Modern upbringing of children is full of nonsense forced by business and political goals. Rhymes that go "rain, rain go away" etc. Values that prioritize and reward sales skills, TV shows that show telling lies and pretending is acceptable and fun, weirdness is desirable etc. Importance of presentation over core content and so on.

We trained our mind to ignore and forget all animal instincts, body signals and wisdom acquired through ages.

Of course, ancient battle wisdom from the East tells you how to approach issues - saama, daana, bhedha, danda - that is - make friends, negotiate, divide and rule, use force. At any point, if things look infeasible, retreat and avoid. Pure common sense.

▲

mk89 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Of course, ancient battle wisdom from the East tells you how to approach issues - saama, daana, bhedha, danda - that is - make friends, negotiate, divide and rule, use force.

That's probably something you learn in India. In the West that'd be Machiavelli (and countless Roman/Greek philopsophers/generals, etc), for whoever went to school.

Anyway, all this is somehow unrelated to the article.

The main issue is that people nowadays have somehow internalized a weird "alpha male, never give up, don't cry, just shut up an resist, impossible is nothing" mindset. The issue is that many parents don't want to create "weak" grownups, with the side effects of creating potentially sick ones, who will grow and will have kids and "won't repeat the same mistakes as my parents".

In my experience the smartest and possibly most successful (not rich, but successful in terms of satisfied/happy/in a good state financially) people are the ones that know when to change course. Finding the sweet spot (the "when") is just pure talent. This is extremely difficult for a parent to understand: when to jump in and tell your kids "it's OK, do something else" without shame.

▲

close04 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> people nowadays have somehow internalized a weird "alpha male, never give up, don't cry, just shut up an resist

I don't know what counts as "nowadays" but this male image has been promoted for a really long time. "Big boys don't cry" and "strong men don't take no for an answer" have been a thing for centuries. Stoicism was centered around emotional self-control more than 2000 years ago.

This survived for so long because we used to live in societies that were very patriarchal. So men knew their role and it was also at the top of the pyramid, all in a precarious equilibrium from a mental health perspective.

What happened nowadays is that society is less patriarchal. Men are no longer at the top of the pyramid, they no longer have a clearly defined societal role, but they still carry some of the old remnants because occasionally that's the expected of them and that's still how many boys are educated. The modern man is locked into a world where his education and emotional toolset are inadequate. They are raised to lock their feelings like an "alpha" but no longer have an outlet for anything because the alpha role in society started evaporating or shifting away from them.

It's a mental health crisis that will overflow sooner or later and it won't be good for anyone around it when it happens.

▲

zozbot234 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> "strong men don't take no for an answer"

This is the exact opposite of what Stoicism teaches. It's all about figuring out as early as possible when you're aiming for an "impossible goal" and should dismiss that goal as something that you really have no control over. As for the emotional control part, the real goal is not to let your emotions affect your behavior in dysfunctional ways. That's why the main focus was not in fact "big boys don't cry", it was "big boys don't get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER". Because that kind of unrestrained anger is really bad for you and those around you.

▲

close04 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I wasn't compiling a list list of values that are consistent, just values that were historically taught to boys/men. There were teachings in that vein for centuries and millennia. Some are contradicting ("be a gentleman" / "don't take no for an answer"). Bottom line, "never give up", "control your emotions", "don't cry" are not a "nowadays" thing by any measure.

> That's why the main focus was not in fact "big boys don't cry", it was "big boys don't get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER"

In practical experience "boys don't cry" has been a staple of the actual education boys get for centuries. To the point that a lot of boys got a smacking for crying. Temper tantrums are as natural as crying, a reaction to the developing brain. They were considered abnormal and "destructive" because that was the limit of our understanding in child psychology.

On the other hand getting educated to never "get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER" is just as toxic. Boys and men are asked to bottle up everything and this sort of worked, still with a high mental health price, in the past when there were outlets for that pressure. With those gone we just made the situation worse.

	▲	zozbot234 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You're right that temper tantrums might be natural and excusable from young children and toddlers, but the obvious argument would be that people really should know better at some point as they develop mentally and are able to reflect about the deeper consequences of that kind of behavior. This is not advocating for systematically bottling up emotions, of course; even the ancients were well aware of the difference between temporarily restraining a negative emotion in order to avert its detrimental effects in the moment, as opposed to addressing its root causes (often in terms of unfulfilled expectations and desires) through inner self-reflection and mental exercises.

▲

tzs 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Modern upbringing of children is full of nonsense forced by business and political goals. Rhymes that go "rain, rain go away" etc.

I don't understand what you mean by "rain, rain go away" in the context of modern upbringing of children. I know of the nursery rhyme with that line, but that's at least 350 years old.

▲

zkmon 10 hours ago | parent [-]

I think it makes children to grow up thinking rain is bad. I used to walk for miles in cyclone rain, cross rivulets with strong water flow - just to attend school. I can't think why someone want to raise their children not exposed to rain.

	▲	circlefavshape 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't know anything about cyclone rain, but nobody in Ireland needs to be taught that the endless dark grey days of winter and their accompanying cold wind-driven rain are unpleasant
	▲	rrjjww 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		The notion that big business is conspiring to keep children from playing in the rain because of… reasons… might be my new favorite conspiracy. I’m bought in.
	▲	iso1631 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You are linking a nursery rhyme which is older than the USA to "Modern Upbringing". That's an odd example.

▲

zwnow 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Social media established a hustle culture in young men, cost of living forces people to work without taking vacation. The modern trend is 72 hour weeks in Silicon Valley corporations. Houses are speculation objects rather than affordable homes for families. In this society you have to teach children early on about how money works and how to keep jobs or you'll find them in a vicious cycle of trying to afford life. Giving up simply is not an option for many people anymore.

▲

mk89 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> In this society you have to teach children early on about how money works

In this society? When and where was it ever different?

First lesson of life should be "you work to buy your bread" followed by "nobody will ever give you something for free".

▲

zwnow 14 hours ago | parent [-]

First lesson of life should be to show empathy towards other living beings.

If the first lesson in life is "you work to buy your bread" and "nobody will ever give you something for free" you'll end up in a world filled with egoistical maniacs. Which unfortunately is where we are at the moment.

Your second lesson is not even true considering I'd have unconditional love for my children/wife. Altruistic love in the form of give for the sake of giving, not give for the sake of receiving.

People forget that we are strong together. Working together is actually the only way humanity got where its at until some maniacs invented slavery.

▲

lazide 8 hours ago | parent [-]

In a world full of (as noted) egotistical maniacs, is not what you are preaching surefire suicide?

Notably, neurotypicals generally fundamentally know this and even priests will throw abusive assholes out of church while still preaching peace, love and tolerance - without blinking at the apparent hypocrisy.

Or, as the case may be sometimes, initiating religious wars.

It seems like neurodivergents are the ones who get hung up on the literalness.

All life requires a degree of self defense/an immune system, or it dies.

And one could argue that the big reason we don’t have slavery anymore (by and large) is because of mechanization.

There were plenty of preachers in the US South (and plenty of religious figures everywhere in history) that preached the righteousness of slavery. While also preaching peace and love. And they put up quite a fight!

It was not an easy thing winning the Civil war, and plenty of wars were won on the back of slaves, at least in antiquity.

The Spartans weren’t feared because of their egalitarian and humanistic ethos, that’s for sure.

	▲	zwnow 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		All life requires a degree of self defense, sure. But self defense does not mean running around the world screaming "me, me, me!". Bees only thrive because they work together. Their hive-self-defense even kills some of their own to protect the rest of the hive. They also only sting if absolutely necessary (in their view) as doing so most likely kills them. Ants work in a similar fashion. No ant thinks "I got so much food, I'll store it in my 1 ant colony all for myself". Humans for some reason have these traits, being jealous, egoistical and whatnot is natural, the difficulty is in acknowledging that and to actively work against these feelings instead of giving into them. A lot of humans also have the wrong perception of strength. They see the rich as the strong and the poor as the weak, but I dont want to get too deep into that. This conversation reached pretty philosophical levels and I can admit that its unrealistic to expect altruism from each and everyone, especially when their basic needs aren't met. Would still be cool if rich people could share a little more though, as in my view it should be impossible to be rich while other people starve... Especially considering rich people make it hard for others getting wealthier because it means competition. A lot of people got rich in highly unethical ways. Everyone should have the chance to thrive and afford basic and cultural needs, nobody should have to work 70 hour weeks or two jobs just to survive.

▲

watwut 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It was not "social media" in an abstract politics neutral way. It was conservative right wing grifters who has seen it as a way to capitalize on notion of traditional masculinity.