KateMack

This is actually hard-data, well-researched fact. People who have children tend to be more altruistic; those who do not tend to be more self-centered. It's logical; having kids forces one into maturity; the focus turns of necessity to the needs of others. It's culture-changing, either way.

There is an innate selfishness in boomers who don’t have children I have 2 visiting me right now. They are from Man’s side of the family. The amount they expect to do every day in environments not conducive to child schedules or convenience for parents has got me so worn down Prior to this, every time they have visited, Man continues working, maybe taking a couple days off & I am left to chauffeur & host them every day The rest of my household has always been thoroughly enamored by them so I have grit my teeth & committed to making the best of it. I do love & appreciate them, they are wonderful people, but hosting them while managing my kids is simply too much for me So this time when I found out they were visiting for 12 days I put my foot down & said he must take the week off work if he wanted them to visit. I simply refused to host them on my own We are on day 6 & this afternoon Man pulled me aside & remarked at how it seems one of them specifically is actually quite selfish & it starts to feel like we are expected to be supporting act in a one man show while managing our children in inconvenient & uncomfortable circumstances & I was like “THANK YOU FOR FINALLY REALIZING THIS” But even with him around to help everyone still relies on me for all plans, directions, reservations, destination & restaurant choices, meal planning, etc. Like when something goes wrong everyone is coming to me to fix it And one of the visitors REFUSES to do anything inside. No museums, malls, movies. Nothing corporate like zoos, aquariums or theme parks. Everything is expected to be outside, beach days, hiking, boats I am fried, tired, my kids haven’t gone to bed before 10pm in a week. I just got my period and I am supposed to get up early tomorrow to herd the boomers & both kids to an island for a 5 hour beach day, no strollers or wagons allowed YOU GUYS I CANT DO THIS, EVEN WITH HIS HELP

@MJTruthUltra In Madison, WI, a past election had Dems/Libs giving cartons of cigarettes to homeless for votes.

x.com/JamesOKeefeIII… 🚨 HOLY CRAP. James O’Keefe went undercover as a Homeless Man and has ON CAMERA the Homeless Population being paid CASH for Ballots - James O’Keefe’s team posed as homeless on LA’s Skid Row and recorded 28 separate instances of paid petitioners handing out cash ($2–$10 per signature), cigarettes, and marijuana in direct exchange for signing voter registration forms and election petitions — a clear state and federal felony. - Petition circulators openly admitted they are paid per signature and can earn $1,000+ in a single day; one bragged, “$7 a signature, $5 a signature, $10 a signature.” - Homeless individuals were repeatedly told to use fake addresses (“You can just put Pinocchio Lane” / “Oh, you can just fake an address”) and many had zero understanding of what they were signing. - Petitions included radical measures funded by Uber, Delta, United Airlines, and the American Hotel & Lodging Association — such as a 5% “one-time tax on billionaires for healthcare” and overturning LA’s $30 minimum wage for hotel/airline workers. - Taxpayer-funded Weingart Center (CEO previously earned $432,000) employees actively directed homeless residents to the bribe-paying petitioners and coached plausible deniability: “See they say ignorance is no excuse for the law. But a lot of times, I have to say ‘I didn’t know, I had no idea.’” - The activity violates 52 U.S. Code §10307 (federal) and California Election Code §18603 (state); identical crimes led to arrests on Skid Row in 2016 and felony charges in 2019 — yet LAPD officers on scene shrugged it off as “a civil lawsuit.” This is documented proof of widespread election fraud in California!

@libsoftiktok If you question a post's truth, just click the little icon above the post; this prompts Grok AI to investigate the claims in a post. Grok verifies this post regarding Angela Lipps as truth.

OMG. Angela Lipps, a 50yo grandmother from Tennessee, was arrested at gunpoint at her home and jailed in South Dakota for over 100 days because AI facial recognition mistakenly linked her to a fraud case. She lost everything she owned, including her home, dog, income, health insurance, doctors, car, and clothes. She says she hasn’t even received an apology. How does this happen?!

@PSidikman @libsoftiktok All you really have to do if you have questions about a post is click the little icon above the post to verify with Grok AI. This is in fact a true post.

I say bullshit to this post as written. There must be a lot more to this story, the circumstances, the evidence, the history, than a couple of sentences. A first year law student would have written a writ of habeus corpus long before 100 days passed. Chaya, your posts are usually much more informative and contain links to underlying factual material.

@KeepItTechie @anttsinc opendata.hhs.gov/datasets/medic… This is the actual link to the data released in February, 2026. There are 3rd-party mirrors like Kaggle & Gigasheet. Over a Trillion dollars worth of fraud discovered.

@anttsinc So we are suppose to just take your word? Where is the data dump?

A sole provider in Arizona is billing $76 million in Medicare out of his van! He’s averaging 1000 claims a day! A pediatrician is averaging 836 claims a day out of his apartment! Doge dumped all the Medicare data online for everyone to come through it…. See more

@anttsinc If you wonder about the database, you can click Grok for the verification. This was made public in February, 2026. It's over a trillion dollars of concern for fraudulent claims, all paid for with taxpayer dollars. Here's the link: opendata.hhs.gov/datasets/medic…

My spouse had to navigate the insurance protocol leading up to heart surgery. Even though the cardiologist knew heart surgery was necessary, it had to be proven by insurance-driven procedures, each costing a fortune. One MRI was $16,000. Utterly mad protocol, took a year of his life before heart surgery & resolution.

Nearly a year ago, my wife went to the hospital for stomach pain. They did a CT Scan of her abdomen and thankfully didn't find anything serious. We got a bill in the mail of $9,117.42 I spent months talking to insurance, the hospital, billing appeals... I was told the claim was still processing. I was told the claim was out of the normal service area. I was told it wasn't clear it was medically necessary. I was told the insurance wasn't valid on the date of service. Finally, we got it handled, but it took well over 6 months from the day we got the first bill to the day we finished the process and paid. We did everything right. We have insurance. We pay our insanely high premiums every single month. It's just so frustrating. This whole healthcare system is broken, from top to bottom.

@Riley_Gaines_ I wish you all the very best of God's blessings, & may each day of your life together bring greater joy. We were married at age 19, first kid at 23, & I can tell you marriage gets better & better. After decades (plenty of challenge/hardship life-stuff), our joy is exponential.

I was engaged at 21 & married less than two months later. This year we will celebrate our fourth anniversary. Our baby girl is almost 6 months old. The American dream starts with getting married and starting a family. The baby giggles & wild hair melt me. Thank you, God!

x.com/VoicesUnheard/… I asked Grok about this; Grok confirmed the entire, appalling story and provided the GoFundMe link: gofundme.com/f/innocent-gra… Angela was left quite literally with nothing, all due to the actions taken by law enforcement on a false facial recognition flag for a crime committed 1200 miles from where Angela lived.

@LisaBritton Sadly, it does happen, and it's way too easy. It also happens when there is a bitter divorce. Easy to accuse, extremely hard to prove innocence. Does it happen? Don't be silly, of course it does. But are the accusations always true? No. It's another cultural trend, & kids suffer.

I once worked with a group of women, moms whose sons had been falsely accused, and they were trying desperately to get them justice. It was a devastating experience. False allegations are more common than most people think, and it destroys lives and the credibility of true victims. Here’s another one. A mother who falsely accused 10 men she met on dating apps has been jailed. She admitted to making up allegations against the men, most of whom were arrested and spent time in police custody! Her false allegations are estimated to have cost the taxpayers £120,000 in wasted police and legal time. She pleaded guilty to 10 counts of perverting the course of justice and was just jailed for four-and-a-half years. Is that enough time? Detective Sergeant Steven Gilliland said “I’d like to pay tribute to the strength of these men, who have endured an experience no one would ever wish to go through, and done so with dignity. I hope they feel a sense of justice for what happened to them today.”

@ryanstephens p.s. She wishes she had had a dozen kids.

She's now 86 and still a dynamo. She had a hip fracture a few years ago; it happened when she was jumping on the trampoline with the grandkids. Two went down at the same time and bounced her off against a boulder. Oops. Three months later, she was teaching the kids how to use a pogo stick she'd given them for Christmas. Unstoppable.

The season of life with young kids is strange. You’re exhausted. You feel behind on everything. Your house is loud and chaotic. And yet, one day you’ll look back and realize it was the best part.

@newstart_2024 Wow. So interesting. When I was young, I thought of my dad as a Cherry-Bomb person. He was highly variable, occasionally violent, but always high in drama. It's like he'd open a door to a room filled with quiet, happy people, and throw in a Cherry Bomb to cause chaos.

Andrew Huberman shares a game-changing red flag from the book Five Types of People Who Can Ruin Your Life: ~10% of people are high-conflict personalities who actively crave drama, feed off conflict, and create it — regardless of labels like narcissist or borderline. The author (a psychologist specializing in conflict resolution) breaks them down like this: - Roughly 50/50 men and women - Half are passive-victim types: super manipulative, weaponize others, master the martyr role while causing chaos - The other half are overtly aggressive/abrasive: direct attacks, intimidation, zero filter Huberman: “I only wish I had read it years ago.” This single insight has helped countless people escape toxic relationships, workplaces, friendships, and family dynamics. Spot them early → protect your peace. Have you ever dealt with a high-conflict person who seemed addicted to drama? What was the biggest red flag that finally made you walk away?

@AlexNoonan6 When homeschooling my kids, I went to the library for some classics (Treasure Island, Count of Monte Cristo, etc), but they didn't have a single one. I went to used book stores and homeschooling fairs to find them. Unbelievable degree of creepy, dystopian fiction for kids now.

I remember when I was in highschool I asked my English teacher: how come we only read books about sad losers who ended up more sad instead of stories where people have an arc and accomplish great things. She said we can't, we don't know how

@SandyofCthulhu This even happened to my son in Spanish class. Students had to read dystopian, violent short stories. He was disgusted, as am I.

When I was in high school they had us read something by Steinbeck. Was it The Grapes of Wrath, about courage and dignity? Was it the rousing and delightful Cannery Row? No. They made us read Steinbeck's The Pearl, a gloomy and horrible tale about a kid dying. F*ck you lady English teacher. Is it not okay for high school kids to read stuff which is uplifting? I know their brains aren't yet developed, but that, to me, is a really good reason to let them read stuff that will wire them to LIKE books. The Pearl made me never again want to read anything by Steinbeck. The Great Gatsby made me never want to read anything by Fitzgerald. I kept reading because I had been hooked on it as an 8 year old, but I learned pretty fast that every require reading in high school sucked donkey goober. Look - let the kids read Ivanhoe or Wind in the Willows or Penrod as high school kids. THEN, when they get older they may choose to dabble in the depressing crap you teachers had shoveled into your heads in college. But please let them learn to enjoy reading. I'm looking at crap like YOU Bridge to Terabithia. I've shown an image of a super fun book for teens.

@DisaffectedPod When I gave birth at 23, my doc told me age 35 is the defining line for "high-risk" pregnancy. Glad we went for early, as I was already perimenopausal at 35 & diagnosed post-meno at 39. It happens. If we'd waited, my chance of conception would've been nearly nil. YMMV.

So many women are completely disconnected from reality. The fantasy world of having kids at 40 and finding "your best life and dream husband" in middle age that's been force fed by culture has convinced them of astonishing things. 35 is a geriatric pregnancy. Yes. No matter that you don't like that. -J

@wokal_distance It's basic biology. Biological males have heavier skeletons and significantly greater muscle mass than biological females. There are risks of injury to females when males join female sports team. Puff & fume if you like, but it's simple biology. Physically different brains, too.

This is a particularly malicious case of pretending not to understand things, so I'm going to explain this.... When I was in high school a girl played on our football team. No one had a problem with it because nobody thought the girls had an unfair advantage, and the girls were willing to accept being at a disadvantage if it meant they got to play. We didn't have a girls football team and the wrestling teams were small, so if girls wanted to play football or wrestling they had to go against boys (at least in practice). None of this was controversial because the wrestling teams were small, and there was no girls football team, so everyone agreed to make do. HOWEVER.... Under absolutely no circumstances would a male athlete be allowed to join a girls team when boys teams were available. No one would have allowed a boy to leave the boys basketball team in order to join the girls team. Sometimes a very good female athlete would be allowed to join a boys team (if she was good enough) but never EVER were boys allowed to join girls teams. What lies underneath all of what was going on back then was the implicit underatanding that boys have an inherent biological advantage over girls in sports. Everyone understood that men have a huge biological advantage when it comes to sports, so if a girl who could keep up joined a boys team it was seen as something to be admired and everyone was cool with it. Nobody pretended that just because one girl joined a boys football team, that the natural advantage that boys have over girls in sports went away. Nobody pretended that a couple of girls on the wrestling team all of the sudden meant putting a boy on the girls basketball team was fair. Nobody pretended that having one girl who was good enough to play on the boys baseball team meant that it was all of the sudden fair to let boys join the girls softball or volleyball teams. Everyone recognized what was going on: the occasional spectacular female athlete can sometimes keep up with boys, and sometimes girls join boys teams when there is no girls team. We were willing to make exceptions when there were no girls teams or when a girl managed to keep up with the boys, with the understanding that those *exceptions* were not binding *precedent*, and that having one girl on about team doesn't dissolve the need for boundaries between the boys and girls team. Everyone knew what was going on, and everyone was willing to make exceptions so long as it didn't create an unfair advantage for whoever wanted the exception, or disadvantage the rest of the players. Everyone knew exactly what was going on, and everyone acted in good faith; nobody tried to take advantage of the situation by using the girl on the football team as an excuse to let boys play on girls teams. In other words, nobody pretended not to understand things...and that's why there wasn't an uproar. The only reason there is an uproar today is because people are pretending not to understand that we separate boys and girls teams for reasons of fairness (with exception for when there are no girls teams, or for spectscular female athletes) and then giant throwing tantrums when we tell them "no, we will not make an exception because you feel like a girl on the inside." The problem isn't the rules, the problem is leftists pretending not to undestand things so they can use reasonable good faith exceptions as an excuse to demand that if the fair exceptions are made, that the obviously unfair exceptions must be made as well. When you see this type of framing, the simple point is: "For the same reason a highschool kid can jump to the NBA, but NBA players can't join highschool teams....it's not cheating if a girl joins a boys team, but it's absolutely cheating if a boy joins a girls team." I hope that helps.

Hard scientific data supports your comment. Comparison of adults who are parents vs adults who are non-parents show higher altruism, higher concern for long-term impact of choices, and greater commitment to what might be termed traditional values/respect amongst the parents. Doesn't mean those who don't are not great people, they just have very different priorities. Parenting forces one to rise above self, maturing in different patterns. Altruism patterns are particularly significant in the studies. These patterns have a profound impact on culture overall.

Stanford University did a fascinating long-term research study with kids' development. They wanted to know when the brain integrates sensory development (sight/hearing/movement-kinesthesia, etc.) for learning skills. Boys were around age 8 on up to 12, girls generally earlier. Great book discussing the research, "Better Late than Early." BTW, it took my son a whole year to learn to tie shoes at age 6 to 7, yet he taught himself to read at 3. Amazing how different kids are, even in the same family. My other son read at 7, but charged ahead into Hardy Boys within just a short time.

My son is six, and he can read chapter books but he can’t tie his own shoes. Any advice?