Ep. 25: Protect People, or Prepare Them? (w. David)

Written By Matti Shicker
🎙️ listen to the episode

EPISODE DESCRIPTION

America’s favorite brother-in-law is back! David returns to It’s Gonna Be Fine for a conversation that starts with a deceptively simple question: when someone we love is struggling with something, is it our job to protect them from the world - or prepare them for it?

We start with parents and their children, and the tricky question of when it’s appropriate to comment on something as sensitive as weight, appearance, health, or behavior. Should a parent wait to be asked? Is there a difference between an adult child and a six-year-old? And can trying to help actually plant a seed of insecurity that wasn’t there before?

From there, David and Matti get into one of their biggest disagreements yet: how much should parents try to shape their children for the world they actually live in? David approaches the question more practically, thinking about influence, societal norms, and the responsibility to prepare kids for reality. Matti comes at it from the emotional side, worrying about the lasting impact of making a child feel like there’s something wrong with them in the first place.

And then comes “Bug Boy.” If your seven-year-old is obsessed with bugs but that obsession is starting to make it harder for him to make friends, do you let him be himself, or gently steer him toward something a little more socially acceptable? David thinks parents have a responsibility to guide. Matti worries that trying to “fix” someone can create the very problem you’re trying to prevent.

That leads into another question: how much conformity is actually good for us? Is preparing someone for society fundamentally different from asking them to fit in? And where exactly is the line between guidance and re-engineering a human being?

Then the conversation turns toward dating and physical attraction, with a story about a live blind-dating show that raises an important question: how much do looks really matter? And what’s the best way to “bow out” if you’re not attracted to someone?

Finally, we zoom out to something even bigger: why does the pressure to look good seem to be following us later and later into life? From the “dad bod” to Botox, gray hair, GLP-1s, biomarkers, hormone treatments, and the increasingly visual world of Zoom, Microsoft Teams, LinkedIn, and social media, are we entering an era where we’re expected to stay “hot” forever?

As usual, David and Matti don’t completely agree. How much should we protect people from the world, and how much should we prepare them for it? And can we do either without making people feel like they aren’t enough as they are?

It’s a conversation about parenting, self-esteem, conformity, dating, attraction, aging, and the complicated business of being a human being in a very visual world.


Referenced in this Episode

TRANSCRIPT

Matti: This guy again. David’s back. I’m back. Literally can’t get rid of you.

David: Everybody’s favorite brother-in-law is back again.

Matti: That is true. In fact, I think I’m gonna order T-shirts that we can wear next time. But yeah, can’t get rid of you—and we’re thrilled that you’re here.

David: Matching T-shirts for our audio-only podcast. Very good.

Matti: For now. For now. More on that soon.

So today we’re gonna talk a lot about looks and physical appearance, and how much they matter in our lives—even though they probably shouldn’t, or at least we wish they didn’t.

David: I mean, that’s why you had me back. You’re talking about looks. We gotta get David in here.

Matti: Best-looking person I know. The best-looking brother-in-law in New Jersey.

David: It’s funny because Matti has another brother-in-law who lives in New York.

Matti: Yes. Who is over the age of thirty.

David: And who actively listens to the podcast.

Matti: I think the other one does too. I get comments from him.

David: Yeah, but—

Matti: Ben doesn’t listen?

David: No, he does. That’s what I’m talking about.

Matti: Okay. Well, I don’t have another brother-in-law in New Jersey.

David: Fine. I misunderstood you.

Matti: We’re off to a great start.

So let’s begin. This topic has always been around, but lately I’ve been seeing a lot more conversations about it.

The first one—and I know I sent this to you in advance to watch, I hope you did—was from Abigail Shrier, a columnist at The Free Press. She was responding to a reader’s question: Can I tell my daughter she’s fat? My adult daughter—can I tell her that she’s overweight?

I thought Abigail took a really interesting approach. Ultimately, she said no. Her point was: she already knows. You’re not telling her anything she doesn’t know, and she’s an adult. Your job as a parent isn’t to point out her shortcomings. Your job is to help her feel better about herself and let her share what she wants to share, in her own time.

So her advice was: don’t bring this up. Don’t go down this road with your adult child.

That got me thinking about adult children, younger children, weight, GLP-1s—all of it. You and I have talked about this stuff before. What were your takeaways from the video?

David: I think the bigger question is parents commenting on their kids’ looks and telling them how they think they should improve them.

I thought the idea of, “Don’t tell her, she already knows,” was a little strange at first because that almost seems beside the point. To me, the bigger issue is inserting your own opinion and beliefs into the life of a fully functioning adult.

You might be her mother, but it’s still not necessarily your business to tell your daughter how you think she should live.

Matti: What if it’s coming from a place of concern for her health?

David: I’m assuming it is. I don’t think she’s trying to insult her.

Matti: Maybe she’s worried about her physical appearance.

David: Right. And I’m not even saying what I think the answer is yet. I just think the better framing is: Can you tell a fully functioning adult how you think they should be living their life when they didn’t ask you?

That’s the broader question.

Matti: Well, I think it’s different when you’re talking about parents and their kids versus random people, coworkers, or acquaintances. The relationship matters.

But if we’re talking about parents and adult children, my general take is: let them ask first.

I agreed with the writer in that sense. You can be there for your child, do things with them, help them feel good about themselves. But if they bring something up as a concern, that’s when you can address it.

It should come from them, not from you.

And honestly, I think that’s generally my approach. If it isn’t about you, it’s usually not your place to bring it up.

David: I think it depends on what the issue is and what relationship the person giving the advice has with the person receiving it.

Like, if I’m in the grocery store looking at cereal and someone says, “You should try this one. It tastes better and it’s healthier,” I’m probably not gonna be offended. I’d just say, “Cool, thanks for the tip.”

Matti: You would be okay with that? I would hate that.

That actually happened to me once at work. We had bagels and cream cheese in the kitchen, and I was spreading cream cheese on a bagel. Our chief financial officer walked in and said, “Matti, you shouldn’t eat that. It’s not good for you.”

I literally went straight to HR.

This was years ago and I was much younger, but I was like, why? It’s none of his business. We actually had a conversation about it, and he apologized. He said he didn’t mean anything by it, but I told him: that’s not your business.

It would have been one thing if he said, “You should try the strawberry cream cheese. It tastes better.” But saying, “You shouldn’t eat cream cheese and bagels”? No.

David: Right. I guess one is an implicit criticism, while the other is just a suggestion.

That’s probably an important distinction. If you’re offering something helpful without a negative connotation, maybe that’s one thing. But if you say, “This isn’t fattening—you should have this instead,” that comes with an implicit criticism.

Matti: Exactly. And you don’t even know why someone is buying something. You don’t know if they’re buying it for themselves or their kids. Maybe their doctor told them they need something that’s in that cereal. You have no idea what’s going on.

David: On the other hand, I do like a certain warmth between people. I like collegiality. I think there can be something nice about someone saying, “Hey, have you tried this?”

As long as it’s not coming from a place of criticism.

But I’ll give you an example of the opposite. I have three kids—eight, five, and two. Recently, my eight- and five-year-olds were riding their bikes down our residential block while I was walking behind them pushing the two-year-old in a stroller. I was maybe half a block away, watching them the whole time.

They rode past a parked car, and apparently a woman was sitting inside. She rolled down her window and said, “How are these girls riding their bikes like this?”

I said, “Like what?”

She said, “It’s so dangerous.”

I said, “What’s dangerous? They’re riding their bikes on a residential street, and I’m supervising them.”

She said, “A car could be there. I didn’t see them.”

And I said, “Well, then you should be paying attention.”

I was furious because she was implying I was being reckless with my kids when they were doing something completely normal, and I was supervising them.

So that’s definitely the dark side of unsolicited advice. There’s an implicit criticism of something important to you, and it can make you furious.

Matti: It’s just safer to mind your own business.

David: With a stranger, sure. But what about someone you know? Someone who has a relationship with you, knows you, and genuinely cares about you? A parent, sibling, or close friend?

That gets trickier.

Matti: Yeah. So going back to the specific example of an adult child and weight, I think you have to ask: are you genuinely worried about their health? And if so, what else is going on?

Maybe they’re overweight, but do they have high blood pressure? High cholesterol? Is their weight actually contributing to a health problem?

Or are you about to put something in their head that they weren’t even worried about?

Imagine someone going through life happy and not self-conscious, and then you plant that seed. Why would you do that?

It’s traumatic as a kid, obviously, but even as an adult, you can change how someone sees themselves.

That’s why I think it’s better to let them come to you and say, “I’m struggling with this. Can you help me?”

Rather than, “Hey, have you realized you’re fat?”

David: Obviously, if someone comes to you for help, that’s different.

But what if they come to you about something adjacent to the issue?

Let’s say the daughter never talks to her mom about her weight. But she’s single, and she comes to her mom upset because she’s having trouble dating. The mom believes her weight might be part of the issue, but the daughter hasn’t made that connection.

The daughter is asking for help, but maybe she’s not identifying what the mom sees as the problem. Is it okay for the mom to bring it up then?

Matti: I think it can be, if it’s done sensitively and supportively.

Not, “Well, obviously you’re overweight, so you need to lose weight.”

More like, “Have you thought about this? Not to say you need to change anything, but is this something you might want to think about?”

You’re presenting it as a possibility, not declaring that it’s the reason.

And intention matters. If the mom genuinely thinks it might be relevant, that’s different from thinking, “Aha, now I finally have an excuse to tell her she’s overweight.”

David: Right.

Let me give you another example. Let’s say it’s not weight. Let’s say the child smokes. They’re otherwise living a normal life, but they’re smoking.

Would a parent, friend, or sibling have the right to sit down and say, “I care about you, and I’m really worried about the health effects of smoking”?

Matti: Yeah, I think that’s different.

You’d still want to approach it supportively, but smoking is different from weight. There’s a huge emotional component to weight and how society treats people based on their bodies.

There’s a stigma around smoking, but I don’t think people subconsciously value someone differently as a person in quite the same way they might judge someone who is overweight.

And weight is complicated. Two people can eat the same way and exercise the same amount and still look completely different. Genetics play a role.

So I see the comparison, but I think they’re different situations and I would approach them differently.

David: Yeah. I guess part of what makes parenting difficult is that parents have so much influence early in a child’s life.

When a kid is born, the parent is their entire world. They provide everything. Then, over time, that influence naturally decreases.

Matti: It’s supposed to.

David: Parents don’t always let it happen.

Matti: Exactly.

David: But that’s the point. Parents were once responsible for everything. So it’s hard to suddenly say, “Okay, you’re eighteen now. Good luck. You’re completely on your own.”

Obviously that’s not healthy either.

So it’s difficult to say, “Stay emotionally invested in your child’s life, but never offer an opinion unless you’re specifically asked.”

Matti: I think you’re allowed to offer opinions. Parents are gonna make mistakes.

And honestly, the fact that this parent wrote in and asked the question means she was already thinking carefully about it. That’s a good sign.

But what about younger kids? Let’s say a doctor says your child is significantly outside a healthy weight range. What do you do?

David: I think you have to consider age.

The younger the child, the more influence you have. As they get older—especially into their teenage years—your influence naturally decreases.

At some point, pushing too hard can become counterproductive.

Matti: But I don’t think influence is really the point.

Just because you have more influence over a six-year-old doesn’t mean you should be careless about what you say or what you put into their head.

Let’s say the child isn’t worried about their body at all. They’re happy. They have friends. They’re comfortable with themselves.

I would be terrified of planting the idea that something is wrong with your body.

You could be setting them up for a lifetime of self-consciousness around something they may not have even been thinking about.

David: I don’t want anyone to misunderstand me. It should never be done in a belittling or insulting way.

But I do believe there’s a balance between nature and nurture.

On one hand, you have to accept who your child is. You can’t force a square peg into a round hole.

But I also think parents have a responsibility to gently guide their children. The younger the child, the more that’s part of parenting.

If your child is naturally moving in a direction you believe isn’t healthy or won’t benefit them long-term, and you can gently influence them, I think that’s part of your responsibility.

As they get older, though, you have to recognize that your influence decreases. Eventually, preserving the relationship becomes more important than fighting a battle you’re probably going to lose anyway.

Matti: It’s interesting because I think you’re approaching this more scientifically. You’re thinking about the amount of influence changing over time.

I’m thinking about the emotional impact.

To me, whether you’re five, eleven, sixteen, or twenty-seven, the emotional impact of how someone talks to you about your body can be enormous.

David: Absolutely. It should never be done in the wrong way.

Matti: Okay, I’m gonna put you on the spot.

Let’s say it’s your child. The doctor says they’re significantly above a healthy weight range. They’re six years old. What do you do?

Do you sit them down and have a conversation? What happens when they go to birthday parties? Do you say they can’t have ice cream on a school trip? How do you actually handle it?

David: I hate being put on the spot.

Matti: I know.

David: But fine. Listeners, let us know how I do.

Honestly, with a six-year-old, I wouldn’t explicitly sit them down and talk about their weight.

But I would make changes for the whole family. Maybe everyone gets one piece of candy for dessert. Maybe we’re all eating healthier food and limiting junk food.

I wouldn’t say, “You’re doing this because you’re overweight.” I would make it part of how our family eats.

Matti: So you’re including everyone. You’re not isolating the child or making it about them.

David: Exactly.

But I also wouldn’t do nothing. I wouldn’t just say, “Well, that’s how they are. They’ll figure it out.”

Matti: I’m not saying do nothing. I think it’s about the approach.

And I also don’t think it’s necessarily a five-alarm emergency that needs to be solved tomorrow. Kids are growing. Bodies change.

If a doctor says your child is outside a normal weight range, you don’t necessarily have to panic and immediately launch into a campaign to fix it.

You can take it slowly.

David: Definitely.

But a fifteen-year-old would be very different.

If my fifteen-year-old was comfortable in their skin, had friends, was confident, and was leading a happy life, I’m honestly not sure I would say anything.

First, I don’t know if it would accomplish anything. And second, if they’re doing well and their weight isn’t negatively affecting their life, I wouldn’t want to create a problem where there wasn’t one.

Matti: What about potential health problems?

David: I guess it depends on how serious the situation is. But at sixteen, I’m not necessarily thinking about that the same way I would if they were much older.

Matti: David, you’ve impressed me.

David: I feel like that means you had a low opinion of me before.

Matti: I thought you might take a different approach.

But there’s more nuance in what you’re saying than I expected. You’d actually think carefully about it, and I think that’s all we can ask for.

You know me. Maybe it’s good that I don’t have kids. But if I did, I would do everything in my power to make sure they felt normal. I would never want them to feel isolated, singled out, or like something was wrong with them.

That’s why I think about these things even as someone without kids. Self-esteem is so important.

David: Okay, let me give you a completely different example.

Let’s say you have a seven-year-old son who is obsessed with bugs. He loves bugs. All he wants to talk about is bugs.

And because he’s constantly talking about bugs at school, he’s having trouble making friends. He’s not getting invited to playdates. Other kids aren’t really connecting with him.

Do you just say, “You do you, Bug Boy”?

Obviously, don’t actually call him Bug Boy.

Matti: Well, first of all, I’m not a fan of bugs.

But I would still encourage his interest. I wouldn’t try to discourage him from liking bugs.

If I noticed it was becoming a problem socially, I might ask questions. “How are things going at school? Do you have friends? Who do you like spending time with?”

I would try to understand what was happening.

David: But he’s seven. Let’s say he has no insight into it. He doesn’t realize he’s isolated.

Matti: He would know whether people talk to him or invite him places.

David: Maybe. Sometimes kids don’t.

Matti: Okay, so you’re saying it’s my responsibility because if I don’t intervene, he may not even realize there’s a problem.

David: Exactly. And I think that’s a realistic scenario.

Matti: Ideally, I would still try to ask questions and help him arrive at conclusions himself.

I wouldn’t want to say, “You can’t like bugs,” or, “People don’t like you because of bugs.” That’s a terrible message.

But maybe I’d eventually say something like, “It’s great that you have a specific interest. We can go to museums and learn more about bugs. But not everyone likes the same things. Some people might not be as interested in bugs as you are. Are there other things you and your friends like that you can enjoy together?”

I would try to frame it around finding common interests.

David: I don’t necessarily disagree.

But honestly, I wouldn’t encourage the bug obsession.

I wouldn’t put it down. I wouldn’t tell him there was something wrong with him. But if it was my kid, I might tell you, “Matti, don’t buy him another bug book for Hanukkah. Get him something else.”

I would try to subtly encourage other interests.

Matti: I wouldn’t let him bring bugs into the house because that would be terrible. But I don’t think I would mind buying him a bug book.

David: If he asked for one, maybe. But I wouldn’t go out of my way to feed the obsession.

Again, I wouldn’t discourage it. I wouldn’t make him feel bad. But I might encourage other things and see if his interests naturally broaden.

Matti: I just don’t think I can re-engineer a human.

David: I think that’s a little bit what raising a kid is.

I don’t think parenting is just saying, “Let them be natural, and whatever they come up with, they come up with.”

Matti: Just because people might judge them?

David: Because this is the world.

Look, if he grows up and loves bugs, great. He’s my kid. I love him unconditionally.

But if, when he’s young, I can gently guide him in a direction where he avoids unnecessary negative consequences, I think that’s part of my role as a parent.

Matti: But there could also be negative consequences from making him feel like there’s something wrong with his interests.

That’s a slippery slope.

David: Maybe. Or maybe five years later, when he’s isolated because nobody ever helped him understand how his behavior was affecting his relationships, he asks, “Dad, where were you?”

It reminds me of something you talked about with Cindy—professional etiquette. You don’t know what you don’t know.

Cindy wore a halter top to work because she didn’t realize it wasn’t appropriate for that environment. Someone had to explain the professional norms to her.

I think parenting can be similar. It’s the job of someone with more experience to help guide someone who doesn’t yet know the rules.

Matti: But companies and children aren’t the same thing.

David: No, but the idea of educating someone is similar.

Matti: Professional norms are different. There are clearer rules. A human being is more complicated.

David: There are societal norms too. And I think it’s a parent’s role to gently guide a child toward understanding them while still being sensitive to their emotional needs.

Matti: So basically, make sure they fit into general society so they’re not considered odd?

David: I think there’s value in some degree of conformity. Yes.

Matti: What if the government mandates it?

David: Now I’m very opposed.

Matti: No, wait! Don’t you think people eventually find like-minded people? You don’t have to fit into the cool kids’ club.

David: I’m not saying I want my kid to be cool. I just want them to be broader.

Matti: And liking bugs doesn’t mean they’re gonna walk around going, “Bugs! Bugs!” all day. They might just like reading about them and otherwise live a completely normal life.

David: If that’s all it is, great.

But I was assuming you’ve already noticed that it’s having a negative impact. This isn’t just a harmless pastime. You’re already seeing consequences.

And if you’re seeing consequences, I don’t think you should just say, “Okay, you’ll figure it out.”

To me, the sensitive and kind thing is to gently and lovingly see if you can help steer your kid in a better direction.

Maybe you and I agree to disagree.

Dear listener, what do you think?

Matti: There are definitely things you and I agree on, David, and things we don’t.

So we would love to hear what everyone else thinks.

And did you know there’s now a website for this podcast? You can visit itsgonnabefine.fm. You can send a message, DM us, and we have a new email address: hello@itsgonnabefine.fm.

So however you’d like to let us know what you think, we’d love to hear it.

David: I’m actually super honored that you debuted the website on an episode with me. That’s really special.

And everyone should like, give five stars, leave great reviews, and reach out to Matti—or me—through the website and let us know what you think.

Matti: Just so you know, David, I did debut it on this recording, but this episode isn’t actually coming out next Sunday. It’s coming out on the sixteenth, and I’m gonna debut it on the next episode, which comes out on the ninth.

David: With Cindy?

Matti: No, just me. It’s a solo episode because I’ve had so many guests lately, and I was like, I need to get back to the foundation for one episode.

Okay, so there’s another video I saw along these lines. It’s different, but it also has to do with physical appearance.

You know the show Love Is Blind on Netflix?

David: I’ve heard of something like this.

Matti: Of course you have.

So, quick explanation for you because you live under a rock: Love Is Blind is a dating show where people get to know each other without seeing each other. They talk in these pods, develop relationships, and then decide whether they want to get engaged before ever seeing the person.

Then the question becomes: now that you’ve seen each other, do you still feel the same way? Is love really blind, or do looks matter?

There is now a live comedy dating show called UpDating. It’s kind of a similar concept. Two single people go on a blindfolded date on stage in front of an audience.

The audience gets to know each person individually, then the two are brought together while blindfolded and get to know each other. At the end, they’re asked whether they’re interested. Thumbs up or thumbs down.

I saw an episode recently with a guy who was your typical conventionally attractive, confident guy. The woman was also attractive but happened to be in a larger body.

They were blindfolded and they were hitting it off. Great conversation. Good chemistry. By the end, before seeing each other, both gave a thumbs-up.

Then they took off the blindfolds.

And when they were asked again whether they were interested, the woman gave a thumbs-up.

The guy gave a thumbs-down.

Now, listen, I have no problem with someone deciding they’re not attracted to someone. That’s fine. You can have your preferences.

But here’s what annoyed me: he said, “I’m a brunette guy. That’s why I said no.”

And I thought that was so patronizing.

We all know why he said no. If you’re hitting it off with someone and you’re interested in them, I don’t believe you’re suddenly out just because she has red hair instead of brown hair.

So that’s what annoyed me. Not that he wasn’t attracted to her, but that he tried to sidestep what was obviously happening.

David: I’m actually gonna disagree with you there. I think saying the hair thing might have been the better move.

Matti: What are you talking about?

David: Because, rightly or wrongly, weight is something people perceive as changeable. Hair color is generally not.

Matti: You can dye your hair in five seconds.

David: I don’t know. I think people view someone’s natural hair color as part of who they are.

What I’m saying is that maybe it’s less insulting to say, “I’m not into this characteristic of yours,” especially if it’s not a judgment about the person, than saying, “I’m not attracted to you because of this thing about your body.”

Matti: I totally agree that he shouldn’t have said, “I’m not interested because you’re overweight.” He didn’t have to say anything.

That’s my point.

He could have just said, “No, I’m not interested.”

David: I think at that point, saying something might be better than saying nothing. Maybe he was trying to give her some dignity.

And who’s to say? Maybe he really doesn’t like redheads.

Matti: If you’re a straight man and you hit it off with a woman over the phone—let’s say this was back in your rotary phone dating days—and then you meet her and she’s beautiful, funny, and everything clicks, but she has red hair instead of brown hair, are you really gonna say, “I’m out”?

David: Probably not.

But when I used to go on blind dates, there were times when I’d talk to someone beforehand and we’d hit it off, and then I’d meet them and I wasn’t attracted to them.

I never said, “Sorry, I’m not attracted to you.” That’s crazy.

And honestly, I think that whole show is kind of sick.

Matti: You hate it?

David: I hate it.

Because you know what the whole point is? This.

They want people to hit it off perfectly, then have one person not be attracted to the other, reject them, and look like a jerk while the other person is embarrassed.

It’s like watching NASCAR for the crashes.

That’s what the show is built around. They know exactly what they’re doing.

And it’s an unfair setup because, as you said from the beginning, physical attraction matters.

Matti: I want to make something clear: I have no issue with him not being attracted to her for any reason at all.

There are really two things that bothered me.

The first was the immediate thing: don’t make up a ridiculous reason. He didn’t have to say anything.

The second is the bigger picture. It does make me sad that two people can hit it off so well and then one person doesn’t even want to go on one actual date after seeing the other person.

I’m not saying they have to get married. I’m saying, one date. Why not?

David: He could have gone on a date with her. That might have been a nice thing to do.

But again, I think he was put in an unfair situation.

Matti: Impossible situation?

David: Okay, not impossible. But it’s a setup.

Matti: He’s also a moron.

David: Fine. He was a dummy for saying that.

Matti: He could have just given a thumbs-down.

David: I still think giving a reason might have been better.

Matti: He could have said, “I’m not physically attracted to you.”

That would have been more honest without pointing to something specific.

David: I don’t know. Someone once gave me an analogy I liked. They said looks are the keys to the car.

Obviously, the most important thing about the car is the engine and how it drives and everything else. But if you don’t have the keys, you’re not going anywhere.

Matti: It’s like a résumé gets you the interview, but then it’s about your experience and everything else.

David: Exactly.

Matti: And that’s fine. I don’t disagree with that.

But since we’re talking about dating, there’s one piece of advice I heard that I thought was simple but insightful: If it’s not a hundred percent no, go on another date.

Maybe if this guy had heard that, the answer would still have been no. But I like the idea.

You’re not committing to anything. You’re just saying, “I’m not fully out, so let’s see what happens.”

David: I don’t know. I went on a lot of dates in my day, and dating isn’t always easy.

People are busy. They’re tired. Maybe you’ve had a busy work week. Maybe you’ve already gone on seven dates where you were seventy-thirty on the person and they were all a bust.

Eventually, you might just not want to go on another one.

Matti: Okay, then go on a date when you’re not done.

David: What if you’re done?

Matti: Then eventually you get to the point where you’re done. That’s what I’m saying. Once you’re truly at the point where there’s no turning back, then you’re out.

But if you’re tired one day, don’t go that day. Go another day.

I was just giving a little dating advice that I heard and liked. Not that I’m a dating expert, but maybe it’ll help somebody.

David: Okay.

Matti: Okay.

So we’ve talked about adult children and younger children. One more topic along these lines, which again emphasizes this idea of looks and the importance of physical appearance.

There was an article on Bloomberg called “Forget Health Span. Midlife Men Face Pressure to Extend Hot Span.”

It was talking about you and me—geriatric millennials.

Historically, when people got into their late thirties, forties, fifties, and closer to retirement, they often stopped worrying so much about how they looked. They had their families, careers, spouses or partners. It wasn’t necessarily as important as it was when you were young and dating.

But something has changed.

There are all these things now that people can do: get their biomarkers checked, do hormone replacement therapy, increase testosterone, get collagen injections, Botox.

It’s become another rat race to look good, even in middle age.

The author was basically asking: Does it ever end? When do we get to just be okay with who we are? Or do we always have to keep up and keep looking good into our forties, fifties, and sixties?

One other point in the article that I found interesting was about people who may have been displaced from careers they expected to stay in.

Maybe they got laid off and now they’re competing in a marketplace that feels younger, faster, and more visual.

We’re in this post-COVID world where everything is on Zoom, Microsoft Teams, video calls. You have a LinkedIn profile. You see yourself constantly.

Looks are becoming more of a thing for every generation, not just younger people.

I found that fascinating. It also made me feel a little tired because I was like, God, I gotta keep up. I’ve got some work to do.

But I’m curious what you think, especially because they’re talking about you and me here.

Do you feel that pressure as a teacher slash mental health worker slash rabbi slash father of three?

David: Slash guy who’s online.

Yeah, I guess I do feel that pressure to some extent.

A few things came to mind. First, I saw something floating around online with a picture of the cast of Cheers. Most of them were in their thirties during the show, and if you look at them, they’re balding, they look older.

Now you look at celebrities in their thirties and they’re playing college students.

Matti: Like Catherine O’Hara in Home Alone. There’s a still image of her that gets shared around, and people assume she was in her fifties or something. She was thirty-eight.

David: Exactly.

Matti: Catherine O’Hara, may she rest in peace. We miss her.

David: So there’s definitely been a cultural shift where people are looking younger and better for longer, which naturally creates more pressure for everyone else to keep up.

But as you know, something else happened in the last few years that really benefited me: the dad bod.

Matti: Mm-hmm.

David: Long gone are the days of the six-pack, if they ever existed for me in the first place.

And suddenly people were like, “Dad bod? That’s cute.”

I felt very seen.

Matti: A lot of people genuinely find dad bods attractive.

David: Right. So maybe there’s also more acceptance of different body types.

And with the manosphere—I don’t know if it’s really about looks as much as health. They’re into cold plunges and hacks and optimization.

Maybe underneath all of that is still wanting to look younger and more attractive, but the language is often about health.

Matti: I think it’s probably both. Health equals attractiveness to a lot of those people.

David: Yeah.

But we definitely live in a more visual world. Everyone is posting pictures. Everyone is on camera.

And if you’re competing against younger people, whether socially or professionally, there’s more pressure to look good.

The expectation isn’t that a forty-five-year-old guy should look like he’s falling apart. You’re expected to still look like you’ve got it together.

Matti: So do you think this is less about middle-aged men and more about society in general? There’s a shift toward trying to look good for longer because we now have more tools available to us?

David: Absolutely.

And honestly, I don’t think geriatric millennials are even the biggest example. I know plenty of people in their sixties and seventies who are clearly on Ozempic.

I don’t know why they’re taking it. Maybe it is for health. I’m not privy to everyone’s medical information.

But you get the impression that people want to look good at every age now.

You might have thought that by your sixties or seventies, you’d say, “Who cares? I’m just gonna enjoy my life.”

But no. People still want to look good.

And maybe that’s not a bad thing.

Matti: If people continue to focus on looking good and the aesthetics of it, is it gonna be fine?

David: Yeah. I think it’s gonna be fine, Matti.

Matti: And do you think the focus itself is good, or do you think people can obviously take it too far?

David: I think people being healthier, not giving up, and not mailing it in as they get older is definitely a good thing.

If you’re getting Botox every other day—and I don’t know if that actually improves your health—that feels different. That’s purely cosmetic.

Maybe there’s something to being a little more graceful as you age. It’s okay not to look thirty-three anymore. It’s okay to look a little older.

But I wouldn’t judge anyone who wants to do something about it.

Matti: You know, it’s interesting. We started this conversation talking about intent—how you talk to your kids and what your intention is behind it.

Is it coming from a place of support and helpfulness, or shame?

And I think the same thing applies here.

I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with wanting to look good, be healthy, or look younger. I cover the grays in my hair. I’m not ready to accept them yet.

But I think it comes down to why you’re doing it and whether you’re taking it too far.

There’s a difference between saying, “Yeah, I want to look good. I’m gonna cover my grays or try this treatment.”

And becoming obsessed with optimizing everything. The algorithms, the hacks, the biomarkers, figuring out how to engineer your body.

That’s where I think we can take it too far.

So, in my opinion, it will be fine if we keep some common sense around it. It’s fine to want to look good. Just don’t go overboard.

Like most things: moderation.

David: Yeah. And it’s okay to have imperfections. It’s okay if you’re getting older.

All of that is okay.

And regardless, it’s gonna be fine.

Matti: Alrighty, David. Thanks very much.

David: Thanks, Matti. Thanks for having me back.

Matti: My pleasure. I’m sure you’ll be back soon. And I’ll probably see you before that.

David: Can’t wait.

Matti: Awesome. Thanks again, everybody. See ya, and we’ll see you next time.

David: Bye.

This transcript has been edited for readability.

Matti Shicker
Previous

Ep. 26: What Do Kids Really Need from Us? - Part 1 (feat. Ethan Weiss, MS, LCSW)
Next

Ep. 24: Before Smartphones or After Smartphones… That is the Question