I don’t agree with ‘spanking’ a 3 year old with a belt. Why not your hand? If you are hitting them so hard that it would hurt your hand so that you use a belt, then YOU ARE HITTING THEM TOO HARD. The pain isn’t the punishment, it is the shame.
A hand on the bottom is a good way to dislocate a little spine. Better to use a very thin switch that stings but does no damage.
Shame a 3 year old? Are you kidding? As another poster has pointed out, a belt is safer. The judicious application of pain for bad behavior is appropriate. Long ago when my 3 year old daughter played with the stove despite several scoldings not to, the swat to her bottom was intended to inflict pain, not shame. I'd rather her bottom be sore for a few hours than see her suffer the consequences of playing with fire, playing in the street or many other things that would cause her far more harm than a little pain from spanking.
It's the nanny state mentality that you are exhibiting, that you know best about how to discipline children, that is exactly the problem with raising civilized children and not little monsters.
You see, that’s the whole point.
How I decide to discipline my children is not for you, or anyone else, to agree or disagree with. Disagree all you want, if it makes you feel better, but it is NOT your place to interfere.
It is sufficient to know that a) he is MY child, and b) he was NOT “beaten” - it WAS a spanking, and lastly c) the tantrum stopped abruptly and the lesson was learned: you don’t behave like a thug in public.
I disagree; at three it is the pain AND the shame that provides the object lesson. Your mileage may vary. I don’t have to spank either of my kids often, but when I do it is DEFINITELY a memorable event. Designedly so.
If more parents had done to their children what I did to mine, society would be in a lot better shape.