury to women in the United States.”‘ A more recent report states that:
- in 2018, intimate partner violence accounted for 20% of all violent crime in the United States,
- 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience severe intimate partner physical violence, intimate partner contact sexual violence, and/or intimate partner stalking with impacts such as injury, fearfulness, post-traumatic stress disorder, use of victim services, contraction of sexually transmitted diseases, etc.
- 1 in 2 female murder victims and 1 in 13 male murder victims are killed by intimate partners.
The notions that one should not interfere in a family’s private matters or that “some” compromise especially by women is essential to maintain family peace continue to make relatives, friends, neighbors and at times even law enforcement look the other way in cases of relationship violence. The battered women themselves are often confused and conflicted about their situation. To quote from the 1989 U.S. Surgeon General’s report:
“The abused woman has no predominant demographic profile.
Her psychological profile consists of low self-esteem, low self-confidence, helplessness, fear, and shame. She has conflicting feelings of love and loyalty toward the batterer.
Fear of the abuser and the control he exerts over her prevent her from acting to escape the abuse, and she typically tries to appease the batterer by attempting to please him.
Batterers are usually from childhood homes where they experienced or witnessed abuse, and they tend to use threats, force, or violence to solve problems or control their partners. They have low self-esteem, often abuse alcohol/drugs, are often jealous of their partner’s relationships with others, and blame their partners for their violence.”
Abused Woman: Fact Sheet
Appease
To appease someone is to calm someone down by agreeing to their demands, even at the cost of principle, because you are anxious to maintain peace. The word comes from the French pais, which means ‘peace’, and in turn comes from the Latin pax, ‘peace.’
In Day 12, you learnt the word propitiate. You may recall that to propitiate someone is to calm them down from a state of anger.
What then is the difference between propitiation and appeasement? The word propitiation is commonly used in a religious context; it is gods whom we normally propitiate or people who hold god-like power over us., while the word appeasement can be used more generally, for gods or for humans.
That’s it for today. We’ll meet again in Day 19, but before you go, here are some more usage examples for the words you learnt today:
- Mrs. Karnegie was a woman of feeble intelligence and violent temper; prompt to take offense, and not, for the most part, easy to appease.
- “That lady’s cool, distant manners rather chilled me at first; but I did my best to propitiate her, and not entirely without success, I think, even in that first short visit; for when I talked cheerfully to her, she gradually became more kind and cordial, and when I departed she bade me a gracious adieu, hoping ere long to have the pleasure of seeing me again.” The Tenant of Wildfell Hall by Anne Bronte
- “A man’s actions and beliefs may be wholly dominated by a desire of which he is quite unconscious, and which he indignantly repudiates when it is suggested to him.” Bertrand Russell
- When Madame Moritz lost all her children one by one, with the exception of one neglected daughter named Justine whom she had sent away to be a maidservant in a household, her conscience was troubled; she began to think that the deaths of her favourites was a judgement from heaven to chastise her partiality. Accordingly, she called Justine home to express her repentance and beg the child to forgive her unkindness.
- It was Thomas Allworthy’s constant maxim in life to make the best of all matters which happen.
- George Remus was known in the early twentieth century America as King of the Bootleggers. During one of his jail stints, his wife started a relationship with a federal government official. On his release from prison, Remus promptly shot and killed his errant spouse. Acting as his own attorney, he pleaded temporary insanity and was acquitted by the jury after just 19 minutes of discussion.
- Ms Westover has been chastised by critics for her suggestion that the economic aid given by the West to Africa should be withdrawn.
- A wealthy lady reprimanded a servant thus:
“Is it your duty in my house to look after the lamps?”
“Yes, my lady.”
“And is it my duty to pay you your wages?””
“If you please, my lady.”
“Why do I find the light in the hall dim, and the wick of that lamp smoking? I have not failed in my duty to You. Don’t let me find you failing again in your duty to Me.”