How much does your environment actually shape your personality?

What can anyone tell me about the current consensus in the psychological community regarding the ideal environment for healthy development and the shaping of a child's personality?😕 Specifically, I am interested in how this relates to the immediate family unit. Is the idea that a child requires both a "male" and a "female" role model to thrive still considered the gold standard, or has that framework been relegated to the archives of outdated thinking?
Could someone provide some insight based on actual clinical research, perhaps explained in terms accessible to a layman like myself? Once we have the groundwork laid, we could perhaps move toward a more analytical discussion...☕

Here I am again, attempting once more to coax an answer out of this void regarding a question that has been weighing on my mind. (I realize it’s somewhat impolite of me to shove my way back to the top of the thread list like this). I would sincerely appreciate even a modicum of feedback—is it truly possible that this topic holds absolutely no interest for anyone here? Or perhaps, in a more cynical sense, maybe it simply doesn't matter...

Old-school parenting is still the way to go, hands down.

Go dig through some prevention theory—you know, the stuff about risk and protective factors in the home environment, building resilient kids, all that jazz. There's a mountain of literature out there on it.

Honestly, I’d probably wait for someone more knowledgeable to weigh in on this too. It’s a question I’ve been wondering about myself.

Old-school parenting is still the absolute gold standard if you ask me! It builds those core traits in a person that actually matter for making it in life.
I honestly feel like how you're raised and the whole environment you grow up in is still everything when it comes to who you become as an individual.

Jesse Sullivan2 said:Old-school parenting is still the gold standard! It builds those essential character traits that serve you well throughout life.
I truly believe that upbringing and the "environment you grow up in" are still absolutely vital for shaping an individual.

Oh, sure, sounds wonderful! Let's just raise him to be silent at the dinner table unless he asks permission to speak, have him kiss the hands of some elderly aunt during visits while reciting poetry, and ban everything—the internet, phones, video games, teen magazines. We should probably tell him kids are found in cabbage patches rather than being the result of sex, convince him all those uncles inviting him into the bushes are perfectly safe, insist the man runs the house, and if the woman doesn't listen, she gets hit or "accidentally" trips down the stairs... oh, and definitely don't let him hang out with his friends. Just perfect.

Using a 1921 parenting playbook for today's brilliant, sharp-witted generation—kids who basically know more the moment they're born than we ever did—is a recipe for disaster. If you rely on that kind of repression and strictness, you’re going to quickly produce
anti-social, angry, and deeply frustrated kids who, once they finally break free from that control, turn into actual serial killers.

Every era has its own standards of beauty and behavior, and every generation needs to be raised in the spirit of their own time. Otherwise, we're just creating mental monsters.

@wearyowl29

That doesn't mean we should just hand kids over to this modern era—letting them stare blankly at computer screens all day, getting into trouble at twelve, or dressing provocatively...
We can't exactly fall back on old-school parenting either, because like you said, we'll just end up creating some kind of mental monster.
The real issue is that even if we teach our children right from wrong, it all goes out the window the second they step out into the world and leave parental supervision behind.

Joseph Johnson37 said:@wearyowl29

That doesn't mean we should just hand kids over to the modern age—you know, let them go blind staring at computer screens all day, getting into trouble at twelve, or dressing like they're trying to start a scandal...
We can't exactly fall back on old-school discipline either, because like you said, we might end up raising some kind of mental monster.
The real kicker is that even if we try to teach them right from wrong, it all goes out the window the second they step out into the world and leave our sight.

Of course not! It’s just that raising a kid isn't like running a controlled lab experiment; it’s all about interaction. If they see other kids watching TV or gaming on their PCs all day, or even getting into bad habits like smoking, how are you supposed to keep yours under a glass bell jar? As soon as they hit the streets, they're going to get a reality check from their peers regardless.

wearyowl29, you’re acting like a total loose cannon here—just pure chaos!
I mean, seriously, how on earth did you end up thinking that "old school" parenting—you know, like keeping kids quiet at the dinner table or banning phones and TV—is somehow outdated?! I’m actually dying to hear your logic on this...

I guess an environment might influence a kid's development, but maybe it doesn't have to. As for parenting, I honestly think you should just go with your gut instead of following some rigid "methods." People evolve with every generation, so kids today are smarter and more advanced; we can't just use old-school tactics or outdated rules that never change. To me, the most important thing is raising a child based on who they actually are. Like, if a kid is hyperactive, a parent shouldn't constantly be telling them to "sit still because guests are coming"—that just stifles their personality and sends the message that who they are isn't acceptable. Of course, there’s a massive line between being hyper and just being spoiled, so kids definitely need to learn right from wrong early on. I truly believe that once a person becomes a parent, they develop an instinct—though, unfortunately, not every parent actually gets it—and that instinct is probably the best tool for raising a child.🙂

wearyowl29 said:Beauty standards shift with every era, and if we don't raise kids with the values of their own time, we end up creating psychological wrecks.

Of everything you just said, that last point is the only one that actually hits home. It’s true—just look around. These little monsters are everywhere because everything is shaped by the current culture.

Jesse Sullivan2 said:wearyowl29, you’re like a walking storm cloud—pure chaos!
I’m dying to know how on earth you decided that "old-school" parenting—you know, silence at the dinner table and banning phones and TV—is the way to go?! Seriously, I need the backstory here...

So, listen, there’s this one family that just moved here from... well, it doesn't really matter where, but the point is, their kids stay quiet during meals, they don't have smartphones, and they only get TV time once a week if the parent and child agree on it....
When I think about those kids just sitting there, being quiet and playing together, I can't help but feel they aren't just mindless little robots...😲

Jesse Sullivan2 said:Out of everything you wrote, only that last point actually holds water. It’s true—just look around. These little monsters are everywhere, all products of their era.

I mean, how could kids be any different from the world they grow up in or their own parent and child dynamics? It's inevitable!
Honestly, modern parenting feels like a high-stakes slalom run down a mountain. If you want to dodge all those traps of kids growing up way too fast, you’ve got to be quick, precise, totally consistent, and in peak physical shape just to keep up!

Well, it looks like things are finally moving again, though perhaps drifting toward topics more suited for a "parent and child" forum. To be a bit more precise with my inquiry: according to the consensus of modern psychologists, to what extent is the presence of both parents—or more specifically, both genders—within the immediate family unit beneficial for ensuring a child's development remains harmonious and balanced? My focus lies primarily on the formation of one's own sense of sexuality, and indeed, the concept of sexuality itself. Of course, one cannot engineer an ideal environment for upbringing (not in any capacity), yet there surely exist factors whose presence, or absence, during such a sensitive formative period are viewed by the profession as either positive or detrimental. Thanks for the responses (which I hope will follow).

redhawk76 said:Well, look at that! It seems we’ve finally broken the ice here, even if the conversation is drifting toward territory more suited for a "Parent and Child" forum. Let me try to be a bit more specific with my question: based on what modern psychologists tell us, how much does having both a parent and child of both sexes present in the immediate family help a kid develop in a smooth, balanced way? I’m mainly thinking about how they form their own sense of sexuality and understand the concept of sex in general. Now, obviously, nobody can engineer a perfect environment for growing up—life isn't that tidy—but surely there are certain factors whose presence (or absence) during those sensitive formative years are viewed as positive or negative by the experts. Thanks for any answers you can throw my way!

It sounds like you're looking for data specifically regarding the presence or absence of parents of both genders.
You might find some useful insights on websites run by American psychologists who specialize in studying

I guess for kids to actually grow up right, they need to be able to show how they feel, talk to their parents, and build some trust... the environment and family vibe always matter because that's how they learn... you can't just shut them down, you have to let them explore while still setting boundaries. I'm not a fan of hitting kids either, that kind of "discipline" doesn't do anything...

And about that whole male-female polarity thing... a kid is just discovering themselves and the world around them, figuring out what feels right and what doesn't... forcing stuff on kids is pointless, but teaching them positive values by leading by example is probably good for their development.

But what about the things that don't impact our personal growth? I’m genuinely curious about who I actually am, which means... hmm...
If you really wanted to see your true self, you’d probably have to develop in total isolation—like being stranded on a desert island, living solo with nothing but food for sustenance. That’s when you’d find out who you really are and what you’re capable of inventing.
Of course, that’s impossible.
In this day and age, knowledge is cumulative. You have to spend years studying intensely just to eventually reach a point where you can draw a conclusion that nobody else has reached before you. And even then, you have to specialize in specific fields because life is far too short to try and grasp the entire picture at once.
I haven't read Freud, but he used the concept of the parent and child through these "sexual" models (gross), implying that your first understanding of what is masculine or feminine comes directly from your parents.
The best approach is to not push children too hard... but you can only really do that if you lead a calm life yourself. If you're financially stable and aren't constantly stressed about basic survival, you can manage, because emotions are fleeting, yet you can't hide them from a child. Kids are much more emotional creatures than their parents. That’s why kids identify so strongly with music; they play in that emotional realm of expression, whereas parents have already transitioned into calculated emotions and logic.
So, basically, you grow most effectively by acting naturally—by learning from your own mistakes rather than having your parents hand everything to you on a silver platter or overprotecting you (and I don't mean being overly strict).
Nowadays, parents are so weighed down by their financial situation that they barely have time for their kids. Instead, TV acts as the medium that teaches them how to live; we're basically raising a new generation of Cabelguy's followers, haha.
"I learned the facts of life by watching a show called Life Facts," lol.
Social communities and traditions are dying out, but what even is a tradition?
It's the guardians of culture, the passing down of something learned. Where are those moments now when your grandma would knit you a sweater? What good does it do you when you just have The Chinese man living on your street? Damn.
The bottom line is that your community shapes your character. As The Chinese man says, "Thanks God we live in such an interesting time," because when and where you are born matters immensely!
Alright, enough philosophizing!
You’ll become the best version of yourself—a humble, kind, empathetic being—if you're raised by someone who is truly good at heart... or, in my opinion, someone who is emotionally fulfilled, stable, cheerful, and lacks malice.

I just remembered something else😉
People spend their whole lives imitating one another, buying stuff from everyone else, constantly comparing themselves—it’s pure envy. But look at animals: a mother teaches them the basic survival skills they need, and then the young ones are just out there, free.
Humans operate as this massive collective, a giant community where the individual barely matters... if we all buy things from everyone else, then something you think is uniquely "you" is actually just you piggybacking on someone else's actions and thoughts.
Who you are is essentially just your consciousness. /And now comes the philosophy part where I have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about😉
That’s why I said people should just live on a deserted island and be left alone to create something truly "new" without any outside influence. Something you didn't just see somewhere else and copy, but something you actually used your own brain to build.
Me, you, all of us—deep down, we're good people. We aren't inherently wicked; it's just a matter of our environment and what shaped our thinking, our actions, the complications we face, the problems we dealt with, etc.
When I really stop to think about it, this is a deep philosophical question, so I honestly don't have a clue, haha.

"Love your neighbor as yourself"—that's such a sneaky way to put it, because the hardest thing in the world is actually knowing yourself...
Maybe we shouldn't ask these kinds of questions too much. You should just live life without overthinking everything (we leave that to the philosophers)
Man is a social animal; we should act the way nature intended instead of just spiraling into infinite thought loops. You won't figure anything out that you don't already know... people spend all their time observing themselves, when the answers have existed for ages.
What was a human thinking while they were running for their lives from a wolf into a cave? Let's try asking *him* a philosophical question!
Humans and animals are basically the same thing, except we’re just too damn proud of our species, thinking we're somehow superior or special. I wonder what God says about animals.....
We should just enjoy ourselves, and if possible, not ask too many questions😉, just relax and act like we're in some movie, letting time carry us along...
Live like a plant, an animal, a human... like a Native American😉
Because if things are "good" for us, we'll spend the whole time in a state of mild euphoria without questioning a single thing. I know from personal experience😉 you only think the most when things are hard, when you're trying to claw your way out of a situation, but when you have everything you need, life is great...

I don't want to get all deep on you about morality or whatever, but I guess the highest value is just empathy—actually giving a damn about someone else. It’s universal, I suppose...