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

What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 644 posts

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#621

Post by dang »

jjulius wrote: post #503
unity1001 wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that you are getting enraged is a huge part of the problem. Keep your own morality to yourself and your own family. How about you people keep your destructive practice to yourself and stop advocating it, less, rationalizing it and pushing it to mainstream. And with 'you people', i mean the US, because the only place where this thing seems to be a 'thing' and is even being advocated by 'professionals' is th…

How about respecting every parents choices for their own family? How about you step away from HN for a bit and get some fresh air before responding to another comment in this thread? You're obviously very heated and it's not constructive. You are making massive judgements about people while simultaneously demonstrating how little you know about what actually happens when you let someone "cry it out".

You also posted a large number of flamewar comments to this thread and broke the site guidelines very badly and repeatedly yourself.

What's worse, you hounded unity1001 in a variety of different places, which is a whole other form of abuse. That sort of spat is emphatically not what this site is for, so please don't do it again.

If someone else's comments are driving you crazy, the tools to use are downvoting and flagging—not commenting, as the site guidelines say ("Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead.") - and certainly not showing up to flame them in multiple places.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#622

Post by dang »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #305
ineptech wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That evolutionary instinct came from a time when humans lived in communal support networks and new parents had help from extended family, and does not translate well to a world where Mom has to work 9-5 in an office a few months after birth. You might as well express shock that suburbanites don't supplement their diets by foraging for fruit and mushrooms. Besides, it's not like parents 10K years ago had the option to…

[flagged]

Nationalistic flamewar will get you banned here, regardless of which country you have a problem with. Please don't post like this to HN again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: we've had to warn you about this kind of thing before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33501516. Would you please review the rules and fix this? I don't want to ban you, but eventually we don't have a choice if an account keeps breaking the rules.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#623

Post by remote_phone »

paganel wrote: post #569
remote_phone wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is easier, watching a movie or making a movie? Or do you think those are equal in effort?

The discussion is in no way comparable. If anything, you could say that we've all been actors, i.e we've al been kids, but even that seems a little stretched. Anyway, this talk of "it's so hard to be a parent!" mostly comes from middle-class well-to-do people for whom it shouldn't be actually hard to be parents, or at least not as hard as it objectively is to much poorer people. I suspect they're mostly doing it (the…

You have no authority to say they are not comparable, nor do you have any authority to say that being a child gives you any insight on how to be a parent.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#624

Post by unity1001 »

dang wrote: post #620
unity1001 wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that you are getting enraged is a huge part of the problem. Keep your own morality to yourself and your own family. How about you people keep your destructive practice to yourself and stop advocating it, less, rationalizing it and pushing it to mainstream. And with 'you people', i mean the US, because the only place where this thing seems to be a 'thing' and is even being advocated by 'professionals' is th…

This type of flamewar abuse is a bannable offense on HN. The last thing we need here is nationalistic hell. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34194158 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34194145 , and please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

There is nothing 'nationalist' about this. The past 40 years have seen an immense amount of trends that were manufactured for profit originating from the US. From privatization of social services to reduction of labor protections. From atomization of social life down to individuals because 'individualism was better' to having those individuals subsist on prozac to keep their resulting depression under control. From sugary food spam then to obesity being bad to now obesity being ok. In the process, a lot of such trends were exported everywhere, including sociopathic scandals like the Avandia drug scandal. (which is one of many). This is without even touching the subject of overseas wars and how they are manufactured with the same trend-making mechanic, starting from how a certain people being 'evil' and their lives not being worth 'that much to ensuing invasion, occupation and destruction being 'a mistake'.

A trend is manufactured by whatever private interest, industry group or segment that catches a moneymaking or career-making opportunity. They push it as hard as they can. If they end up being able to gather popular dynamics behind them for whatsoever reason - like how some people are jumping on this bandwagon - then the trend becomes ever stronger and more easily exportable.

The topic at hand follows on the heels of the mentality that exported all of those to everywhere around the world. If that is a trait of the US as a nation, then there is a problem with that and the rest of the world cannot stop calling it out because 'that would be nationalism'.

By the way, nationalism in its negative sense means people elevating their own nation above others and demeaning others. Not criticising some other nation beause of their actual deeds. At no point I said that 'this particular nation is better than the US and therefore they are superior'. I literally said that the only country on the planet that this is a mainstream trend is the US, which means that the US goes against entire world. Which is obviously not 'a nation'.

I want to stress again that such logic would literally prohibit any criticsm of US foreign policy and prevent anyone from saying that the US has been invading and destroying nations in the past 40 years - due to being 'nationalism' in the subverted definition of 'criticism of a particular nation' that you reduced it to.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#625

Post by unity1001 »

dang wrote: post #618
unity1001 wrote: post #482

[flagged]

Please don't take HN threads into flamewar, and certainly not nationalistic flamewar, and please follow the site guidelines in the future ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ). You broke them horribly and at great length in this thread. I'm not disagreeing with you about how to handle babies but what you did here was abusive and we need it not to happen again. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/it…

> Please don't take HN threads into flamewar, and certainly not nationalistic flamewar,

I don't see anything 'nationalistic' about calling out trends that are manufactured solely in the US. If calling out the US warmongering of last 40 years is not 'nationalistic', this neither is.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#626

Post by unity1001 »

dang wrote: post #616
unity1001 wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You turned large parts of this thread into nationalistic flamewars and broke the site guidelines in countless egregious ways. That's vandalism and abuse. We ban accounts that wreck threads like this. I appreciate that child-rearing is an intensely emotional topic and that standards differ between countries, but that doesn't make it ok to pour dozens of flamewar comments into a thread about it. Please see https://news…

> You turned large parts of this thread into nationalistic flamewars

As I said, I dont see anything 'nationalistic' about criticism of US-endemic policies and trends. With that logic, we would need to flag anyone who critices the US imperialism of the last 40 years and its overseas wars since it would also evaluate to being nationalistic with the same logic.

Additionally, I didnt name any specific nation to elevate it over the US. I specifically criticized the US, and said that this kind of mainstreamed anti-humane behavior is not present in any other country on the planet. If that makes the rest of the planet a 'nation', Im fine with that.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#627

Post by unity1001 »

naasking wrote: post #586
unity1001 wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is way too much romanticization of a false past here in this larger HN discussion Some stuff is evolutionary. Co-sleeping is seen in all mammal species. And its an important part of the group sentiment, including the social support it brings. The lack of it causes anxiety in mammal species. Even domestic cats prefer to take care of their young in groups of mothers until the kittens grow up. > This kid cried e…

Invoking evolutionary biology is not the strong point you seem to think it is. Humans have plenty of characteristics and behaviours that are not present in other mammals, even characteristics that seem to be shared among all other mammals. Our shared heritage with cats didn't lead to our sophisticated language or take us to the moon. Furthermore, if letting babies cry it out were truly as atrocious a practice as you…

> Invoking evolutionary biology is not the strong point you seem to think it is. Humans have plenty of characteristics and behaviours that are not present in other mammals

Yes, but co-sleeping, rearing children, co-habitation, touching, grooming, infants depending on their parents are present in all mammal species. More sophisticated and derived behaviors may not be. But these, are. And the repression of some of these in modern humans causes considerable psychological distress and anxiety.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#628

Post by IshKebab »

burnished wrote: post #614
IshKebab wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean that's literally true. Also why babies are so cute. The ones that weren't got put in the bin.

Quibble: I'm not sure its true, though it is entertaining, reasonable, and appears to fit the facts. The cuteness one is good too. I wonder if this sort of thing emerged slowly or quickly? Like, is cooperation just generally selected for and animal cuteness has been developing for a long time, or did it appear swiftly somewhere and provide some huge benefit? Or something else entirely?

I reckon both must have evolved along with the increase in head size. Most animals have babies that have developed enough so that they are reasonably independent. They can at least walk!

But humans have really big heads so they have to give birth really early before the baby is capable of walking, so screaming for help and being super cute is their only option.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#629

Post by europeanguy »

kqr wrote: post #162
loteck wrote: post #58

What we were trying to do was help the parents to teach the kids to self-soothe. So in effect, we weren't saying that they wouldn't wake. We were saying that they would wake, but they wouldn't have to signal their parents. They could go back down into the next sleep cycle. The conversations around sleep training are always rife with folks focusing on their own perceived risks, and the emotional guilt, that come with…

This is one thing I learned only in my third year as a parent. If I tell an adult "I'm worried you'll break that when you poke it so hard" I expect them to either argue to the contrary or stop poking it so hard. For my children, they don't register what I've said until a few days (and attempts) later. It's virtually impossible to teach them something in the moment, it all falls into place later. Super frustrating and…

I think there's actually a saying about this. Something like how people don't learn when they're told something, they have to experience it themselves.

Re: What happens when babies are left to cry it out?

#630

Post by thewhitetulip »

2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #585
thewhitetulip wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mongols weren't exactly 20th and 21st century were they? I had no idea about Korean slavery that existed till the 20th century. Why aren't these parts included in history curriculum?

It sounds like the authorities where you live should have a look at not just the history curriculum but the rest as well. Slavery is very much a contemporary issue and it's been around, globally, since times that predate written history.

To be honest, history in India (for school or college) ends at 1947 i.e. year of independence
Post reply on HN