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

Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#571

Post by danenania »

oblio wrote: post #537
danenania wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The really hard thing is finding the right balance. “Don’t be a baby” isn’t good, but over-compensating too far in the other direction doesn’t do a kid any favors either. There are times when being a good dad can mean (kindly) pushing kids out of their comfort zones or tempering excessive self-pity. I’m currently trying to teach my 4 year old daughter to swim, so this is very front-of-mind for me. If it was up to her…

> If it was up to her, she would just splash around in the shallowest part by the steps without trying anything she’s afraid of, and she would never learn to swim. It is a very fine line but this part is probably not true. She's 4 years old and doesn't need to learn to swim, unless you really want an Olympic swimmer. If she keeps going swimming in the shallow end, do you know what will happen? She will get bored and…

I’m curious whether you’ve seen kids learn to swim with that approach? There are definitely some kids that take to the water easily and push forward on their own, but I wouldn’t say it’s the norm. More often it seems like fear of going underwater especially needs a period of steady, concentrated effort to get past.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#572

Post by Der_Einzige »

Mat3777 wrote: post #515

There is a vast overrepresentation of women in education

Most don't know just how bad it is:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/young-men-...

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/10/08/the-male-...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/college-university-fall-higher-...

Women are now more dominant in universities today than men were in the 1950-70s

There's an article I can't find that specifically documents how douchy fratboys are having the time of their life due to the surplus of women and dearth of men in college now.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#573

Post by emptyfile »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #275
caditinpiscinam wrote: post #29

As a black guy I don't remember a friend ever saying "black people suck" to my face. But I've heard people I'm close with, both women and men, say that "men suck" countless times. I think a lot of people who don't see themselves as "biased" still carry a lot of bias when it comes to gender, and it has an impact.

[flagged]

[dead]

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#574

Post by zo1 »

zo1 wrote: post #498

I really hope more of this specific discussion is had here. It's the type of conversation we should be having instead of what's being shouted around in social media.

This topic has me oddly emotional, not in an angry way. A bit sad, but also, happy-sad that perhaps these things can maybe be discussed in a sane way and we can just help people that need help.

Although I don't agree with everyone here, I see a lot more nuance and reasoning behind a lot of the discussion here. It overrides the overall MSM/social-media picture that says there is only one right answer and all who question it are evil.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#575

Post by steve_adams_86 »

nprateem wrote: post #541
gizmo wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mention downvotes which suggests you understand forced/incentivized sterilization has a sordid history of eugenics. Yet, you make no effort to explain why your proposal isn’t eugenicist.

Because it must be a voluntary choice instead of forced. A free trade of reproductive capability in return for a reduced sentence. To avoid overly targetting certain groups, the offer could be standardised in some way. Ultimately I believe society would benefit by breaking such toxic cycles.

The problem with incentivizing sterilization is that you’re essentially abusing power dynamics to coerce vulnerable people into doing something they would otherwise not choose.

You also need to consider that a staggering number of men in prison in the USA for decades were jailed over cannabis, which is now legal in more states all the time. These are not people who we need to sterilize.

Any situation where an authority incentivizes a marginalized individual to be sterilized, there’s a serious problem.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#576

Post by _8j50 »

corinroyal wrote: post #540
_8j50 wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what I am saying. I am saying someone has to play the role of a father. As a boy, someone needs to teach that boy how to become a strong man but also a man who lives correctly and fulfills his duties. If it was me, I would teach my son to be honest, honorable, to defend the weak and to understand different types of strengths (including intellectual), to treat his romantaic partner right and to learn how to…

> A well rounded upbringing with all emotional, social and psychilogical needs met is all I advocated. Fair enough, but then: > What I said was that it is not a father's job or rather, if a mother is available then she is best suited for that job. Who says that she is? Plenty of women suck at nurturing. Plenty of men are good at it. Why not have both parents capable of providing emotional support and guidance? What a…

> Who says that she is? Plenty of women suck at nurturing. Plenty of men are good at it. Why not have both parents capable of providing emotional support and guidance?

You talked about a lot of things but I don't think this forum is best to discuss most of it, but let me reply to that statement.

I did not imply that all women are excellent nurturers or all men are great at being masculine. But whether you believe it is nature or society, parenting is many jobs packed into one. One person has to teach a child how to be masculine or feminine or if you are one of those people inventing thingd the whatever non-masculine/non-feminist thing I guess? But a father teaches his son how to be man, now you take that and make it about some ideologicial/political culture war and that isn't right. What's wrong with a mother providing emotional support? If a father is providing that then is that father also teaching the boy how to be a man? What is the woman doing then? Someone needs to do both jobs. If the mother can do the father's job then so be it. I don't get this obsession with reducing everything into politics or whataboutism. As a child I needed both types of support, to be understood as a male and thaught how to handle myself as well as to be taught how to be kind, caring and intouch with my emotions, to avoid burying them. Women don't have testestrome and society has it such that if you are feminine, you spend most of your life being emotional and being in touch with your feelings, so you're an expert at that.

You talk about what can be and hypotheticals. Ok, if you work hard enough, maybe a woman can teach a boy how to be man and a man can learn how to provide what a mother provides? But why are you talking about that? Why are you insisting that men who only know how to be men and have no interest in becoming women pretend to be something they are not? And if a woman is not great at providing motherly love and support, I say she should talk about it with her spouse and let them figure out the best way to meet the needs of their children. I hope we can at least agree that whatever socio-political winds may prevail, the needs of children should not be neglected.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#577

Post by Der_Einzige »

thriftwy wrote: post #94
908B64B197 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With shrinking recess time and PE disappearing from some schools, boys with normal needs for physical activities are increasingly labelled as "sick" and medicalized for completely normal behavior by the taxpayer funded school system. Energy has to go somewhere so it ends up manifesting itself in behaviors that are deemed "disruptive" (really, not sitting still and being unable to concentrate on tasks). That's the beg…

People seem to disregard that a disproportionally large part of autism spectrum is also made up by boys. Nothing would make me more miserable than shoving PE up my throat on account that I got to 'need' it. It was the worst part of my school and uni days, which in turn was the worst part of my life, period. The assumption that boys are all extroverted, physically active and agressive is a big part of the problem.

You're going to get people here saying "no, it's the same rate for girls, they just mask better"

Well, that ability to mask is exactly what increases their likelihood to be spared from the worst of the pain of being ASD (the negative treatment from others due to inability to mask).

Autism really does hit men harder

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#579

Post by gizmo »

nprateem wrote: post #541
gizmo wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mention downvotes which suggests you understand forced/incentivized sterilization has a sordid history of eugenics. Yet, you make no effort to explain why your proposal isn’t eugenicist.

Because it must be a voluntary choice instead of forced. A free trade of reproductive capability in return for a reduced sentence. To avoid overly targetting certain groups, the offer could be standardised in some way. Ultimately I believe society would benefit by breaking such toxic cycles.

I'm not sure I believe incarcerated people can make free choices. And I would assume that legislators would push towards harsher and harsher sentences to incentivize prisoners to "choose" sterilization if they ever want to see daylight again.

An incarceration system, if it has any hope of working, must treat prisoners as people who can become valuable members of society in the future despite their past wrongdoing. When you decide that prisoners are a blight on society and that no rehabilitation is possible then prisoners turn into some kind of underclass that is to be disposed of, either directly or indirectly. That's real dark.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#580

Post by kortilla »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #559
screye wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People aren't having enough children. Every extra hurdle is going to reduce the number of people who end up parents. > Potentially break the cycles of bad parenting You can't break cycles of bad parenting, because they are 2nd order effects of cycles of trauma. And cycles of trauma have been a fundamental part of human civilization since we've existed. We absolutely should teach compassion, good parenting 101s and ba…

> People aren't having enough children. By what metric? Economics? Economics, ironically, is the reason I don't have more kids. My family is doing, what I would consider, "quite well", but we'd still be pretty fucked with one more mouth to feed, the need for a larger car and possibly larger house. I truly don't know how people that aren't that far below us on the resources / income scale have any hope of comfortable…

By failing to maintain the population. The richer people get, the fewer children they have. This is the same in countries all over the world. Your intuition is wrong on this one.
Post reply on HN