old parents as well btw
Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
111–120 of 424 posts
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#112I know this comment invites disaster but.....what is heaven other than the ultimate delayed gratification? i.e. don't worry about your miserable life as a serf toiling for the lord of the manor 6 days a week because if you're good now you'll be happy after you die. You can imagine the aristocracy laughing to themselves about that idea. Nowadays we get told to save money...but I'm from Zimbabwe where saving money was…
Did things get better after dollarization?
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#113This article mentions the marshmallow experiment. I am confused do people actually like eating marshmallows, if so why? It always seems to be taken as read that they’re irresistible. Why on Earth
> do people actually like eating marshmallows, if so why?
Everybody around me likes them. I have no idea why. It could be cultural. I moved to the US when I was about 19. Tried my first marshmallow when I was maybe 25. Ick. Its mostly a ball of sugar. I don't like Vanilla ice cream either. For similar reasons.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
I reject that premise. It's completely fine to point out societal norms. Neither were particularly offensive. But assuming a Japanese child will have patience where an American will not is the same weird thought that leads to weird guys wanting Japanese wives for 'obedience.' I'm not at all against pointing out or even flexing cultural differences, but they don't matter at all when raising a child(other than of cours…
> I'm not at all against pointing out or even flexing cultural differences, but they don't matter at all when raising a child(other than of course, if you teach your child by that example.) Except they do matter, unless you're going to "raise" a child by locking them in the apartment until they turn 18. Otherwise, as soon as they go to kindergarten[0], it's entirely out of your hands. They say[1] that minimum viable…
I think you have a really important point. There are these philosophical or political individualists that don't get this.
You could make an analogy with dogs. There you have plenty of examples of what can happen in isolation. A functional collective will in most cases manouver you out of parenting in part or fully with soft or hard means if you are bad enough since you will indirectly wreck havoc otherwise.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#115Going off on a tangent, but what's the point of washing an orange?
I’ve read online that the skin of fruits can contain bugs and larvae that when washed help keep your fruit longer and prevent things like fruit flies.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not at all against pointing out or even flexing cultural differences, but they don't matter at all when raising a child(other than of course, if you teach your child by that example.) Except they do matter, unless you're going to "raise" a child by locking them in the apartment until they turn 18. Otherwise, as soon as they go to kindergarten[0], it's entirely out of your hands. They say[1] that minimum viable…
I'd have to find a copy to see if it cites its source but paraphrased I've heard it: > People mechanically can have kids, physically, before they're mentally able to take care of them. The [village] elders would raise and teach the children while the adolescents worked at things adolescents do better than elders So "it takes a village" used to be literal, and as we in this part of the west started to isolate and nucl…
The way I understood the line about "minimum viable reproductive unit" I quoted is different, more straightforward: a nuclear family can't survive alone. Two people and a kid just can't survive in the wilderness; we've evolved to function in group.
From this POV, the "village" is still there, it's always there. It may not be a literal village, and you and me might both be pretty much alone except for our partners, when it comes to parental responsibilities. However, the modern "village" is the society we live in - our neighbors, our friends, co-workers, the market economy as represented by people selling good and providing services we need to survive; later, also parents of children our kids go to school with. These are all people we interact with daily, share the same material and social environment, and we all influence each other.
There's no way to avoid that influence (in fact, if you try, the "village" will start getting worried, possibly to the point social services might get involved). It's always there, and once your kids start education, they'll be interacting with other members of society unsupervised - this is what I mean by "village finding your child".
> I think a large, maybe even the main part of why community of family and close friends raising children together works: humans are uniquely motivated by shame and pride, and having that many eyes on you leads to quick corrections before bad habits take root.
I 100% agree with that. I think it's fundamental. But it works only up to certain size; it's not that globalization is in opposition to that, it's just that to form societies larger than ~150, you need replacements for "shame and pride" as behavioral regulators to keep a group from self-destructing. Hence leaders and rules - and applied recursively a couple times, you end up with presidents and districts and rule of law and bureaucracy and all the staples of modern life, existing next to and on top of groups of families and friends.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you notice that you just devided kids in Loudoun and Baltimore in 2 groups, giving them as examples of different environments? You do not object to premise, only to granularity of defining environment geographically.
> You do not object to premise, only to granularity of defining environment geographically. Correct. I just picked those two because of stark differences of two well known areas close to each other. But it can go down to even neighborhood, or even street in said neighborhood. Sorry if my rambling seems confusing. I'm not against the idea that environment affects children. I'm against broad brush stroke categorization…
> or even street in said neighborhood
Or even one individual on different days. It should be all chaos and noise and yet it's not because these "general" numbers get translated to a realistic "it's more/less likely" not "it's guaranteed".
You're arguing against comparisons you don't like, or feel make you look worse than others. In other words you want to get to arbitrarily define the brush width presumably based on where you feel you sit in the comparison.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
The skin might be dirty, so cutting a knife through it will slightly contaminate the insides
And thats a good thing? It wont kill you, but your immune system will be busy and trained.
Wikipedia mentions that immunity to any particular strain of norovirus lasts for 6 to 24 months.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#119I feel like this article is good, on the verge of great, then makes cultural comments that invalidate the point trying to be made for no real reason. Like the race or location of the parent determines their childhood? The rest is spot on. I became a parent before I was ready, and man, they are little sponges. They learn everything you do, everything you say, embarrassingly so. My 5 year old would lay on the couch to…
Well written comment... compliments the article well.
I think you inserting the objections to the culture/country part yourself. I don't think they are present in the actual article.
The central idea here is that children are shaped by their environment, the people around them and those people's behaviour. They sponge up behaviours of their parents, peers and such.
But... it's not all mimicry and habits. It's also a response to incentives in their life. That's the writer's point about trust... and the marshmello test. Does the child live in a world where trust and patience pay off... or a world where you get what you can while you can? The socio-economic correlation to patience in the marshmello test is a proxy... demonstrating his point.
Re: Why young parents should focus on building trust with their kids
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not at all against pointing out or even flexing cultural differences, but they don't matter at all when raising a child(other than of course, if you teach your child by that example.) Except they do matter, unless you're going to "raise" a child by locking them in the apartment until they turn 18. Otherwise, as soon as they go to kindergarten[0], it's entirely out of your hands. They say[1] that minimum viable…
I'd have to find a copy to see if it cites its source but paraphrased I've heard it: > People mechanically can have kids, physically, before they're mentally able to take care of them. The [village] elders would raise and teach the children while the adolescents worked at things adolescents do better than elders So "it takes a village" used to be literal, and as we in this part of the west started to isolate and nucl…
I think the main potential benefit for a child, and the future community it will be part of, with secondary caretakers, is if the primary caretakers are insane.
It is like abit of good influence outweights alot of bad influence.