I sometimes wonder about the effect on the doomers kids. Wednesday, 01-Sep-1999 14:59:08

Paul Davis writes:

I think everyone here knows I am not one of the "do it for the children" characters. But I do wonder what the long term effect will be on the children of the doomers.

From the point where the parents began to obsess about Y2K on - the kids will have been scared to death. Doomer kids that have spoken to reporters say things like 'next year everything will be gone' or 'I hate it that I will not get to finish high school or go to college' and even things like 'it is awful that so many people are going to die'. Now those things just are not going to happen. And the kids will be forced to realize their parents are fools.

To put the icing on the cake - many kids have been moved away from friends and family. Families have broken up over Y2K. In others, there has been a LOT of friction between the parents. Divorces have resulted, as have suicides.

Would anyone here be surprised to be hearing about the MENTAL PROBLEMS of Y2K KIDS in a few years?

Paul Davis

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb723589&MyNum=936212348&P=No&TL=936212348

-- a (a@a.a), September 01, 1999

Answers

Would anyone here be surprised to be hearing about the MENTAL PROBLEMS of Y2K KIDS in a few years?

Nope. Just add it to the very long list of existing problems.

-- Peg (peg@debunkie.II), September 01, 1999.

"Now those things just are not going to happen..."

I'm glad Paul Davis has his crystal ball working.

But... What about polly kids if TS really does HTF? I don't think anyone will be too worried about their mental health.

-- (dot@dot.dot), September 01, 1999.

"I think everyone here knows I am not one of the "do it for the children" characters."

Phew! That's a relief. Anecdotally, it appears that pollies have far fewer children than GIs, often none. That means our side will win in the long-run. As we should.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 01, 1999.

It's no different than putting your children into public schools where they teach your children how to put a condom over a cucumber. Or the new diversity classes in homosexuality for grade school children in New York. I hope Y2K kids get a good education on where this country is headed. I hope while they are holed up in their house with their parents that good morals and values will be taught and the next generation can be decent and well-mannered adults. Y2K is something that needs to happen, parents and children will be brought together and hopefully some decency will come out of it.

-- hope it happens (hopeithappens@hopeithappenss.com), September 01, 1999.

This guy Davis is substantially off the wall. He has these huge and irrational fears about the kids of Doomers. I would suggest that he spend some time and energy considering the impacts of a long, cold, dark and hungry winter of 2000 for the children of the polly crowd. In a certain way, I almost agree with "hope-it-happens". People are so hopelessly constipated with this phony emotional diversity junk. Y2K or not, we are in need of a moral awakening. Lets consider the bitter realities, not the touchy-feely nonsense.

Regards,

Irving

-- Irving (Irving@privacy.net), September 01, 1999.

"That means our side will win in the long-run. As we should. "

....not if Darwin has anything to do with it....

-- (no.monkeys@in.kansas), September 01, 1999.

Comment for Paul if he visits anymore:

The duck and cover drills during the 50's didn't scar me. How about you?

-- MoVe Immediate (MVI@yepimhere.com), September 01, 1999.

MVI:

Are you sure? You might be the last to know [g].

And it might be interesting to learn what childhood experience, if any, had such a serious effect on 'a' that he is so much more concerned with finding some reason to insult someone than he is with y2k itself. Yet whatever it was, I'll be he too can't see what's obvious to others. Disturbed? Me? Why, I'll insult you to prove otherwise! Just watch me.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 01, 1999.

Paul Davis does not live in the real world. Apparently anything that threatens his orderly, safe, predictable world view is so terrifying to him that he blots it out completely. If he had been among the innocent Christians the U.S. government murdered at Waco, he would probably have insisted the fires and the explosions were just a pleasant fireworks display on a nice spring morning.

-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), September 01, 1999.

Maybe you are right Flint.

Perhaps it ingrained into my psyche the concept of "planning for the worst and hoping for the best"

-- MoVe Immediate (MVI@yepimhere.com), September 01, 1999.

MVI:

Good possibility, since it may have done the same for me.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 01, 1999.

My children, 15 and 6, completely understand what "could" happen with Y2K. They are not scared, because we are prepared. A friend of my son who spends more time here than at his own house has become frightened because his family is NOT preparing. He gave me a $20 and asked if I could buy some things for him. It broke my heart. I have promised him I will provide for him, but I can't say the same for his family. I think it's only scary to children who feel they have no control over the situation. Still, I never use the words "will happen" over "could happen". I am very carefull not to frighten the little one, although she is the one who takes the most delight in the idea at the moment. (Consider how a child enjoys the occasional black out, with the candles and all, and you could understand that perception from a child)

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), September 01, 1999.

Actually Flint...my dad was a CD director when I was a tot. Maybe all those years of seeing charts of blast range for 20 megaton nukes and maps of hurricane flood potentials took a toll on me. And the outcome is that I now have this serious mental imbalance where I actually think Paul's quotes like "The doomers are selling pot to finance their preps" and "We can run the trains off peanut oil" are funny.

LOL You're a trip Flint.

-- a (a@a.a), September 01, 1999.

I am seriously concerned about Paul Davis, and I am not kidding. When I first started on this forum about a year ago, although I completely disagreed with virtually everything he had to say on Y2K, since his view seemed so naively optimistic, I never saw his posts as anything but rational. And many of the things that he said were indeed worth considering.

I certainly am disappointed by yet another bizarre set of statements attributed to Paul. And I was also very disappointed to recently learn that apparently he was behind the so-called "Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot" smear campaign of a web site. Certainly, at least not in late 1998 nor early 1999, I would not have guessed this about him.

The man may have a real problem. And again, I am not kidding about this.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), September 01, 1999.

Thanks, kritter! My 9 year old niece is VERY aware of the preps that are happening at grandma's for the clan. (niece is the only kid) She's been present for many a conversation about various aspects of the preps, understands that it is all *only in the realm of possibility*, and has made several excellent suggestions. Nobody asked her to get involved, she was interested of her own accord. One of the most intelligent kids I've ever known, she certainly is not scared of anything, and is certainly not suffering from any mental imbalances. It's the polly kids whose folks are in denial that will suffer *if TSHTF.* If nothing happens, niece will forget about the whole thing, IF it turns bad, niece will be warm and fed. Niece thought that the chemical toilet that grandma her gave me last Christmas was a hilarious present...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), September 01, 1999.

ROFLMAO!

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), September 01, 1999.

I'm with Jack. Paul Davis seems to be grasping for straws. He has his own sorta doomer thing going on.

-- Elbow Grease (LBO Grise@aol.com), September 01, 1999.

*Ughgh-uumph*

There, I'm outta my hole. These mental imbalances make me do weird things, you know.

Neat stuff for GI children: Doomer Kids (TM) trading cards!

Yes, there's Camo Carl, hiding in the garden...

and Gus Gunner, ready to blast intruders...

with Canning Annie, Diesel Doug, Jerry Jerky and Flashlight Fred.

Fun to collect and barter with your Doomer pals!

Oooh... It's getting murky again...

Glistening, twitching rutabagas!

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), September 01, 1999.

I suppose if some G.I. parents are looking at their kids and saying, "Heh heh heh, little Susie, you're our last resort food option", it might screw with a few heads. But I'd like to think that there's not too much of that going on, and most kids are grateful their parents are looking out for them.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), September 01, 1999.

I chatted with one woman getting a divorce over y2k. She simply wasn't comfortable with anything short of bridge-burning -- quitting the job, liquidating everything, moving to an armed y2k enclave (and giving them their money), and learning to farm. Her husband was satisfied with 3 weeks of food on hand, and though she was around the bend. No children were involved, though.

I don't know how many such divorces y2k might be causing, but I doubt Paul's fears are justified -- the doom-at-any-cost fanatic legion doesn't seem to be growing any, and divorces are always bad for children whatever the cause, though sometimes not near as bad as if divorce that ought to happen doesn't.

Those whose lives become driven and dominated by a single issue tend generally to make poor spouses or friends or parents. Y2k seems less of a divisive issue than most, because it's temporary.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 01, 1999.

I've always read Paul's posts here, and respectfully disagreed with most of them. I, like others, have noticed a real downturn in Pauls attitude towards the "doomers". Granted, some of it is deserved, but when you start into "it's for the children" territory, it means that you have exhausted your rational arguments. Quite a bit of evil is done in the name of saving the children, Im sad to think that this is where he is headed.

There are a lot of truly F*&ked up parents out there, the ones who may err on the side of over-protecting their kids from a possible bad outcome are the least of them.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 01, 1999.

There must be something else going on in a marriage besides the wife or husband wanting to stock up on some beans and rice. It could be a money issue. Or, the husband or wife go off the deep end emotionally and it's too much for either one to handle. Maybe the husband goes out and buys guns and ammo and scares the crap out of his wife. But that's no reason to get a divorce. Divorce is too easy, and regardless of broken homes, Y2K is what it is.

-- It is what it is (Itiswhatitis@Itiswhatitiss.com), September 01, 1999.

I have to agree with Jack and Uncle Deedah. There has been a definite change in Paul from last year till now. Sometimes "doomers" become irrational and go to the extreme, but it's obvious to me that the same thing can happen to "pollys." How sad- in BOTH cases!

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), September 01, 1999.

I run around with quite a few 'doomers'. In my part of the country it seems that if Joe Sixpack is a GI, his wife is a leader, not a follower. I have seen more divorces over the last year (3) because of the wife going totally bonkers over religion than I have over y2k (0). Of course I have seen far more divorces over the new girl or boyfriend over the last 2 years than any other reason. Sometimes the divorces are .38 caliber in nature.

Don't worry about my kids, Paul. That is, unless you come around where you are not welcome. My granddaughter is a better shot than I am (and I'm pretty good) and she is just 12. She regards all this y2k as a good excuse to sit with the adults and talk. She accepts this situation is for 'might be' not 'will be'. Too bad a 12 year old has more common sense than the pollies such as you.

-- Lobo (atthelair@yahoo.com), September 02, 1999.

"She accepts this situation is for 'might be' not 'will be'. Too bad a 12 year old has more common sense than the pollies such as you."

That just about sums it up for my kids too. They feel "in the loop" as opposed to out of it, and that's a secure feeling for them. Paul D. sells short the resilience and intellect of children, which doesn't suprise me coming from a hard-core polly.

And as for the divorce question, married couples who can't face y2k together now, will not do any better next year if it's more than a BITR. If they can't resolve a difference in opinion such as y2k and it causes divorce, it's because they weren't a good match to begin with. Something else would separate them eventually. Better that they divorce now as contengency planning for the "doomer", IMO. I'd hate to have to face a husband who fought me all the way in preps if it was more than a BITR..."told you so" would be written all over my face and I'd be unable to feel anything but contempt for him from then on.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 02, 1999.

My wife and stepdaughter understand the "might be" and my wife has been supportive, but the bulk of the thinking and prepping has been left to me. I'm getting kind of burned out, thankfully Im' %95 'compliant'.

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), September 02, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California

I would not be at all surprised to learn that divorce statistics have actually trended downward during recent months. People are girding for bad times and battening down hatches and even pollies may be subconsciously affected in this way. Divorces which happen after things finally shake out, however bad things get, may be just ones which were put on the back burner during the end of the millennium.

[Since bad things won't actually happen] the kids will be forced to realize their parents are fools. The only people who could seriously entertain such an opinion are ones who think that being wrong is always a horrible shaming disgrace. This mentality is most dramatic in some cultures that encourage ritual suicide or intra-familial homicide in the face of high profile embarrassment. Like schools, such people leave no room for people to learn from their mistakes. Ironically, being wrong will be a horrible shaming disgrace this time, unlike almost all other times in life, but only if one doesn't prepare and is wrong.

Being prepared can never be wrong, even if the contingency prepared for does not materialize. In case Y2K ends up being a mere bump in the road, most parents will of course be genuinely relieved. Having been prepared would only have served as a powerful demonstration to their children that they are much loved and that their parents are doing their utmost to protect them, even from bad things that might not happen. If parents continue to maintain a high level of disaster preparedness, this can only be psychologically beneficial to children, aside from the survival advantages that practice would confer.

Several posters have taken note of the continuing reduction in the quality of polly arguments. The mental deterioration of those who do not prepare, as we approach the end of the year, is to be expected. The cognitive dissonance that entrenches them ever deeper in their denial until it's too late to make even minimal preparations must be deafening.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), September 02, 1999.

Paul, if you are so worried about the psychological development of children, perhaps you might like to volunteer for the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program, or even a mentor program in your area. I guarantee you'll find far worse problems than kids with parents who have a basement full of provisions. How can I guarantee it? Because I do as I say--I've been a volunteer for both programs.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), September 02, 1999.

Forrest--I know what you mean about the burn out, but someone has to do it. My husband is a GI but he doesn't like to think about it. I'm doing the food storage and he's doing the guns and ammo, so we balance each other out.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), September 02, 1999.

I've written at length a few weeks ago about my childhood in Brooklyn during WWII, and the many things we did and were aware of regarding the war: rationing, blackouts, air raid wardens knocking on one's door if a crack of light could be seen from outdoors, my brother and me taking our little red wagon to the collection stations for used newspaper, tin cans we'd stomped flat first, and the cooking fat Grandma in our house saved in a coffee can...all for the war effort. And of the big cannons which appeared on Shore Road Drive, to protect us from Germans and Japanese. We saw war coverage newsreels at the movie theater (pre-TV) on weekends. My second grade teacher had us clip the three most relevant news stories of the day and present them next day, and paste them into a scrapbook (wish I had it now!) Then when I entered Junior High it was the drills of running into the hallways and crouching down, and for the girls, we were supposed to pull our skirts over our heads too...but I balked at this, saying if a Russian nuclear bomb hit NYC, my skirt wasn't going to matter in my protection. I raised my children during the Cold War, with all the gravity of knowing that this could still happen.

Today I am nearly 64 and have lead a productive, normal, balanced life. My brother and I have both been clergy or clergy wife, done lots of community service, and our "baby brother" is a NYC employee nearly ready for early retirement, who also served in Vietnam. We are all healthy, happy, and normal. The interesting thing about us is that we take no good thing in life for granted, but are grateful for it. We each are extremely patriotic, appreciate the way our nation fought for our safety, and yet we each want the current system improved/changed, and each hate the moral depravity of the present administration. This is true of most of our contemporaries from Brooklyn, who grew up under two shadows. So where's the problem from children's parents preparing for possible similar scenarios???

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), September 02, 1999.

So where's the problem from children's parents preparing for possible similar scenarios???

Exactly. Preparation is always the key, and it's just as important for children as for adults. Regular survival drills, weapons training, and mental preparation is very important so that children will know what to expect. Children who are unprepared to deal mentally with devastation, violence, and death will panic and endanger themselves and the rest of the family when Y2K hits. It's practically a given that children of Pollys will probably die. Of course, Pollys are to blind to see this so they make up ridiculous stories about "Doomer Children Mental Problems." What BS.

-- (its@coming.soon), September 02, 1999.

I think Paul Davis is just a silly-dilly.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), September 02, 1999.

Actually- I can see Davis's point, somewhat. But for diffirent reasons. [Not that I tend to agree with him-(or much anyone else for that matter.)]

It isn't fair to kids. To lay heavy stuff on their heads. Parents do it all the time. To protect their own emotional integrity.

If a panic ever commenses (doubt it totally) it will begin not with adult emotions...but the children. Because they're the ones who embody all our (largely unspoken) fears/aspirations/dreams, etc.

-- dianebeatty (dbeatty@jaguarsystems.com), September 02, 1999.

"If he had been among the innocent Christians the U.S. government murdered at Waco, he would probably have insisted the fires and the explosions were just a pleasant fireworks display on a nice spring morning. "

-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), September 01, 1999.

Most would not consider the branch davidians to be christians.Certianly they were nutbags(and it seemed like they were cop-killer nutbags),but they still should have had thier civil rights and due process.

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), September 02, 1999.

It isn't fair to kids. To lay heavy stuff on their heads. Parents do it all the time. To protect their own emotional integrity.

None of this is really "fair" to kids, but it's certainly much more "fair" to lay heavy stuff on their heads than to let them panic and probably die because they weren't prepared.

If a panic ever commenses (doubt it totally) it will begin not with adult emotions...but the children. Because they're the ones who embody all our (largely unspoken) fears/aspirations/dreams, etc.

But it will be much less likely if the children have a better idea of what's coming. This isn't a time to shield them from the truth - the govt's doing that enough already. They need to understand that lives are at stake and that they need to do whatever it takes to survive.

-- (its@coming.soon), September 02, 1999.

It's coming, "children need to do whatever it takes to survive". Do you realize what you said? Children with guns, yeah we need more of that.

..."teach your children well, their father's hell will slowly go by. And feed them on their dreams..." I'm sure this is what Crosby, Stills, and Nash had in mind.

-- you guys (are@ll.nuts), September 02, 1999.

I notice that some of you address your questions directly to Paul on this thread. Well, he don't seem to be talking to you. So, If y'all are so up in arms over what he said on another thread on a completely separate forum, why not mosey on over to Debunkie II and tell him he's full of it? Huh?

-- here be chickens (cluck@cluck.squawk), September 02, 1999.

It's coming, "children need to do whatever it takes to survive". Do you realize what you said? Children with guns, yeah we need more of that.

As opposed to dead children, yeah we need more of that. ..."teach your children well, their father's hell will slowly go by. And feed them on their dreams..." I'm sure this is what Crosby, Stills, and Nash had in mind.

It's hard to know what those potheads had in mind, but I don't think they saw a disaster as big as Y2K coming. But if you want to follow the advice of a bunch of aging drug addicts, you go right ahead.

-- (its@coming.soon), September 02, 1999.

its@coming soon

You made me laugh. Not intentionally I'm sure.

'aging potheads' - too funny!!!

Get out much??

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), September 02, 1999.

I just popped over to D-Bunky II, to the above thread. Not one doomer response. Just a couple from Patricia, Peg, and a bushelful from the ever-prolific CPR. But no one from here.

-- here be chickens (cluck@cluck.squawk), September 02, 1999.

Hey Deano, come on over http://www.insidetheweb.com/mbs.cgi/mb723589

-- Maria (anon@mous.com), September 02, 1999.

The reason why no one posts at deBunghole is because the place is a joke, thanks mainly to folks like Paul and CPR.

-- thanks but no thanks (@ .), September 02, 1999.

Zoobie,

You're misinformed about the Branch Davidians. They were not "cop-killer nutbags," they were innocent victims a mass murder; the surviving Davidians were AQUITTED of murder charges, due to the overwhelming force brought against them - add the fact that the government fired first, destroyed evidence, etc.. There is clear photographic evidence of the tank crews setting off the fire with a "pyrotechnic device," and fire teams using machine guns on the Davidians to PREVENT them from coming out.

People persist in labling this as "conspiracy theory" when the evidence, held by the Texas Rangers and presented in the video "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" shows the facts clearly and unambiguously. All you have to do it see it - unless you feel more comfortable repeating second-hand analysis fed to you by huge media conglomerates.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), September 02, 1999.

Yes Zoobie,

what's got into you - i thought you were more aware than this - you haven't seen the doc. or done your homework laddie - get with the programme, pronto!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), September 02, 1999.

Paul is a strange bird,

he likes to think he is intellectually aware yet he always comes across as pretty clueless when you get down to brass tacks... seems to know a fair deal about agriculture, but on many threads he pooh- poohed the fact that a famine would be possible in the usa - he just couldn't grasp the fact that 3 zillion tons of xxxx at point a would not be able to feed the homeboys at point b, 1. because of the distance and logistical problems 2. because nobody knew how to process/cook xxxx anymore. yeah the usa has humongous grain surplusses every year, that's why the farmers are going bankrupt, but he cannot see how this WILL NOT translate into abundance for 280 miliion people next january.

he's a freakin' clueless know-nothing polly-asshole idiot IMVHO!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), September 02, 1999.

Curious - all I asked was a fairly simple question. Lets put it another way - do you think young children being brought up in a household where one or both parents are convinced TEOTW is at hand are going to have a normal attitude towards their parents if it is a BITR? Will they have psychological adjustment problems at some point in the future? It is a sucker bet that some certainly will.

And should I ring in all the psych papers written about the people who grew up with irrational fears about ANYTHING with the words NUCLEAR or ATOMIC included in the name because their parents were scared of the bomb - fears I see echoed on this forum daily? Seems like some of you just might have been in families where Civil Defense against Nuclear War might have been a hot item? HMMMM - surely that did not have an EFFECT that just might make you FEARFUL OF THE FUTURE? Nah - couldn't be.

And there is just no way my attitude has shifted because of the fact that at least 20% of the posts over here now are simply anti- government? And another 20% are about such lovely items as poison contrails, comets, mysterious objects near the sun, Nostradamus and a fair number that are related to the Book of Revelations. Then we have the daily reposts of Milne - a year ago a repost of Milne was a good way to get yourself laughed at here.

And we keep hearing the announcements that 'Personal Attacks are a NO NO'. Of course, this thread would not be intended as a personal attack, now would it? Surely not!

Now when did I engage in personal attacks? I told Cory he could not write - and he can't - his style is even worse than mine. I told Milne he was an idiot - and the evidence speaks for itself. Aside from that I have been pretty careful about names and trying to hurt people - a courtesy that has NOT been reciprocated.

Admittedly, I do have an ongoing quarrel with Andy and a about some of the logic behind the stuff they repost - but when did that sort of thing become personal? They don't like me very much either.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@Yahoo.com), September 03, 1999.

20% anti-government? Or anti-government abuse of power? There is a difference between the two.

And I still say that there are a lot worse things that a parent can do to a child than go off the deep end trying to provide for, and protect, that child.

Oh yeah, and don't worry, I like you Paul. Feel a little better now?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 03, 1999.

Well, OK, I shouldn't have said "silly-dilly". Just thoroughly mixed-up on stuff.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), September 03, 1999.

Wow! Now I get!! -POLLYANNA- (duh!)

So Paul, you must have been living in one heck of a comfortable, isolated from the outside world bubble growing up, with parents wearing a glazed smile all day long who never picked up a newspaper and didn't own a t.v. You must have lived in a fairy tale all your life, not just at the present!

I think you're the oposite of the pathological paranoids, you're a pathological...Pollyanna!

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 03, 1999.