My friend Bridget Phetasy recently replied to this highly accurate meme on X, and it made me laugh.

Possibly drunk, I felt compelled to respond.

Challenge accepted.

I had my assignment.

I’d write about all the ways my wife and I could raise our two kids Gen X and how in the end it would be really good for them for reasons of confidence, self-reliance and proper taste in music.

Then a funny thing happened.

As I started thinking about how we could raise our kids Gen X, I realized … WE ALREADY WERE.

Every time I thought of a funny or real Gen X thing, it was like, oh hey what, we’re doing that. Obviously, it’s not 1988, and we’re not checking every single Gen X box, but, come on, our third graders already have very strong opinions about Full House.

Now … I know what some of you are thinking.

You might say it reflects poorly upon me not to have a parenting strategy of which I am even conscious at all.

My response is that it is the most Gen X thing possible to not even have a parenting strategy.

Oh, you’re a Tiger Parent? I’m a Keep My Kids Alive and Teach Them Not to Be A Chucklehead Parent, nice to meet you. Yes, I was born between 1965 and 1980. How could you tell?

Without even ever discussing it, my wife Jen (a standard issue Gen-X name if there ever was one) and I are teaching our children The Old Ways. //

By today’s standards, our childhood was basically a series of OSHA violations. We ate too many Pop-Tarts, rode in the back of station wagons without seatbelts, lived in constant fear of being kidnapped by a creepy guy in a white van named Lester and got most of our hydration and immunity from garden hoses. But we also learned how to exist without constant supervision, how to entertain ourselves without a screen, how to handle differences of opinion away from adults and how to venture forth from the house without a subcutaneous GPS chip.

The Old Ways are the good ways.

With any luck, one day my kids will grow up, roll their eyes at the next generation, and mutter, they’re the worst. //

A Gen-X sibling who had sisters and a single landline will be the one who brings peace to the Middle East.

This book contains 7 easy ways to motivate someone with Asperger's to do daily tasks and take charge of their own life... without arguing, manipulation or stress. It's a quick, actionable read that is based in our own experiences of living & growing up being diagnosed with Asperger's and contains tools, communication strategies and step-by-step advice you can put to work immediately.

Red-Line motivation is by far the most commonly used kind of motivation out there. A Red-Line Motivator’s go-to question is, “What can I do, give, or take away that will produce a result (a change in behavior) now?” Red-Liners love carrots and sticks, rewards and punishments; it’s all about control.

If a Red-Liner wants you to do something, then they will find the sweetest carrot they are willing to give and dangle it in front of you until you start chasing after it (money, video games, love and acceptance, etc.) Alternatively, they will find the scariest punishment they can and throw it at you until you move (losing privileges, yelling, withholding love and affection, etc.) They will bribe, manipulate, control, and coerce you to try to get you to do what they want.

Basically, Red-Liners seek to reduce human motivation to its most basic elements. They assume that people avoid pain and effort, and that they will only work hard if moved upon by an outside force or a biological urge (hunger, sleep, sex, etc.) Red-Liners see human beings as little more than animals responding to stimuli. Trained rats in a cage will press a lever over and over if you give them food. A yappy dog with a shock collar can be conditioned to stop barking. Similarly, a Red-Liner believes that you can motivate humans by tapping into that same desire to avoid pain and seek out pleasure. //

Psychologists have known for nearly a century that people will respond to the right rewards and punishments (they call it conditioning). Meanwhile, kings and rulers have understood this basic truth for millennia. You have to admit, it’s a rather elegant idea. If you want more of a particular behavior, reward it. If you want less, punish it.

However, nowadays we have decades of scientific research showing that the carrot-and-stick philosophy we hold dear actually has quite a few holes. Parents, teachers, and managers are gradually discovering that people, particularly people with Asperger’s, don’t always respond to external influences in the ways we would hope or expect. //

In a classic 1978 study, three psychologists investigated and measured the happiness levels of paraplegics and lottery winners. They found that less than a year after experiencing one of these life-changing events both the lottery winners and the paraplegics had mostly returned to their baseline levels of happiness. We would normally expect lottery winners to be much happier than regular folks. However, they were, on average, only slightly happier. Similarly, the paraplegics were only slightly less happy than others. For the most part, they were just as content with life as they had been before that fateful tragedy befell them.

Human beings are truly incredible at adapting to almost anything. Given enough time, both positive and negative changes in our lives can quickly become our new “normal.” When this happens they no longer have a significant impact on our day-to-day emotions. Scientists call this phenomenon hedonic adaptation. It crops up everywhere. //

The more Margaret uses this Red-Line approach, the more Johnny goes into Defense Mode and lives in a state of fear. He’s shut down and angry. Any semblance of trust or mutual understanding in their relationship has been destroyed. In fact, he might even start missing school just to assert his independence and regain a feeling of control.

As shown in the Red-Line graph, each new attempt to motivate will produce fewer results, and, in the long-term, will continually require a sweeter carrot or a scarier stick in order to maintain its original effectiveness. //

Contrary to what we would expect, introducing an expectation with a contingent reward attached actually decreased the rewarded behavior instead of increasing it. Why? Because human beings are incredibly adaptive. When this new drawing experience taught the children that drawing a picture=compensation, they got the message loud and clear. The children used to draw because they enjoyed it for its own sake (intrinsic motivation). Now they will only draw if they’re expecting to receive some kind of reward. //

What does hedonic adaptation have to do with motivation? Well, it means that any reward or punishment consistently used to motivate your child will quickly be adapted to and thus rendered ineffective. //

Choosing to use Red-Line carrots, sticks, and other if/then methods of motivation is not inherently bad and wrong, nor is it always good and right. Red-Line is simply a tool that is uniquely suited for specific kinds of situations.

A hammer is great if you need to drive a nail into wood. It’s less than ideal if you’re trying to perform surgery. The problems arise when you encounter a situation that requires a tool, you look into your toolbox, and you discover nothing but a single, lonely hammer. You’ll probably end up using the hammer because, after all, it’s better than nothing, right? //

Blue-Line Motivation is all about holistic influence. This means that a Blue-Liner recognizes people as whole, complex human beings who are often intrinsically motivated. They know that people are so much more than animals that simply avoid pain and seek out pleasure.

A Blue-Liner will tap into this innate drive by approaching people and situations from a place of trust and love. They sincerely believe you can and will make good choices for yourself and others. They assume that you’re not necessarily unmotivated. Rather, they are open to the possibility that you might just be scared, stressed, missing resources, or lacking understanding, etc. A Blue-Liner will not try to “force” things to happen, or control you from the outside with carrots and sticks. They will work with and catalyze the natural, intrinsic motivation processes that already exist inside you and within the situation.

However, the Blue-Line path comes with one costly trade-off. A Blue-Liner will need to put in most of the work on the front end, and they will see few (if any) results for the first while. That’s just how the organic process of intrinsic motivation works. Blue-Liners are 100% okay with that because they understand that once you hit the tipping point (i.e. the point where you’re intrinsically motivated and you truly choose it for yourself), then the whole system will become largely self-sustaining.

Blue-Line is essentially the opposite of Red-Line. As more time passes Red-Line requires more and more work, whereas Blue-Line requires less and less. In the end, both approaches to motivation require work and effort. There’s no getting around that. The trap of Red Line is that it looks so easy in the beginning, while it’s actually the more difficult out of the two. The work is still there, it’s just hidden. A Red-liner will undoubtedly find more and more of it as time passes and they slide further down the slope. They have to keep working endlessly and putting in more effort as they attempt to produce the same result. Blue-Line motivation, on the other hand, can get to a point where the parent (or teacher, therapist, whomever) can step back and watch their child soar. //

When you’re looking to cultivate the “Blue,” intrinsic, self-sustaining kind of motivation, then there’s three key ingredients you need. They are as follows:

• Capability
• Belief
• Desire

//

A Red-Liner is a like a carpenter using their tools to shape, manipulate, and polish an inanimate block of wood in order to produce a specific result. A Blue-Liner is more like a gardener, using their tools to adapt the environment and add the necessary resources in order to give the living plant what it needs to grow and flourish on its own.

Catherine Pakaluk and Emily Reynolds’ new book, ‘Hannah’s Children,’ studies mothers of large families and concludes they may hold the key for solving many societal ills. //

While there is much to be said about the particular reasons people choose to have large families, Pakaluk writes that there is one beautiful commonality among these women:

I suppose it boils down to some sort of deeply held thing, possibly from childhood — a platinum conviction — that the capacity to conceive children, to receive them into my arms, to take them home, to dwell with them in love, to sacrifice for them as they grow, and to delight in them as the Lord delights in us, that that thing, call it motherhood, call it childbearing, that that thing is the most worthwhile thing in the world — the most perfect thing I am capable of doing.

Hannah
Pakaluk opens with the story of Hannah, a woman from a Reformed Jewish background whose search for meaning led her ultimately to procreation and the proliferation of family through child-bearing, what she called “this key to infinity.” At the time of her interview, Hannah had seven children, and described her choice to have a large family as a “deliberate rejection of an autonomous, customized, self-regarding lifestyle in favor of a way of life intentionally limited by the demands of motherhood.” //

The modern challenge to traditional and cohesive family roles has absolutely impacted family growth patterns, the book argues, and will likely continue to do so. And the declining population will impact future workforces, infrastructure, and entitlement programs far beyond basic demography.

“The political and economic consequences of these trends cannot be overstated,” Pakaluk writes. “Birth rates are falling because of tradeoffs women and households are making — tradeoffs between children and other things that they value.”

‘Home Alone’ isn’t just a funny Christmas movie. It displays a mother’s transformation from selfish, absentee parent to devoted loving mother.

Be A Man

Nick Freitas
Playlist
•
9 videos
•

• What They Don’t Tell Fathers About Raising Sons
• Three Things I Learned Raising Daughters
• Why Dads Should Be Dangerous
• Should You Get Married Young?
• What Every Son Needs To Hear From His Father

Florida has long been the most prominent battleground in the ongoing struggle between the rights of parents and the elitists who wish to violate them.

The latest skirmish in this war centers on HB 1069 which, among other things, gives parents and taxpayers more of a say in which books and materials are made available in public school libraries. //

The law empowers parents to raise objections to certain types of material. These objections would be taken into account by the district, which will work with the community to decide whether the content will be removed, restricted, or allowed.

This has nothing to do with censorship, as folks on the left contend. It has everything to do with parents being able to decide what their children are learning in the schools they fund through taxes. It is a process through which local communities have a stronger voice in what their children are seeing and consuming in the state’s educational institutions.

For most people, this concept is a no-brainer. Parents are the ones responsible for raising their children. Moreover, schools are funded using money taken from parents in the form of taxes. Why shouldn’t they have more of a say in what schools are teaching their children? //

The suit complains that Florida’s law requires books to be removed without consulting “trained professionals, such as teachers or media specialists.”

The notion that only governmental and corporate “experts” should decide what books are appropriate for school libraries smacks of elitism. This perspective implies that only our betters are equipped to know what our children should and should not be learning in class. //

The plaintiffs cannot win this lawsuit. It is not just about books. It is about parental rights. Corporate and governmental interests should not supersede the rights of parents to determine how their children are raised and educated just because there are some folks who want small children to view sexually explicit content.

A lot is said about what a good father is. He's strong, present, tough but fair. All of these are good qualities to have, but one that is ignored in today's society, or denounced once identified, is one you don't often hear about.

Indifference to worldly pressures. //

Brandon Morse @TheBrandonMorse
·
This is fantastic.
At the end of the day, the demand to validate lifestyles of others is going to fall flat on the ears of a father that loves his children, because it's a father's job to stand between his children and danger. Rage and cancel all you want, but a good father… Show more
Nickmercs @NICKMERCS
Stay true to your beliefs
Embedded video
4:24 PM · Sep 10, 2024

This indifference to the world's demands is fueled entirely by his love for his child.

This quality is often the most frustrating thing to the world. Fathers are belittled, disregarded, called "toxic," and hated for what I believe is this often unspoken quality.

Getting to the child is very difficult with a father standing in the way saying "no."

If they can't get to the child, they'll go after the father. They'll try to shame him, pressure him, threaten him, and make him into a pariah. Yet it's the father's duty to stay strong, shrug, and not budge. It's his job to be indifferent to the demands made upon him and his child. His job isn't just to protect the home physically, it's to protect the home's heart as well. //

It can be overwhelming, but sometimes the father must stand up amid all that and say "no, not in my house." He has to reject the pressure on behalf of his family and take on the responsibility of being that wall. You'll often hear this referred to as despotism in the home, but really, it's a father having a calming influence in the lives of his family members, keeping them from sinking into a mire of confusion and harm.

Fathers are built for the fight, but oftentimes the fight isn't physical or forceful. It's calm, quiet, and immovable. It's shrugging at an angry and demanding world, and softly telling it to move on.

Because that's what fathers are built to do. They hold the fort. Their defend the bridge. They protect the home.

Ever since my little boy came into the world, I've steadily become a different person than I was before he was around. The more he grows, the more I do, or at the very least, the more I notice my perspectives change. //

Angela Belcamino @AngelaBelcamino
·
Imagine being 42, child-free, stress-free, and being this happy.

The right hates this.
0:20 / 0:20
6:58 PM · Jul 28, 2024

Is being child-free less stressful? Absolutely. At nearly two, my son is a gremlin who has two modes; asleep or going wild. When he's not in the house, I feel my muscles relax and my focus return.

But ease does not make for happiness. The question isn't whether your life is easier, the question is whether your life is filled with joy. That little gremlin is a joy to have. He gives my life far more purpose than something beyond myself and represents something much larger than me. Watching him grow is like watching a slow miracle unfold right before my eyes. My life is harder with him in it, but far better overall.

I don't need to use the "when you're on your deathbed, you'll want to be surrounded by your children and not your cats" argument. I can tell you that the joy is in the present, turning these little gremlins into proper people.

But the grandest of childless takes are the ones I see in positions of power. I'm amazed at how often school boards are made up of childless bureaucrats.

Pelican State officials have approved a proposal that says sex is “immutable,” that a “female” is someone who produces eggs absent a biological anomaly, and that a “male” is someone who produces sperm.

The proposal also says that K-12 educators must call a minor-age student by the name or pronoun listed on the child’s birth certificate.

Those provisions are similar to The Heritage Foundation’s model bills—and are bulwarks against dangerous gender ideology threatening women and girls. (Heritage founded The Daily Signal in 2014.)

Gov. Jeff Landry’s signature would make Louisiana the eighth state to adopt a version of a “Given Name Act,” which requires parental permission before a teacher can socially affirm a child’s confusion about his or her sex by using a name or pronoun that does not correspond to the student’s official records.

Lawmakers should insert parents back into important health-related conversations educators may have with the parents’ students. Children confused about their sex need compassion and wise counsel—and for their primary caregivers to be a part of those conversations.

But there are ads that can move you. There are bad ones—think Bud Light and Dylan Mulvaney—and there are good ones. Anyone who is old enough to remember “where’s the beef” knows that it became a catchphrase throughout the ‘80s, deservedly so, IMHO.

https://youtu.be/idnwh6iDnXA //

As one user noted, "It's interesting that countries outside the US are sent advertisements that celebrate life." Good point. //

There are many commercials over the decades that we could discuss—both terrific and terrible—but my wife sent me one Sunday that maybe sort of touched my cold, hard, toxic-masculinity-filled heart just a little bit. The spot, for Coca-Cola, brilliantly sums up both the joys and trials of parenthood in the modern age. Yes, little kids are bundles of joy—but yes, they also will test your stress tolerance and bring you to the edge of exhaustion in ways you never thought possible.

Watch, and if you’re a parent, pretend to look out the window and scratch that non-existent itch in your eye.

https://twitter.com/JoshuaSteinman/status/1792257229405749750

How could America shift so babies were more welcomed, less dreaded?

Tim Carney, author of the new book “Family Unfriendly: How Our Culture Made Raising Kids Much Harder Than It Needs to Be,” has a few ideas. He’d like to see corporations offer parents their child’s birthday off every year. He wants parents to not work so hard at parenting—and to never, ever, sign up their kids for a travel sports team. He’d like to see local governments prioritize sidewalks and denser housing, which would make neighborhoods safer for kids.

But he also wants us to think about why we have a falling birth rate—and what it says about us. After World War II, America had a baby boom, while Germany experienced a baby bust. Now, we’re struggling with our own baby bust, even as we are hammered by relentless discussions of America’s failures, the threat of climate change, and more. “The spirit of the age now is what I call civilizational sadness,” says Carney. “And the sadness is a belief that we’re just not good or that humans were a mistake.” //

"Kids make us be better people. They make us aspire to be better people, both our kids and other people's kids around us," says author Tim Carney.

In Florida, a court challenge to the hotly contested Parental Rights In Education Act has ended with a settlement reached between the plaintiffs and the state. You can read through the media reports about this conclusion and see the bias plainly on display.

The Associated Press talked of “the fallout from Florida’s settlement.” The New Republic claimed the “settlement has curtailed the ‘Don’t Say Gay' Law”. The Miami Herald, in imbalanced thinking, declares “DeSantis’ homophobic law doesn’t survive court challenge intact.”

These are all very dramatic interpretations of a court agreement where the law in question was, in reality, completely upheld. //

Not a single thing about the law was affected. No elements were moved, no content was altered – not a single word has been changed. So just what are the journalism geniuses claiming? //

This new court decision has to then be regarded as a complete failure. Not only was the law upheld but no portion of it has been struck down. The settlement that was reached can better be described as a “Clarification." //

While representatives from Equity Florida pointed at the vague language of the law leading to some using it oppressively, the fact is the false negative reporting on the law created that atmosphere. Claims about the restrictions that did not exist led to adverse reactions in some areas, and it was all rooted in a lie. This is proven in the settlement terms.

The opponents are cheering all of the things they are now permitted to do today as a result, but this is coming about without having changed a single aspect of the law - meaning that all of those items were originally permitted. Yet today we have the press cheering they are allowed to do what they had always been allowed to do, and they are claiming victory while nothing has changed.

Those who refused to read the language of the law are now refusing to read the language of the settlement, and as a result, they are cheering wholesale changes taking place when they have the very same legislation in place that they had years ago. The deluded thinking is a marvel to behold. //

Quizzical
44 minutes ago
I've read the law in question. It has often been observed that the word "gay" is not contained in the law at all. For good measure, the neither the word "don't" nor "say" appears in the law, either. The word "parent" or some variation on it (parents, parental, etc.) appears 39 times. It's a law about parental rights, not about saying gay or not.