Strict Parenting

[GrandizerII]

How do you know what you're referring to is the average set?

Numbers ... by definition.

Did you take into account the number of families whose children didn't turn out to be f*cked up?

How do you know the families you're referring to aren't of a similar percentage as families who just happen to have temperamentally difficult children?

[Thumpalumpacus]

The nature vs. nurture debate has rarely ever been proposed as an either/or scenario and those that do make this proposition aren't taken seriously. Generally speaking, the nature vs. nurture debate almost exclusively deals with flushing out which is more dominant. Invoking an either/or proposition to score a cheap point is ridiculous and a straw man argument.

You can also drop in as many disorders as you like into the discussion. Keep in mind that the term disorder presupposes what is deemed normal, the concept that seems to have your panties twisted. Thumpalumpacus also explained that the references were general and not technical, relying on a charitable reading and understanding of what is meant by normal. The fact that you continued to nitpick the meaning of well known terms in general use suggests you are intentionally being a pain in the ass rather than wanting to participate in the discussion.

You are of course free to continue to state your case; however, I will be compelled to conclude that you don't know the meaning of 'normal' or 'average set'. Is this your goal here?

No need to be touchy. It has not been established that, in general, children are difficult because of their parents.

Remember that Thumpalumpacus was quoting another member complaining about children being troublesome. Antisocial children are just a small subset of these troublesome children anyway.

And even if it is a small percentage of children that are temperamentally difficult, a logical error is being committed by concluding that, therefore, it must be a big enough percentage that parents cause their children to be difficult or "fucked up". Maybe it's also a small percentage, thereby not constituting what you are referring to as "average" or "general".

I'm unsure why you read my term "fucked up" as a technical diagnosis; it wasn't intended as such. My point was at the moral level: children are born learning machines with a beautiful curiousity about every aspect of the world around them, and it takes adults to turn them into drones, or monsters.

Also, I didn't make any conclusion about the parenting based on any percentage. My conclusion about parenting being the cause of bad people is admittedly anecdotal; it's based on my personal experiences with and observations of people in my 47 years.

If you'd like, I'll make sure to include a disclaimer each time I'm speaking in a colloquial and non-technical manner.

---

Did you take into account the number of families whose children didn't turn out to be f*cked up?

Yes.

How do you know the families you're referring to aren't of a similar percentage as families who just happen to have temperamentally difficult children?

Again, I'm not talking about "temperamentally difficult" children; I was talking in moral terms.

I'm uninterested in giving you a stage for your pedantry.

[Little lunch]

I recall a few years back I was attempting to leave the grocery store, and between the doors, mom was dealing with a toddler in full meltdown mode. It was a busy day, and pretty quick, there were several of us waiting to leave, and the brat wasn't letting up on the screaming.

I turned and said to the man behind me, "Looks like we are going to be hear till mom develops some parenting skills"

Mom GLARED at me.

When I was a kid, the inconvenient meltdown problem was handled with a quick swat to the behind and lasted all of 1 second, nowadays, the meltdowns must be handled with consultations, medications, and is fraught with the peril of lifetime psychological trauma.

Sorry, but your story makes you sound like in ignorant arsehole.

[vorlon13]

John Rosemond concurs.

[Cato]

No need to be touchy. It has not been established that, in general, children are difficult because of their parents.

Remember that Thumpalumpacus was quoting another member complaining about children being troublesome. Antisocial children are just a small subset of these troublesome children anyway.

And even if it is a small percentage of children that are temperamentally difficult, a logical error is being committed by concluding that, therefore, it must be a big enough percentage that parents cause their children to be difficult or "fucked up". Maybe it's also a small percentage, thereby not constituting what you are referring to as "average" or "general".

Now we're talking. I was not being touchy; I simply wanted to get beyond the needless clarification of terms bullshit.

Setting aside genetic contribution, I can agree that parents cannot be solely accountable for behavior issues. Having been a child myself, having raised children, and observing others I think I can safely say that a parent's influence wanes as a child ages. Non-parental authority figures, peers, and societal inputs (books, tv, movies, music, internet, etc.) also have a significant impact on behavioral development. I don't think it's a stretch to say that most of us can think of one 'fucked up' person where it would be impossible to reasonably assign blame to the parents.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I didn't say it takes parents to fuck them up. I said it takes adults to fuck them up.