this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
77 points (91.4% liked)

Comradeship // Freechat

2115 readers
1 users here now

Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.

A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Huge rantI am not anti-natalist at all and I am not making a case for such reactionary ideologies here. Just sharing what I have seen so other folks and point my mistakes or just listen.

I am witnessing the older cousins of my generation in the family have and raise kids and it is a little bit terrifying. I am talking about two couples of parents, each with one child. The older kid is about 3 years old and the younger one is about 1 year old.

The older kid does almost nothing but throw tantrums all day. It is near impossible to make them do anything they do not want to do. For example, making them sit down in their high chair and eat the food they are being fed is a Herculean task. The child has to be distracted somehow. Two things that I saw that work:

  • Put on YouTube videos on an iPad. These videos are like crack-cocaine for a child's brain BTW. The creators are highly incentivised to make the videos as addictive as possible to boost their ad revenue.
  • Have someone play with them. The kid seemed to like me because I was new to them and I made them laugh, so they would sometimes allow their parents to feed them as long as I played with them.

The other child, who is a year old, is starting to exhibit similar behaviour. In the morning and afternoon, they are looked after by their grandparents. Their grandfather is responsible for feeding them. The grandfather is a boomer addicted to cable TV news and the stock market. (Cable TV news in India is BTW extremely garbage and inflicts incalculable amounts of psychic damage. There are no words to describe how bad it is.) As he feeds the child, the child sits on his lap watching the TV while being spoonfed. On the other hand, if the child is sitting on a high chair with no distractions, they refuse to eat even as the one who feeds them talks to them. The child does drink milk from the bottle without fuss so I am not sure whether they are in a descend towards problematic behaviour or not.

I don't have the knowledge or experience to confidently say whether things have to be this way or not so I don't want to jump to passing judgement on the child's parents and definitely not on the child. Maybe it is just how it is. Maybe children just throw tantrums while being subjected to feeding. Maybe TV or YouTube videos have nothing to do with it. I admittedly do not like technology as it is sold to us so my cynicism definitely comes a biased standpoint.

Mostly it got me wondering though how there are no public services to help with parenting, which is a foundationally important task for not just the well-being of society, but also perpetuating it. For example, I was wondering if crack-cocaine-tier addictive YouTube videos for children are detrimental to the child's growth and the overall experience of parenting. This is the year 2023 and I am pretty sure god knows how many tens of thousands of work-hours must have been put into researching issues like this. To find out, I can try using a search engine and hope to god that I don't get ratfucked by dishonest or just low quality articles that have been pushed to the top of the results through SEO. If I am savvy, I can try searching directly for research on something like Google Scholar but very few people are capable of this. (Not even me.) I found a pediatric psychologist who has made it her life's work to extol the vices of electronic media addiction on children. She sells books and courses on this which makes me trust her a little bit less since she profits off of it. She could be a charlatan feeding off of technophobe parents' paranoia. There are pediatric associations in every country but their findings and recommendations don't reach the masses. I have heard some advertisements from my country's on the radio. But they are few and far between and not in-depth at all. This kind of knowledge is still mostly passed from parents to their children instead of being rooted deeper in collective scientific findings.

Electronic media, social media, and their effects on the brain and habits is something that I am maybe overly sensitive about. My brain has been fried by a combination of anxiety and social media addiction to the point that I really struggle to read books because of being attention deficit. The children's parents and grandparents are also hooked to their phones and TVs. But since they are comfortably upper middle class and with generational wealth, they do not introspect their habits and life choices because having wealth in a capitalist society means you are doing good so you don't need to change what you are doing. The only things you can do better are what will net you more wealth.

Lastly, the parents don't seem to find it problematic that they don't get the chance to spend much time with their child even if they wanted to. All these parents are employed and working, so they work most of the day and delegate childcare to the grandparents and nannies who are poor and underpaid. One of the mothers, did not even get paid maternal leave despite working at one of the biggest private hospital chains. She had to quit the job and find a new one when the child was just six months old. I feel like if I had a child, I would want to take care of them almost full time at least until they are a year old and likely even older. It feels terrible to delegate childcare to an underpaid servant.

I don't have a larger point to make because I was just ranting. I don't feel qualified to hold strong opinions in this realm. Parenting I feel is always going to be tough. I cannot imagine it being programmatic and straightforward to raise human beings with all their complexities. The problem for me is that there are no public institutions to try and make this easier. Parents are left to their own devices, like getting their child hooked to addictive YouTube video channels, or finding an underpaid slave that ends up spending more time taking care of your child than her own to be able to put food on the table, or maybe paying for an expensive private daycare so you can slave away and the execs at your company can buy their seventh yacht.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] absentthereaper@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I mean, you're not entirely wrong on the fear factor. There's a lot of physical and mental fuck that runs through my family's genetics that I don't feel I have a reason to be passing on; it's just so much worse watching the way my in-law's kids comport themselves compared to how I remember my generation doing it.

And if not for the much more vast amount of time a kid spends at school, than under your thumb these days, I'd agree that there SHOULD be a way to offset the deleterious effects of the rest of the student body... But if your kid is up and preparing for school at 7, and gone by 8, and won't be back from anywhere between 4 to 6, the state has your seed for at least 8 hours a day. Tack on an hour or two of homework to that after the second grade, that's 8-10. Tack on at least one extracurricular to that by high school, that's now 8-12 hours, maybe more if it's a sport extracurricular, or if your kid's like I was at that age and juggling two or more extras per year. You're left with like 4 to 6 hours of wakeful time at best to impart whatever you will on your seed, assuming you're not working multiple jobs, gigs, or hustles at one time to further split your capacity for unfucking what the school fucks up.

That's not enough time to unfuck the state's socialization. The parent is outweighed under this paradigm; especially if they work or have to maintain multiple hustles themselves. A kid's just a net loss in my estimation these days, under this system; and if you tell me that you can successfully inoculate your kids against Bebe's kids, when they're seeing Bebe's kids way more often than they're seeing you, I genuinely don't believe you from the absolute failures of parenting I've been privy to thus far.

[–] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah you have a point about the number of hours spend in school and school's homework.

It's not looking good obviously.

An alarming pattern is that we learn about amazing individual socialist leaders (eg. Lenin, Mao, Che) (these are the ones I've read about) but not much about their parents or their children.

I don't really have a larger point that I can back with good arguments. I don't think we should give up though.

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tack on an hour or two of homework to that after the second grade, that’s 8-10. Tack on at least one extracurricular to that by high school, that’s now 8-12 hours, maybe more if it’s a sport extracurricular

First off, why wouldn't time doing homework or sports also be time to interact with your kids? My kids do their own HW, but they do it in the main room where we can all talk about it and so I can help them/correct their work as needed. My kids pick their own sports, but I'm spending the time with them to practice at home and engaging with them on the way to and from practices and games.

You’re left with like 4 to 6 hours of wakeful time to impart whatever you will on your seed.

Even assuming that you have zero interaction with your kids during all their daily activities and schooling, 4-6 hours of time with a single, consistent influence is hugely impactful. Teachers see them 6 hours/day, but they have 20-40 other students they are spending time with, too. Same with coaches. Your words to your kids are much more impactful because they are in a smaller group of people and because they are your kids. They might act too cool or like they're not listening, but they are.

Giving up and saying "there's nothing I can do" is simply inaccurate.

[–] absentthereaper@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I said, "I'm not having them." Accept my 'no', and move on, preferably before I have to start getting uncivil.

debate pervert

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's your prerogative; whether you plan on having kids or not, I just thought you'd like to know that the line of reasoning you're repeatedly and forcefully extolling is deeply flawed. You know, so you don't sound like a tool who has no idea what they're talking about.

At least for me personally, I appreciate it when people let me know if I'm way off-base in a topic where I have little to no knowledge. But hey, I'm the type of person that enjoys learning more about how the world around me works and appreciates that every situation has room for nuance. Maybe you're the other type.

[–] absentthereaper@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

You know how I know you're a suburbanite who actually has access to means enough to not have to worry the way I do? That you're still here, with your "NO, DEBATE ME, DEBATE ME" headass. I. Said. Move. On.

debate pervert