8 ms·

It's disheartening to see such drastic disparities between foster kids and their peers in terms of both education and incarceration rates. It really highlights

It's disheartening to see such drastic disparities between foster kids and their peers in terms of both education and incarceration rates. It really highlights just how important having a stable home life is to shaping the future outcomes for kids and how big of a disadvantage it is for those who don't have this privilege. Sad that we live in a society where we can't provide a healthy, stable environment so many kids.

bluetomcat 3y ago
[flagged]
- majormajor 3y ago
  I don't agree in general, but I wonder why you blame it on sexualization of culture and the effect of that on women instead of hyper-masculization/glorification of scams/violence in culture and the effect of that on men? All those "risk-taking macho [men]" you refer to could be easily blamed on a mass media system that glorifies such behavior, yet you focus your comment on sexualization and women, who seem to be less of the principal actors in your story compared to the men taking risks and leaving people in the lurch.
  - bluetomcat 3y ago
    Teenage girls in particular fall prey to that mass conditioning. In recent years, platforms like TikTok incentivise their early sexualisation. Before that it was teen pop and MTV videos. You just don’t see a 20-year-old woman imagining herself as a housewife and cooking meals anymore. Her biggest asset is her body and she uses it as a tool to manipulate men.
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      >Teenage girls in particular fall prey to that mass conditioning. Bold of you to assume only teenage girls do. I know guys in their late 20s to early 30s (with university degrees!) who follow and agree with the likes of Andrew Tate or other such scammer nutjobs of the manosphere. From what I saw, my take is that such people are like that due to lacking support. They lack a supporting family unit(poor relationship with their parents), they lack a caring social group(isolated, introverts, very few friends), they lack a caring mentor to show them the way on how to get out of a rut and improve their situation, so end up pray to easy manipulation of these fake gurus who help them fill that void.
    - dawatchusay 3y ago
      Evidence please
    - mxkopy 3y ago
      These things are not mutually exclusive
    - klooney 3y ago
      > You just don’t see a 20-year-old woman imagining herself as a housewife and cooking meals anymore Au contraire, this is now a popular content vertical/subculture- "tradwife" is the keyword you need to dig this stuff up.
  - greenhexagon 3y ago
    Curious how different our experiences of "culture" can be. I'm an American in my 40s. I've never seen "glorification of scams" in any mainstream culture and can't really think of any subculture where that would be the case... maybe used car sales, crypto or drug dealers or something? I've also never seen any sort of "hyper-masculization" shown in a positive light in mainstream culture. I've always been pressured by society to present as less masculine and it's common to see masculinity referred to as as "toxic" and equated with negative traits or externalities. In fact, it's an entirely one-sided debate at this point. Suggesting any positive aspect of masculinity is considered sexist, misogynistic and unacceptable among the people who's opinions carry power in society. Negative aspects of masculinity are of course strongly encouraged, reinforced and amplified.
    - the_gastropod 3y ago
      > I'm an American in my 40s. I've never seen "glorification of scams" in any mainstream culture Some very popular movies that come to mind (Some of these may not be intended to be glorifying scams, but to many unsophisticated viewers, they absolutely are): - The Social Network - The Wolf of Wall Street - Uncut Gems - The Godfather - Scarface - Ocean's Eleven (and Twelve and Thirteen) - Emily the Criminal - I Care a Lot - Nine Queens - Punch-Drunk Love > I've also never seen any sort of "hyper-masculization" shown in a positive light in mainstream culture More movies! - The Godfather (again) - Pulp Fiction - Fight Club - American History X - Gangster Squad - Django Unchained - Expendables - Every Fast and Furious movie - (Nearly?) Every Arnold Schwarzenegger movie > it's common to see masculinity referred to as as "toxic" and equated with negative traits or externalities I think this is (usually?) a misunderstanding. People refer to toxic masculinity, a set of problematic behaviors some men exhibit as part of attempting to appear "manly" that includes traits such as: homophobia, glorifying unhealthy habits (e.g., drinking like a man, don't cry like a woman, mental health issues depicted as "weakness", etc.) They're not referring to masculinity, itself, as being toxic.
      - jwells89 3y ago
        > People refer to toxic masculinity, a set of problematic behaviors some men exhibit as part of attempting to appear "manly" that includes traits such as: homophobia, glorifying unhealthy habits (e.g., drinking like a man, don't cry like a woman, mental health issues depicted as "weakness", etc.) They're not referring to masculinity, itself, as being toxic. Yes, toxic masculinity ≠ masculinity. Broadly speaking, toxic masculinity has to do with behaviors that are deleterious to the one behaving that way, others, or both. Nobody is going to claim for example that a man’s efforts to be a warm, supportive father who strives to be his family’s rock (a pretty traditional male archetype) are toxic.
- foofie 3y ago
  > Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho who (...) pleases her. (...) In case they find a boring man (...) they (...) divorce him. Perhaps you should start off by assuming women are people with free will, and afterwards take a long hard look at why people tend to prefer partners that "please" them over those who instead have nothing to offer and try to use economic stability as leverage.
  - sdsd 3y ago
    >those who instead have nothing to offer and try to use economic stability as leverage. If they offer stability, they hardly offer nothing. Why is it okay to leverage your looks and personality, but not stability? I personally really like that my wife is stable, it's something really valuable that she brings to my life.
    - foofie 3y ago
      > If they offer stability, they hardly offer nothing. You're somehow assuming that those who are attractive and have something to offer in terms of romantic relationships have an exclusive monopoly on economic stability. > Why is it okay to leverage your looks and personality, but not stability? You can try to leverage anything you'd like. Hell, pick up juggling and work on that too. The point is that you are not entitled to a spouse just because you hold a job, and if you are a lousy person then don't be surprised when you repel people. You don't own people and you are not entitled to abuse others by holding your income over them. If you want paid services, hire someone. In the meantime, don't be surprised that people with free will opt to stay with people they actually like and stay away from creeps who think they are entitled to other people.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  This is straightforward victim blaming. Plenty of boring men neglect and abuse their families too.
- robocat 3y ago
  > Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho Many middle-aged women I know remain attracted to the same type of men. It often works out poorly for them, but they still don't seem to learn new preferences. I know of far too many arsehole guys that never lack for a girlfriend. Smart, attractive, caring women that don't seem to be able to choose a worthwhile guy. And I know of too many women that can't extricate themselves after they are entrapped by some arsehole. I don't have much of a theory of why, but one pattern is often a taking guy and a giving woman. I don't know enough gay men or women to have noticed similar patterns within my gay acquantances. The other odd thing is that I have some caring male friends who would make fabulous husbands (and fathers), however they are not snapped up by women. It appears to me that their positives are not valued - and perhaps they are judged too harshly by their flaws (goofy, overweight, bad teeth, crappy job, whatever). It isn't just young women. Women in their 30's, 40's, 50's still often make the same choices. They seem to remain attracted to the same type of guy, but may avoid entrapment through a variety of mental gymnastics (or plain celibacy). (Re-edited for clarity).
- KittenInABox 3y ago
  > Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho who lives on the edge and pleases her. This isn't really broadly true. Women in their early age are just as varied as the rest of us. I know women who were raised in a setting where they were expected to be parents (cleaning, cooking, looking after the younger siblings) and so naturally never learned healthy boundaries, and thought looking after a manchild was normal. I know women who were raised in a setting where abusive men were also normal and so they accepted romantic abuse. I know women who were simply alone and didn't have support systems to help them through the isolation and financial constraints that is entering an abusive relationship by men who promised traditional breadwinning homelives. It's dismissive to wave off an entire gender this way and not consider all the ways we already dismiss women. Of course, if women are constantly exposed to men lambasting them for being 20 year old sluts as a category, how do they enter healthy sexual relationships with men?
- dawatchusay 3y ago
  You should not make such blanket statements about groups of people. And then especially blame it on culture when it is in fact your opinion/experience.
  - bluetomcat 3y ago
    Any abstract reasoning about societal issues is about “groups of people”. Individual peculiarities must always be taken into account when reasoning about a particular case, but collective profiling is needed in order to take action at a wider political scale.
meiraleal 3y ago
> It really highlights just how important having a stable home life is to shaping the future outcomes for kids It also highlights the lack of investment to support those kids having a better future. It is just a matter of priority and resource allocation, after all.
- rayiner 3y ago
  This is not a problem you can fix with bureaucracy. Bangladeshi villages manage to raise stable kids that don’t commit crimes at the rate of the average American, much less the rate of Americans in the foster system. That should give you a hint about how important “investment” and “resource allocation” is in this problem versus other factors.
  - meiraleal 3y ago
    That exactly proves my point, if Bangladeshi can do it, the US could too, if it was a priority. It is not and it probably won't ever be.
    - rayiner 3y ago
      America places far more priority on, and makes much more investment in, the well-being of children than Bangladesh does. The problem is that the tools Americans have limited themselves to using to accomplish those ends (experts, money, the formal education system) are the wrong tools for the job.
Sevii 3y ago
The way foster care works children will be placed with foster parents for a few years, then be returned to their parents, then be placed back in foster care with a different family, over and over again. The system is not setup to prioritize a stable environment. The reality is that to provide a healthy stable environment for these kids, we would have to effectively eliminate their parents from their lives. We'd basically have to say, "It's great you are off drugs and have a house and job now, but you don't get to have your kids back ever because they need stability". In general we prioritize getting kids back with their families over a healthy or stable environment.
- g-b-r 3y ago
  That's dangerous though, there have been cases of widespread unjustified foster care placements
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    Not to mention making an already gut-wrenching decision (to place your own child into the foster system) even more difficult if it's perceived to be a one-way door.
    - cool_dude85 3y ago
      I think this may be different stae to state. Here you cannot just place your kid in foster care, they need to meet certain criteria e.g. they are abused or neglected. I guess you could purposefully neglect your kid but there are legal risks there for sure. The way you can choose to "place" your kid in foster care is to voluntarily terminate your parental rights, which is outside of very rare circumstances a one-way trip. Regardless it is still done both for medical reasons and inability to deal with behaviors.
      - em-bee 3y ago
        couldn't you do it privately? find a family who is willing to take care of your kids for a while without getting any government agency involved?
pizzafeelsright 3y ago
I am curious where people cannot provide a healthy and stable environment. I grew up poor, somewhat stable. My children are going to be growing up in a stable and healthy environment because of my choices. This is course has a cost. The wife doesn't have a full time job. Income is limited to one earner. Vacations aren't as extravagant. I am in the middle of becoming a foster family. Loads more sacrifices and paperwork. The families that lose their children are really screwed up. There's neglect, abuse, and no blood related that are available to help. The State is not any better at parenting because their interest doesn't align with the child's best interest. The State essentially contracts out parenting. The problem is parenting is essentially its own religion. Naturally that means the State will be in conflict with the Parenting. Foster children are protected by the State so disciplining methods aren't always accepted. A child of any age without effective discipline will be subject to natural consequences which are often more severe that a loving parent with patience, grace, understanding, and attention to desired outcome.
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  > Foster children are protected by the State so disciplining methods aren't always accepted. Curious what effective methods the state considers unacceptable?
  - pizzafeelsright 3y ago
    Taking away cell phones, taking off doors, physical punishment are a few. I don't agree with them all of these myself but unchecked behavior without corrective action leads to more outbursts and potentially violent reactions. If you've got an eight year old that has a cell phone because the birth mother gave them one you cannot take it away. Leverage allows for better negotiating.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      yup, taking away the computer from my kids (they have no phones) until they clean up their room works for a 6 year old and a 12 year old. there should be a law that mobile phones for children should not be allowed without parental/guardian guidance and supervision. which would give foster parents the right to control that.
sokoloff 3y ago
It's not inaccurate to categorize them as "foster kids", but I think it risks putting too much emphasis on the wrong part of the root of the problem, just like thinking of people as "level 1 trauma center patients" rather than "car crash victims", "shooting victims", or "workplace accident victims". When we see poor outcomes from trauma centers, we don't exclusively focus on better trauma medicine to improve per-patient outcomes; we also take steps aimed at reducing the number of patients created to improve society-wide outcomes. Underlying every foster kid is some kind of failed original/default family situation. Improving the outcomes of the set of all children may have less to do with improving the foster machine and more to do with changing the dynamics that feed so many children into the gears of that machine in the first place.

bluetomcat 3y ago

[flagged]

majormajor 3y ago
I don't agree in general, but I wonder why you blame it on sexualization of culture and the effect of that on women instead of hyper-masculization/glorification of scams/violence in culture and the effect of that on men? All those "risk-taking macho [men]" you refer to could be easily blamed on a mass media system that glorifies such behavior, yet you focus your comment on sexualization and women, who seem to be less of the principal actors in your story compared to the men taking risks and leaving people in the lurch.
- bluetomcat 3y ago
  Teenage girls in particular fall prey to that mass conditioning. In recent years, platforms like TikTok incentivise their early sexualisation. Before that it was teen pop and MTV videos. You just don’t see a 20-year-old woman imagining herself as a housewife and cooking meals anymore. Her biggest asset is her body and she uses it as a tool to manipulate men.
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    >Teenage girls in particular fall prey to that mass conditioning. Bold of you to assume only teenage girls do. I know guys in their late 20s to early 30s (with university degrees!) who follow and agree with the likes of Andrew Tate or other such scammer nutjobs of the manosphere. From what I saw, my take is that such people are like that due to lacking support. They lack a supporting family unit(poor relationship with their parents), they lack a caring social group(isolated, introverts, very few friends), they lack a caring mentor to show them the way on how to get out of a rut and improve their situation, so end up pray to easy manipulation of these fake gurus who help them fill that void.
  - dawatchusay 3y ago
    Evidence please
  - mxkopy 3y ago
    These things are not mutually exclusive
  - klooney 3y ago
    > You just don’t see a 20-year-old woman imagining herself as a housewife and cooking meals anymore Au contraire, this is now a popular content vertical/subculture- "tradwife" is the keyword you need to dig this stuff up.
- greenhexagon 3y ago
  Curious how different our experiences of "culture" can be. I'm an American in my 40s. I've never seen "glorification of scams" in any mainstream culture and can't really think of any subculture where that would be the case... maybe used car sales, crypto or drug dealers or something? I've also never seen any sort of "hyper-masculization" shown in a positive light in mainstream culture. I've always been pressured by society to present as less masculine and it's common to see masculinity referred to as as "toxic" and equated with negative traits or externalities. In fact, it's an entirely one-sided debate at this point. Suggesting any positive aspect of masculinity is considered sexist, misogynistic and unacceptable among the people who's opinions carry power in society. Negative aspects of masculinity are of course strongly encouraged, reinforced and amplified.
  - the_gastropod 3y ago
    > I'm an American in my 40s. I've never seen "glorification of scams" in any mainstream culture Some very popular movies that come to mind (Some of these may not be intended to be glorifying scams, but to many unsophisticated viewers, they absolutely are): - The Social Network - The Wolf of Wall Street - Uncut Gems - The Godfather - Scarface - Ocean's Eleven (and Twelve and Thirteen) - Emily the Criminal - I Care a Lot - Nine Queens - Punch-Drunk Love > I've also never seen any sort of "hyper-masculization" shown in a positive light in mainstream culture More movies! - The Godfather (again) - Pulp Fiction - Fight Club - American History X - Gangster Squad - Django Unchained - Expendables - Every Fast and Furious movie - (Nearly?) Every Arnold Schwarzenegger movie > it's common to see masculinity referred to as as "toxic" and equated with negative traits or externalities I think this is (usually?) a misunderstanding. People refer to toxic masculinity, a set of problematic behaviors some men exhibit as part of attempting to appear "manly" that includes traits such as: homophobia, glorifying unhealthy habits (e.g., drinking like a man, don't cry like a woman, mental health issues depicted as "weakness", etc.) They're not referring to masculinity, itself, as being toxic.
    - jwells89 3y ago
      > People refer to toxic masculinity, a set of problematic behaviors some men exhibit as part of attempting to appear "manly" that includes traits such as: homophobia, glorifying unhealthy habits (e.g., drinking like a man, don't cry like a woman, mental health issues depicted as "weakness", etc.) They're not referring to masculinity, itself, as being toxic. Yes, toxic masculinity ≠ masculinity. Broadly speaking, toxic masculinity has to do with behaviors that are deleterious to the one behaving that way, others, or both. Nobody is going to claim for example that a man’s efforts to be a warm, supportive father who strives to be his family’s rock (a pretty traditional male archetype) are toxic.
foofie 3y ago
> Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho who (...) pleases her. (...) In case they find a boring man (...) they (...) divorce him. Perhaps you should start off by assuming women are people with free will, and afterwards take a long hard look at why people tend to prefer partners that "please" them over those who instead have nothing to offer and try to use economic stability as leverage.
- sdsd 3y ago
  >those who instead have nothing to offer and try to use economic stability as leverage. If they offer stability, they hardly offer nothing. Why is it okay to leverage your looks and personality, but not stability? I personally really like that my wife is stable, it's something really valuable that she brings to my life.
  - foofie 3y ago
    > If they offer stability, they hardly offer nothing. You're somehow assuming that those who are attractive and have something to offer in terms of romantic relationships have an exclusive monopoly on economic stability. > Why is it okay to leverage your looks and personality, but not stability? You can try to leverage anything you'd like. Hell, pick up juggling and work on that too. The point is that you are not entitled to a spouse just because you hold a job, and if you are a lousy person then don't be surprised when you repel people. You don't own people and you are not entitled to abuse others by holding your income over them. If you want paid services, hire someone. In the meantime, don't be surprised that people with free will opt to stay with people they actually like and stay away from creeps who think they are entitled to other people.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
This is straightforward victim blaming. Plenty of boring men neglect and abuse their families too.
robocat 3y ago
> Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho Many middle-aged women I know remain attracted to the same type of men. It often works out poorly for them, but they still don't seem to learn new preferences. I know of far too many arsehole guys that never lack for a girlfriend. Smart, attractive, caring women that don't seem to be able to choose a worthwhile guy. And I know of too many women that can't extricate themselves after they are entrapped by some arsehole. I don't have much of a theory of why, but one pattern is often a taking guy and a giving woman. I don't know enough gay men or women to have noticed similar patterns within my gay acquantances. The other odd thing is that I have some caring male friends who would make fabulous husbands (and fathers), however they are not snapped up by women. It appears to me that their positives are not valued - and perhaps they are judged too harshly by their flaws (goofy, overweight, bad teeth, crappy job, whatever). It isn't just young women. Women in their 30's, 40's, 50's still often make the same choices. They seem to remain attracted to the same type of guy, but may avoid entrapment through a variety of mental gymnastics (or plain celibacy). (Re-edited for clarity).
KittenInABox 3y ago
> Women in their early age are attracted to the risk-taking macho who lives on the edge and pleases her. This isn't really broadly true. Women in their early age are just as varied as the rest of us. I know women who were raised in a setting where they were expected to be parents (cleaning, cooking, looking after the younger siblings) and so naturally never learned healthy boundaries, and thought looking after a manchild was normal. I know women who were raised in a setting where abusive men were also normal and so they accepted romantic abuse. I know women who were simply alone and didn't have support systems to help them through the isolation and financial constraints that is entering an abusive relationship by men who promised traditional breadwinning homelives. It's dismissive to wave off an entire gender this way and not consider all the ways we already dismiss women. Of course, if women are constantly exposed to men lambasting them for being 20 year old sluts as a category, how do they enter healthy sexual relationships with men?
dawatchusay 3y ago
You should not make such blanket statements about groups of people. And then especially blame it on culture when it is in fact your opinion/experience.
- bluetomcat 3y ago
  Any abstract reasoning about societal issues is about “groups of people”. Individual peculiarities must always be taken into account when reasoning about a particular case, but collective profiling is needed in order to take action at a wider political scale.

meiraleal 3y ago

> It really highlights just how important having a stable home life is to shaping the future outcomes for kids It also highlights the lack of investment to support those kids having a better future. It is just a matter of priority and resource allocation, after all.

rayiner 3y ago
This is not a problem you can fix with bureaucracy. Bangladeshi villages manage to raise stable kids that don’t commit crimes at the rate of the average American, much less the rate of Americans in the foster system. That should give you a hint about how important “investment” and “resource allocation” is in this problem versus other factors.
- meiraleal 3y ago
  That exactly proves my point, if Bangladeshi can do it, the US could too, if it was a priority. It is not and it probably won't ever be.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    America places far more priority on, and makes much more investment in, the well-being of children than Bangladesh does. The problem is that the tools Americans have limited themselves to using to accomplish those ends (experts, money, the formal education system) are the wrong tools for the job.

Sevii 3y ago

The way foster care works children will be placed with foster parents for a few years, then be returned to their parents, then be placed back in foster care with a different family, over and over again. The system is not setup to prioritize a stable environment. The reality is that to provide a healthy stable environment for these kids, we would have to effectively eliminate their parents from their lives. We'd basically have to say, "It's great you are off drugs and have a house and job now, but you don't get to have your kids back ever because they need stability". In general we prioritize getting kids back with their families over a healthy or stable environment.

g-b-r 3y ago
That's dangerous though, there have been cases of widespread unjustified foster care placements
- sokoloff 3y ago
  Not to mention making an already gut-wrenching decision (to place your own child into the foster system) even more difficult if it's perceived to be a one-way door.
  - cool_dude85 3y ago
    I think this may be different stae to state. Here you cannot just place your kid in foster care, they need to meet certain criteria e.g. they are abused or neglected. I guess you could purposefully neglect your kid but there are legal risks there for sure. The way you can choose to "place" your kid in foster care is to voluntarily terminate your parental rights, which is outside of very rare circumstances a one-way trip. Regardless it is still done both for medical reasons and inability to deal with behaviors.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      couldn't you do it privately? find a family who is willing to take care of your kids for a while without getting any government agency involved?

pizzafeelsright 3y ago

I am curious where people cannot provide a healthy and stable environment. I grew up poor, somewhat stable. My children are going to be growing up in a stable and healthy environment because of my choices. This is course has a cost. The wife doesn't have a full time job. Income is limited to one earner. Vacations aren't as extravagant. I am in the middle of becoming a foster family. Loads more sacrifices and paperwork. The families that lose their children are really screwed up. There's neglect, abuse, and no blood related that are available to help. The State is not any better at parenting because their interest doesn't align with the child's best interest. The State essentially contracts out parenting. The problem is parenting is essentially its own religion. Naturally that means the State will be in conflict with the Parenting. Foster children are protected by the State so disciplining methods aren't always accepted. A child of any age without effective discipline will be subject to natural consequences which are often more severe that a loving parent with patience, grace, understanding, and attention to desired outcome.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
> Foster children are protected by the State so disciplining methods aren't always accepted. Curious what effective methods the state considers unacceptable?
- pizzafeelsright 3y ago
  Taking away cell phones, taking off doors, physical punishment are a few. I don't agree with them all of these myself but unchecked behavior without corrective action leads to more outbursts and potentially violent reactions. If you've got an eight year old that has a cell phone because the birth mother gave them one you cannot take it away. Leverage allows for better negotiating.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    yup, taking away the computer from my kids (they have no phones) until they clean up their room works for a 6 year old and a 12 year old. there should be a law that mobile phones for children should not be allowed without parental/guardian guidance and supervision. which would give foster parents the right to control that.

sokoloff 3y ago

It's not inaccurate to categorize them as "foster kids", but I think it risks putting too much emphasis on the wrong part of the root of the problem, just like thinking of people as "level 1 trauma center patients" rather than "car crash victims", "shooting victims", or "workplace accident victims". When we see poor outcomes from trauma centers, we don't exclusively focus on better trauma medicine to improve per-patient outcomes; we also take steps aimed at reducing the number of patients created to improve society-wide outcomes. Underlying every foster kid is some kind of failed original/default family situation. Improving the outcomes of the set of all children may have less to do with improving the foster machine and more to do with changing the dynamics that feed so many children into the gears of that machine in the first place.