We got the kids Fitbits recently, and they seem to really like them. Lil' S2 especially has become obsessed with measuring his daily step total. (It combines two things he likes -- movement and counting.) He regularly goes over 20,000 steps a day, sometimes breaking 25,000. That sounds crazy high to my adult ears. The average for an adult is around 2,500 steps per day, and 10,000 is the standard "trying to be healthy" goal. And he frequently doubles it. That's pure little boy energy. He gets in 2,000 -- 3,000 steps before we even leave the house for school in the morning. After breakfast, he'll usually just walk in a circle around our kitchen and living room until it's time to go.
Lil' S1 is not as hardcore (he usually gets 6,000 -- 7,000 a day), but I do think a Fitbit has helped him become a little more active. It's almost like a video game and your total steps is your score. Also, I started a new thing where if he wants screen time, he has to walk for 20 minutes. He willingly accepts the deal (and often proposes it himself), which is good, as there are few things that make you feel more like an overbearing parent than forcing your child to do physical activity. It's like you're Marv Marinovich, except your kid isn't going to make the NFL.
It's funny how two kids with basically the same upbringing can diverge so much in their interests and development. In our case, the simplistic breakdown is: Lil' S1 takes after S and Lil' S2 takes after me. It's not a perfect mapping, but it is a pretty good heuristic. An illustration of this is their weekly spelling tests. When Lil' S1 was his brother's age, he struggled mightily with these tests. Eventually he would learn the weekly list, but it would take an intense study session every night to do so. Lil' S1 memorizes the entire list perfectly in about ten minutes. We have a stack of tests on our fridge right now and all but one of them is a 100%.*
*I think it would be cool if Lil' S2 became a spelling champion. Indian-Americans dominate the ranks of the top spellers, and so it would be funny if people were like Oh, right, he's half-Indian. That makes sense. And then I'd be like No, that's his white side! I'm a much better speller than his mother!
On the flip-side, Lil' S1 is light-years ahead of his brother when it comes to navigating the world -- and it's not just because he's older. He's never been scared to talk to people, even adults, or try things on his own. An example of this occurred when we went to the library. Lil' S2 wanted a football book (like a little me), but he didn't know where to look, and he didn't want to ask the librarian (like a little -- and big -- me), so Lil' S1 is like I'll find it for you. And he just goes up to the front desk and asks.
That's totally an S characteristic -- getting what you want by having the gumption to ask for it. It seems like a simple skill, but it's not. I've never really had it. My strategy has been to get good at something and do it over and over until people eventually take notice. It's served me decently, but I think I could've done a lot more if I were a little more bold. It's why S makes more money than me.
And... as I'm writing this, Lil' S2 just came back home from his friend's birthday party. He was supposed to stay for two hours, but he only stayed for 30 minutes, and he didn't participate in the festivities (a video game truck). It's his neighborhood friend, and he spends almost every weekend day at his house, but because this kid is a grade below him, they don't hang out much at school. This birthday had a lot of the boy's school friends at it, and so since it was a different social dynamic, Lil' S2 felt uncomfortable and didn't want to stay. This is not a reaction Lil' S1 would be likely to have. (In fact, once he found out there was a video game truck there, he wanted to go to the party even though he wasn't invited. Ple-e-e-e-ase! I can just take my brother's place!)
Anyway...
In other news, "lab leak" is back in the public consciousness. Apparently, Covid did come from a lab after all -- according to some government agencies with "low confidence" at least. The correct answer here, in my opinion, is "maybe," followed by "we will likely never know for sure." But this news, along with a study suggesting that mask mandates don't work, provided yet more examples of how badly the powers-that-be got the Covid response so, so wrong. And this applies to both sides of the political aisle. The left foolishly insisted on super invasive, very unpopular and unhelpful (or in some cases downright harmful) measures such as mask mandates and school closures, while the right spread misinformation about Bill Gates controlling you with vaccines or whatever.
On the lab leak, I think far too many people fell victim to the "bad people have bad ideas" fallacy. Because this theory was pushed so heavily on the right by dipshits like Donald Trump and Steve Bannon and liberal foils like Tom Cotton, people on the left reflexively pushed back against it and called it xenophobic and racist. I don't think I need to point out why this is a fallacious way to form opinions. But I will. Not only is it a great way to consistently look stupid, it gives people you don't like way too much power over you. It's like a reverse form of mind control. It reminds me of a Robert Smith (lead singer of The Cure) quote about Morrisey (lead singer of The Smiths): “If Morrissey says not to eat meat, then I'm going to eat meat; that's how much I hate Morrissey." It's funny as a barb, but not so funny as a real-life practice.
On mask mandates, I think it very quickly became very obvious that they don't work. (I wrote about this a year ago.) I still believe masking done properly can reduce the spread of Covid, but not mask mandates. The reason for this is simple: people, even when mandated to do so, don't wear masks properly. Theoretically they could, but they don't.* And short of some sort of Chinese-style police-state enforcement, what can anybody do about it?
*It's not just selfishness or spite or what have you either. It's difficult even for well-intentioned people to follow mask mandates. You become complacent; you can't help it. Also, you have to take it off to eat or drink, which is a huge flaw with entire endeavor.
I think as a society we focused way too much on communal masking and not enough on personal masking. We would have been much better off instructing people on the best way to mask to keep themselves safe regardless of what others around them are doing. I know that masks are better at keeping others safe from the mask-wearer than they are at keeping the mask-wearer safe from others, but having to rely on others to keep you safe has the obvious downside of having to rely on others to keep you safe. A good mask worn properly at all times can still help protect you.
But we chose not to promote the "save yourself" narrative on masking, and I think I know why. It's a personal-responsibility messages, and the people who supported and implemented mask mandates (mainly liberals) mostly hate personal-responsibility messages. (They don't jibe well with the all-problems-in-life-are-caused-by-priviledged-people-oppressing-marginalized-communities mindset.) Paul Krugman used to talk about the "cult of selfishness" on the right, but I think now there is a "cult of the collective" on the left. Neither one coheres nicely with my normcore sensibilities.
Until next time...
No comments:
Post a Comment