It’s difficult to be a good parent in our culture today. The forces pulling your child away from you — the corrupting influences that seek to degrade him and destroy his soul — are more numerous and more powerful and more ubiquitous and unavoidable, and have more immediate access to him, than at any other point in human history. This is why it is so easy to fail at parenting, but also why it is so crucial that we don’t.

For that reason I’m always troubled when some confused, fatally stupid and inept parenting method arises. Every few years a fancy new parenting trend seems to crop up. They always have different names and present themselves as different strategies, but they are basically the same bad ideas repackaged and resold over and over again. You’ll notice that up until the latter half of the last century, there were no parenting trends or parenting methods. You didn’t have different types of parenting. There was only parenting. If you’d asked your great grandfather what parenting strategy he preferred — if you asked him if he was a “conscious parent” or a “helicopter parent” or a “positive parent” or whatever — he would have looked at you confused, not understanding the question. Or else he would have shown you his belt. 

In recent decades, thanks in large part to the psychiatric industry, parenting has become much more complicated than it needs to be, with too many competing strategies — all of them seemingly designed to make your child into a dysfunctional, needy, entitled little hellion. And in that way, they’ve been extremely successful. 

Which brings us to a parenting trend that has gotten a lot of attention lately. It’s called “gentle parenting.” If you have ever ventured into the world of TikTok and Instagram parents, you are familiar with this term. It’s a style of parenting gaining popularity especially in my generation. A recent survey of millennial parents conducted by Lurie Children’s Hospital in Chicago found that a staggering 75 percent use the gentle parenting technique.

WATCH THE TRAILER FOR ‘AM I RACIST?’ — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI

So what is gentle parenting? The website parents.com has an explainer on the subject: 

Gentle parenting is a peaceful, positive style of parenting that is very different from that of previous generations of parents. It is but one of many styles of parenting out there. From authoritative and permissive to free-range and conscious parenting, there are seemingly more variations than a burnt-out parent can count. But if you’re looking to add a new approach to your arsenal, you may want to consider gentle parenting.

Before parents.com tells us exactly what this approach consists of, we should make note of one thing. We’re told that gentle parenting is “very different from that of previous generations of parens.” That’s true. And also the whole problem. I’m not saying that we should parent exactly as our own parents and grandparents did. I’m not saying that previous generations of parents didn’t make mistakes. But previous generations of parents did parent the people who built human civilization. They parented the pioneers and poets and philosophers and artists and inventors and warriors and leaders who accomplished incomprehensible feats of heroism and genius, and who gave us every good and wonderful and beautiful thing we have in our lives. Old fashioned parenting has a track record. It’s the parenting that took us from mud huts to the moon. What has modern parenting produced? Does it have a similar record of success? Or has it instead produced multiple generations of depressed, lazy, overgrown brats stuck in a perpetual state of emotional and mental adolescence? I’ll let you answer that question for yourself.

WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show

The point is: we should be immediately suspicious of a “very different” style of parenting. Why is it very different? Was old fashioned parenting broken? If not, why are we fixing it? 

Continuing:

Gentle parenting is a means of parenting without shame, blame, or punishment. It is centered on partnership as both parents and children have a say in this collaborative style…. “Gentle parenting, also known as collaborative parenting, is a style of parenting where parents do not compel children to behave by means of punishment or control, but rather use connection, communication, and other democratic methods to make decisions together as a family,” says Danielle Sullivan, a parenting coach… “Gentle parenting teaches children that they can be active in the world, set their own boundaries, trust their own needs, and make their voices heard.

Now there is a lot wrong with what I just read. Using “democratic methods” in your home is a recipe for dysfunction and chaos. As the father and head of my household, I am not presiding over a democracy. I was not elected to my position. Even if my children voted to throw me out of office, I would remain in power. Our system of government in the United States, in theory anyway, depends on the consent of the governed. My home does not. If your home does, that certainly means — without exception — that you have failed as a parent and your children are the kinds of horrible, out of control, miniature terrorists who nobody wants to be around, and who, without miraculous intervention, will grow into maladapted, miserable adults. 

To explain why, it may be helpful to take a look at some examples of gentle parenting in action. In fact this article provides one: 

If you’re looking for a way to incorporate gentle parenting into your life, your best bet is to start small… Model what you want to see on a regular basis. Practice kindness, compassion, and empathy at all times. And try to be less demanding and commanding. Instead of saying “tie your shoes,” make it a suggestion. Something like “Do you think you should tie your shoes so you don’t trip?

The first few sentences of this paragraph start out fine, but then we’re told that you should be “less demanding and commanding.” This is only half right. Less demanding, sure. But you should be commanding. Demands are weak. Demands are made by people who are not in control but want to be. Kidnappers and bank robbers make demands. Demands are desperate and weak. It means that you are not in control of yourself or your surroundings. To demand respect is to pathetically and impotently request it. It is to shout “respect me!” because nobody does. But to command respect is to be regarded with esteem, admiration, and obedience without asking for it. If you have to demand respect from your children, it means that you are not commanding respect. So you should be less demanding because you are more commanding. But to be neither demanding nor commanding is to be a figure with no authority or respect at all. 

So instead of telling your child, “tie your shoes,” you’re encouraged to say, “Do you think you should tie your shoes so you don’t trip?” This is all wrong. A strong leader knows what things must be done and gives clear, concise, and confident instructions accordingly. Tying shoes is a thing that must be done. It doesn’t matter if your child thinks he should tie his shoes. You don’t need to build a consensus on the matter. You don’t need to put a referendum up for a vote to democratically establish the necessity of tying shoes. And what if he says that, no, he doesn’t think he should? What then? Will you respect him as an equal and let him fall down the steps and break his neck? Or will you tell him to tie them anyway? If the latter — and I hope it’s the latter — what was the point of asking the question in the first place? 

Your child is a child. He has no idea what he’s doing, what he should be doing, or what’s going on. He needs to know that you know. He needs to know that you are confident and secure in your position as the leader.

Here’s a parenting secret for you: a child wants to be told what to do. He doesn’t want open ended questions and limitless options. He wants direction. He may not know that he wants it. He may say that he doesn’t want it. But that’s because he doesn’t understand his own wants, much less his needs. If you give instructions — not requests, instructions — and you do it clearly and firmly, he will be a happier kid. He will feel safer, more loved, and will end up a better person in the long run.

This is the major problem with the “gentle parenting” method. It relies heavily on “partnering” with children who don’t know what’s best for them and are relying on you to know instead. You should not be looking to make your child a partner in his own parenting, any more than you’d want the captain of your plane to invite you to be a co-pilot. Your captain’s commitment to democratic equality may flatter you for a moment, but it also makes it much more likely that you’ll die a fiery death.

If you go over to TikTok, as mentioned, you’ll find many examples of influencers promoting gentle parenting, and they all run into the same problem. Here’s one popular gentle parenting video from a guy with 12 million followers on the platform:

Now, it will not surprise you to learn that the comments — and there are hundreds of them — are all from people applauding this strategy and saying that they wish this guy was their own dad. That’s because most of the comments are likely from teenagers who, for obvious reasons, would love to have a dad who only grounds them if they agree that it’s fair, and who will still let them go to parties even when they’re grounded. Which is like the court sentencing you to house arrest, but then telling you that your house, for these purposes, includes anywhere on the Earth.

Of course, in real life, if you tell your teenage daughter that she’s grounded and then ask her if it’s fair, in a million cases out of a million, she will say “no.” What then? Will you respect her opinion and validate her perspective by throwing out the punishment? If so, what was the point of the whole exercise, other than making you look emasculated and weak? And if you will stick with the punishment even though she says it’s unfair, what was the point of asking her whether it’s fair or not?

This is what gentle parenting is all about. It’s designed to make parents look indecisive and pathetic in the eyes of their children. Here’s another example:

Dear God. That video has 360 thousand likes by the way. Let me see if I have this right. Your daughter slammed the freezer door, lectured you, and instructed you not to eat food without her permission, and you stood there, tail between your legs like a scolded puppy and just took it? You allowed yourself to be chastised and reprimanded by your own daughter? You permitted her to rebuke you for eating your food that you purchased? This is disordered in the extreme.

What you and your husband should be communicating is that the ice cream is your ice cream. It is your fridge. Your kitchen. Your house. You don’t have to ask her for permission to do anything. She should be grateful that she has a roof over her head, a room to sleep in, and food to eat. You’re so generous that you even buy her ice cream sometimes. The only attitude you should accept from her is gratitude for the things you give her and the life your provide for her. And if she speaks to you that way, you should not respond by promising to give her more snacks in the future. No, you should take away snacks, take away privileges, take away freedom until she learns how to speak to you and afford you the respect that she owes you. The only things you have to give her are the basic necessities to keep her alive. Everything else is a privilege, and privileges can and should be revoked if they are not deserved.

I had to give my own daughter a lecture like this recently. She wasn’t scolding me for eating my own food out of my own fridge, and wouldn’t dare talk to me like that. But she did tell me, after I reprimanded her for not keeping her room clean, that it’s her room and she doesn’t know why I care so much whether it’s clean or not. I did not validate her feelings or get down to her level to make sure that she felt seen and heard. I didn’t get on my knees and look her in the eyes and say “I’m sorry you feel that way, sweetie. That must be so hard. I’d just really like it if your room was clean. Is that fair?”

No, instead I stood there and simply said: “No, it’s not your room. It’s my room. It’s my house. I let you stay in this room under certain conditions. One of those conditions is that you keep it clean. That’s a requirement. Not a request. I’m going downstairs and when I come back up in an hour, it will be clean.” That’s it. I wasn’t negotiating or asking for permission or trying to come to a consensus. I simply asserted my authority, gave the instruction, and made sure that I was clear.

It wasn’t any kind of revolutionary parenting technique. It was just parenting.

I want to play one more gentle parenting video for you. Another thing you hear from the gentle parents is that you shouldn’t punish your children. You should instead rely on “natural consequences.” What does that mean? Well here’s another popular parenting TikTok influencer named Dr. Chelsey — she has a doctorate in education, but still uses the “doctor” prefix — explaining how consequences should work:

Well you should know from the start not to pay attention to a parenting guru who can’t even get her own kids to be quiet for two minutes so she can record a video. More to the point, there’s a major problem with the consequences she suggests. She calls them “natural” — I don’t even know what that’s supposed to mean in this context — but they would more aptly be called flimsy and toothless. The problem with a “consequence” like pulling the car over momentarily before you start driving again, or taking TV away only until dinner, is that those consequences cause no discomfort, pain, or even inconvenience to your children. They aren’t going to care about the consequences because there’s no reason to care. A consequence should be something that causes them enough grief that they want to avoid it in the future. No other consequence has any meaning or will have any impact.

Think of the consequences that she says don’t work: taking away screen time, grounding, taking away a party that they were supposed to go to. But those are all good consequences, effective consequences, because they are consequences a child will not like. A child will be upset about losing screen time, losing a party, etc. And that’s the whole point of the consequence. If they are not upset with the consequence, then it was not a consequence.

The problem is that many parents today are terrified of making their children upset. They’d rather be friends than authority figures. They’re so focused on “validating” their kids that they’ve lost all sight of the much more important job, which is guiding, instructing, and civilizing their kids. That is the primary role of a parent. That IS parenting. Gentle parenting — like so many modern methods to come before it, and so many that will come after — may more accurately be called non-parenting. It is not a new way of fulfilling your parenting duties, but a way of abdicating them entirely.

As a commodities trader, I rarely dabble in equities other than the ole 401k and IRA. But it behooves traders in any market to pay attention to activity in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), S&P 500 Index (SPX) and NASDAQ Composite Index (Nasdaq) as they can be a harbinger of demand for energy and raw materials down the road.

As of this writing, the DJIA is down roughly 750 points today, the SPX down 134, both just under a 2% decline. For the DJIA, this represents an almost 6% decline from last month’s all-time high and 8% for the SPX.  The tech-heavy Nasdaq is down a shade at more than 2% today, compounding a 12% retracement from its all-time high, which is more interesting and concerning.

So what’s happening? Several factors seem to be at play here. Some fundamental, some international, some even psychological.

First the fundamentals. The Nasdaq has been propelled to record highs recently on big bets in AI stocks. But after the disappointing earnings from tech goliaths Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, Alphabet and Apple, the luster seems to have faded, at least in the short term. Meta seems to be the bright exception, although it’s not helping its share price.  And Intel, once a tech giant now playing catch-up in the AI game, had its worst day in 50 years last Friday and is down another 5% today — it is down an astounding 41% on the year.

The broad sell-off was more or less triggered on Friday when the monthly jobs report was weaker than expected, adding only 114,000 new jobs when 175,000 was the expectation. Unemployment also grew, climbing from 4.1% to 4.3%, igniting fears that the economy may be slowing down. This, of course, is bearish in any environment let alone one already teetering under the weight of disappointing earnings when markets are at lifetime highs.

This turns traders’ attention to The Fed, which many now say has been too slow to lower rates (which it steadily raised in response to 40-year-high inflation levels). High rates for too long stifle an economy’s ability to expand as the cost of money remains high. In response, traders did what they always do — they dumped their stocks and moved their money into the safe haven of bonds, just as I explain in my latest book. They anticipate The Fed will have to be more aggressive in its future rate cuts to play catch-up with a cooling economy.

One more factor to consider. The Nikkei Stock Average Volatility Index (Nikkei 225 VI) has rocketed to the highest levels since first being tracked in 2001. This is a direct result of dumping Japanese stocks due to the rising yen against the dollar. Why does this matter? Many trades in the market (too detailed for this format) are made with the assumption of cheap yen borrowing. This has been upended in recent days as the Bank of Japan raised rates last week. This, combined with belief that the U.S. central bank must move to cut rates quickly, has sent the dollar-to-yen spread surging. Japan, the fourth largest economy in the world, is in a bind.

Raise rates to curb inflation and the cost of money (in this case the yen) rises, causing the markets to tumble. Lower rates to stimulate the economy and the currency is devalued and thus triggers inflation. Rinse and repeat. Oh, to be a central banker in Tokyo today. No thanks!

To recap: earnings bad, economic data bad, Fed action too late, Japan bad. And here we are.

There is also a psychological factor in all this as markets are, in the end, human constructs. All this uncertainty as to Fed action and slowing economic growth has led to increased volatility in the equities markets as reflected in the CBOE Market Volatility Index (VIX). As of this writing, this number has spiked up just under a whopping 39% — levels not seen since May 2020. By way of comparison, though, its current level of 32.5 is still half what the VIX was in March 2020. But when you consider it is still almost double what it was just three trading sessions ago, this is worth watching. Investors — not to be confused with traders — loathe uncertainty. And when they feel their spidey senses tingling, as volatility is just a measure of uncertainty they tend to initiate what is known as a “flight to quality.” Dumping stocks and buying bond futures in anticipation of The Fed trying to salvage a cooling economy by making dollars, thus investment capital, cheaper through interest rate cuts. A bond future’s value is inverse to interest rates. As such, rates go down, bond futures go up and yields go down.

WATCH THE TRAILER FOR ‘AM I RACIST?’ — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI

As you can see, emotion is often a driver of these sell-offs. One which has put the Nasdaq in official “correction” territory. Having been in the markets for over three decades, one can see this same pattern repeating itself again and again. Investors move like a shoal of fish, and once the mass of dealers changes course, they tend to run in that direction for a while. 

The most important question an investor must ask is this: Is this the beginning of a prolonged and painful sell-off in equities (and concurrent rally in bonds)? Or is this a buying opportunity? And if I knew the answer to either of those questions, I’d be writing this from my destroyer-sized yacht in Monte Carlo rather than a little trading office in New Jersey. But I do know that, in markets especially, history repeats itself. Because people are the same, even if the manner in which they transact has changed due to technology.

So, we shall see what today, which is really a continuation of the rumblings The Street began to experience in its gut last week, portends.

For what it’s worth, the crash of 1987, one of the greatest buying opportunities in a generation, saw the DJIA plummet 22% in one day, as opposed to 2% today. It just feels more dramatic because, obviously, 2% of 40,000 is nominally bigger than 22% of 2,300. Therefore, much of the strum und drang could be emotions taking place of analysis.

Whether this is a hiccup or the big one remains to be seen. Only time will tell.

* * *

Brad Schaeffer is a commodities trader, columnist, and author of two acclaimed novels. Along with Daily Wire, his articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, New York Daily News, New York Post, National Review, The Federalist, The Hill and other media outlets. His newest book, LIFE IN THE PITS: My Time as a Trader on the Rough-and-Tumble Exchange Floors, is a fun and informative memoir of his time as a floor trader in Chicago and New York. You can also find more of Brad’s articles on Substack.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.