Cullen and Katie: Blame the Mailman Part 7

[runblondie]

Can choosing to be a stay at home parent and quitting a well-paying job with benefits ever be looked at like a good financial move, though?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tratra58]

Can choosing to be a stay at home parent and quitting a well-paying job with benefits ever be looked at like a good financial move, though?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not sure what you mean.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[tratra58]

[quote="tratra58"][quote="runblondie"]Can choosing to be a stay at home parent and quitting a well-paying job with benefits ever be looked at like a good financial move, though?


It is an individual family choice in the end.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[lmmomSD]

Can choosing to be a stay at home parent and quitting a well-paying job with benefits ever be looked at like a good financial move, though?


It is an individual family choice in the end.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I don't think that it's an individual family choice is being denied. And I don't think there was any judgement-- just asking if quitting a well paying job with benefits would ever be considered a good _financial_ move. That's taking the emotions out of it-- jobs with benefits aren't always that easy to come by. So even if someone decides that it's the best choice for their family,it still might not be the best _financial_ move for them.

Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk

[tratra58]

I don't think that it's an individual family choice is being denied. And I don't think there was any judgement-- just asking if quitting a well paying job with benefits would ever be considered a good _financial_ move. That's taking the emotions out of it-- jobs with benefits aren't always that easy to come by. So even if someone decides that it's the best choice for their family,it still might not be the best _financial_ move for them.

Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk

I thought it was a trick question so I gave a neutral answer lol. I felt I stated or agree with you that you do lose out benefits and salary if you stay home with a profession that pays well. I've done both and the difference is my older children were helped with college, but not like the younger ones who we could support better with my income. So if you ask your kids later in life about you being home, the memories are vague, but they sure remember you paid their college tuition which has gone up so much I close my eyes when I see the bill.

There are risk living on one salary and this includes layoffs, disability, and other issues. YouTube to me is an even riskier job. For me personally, I also think we could retire young if I worked more...but it was not on my radar when I was home...I regret this since I gave up being part of a good pension. That is why I feel as I do with Katie's choice quitting her job which is a great occupation and really they had a stay at home parent. I also don't assume her parents will provide as much for her family as some has stated. Wasn't the original argument she seem upset that they would need to match a larger amount than she anticipated...this is not the response I would expect from someone who has no budgetary limits or mom and dad will come in and match it instead.

[HashtagBlessed]

I think it's definitely an issue that almost every middle-class family struggles with- especially if you're a woman in the south with a higher earning potential than you're husband and you experience those family and societal pressures. I completely understand the pull to stay at home, but for most people being a single income family comes with a lot of sacrifice and risk.

I also completely understand the desire to have one parent stay at home while the kids are young, I think that's ideal, but then there is the question of which parent that will be. If I'm remembering correctly, Cullen found himself laid-off again for the second time right around the time they were expecting their oldest. Katie had just started using her degree and it clearly made the most sense for Cullen to be the stay-at-home parent, but I really don't think that was going to fly with Katie, even if it only meant working part-time.

I do think it's going to be a lot harder for her to re-enter the workforce if YouTube peters out, considering her limited experience in the field using her degree and the influx of new or recent graduates with similar levels of experience as her but a more recent degree under their belts. On the one hand I think they're incredibly fortunate to both be self-employed from home and to work pretty limited hours for such a high pay check, but on the other hand I still find family vlogging incredibly exploitative and damaging to the kids- I can't imagine what it would be like to find out that there are daily videos of you on the internet from birth. It's like all of these kids have their own Truman Show and they have no expectation of privacy or consent in the matter. I don't think they're going to play along once they're older and have more personal autonomy.

[lmmomSD]

I think it's going to be really interesting in a few years to see what happens with these kids. Hopefully it's not going to be tragic. I don't think it will be quite like child stars because the problem there is people all over telling them how wonderful they are and then it petering out, but I can't believe it's not going to be damaging to some of these kids, especially the ones where reality in front of the camera is different from when the camera isn't on.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Lurker4Life]

I think it's going to be really interesting in a few years to see what happens with these kids. Hopefully it's not going to be tragic. I don't think it will be quite like child stars because the problem there is people all over telling them how wonderful they are and then it petering out, but I can't believe it's not going to be damaging to some of these kids, especially the ones where reality in front of the camera is different from when the camera isn't on.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I feel like C&K's kids atm will be pretty ok, they don't seem to put on as much of a show for the audience as *cough* Bumps *cough* other people do. I feel like it may be harder for Katie and Cullen rather than Gaines and Brooks (and any future children) for the same reasons people have said before. In saying that, we have seen people quickly change, so who knows what will happen. Also by the time YouTube falls out, who knows what the world will be, it will probably not be much of a shock/problem for them in comparison to if they found out even a few years ago.

[Lovethesnark]

I think it's going to be really difficult on these YouTube kids. Child stars get breaks. These YT kids are always on. Laws don't protect the YT kids. There's no mandatory trust. There's no laws regulating how long they can be on set. These kids will be exposed to all of the dangers without an ounce of the protections. Some point these kids will feel the pressure of supporting their families. These kids are the main reason most of these vloggers are able to do it full time. Part of me feels like YouTube should step in at some point to kind of protect these kids.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tratra58]

I think it's going to be really interesting in a few years to see what happens with these kids. Hopefully it's not going to be tragic. I don't think it will be quite like child stars because the problem there is people all over telling them how wonderful they are and then it petering out, but I can't believe it's not going to be damaging to some of these kids, especially the ones where reality in front of the camera is different from when the camera isn't on.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I feel like C&K's kids atm will be pretty ok, they don't seem to put on as much of a show for the audience as *cough* Bumps *cough* other people do. I feel like it may be harder for Katie and Cullen rather than Gaines and Brooks (and any future children) for the same reasons people have said before. In saying that, we have seen people quickly change, so who knows what will happen. Also by the time YouTube falls out, who knows what the world will be, it will probably not be much of a shock/problem for them in comparison to if they found out even a few years ago.

Having your potty training experiences on their parent's channel will be too much information available for peers to see when they are teenagers.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[Lurker4Life]

I think it's going to be really difficult on these YouTube kids. Child stars get breaks. These YT kids are always on. Laws don't protect the YT kids. There's no mandatory trust. There's no laws regulating how long they can be on set. These kids will be exposed to all of the dangers without an ounce of the protections. Some point these kids will feel the pressure of supporting their families. These kids are the main reason most of these vloggers are able to do it full time. Part of me feels like YouTube should step in at some point to kind of protect these kids.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think by the point that they are old enough to feel the pressure of youtube, either the channel will be dead, youtube will be dead/not have the same tween following or they will have been overlooked and then feel the isolation of not being a favourite. People love babies and toddlers, by the time these kids will realise what youtube is and the mass audience it reaches they will no longer fit in these categories. Unless mummy and daddy have continued to pop out kids, their tween following will have grown up and without the new excitement factor they won't be getting replaced. Ignoring the psychology of knowing you were filmed everyday and what not, and just the transition from youtube life to "regular" life, I don't feel like for the kids of more relatable families it will be too difficult, depending on if the parents are able to get jobs that match the youtube income, but I can definitely see kids from families which lavishly spend money and whose parents have little to no qualifications it will be detrimental and hard when the lifestyle they are use to suddenly cant be maintained.

[Lurker4Life]

I think it's going to be really interesting in a few years to see what happens with these kids. Hopefully it's not going to be tragic. I don't think it will be quite like child stars because the problem there is people all over telling them how wonderful they are and then it petering out, but I can't believe it's not going to be damaging to some of these kids, especially the ones where reality in front of the camera is different from when the camera isn't on.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I feel like C&K's kids atm will be pretty ok, they don't seem to put on as much of a show for the audience as *cough* Bumps *cough* other people do. I feel like it may be harder for Katie and Cullen rather than Gaines and Brooks (and any future children) for the same reasons people have said before. In saying that, we have seen people quickly change, so who knows what will happen. Also by the time YouTube falls out, who knows what the world will be, it will probably not be much of a shock/problem for them in comparison to if they found out even a few years ago.

Having your potty training experiences on their parent's channel will be too much information available for peers to see when they are teenagers.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I'm not going to restart this debate about the ethics and psychology of vlogging and what not, so I'm not going to respond directly to what you wrote, but my initial comment was meant to be more of the transition from being on camera all the time to off camera and the different daily activities which may occur, not general mental and social health.

[tratra58]

I feel like C&K's kids atm will be pretty ok, they don't seem to put on as much of a show for the audience as *cough* Bumps *cough* other people do. I feel like it may be harder for Katie and Cullen rather than Gaines and Brooks (and any future children) for the same reasons people have said before. In saying that, we have seen people quickly change, so who knows what will happen. Also by the time YouTube falls out, who knows what the world will be, it will probably not be much of a shock/problem for them in comparison to if they found out even a few years ago.

Having your potty training experiences on their parent's channel will be too much information available for peers to see when they are teenagers.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I'm not going to restart this debate about the ethics and psychology of vlogging and what not, so I'm not going to respond directly to what you wrote, but my initial comment was meant to be more of the transition from being on camera all the time to off camera and the different daily activities which may occur, not general mental and social health.

Ohhh I re-read your message. You could be right and the parents transactioning back to traditional jobs might have some issues, but maybe not. Perhaps the kids wouldn't have problems being on YouTube since they are comfortable with social media and some may even have their own channel.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[Lurker4Life]

[quote="tratra58]

I think it's going to be really interesting in a few years to see what happens with these kids. Hopefully it's not going to be tragic. I don't think it will be quite like child stars because the problem there is people all over telling them how wonderful they are and then it petering out, but I can't believe it's not going to be damaging to some of these kids, especially the ones where reality in front of the camera is different from when the camera isn't on.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I'm not going to restart this debate about the ethics and psychology of vlogging and what not, so I'm not going to respond directly to what you wrote, but my initial comment was meant to be more of the transition from being on camera all the time to off camera and the different daily activities which may occur, not general mental and social health.

Ohhh I re-read your message. You could be right and the parents transactioning back to traditional jobs might have some issues, but perhaps not. Perhaps the kids wouldn't and some may even have their own channel.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk[/quote]

Unless YouTube itself dies *cue dramatic music*

[HashtagBlessed]

I've found myself saying how glad I am that Facebook and social media in general wasn't around when I was growing up. I got to choose what I put online about myself and who could see it. I don't plan on putting anything about my kids on the internet and they'll get to determine their own online presence when they're old enough. I'm trying to imagine how bizarre it would be to realize that something like going down a slide and bonking your head at two-years-old was filmed by your parents, put on the internet with the title "TODDLER SLIDE FAIL!" and used as click bait. There's no way these kids aren't going to grow up with serious questions about why mom and dad broadcast their childhood on YouTube and made it their livelihood.

[HashtagBlessed]

I'm also trying to understand why Cullen was so bothered that a trailer with the word "f*ck" played before his supposedly "family-oriented" videos, and now he's tricking his two-year-old daughter into saying "f*cking" in every video. Seems a bit hypocritical.

[tratra58]

I think it's going to be really difficult on these YouTube kids. Child stars get breaks. These YT kids are always on. Laws don't protect the YT kids. There's no mandatory trust. There's no laws regulating how long they can be on set. These kids will be exposed to all of the dangers without an ounce of the protections. Some point these kids will feel the pressure of supporting their families. These kids are the main reason most of these vloggers are able to do it full time. Part of me feels like YouTube should step in at some point to kind of protect these kids.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I often wondered this with YouTube responsibly to protect children. It is left up to parents and we all know how well that goes at times. Great point(s).




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Lovethesnark]

I'm also trying to understand why Cullen was so bothered that a trailer with the word "f*ck" played before his supposedly "family-oriented" videos, and now he's tricking his two-year-old daughter into saying "f*cking" in every video. Seems a bit hypocritical.

He was bothered because viewers were complaining directly to him, but MG saying it is "cute". Plus he doesn't realize when things aren't funny anymore.

[chipmunks]

I only watch C+K occasionally, but I have watched enough to see MG often requests the camera to be turned off, and C+K comply. It will definitely be interesting to see if (assuming they'll be vlogging for several more years) she someday decides all together that she does not want to be on camera. She's the only tot of those I've watched request this, the rest seem to just be conditioned to having a camera on all the time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[chipmunks]

I only watch C+K occasionally, but I have watched enough to see MG often requests the camera to be turned off, and C+K comply. It will definitely be interesting to see if (assuming they'll be vlogging for several more years) she someday decides all together that she does not want to be on camera. She's the only tot of those I've watched request this, the rest seem to just be conditioned to having a camera on all the time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk