Where does this come from? It plays extraordinarily conveniently into a left-wing narrative.
Is it so unbelievable though?
I think that this is almost a common-sense finding for anyone who has ever had money problems.
Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
41–50 of 172 posts
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#42Kids know. They always know and they understand. My family went through a bankruptcy when I was a kid. We lost the family business. My parents never told me about it, but I knew. The discussions, the fear of coming home to nothing. It's all real. Tell your kids, explain to them. Use the difficult time to build a closer bond with them instead of leaving them in the dark.
I grew up in a fairly poor home and it was similar. My parents sometimes acknowledged that we were poor, but they otherwise seemed to pretend it wasn’t true. Asking for something that cost money was practically punishable - instead of saying no, we still can’t afford that, it was construed as rude and selfish.
This kind of sensitivity and denial around financial difficulties is common but very unhealthy for both the kids and the parent.
Kids won’t hate you for having money troubles. They won’t be annoyed that you can’t buy them {cool thing} if it’s clear why you can’t. If they are, it’s another learning opportunity.
I’m doing okay now, but I share my financial mistakes with my kids when it’s relevant and try to keep conversations open about how these matters impact them now and later in their lives.
My hope is that as they age they’ll see me as a resource for help, someone to guide them through things, to recognize that their finances aren’t something to be afraid of or keep secret.
In my parent’s defence, they wanted to hide our financial situation because it scared them and they didn’t want it to scare and unnerve their kids. The trouble is though that like you said, the kids will know anyway. The lack of insight into what’s happening only makes them feel more insecure and normalizes hiding upsetting things from people you love. Good intentions only get you so far, I guess.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#43I actually came here to say that funnily enough, my parents did the opposite. Santa even had a damn budget...
In my case, all my Dad did everday after work, was get drunk and talk about how much the kids were costing him.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#44Kids know. They always know and they understand. My family went through a bankruptcy when I was a kid. We lost the family business. My parents never told me about it, but I knew. The discussions, the fear of coming home to nothing. It's all real. Tell your kids, explain to them. Use the difficult time to build a closer bond with them instead of leaving them in the dark.
It amazes me what my 2 year old manages to absorb and understand. Feels like there's a big disparity in their ability to observe and absorb compared to being able to articulate.
The real trick is, being able to observe and absorb is one thing, or indeed to articulate.
To CONTEXTUALIZE is a whole other ball game.
Observing has special risks when you're a small child and cannot work out yet that everything does not relate to you. There's a lot of bad stuff that can go on that's not the fault of the child, but a young enough child will still conclude 'I did that'.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#45Kids know. They always know and they understand. My family went through a bankruptcy when I was a kid. We lost the family business. My parents never told me about it, but I knew. The discussions, the fear of coming home to nothing. It's all real. Tell your kids, explain to them. Use the difficult time to build a closer bond with them instead of leaving them in the dark.
Our school,as pretty much any other in the country,used to do annual photoshoots. You get a class together with the teacher, they take picture and then you pay for it. I'm missing 3rd grade photo. It was many years later when I asked my parents how come I don't have it. Turns out, I overheard some conversation on how challenging it was for them to meet the ends at the time and decided to tell at the school that I won't be buying any photos that year. My mum found it a bit odd that there was no photoshoot that year and when she questioned me about it, I did explain that we couldn't afford it( we could and I could have gotten the money for the photos). Now I have a 4 year old and I often get blown away by her reasoning.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#46The photo looks like me on Hacker News, reading about some pseudoscience, whilst I should be playing with my daughter.
[deleted]
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#47In the first experiment, researchers sought to observe how parents would interact with their children (in this case, 3-year-olds) after the parents were asked to describe times in which they had recently experienced scarcity. A control group of parents were instead asked to describe other recent activities. How many studies like this need to not replicate before we stop treating them seriously?
Do you hold an oracle which tells you which studies will not replicate, or is there some particular trait of the study that provably doesn't replicate?
It's not about an Oracle. It's that the mentioning of a topic prior to some conclusion generating observation has practically never generated replicable results. Still, these studies make news all the time because they're easy to p-hack into some interesting conclusion.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't require a scientific paper to create the mascot but you seem to be arguing it requires a "good paper" that's been validated to rename it? You are demonstrating a status quo cognitive bias.
So if someone comes up with a paper that says the opposite (that using native American names) has a proven (by the a paid study) positive impact, since it's low stakes, we should go ahead and name teams after native American tribes?
[deleted]
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was a report by a psychologist who said Native American mascots have a negative effect on children of native Americans. This may or may not be the case or may be true in some specific circumstances (Redskins, for example) but may not be true for all, however, many high schools are changing their team names based on this one study/conclusion which was funded by a tribe. Which is fine, but usually when there is a…
So native Americans tribes have for the majority almost been wiped out and eradicated due to something not very far from genocide (or at the minimum, a very targeted policy of extermination) And somehow you think that schools that have nothing to do with those people finally changing their very questionable names is due to a “conflict of interest of a psychologist”? Not because it was just racist?
It could be argued that using that symbolism is more a form of respect than it is a form of racism. I don't think people who decided those names actively participated in the genocide, and objectively, they used those names and that symbolism as an ideal to look up to, they used it as a warrior symbol for their team.
It could also be argued that it dilutes the image/culture/history and probably a bunch more things by wrapping it up in american plastic. I wouldn't argue with that.
Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't require a scientific paper to create the mascot but you seem to be arguing it requires a "good paper" that's been validated to rename it? You are demonstrating a status quo cognitive bias.
So if someone comes up with a paper that says the opposite (that using native American names) has a proven (by the a paid study) positive impact, since it's low stakes, we should go ahead and name teams after native American tribes?
I think we were talking about high school mascots not team names. Are those two scenarios equally low stakes?
In one you change the high school mascot from a native american cartoon to an animal or something. I'm assuming native americans were not consulted with the creation of the mascot to begin with.
In the other we change... what all the teams names? Is that a equivilent scenario?
To be honest I'm finding it hard to relate to someone would care enough about a high school mascot to even need a study at all. Low stakes B.S. But that's me.
Since this topic is probably of zero importance to anyone not native american who else is going to fund it, for that matter?