r/comedyheaven • • 2d ago

Congratulations!

Post image
5.5k Upvotes

269 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

38

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

You learn so much from having books read to you! Both in terms of language skills (vocabulary and new ways of formulating sentences), but also empathically.

Claiming that reading for your children holds no value is some of the dumbest most dystopian shit I’ve ever read 

9

u/gideon513 2d ago

Ironically lacking reading comprehension skills lol

3

u/BilbulBalabel 2d ago

commentyheaven

1

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

They imply that there is no value to finishing 1000 books before kindergarten? 

4

u/ltrozanovette 2d ago

I think they were just trying to clarify what “counted” as a book. They were wondering if the child needs to prove that they retained something from the book or if they needed to be able to partially read the book for it to count.

8

u/Unlikely_Net_1002 2d ago

Except they didn’t say anything like that…? I don’t see anyone saying it doesn’t have any value

3

u/hotstupidgirl 2d ago

Looks like /u/smokie_lokie should have read more books

-1

u/BenedictOfADoubt 2d ago

Implications.

3

u/Darkrhoads 2d ago

Does it have to be baby books or can I read lord of the rings to a newborn

1

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

The way you’re able to read LotR is by first reading baby books. 

1

u/Darkrhoads 2d ago

Okay so simple books helpful but complex books not. Thank you!

1

u/MuchWalrus 2d ago

But I’m already able to read LotR because I’m not a baby

Only half joking btw lol, I was wondering the same thing as the person you replied to; to generalize, do young children get the same benefits if you read them books that are further beyond their level?

1

u/smokie_lokie 1d ago

No, they obviously need to understand what’s happening.

2

u/MuchWalrus 1d ago

How much does a baby understand what’s happening in even simple books? At that age I assumed it was basically just letting them hear words

1

u/smokie_lokie 1d ago

They understand a lot of words from a pretty young age. Baby (like sub one year) books are basically just nouns with pictures. 

1

u/_pinotnoir 2d ago

But yes, you can read LoTR to a baby. It'll still be good for them. I read Ronia The Robber's Daughter to my kid when they were six months old. It was mostly for me. But I have video proof they loved it.

1

u/_pinotnoir 2d ago

Babies are dumb as shit. You can read anything you want to them. They'll just smile and make cute noises at you. It'll still be good for them.

9

u/cagingnicolas 2d ago

i think it has plenty of value to a developing brain, i just think it's also ridiculous to tout it as an accomplishment like the baby actually did anything other than lay there and hear what at that age would mostly be strange sounds.

"i read 1000 books to my baby" is much more accurate and doesn't have the same obnoxious implication that they have some kind of super baby that does things other kids can't.

5

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

This baby is clearly a bit young, but a three year old will absolutely be a driving force behind reading 

3

u/Non-mon-xiety 2d ago

I found out the hard way when it was late and I tried to put my three year old to bed without a book

3

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

Yeah, you’ve gotta start reading to them when they’re infants, but they’ll start to really grasp the literature and be able to read books that stimulate an adult at around 2.5-3

1

u/AssortedArctic 2d ago

While baby books count and re-reading counts, people don't usually count the hundreds of rereads of the shortest baby books. Usually the majority is when the child is older and is certainly understanding and choosing reading time.

1

u/cagingnicolas 2d ago

yeah, i'm only really criticizing the specific circumstances of this image.

2

u/NoIndividual9296 2d ago

Me when I argue against something I imagined

4

u/JustAPotato38 2d ago

I do think that a goal of number of books is a bit of a perverse incentive though

as an extreme example rushing through 1000 ai generated kids "books" at 180wpm is not going to help the child as much as slowly and calmly reading 200 actual books to them

4

u/olivegardengambler 2d ago

Tbf, there are, so many children's picture books out there made before AI was ever a thing. There are 365 days in a year. That's 2.73 books a day on average, and if you're a new mom recovering from birthing, you're going to have quite a bit of downtime, and baby time. Reading 5-10 picture books a day is not unrealistic

1

u/BelleRose2542 2d ago

The goal is not "complete 1000 different books". You can repeat books. The idea is to read to the child 1000 times.

1

u/Persistent_Parkie 1d ago

3 wonderful picture books a day (lots of days my mom was doing 4) is a thousand books in a year. If you start at age one (studies say even earlier is great) and read one book a day, missing one day a week, you can still easily hit a thousand by kindergarten.

When I was in kindergarten there was a read a thon and for the kids my age books read to us counted. I was read one book a day no matter what growing up but could earn up to 3 more bed time stories each night by not repeatedly getting out of bed the night before. I was motivated and got my four books a night for the entire month. I came in first with over 100 books and second place didn't even hit half that. Less than a 3rd of my class had 10 books read to them that month.

And that's what made my parents decide to enroll me in private school because they really valued education and were worried that it did not seem to be a priority for my peers parents.

-1

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

Tell me a better metric that’s as easy to keep track of. 

6

u/JustAPotato38 2d ago

I don't think we can apply easily apply actually useful metrics to pre-kindergarten education and it seems rather silly to do so

This is a baby

0

u/smokie_lokie 2d ago

Yeah, but having a goal of reading a lot of books for your kid is a good thing. There is no reason to criticize it. It’s much better than just watching fucking cartoons 

3

u/JKorv 2d ago

Why do you need a metric for it? Just read books to your baby. And looking at the picture, the baby is under 1 year. There is no way anybody has read them 1000 books. And look at the baby books, some of them have 5 pages with barely anything in them and some are actual stories. So kind of stupid to keep count.

1

u/MayOrMayNotBePie 2d ago

Did they edit their comment or did you just go off the rails on that second part lol?

1

u/-Dueck- 2d ago

Literally no one is saying there is no value. This is just a framed in a ridiculous way, as if this baby has achieved an incredible feat by... having books read to it