3 ms·

Yeah its one thing to deprive yourself of things, but when you start depriving your offspring of things, that's tough. Having a family changes all the goalpost

by axod 17y ago

Yeah its one thing to deprive yourself of things, but when you start depriving your offspring of things, that's tough. Having a family changes all the goalposts.

newsio 17y ago
So, it is preferable to deprive kids of attention/love/help with school (OP says he barely sees his children) as opposed to depriving kids of "things"?
- axod 17y ago
  There's obviously a balance. Kids need ideally both.
  - azanar 17y ago
    Do you think they need as much of the "things" as parents seem to feel obligated to provide for them now? There is no need for this false dichotomy of "things" or "complete lack of things". As I've commented on here before, I and a lot of the people I know seem to have gone through childhoods where the parents believed this trade-off was really binary. I got it less than many people, but I still would have liked to see my parents, and their parents as well, not suffer through existence so much because of "needs" they thought we had. The only reason they thought we had those needs is because all the other parents in the neighborhood reinforced that children have those needs by catering to their own children thusly. It almost seems like the same force that drives parents to obsess about the safety of their children. They don't want to seem like the parent who cares the least. The problem is that the goalposts you allude to in a higher-level comment are defined by this mechanism. I agree that goals will change -- any life change will result in resetting of goals --, but I think we absolutely suck as a collective on evaluating where those goals ought to reset to, and just let blind oneupmanship against other families guide us to local maxima.
    - eslifka 17y ago
      Your comments ring very true to me. My father decided he'd rather stay in a relatively low chemical engineering job rather than push up the corporate latter into a black tie management position. As a result my friends all had much nicer toys and bigger houses, but they rarely saw their parents. On top of that my friend's parents never seemed happy, ever. Whereas my father has always been one of the happiest people I know. Throughout my highschool years he'd tell me stories almost nightly of something interesting he'd done that day. Now that I'm older and nearing the end of my own degree I have no doubt I'll keep the same perspective: stick with doing what you love no matter how much you make off of it. - I should clarify that we didn't live anywhere near poverty. My father wasn't putting us in a bad situation to keep the job he loved. We were just significantly lower than the people around us, and as a result he didn't have many friends among his peers (by that I mean parents in our suburb) because they looked down on him. So that situation may not have any real bearing on this discussion since he didn't seem to be facing a hard decision: give up the respect of a bunch of career pushing suits or hate his life and his job, hmmm.
indiejade 17y ago
Disagree. Comfort breeds complacency. Complacency breeds discontent. My family was completely nomadic growing up. While it was kind of a constant uncertain adventure, I see, as an adult, how it made me a better and stronger person. Look at people with a small zone of comfort, people who are so incredibly attached to their physical manifestations of "success" and they are some of the most unhappy people ever. Living the nomadic existence more or less teaches people to value their relationships with people over things or those things that 9-5 drudgery provides. Besides, children are resilient. I would never trade the memory of the time with my parents & family -- moving, camping, learning and adapting all over the freaking place -- for memories of what most adults would call a "stable" childhood.
- iamwil 17y ago
  I've seen different people react differently to having moved around a lot as a kid. Some react the way you do. Others like nothing better to just plot down and settle in some roots when they're adults.
Sukotto 17y ago
Your duty to your offspring is to 1) raise them to be contributing members of society 2) be capable to care for themselves 3) be capable to care for their own offspring. You have no duty to provide "stuff" and failing to give them stuff is not deprivation.

by axod 17y ago

Yeah its one thing to deprive yourself of things, but when you start depriving your offspring of things, that's tough. Having a family changes all the goalposts.

newsio 17y ago

So, it is preferable to deprive kids of attention/love/help with school (OP says he barely sees his children) as opposed to depriving kids of "things"?

axod 17y ago
There's obviously a balance. Kids need ideally both.
- azanar 17y ago
  Do you think they need as much of the "things" as parents seem to feel obligated to provide for them now? There is no need for this false dichotomy of "things" or "complete lack of things". As I've commented on here before, I and a lot of the people I know seem to have gone through childhoods where the parents believed this trade-off was really binary. I got it less than many people, but I still would have liked to see my parents, and their parents as well, not suffer through existence so much because of "needs" they thought we had. The only reason they thought we had those needs is because all the other parents in the neighborhood reinforced that children have those needs by catering to their own children thusly. It almost seems like the same force that drives parents to obsess about the safety of their children. They don't want to seem like the parent who cares the least. The problem is that the goalposts you allude to in a higher-level comment are defined by this mechanism. I agree that goals will change -- any life change will result in resetting of goals --, but I think we absolutely suck as a collective on evaluating where those goals ought to reset to, and just let blind oneupmanship against other families guide us to local maxima.
  - eslifka 17y ago
    Your comments ring very true to me. My father decided he'd rather stay in a relatively low chemical engineering job rather than push up the corporate latter into a black tie management position. As a result my friends all had much nicer toys and bigger houses, but they rarely saw their parents. On top of that my friend's parents never seemed happy, ever. Whereas my father has always been one of the happiest people I know. Throughout my highschool years he'd tell me stories almost nightly of something interesting he'd done that day. Now that I'm older and nearing the end of my own degree I have no doubt I'll keep the same perspective: stick with doing what you love no matter how much you make off of it. - I should clarify that we didn't live anywhere near poverty. My father wasn't putting us in a bad situation to keep the job he loved. We were just significantly lower than the people around us, and as a result he didn't have many friends among his peers (by that I mean parents in our suburb) because they looked down on him. So that situation may not have any real bearing on this discussion since he didn't seem to be facing a hard decision: give up the respect of a bunch of career pushing suits or hate his life and his job, hmmm.

indiejade 17y ago

Disagree. Comfort breeds complacency. Complacency breeds discontent. My family was completely nomadic growing up. While it was kind of a constant uncertain adventure, I see, as an adult, how it made me a better and stronger person. Look at people with a small zone of comfort, people who are so incredibly attached to their physical manifestations of "success" and they are some of the most unhappy people ever. Living the nomadic existence more or less teaches people to value their relationships with people over things or those things that 9-5 drudgery provides. Besides, children are resilient. I would never trade the memory of the time with my parents & family -- moving, camping, learning and adapting all over the freaking place -- for memories of what most adults would call a "stable" childhood.

iamwil 17y ago
I've seen different people react differently to having moved around a lot as a kid. Some react the way you do. Others like nothing better to just plot down and settle in some roots when they're adults.

Sukotto 17y ago

Your duty to your offspring is to 1) raise them to be contributing members of society 2) be capable to care for themselves 3) be capable to care for their own offspring. You have no duty to provide "stuff" and failing to give them stuff is not deprivation.