I wonder what could be driving that trend.
Click on some YTube show and baby won’t bother you for the next hour or two.
A coworker of mine had every intention of not having any screentime for their toddler. But lockdown meant two parents working from home + no daycare. The solutions were either one of them quits their job or they buy an iPad. Economy necessity dictated the latter.
With my toddler, we retained zero screentime simply because my wife is freelance and can get away with ~10 hours of actual work per week.
The entire point of this sub-thread was to analyze the trend pre-lockdown. (FWIW, I'm then not wanting to comment on whether this is lazy behavior or not, but just that this defense is out of place.)
Turns out, it does not destroys them at all. It can actually add quite a lot.
The harm can happen if you overdo it a lot. But some watching or playing is not destroying them at all.
I know this is a poor form but fuck you. We work our asses off to give our kids what is generally accepted as a “good” upbringing and it’s hard. Hard during any normal period of time and even harder when dealing the pressures of the pandemic’s affect on work, day care, extracurricular activities, etc.
Happy to read whatever evidence you have on this topic. I’m keenly interested and sure as shit not “lazy” for allowing our children time to play age appropriate games on a tablet.
Please don't do that here, regardless of how strong and legitimate your feelings are. It only makes things worse.
They just need help to learn to manage those excessive behaviors
That is both name-calling and flamebait, and therefore breaks the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). Can you please make your substantive points without doing that? Note this guideline also:
"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
Parenting is one of the most emotionally activating topics that exists, and therefore one of the most divisive.
You can report me and ban, I don’t mind
Would be curious to see data on this. I most frequently see an emotional appeal against authority, vague anxieties and fears and/or slippery slope arguments.
And covid vaccines being spike-only may be less effective against variants than whole-virus vaccines or actual infections. But flu shots manage to be ineffective a year later with whole viruses in them, so maybe that wouldn’t help.
They are certainly not using a scientific mindset - they are just using language that sounds scientific, so it sounds smart and solid. But is not, when you look closer and try to find their data and sources. But common people does not do that - and fall for it. It is basically fraud, in most instances.
One of my latest memories is the introduction of a test that can be used to test for Corona and flu at the same time. The relevant article headline spoke of a test to distinguish flu from Corona. This then turned into the antivaxxers saying that previous PCR tests could not distinguish corona from flu.
Nor does it evince the collapse of rational thinking. If people just suspended their critical judgement and did whatever they were told unquestioningly, there would also be no antivax movement, but their compliance would not speak to their capacity for rationality, only their bovinity.
Falsely presenting subjective viewpoints as objective would appear more rational. It isn't the trappings which make it rational or even distance from emotions. One can rationally make "non-optimal" decisions from subjective personal costs.