31–40 of 118 posts
Sure seems like correlation to me. Older fathers are more likely to have established careers, establishing higher socioeconomic status, affording a lifestyle that engenders "geekiness".
Russia is a tought life country. A decision to start a family when you are still in your prime may make more sense there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it obvious? Doesn't seem obvious to me. Is it because of the stereotype that geekier men don't hook up as young as non-geek men? What is the difference between a geekier man and a less-geeky man? Can it be objectively defined?
I'd suggest that geeky dads are going to attempt to be very logical with their all their decisions. So they might take their time with their spouse, want to get a house, get finances in a great place, etc, before making the jump to have kids. At some point the geekier types either alleviate all their concerns and/or realize that a lot of great things can't be framed into a logical decision, and they make the jump. :)
How is it logical then to wait until you're older (define older!)?
Part of my decision - first child c. 30 - was not to wait any longer lest I be unable to keep up with them physically.
I know N=1... but when you're debating with your friends whether or not this (http://imgur.com/m52Wo4a) can be classified as a sandwich or if it warrants a new nomenclature entirely and realizing that these are the people you are associating with it's difficult to not look for answers.
I'm seriously confused on this. First, the article throws out some very reasonable sounding things, like older dads are more established and stable parents. This seems totally legit. Then they start talking of a 'geek gene' that gets passed down by dads as they get older? That seems ridiculous to me. We don't even know how general intelligence works on a genetic level. Overall, I feel like we put way too much stock i…
Almost every study on early childhood development and later outcomes shows that how a child is raised has very little to do with outcomes compared to heredity. https://www.vox.com/2015/8/11/9127769/parenting-advice-worth... https://www.vox.com/2015/3/31/8320233/time-spent-with-kids http://quillette.com/2016/01/19/heritability-and-why-parents...
I do agree that there's no magic formula for being a great parent. The baby Beethoven phenom, best color to paint your baby's room, etc are indeed useless. But that's good parents who actually care trying to read studies and be better. These parents are involved, and care. Not all parents are like that.
From your second article:
"In fact, the study found one key instance when parent time can be particularly harmful to children. That’s when parents, mothers in particular, are stressed, sleep-deprived, guilty and anxious."
This sounds like exactly the kind of thing that would happen less with older, more established parents.
On the other hand, if the parents can't hold a job, or are addicted to drugs, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that doesn't have an effect on childhood outcomes. If anything, parents who are criminals are more likely to have children that are criminals.
If you want to say criminality is genetic, that's a fair argument. But I believe it's more likely to be about class/race/means, and is a set of learned behaviors.
I think there's a limit to how good parenting can affect outcomes to the positive (genetics). But I also think bad parenting can't be ruled out. And none of these studies talk about sub-par parenting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties... "In the study population, advancing paternal age was associated with increased risk of some psychiatric disorders (eg, autism..."
I remember a Stanford professor dived into this advanced age gamete suboptimality and stressed to everyone the compromises folks take in delaying past prime biological stages. He showed some time profiles of the diminishing chances for implantation, genetic disorders, etc. It was really palpable because you could sense he was a bit off balance having to present this sort of news to a bunch of young folks with the fou…
Meg Jay writes more about the practical implications of potentially delaying common life goals in "The Defining Decade"
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13523061-the-defining-de...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then they start talking of a 'geek gene' that gets passed down by dads as they get older? That seems ridiculous to me. We don't even know how general intelligence works on a genetic level. That's a bit silly. Far more plausible is the supposition I will make here: geeky guys are less likely to be teenage fathers and geekiness is generally heritable. There, no epigenetic assumption necessary.
If by 'heritable' you mean 'learned behavior' then I'd agree.
Sure seems like correlation to me. Older fathers are more likely to have established careers, establishing higher socioeconomic status, affording a lifestyle that engenders "geekiness".
https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties... "In the study population, advancing paternal age was associated with increased risk of some psychiatric disorders (eg, autism..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would also seem that they're less likely to play sports with their children. I wonder if there's a way to isolate athleticism from geekiness.
Plenty of men with single mothers* learn to play sports just fine (see many NBA and NFL players). *This is not to say that women don't play sports with their sons, but to say that it's silly to assume that all young fathers play sports with their sons.
In families with older fathers, [assuming] there is a higher percentage of dual parenting ... which could mean more attention at home = less time playing sports with the neighborhood kids
Sure seems like correlation to me. Older fathers are more likely to have established careers, establishing higher socioeconomic status, affording a lifestyle that engenders "geekiness".
Plus the tendency towards later parenthood for those focused on achieving a higher education and/or advanced career. If someone has a "geekier" career path or educational background, they're almost certainly more likely to have geekier children.