I don't think attempting to quantify neglect to identify who is most traumatized is a healthy or productive exercise in this case. Both are bad for the children involved with so many internal and external variables affecting outcome.

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It has deeper meaning to me, and I'm curious about outside perspectives to the point of playing devil's advocate if I must.

The next real conversational question is, what is the difference between a parent that is well intentioned but not smart enough to take a deeper interest in their child beyond just the child's fundamental needs, and one that is smart enough to have neglected to take an interest?

Edit: I'm getting the hint, I guess. People don't want the messy therapeutic hard conversations or deeper subjects.

Growing up, I went to a magnet high school. Every Wednesday, we would spend half a day in home room having discussions about topics like this. That was my favorite school experience; sitting in a circle of a mixed group and having an open minded discussion. The school was on the edge of some rough neighborhoods and was 90% black, k-12, admission by application only, uni prep, and on the campus of a state college. It was intended to uplift the best and brightest in the local community while drawing in students from a wider pool as well. This type of question is only negative if you choose to view it in that light. It is very healthy to be open to the potential perspectives and experiences of others even on hard subjects.

There is a lot of nuance in what can be neglect in this kind of question. The majority of neglect is likely ignorance and the result of continuing the mistakes of their parents. By discussing these things casually and openly, it increases community awareness and helps to potentially break the cycle by getting someone to think about how they spend their time and what it means to be a good parent.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I find it impossible to have these kinds of conversations on Lemmy. Irl you can set up the structures to enable it - like ensure that everyone knows that it is a safe space to share opinions, none wrong or invalid so long as you approach it genuinely and don't bully others, etc. - but here...

You'd have to create a niche community, and then nobody would ever hear of it, especially with only one post per slow unit of time.

Plus typing is different than verbalizing, especially on a mobile.

Plus people may want to avoid doxxing themselves by putting out so much personal info, which over the years can really add up.

The structure of Lemmy is set up more for doomscrolling memes and occasionally firing off a retort, more's the pity.

As for the question: it seems similar to this one, is it worse to be shot in the head or poisoned? For both questions, I don't think it matters: both options in them are bad, it being subjective which is worse, b/c beauty (and ugliness) is in the eye of the beholder, so it seems not a well-phrased question.

[–] Vanth@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Agreed. Sitting in a room together with established rules is one thing. Anonymous comments online, lack of any personal connection and body language, asynchronous nature of forum comments. This is not the sort of place to try to recreate the atmosphere of OPs previous experience.

Zoomed out from that even further, I've found trying to recreate any high school era atmosphere to be disappointing. It's more satisfying to savor the memory than to be disappointed in a failed recreation, IMO. Strike out and find a new experience, OP, instead of trying to find the old.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 2 points 1 month ago

Agreed in the first half, and the first part of the second, but not the last. If you've ever had a good meal, does that mean that you should never attempt to have another good meal experience again?

OP is doing what many of us on the Fediverse long for - attempting to have a deeper conversation. It never works, at least not for me, but I do understand the attempt. People are simply not capable of setting aside their biases and preconditions and conversing in that kind of "safe space" environment, here. Instead, people actively downvote and move on, angry that you even so much as tried. Maybe an upcoming change to allow for private communities will help change things, when not every single post can appear on All to pollute everyone's feed.

A personal example is my post: [Opinion] Biden Must Resign, which wasn't even my firm opinion yet at the time but I thought that the article had made some great points that were worthy to explore & think about. Never mind the vindication that it ended up happening, never mind how patiently and repeatedly and firmly I mentioned that "blue no matter who", never mind that the position was endorsed by the likes of Jon Stewart (my personal fucking hero) and George Clooney (who I'm not just citing as being famous, but rather someone who personally met with Biden recently just before that time, as e.g. I for one did not) - it was still downvoted far into the negative (ironically, if you sort that community's posts by Controversial, this is the second post with a negative score, and the first one with a double-digit negative score, so apparently I've caused a new record low by having posted it there).

Another, this time non-political, personal example is ...Will Save Your Life Next Week (13:25) that despite being (later) chosen by the non-profit Tournesol group to combat misinformation as one of their top 50 videos, once again features prominently if you sort that community by Controversial, appearing at the bottom of the first page for me right now. Admittedly the source gave it a click-bait sounding title on YouTube, which it seems they later changed, but on the other hand it is "Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell", so I felt that it was very deserving of a deeper look despite that. It seems that most people disagreed so strongly that they actively downvoted it in order to get it to appear lower - this time not setting any new records, but still being on the first page among others with similar total scores and negative feedback.

Lemmy wants what it wants: content promoting Linux, memes, and news that lately (aside from the weather) seems mostly politics. The crowd-Think here is strong, and while I for one may rarely ever downvote anything (almost always reserved for when I feel the person speaking is being mean in some manner), others vehemently disagree, and also speak up with their comments as well. Most of which ignoring the points that you may have wanted to discuss, and instead being quick to hit the usual talking points that all of the other comments also say as well - essentially giving the person "a good talking-to" for their nerve to stand up and speak up, with something not universally agreed-upon; or else simply not responding to it at all.

But there is hope. e.g. poetry@lemmy.world and poetry@sh.itjust.works exist, to try to feed our souls, and there are always books to read rather than spending all our time on the internets:-).

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm disabled and stuck at home. I have no alternative or option but to bottle or try. My chronic issues make it harmful for me to go anywhere that is not a necessity, and doing so is painful enough I am not myself.

People are fundamentally capable of more complex conversations but ultimately lack the maturity to see nuance and use a heightened self awareness when they have other easier outlets and assume others do as well. It is a major factor in the aloneness and insulated feeling of being in my situation.

[–] Vanth@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago

It's the asynchronous nature of Lemmy then that I think will be your biggest barrier to the complex, nuanced conversation you seek.

A person comments knowing it may be hours before it is responded to, if ever. So they write their comment to stand on its own as much as possible.

"A or B?"

"Neither, not enough information to say one is better/worse than the other"

Self-contained comment for a forum style platform.

Lemmy is a forum platform. Are you seeking a platform designed more for ongoing conversation? Like Discord or Matrix, perhaps.

Not that I want you to stop posting here. Just that you seem frustrated with the types of responses you received when I think those responses look like the obvious sort one would get on a platform designed in the way Lemmy is with the question prints you are asking.

You seem to think it's because people don't know how to be vulnerable or open to deep conversation. I think it's because Lemmy is the wrong tool for those sorts of convos.