Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

codinghorror.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 175 posts

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#121

Post by bhc3 »

Tichy wrote: post #13

Nicely written, although I have to say I don't find having a baby quite as horrible as most other parents seem to find it. Exhausting at times, yes, but nothing that gets me angry. As for my old life - maybe I wasn't partying hard enough, because I don't really miss it that much. OK, it is terrifying, but not because the kid is a terrorist. It is terrifying because life suddenly has you by the guts. I guess I cared a…

> I guess I cared a little about my own survival before

After kids, I suddenly became much more conscious of my mortality than I ever had been. Intellectually, we all know we die. But seeing my kids, I suddenly internalized this fact much more. Perhaps it's the thought of the things I won't be around to see or help with once I'm gone.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#122

Post by acheron »

Tichy wrote: post #13

Nicely written, although I have to say I don't find having a baby quite as horrible as most other parents seem to find it. Exhausting at times, yes, but nothing that gets me angry. As for my old life - maybe I wasn't partying hard enough, because I don't really miss it that much. OK, it is terrifying, but not because the kid is a terrorist. It is terrifying because life suddenly has you by the guts. I guess I cared a…

Same here.. our baby has been pretty easy once we got past the first couple weeks. He's 3 months old, and sleeps 9+ hours straight at night, he almost never screams unless there's a reason, etc. I kind of worry that we're going to think, "oh, babies are easy!" and the next one (if there is a next one) will turn out to be terribly hard, but....

Also totally agree about "caring for your own survival". Not that I didn't before, but it's suddenly so much clearer.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#123

Post by bambax »

jasonlotito wrote: post #111
bambax wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for commenting, because I can't understand the downvotes. I still don't see where I "publicly talk about my own family" in a "disgusting" way, but if that's how my comment comes across, it sure looks bad. For all it's worth, I love my kids. Of course. And I would throw myself under a bus for any of them. Of course. And I almost have, twice (under my motorbike, which is not a bus, but weights over 400 pounds).…

> It objectifies them: in fact, it's a kind of abuse. Really? It's abuse to praise your kids in public? Do you really feel that praising your child in public is the same as abusing them? Regardless of whether that praise is warranted or not, you're calling it abuse? I honestly think you are disconnected. I understand you are trying to make a point, and while I didn't necessarily agree, I could respect that opinion. B…

I didn't make myself clear, I think.

Praising your kid in front of your kid, in public, when he deserves it, for example at the end of a game where he played well: that's good, that's just... normal.

Talking about your kid, when he's not here, and presenting him, or your relation to him, in such a way that you benefit from the exposition: I don't think that's ok. Abuse is certainly too strong a word, but it's related.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#124

Post by mikeash »

run4yourlives wrote: post #120
mikeash wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really bugs me. Why can't we have a normal range of emotions here? Yes, we are predisposed to enormously love our children. But it's just a massive bias , not an absolute requirement. Acting like anything short of complete and unconditional love with absolutely no complaints or downside somehow means that there's something wrong with a person just suppresses completely legitimate feelings and makes it difficult…

> Yes, we are predisposed to enormously love our children. But it's just a massive bias, not an absolute requirement. You're not getting the entire point of Jeff's post if you are saying something like this. If you aren't a parent, fair enough, you simply don't understand. No disrespect intended but this is the truth. If you are a parent, we should clarify that "unconditional love" doesn't mean no complaints or downs…

What does "unconditional love" mean in this context, then? Are we still allowed to hate the little fucker temporarily because they got shit everywhere? If so, how's that mesh with the unconditional love?

My point is just that it's apparently unacceptable to complain unless it's also tempered with something like, "but it's awesome and great and they're wonderful and it totally outweighs the downsides!" The moment you talk about your children as troublesome without explicitly bringing up all the wonderment and joy and love, you get accused of having mental problems. Bambax presented a view of parenting where the children aren't absolutely wonderful all of the time. He fails to add on the socially mandated "but they're the best thing ever", and as a consequence people start wondering about his mental health, just because he presents a realistic picture of parenting. This, to me, is sick.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#125

Post by deanproxy »

TamDenholm wrote: post #102

I'm not a parent and don't ever plan to be (not all plans go that way, so my feelings might change on the matter) but I dont really get the whole parenting/having kids thing. I really have no affection for children at all, I dont find babies cute, i dont think kids are darling and i honestly think i'd make an absolutely terrible father because i just dont think im wired that way. When Jeff talks about the 51% to the…

This is hilarious because this is exactly what both my wife and I think and we would have said exactly the same thing as you just did.

I think some people are geared for it. Some people are not. Unfortunately, a lot of people that aren't geared for it still end up having children anyway and that becomes a huge mess, obviously.

I personally just don't like children. My family begs my wife and I to have children and it annoys us to no extent. We understand the complexities of having a child and we also understand how selfish we currently are. We would probably end up despising the child if we ever had one.

We go through periods at times where we'll see a baby and be like "aw, how cute", but that quickly changes when that child starts screaming and crying.

I can't even stand my nieces and nephews. I'm serious... I hate holidays because I know I'll have to put up with them. This sounds harsh, sure... but it's the truth. All I see out of them is a mass quantity of pure concentrated annoyance. While I love them because they are family, I simply don't want to be around them. If they ever needed help, I'd help them. If they ever needed a home, I'd house them... I'd be there for them because they're family and that's what family is there for... however, nobody said I had to like them!

Our views may change, obviously. As you get older, your priorities change and we both may have different opinions. However, we're both in our mid thirties and time is not on our side anymore and we still, to this day, feel that not having children was a great idea.

As far as the 51/49 split, I'd personally say I feel that way with my dog. :) However, when I want to get away from my dog, I crate her and go out to dinner!

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#126

Post by acheron »

mynameishere wrote: post #32

Little tip for any budding writers: Whenever you feel the urge to use the word "enormity", use enormousness or magnitude instead. Especially if you're talking about your children.

Yeah, that always bugs me too. It seems like a relatively recent thing, too; I feel like I always heard it with the negative connotation growing up and in early adulthood, but within the past 10 years or so I suddenly see people who write as if there were nothing negative about it. It would be like next year seeing people start using words like "terrible" or "PHP application" non-negatively.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#127

Post by bambax »

run4yourlives wrote: post #99
bambax wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for commenting, because I can't understand the downvotes. I still don't see where I "publicly talk about my own family" in a "disgusting" way, but if that's how my comment comes across, it sure looks bad. For all it's worth, I love my kids. Of course. And I would throw myself under a bus for any of them. Of course. And I almost have, twice (under my motorbike, which is not a bus, but weights over 400 pounds).…

I'm not a psychologist and I really, really hate what I'm about to do, but I'm going to do it anyway because I believe it may possibly help you. Feel free to take it or leave it, it's just a voice on the internet after all. First, I find it annoying that you're being downvoted here. You're being honest and sincere and that should be commended even if I don't agree with you. To the point however: From reading your com…

At first I read too fast and saw "I'm a psychologist and..." Now I'm happy to see that you are not! ;-)

Again, I love all my children the same way. Really. I just meant to say something really trivial: having three (very young) kids is a lot different than having just one.

With the first kid, everything is amazing, and eventually kind of funny / charming. With three kids, you're just tired.

Tired makes you upset, and it doesn't have anything to do with any of them. The cure? Sending them to their grandparents. After only one day I miss them so much I have to go back to check on them; and then it starts all over again.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#128

Post by jasonlotito »

bambax wrote: post #123
jasonlotito wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It objectifies them: in fact, it's a kind of abuse. Really? It's abuse to praise your kids in public? Do you really feel that praising your child in public is the same as abusing them? Regardless of whether that praise is warranted or not, you're calling it abuse? I honestly think you are disconnected. I understand you are trying to make a point, and while I didn't necessarily agree, I could respect that opinion. B…

I didn't make myself clear, I think. Praising your kid in front of your kid, in public, when he deserves it, for example at the end of a game where he played well: that's good, that's just... normal. Talking about your kid, when he's not here, and presenting him, or your relation to him, in such a way that you benefit from the exposition: I don't think that's ok. Abuse is certainly too strong a word, but it's related…

You didn't. I could have assumed you didn't mean what you said, but you were so adamant about it, I didn't want to impress my beliefs on you. Thanks for explaining.

That being said:

"Talking about your kid, when he's not here, and presenting him, or your relation to him, in such a way that you benefit from the exposition"

Is this abuse?

"For all it's worth, I love my kids. Of course. And I would throw myself under a bus for any of them. Of course. And I almost have, twice (under my motorbike, which is not a bus, but weights over 400 pounds)."

Because, in this context, you are using your child and your relation to them, as well as your love, as a way to bolster your own argument. It's a way to lend credibility and weight to what you have to say. It could be said that you felt your arguments couldn't stand on their own without making it clear that you're a parent.

=)

No, I dont' think it's abuse. I understand what I think you are trying to say: using those that would treat their children as mere accessories rather than children. But honestly, I don't think that's something you can see from one single post. Jeff made a post on a blog. It had some commentary, some interesting thoughts. It was something he had on his mind, and wanted to share it. He also used it as a segue into announcing the future birth of twins.

To equate his post on his personal site announcing the pregnancy to abuse is, if I may be so bold, absurd.

> downvoters should try to take care of my kids for a few days

And it could be equally said upvoters should take care of my kids for a few days.

Kids are different, and some can be an absolute joy, and others a nightmare. And you see both sides. People complaining, and people happy.

Throughout my life, I've heard people say "Just wait until..." and at that moment, I'll understand what they've said.

Sometimes this is the case. Sometimes it isn't.

Just wait until you're me. You'll understand.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#129

Post by jasonlotito »

mcrittenden wrote: post #108
run4yourlives wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I can honestly say that as a father I cannot relate to you at all. I've got two boys, 4 and 2. As you said the first one is pretty good, but the second one is a terror. If I lose it on him and yell with all my might at his misdeeds he will just sit there and laugh - he thinks it's funny. He can be - and is - exhausting to just be around, let alone parent. But I love him to death. He's a reflection of certain sid…

> how they handle stress, their gut reactions, their deepest feelings, their expression of opinion - all very similar to the parent. Do you really think that this is true often enough to present it as a blanket rule like that? It seems like a fantastic oversimplification to me.

> Do you really think that this is true often enough to present it as a blanket rule like that? It seems like a fantastic oversimplification to me.

Of all the children and parents I know well enough, yes. They all match this mold. Even my own children. They match expectedly and precisely.

This, of course, is merely my own observations, and limited in it's scope.

Re: Jeff Atwood On Parenthood

#130

Post by Confusion »

smoyer wrote: post #58
bambax wrote: post #8

> 49% incredible pain in the ass, 51% most sublime joy you've ever felt; that one percent makes all the difference. Between 49 and 51 I count a difference of two percents? > Turns out, we're having two babies, due in mid-February 2012. Aha. Let's talk again in a year or two, see who you'd throw under a bus. I have three of those myself. I don't really subscribe to this whole "kids are wonderful" cliché. The first kid…

I have four kids and you'd have no problem watching them for a few days ... they're obedient, yet questioning ... civil, yet fun-loving ... rambunctious yet non-destructive. Each of our kids was different and their personalities were by no means easy to deal with, but molding them into who they should have been was our job as their parents. A few days with your kids might be hard but once they understood our boundari…

You assume, without evidence, that his kids are troublesome. You overlook that they could be perfect angels, but that he still feels they are a larger timesink than he would have liked. You validate the taboo: he dissents, so your immediate kneejerk reaction is that he must be a bad parent with unbehaving kids.

Here's a thought: one can be a model parent with model kids and still feel that life without kids would have been better. You can even enjoy your life and your kids while still feeling that way.

Post reply on HN