From: oldernow@dev.null   
      
   On 2024-08-07, D  wrote:   
      
   >>> One thing you could conclude is that the YOU MUST ACCEPT   
   >>> behaviour could be due to a bad childhood which left   
   >>> psychological scars and warped the needs the person has. A   
   >>> kind of narcissistic illness.   
   >>   
   >> Seems a reasonable theory/conclusion.   
   >>   
   >>> Then, the interesting question is... what happened to   
   >>> bringing up children in the 70s and 80s so that we today   
   >>> have this annoying trans people? Was there some kind of   
   >>> paradigm shift in bringing up children?   
   >>   
   >> How to identify the factors, their relative impact, and   
   >> then measure them now, then, and before then in order to   
   >> have sufficient data for conclusion?   
   >   
   > Very difficult! But if we solve this problem here in   
   > alt.philosophy I bet we could get a Nobel peace prize or   
   > two! ;)   
      
   It's already been solved by Jesus and others, but don't   
   expect self-centric egos to rush embrace practicing leading   
   until selflessness.   
      
   Jokes aside, it is not that far away, so at least it is still possible to   
   round up parents from the different generations and compare their   
   memories, thoughts and ideas.   
      
   > Another thing I'm thinking is if the answer is trivial and   
   > known by psychologists since decades back, but, that we   
   > have no interest, time or resources to actually implement   
   > those policies.   
      
   decades -> millennia (per the above)   
      
   > Or... what _if_ stay at home mothers, with their   
   > biologically superior empathy and caring is the key   
   > to raise children with a emotionally secure base... how   
   > would that go down with todays militant feminists and woke   
   > warriors? ;)   
      
   Too bad that's rocket science for self-centric beings.   
      
   > I read about a movement called the "Trad wife" movement   
   > where the arguments by some women is that they feel happier   
   > and more female assuming the role of a traditional stay   
   > at home mother, caring for the family, and therefore they   
   > reject the prevailing norm of todays society that women   
   > must be like small men. This is enormously provocative for   
   > social justive warriors. I always smile when I encounter   
   > those conflicts! =)   
      
   Again, simple stuff for those who get their self out of   
   the way.   
      
   > I think that is also an interesting idea. Not everyone   
   > should be a parent, and some people should be actively   
   > forbidden from procreating for the sake of themselves _and_   
   > their potential children. This is also taboo to bring up in   
   > todays society where everyone is entitled to everything. ;)   
      
   There's no limit to the stupidity unearth-able by selfish   
   selves.   
      
   >>> Modesty forbids me from saying that I think it was an   
   >>> excellent upbringing that yielded excellent results. ;)   
   >>   
   >> It certainly yielded fine language usage and typing   
   >> skills. But I'd have to hear from your wife on the   
   >> rest.... :-)   
   >   
   > You're very kind! However, my wife calls everyone I   
   > interact with online the "freak show" so I doubt she would   
   > be willing to make an appearance here. ;)   
      
   She's definitely got it right in my case! ;-)   
      
   --   
   Oh, for the love of signature silliness....   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)