Hey! My son RESPECTS me

Respect is earned. Love is obligation

>Love is obligation

I get where you're coming from, how you should "love" your family no matter what because you need to be there for each other, but for better or for worse, I've been instilled with Individualism and if any of my family cries for help I'm going to ask "where were you when I needed help?"

Goofy's solution to the problem was to keep Max as a child, the one he could more easily coexist with and related to. When children are inquisitive and learning, they are more willing to obey those they trust to teach them. This is, most obviously, a parent in most children's situation, with Max's being no different. As children grow up, however, their cognitive faculties begin to mature and are more capable of rationalizing the world around them independently. The role of the parent as arbiter of subjective truth is diminished and, in that way, children tend to start to distance themselves. When parents become overbearing in trying to retain that relationship, it causes friction. This move to keep a growing child in this state is a take on Seligman's 'learned helplessness'.

Goofy eventually learned that his solution of keeping Max helpless (by treating him as an adolescent) was incorrect, and changed his approach to syncretizing his personal skills and hobbies into Max's own interests (The Perfect Catch becoming a dance move, for example).

In this way, Goofy showed himself to be a flawed but rational and compassionate father, which Pete is not.

Attached: bf-skinner.jpg (640x428, 48.01K)

>yeah well my son got laid a hyuck

naruhodone, well said

Both fathers represents radical ends of parental retardness

Respect and fear are not the same thing, though they are sometimes intertwined

Do you think fear has any place in the relatioship between child and parent? I loved the shit out of my mother but I wont deny I was a tiny bit scared of her.

>confederate flag colorway
UH OHHH

What's the difference, home boy?

None whatsoever. A child should naturally fear things like striking (

Attached: carl jung.jpg (498x269, 21.31K)

I honestly couldn't take this moment seriosuly, mainly because of how implausible it is for Pete to run into the Goofs twice in a row during the trip. Like, we see that montage of the Goofs travelling across the entire country and stopping in a motel not far from LA, only for Pete to randomly drop by in the same motel as them.

Now that's some quality autism

God damn, well there goes a previously life long held belief.

In your opinion, can an ideal parent exist?

It's quite implausible and forced. I can understand them running into each other in those woods, since Pete was taking his son for camping, but the second time in the motel was just silly. Was Pete following Goofy or something ?

Do they expect me to believe that, inmediately after that montage, they just happened to stop in the same motel during the very same night ? youtube.com/watch?v=zY-3WRy_gg0

This is a cartoon film lead by Goofy, where complete strangers synchronize perfectly for impromptu musicals; the leads hijack the scenario of a famous pop star in the middle of his show are rewarded for it; Bigfoot exists and knows how to dance to the Bee Gees.

But Pete meeting the Goofs twice is where you stop suspending disbelief?

The framing of the question is awkward. Implying there's an ideal parent implies there's an ideal child, which in turn leads to a debate over which social mores and ethical tolerances are better or worse than others. That's a can of worms I'll leave the frogposters to shred themselves over.

But taking your question seriously, look at Maslow's hierarchy (and damn me for using his image all the way at the beginning....) So long as a parent is capable of reasonably providing these key elements, they are effective as a parent. Now, if the child grows up cognitively well adjusted, and physically fit, but with differing personal beliefs to those of the parent; to a counselor like myself, that's perfectly fine. It's actually worrying if a child is wholly identical in personality to their parent. That implies either a stunted emotional or cognitive development, usually through isolation, or emotional abuse like you see in cult-run households.

I hope that answers your question. If not, could you rephrase it?

Attached: maslow-hierachy-of-needs-min.jpg (776x429, 73.98K)

I can suspend my disbelief for that kind of silly stuff meant for laughs, but meeting twice in a row is pushing it. It doesn't help that the movie doesn't lampshade the absurdity of the situation, and throws a serious moment like this inmediately after.

Respect influences even when the person is unlikely to discover what you've done.
Fear only reaches as far as the end of the arm that holds it.

See this would mean something if Pete wasn't a complete shithead like many parents today, why is this movie so 90's yet so timeless at the same time?

Yes.
His son doesn't respect him.
His son fears him.

It may have some timeless themes, but it's still a really dated product of the 90s. No sugarcoating

Attached: 013de4f18e4cbcac5fc8e4f34d658f1a.jpg (1000x524, 75.17K)

Dude even Goofy knew Pete was full of shit in that moment the way he dismisses Pete and walks away, seriously papa Goofy is some of the deepest shit Disney's ever done.

He thought Pete was lying to sabotage their relationship, yet still ends up checking the map inmediately after, thus finding out he was telling the truth

He was just the opposite extreme of Goofy. He was too controlling of PJ, but Goofy was too loose with Max. Given it was the 90s, Goofy never really gets shown why his style isn't necessarily right either.

In a manipulative way you have to admit, Pete was just wanting to be right and superior.

Do you have any kids?