this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Lemmy Be Wholesome

6584 readers
337 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Be Wholesome. This is the polar opposite of LemmeShitpost. Here you can post wholesome memes, palate cleanser and good vibes.

The home to heal your soul. No bleak-posting!

Rules:


1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. No NSFW Content


-Content shouldn't be NSFW

-Refrain from posting triggering content, if the content might be triggering try putting it behind NSFW tags.


7. Content should be Wholesome, we accept cute cats, kittens, puppies, dogs and anything, everything that restores your faith in humanity!


Content that isn't wholesome will be removed.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Mildly Infuriating

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Jokes

7.Credible Defense

...

Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Yes, the babies all said that was the reason when they were interviewed later.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Regardless of the source's background, the information she mentioned actually reflects current knowledge of how infants and older children develop. In order to develop emotion regulation skills, healthy attachment, and social skills, we do naturally look away from our caregiver and others doting on us as a way to self-regulate intense feelings.

In fact, many children can develop attachment and emotion regulation issues if caregivers aren't responsive and share compassion or empathize with a child's behavior (e.g. a baby becoming upset and crying if- when looking away- the caregiver instead tries to get its attention repeatedly and not giving the child a break.) That's why it's important to have some level of emotional intelligence to develop healthy attachments with kids and them with us.

For more information, you can look up attachment theory and theories on human development (Erikson, Piaget, etc.). This is also mentioned here.

Source: Therapist

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

[citation needed]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

In my experience, the first time your child smiles at you, you're overwhelmed with joy and wonder, which is undercut moments late by the realization that your child is not smiling because of you, but because they just took a massive shit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Fake or not it made me smile and I do think/remember children feelings being extremely strong. Minor shit makes kids cry and wallow in despair. We all ought to remember about that more often

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

It's all the best and worst they've ever felt, cause it's all they've known yet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

My adult partner also does this

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That sounds incredibly pulled out of someone's ass.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Source: trust me bro

Also "emoting"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hey, I have no problem with verbing words though. Also emote has been in use for many decades.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

I initially assumed they meant emojiing the chocolate ice cream emoji in their nappies

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

I have a feeling this is like that elephant "fact" that was spread around and I 100% fell for, that elephants look at us and think we're "cute".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Plausible enough, but a good reminder to read the citation before passing along as a fact. That’s how dictatorships come about.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

... they sometimes turn away in the middle of smiling at you because they're so overwhelmed by joy they can't handle all the emotion and have to regulate like Warren G and Nate Dogg.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I hate it when people say shit like this so authoritatively. Like this is some conjecture at best. It’s a baby. No one knows why a baby does this. Someone assumed that and some other people said oh yeah that makes sense.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It doesn't really seem that hard to test? Emotions--at least in their occurrence and strength--are detectable with non-invasive brain scans. We've been doing that for ages. Put some electrodes on a baby, let them see their mommy, watch the graph spike until they turn away.

The argument "how could we know that about babies?" was used, for decades, to justify doing surgery on babies without anesthesia. They can't talk, so who knows if they're feeling pain or not. Guess we can safely assume they don't. Point being, we don't have to have a conversation with them about it to know why they're doing something.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Oh yeah let me just plug in an fmri and find out if someone is definitively experiencing “joy”. That’s high level somewhat subjective emotion, not pain. Neurological understanding is not nearly as advanced as you think it is. I spent my post doc doing fmri research; the best thing you could come up with here is “areas of the brain associate with pleasure are highly activated” but even that doesn’t necessarily indicate the baby feels overwhelmed. Maybe I’m wrong and there’s some fancier neuroscientist out their that can read baby brains but I doubt it

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Yeah baby please stand still for the brainscan... Or try to laugh while your head is restrained in a vise. Easy peasy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

While I think scanning baby brains is not really viable for this (see my other reply) they actually do basically put babies in a restraint for X-rays and neurological scans that looks pretty fucked up. But I mean if a baby is having seizures or has a suspected broken bone you have to get imaging, even if it’s kind of cruel

!(https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/5247993e-4362-4606-96c2-928b4ee7669a.jpeg)

!(https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3369d6b4-8c42-4899-b5a3-41bac83d8d66.jpeg)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

EEG's aren't that uncomfortable.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You don't know what an EEG is, do you?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I replied to someone mentioning a brain 'scan' though. You know what an EEG is but... Do you know what that G stands for?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You know how to discourage people from learning, don't you?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Only people who make fun of those who know more from a position of ignorance

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

How ironic of you

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

We interviewed 10,000 babies and learned jack shit

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Or like a study in UK concluded: fuck all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

We interviewed 10,000 babies and the most common answer were:

giggle

cry

smile

shit themselves

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

My first thought what how the fuck could you possibly know that

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's nicer to believe than my baby turned away because it's tummy hurts from laughing at my face too much.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

their*, babies aren't objects

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Excellent point! I stand corrected.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

it isn‘t tummy 😉

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn’t this woman some sort of religious fundamentalist?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

She is religious, and writes opinion articles, so I wouldn't take anything she says any more seriously than anything you read here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Bruenig

https://www.theatlantic.com/author/elizabeth-bruenig/

This makes me think she's probably not a fundie.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/

load more comments
view more: next ›