4 ms·

> _A_ device free dinner? Why aren't all of them? These weird little "small gestures" make me feel like people have lost control of their homes. Why should all

by libria 9y ago

> _A_ device free dinner? Why aren't all of them? These weird little "small gestures" make me feel like people have lost control of their homes. Why should all dinners be distraction[1] free? I understand dinner is a social event for many cultures/families, but not every person wants this nor am I convinced it must be this way. I'm efficient with my eating and when the family wants to socialize we play Catan or sit around the couch and talk. Besides that, when the dinner conversation reaches an impasse, Alexa has occasionally been helpful in resolving it. It's fine if people enjoy socializing over dinner, but let's not arbitrarily assume it's morally superior. Nor should we mistakenly compare it to our own childhoods, when devices weren't as ubiquitous. We should question old habits/traditions especially when the environment has changed. [1] I'm subbing in "distraction" for "device", my kids have brought non-powered distractions to the table before.

citizenkeen 9y ago
> Why should all dinners be distraction[1] free? Sure, fine. I was mostly critiquing the notion that a "distraction" free dinner was an event that needed to be planned, as opposed to something approaching a default.
sndean 9y ago
> [1] I'm subbing in "distraction" for "device", my kids have brought non-powered distractions to the table before. This is a good point. I remember my mom getting mad when I'd bring a book to the table (c. 1995). If it's not a phone, it's something else.
- OJFord 9y ago
  I do think you might talk to me, Charles. I've had a very exhausting day! Take me out of myself!
- flukus 9y ago
  Same for me, a book or a gameboy at the dinner table would result in a clip around the ears. My parents weren't strict in the slightest, but dinner time was the 10-20 minutes where we all sat down together as a family and put up with mums political views.
- NoGravitas 9y ago
  My elder child frequently tries to bring a novel to the dinner table, as I'm sure I did at their age. But we don't allow it. Of course, the image of the paterfamilias at the breakfast table with his nose in the newspaper, ignoring his family, was a constant in the 19th and 20th centuries.
blubb-fish 9y ago
Well - maybe some people like sugar b/c it's so sweat - why not then eat it as much as you like?
erikpukinskis 9y ago
You're right. If you have other frequent means of socializing and dinner is just a time for food in mouths, then devices at the table aren't the end of the world. But there is a reason many people like to use dinner as a mandatory point of family social contact: it keeps you on a daily schedule. You can multitask: listening to stories while you chew. And it provides some resilience to changes. Like marriage, there is some value to committing to something like this "in sickness and in health". It's nice that you all want to play Catan now, but what happens when your teenager decides they don't like games anymore? Or what happens if your spouse isn't loving your approach to competition these days? Or if someone just doesn't feel like socializing? Everyone needs to eat, so in that way it's resilient to these shifting winds. If nothing else, you can sit and chew and listen to your family's voices. So I'm not disagreeing with you: there are other ways to achieve the same ends that might be more efficient or more comfortable for your family. But there are also good reasons to sacrifice a little of that in order to fix a ritual that can pay off in unpredictable ways.
- philh 9y ago
  When I don't feel like socializing, I wouldn't want to have a dinner where I can't use my phone.
  - wott 9y ago
    Reading this thread is frightening.
  - cirgue 9y ago
    Do you not think that easily available distraction is a cause of and not a solution to this problem?
tootie 9y ago
My kids watch TV or play with iPads during dinner. They are perfectly fine if not well above-average. I think it can possibly exacerbate certain bad behaviors, but it won't make good kids turn bad.
spraak 9y ago
> Why should all dinners be distraction[1] free? Well, one reason is mindfulness: being present to really just eating.
shannongreen 9y ago
> We should question old habits/traditions especially when the environment has changed. I strongly agree. I'm always surprised how much resistance to this idea I encounter, though.
- Ntrails 9y ago
  As a parent I should make whatever arbitrary rules I consider appropriate. Be that "no screens at the table" or "Don't eat with your mouth open" or "How can you have any pudd'n if you don't eat your meat?". Whether they'll make your family happier or "more perfect " according to someone elses yardstick is irrelevant. You set the boundaries, and live with the environment that they create. So set the ones that make you happier and stick with them. They may be just what your parents did, or they may be the opposite.
rhn_mk1 9y ago
> I'm subbing in "distraction" for "device", my kids have brought non-powered distractions to the table before. A distraction is not the same as a device. A screen's distraction area is just the one person using it. A general distraction can be shared by everyone at the table, making it a social thing again. That would explain why people who value the social aspect of dinners hate screens.
robertlagrant 9y ago
> It's fine if people enjoy socializing over dinner, but let's not arbitrarily assume it's morally superior. Why mischaracterise as an arbitrary moral thing to latch on to the current zeitgeist and make it seem somehow worse? It's a bit like saying getting kids to eat less junk food is an arbitrary moral imposition. Adds nothing.

by libria 9y ago

citizenkeen 9y ago

> Why should all dinners be distraction[1] free? Sure, fine. I was mostly critiquing the notion that a "distraction" free dinner was an event that needed to be planned, as opposed to something approaching a default.

sndean 9y ago

> [1] I'm subbing in "distraction" for "device", my kids have brought non-powered distractions to the table before. This is a good point. I remember my mom getting mad when I'd bring a book to the table (c. 1995). If it's not a phone, it's something else.

OJFord 9y ago
I do think you might talk to me, Charles. I've had a very exhausting day! Take me out of myself!
flukus 9y ago
Same for me, a book or a gameboy at the dinner table would result in a clip around the ears. My parents weren't strict in the slightest, but dinner time was the 10-20 minutes where we all sat down together as a family and put up with mums political views.
NoGravitas 9y ago
My elder child frequently tries to bring a novel to the dinner table, as I'm sure I did at their age. But we don't allow it. Of course, the image of the paterfamilias at the breakfast table with his nose in the newspaper, ignoring his family, was a constant in the 19th and 20th centuries.

blubb-fish 9y ago

Well - maybe some people like sugar b/c it's so sweat - why not then eat it as much as you like?

erikpukinskis 9y ago

You're right. If you have other frequent means of socializing and dinner is just a time for food in mouths, then devices at the table aren't the end of the world. But there is a reason many people like to use dinner as a mandatory point of family social contact: it keeps you on a daily schedule. You can multitask: listening to stories while you chew. And it provides some resilience to changes. Like marriage, there is some value to committing to something like this "in sickness and in health". It's nice that you all want to play Catan now, but what happens when your teenager decides they don't like games anymore? Or what happens if your spouse isn't loving your approach to competition these days? Or if someone just doesn't feel like socializing? Everyone needs to eat, so in that way it's resilient to these shifting winds. If nothing else, you can sit and chew and listen to your family's voices. So I'm not disagreeing with you: there are other ways to achieve the same ends that might be more efficient or more comfortable for your family. But there are also good reasons to sacrifice a little of that in order to fix a ritual that can pay off in unpredictable ways.

philh 9y ago
When I don't feel like socializing, I wouldn't want to have a dinner where I can't use my phone.
- wott 9y ago
  Reading this thread is frightening.
- cirgue 9y ago
  Do you not think that easily available distraction is a cause of and not a solution to this problem?

tootie 9y ago

My kids watch TV or play with iPads during dinner. They are perfectly fine if not well above-average. I think it can possibly exacerbate certain bad behaviors, but it won't make good kids turn bad.

spraak 9y ago

> Why should all dinners be distraction[1] free? Well, one reason is mindfulness: being present to really just eating.

shannongreen 9y ago

> We should question old habits/traditions especially when the environment has changed. I strongly agree. I'm always surprised how much resistance to this idea I encounter, though.

Ntrails 9y ago
As a parent I should make whatever arbitrary rules I consider appropriate. Be that "no screens at the table" or "Don't eat with your mouth open" or "How can you have any pudd'n if you don't eat your meat?". Whether they'll make your family happier or "more perfect " according to someone elses yardstick is irrelevant. You set the boundaries, and live with the environment that they create. So set the ones that make you happier and stick with them. They may be just what your parents did, or they may be the opposite.

rhn_mk1 9y ago

> I'm subbing in "distraction" for "device", my kids have brought non-powered distractions to the table before. A distraction is not the same as a device. A screen's distraction area is just the one person using it. A general distraction can be shared by everyone at the table, making it a social thing again. That would explain why people who value the social aspect of dinners hate screens.

robertlagrant 9y ago

> It's fine if people enjoy socializing over dinner, but let's not arbitrarily assume it's morally superior. Why mischaracterise as an arbitrary moral thing to latch on to the current zeitgeist and make it seem somehow worse? It's a bit like saying getting kids to eat less junk food is an arbitrary moral imposition. Adds nothing.