- Messages
- 54,308
The lawsuit portion made me wonder about this:
Do many modern parents not "parent" their children but rely on others and institutions to parent their children?
From what I see in public school every day---plenty!:eusa_doh:
The lawsuit portion made me wonder about this:
Do many modern parents not "parent" their children but rely on others and institutions to parent their children?
Today we seem to see polar opposites in play where in some areas the competition is so ruthless that cruelty is common place tool to weed out the imperfect and in other areas enabling is taken to an absurd degree and in the end is actually cruel.
Depends whose real world they will be getting into. And there, we get back into the generation wars again.
All right John - are you hinting that out and out cruelty is actually less cruel?
Is it necessary? Ought it to be tolerated?
There's a highly cogent essay by Neal Gabler in today's Boston Globe
No not at all. Cruelty has a lot of connotations to it and we all have different concepts as to what is cruel.
Take the idea of some, where you teach your kids to swim by throwing them in the water. No prior instruction just a sink or swim reality. Traumatic to a kid especially if they have to be rescued to keep from drowning. Some would say it is a viable teaching method for their children, others would not.
Take training for some sports, in the pursuit of excellence it is possible for a coach to go to far. How far is too far? I don't know.
We have standards as to abilities say something like you have to have perfect vision to be a pilot in the Air Force, is that cruel to someone that doesn't have perfect vision?
There is no one simple answer. Some people parent their children and other do not.The lawsuit portion made me wonder about this:
Do many modern parents not "parent" their children but rely on others and institutions to parent their children?
If we apply the mindset of the parent in question in the article to people today it is not so absurd. There are too many daily examples noted in the media and our lives of absurd parenting (and the results) and behaviors of adults that fall neatly under this umbrella.Interesting article. But outside of media hyperbole and the occasional example they love to throw before us I've not seen anyone like what was described, at least not around here. Not saying they don't exist, just that the article is as much illusion as the illusions they describe. To describe all or even a significant part of American society in such terms is patently absurd.
Interesting article. But outside of media hyperbole and the occasional example they love to throw before us I've not seen anyone like what was described, at least not around here. Not saying they don't exist, just that the article is as much illusion as the illusions they describe. To describe all or even a significant part of American society in such terms is patently absurd.
There is no one simple answer. Some people parent their children and other do not.
Come out to California and see loads of examples. You are safer there in NC.
Only in some ways.
We certainly have other types of weirdness here.
Hard to say..But what I am wondering is if there is a an overall trend or trends in certain regions? We see a lot of people get huffy we the find out people are home schooling there kids which in a way is more traditional than sending your kids to school.
The problem isn't just the "Ivy League" thing, although if you talk to teenagers today, you'll find many of them absolutely writhing under the pressure from parents and teachers to get into not just "a" college but *the* college. My own niece was brainwashed and browbeaten into going to an elite school by such advisors, and washed out after one year because she couldn't handle the culture shock. I could have said "I told you so," but I refrained.
The problem as I see it isn't the idea of personal achievement. Wanting to do something good with your life is important. The problem is when doing something "good" with your life isn't enough -- it used to be a family aspired to buy a home and live in the rest of their days. Now, the idea is you have to buy a home, trade up to a bigger one, and then another bigger one, and on and on, because otherwise "you aren't keeping up."
This type of mindless aspirationalism was a cancer on the postwar era, but it's become much, much worse since the '80s. We not only have "starter homes" now, but "starter families." It's an absolute perversion of what the American Dream ought to be.
The problem isn't just the "Ivy League" thing, although if you talk to teenagers today, you'll find many of them absolutely writhing under the pressure from parents and teachers to get into not just "a" college but *the* college. My own niece was brainwashed and browbeaten into going to an elite school by such advisors, and washed out after one year because she couldn't handle the culture shock. I could have said "I told you so," but I refrained.
The problem as I see it isn't the idea of personal achievement. Wanting to do something good with your life is important. The problem is when doing something "good" with your life isn't enough -- it used to be a family aspired to buy a home and live in the rest of their days. Now, the idea is you have to buy a home, trade up to a bigger one, and then another bigger one, and on and on, because otherwise "you aren't keeping up."
This type of mindless aspirationalism was a cancer on the postwar era, but it's become much, much worse since the '80s. We not only have "starter homes" now, but "starter families." It's an absolute perversion of what the American Dream ought to be.
Well said.
And may I throw something else into the conversation?
My daughter doesn't do the best in school. However, she is an immensely talented artist. I already have her with a private art tutor. Even though she will only be 11 this year, I'm already wondering about college - and if, she doesn't want to go, I should push her into it. I think there is also a trend today in our thought patterns that if you don't go to college right after high school, you'll never make the big bucks, be seen as "intelligent", etc. I have no problem with education - heck, I have a BA and an MA (but I am NOT making the big bucks). But I don't know that it's the ideal path for everyone.
I think there was a thread on this here before...but anyway. I would be more inclined to send my daughter to an art-only school or a community college instead of a 4-year college. Heck, at the price of tuition, I don't think I could afford to send her to a four-year college when the time comes.
But would it be terrible if I didn't send her to college at all if she doens't want to go? I'm thinking not...