Are answers like this really unwanted here on Parenting.SE?

Question

So, I wrote an answer (-3/+2 I think, or -4/+3) which sparked some disagreement and I am trying to understand whether answers of this type are actually unwelcome or whether this is just an issue of people not liking certain things I am saying.

Let me just summarize what the answer does and what my thoughts are.

1. I used the first part of the post to put the question into perspective and to some extend attack the premise of the question (first 2 paragraphs)
2. As this in turn allowed me to answer the actual question (third paragraph: the problem might not be there in the first place). Whilst doing this I probably stepped on a certain painful issue which people do not like to hear about which I also backed up with a source: the part where indoctrination is part of education (yes, the source was Wikipedia, but then again, this is the kind of fact you will only find in encyclopedias and Wikipedia is the highest quality encyclopedia out there).
3. And then I finish of in the fourth and fifth paragraph with practical advice how to handle issues like these practically, whilst dismissing points from the answer that was then highest voted (last line, fourth paragraph).
4. And then I have an 'unimportant post script' where I call out the author for calling certain behaviour bullying and making the claim that certain things proposed in comments/another answer are more bully-like.

Now, what I am trying to figure out what the reason is that I got so many downvotes? Let me just list what I have been able to think of myself, but honestly, I don't know.

• The best reason is if people simply think the advice given in the fourth and fifth paragraphs are bad parenting advice (if so, that's a reason I am perfectly fine with!)
• It might be because attacks on premise are really in general unwelcome on parenting.SE, in that regard I got pointed to this question.
  • My 'attack' however is regarding verifiable fact (which is why I sourced it), but through the 'attack' I am able to answer part of the question, thus 'just' a comment seems hardly sensible. Is my understanding wrong here?
  • People are indoctrinated in western post modernist thinking and thus do not realize how strongly the question is written from such a view point and are thus confused by my answer (see the top comment). In this case my question would be whether such a question should only be answered by other western post-modernists? I very explicitly made sure not to push any specific world view in my answer and only tried to make clear that it's not a case of "us vs the religions", but "just different world views" and how to raise a child in such a world.

So, concluding, I am mostly genuinely curious about one thing: are answers like this actually unwelcome or is this just a case of people disagreeing for... 'political' or emotive reasons.

Answer 1

I don't downvote for content, so one downvote you got was from me because of the framing of the answer. Given the OP's comment on your answer that he felt it attacked the premise of the question, that is a likely source of a second downvote. A third was for "ignoring the actual question" (ref. DanBeale's answer below). So that's at least 3/4 because of the question's structure, not its content.

---

What are you truly asking? is pretty much textbook "disagreeing with the premise of the question." Regardless, it's a blunt way to start off any answer, and on its own would be better as a comment. If you really want clarification on the purpose of a question, comment on the question:

What are you truly asking? It sounds to me like what you seem to be asking is "How can I indoctrinate my child with a post modernist world view?" -- if you could clarify whether that's your intent, I have some thoughts that I'd love to expand into an answer.

As Joe has effectively outlined, you did end up answering something fairly different than what the OP intended. And I honestly think it still needs editing and rephrasing; even with your edits, it's still just not addressing what was asked.

I didn't read his question as a need to shield a child from all religions, but rather from belief structures that are not the same as his family's. I realized while writing my own answer that this could be an overreach on my part, since the struggle of raising a child among a majority religion that is not our own resonates with me. However, given the OP's comment to your answer, I don't think that interpretation was all that wrong.

Answer 2

Answers that disagree with the premise of the question, as per this meta question, are inappropriate. IE:

How can I avoid religious indoctrination?

You shouldn't, you should indoctrinate religiously.

This would be an inappropriate answer. See this meta question for what to do; it advises downvoting and leaving comments. We do not explicitly prohibit the answers, nor will they usually be deleted (unless very low quality).

---

Specifically for your answer, then, the question is, does your answer fall into the category of "Disagrees with the premise to the question", or if it falls into another similar category with a similar resolution, or not.

I will start by saying you don't know why the downvotes are there necessarily (well, other than the one that was announced by the OP); they could be there because they disagree with your restatement of the question, or some other reason. Adding the final sentence to your question above is a bit indicative of your opinion, I think; people can disagree for reasons not political or emotive.

But, addressing whether your answer disagrees with the question's premise, I think it does. The question asks, "How can I shield my children from religious indoctrination", and while I sympathize with you on the possible ulterior motives, the first half of your answer is telling the OP his question is wrong, and the second half is (sort of) answering the 'right' question. That's textbook disagreeing with the premise of the question.

You are not disagreeing with a verifiable fact; that was intended to be something like a name or a place (who wrote a book, where a battle occurred, what grade in american schools a 13 year old is in). You're disagreeing with the wording and approach of the question, and with whether it's possible to defend a child from indoctrination. That's not a fact, at most that's a theory.

However, I think if you tone down the disagreeing with the OP, the second half of your answer - and even the first part, to some degree - are usable and a good answer. It's not wrong to say that an effective defense against indoctrination is indoctrination, for one; and for two, your answer really talks about teaching children to think for themselves, which is really answering the original question as provided. Almost all of the answer is fine as is: just remove the part where you actively disagree with the question, that's all.

Answer 3

Your answer was rude and defensive. You ignored the actual point of the question and used your answer to attack some other thing. You also took very many words to do this.