JayB Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 I think there's already some research coming out showing that micro-managing kids lives down to the minute and engineering every ounce of physical out of their lives is hardly a foolproof method for producing a happy and productive adult. Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. When they canceled track and field day in favor of a bunch of gay-ass sharing games, and make us wear badges that said "I am lovable and capable" I new that things were going seriously awry, even as an eleven year old. Quote
fenderfour Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 How sad. What will they ban next? Public masturbation. 1Ow1kPwImDY Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 But... but.. but what about their self-esteem? Quote
AlpineK Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 When I was in grade school we used to play smear the queer. I guess those kids that can't play tag will have to take that up as a new activity. Quote
archenemy Posted August 30, 2007 Author Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. Quote
Dechristo Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 The ban at this school may be due to laziness. Repeatedly correcting hyper-active kids and mollifying uptight parents requires a lot more time and energy than simply banning games. Quote
hefeweizen Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. You're saying that reproduction of the species is a selfish psychological drive? I would've thought it's more of an inherent evolutionary drive. Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. You're saying that reproduction of the species is a selfish psychological drive? I would've thought it's more of an inherent evolutionary drive. I was gonna say hormonal, but maybe you pegged it. Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 The ban at this school may be due to laziness. Repeatedly correcting hyper-active kids and mollifying uptight parents requires a lot more time and energy than simply banning games. Just give the little trolls Ritalin and video games and tell them to shut up once in a while. Quote
Dechristo Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 I found duct tape performed better and was more cost-effective Quote
underworld Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. i'm a new uncle in the past few years. watching my sisters take care of the little ones has really opened my eyes ...i've come to notice that it is the least selfish thing there is Quote
underworld Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 I found duct tape performed better and was more cost-effective in the 'making' or 'disciplining' arena? Quote
archenemy Posted August 30, 2007 Author Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. You're saying that reproduction of the species is a selfish psychological drive? I would've thought it's more of an inherent evolutionary drive. I was gonna say hormonal, but maybe you pegged it. Without fail, once a society accepts birth control and becomes financially sound and fairly secure; people have fewer children--to the point where often there aren't enough kids being produced to replace the existing population. So I would think the "hormonal" drive seems to have a little merit, but not a whole hell of a lot. People often get control over their "hormones" when not having a litter of six is a viable option. Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 In high school we used to play a game called "drink 'til you vomit". Quote
JayB Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. You're saying that reproduction of the species is a selfish psychological drive? I would've thought it's more of an inherent evolutionary drive. I was gonna say hormonal, but maybe you pegged it. Without fail, once a society accepts birth control and becomes financially sound and fairly secure; people have fewer children--to the point where often there aren't enough kids being produced to replace the existing population. So I would think the "hormonal" drive seems to have a little merit, but not a whole hell of a lot. People often get control over their "hormones" when not having a litter of six is a viable option. Interestingly - the fertility rate for first and second generation Americans with Mexican ancestry is substantially higher than that of Mexicans. I think that the same is true for several North African populations living in Euroland, but I'd have to check to make sure. I suppose it comes down to how one defines "selfishness," but I don't know how, under any definition of the word, refusing to have children because it will interfere with your career goals, make it tougher to afford the dream-home, make travel and socializing more complicated, etc - could be construed as *less* selfish than having children. I also think that - imagine this coming from me - there are economic factors that heavily influence reproduction choices on a country-by-country level. One obviously selfish motive for having children is so that you'll have someone to look after you when you can no longer care for or provide for yourself. When the state assumes a legal obligation to provide for the elderly, the odds are good that this motive is no longer as forceful, and this factors into people's decisions about the way they'll live their lives. Ditto for the societies in which children add to, rather than ameliorate, the financial burdens on the parents. I'd also venture that the extent to which young people are taxed to support the elderly has an effect on their reproductive choices, whether consciously or not, as responsible people who are in households where both parties have to work full time to earn enough after-tax money to get by aren't as likely to have children, IMO. Complicated issue, to be sure. Quote
mattp Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 I think there's already some research coming out showing that micro-managing kids lives down to the minute and engineering every ounce of physical out of their lives is hardly a foolproof method for producing a happy and productive adult. Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. When they canceled track and field day in favor of a bunch of gay-ass sharing games, and make us wear badges that said "I am lovable and capable" I new that things were going seriously awry, even as an eleven year old. I share your disdain for the politically correct hyper-protective and overbearing yet spoiling parenting styles and educational methods we have come to accept as standard. Quote
underworld Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 I think there's already some research coming out showing that micro-managing kids lives down to the minute and engineering every ounce of physical out of their lives is hardly a foolproof method for producing a happy and productive adult. Seems like a significant amount of the changes in parenting over the past 50 years have been driven by the psychological needs of parents rather than any objective consideration of what's actually good for the children. When they canceled track and field day in favor of a bunch of gay-ass sharing games, and make us wear badges that said "I am lovable and capable" I new that things were going seriously awry, even as an eleven year old. I share your disdain for the politically correct hyper-protective and overbearing yet spoiling parenting styles and educational methods we have come to accept as standard. hell just froze over Quote
kevbone Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 The ban at this school may be due to laziness. Repeatedly correcting hyper-active kids and mollifying uptight parents requires a lot more time and energy than simply banning games. Hyper-active kids……dude…..most children are “hyper-active”. Why you got to put the label on? Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 The ban at this school may be due to laziness. Repeatedly correcting hyper-active kids and mollifying uptight parents requires a lot more time and energy than simply banning games. Hyper-active kids……dude…..most children are “hyper-active”. Why you got to put the label on? "hyper-active" = $$$ Quote
underworld Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 hyper-active = excuse (it's not my fault..it's their condition) Quote
lI1|1! Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 banning tag will lead to more childhood obesity Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 hyper-active = excuse (it's not my fault..it's their condition) ...and the drug companies will "help" you! God bless them! Quote
underworld Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 the fat kids played tag when i was a kid. they usually lost, but still played. then beat up the scrawny ones. ...the cycle of life Quote
lizard_brain Posted August 30, 2007 Posted August 30, 2007 the fat kids played tag when i was a kid. they usually lost, but still played. then beat up the scrawny ones. ...the cycle of life Fat kids were a rarity when I was a kid. There might have been one, MAYBE two per class. They were different. Now they are the norm. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.