TL;DR
Get gifts for the two of you delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Bolde published a retrospective on 11 rules it says many children faced in the 1960s and ’70s, including finishing every meal, accepting adult authority without explanation and having little privacy. The article describes cultural shifts, not a measured study of all families or a definitive account of how younger generations are raised.
Bolde has published a retrospective listing 11 rules it associates with childhood in the 1960s and ’70s that, it argues, are less commonly applied to children today. The examples range from clean-plate demands and unquestioned adult authority to gendered expectations about emotion, school attendance and privacy; the piece is cultural commentary rather than a survey measuring how widely the rules were followed.
The article’s central argument is that some older household rules weakened as the circumstances and expectations behind them changed. It describes food scarcity as part of the history behind demands to finish meals, while suggesting that contemporary parents are more likely to let children respond to their own hunger. Bolde cites pediatrician Susan Woolford of the University of Michigan, saying that a report on how families feed young children found about one in eight parents still require a clean plate. The supplied material does not identify the report’s date, sample size or methods.
Other examples concern authority and responsibility. Bolde says children in the earlier era were often expected to accept “because I said so”, treat a teacher’s account as final, attend school unless visibly very ill, and manage homework with little parental oversight. It contrasts those expectations with parents who explain rules, hear a child’s account of a school dispute, keep track of assignments through online systems and are more cautious about sending sick children to class. These comparisons are presented as the article’s account, not as findings from a representative study.
The list also covers family roles and children’s emotional lives: boys discouraged from crying, girls discouraged from showing anger, parents entering children’s rooms or reading diaries, and discipline deferred until a father returned home. The source excerpt begins an additional item about children being told to walk off an injury but ends before completing it. It therefore does not provide enough information to verify the full set of 11 rules or describe all of the article’s examples.
How Parenting Expectations Have Shifted
The list points to changing ideas about children’s autonomy, emotional expression and adult authority. A clean-plate rule, for example, is not merely a matter of table manners: as the source’s cited pediatrician cautions, requiring children to eat beyond fullness can conflict with allowing them to recognize hunger and fullness. Likewise, encouraging children to explain what happened at school or to express emotions may change how parents and teachers handle conflict, even when adults still set boundaries.
For readers, the piece is best understood as a prompt to compare family norms across generations, not proof that every child raised decades ago experienced the same rules or that all current parents reject them. Its examples help explain why memories of childhood can differ sharply within families, while the lack of broad data means the article cannot establish how common each practice was then or is now.
Popular right now
Ninja Flip Toaster Oven and Air Fryer, 8-in-1, Stainless Steel, SP151
Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones (2nd Gen), Wireless Noise-Cancelling Over-Ear Headphones, Black
Sony WH-1000XM4 Wireless Noise-Canceling Headphones, Silver
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Rules Behind the Generational Comparison
Bolde frames the list as a comparison between family life in the 1960s and ’70s and contemporary parenting. Its examples connect older practices to specific assumptions: food should not be wasted, adults’ authority should not be challenged, school attendance should continue through minor illness, and household privacy belonged to parents. It says those assumptions have weakened, though the source does not present historical records or polling to quantify that change.
The article does include references to two named experts. It attributes the clean-plate statistic and warning to University of Michigan pediatrician Susan Woolford, and describes psychologist Niobe Way of New York University as discussing a boy culture that prizes thinking over feeling and stoicism over vulnerability. The provided material offers no links to the underlying report or interview, so the details cannot be independently assessed from this source excerpt alone.
““The reason underneath each one left, and the rule went with it.””
— Bolde, describing the article’s argument
What the List Cannot Establish
The supplied report does not define what counts as a rule that “no longer applies,” or provide a survey comparing families across generations. The claims are therefore illustrative rather than representative; practices varied by household, region, culture and individual circumstances. It is also unclear how frequently the listed rules remain in use today.
The source excerpt names an expert and a statistic but does not provide the underlying report’s date, sample or methodology. It also stops partway through the ninth rule, so the available material does not confirm the remaining examples or the complete final list. No new research, response from the cited experts or independent verification is included in the supplied source.
Further Evidence Would Clarify the Trend
The next step for readers seeking a broader picture would be to consult the original article and its linked research, particularly the University of Michigan report cited for the clean-plate statistic and the interview with Niobe Way. Those materials could clarify the evidence behind the specific claims, including how the figures were collected and what population they describe.
Until comparative research or additional sourcing is available, the list remains a generational commentary, not a definitive account of parenting then and now. The supplied source does not announce a follow-up study or another scheduled development.
Key Questions
What is the news development?
Bolde published a retrospective list of 11 rules it associates with childhood in the 1960s and ’70s and says are less common for younger generations. It is a commentary piece, not a newly released study.
Which rules does the supplied report discuss?
The excerpt covers expectations such as finishing meals, obeying adults without explanation, accepting a teacher’s account, going to school while mildly ill, following gendered rules about emotions, managing homework independently, having little privacy and waiting for a father to handle discipline. It begins another example about walking off an injury but cuts off before completing it.
Does the article prove that these rules have disappeared?
No. The source presents cultural observations but does not provide a representative survey establishing how common the rules were in the past or how often they are used today. The article’s headline and argument should be read as a broad comparison, not a universal finding.
What evidence does Bolde cite?
Bolde attributes a clean-plate statistic—about one in eight parents still require children to finish their meals—to University of Michigan pediatrician Susan Woolford. It also summarizes psychologist Niobe Way’s comments on emotional norms for boys. The supplied excerpt does not give the underlying report’s date or methodology.
Source: bolde.com
