Stop puffing us up with Caroline Goldman, even if you think I’m talking nonsense

Positive parenting enthusiasts have been tirelessly denouncing psychologist Caroline Goldman on social media for months. Whether we agree with her or not, do we really have to hold on in a vacuum? And what are the reasons that drive parental accounts to continue their campaigns of undermining? Chloé Genovesi Fluitman, passionate about educational topics, wonders (without defending the professional).

Caroline Goldman, the new whipping mother? This is the kind of catchphrase reserved for articles dedicated to Caroline Goldman, and announcing her color. From the reprint of her famous Go to your roomthe psychologist is navigating a wave of controversy that I imagine is particularly lucrative for many parenting gamers.

At least, that’s the only explanation I’ve found for why this discussion still persists millennia after the book’s release. Finally I say discussion, but this is not the definition I will give to this collective hysteria, systematically followed by media responses.

Therefore, the Caroline Goldman controversy. But what controversy? And why can’t I not see it above all as a search for individual visibility by its illustrious detractors?

An article published yesterday, Thursday 20 July in Publication, she regrets that the media bickering has caricatured such an important debate and points out in passing that there is no magic formula for raising happy, socially well-behaved children.

So please, let’s stop obsessing over Caroline Goldman’s every move and focus on something worthwhile. Thank you.

Caroline Goldman, hateful, insufferable, controversial!

Caroline Goldman is a psychotherapist, of the psychoanalytic current. That is, those who apply and transmit Freudian precepts – even if the German, famous for his obsession with penises, is not the only one who has distinguished himself in this field. Freud didn’t just talk nonsense, but in light of our society, some of his theories are clearly reductive and invalidate established truths. For example, they question the veracity of neurodevelopmental disorders. They suggest that the sources of these neuroatypias lie in the patient’s early childhood. Yes, science has shown that this was not the case, but psychoanalysis remains a very popular and majority psychological current in France… Caroline Goldman’s country.

Second, but also the main point of disagreement — invalidating neuroatypical people is bad, isolating a five-year-old who breaks everything is intolerable — Caroline Goldman spoke out against positive parenting. In detail, she actually denounces the excesses of positive parenting, she herself has clarified on certain occasions. But since this clarification does not interest anyone, we will therefore pretend that it was raised against positive parenting, a source of anxiety and family conflict.

According to the psychotherapist, it is important to establish structures and boundaries for children so that they can develop in a healthy way. An opinion shared by all serious early childhood professionals, whatever their part, but let’s move on.

He suggests setting aside the child – under very specific conditions – and reiterates the importance of establishing coherent and firm educational rules for educating children. And that’s it, unless you have sources to share with me that prove Caroline Goldman dangerous.

Don’t believe in neurodevelopmental disorders for a psychoanalyst and find out that you have to put limits on children, you have to admit it’s baffling.

Collective fingering on Instagram, the onanism of the void

It’s always the same story. A bad guy comes along, says something perfectly shocking and intolerable. We fall on him with short arms and it works! The crowd turns on and wants more! Except, when you build on a dispute, you have to maintain it. Especially when he helps get views, engagement, and followers.

The good news is that while the ugly badass continues to live his life and his simple breath offers his detractors endless inspiration, there’s never a shortage of outrageous content. At the slightest sneeze, he sets off for the race to see who will Actual the more virulent, the more malignant.

And that, guys, is not denunciation or even activism, it is a contest of eloquence. Held annually in France, join instead of ridiculing important causes on your own feeds.

By itself, I understand the concept, I see nothing wrong with exploring new forms of business, but not with borderline dishonest claims. Personally, by dint of seeing the herd bark as soon as it puts its nose out, I suspect that its detractors brandish the subject for publicity. And while I don’t doubt that some accounts are in good faith, this way of doing it is totally counterproductive:

• The chastised person does not care about complaints. We’ve never seen anyone question their life plan because “Wow, I saw a mamoune dance in a Actual ! I really have to question myself! »
• On the contrary, these denunciations give it a lot of visibility (thanks to the algorithms). Proof ? I grasp the subject, while it is indifferent to me, but I know it will attract readers.
• No one has ever participated in a constructive discussion on a social network. We congratulate each other or tear each other apart, but we don’t argue intelligently.
• Result? The debate does not advance, and neither does the cause. But wasn’t that the original goal?

So, let’s calm down, please.

My (not) opinion on Caroline Goldman

To write this post I had to read and re-read many articles. I had to make sure I hadn’t missed a crucial episode, where she advised, for example, drowning kittens, or traveling by plane from Paris to Lille. How much wasted time could I have spent typing nap instead?

When I read words like dangerous OR crazy, about him, I wonder if we all have the same linguistic notions. You can find his educational advice old school, see questionable on some points, but before using these terms, let’s ask ourselves about their real meaning. Or share compelling sources with me (encore).

I had the opportunity to exchange some of my articles with several early childhood professionals. From Caroline Goldman to Héloïse Junier, via the Children’s Foundation. These exchanges had two things in common: they were exciting and measured. They had nothing to do with these isolated shock phrases that can be read in the media. As a mother, I particularly enjoyed some of the talks, for example I loved my exchange with Héloïse Junier, whose vision of childhood and education resonates a lot with me. This doesn’t mean I have to rebel against anyone who doesn’t share her views. Even if it allows me to attract followers. Still, my account at 800 subscribers makes a face.

At this level of emptiness (unless we have sources, bis repetitam), we could choose to talk about something else and dedicate ourselves to more interesting activities, such as supporting associations. Anyone who takes charge of his own cause by denouncing that of others makes me think he doesn’t have much to say. And as long as I agree with them, I resent them for giving someone so much exposure that they aren’t worth it.

Finally, I remind you that there is no magic formula that allows you to magically raise your children in harmony and development. He keeps fumbling, understanding nothing and trying anyway. It’s the best thing to do. Without (too much) involving your social networks, thank you.

Do you like our articles? You will love our newsletters! Sign up for free on this page.