I'm gay, so my child must be as well.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

The typical parenting advice article in this sort of genre starts with the parent either thinking or doing something wrong, and then changing their thinking or doing, or both, by the end. E.g.:

• "I was doing X, but thought it was wrong because Y, but now I think Z, so X was OK all along."
• "I was doing X, but thought it was OK because Y, but now I think Z, so I'm not going to do X anymore."
• "I was doing X, but thought it was wrong because Y, and I finally stopped doing X."

It doesn't take a novel to get there. This article looked like either raw clickbait or fishing for affirmation. ("I'm doing this! And I think this! Aren't I wonderful?")

Now, maybe she's inviting comment, and the twist will come in Article #2: The Sequel when she says "I used to do X, and then you guys agreed with my friends, so I'm not going to do X anymore. Thanks, Internet Commenters, you helped me wise up as a parent."

Would you like to put odds on that happening?

Given the style that I've seen from exactly this sort of parenting story, I would in fact be willing to bet money that we would see exactly that.

If I was willing to bet money with someone over the internet on a forum like this, which I'm not even if it wouldn't violate the forum rules (I assume they would frown on gambling.)

Her writing style strikes me as very similar to the style I see from Love, Joy, Femenism an atheist blogger who often writes about raising her children outside of the oppressive quiver-full environment in which she was raised.

[Tahar Joblis]

You mean this line at the end?

Which is much the same as this line a couple paragraphs up?

Or this line, substantially earlier in the article?

What narrative of progression?

She is alternating platitudes about supporting her child no matter what with a discussion of the ways in which she's making it clear to her kid what Mommy wants her to grow up to be. And along the way, we see rationalization attempting to paper over the gap between that principle and that action. We don't see a narrative of progression of parenting techniques or of progression of beliefs; we see a narrative in which parenting is static and unchanging.

Sweet jumped up christ, your complaint is about the order of statements? Your core issue is that it's not organized like a five paragraph essay? She's a fucking journalist, not a first year community college student, they don't use that form anymore.

Did you think before posting that comment?

You said I'm complaining about bad writing technique, but because she isn't a beginning student, I shouldn't be upset about bad writing technique.

I'm not complaining about bad writing technique.

A punch in the gut. She was right.

Do these words not register to you about how the author has changed their views?

No, they don't. They register admitting bias, but not as doing a damn thing about it. In the very first paragraph, she admits that wanting your kid to become X is frowned upon:

... no yuppie would ever admit to wanting their kid to be anything in particular, other than happy.

To me, that looks like shame at your friends calling you out on showing bias.

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

[Mavorpen]

Is TJ complaining over utterly nothing again?

[Fartsniffage]

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

Let's look at the final thing the author says. The sign-off, the conclusion, the thing that's supposed to be remembered when writing in this style -

She was right. I’m a slightly overbearing pro-gay gay mom. But I’m going to support my daughter, whatever choices she makes.

That is progress. Moving from wanting to have a gay daughter to deciding to support any decision the daughter makes. And it's what the author wants us readers to take from the editorial.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

No, they don't. They register admitting bias, but not as doing a damn thing about it. In the very first paragraph, she admits that wanting your kid to become X is frowned upon:

... no yuppie would ever admit to wanting their kid to be anything in particular, other than happy.

To me, that looks like shame at your friends calling you out on showing bias.

Exactly. That's the whole fucking point. "I was doing a thing, and then I realized that the thing that I was doing was wrong, and now I have to figure out how to go forward in the situation I find myself in" seems very much to be her conclusion here.

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

You assume without adequate evidence. We do not at this time know how she intends to proceed, other than supporting her daughter regardless of what her sexual identity ends up being.

[Desperate Measures]

Sweet jumped up christ, your complaint is about the order of statements? Your core issue is that it's not organized like a five paragraph essay? She's a fucking journalist, not a first year community college student, they don't use that form anymore.

Did you think before posting that comment?

You said I'm complaining about bad writing technique, but because she isn't a beginning student, I shouldn't be upset about bad writing technique.

I'm not complaining about bad writing technique.

A punch in the gut. She was right.

Do these words not register to you about how the author has changed their views?

No, they don't. They register admitting bias, but not as doing a damn thing about it. In the very first paragraph, she admits that wanting your kid to become X is frowned upon:

... no yuppie would ever admit to wanting their kid to be anything in particular, other than happy.

To me, that looks like shame at your friends calling you out on showing bias.

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

I want my kid to be gay.
Really, I just want my kid to be happy.
Happy seems more important than my bias.
So, like, you know what? I'll support my kid no matter what choice she makes as long as she's happy!

Or do you think from what she's saying in the article that she'll disown her kid if she becomes an artist? It's the same line that she's going down.

[Cannot think of a name]

Sweet jumped up christ, your complaint is about the order of statements? Your core issue is that it's not organized like a five paragraph essay? She's a fucking journalist, not a first year community college student, they don't use that form anymore.

Did you think before posting that comment?

You said I'm complaining about bad writing technique, but because she isn't a beginning student, I shouldn't be upset about bad writing technique.

I'm not complaining about bad writing technique.

Not only are you compaining about technique, putting all of your stock in dismissing out of hand all the of the statements that invalidate your laughably bad premise based on their spacing in the article...you're doing a horrible job of it.

You have expounded on this...just...awful critique by insisting that this opinion piece have a narrative arc.

That is also a complaint about technique.

Except it is an adherence to a technique that is used only on beginning writers to introduce them to the idea of organizing their thoughts. Once they reach the level of...oh, let's say professional journalist, they are not as beholden to these kinds of rigid structures because they aren't actually necessary.

This is a laughably bad defense of a terribly forced reading of the article.

[Mavorpen]

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

Let's look at the final thing the author says. The sign-off, the conclusion, the thing that's supposed to be remembered when writing in this style -

She was right. I’m a slightly overbearing pro-gay gay mom. But I’m going to support my daughter, whatever choices she makes.

That is progress. Moving from wanting to have a gay daughter to deciding to support any decision the daughter makes. And it's what the author wants to take from the editorial.

Yeah, but she didn't lay out a ~10 year mapping of what exactly she will do with regards to raising her daughter.

Worst mother of the year, clearly.

[Cannot think of a name]

Is TJ complaining over utterly nothing again?

Circle gets the square!







Am I the only one in the thread old enough to get that?

[Tahar Joblis]

The typical parenting advice article in this sort of genre starts with the parent either thinking or doing something wrong, and then changing their thinking or doing, or both, by the end. E.g.:

• "I was doing X, but thought it was wrong because Y, but now I think Z, so X was OK all along."
• "I was doing X, but thought it was OK because Y, but now I think Z, so I'm not going to do X anymore."
• "I was doing X, but thought it was wrong because Y, and I finally stopped doing X."

It doesn't take a novel to get there. This article looked like either raw clickbait or fishing for affirmation. ("I'm doing this! And I think this! Aren't I wonderful?")

Now, maybe she's inviting comment, and the twist will come in Article #2: The Sequel when she says "I used to do X, and then you guys agreed with my friends, so I'm not going to do X anymore. Thanks, Internet Commenters, you helped me wise up as a parent."

Would you like to put odds on that happening?

Given the style that I've seen from exactly this sort of parenting story, I would in fact be willing to bet money that we would see exactly that.

If I was willing to bet money with someone over the internet on a forum like this, which I'm not even if it wouldn't violate the forum rules (I assume they would frown on gambling.)

Her writing style strikes me as very similar to the style I see from [urlhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/]Love, Joy, Femenism[/url] an atheist blogger who often writes about raising her children outside of the oppressive quiver-full environment in which she was raised.

Standard internet betting-for-debate-points involves the losing party making a small charitable donation to a third party charity of the winning party's choice. (Generally one that can be Paypal-donated to.) This also tends to require a limited time frame.

E.g., $5, American Red Cross, and a month deadline for reflection, change, and revision on her part to come out with Article #2: The Sequel. Even odds seem fair to me - I think, given the landslide of the comments section, a follow-up of some kind seems >50%. I suspect that the probability she posts a follow-up and that follow-up shows her saying that she's changing is <50%, but not by all that much. Pessimistically, I wouldn't go below 33%. You, I think, are somewhere on >50% end.

The problem, of course, is that adjudicating that is clearly subjective, given the number of people who think this article implies some sort of change of parenting behavior... It's bad form to have to argue over whether or not you won the bet.

So let's just say that I wouldn't be surprised if she does, and that I wouldn't be surprised if she doubles down saying she wasn't doing anything wrong. But I don't see that narrative of progress as present in this article.

[Tahar Joblis]

Not only are you compaining about technique

Nope. You're the one that brought up the "five paragraph essay."

putting all of your stock in dismissing out of hand all the of the statements that invalidate your laughably bad premise based on their spacing in the article...

Nope. Desperate Measures, Fartsniffage, etc brought up the "spacing in the article" [ordering of the article] as a method of constructing a narrative of progress.

Except that appeal to order as a method of emphasis falls apart once you realize that statements like the closing statement are all over the article in the first place.

You're attacking me for doing the things I'm criticizing in others. Which would be more fitting if you were accusing me of hypocrisy. Would you mind moving over to the tu quoque attacks? You'll be more entertaining if you do.

This is a laughably bad defense of a terribly forced reading of the article.

This is not a "forced reading."

And do you know how I can know it's not a "forced" reading of the text? Because it's the natural reading. Most of the comments, and in particular most of the top-rated comments, agree with me in my reading of the text.

[Vandario]

way I see it OP it the nail right on the head, kids are kdis they want to play explore and learn, devolved friendships and experience the world around them, at this point in the little girls life she most likely doesn't care much if she likes boys or girls because she's developing, and to make it serious can be damaging to someone so young, as well no parent should force something on their kid just because they are, straight or gay, let them be who they are, and teach them to be the best version of themselves

[Desperate Measures]

Not only are you compaining about technique

Nope. You're the one that brought up the "five paragraph essay."

putting all of your stock in dismissing out of hand all the of the statements that invalidate your laughably bad premise based on their spacing in the article...

Nope. Desperate Measures, Fartsniffage, etc brought up the "spacing in the article" [ordering of the article] as a method of constructing a narrative of progress.

Except that appeal to order as a method of emphasis falls apart once you realize that statements like the closing statement are all over the article in the first place.

You're attacking me for doing the things I'm criticizing in others. Which would be more fitting if you were accusing me of hypocrisy. Would you mind moving over to the tu quoque attacks? You'll be more entertaining if you do.

This is a laughably bad defense of a terribly forced reading of the article.

This is not a "forced reading."

And do you know how I can know it's not a "forced" reading of the text? Because it's the natural reading. Most of the comments, and in particular most of the top-rated comments, all agree with me.

What the hell? I talked about her progress as a parent. Not the spacing of the article. You did that nonsense on your own. I love nonsense - but that wasn't my nonsense.

[Tahar Joblis]

Nope. You're the one that brought up the "five paragraph essay."

Nope. Desperate Measures, Fartsniffage, etc brought up the "spacing in the article" [ordering of the article] as a method of constructing a narrative of progress.

Except that appeal to order as a method of emphasis falls apart once you realize that statements like the closing statement are all over the article in the first place.

You're attacking me for doing the things I'm criticizing in others. Which would be more fitting if you were accusing me of hypocrisy. Would you mind moving over to the tu quoque attacks? You'll be more entertaining if you do.

This is not a "forced reading."

And do you know how I can know it's not a "forced" reading of the text? Because it's the natural reading. Most of the comments, and in particular most of the top-rated comments, all agree with me.

What the hell? I talked about her progress as a parent. Not the spacing of the article. You did that nonsense on your own. I love nonsense - but that wasn't my nonsense.

Your side - the small mob of angry anti-TJs - came up with it:

And when your friends are telling you that you're putting pressure on your kid and to ease up for their sake? Well, your friends are probably right. Step back, self-confessed overbearing parent, step back!

Which is exactly what the writer of the editorial is saying that she is doing. Jesus Christ, the piece is not that long and it comes at the end.

Try to think of it this way, it's not a fucking manifesto, it's a narrative of a progression in attitude through time as a parent. The end is more important than the beginning.

And continued to repeat it, by the way:

As I said, the narrative doesn't show progress, as we see that several times elsewhere, and the response is simply rationalization.

Let's look at the final thing the author says. The sign-off, the conclusion, the thing that's supposed to be remembered when writing in this style -

She was right. I’m a slightly overbearing pro-gay gay mom. But I’m going to support my daughter, whatever choices she makes.

That is progress. Moving from wanting to have a gay daughter to deciding to support any decision the daughter makes. And it's what the author wants us readers to take from the editorial.

[Cannot think of a name]

the small mob of angry anti-TJs

Oh hell no, is this what this whole display is about? Fuck that shit, I'm out. You can suck your own dick.

[Fartsniffage]

What the hell? I talked about her progress as a parent. Not the spacing of the article. You did that nonsense on your own. I love nonsense - but that wasn't my nonsense.

Your side - the small mob of angry anti-TJs - came up with it:

Which is exactly what the writer of the editorial is saying that she is doing. Jesus Christ, the piece is not that long and it comes at the end.

Try to think of it this way, it's not a fucking manifesto, it's a narrative of a progression in attitude through time as a parent. The end is more important than the beginning.

And continued to repeat it, by the way:

Let's look at the final thing the author says. The sign-off, the conclusion, the thing that's supposed to be remembered when writing in this style -



That is progress. Moving from wanting to have a gay daughter to deciding to support any decision the daughter makes. And it's what the author wants us readers to take from the editorial.

Your complete lack of understanding of literary techniques not withstanding, do you have any actual response to what I said?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Your side - the small mob of angry anti-TJs - came up with it:

There is no mob of "angry anti-TJs", small or otherwise.

If there are a number of people poking holes in your argument, then that is not necessarily an indication of a mob mentality. It may very well be that your argument has numerous and significant holes.

[Dakini]

Jesus, fuck. Why is anyone reading the comments on the article and taking their agreement as a sign of being right? 99% of the people who respond to newspaper website articles are barely literate idiots who totally fail to understand shit-all.

So good job. Some idiot who probably spends all day insulting journalists for being left wing and deliberately misreads articles like this because they fear the dreaded homosexual agenda agrees with you.

I mean, seriously. What is even supposed to be the point of talking about the comments section of the article? Is it "People somewhere else on the internet agree with me, even if you people who managed to read and understand the article didn't"?

[Nazi Flower Power]

Are people still trying to turn this article into something controversial?

[Dakini]

Are people still trying to turn this article into something controversial?

I'm not sure. There seems to be some sort of "the writing was shitty because it was a professional editorial instead of a high school essay and was therefore written in a different style (when high school essay style is the only acceptable way to write anything)" crusade...

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Are people still trying to turn this article into something controversial?

I'm not sure. There seems to be some sort of "the writing was shitty because it was a professional editorial instead of a high school essay and was therefore written in a different style (when high school essay style is the only acceptable way to write anything)" crusade...

man you can't expect anything from some people

[Sun Wukong]

I'm not sure. There seems to be some sort of "the writing was shitty because it was a professional editorial instead of a high school essay and was therefore written in a different style (when high school essay style is the only acceptable way to write anything)" crusade...

man you can't expect anything from some people

I demand my editorials be written in Vedic Sanskrit, and iambic heptameter.

[Dakini]

I'm not sure. There seems to be some sort of "the writing was shitty because it was a professional editorial instead of a high school essay and was therefore written in a different style (when high school essay style is the only acceptable way to write anything)" crusade...

man you can't expect anything from some people

I'm just thinking about what would have happened if I'd tried writing my PhD thesis as a 5 paragraph essay or in a format similar to that. The committee probably would have laughed at me instead of giving me my PhD.

Hell, I can't even imagine submitting an article written like that to a peer-review journal.

[Tahar Joblis]

the small mob of angry anti-TJs

Oh hell no, is this what this whole display is about? Fuck that shit, I'm out. You can suck your own dick.

I posted in this thread; then Russels Orbiting Teapot asked me to clarify my position.

In response to that, Fartsniffage jumped in to reply with the following ad hominem attack:

It's TJ and the person who wrote the editorial was a woman. Do the math.

Desperate Measures was, at the time, already in the middle of a conversation with Fartsniffage and jumped in to echo Fartsniffage.

You then jumped in to defend Fartsniffage, with a fairly insane claim that I was relying on the order of the text in order to prove a positive claim. Voila, a small mob. As far as the anti-TJ part, well, that's evident on the face of it.

Your remarkable claim, of course, ignored the fact that Fartsniffage was the one making a positive claim related to the ordering and format of the text. Not me. Here's how things went:

Fartsniffage #1: Ad hominem attack.
TJ#1: Call out ad hominem as fallacious and further debunk by pointing out that very different people arrive at the same interpretations of the article I had.
Fartsniffage #2: Claim that the article follows a clear narrative of progression in attitude, as shown by the end of the article and its privileged position as the end of an article in this format of article.
TJ#2: Point out that there is no such progression visible, and nothing special about what is said at the end of the article as opposed to throughout it.
Fartsniffage #3: Essentially a repeat of Fartsniffage #2.
Fartsniffage #4: New claim: "Punch to the gut" must mean "change of attitude."
TJ #3: Pointing out the "punch to the gut" could just refer to feeling bad about being shamed by a friend without any actual intent to change behavior.
Fartsniffage #5: Question (which I did not bother to answer by quote, since I said it half a dozen times elsewhere) about what the author of the article was doing wrong.
Fartsniffage #6: Repetition of claim in #2. (And #3.) Still no attempt to address TJ #2.
Fartsniffage #7: Impatient demand for response.

So. As CTOAN said, appealing to something showing up at the end of the article isn't really getting you very far. It especially falls flat as an argument because the closing line is a platitude repeated in several forms elsewhere in the article; and because at the end, as with everywhere else in the article, it's accompanied by a demonstration that she is an overbearing mother. Nowhere in the article does it come anywhere near to:

(A) An admission that she is doing anything wrong.
(B) A statement that she has changed her mind about anything.
(C) A statement that she has changed, or will change, her parenting techniques.

Fartsniffage has made a positive claim that there is a visible narrative of progression, and appealed to the order of the text. I have pointed out that (A), (B), and (C) are nowhere visible in the article.

[The Conez Imperium]

"Children aren't colouring books, you don't get to choose the colour"