+
“A balm for the soul”
  review on Goodreads
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy
Family

People are sharing the parenting trends that absolutely ‘need to end now’

Here are 21 of the best responses.

parenting trends
via Pexels

Not all trends in parenting are a good thing

It’s tough to quantify whether today’s parents are stricter or more permissive than previous generations, but the overall sentiment seems to be that parents are more lenient than they were a few decades back.

A poll by YouGov found that younger Americans are more likely than their elders to have been raised by “not very strict” or “not at all strict” parents. Thirty-nine percent of under-30s say that their parents weren't very strict or not strict at all, compared to only 15% of over-65s.

Nicola Kraus, author of “The Nanny Diaries,” believes that it’s a natural outgrowth of the fact that we know a lot more about children than we did in the past.

“We are deeply aware that our children are cognizant, conscious humans in a way previous generations weren't aware. Children were treated like pets or-worse-release-valves for their parents' stresses and fears, then expected to magically transform into healthy, functional adults,” she writes.

But this change in parenting has encouraged other trends that many think are creating a greater number of entitled young adults who can’t fend for themselves. These days we have helicopter parents, bulldozer parents and dependent parents whose overinvolvement in their children’s lives renders them incapable of becoming fully integrated adults.

Reddit user u/qquackie asked the online forum "What parenting 'trend' do you strongly disagree with?" and got an overwhelming number of responses from people who think that today's parents are raising entitled children.

Many of the responders think that parents are being too sensitive with their children and they don’t provide firm boundaries. They also think it’s a big problem for kids to think they’re the center of the universe.

Here are 21 of the most popular responses to the parenting question.

1. Pretending that not parenting is parenting

"I won't tell my child to stop kicking your leg repeatedly because i don't want to crush his spirit!' — StoicDonkey

2. ​Denying your kid any negative experiences or emotions

"They are a normal part of being a person, teach them to handle negative emotions now before you send them out into a world they are not prepared to handle." — IAmRules

3. Fake “gentle parenting”

"You hear and see so many parents letting their children do whatever they want, no matter how destructive, rude or hurtful their behaviours are. Parents find themselves beholden to the whims of their childrens’ emotions in the name of gentle parenting, instead of true gentle parenting where (so I hear) boundaries are set alongside validating emotions." — candianuk

4. Not setting clear boundaries

"You are the adult, not the kid. Children benefit sooo much more from clear rules and consequences." — NorthWeight3580

5. The “bulldozer” parent

"The parent who removes all obstacles/challenges from a child’s life so they don’t learn about perseverance, problem solving, failure (sometimes you can try hard and still not get the reward) and learning from mistakes - unless the goal is to develop a highly anxious person - then, being a bulldozer parent is great." — spinefexmouse

6. Stage-mom syndrome

"Abusing the talents of your child just to boost your self image in society." — sweettooth_92

7. Nonstop supervision

"Hovering over them at every turn. Whatever happened to tossing them in a play area in another room and letting them create, explore, and get the occasional bumps?" — ansibley

8. Not believing the teacher

"'My kid never lies to me.' Seriously. Parents absolutely should be their kid’s biggest supporter. But support sometimes means holding the kid responsible when they don’t do the right thing." — jdith123

9. "No talking back!"

"If this also counts... Parents who punish their kids for speaking up or otherwise explaining something, saying that they're 'talking back.' I honestly don't get why most parents refuse to admit they're not always right sometimes. Besides, what if their kid one day comes up to them and says another adult is touching them inappropriately?" — EntryRepresentative5

10. Helicopter parenting

"Kids need freedom to explore the world, get dirty, engage in free play. I am not advocating putting the child outside on a Saturday morning and telling them to come home when the street lights come on, but an age acceptable level of freedom." — Cat_Astrophe_X

11. Pushing them too hard

"Pushing them too hard in sports, academics, etc. Like pushing til they need therapy or get injured, no free time, no downtime. FFS, they only get to be young & without excessive responsibilities once." — Oh-Oh-Ophelia

12. Tablets in public

"Loud cartoons and games on tablets in public places." — StarrCreationsLLC

13. Potty training too late

"Oh man, I’m a nanny and work in daycare. I can talk so much about this. One is late potty training. Waiting to potty train a child is more and more common. Which I generally agree with. Wait until they’re 2.5-3 and knock it out. Some take longer, some are probably ready earlier. Better than rushing it and causing issues. What this has turned into. Not potty training. I nanny a 4 year old that is still in pull ups. She is more than capable of using the potty. Our 4 year old classroom just installed a diaper genie because so many 4 year olds are starting preschool in diapers. My best friend who is a Kindergarten teacher had 2 kids start kindergarten in diapers. Luckily they’re potty trained now." — cleaning-meaning

14. Kids on social media

"Creating social media channels for your children where they proceed to upload videos and photos of their kids. Perfect place for pedophiles." — AJSK18

15. Too much structure

​"I guess the overall trend of prioritizing academics/extracurriculars and college admissions over everything else. Give your kids some chores and let them hang out with their friends outside of structured sports and musical activities!" — hausfrau224

16. Tablet addiction

"Constantly giving your kid(s) a tablet or cellphone to keep them busy because you can't be bothered to actually be a parent or pay attention to them." — ZRuneDemonX

17. Letting the kid make all the choices

"I believe kids should have reasonable choices, like what their snack is and the character that's on their bedspread, but you can't let your 3 year old decide when you're allowed to leave your house. The world doesn't work that way." — cihojuda

18. Silence

"Saying 'what goes on in this house, stays in this house.' I know hundreds of victims of abuse, go through years of pain because of this phrase." — Dixie_Maclant

19. Birthdays

"The social media trend that keeps upping the expectations for birthday parties and any celebration connected to a kid. When I was a kid, birthdays consisted of a handmade invitation made by me, a cake from the grocery store, food that my Mom cooked and then inviting some friends and family over for games. Today's expectation is that every monthversary and half-birthday consist of a huge arch of balloons that will end up in the trash, a customized three-tier fondant cake, gift wrapping that color-coordinates with the themed party favors and of course, a very intentional outfit for the numerous photo ops that will take up most of the day. Anything for the 'gram, right? Don't even get me started on gender reveal announcements." — littlebunsenburner

20. Parent, not friend

"Trying to be your kid's 'friend,' not a parent. A parent is there to provide guidance and responsible behavior to model. Yes, sometimes making their actions have consequences and setting boundaries can be difficult and they'll not be too happy with you. That's part of the job. Ultimately I think that will result in a healthier relationship than being the "cool" permissive parent. I've seen results of that style of (not) parenting with very sad outcomes." — DataPlenty

21. You're not special

"Perpetuating the myth that one's children are somehow special. With about 97% certainty, they are not. Teaching them that they are just sets them up for crushing disappointment down the road. It's far better to raise kids to believe they are ordinary people with a few gifts, but also some flaws and weaknesses." — AssistantToTheSensei


This article originally appeared on 2.20.23

From Your Site Articles
parenting
Health

Conflict expert shares the 1 phrase you can use to stop an argument from happening

It'll make people agree with you, too.

via Canva/Photos

A guy having a collaborative conversation.

The quickest way to stop having a constructive dialog with someone is when they become defensive. This usually results in them digging in their heels and making you defensive. This can result in a vicious cycle of back-and-forth defensive behavior that can feel impossible to break. Once that happens, the walls go up, the gloves come off and resolving the situation becomes tough.

Amanda Ripley, author of “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out,” says in her book that you can prevent someone you disagree with from becoming defensive by being curious about their opinion.

Ripley is a bestselling author and the co-founder of Good Conflict, a media and training company that helps people reimagine conflict.

How to have a constructive conversation

Let’s say you believe the room should be painted red and your spouse says it should be blue. Instead of saying, “I think blue is ugly,” you can say, “It’s interesting that you say that…” and ask them to explain why they chose blue.

The key phrase is: “It’s interesting that you say that…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsPeople coming to an agreement. via Canva/Photos

When you show the other person that you genuinely care about their thoughts and appreciate their reasoning, they let down their guard. This makes them feel heard and encourages them to hear your side as well. This approach also encourages the person you disagree with to consider coming up with a collaborative solution instead of arguing to defend their position.

It’s important to assume the other person has the best intentions while listening to them make their case. “To be genuinely curious, we need to refrain from judgment and making negative assumptions about others. Assume the other person didn’t intend to annoy you. Assume they are doing the best they can. Assume the very best about them. You’ll appreciate it when others do it for you,” Kaitlyn Skelly at The Ripple Effect Education writes.

Phrases you can use to avoid an argument

The curiosity approach can also involve affirming the other person’s perspective while adding your own, using a phrase like, “On the one hand, I see what you’re saying. On the other hand…”

Here are some other phrases you can use:

“I wonder if…”

“It’s interesting that you say that because I see it differently…”

“I might be wrong, but…”

“How funny! I had a different reaction…”

“I hadn’t thought of it like that! For me, though, it seems…”

“I think I understand your point, though I look at it a little differently…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsTwo men high-fiving one another.via Canva/Photos

What's the best way to disagree with people?

A 2016 study from Yale University supports Ripley’s ideas. The study found that when people argue to “win,” they take a hard line and only see one correct answer in the conflict. Whereas those who want to “learn” are more likely to see that there is more than one solution to the problem. At that point, competition magically turns into collaboration.

“Being willing to hear out other perspectives and engage in dialogue that isn’t simply meant to convince the other person you’re right can lead to all sorts of unexpected insights,” psychologist and marketing Professor at Southern Methodist University tells CNBC.

In a world of strong opinions and differing perspectives, curiosity can be a superpower that helps you have more constructive conversations with those with whom you disagree. All it takes is a little humility and an open mind, and you can turn conflict into collaboration, building bridges instead of walls.

relationships
Pop Culture

Nazis demanded to know if ‘The Hobbit’ author was Jewish. He responded with a high-class burn.

J.R.R. Tolkien hated Nazi “race doctrine” and no problem telling his German publishing house about it.

J.R.R. Tolkien by Public Domain/ Wikimedia Commons Joseph Goebbels by Vitold Muratov/Wikimedia Commons

In 1933, Adolf Hitler handed the power of Jewish cultural life in Nazi Germany to his chief propagandist, Joseph Goebbels. Goebbels established a team of of regulators that would oversee the works of Jewish artists in film, theater, music, fine arts, literature, broadcasting, and the press.

Goebbels' new regulations essentially eliminated Jewish people from participating in mainstream German cultural activities by requiring them to have a license to do so.

This attempt by the Nazis to purge Germany of any culture that wasn't Aryan in origin led to the questioning of artists from outside the country.

Nazi book burning via Wikimedia Commons

In 1938, English author J. R. R. Tolkien and his British publisher, Stanley Unwin, opened talks with Rütten & Loening, a Berlin-based publishing house, about a German translation of his recently-published hit novel, "The Hobbit."

Privately, according to "1937 The Hobbit or There and Back Again," Tolkien told Unwin he hated Nazi "race-doctrine" as "wholly pernicious and unscientific." He added he had many Jewish friends and was considering abandoning the idea of a German translation altogether.

The Berlin-based publishing house sent Tolkien a letter asking for proof of his Aryan descent. Tolkien was incensed by the request and gave his publisher two responses, one in which he sidestepped the question, another in which he clapped back '30s-style with pure class.

His publisher sent the classy clap-back.

In the letter sent to Rütten & Loening, Tolkien notes that Aryans are of Indo-Iranian "extraction," correcting the incorrect Nazi aumption that Aryans come from northern Europe. He cuts to the chase by saying that he is not Jewish but holds them in high regard. "I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people," Tolkien wrote.

Tolkien also takes a shot at the race policies of Nazi Germany by saying he's beginning to regret his German surname. "The time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride," he writes.

Here's the letter sent to Rütten & Loening:

25 July 1938 20 Northmoor Road, Oxford
Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter. I regret that I am not clear as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-Iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people.

My great-great-grandfather came to England in the eighteenth century from Germany: the main part of my descent is therefore purely English, and I am an English subject — which should be sufficient. I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride.

Your enquiry is doubtless made in order to comply with the laws of your own country, but that this should be held to apply to the subjects of another state would be improper, even if it had (as it has not) any bearing whatsoever on the merits of my work or its sustainability for publication, of which you appear to have satisfied yourselves without reference to my Abstammung.
I trust you will find this reply satisfactory, and
remain yours faithfully,

J. R. R. Tolkien

assets.rebelmouse.io

This article originally appeared on 2.15.22

From Your Site Articles
humanity
Modern Families

Do you have a "living room family" or a "bedroom family"?

This 'debate' is all the rage on TikTok. But one is not better than the other.

alexxx1915/TikTok

TikTok user alexxx1915 recently posted a short video with the caption: "I just learned the term 'living room family' and I never understood why my kids never played in their rooms when I always did as a kid."

She briefly shows her kids hanging out in the living room with their pet dog and some toys scattered around the floor, before panning to her own face and giving a sort of sentimental look. The simple, ten-second clip struck a huge nerve with parents, racking up over 25 million views and thousands of heartfelt comments.





@alexxx1915

#livingroomfamily #fypシ

What are "living room families" and "bedroom families"?

This idea has been going around for a while on social media.

Simply put, a living room family is a family that congregates in the living room, or any common space in the household. Kids play in the same space where the adults relax — and things are often messy, as a result. Everyone interacts with each other and spends lots of time together. Bedrooms are reserved mostly for sleeping and dressing.

A bedroom family, on the other hand, is where the kids spend more time in their rooms. They play there, watch TV, and maybe even eat meals. Typically, the main rooms of the house are kept neat and tidy — you won't find a lot of toys scattered about — and family time spent together is more structured and planned ahead rather than casual.

"Living room families" has become the latest aspirational term on TikTok. Everyone wants to be a living room family!

The implication of being a bedroom family, or having 'room kids', is that perhaps they don't feel safe or comfortable or even allowed to take up room in the rest of the house, or to be around the adults.

"I remember my brother coming round once and he just sat in silence while watching my kids play in livingroom. After a while he looked at me and said 'It's so nice that your kids want to be around you'" one commenter said on alexxx1915's video.

"I thought my kids hated their rooms 🥺 turns out they like me more" said another.

"You broke a generational curse. Good job mama!" said yet another.

There's so much that's great about having a family that lives out in the open — especially if you were raised feeling like you had to hide in your room.

In my own household, we're definitely a living room family. We're around each other constantly, and the house is often a mess because of it. Learning about this term makes me feel a little better that my kids want to be around us and feel comfortable enough to get their 'play mess' all over the living room.

The mess is a sign of the love and comfort we all share together.

But the big twist is that it's also perfectly fine if your kids — and you! — like a little more solitary time.

boy playing with toys on the floorGavyn Alejandro/Unsplash

Being a 'bedroom family' is actually perfectly OK.

There's a similar discourse that took place last year about living room parents vs bedroom parents. The general consensus seemed to be that it was better to be a living room parent, who relaxed out in the open versus taking alone time behind closed doors.

But it really doesn't have to be one or the other, and neither is necessarily better.

Making your kids feel relegated to their room is, obviously, not great. It's not a good thing if they feel like they're not allowed to exist in and play in the rest of the house.

But if they just like hanging out in their room? Nothing wrong with that at all! And same goes for parents.

Alone time is important for parents and kids alike, and everyone needs different amounts of it to thrive.

Kids with certain special needs, like being on the autism spectrum, may be absolutely thrilled to spend lots of time in their rooms, for example.

So are you a living room family or a bedroom family? Turns out, it doesn't really matter, as long as your family loves each other and allows everyone to be exactly who they are.

From Your Site Articles
parents
Pop Culture

Here’s a paycheck for a McDonald’s worker. And here's my jaw dropping to the floor.

So we've all heard the numbers, but what does that mean in reality? Here's one year's wages — yes, *full-time* wages. Woo.

Making a little over 10,000 for a yearly salary.

I've written tons of things about minimum wage, backed up by fact-checkers and economists and scholarly studies. All of them point to raising the minimum wage as a solution to lifting people out of poverty and getting folks off of public assistance. It's slowly happening, and there's much more to be done.

But when it comes right down to it, where the rubber meets the road is what it means for everyday workers who have to live with those wages. I honestly don't know how they do it.

Ask yourself: Could I live on this small of a full-time paycheck? I know what my answer is.

(And note that the minimum wage in many parts of the county is STILL $7.25, so it would be even less than this).

paychecks, McDonalds, corporate power, broken system

One year of work at McDonalds grossed this worker $13,811.18.

assets.rebelmouse.io

The YouTube channel Just Frugal Me discussed the viral paycheck and noted there's absolutely nothing wrong with working at McDonald's. More than 2 million people in the U.S. alone work for the fast food giant. The worker's paycheck shows they put in 72 hours over the pay period making $8.75 per hour. Before taxes, that's $631 for the week. Just Frugal Me's breakdown is even more eye opening, breaking down this person's pay after taxes and weighed across average rent and utility costs. Spoiler Alert: the total costs for basic necessities far outweighs what this person is making even while working 12 hours per day. But they do make too much to qualify for Medicaid, meaning they will have to go out and buy their own health insurance.

Even in states like California, where the state's $20 minimum wage ensures that people earn nearly three times as much as the federal minimum wage, which remains as low as when this paycheck first made the rounds nearly 10 years ago.

Still, even for a worker that maxed out at 40 hours per week and took zero vacation or sick time, that's only a little over $41,000 per year. That's barely half the median wage in the state of $78,000 and far below a sustainable living wage in cities like Los Angeles.


This story originally appeared on 02.26.15. It has been updated to reflect new information.

From Your Site Articles
Science

Conjoined twins with fused brains separated; surgeons practiced for months in virtual reality

Arthur and Bernardo finally get to see each other face to face.

Image by sasint/Canva

Surgeons prepared to separate 3-year-old conjoined twins in Brazil using virtual reality.

The things human beings have figured out how to do boggles the mind sometimes, especially in the realm of medicine.

It wasn't terribly long ago that people with a severe injury had to liquor up, bite a stick, have a body part sewn up or sawed off and hope for the best. (Sorry for the visual, but it's true.) The discoveries of antibiotics and anesthesia alone have completely revolutionized human existence, but we've gone well beyond that with what our best surgeons can accomplish.

Surgeries can range from fairly simple to incredibly complex, but few surgeries are more complicated than separating conjoined twins with combined major organs. That's why the recent surgical separation of conjoined twin boys with fused brains in Brazil is so incredible.


The twins, Bernardo and Arthur Lima, are almost 4 years old and have never seen one another's face. They've spent their lives conjoined at the top of their heads, facing opposite directions. Born as craniopagus twins (joined at the cranium), their brains were also fused together, making their separation extremely complex. According to the BBC, they've been cared for at the Instituto Estadual do Cérebro Paulo Niemeyer (Paulo Niemeyer State Brain Institute) in Rio de Janeiro for the past two and a half years.

Surgeon Noor ul Owase Jeelani is the founder of medical charity Gemini Untwined, which funded the surgery. He helped lead the team of nearly 100 medical workers who worked for months to prepare for the boys' separation, which was one of the most complicated of its kind.

Jeelani told the BBC that it was the first time surgeons in separate countries practiced by operating in the same "virtual reality room" together, wearing VR headsets.

"It's just wonderful," he said. "It's really great to see the anatomy and do the surgery before you actually put the children at any risk. You can’t imagine how reassuring this is for the surgeons. To do it in virtual reality was just really man-on-Mars stuff."

Watch Jeelani explain how they prepared for the procedure:

Prior attempts to separate the twins had been unsuccessful, making the surgery even more challenging due to scar tissue. However, after multiple surgeries that took more than 33 hours collectively, the boys were successfully separated in June.

“It was without a doubt the most complex surgery of my career,” said neurosurgeon Gabriel Mufarrej of the Paulo Niemeyer State Brain Institute, according to EuroNews. “At the beginning, nobody thought they would survive. It is already historic that both of them could be saved."

Jeelani told the BBC that the boys' heart rates and blood pressure were "through the roof" for four days after the surgery—until they were reunited and touched hands.

According to Reuters, Bernardo and Arthur are the oldest twins with fused brains to be successfully separated. They will spend the next six months in rehabilitation.

Congratulations to the Lima family and to the global team that combined dedication, perseverance and the miracle of modern technology to create a brighter future for these young boys.


This article originally appeared on 08.04.22

From Your Site Articles
Trending Stories