Clickbait Comment

I was reading through one of those click bait pages, something like '30 times people got revenge,' when I found an interesting confession.

It was someone complaining about their dad always rummaging in the fridge and stealing other people's leftovers. He continued to do so despite repeated complaints so the poster got revenge by loading up leftovers with ghost pepper cheese and other flamethrowers. Sure enough, dad took the bait and was soon coughing up a lung and trying to put out the fire.

The comment at the end: 'I got a spanking for it but dad never took anyone's leftovers again.'

They didn't mention their age or whether they were male or female. Assuming the comment is true (which I presume it was because who'd make up that sort of detail to share with the world), the poster probably had to be a late teenager since they had the ability to drive and purchase the ingredients.

Frankly, to me his/her dad sounds like an arse. He gets pissed off and spanks his kid because he got pranked over something that his family had repeatedly complained about. To me he got exactly what he deserved but he couldn't stand to be shown up and had to take out his frustration on his kid's butt. Just the matter-of-fact way it was written made me think that getting spanked was hardly an unusual experience for this person.

Anyway, I guess my question to the group is whether you think dad overreacted or not? I know I would have just laughed it off but obviously he felt differently.

Perhaps Dad was grateful for the excuse.....

Geoffrey Stirling.

Well, that was my first reaction too, however it might depend on what "other people's leftovers" means.

If someone has a take-home box containing leftovers from his/her meal at Olive Garden, then those definitely belong to him/her personally, even if 'Dad' paid for the family to eat there. However, what if the food is merely left over from a meal consumed at home, can a particular family member label some of it as his/hers so that nobody else is allowed to eat it later? (My younger sister actually used to do that, I didn't take any of 'her' saved food, looking back though perhaps I should have, I did find that practice of hers annoying.)

Another issue might be the amount of potential health risk involved in tricking someone into consuming overly hot, spicy food, it may seem like a harmless prank yet might not turn out that way. If the food truly could have been physically hazardous to the victim, then a butt-whipping might have been warranted.

(If the 'hot stuff' had already been in the pantry or spice rack in the kitchen, then the perpetrator wouldn't necessarily need to have been in his/her late teens either.)

So there are a few 'unknowns' to be considered here... --C.K.

Something to remember is that for many people the term ‘spanking’ could include an episode where they only got one or two slaps on the bottom, rather than the extensive disciplinary process that we spankos naturally imagine.

It becomes a very different scenario if we imagine dad, red faced, gasping, desperately drinking iced water, and his daughter doubled up with laughter at the scene. If he was then to spin her around, perhaps laughing himself by this point, and land a smack on her bum, she might call that a spanking, but we wouldn’t.

After some reflection, the dad was an arse. Who steals someone else's food/leftovers anyway?
Ghost peppers did not show up in the marketplace until the year 2000. A ghost pepper cheese spread would not have appeared for at least another 5-to-10 years. The ghost pepper cheese spread was likely already in the fridge, along with other "flame throwers" like pickled peppers or wasabi paste.
I don’t know what the house fridge rules were. In our house, any leftover older than 24 hours is fair game unless it is something very special to someone, often followed by repeatedly being asked: “Are you going to eat that?” My family despises wasting food.
A prank is a practical joke intended to be funny for all involved. A prank involving the consumption of ghost peppers is funny to no one unless they are a bit psychopathic. Plus, a few people have been severely harmed by consuming ghost peppers.
In conclusion, the spanking was justified.
I am not a fan of two wrongs canceling each other. Hopefully, the dad felt awful about having to give a spanking for a reprisal he precipitated by stealing another’s food. And that this was the chief cause of his behavior change, and not the ghost pepper itself.

My take is, and I'm taking the story at face value, that the Dad was being a jerk here. If you've been repeatedly told to stop eating leftovers that belong to another family member, then get "punished" yourself for doing it, and let's be real, loaded up leftovers with "flamethrowers" is punishment for the old man. Then sorry old buddy, you have only yourself to blame.

Seen from my perspective and from first principles:
Firstly a 'child' does not 'tell' a parent to do or to not do anything! Any attempt to do so is inherently disrespectful and unacceptable. There are respectful ways of getting one's feelings across with a suitable explanation.
I am also struggling to understand the term 'my leftovers' in the context of a family environment; especially if the 'child' is being supported by the parent.
Spiking food with ingredients that will make it either inedible or potentially dangerous to eat is both wasteful and wrong. This was no harmless 'prank' it was stupid, vicious, and potentially dangerous.
For all the above reasons the 'spanking' was well deserved.

I'd like to rewrite the story. After spiking the leftovers, the child is given a brief spanking (for the health risk) and an apology by Dad. Then Mom spanks Dad seriously hard and takes over the HoH role. Of course, as Mom has been AWOL in stepping up to her HoH responsibilities, Granny then takes her to task.