Tweet
I often come across in psychology and women's interest groups of what are bad examples and role models for children and what should be good examples and role models. But how we decide what is bad and good is often based, it seems, on the appearance and actions of the person they use as an example without knowing the driving force or story that is behind that example.
Perhaps that is okay when we want to say that he is a bad example and not to be like him, but to me, it is complexing and potentially unhealthy when we apply it to what is believed to be the good example.
Ie, such as the person who is completely dedicated to serving and protecting their society but may be unable to achieve an intimate relationship for themselves. Now that isn't necessarily bad if it works for them, but to say to another, especially a child, that they should be like that person without realizing the cost that person has paid is potentially undesirable.
Of course, it is conceptually possible to obtain an appearance, a behavior without having the same background as the example. One does not need to be St. Francis to have him as a role model.
Thoughts?
Perhaps that is okay when we want to say that he is a bad example and not to be like him, but to me, it is complexing and potentially unhealthy when we apply it to what is believed to be the good example.
Ie, such as the person who is completely dedicated to serving and protecting their society but may be unable to achieve an intimate relationship for themselves. Now that isn't necessarily bad if it works for them, but to say to another, especially a child, that they should be like that person without realizing the cost that person has paid is potentially undesirable.
Of course, it is conceptually possible to obtain an appearance, a behavior without having the same background as the example. One does not need to be St. Francis to have him as a role model.
Thoughts?