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

Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 118 posts

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#71

Post by jdietrich »

sdh wrote: post #56
jdietrich wrote: post #46

I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larva…

"I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larv…

At two I was a committed vegetarian, at four a committed socialist, at six a committed atheist. I could calculate the kinetic energy of a bicycle in motion before I could ride one. At four years old, I most certainly did feel de-humanised when refused a vegetarian meal or spitefully tricked into eating meat. I'm obviously a distant outlier, but the standard deviation is much greater than most people imagine. At the other end of the distribution, here in Britain a tenth of all 16 year olds can't understand a bus timetable, fill in a job application, read the instructions on a frozen meal or make change from a ten pound note. I believe matters are significantly worse in the US. Those people have all been dismally failed by a society and a schools system that assumes that children develop at the same pace. Given that in my country half of all prisoners are functionally illiterate, I believe we have paid a very dear price for that attitude.

Age-appropriate is one size fits all; It works fine for average people but fails catastrophically for anyone at the edge of the bell curve. If you think there is such a thing as "age appropriate learning and guidance", spend a day in an elementary classroom and see for yourself just how different a group of young children can be in terms of mental and emotional development. I'll wager that you'll be astonished at just how great the range is.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#73

Post by Retric »

sdh wrote: post #56
jdietrich wrote: post #46

I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larva…

"I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larv…

I think many children are far more capable than most people think.

As to preferences, I had a fairly long hart to hart with my mother over the God question when I was 3. At 2 I decided I don't like fresh tomato's and at 29 I have yet to change my stance.

PS: A friend of mine found out that it was easier to get his children to fall asleep when lowed music was playing than in a reasonably quiet room. If your open to the possibility you can find all sorts of interesting things about your children even at fairly young ages.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#74

Post by jimmyjim »

jdietrich wrote: post #71
sdh wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larv…

At two I was a committed vegetarian, at four a committed socialist, at six a committed atheist. I could calculate the kinetic energy of a bicycle in motion before I could ride one. At four years old, I most certainly did feel de-humanised when refused a vegetarian meal or spitefully tricked into eating meat. I'm obviously a distant outlier, but the standard deviation is much greater than most people imagine. At the o…

You seem to be taking a very blunt position in the nature vs. nurture debate, which I find a little unsettling.

That said, I don't think the problem with common education today is that it's one of an one-size-fits-all orientation, I think it's rather that the culture at large doesn't value education and reasoning as much as it should. Kids today are so distracted with gadgets these days that it's very hard for them to truly try and develop their intuition with things like mechanical objects (my niece likes to stare at the coffeemaker, and see how it stops, when it stops, etc. It's absolutely fascinating to see her figure it out).

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#75

Post by rikthevik »

I'm surprised no one has brought up mental illness. There are very few of us who will make it through life without some kind of depressive episode. Some of use internalize it, some of us lash out and destroy the things around us.

I think the author knows very well the character of her husband. She realized that these feelings and changes in him were out of character, and that other things in his life might be causing him serious distress. She was patient, and gave him the chance to leave if he really thought he needed to, and the time to get his head straightened out. What she didn't do was respond to his lashing out, making the situation worse.

As I see it, she stuck by her husband as he was having a hell of a time in his life. She knew the kind of man he is, and that he'd be back.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#76

Post by yason »

jdietrich wrote: post #46

I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larva…

I think the woman was right. He didn't want to leave his family but just go through all his life he has lived so far. If confronted, he probably would have had to leave.

When a man needs to sort out his life, a wise woman gives him the space and doesn't freak out. Freaking out and scooping him for the answer would just drive him further away.

Such a life-reset is the result of ignoring your own life for decades and you need to take the time, either in small doses over the years or mentally going away once in ten years for a longer time.

When you're going through one, you can't take anything for granted, not your job, not your wife, not your family. You can't reset your idea of who you are now if you do it conditionally: if you don't dare to keep your options open, you can never see which of them you can safely close again.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#77

Post by robryan »

zeynel1 wrote: post #14

“Go trekking in Nepal. Build a yurt in the back meadow. Turn the garage studio into a man-cave. Get that drum set you’ve always wanted. ..." Is there anyone else who finds this a very condescending and nasty thing to say? This ought to sound to her husband like fighting words.

Seems she was only willing to let him do these things once she thought she may lose him. Why couldn't he do these things at any time if that's what he really wanted.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#78

Post by [deleted] »

MrFoof wrote: post #41
sliverstorm wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my guess: (s)he loves , but all the (wo)men (s)he dates hates and if (s)he married that (wo)man (s)he'd have to give up . Replace with the tag of your choice :) (^ one of the biggest crimes of political correctness: making everything so damn hard to read and full of strange punctuation!) Either that, or (s)he is typically extremely busy with very fulfilling things, and is looking for either a similar partner or a par…

I've run into that dating. The conversation was along the lines of... "So, it's paid off since I bought it with cash. The insurance is cheaper than an economy car. The parts are as cheap as economy cars, save for wear parts. It actually gets pretty decent mileage to boot. Why would I have to get rid of it?" "You just would, that's why!" I had hung out with her for two weeks and apparently her idea of a happy marriage…

[deleted]

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#79

Post by roel_v »

georgieporgie wrote: post #68
MrFoof wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've run into that dating. The conversation was along the lines of... "So, it's paid off since I bought it with cash. The insurance is cheaper than an economy car. The parts are as cheap as economy cars, save for wear parts. It actually gets pretty decent mileage to boot. Why would I have to get rid of it?" "You just would, that's why!" I had hung out with her for two weeks and apparently her idea of a happy marriage…

> despite the fact my apartment has won AWARDS Okay, seriously, how do you win awards for an apartment? That's got to be an impressively flexible come-back for an awful lot of relationship-related comments.

I'm interested as well, and also in seeing pictures - no award-winning goes without pictures so there have to be some.

Re: Those Aren’t Fighting Words, Dear

#80

Post by IsaacSchlueter »

jdietrich wrote: post #46

I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larva…

I think she's lauded as wise because this story gives the reader an easy bromide disguised as deep understanding.

She never once in this story actually sat with her partner and tried to understand what was going on with him. She gave him an answer, made a few demands, and flat out refused to listen.

Reading this story broke my heart. I couldn't believe her utter weakness and lack of compassion.

The truth is scary. Love is scary. Change is scary. These things loom over our comfortable lives threatening to expose us to the changes going on outside our realm of control. You don't own your lover, and the truth may one day be that they're unhappy, and need to leave. That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be.

If this is indeed a true story, I sure hope the guy has since managed to find a good divorce attorney.

ADDITION:

    I’d finally managed to exile the voices in my head
    that told me my personal happiness was only as good
    as my outward success, rooted in things that were
    often outside my control.
This is a huge red flag.

Whenever some says that they've "finally managed" to fix themselves in some major way, be very suspicious. It doesn't work that way. We keep our patterns, and they find new ways to manifest until we learn through repeated painful experience to turn them to our benefit some of the time.

There is no switch.

Her happiness was still clearly very much rooted in her "successful" marriage, her ability to provide a traditional two-coupled-parents environment for her children, etc.

The first step to Happiness is admitting one's neuroses.

The second is admitting that the first didn't make them go away.

Post reply on HN