the new family operating system that prioritizes mental health over extracurricular activities

A drawer full of tupperware mismatched that threatens to overflow when opened. A costume from the school function forgotten for weeks in the back seat of the car. A mother laughing out loud with her children in the middle of a living room where the cushions serve as a military fort, blatantly ignoring the fluff in the hallway. It might seem like a portrait of an overwhelmed family, but it is, in reality, the image of a silent revolution. For the past two decades, the gold standard of parenting seemed to have a name: Mother Tiger. Inspired in Amy Chua’s controversial book In 2011, this model required parents—especially women—to act as CEOs of their children’s future. The ultimate goal was to optimize their success through packed schedules, tutoring, fluency in three languages, and an immaculate diet. But the mothers have said enough. Faced with unsustainable levels of exhaustion, a new generation is deciding to get off the wheel. They claim their right to live with dirty dishes in the sink and to accept that a grade of “Good” (a B) on the report card is more than enough. The Beta Motherand this new family operating system is showing that, sometimes, the best way to protect your children’s future is to simply leave them alone. The rebellion of the imperfect As stated an extensive report on The Wall Street Journalthese acts of daily “renunciation” are adding forces to become a “discreet feminist revolution.” The American newspaper illustrates this paradigm shift through women like Sophie Jaffe, a mother from Los Angeles who allows her 13-year-old son to do parkour around the city or set your own schedules, as long as you respect the curfew. “I see what happens to children who are overly controlled,” Jaffe tells the newspaper. “I’d rather them be out making memories than sitting in front of a video game.” In internet culture and popular psychology, this profile has been called a “Type B” mother. The magazine TODAY includes the explanations of psychotherapist Colette Brownwho defines these mothers as “relaxed, very patient, women who don’t mind chaos.” According to Brown, the rise of this profile on social networks is a direct response and a frontal rejection of pressure from the tradwives (traditional wives) and the toxic perfectionism of Instagram. Mothers like Katie Ziemer summarize this philosophy with a lapidary phrase: “I’m Type B, of course my house doesn’t look like a museum. I prefer my children to have fun playing in the mud rather than watching television.” The spectrum, however, has nuances. For those women unable to let go of control completely, the publication The Bump marks the emergence of a middle ground: the “Type C” mother. Coined by content creator Ashleigh Surratt, it defines “recovering perfectionists.” They are women who maintain non-negotiable structures (such as sleep schedules or medical appointments), but who apply strategic neglect to the rest. As one of them relates: “They have their shirts clean, even if they are not hanging in the closet; I know exactly which pile they are in.” This rebellion towards the imperfect is not born of whim, but of absolute collapse. Sociological data show that the demands on parents have multiplied exponentially. Recently in Xataka we documented how parents millennials Today they dedicate four times more time to their children than the generation of the baby boom. And the economist Corinne Low confirms in WSJ that, paradoxically, after the massive entry of women into the labor market, the time they dedicate to children’s tasks has skyrocketed (from 14 minutes a week of help with homework in 1975 to more than an hour today). Globally, the family scaffolding is creaking. A study published in the scientific journal Healthcare reveals alarming rates of burnout (burnout syndrome) applied to motherhood and fatherhood: it affects 8.9% of fathers in the US, 9.8% in Belgium or 9.6% in Poland. And they bear the worst part. Although in countries like Spain leave has been equalized to 19 weeks, recent studies indicate that 78% of mothers declare themselves overloaded, assuming the invisible weight of the “mental load.” As researcher Eve Rodsky warnsmen today “help”, but women continue to be the directors of the project, managing their partners as if they were kind subordinates. Science dictates sentence But this maternal collapse is not the only collateral damage. If all this enormous sacrifice had guaranteed the well-being of the minors, the story would be different. But scientific evidence has shown exactly the opposite. Parenting under the “helicopter” model—flying over children to spare them any frustration or failure—is destroying them. Academic journals are blunt. A meta-analysis published in the Journal of Adult Development, which reviewed 53 independent studiesshowed that paternal overprotection is directly associated with an increase in internalizing problems (such as anxiety and depression) and a sharp decline in self-efficacy and academic performance of young people. Along these lines, an investigation of Journal of Youth and Adolescence showed that excessive parental control directly threatens the satisfaction of adolescents’ basic psychological needs, especially their sense of autonomy. The real-life result is a drastic increase in adolescent psychiatric admissions and alarming rates of suicidal ideation linked to the inability to manage frustration. Preventing a child from tripping deprives him or her of the neurological development necessary (specifically in the prefrontal cortex) to learn to stand up. However, we must take a broader look. How it contributes The Conversationthe phenomenon of hyperparenting is the psychologization of an enormous social problem. In other words, it is easy to criticize the mother who calls the university to review her child’s exam, but we ignore the macroeconomic context. Parents subject children to academic training programs almost from preschool because they perceive a wild and stagnant job market. When you compete with millions of graduates to obtain a halfway decent job, the anguish of ensuring the child’s future becomes a suffocating control. Furthermore, getting off the wheel has a high emotional cost. The publication Bolde documents the “B side” of being a Beta mother. These … Read more

Apple TV once again prioritizes quality over everything else

AppleTV has done it again. It is a platform that we could consider minority, which refuses to follow the currents that unify the rest…and gives us one of the best series we can see right now. Vince Gillighan’s seal of quality, a plot that will be familiar to science fiction regulars and a tremendous humanist message that reflects on the here and now. It’s ‘Pluribus’ and these are some of the keys to its success. How it started. After closing the ‘Breaking Bad’ universe with the end of ‘Better Call Saul’ in 2022, Vince Gilligan presented an original project to Sony Pictures Television completely unrelated to Walter White. A bidding war between platforms then broke out in which Apple TV+ won, offering what Gilligan valued most: “trust and time.” Trust translated into figures: each episode of ‘Pluribus’ has a $15 million budgetquintupling what ‘Breaking Bad’ cost. What is it about? “The most miserable person on Earth must save the world from happiness,” reads the official synopsis from Apple TV+. Carol Sturka, author of romanticasydiscovers he is one of just 13 people immune to the “Union”: an extraterrestrial virus that merges human minds into a perpetually optimistic collective consciousness. The film’s title inverts the American motto “E pluribus unum” (out of many, one) to question what happens when individualism dies out. Gilligan, a self-declared “science fiction nerd my entire life,” wanted to “touch every trope of the sci-fi world“. For example, Carol baptizes the hive as “Pod People”, a direct tribute to ‘The invasion of the ultrabodies‘, which Gillighan obviously cites along with ‘The Twilight Zone’ as a fundamental inspiration. There are also something from the Borg of ‘Star Trek‘ when designing the hive mind, but in general the entire series breathes an air of classic sci-fi, like a Richard Matheson story, absolutely delicious. Everyone loves ‘Pluribus’. The series has been unanimously acclaimed on aggregators such as Rotten Tomatoes (99%) or Metacritic (86). Her it has been said which is “an exceptional and distinctive vehicle for its star” (incidentally, Gilligan conceived the project as a vehicle for Rhea Seehorn, who agreed to come on board before reading a single draft of the script). BBC crowned her as “one of the most intelligent and entertaining series of 2025“and Variety as a”captivating piece of television“. Is it that good? It’s all a matter of opinion, but… yeah. Now his proposal, of original science fiction with a super-production budget in an audiovisual era kneeling before the franchises It is worthy of admiration. But also, the balance between satire, forceful drama and exquisite staging is just what we can expect from the creator of ‘Breaking Bad’, with that narrative that unfolds very little by little, without artificial secrets or cheap twists, but keeping the viewer absolutely fascinated with what happens. There will be those who may object to its overtly symbolic approach, but the satire works perfectly (in the first instance, towards the AI artifacts; secondly, to the post-internet human species that we have left, where our only objective is to express an eternal complacency towards strangers). There is infinite space in its approach to show us characters that move in an infinite scale of gray, as in fact it has already done in just three chapters, and that force us to ask ourselves in each episode the million-dollar question: what would I do? Apple TV, the great winner of all this. ‘Pluribus’ represents one of its most ambitious bets to date for the platform (not bad for someone who has built a mastodon like ‘Foundation’). The platform invests between 4,500 and 5,000 million dollars annually in contentpursuing a radically different strategy than Netflix or Disney+: prestige over massive volume. Apple TV controls only 8-9% of the business streaming in the US after Netflix, Prime Video, HBO Max and Disney+. But its objective is different. Apple TV+ has become the prestige area of ​​the streamingthat corner in which HBO once sat comfortably. Now there are more viewers than in the days of ‘The Sopranos’ and Apple TV loses about a billion dollars a year, but can afford it. The figures are overwhelming: 271 original titles compared to 13,000 from Prime Video, but yes, 271 titles of unquestionable technical and artistic quality. Apple TV, and ‘Pluribus’ is the best proof, it does not seek to conquer the numbers, but the conversation. In Xataka | The 21 best science fiction series

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.