5 ms·

I like the idea, but man that is some serious military parenting.

by quickthrower2 7y ago

xupybd 7y ago
I don't know how else you could do it with that many kids.
- reitanqild 7y ago
  As someone who grew up in a technically poor (meaning it didn't feel that way since they hid it well for us) with a comparable number of siblings (won't say exactly how many as to avoid fingerprinting), I know it can be done without military dicipline, because we had nothing of that. How they did it is more of a mystery even if I saw it first hand. And today I feel I really struggle to let my children experience the fantastic childhood I had, even though I have less than half as many kids as my parents had - and a way better job.
- xvector 7y ago
  Simple. You don’t have that many kids in the first place. Step 1 of “common-sense responsible parenting in a post hunter-gatherer society.”
  - rjf72 7y ago
    This leads to a great paradox. I don't, on the surface, disagree with you. If everybody had 12 children the world would rapidly descend into chaos and dystopia. So it seems rather self evident that people should not have 12 children as a matter of, as you said, common sense. Yet the issue is that today there is a strong correlation between high religiosity, low education, low income and high fertility. This is worldwide and nation wide. For instance this [1] is a table of fertility by income in the US. People earning < $10k reproduce at a rate about 50% greater than those earning > $200k with a perfectly smooth transition between those two incomes. This is a source to also demonstrate the religiosity scaling, which is similarly smooth. [2] Think about the lives of people growing up in those < $10k homes. Their parents are going to be disproportionately poorly educated and highly religious. And on the scale between completely irresponsible and completely responsible, where do you expect a person who chooses to have children when they have income of less than $10k to fall on average? And outside the home it's not going to be much better. They're likely to live disproportionately in high crime urban areas which tend to be viral. Dysgenic fertility also ties directly in to this all. The generation of tomorrow is determined in large part by the generation of today. What values will they be raised with? What will they think of education? What will be their views towards other people? Will their hereditary factors be favorable or unfavorable? These questions are largely answered by whom their parents are. And so this leads to the great paradox. Those that would engage in 'responsible fertility' are the exact people that should be doing the exact opposite. If somebody has the willpower and social consideration to voluntarily cede the strongest urge available to a human, they need to pass their genes and views onto the next generation. Yet by engaging in responsible fertility, they are doing the exact opposite and effectively removing themselves from the gene pool or, at best, minimizing their effect upon it. If you look at any given baby we can view it as a lottery in determining who their parents are and consequently what life they will live. By engaging in 'responsibility fertility' we're all collectively rigging the game against these babies. Ultimately responsible fertility is paradoxically anything but. [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam... [2] - https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-distribution/ https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-di...
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  Here are your chores. There are lots. Once you've done them and your schoolwork is good enough do whatever you want, by which I mean if I see you being idle I will find work for you so don’t let me see you being idle. That’s more or less how my parents were raised and they both care from big families. Military discipline it was not.
IceDane 7y ago
I can't help but agree. There is obviously a need for organization if you have so many kids you're basically running a kindergarten, but it sounds like these kids grew up in a military school or something. The best thing my parents ever did for me was to give me freedom to grow up on my own.
- avinium 7y ago
  Is it fair to assume the author is a Mormon? From my limited understanding, large families are the norm for Mormons and I'm guessing there's a lot more structure in that kind of community. By contrast, my father came from a much laxer 5 child family, and was the only one who went to university. I can't imagine how anyone would manage with 12.
  - shijie 7y ago
    Member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon) here. 12 is a lot. Like a lot.
  - woodruffw 7y ago
    The author's other article[1] talks about their Mormonism and other subjects of faith. [1]: https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-your-children/ https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-y...
  - xvector 7y ago
    The author does mention he is Mormon[1]. > My wife and I are religious and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [...] > With no religious upbringing, [children] have no way to measure the goodness of other organizations, as they have no foundation. > They participated in the religious activities: we were the parents, they did not have a choice. [1]: https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-your-children/ https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-y...
- mixmastamyk 7y ago
  It sounds like they got enough freedom, they just had to learn to take care of themselves as well. What does freedom mean to you?

I like the idea, but man that is some serious military parenting.

xupybd 7y ago

I don't know how else you could do it with that many kids.

reitanqild 7y ago
As someone who grew up in a technically poor (meaning it didn't feel that way since they hid it well for us) with a comparable number of siblings (won't say exactly how many as to avoid fingerprinting), I know it can be done without military dicipline, because we had nothing of that. How they did it is more of a mystery even if I saw it first hand. And today I feel I really struggle to let my children experience the fantastic childhood I had, even though I have less than half as many kids as my parents had - and a way better job.
xvector 7y ago
Simple. You don’t have that many kids in the first place. Step 1 of “common-sense responsible parenting in a post hunter-gatherer society.”
- rjf72 7y ago
  This leads to a great paradox. I don't, on the surface, disagree with you. If everybody had 12 children the world would rapidly descend into chaos and dystopia. So it seems rather self evident that people should not have 12 children as a matter of, as you said, common sense. Yet the issue is that today there is a strong correlation between high religiosity, low education, low income and high fertility. This is worldwide and nation wide. For instance this [1] is a table of fertility by income in the US. People earning < $10k reproduce at a rate about 50% greater than those earning > $200k with a perfectly smooth transition between those two incomes. This is a source to also demonstrate the religiosity scaling, which is similarly smooth. [2] Think about the lives of people growing up in those < $10k homes. Their parents are going to be disproportionately poorly educated and highly religious. And on the scale between completely irresponsible and completely responsible, where do you expect a person who chooses to have children when they have income of less than $10k to fall on average? And outside the home it's not going to be much better. They're likely to live disproportionately in high crime urban areas which tend to be viral. Dysgenic fertility also ties directly in to this all. The generation of tomorrow is determined in large part by the generation of today. What values will they be raised with? What will they think of education? What will be their views towards other people? Will their hereditary factors be favorable or unfavorable? These questions are largely answered by whom their parents are. And so this leads to the great paradox. Those that would engage in 'responsible fertility' are the exact people that should be doing the exact opposite. If somebody has the willpower and social consideration to voluntarily cede the strongest urge available to a human, they need to pass their genes and views onto the next generation. Yet by engaging in responsible fertility, they are doing the exact opposite and effectively removing themselves from the gene pool or, at best, minimizing their effect upon it. If you look at any given baby we can view it as a lottery in determining who their parents are and consequently what life they will live. By engaging in 'responsibility fertility' we're all collectively rigging the game against these babies. Ultimately responsible fertility is paradoxically anything but. [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-fam... [2] - https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-distribution/ https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-di...
barry-cotter 7y ago
Here are your chores. There are lots. Once you've done them and your schoolwork is good enough do whatever you want, by which I mean if I see you being idle I will find work for you so don’t let me see you being idle. That’s more or less how my parents were raised and they both care from big families. Military discipline it was not.

IceDane 7y ago

I can't help but agree. There is obviously a need for organization if you have so many kids you're basically running a kindergarten, but it sounds like these kids grew up in a military school or something. The best thing my parents ever did for me was to give me freedom to grow up on my own.

avinium 7y ago
Is it fair to assume the author is a Mormon? From my limited understanding, large families are the norm for Mormons and I'm guessing there's a lot more structure in that kind of community. By contrast, my father came from a much laxer 5 child family, and was the only one who went to university. I can't imagine how anyone would manage with 12.
- shijie 7y ago
  Member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon) here. 12 is a lot. Like a lot.
- woodruffw 7y ago
  The author's other article[1] talks about their Mormonism and other subjects of faith. [1]: https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-your-children/ https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-y...
- xvector 7y ago
  The author does mention he is Mormon[1]. > My wife and I are religious and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [...] > With no religious upbringing, [children] have no way to measure the goodness of other organizations, as they have no foundation. > They participated in the religious activities: we were the parents, they did not have a choice. [1]: https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-your-children/ https://qz.com/296701/how-to-keep-your-wealth-from-ruining-y...
mixmastamyk 7y ago
It sounds like they got enough freedom, they just had to learn to take care of themselves as well. What does freedom mean to you?