We are two income household and still
Manage to run a tight ship. I would never let my kid act they way OP described in first post. I also don’t allow electronics/screens of any sort at the table, not even in restaurants. My other pet peeve when people do this and say it’s because their kid has special needs. I do t care if I come across as old school. I’m from the south and we mean business when it comes to manners, and monogramming and thank you notes. Kid will thank me later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

Why is it that boys are just generally more annoying to adults than girls? Obviously there are exceptions to this. I have a sister/daughters but no sons/brothers. I obviously married a lovely man, but don’t understand little boys at all.

Biological/genetic. Boys were active, physical and taught how to hunt, fight, farm or otherwise do physical things from a young age. Girls were expected to do tiring things (fingers cramping from embroidery all day or sweating/tired from canning all day!), but it’s more a question of stamina and stress than quick action and building muscles.

Translate that genetic selection over millennia into today’s world. We have boys “acting out” in preschool through mid/late elementary, because their bodies are full of energy, ready to be used. Until their bodies learn to sit for hours per day, it’s difficult.

I’m not saying that every boy is “hyperactive,” but I’d definitely say it applies to over 50% of 3-7yo boys. Again, it’s not that all girls are quieter and sedate. But again, in comparison to boys, over 75% are.

It would be a lot better if they could be active while also learning. It’s possible, but most teachers are middle age females who don’t want or need to exercise as much as little boys, and the current state of mandated curriculum doesn’t leave much room for wiggles.

It hasn’t been long enough that humans have made those particular gendered roles to explain genetic drift. We’ve only been farming in a settled fashion maybe 10-15k years. Women were very active gathering foods prior to that and probably spent more hours per week getting food than make hunters did.

Not necessarily true since the domestic dog went from Wolf to Pug in a similar amount of time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

What do you consider low wages and reasonable housing? Because experts disagree with you.

Any family making 50k can survive on one income.

How? Please link to stable housing for a family of 4-6 that costs under 1/3 of that income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

Why is it that boys are just generally more annoying to adults than girls? Obviously there are exceptions to this. I have a sister/daughters but no sons/brothers. I obviously married a lovely man, but don’t understand little boys at all.

Biological/genetic. Boys were active, physical and taught how to hunt, fight, farm or otherwise do physical things from a young age. Girls were expected to do tiring things (fingers cramping from embroidery all day or sweating/tired from canning all day!), but it’s more a question of stamina and stress than quick action and building muscles.

Translate that genetic selection over millennia into today’s world. We have boys “acting out” in preschool through mid/late elementary, because their bodies are full of energy, ready to be used. Until their bodies learn to sit for hours per day, it’s difficult.

I’m not saying that every boy is “hyperactive,” but I’d definitely say it applies to over 50% of 3-7yo boys. Again, it’s not that all girls are quieter and sedate. But again, in comparison to boys, over 75% are.

It would be a lot better if they could be active while also learning. It’s possible, but most teachers are middle age females who don’t want or need to exercise as much as little boys, and the current state of mandated curriculum doesn’t leave much room for wiggles.

It hasn’t been long enough that humans have made those particular gendered roles to explain genetic drift. We’ve only been farming in a settled fashion maybe 10-15k years. Women were very active gathering foods prior to that and probably spent more hours per week getting food than make hunters did.

Again, gathering takes stamina, not quick movements and skills/muscles developed over years of active play/practice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

It sounds like you have no clue. I know several families who struggle with housing and food costs, even on two incomes. No, they don’t have middle class lives. They live paycheck to paycheck and CAN’T live on just one income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

I don’t know, but even my friends who have all boys seem more stressed than those with all girls or a mix.

My brothers drove my parents nuts compared to my sister and I. We weren’t angels either, just kept a lower profile.

Your friends are likely stressed because people are judging their parenting skills.

Boys are usually much more energetic than girls, so they tire out their parents more. However, in my own family, the girls we’re just as exhausting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

What do you consider low wages and reasonable housing? Because experts disagree with you.

Any family making 50k can survive on one income.

Not in this area. Trust me. I was newly divorced with two kids trying to make it on that. Even without luxuries like non-thrift store clothes, it was impossible. I took a part time job in addition to my FT one just to keep our heads above water. Housing alone, even in my then-very unpopular zip code, was 60% of my income with the PT job supplementing. Moving to a lower COLA wouldn’t have helped. I would have earned even less than I did here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

NP - I don’t think the earlier poster necessarily meant one parent needs to stay at home; I agree with what they were saying (unless that was what they intended). My take is that so many parents we meet through school and in our neighborhood spend so much time working, commuting, and then doing what they have to do (errands, exercise, etc), their kids spend the bulk of the week in childcare, which I think is just par for the course in this area (though we know equal numbers of parents who stagger schedules). But I think the point is, then on the weekend, instead of doing house chores and hanging out as a family and interacting to teach manners and behavior appropriate to various situations, most families are completely over scheduled with activities, classes, brunch and scheduled play dates. My husband and I both work, but for us, a lot of our parenting comes by hanging out/unstructured time with the kids on the weekend both in guiding them on rules and manners, but also just connecting with them. I think you lose out on this if you are constantly going going going. For us, The kids test out naughty behavior at home, where there are consequences but they feel safe; they also just need relax time so they don’t burn out. I also think they need informal hangouts or get togethers to learn and practice social skills (not classes or engineered play dates) so they know how to behave in more formal situations, but In our neighborhood it’s really hard to get together with people last minute or have our kids run down the street to see who is around. And it is also true that many parents we know alternate the humble brag/my kids are so cute conversations with the eye rolling, “so hard to handle, throw them a screen and give me some wine, you know what I mean” commiseration. I don’t necessarily think this is widespread; I am from the west coast and when I visit family back home the families we socialize it’s are much more relaxed. I think it is a function of the DMV lifestyle where people have long hours, terrible commutes and (in Arlington anyway) compete to be the busiest. It’s definitely possible, though, to be a 2 income household and still connect with and actually parent your kids; but I agree that at least around here it seems that those families are fewer and farther between. Probably because they are at home relaxing and hanging out!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

What do you consider low wages and reasonable housing? Because experts disagree with you.

Any family making 50k can survive on one income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

What do you consider low wages and reasonable housing? Because experts disagree with you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

Why is it that boys are just generally more annoying to adults than girls? Obviously there are exceptions to this. I have a sister/daughters but no sons/brothers. I obviously married a lovely man, but don’t understand little boys at all.

Biological/genetic. Boys were active, physical and taught how to hunt, fight, farm or otherwise do physical things from a young age. Girls were expected to do tiring things (fingers cramping from embroidery all day or sweating/tired from canning all day!), but it’s more a question of stamina and stress than quick action and building muscles.

Translate that genetic selection over millennia into today’s world. We have boys “acting out” in preschool through mid/late elementary, because their bodies are full of energy, ready to be used. Until their bodies learn to sit for hours per day, it’s difficult.

I’m not saying that every boy is “hyperactive,” but I’d definitely say it applies to over 50% of 3-7yo boys. Again, it’s not that all girls are quieter and sedate. But again, in comparison to boys, over 75% are.

It would be a lot better if they could be active while also learning. It’s possible, but most teachers are middle age females who don’t want or need to exercise as much as little boys, and the current state of mandated curriculum doesn’t leave much room for wiggles.

It hasn’t been long enough that humans have made those particular gendered roles to explain genetic drift. We’ve only been farming in a settled fashion maybe 10-15k years. Women were very active gathering foods prior to that and probably spent more hours per week getting food than make hunters did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Unless you’re a low wage earner, NO life doesn’t require 2 earners in the US. Food is incredibly cheap here and reasonable housing is everywhere. Even in DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been a teacher for over 20 years and am raising a family of my own. I have noticed a shift. Some good, some great, mostly bad. Parents have outsourced so much of their parenting. So many children are being raised by nannies, aftercare, 10 hours of daycare from birth and it's just not the same as a consistent, loving family member invested in their future. The parents hang on every moment at soccer or gymnastics (the activities have never been better). This time should be used as productive time for the parents instead. That way, when the child is through, the distraction is over and the family can spend time. But, no, the parents micromanage the unimportant things. Then feel guilty ignoring them to do what could have been done while the kids were occupied.

Parents are terrified of tantrums and let the child be in charge. Children need boundaries and overindulgence is the worst thing for kids. I get so many calls from parents trying to plow a way for their kids that have nothing to do with what the kid wants or needs. (I think they should play varsity, no they have never played soccer before,). On the other hand, kids now have no concept of the biases of previous generations. So, as long as these kids as young adult can get out of their safe spaces, function without their parents, and leave the emotional support llama at home...society will be ok.

This is so well said...and right.

Pp, what a rude post. Everyone can not afford for one parent to stay home these days. I will be happy to quit my job if you would like to match my salary, benefits etc. since you feel so strongly about it.

Very few families actually need two income earners.

Maybe in your bubble!!! The vast majority of America has to have 2 incomes, just to avoid losing their housing and to have food on the table.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

Why is it that boys are just generally more annoying to adults than girls? Obviously there are exceptions to this. I have a sister/daughters but no sons/brothers. I obviously married a lovely man, but don’t understand little boys at all.

Biological/genetic. Boys were active, physical and taught how to hunt, fight, farm or otherwise do physical things from a young age. Girls were expected to do tiring things (fingers cramping from embroidery all day or sweating/tired from canning all day!), but it’s more a question of stamina and stress than quick action and building muscles.

Translate that genetic selection over millennia into today’s world. We have boys “acting out” in preschool through mid/late elementary, because their bodies are full of energy, ready to be used. Until their bodies learn to sit for hours per day, it’s difficult.

I’m not saying that every boy is “hyperactive,” but I’d definitely say it applies to over 50% of 3-7yo boys. Again, it’s not that all girls are quieter and sedate. But again, in comparison to boys, over 75% are.

It would be a lot better if they could be active while also learning. It’s possible, but most teachers are middle age females who don’t want or need to exercise as much as little boys, and the current state of mandated curriculum doesn’t leave much room for wiggles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the teachers who tried to warn y’all were accused of not understanding boys and just generally hating kids. My consolation has been that I have the out of control child for 10 months and the parents have them for years!

I have boys. I believe that teachers do not understand boys. Go ahead and teach them how to behave -- just don't act like there is something wrong with them for needing to be taught it. Punishing is not the only way to teach.

So very, very true. They are labeled as bad or naughty or uncontrollable.

I don’t know, but even my friends who have all boys seem more stressed than those with all girls or a mix.

My brothers drove my parents nuts compared to my sister and I. We weren’t angels either, just kept a lower profile.