📌
Case Study No. 1: “Mum First!”
(This example is not about a specific person, but about recurring rhetorical patterns I encounter online. The following excerpt illustrates one such pattern.)
A publicly shared post, representative of a wider trend, reads as follows (names and identifying details withheld for anonymity):
“We’re celebrating a family holiday.
The children decorated the house in the evening after we had already gone to bed.
In the morning they woke early, made tea and laid the table.
The cake was also entirely their idea and creation.
My husband cut the first slice, and the little one (10 years old) whispered:
– First for Mum! First for Mum!
And my husband replied:
– Of course, first for Mum! Mum is the most important!
Everything looks like a Hollywood film. What isn’t seen in the film, dear mothers, is how Mum has taught the boys all this.
How year after year after year I’ve shown them how we show care for each other. How we prepare for holidays. I’ve spoken when there were quarrels. I’ve spoken when there was neglect. And again and again Mum has shown the way.
Behind the scenes, the Hollywood film is as dramatic as a Russian novel. But it’s worth it.” (The wording has been slightly adapted to protect the privacy of the author, but the meaning remains intact.)
Background context: Such idyllic scenes are often presented without disclosing the wider reality. In many cases (as is the case with this post), these online personas are marked by an ideological rejection of formal schooling, resulting in the isolation of children from peers and society. What appears as wholesome family storytelling can, in fact, mask practices that restrict socialisation and limit access to education.
At the same time, the constant use of family narratives functions as a central marketing strategy – a way to attract attention, build authority, and promote services that are not legitimately accredited, lack proven competence, and primarily aim to financially exploit vulnerable people under the guise of 'mentorship.”
🎭
Translation from “Mentor-Speak” to Normal
- Original line:“The children woke early, made tea, the cake was their idea” → This rhetoric pattern, often found in mentor-style posts, can be translated as: Carefully staged scene. Mum is obviously the director, producer, and star, ensuring her brilliance is on full display while the children merely follow the script. Call it "Benevolent Goddess of Sugar and Chamomile".
- Original line:“First for Mum!” → Translation: Not a sweet gesture—more like a tiny recruit reciting the family cult mantra, complete with invisible robes, tiny ceremonial bows, and a sense of doom should anyone dare serve themselves first. Bonus points if the kid salutes afterward.
- Original line:“Mum is the most important!” → Translation: Cue imaginary confetti, red carpet, and a drumroll. Everyone else? Just background extras in Mum’s biopic.
- Original line:“Dear mothers, behind the scenes…” → Translation: The obligatory wink to the audience: “Behold my tireless heroism! Marvel at my uncanny ability to civilize chaos! Applaud my boundless patience!” Mum’s halo gleams brilliantly for Instagram’s omniscient gaze, as she single-handedly molds humans into perfect little devotees of her brilliance. Stand back— even the ficus might shed a tear. Oscar nomination pending.
In short: an Instagram adaptation of Anna Karenina, staged in the back garden, with Mum as the tragic heroine, children as dutiful extras, the bewildered audience still trying to decide whether the cake is edible or purely symbolic—and Dad, bless him, reduced to optional scenery.
🧠
Psychological Reading – Potential Impact on the Children
Psychological and Developmental Risks
- Emotional dependence
When children are repeatedly told that “Mum is the most important”, they are encouraged to see the parent – rather than themselves – as the centre of their universe. Their role becomes one of serving or validating the parent, rather than exploring their own identity.
Risk: difficulties in developing autonomy, critical thinking, and healthy personal boundaries. - Limited socialisation
When children are denied access to school or wider environments, their opportunities for peer interaction, cultural exchange, and exposure to diverse perspectives are severely restricted. Social skills develop best in varied, sometimes challenging contexts – not in a closed circle.
Risk: increased vulnerability to social anxiety, limited adaptability, and struggles when integrating into society beyond the family home. - Cult-like dynamics
If one figure is consistently framed as the centre, the teacher, and even the idol, family life can begin to resemble a closed belief system. In such a system, alternative viewpoints are excluded, and children are conditioned to treat one narrative as absolute truth.
Risk: children may either remain dependent and unquestioning throughout adulthood, or eventually break away in a painful and destructive rebellion. - Narcissistic exploitation
When the parent–child bond is reframed as a performance in which children must express admiration and gratitude, the natural relationship of love and care is distorted. The child becomes a mirror for the parent’s image, rather than a developing individual in their own right.
Risk: erosion of self-worth, emotional confusion, and difficulty distinguishing genuine affection from obligation.
Wider Social and Ethical Concerns
- Instrumentalization of childhood
When family life and children’s actions are presented primarily as material for public display – whether to attract admiration, sympathy, or clients – children risk being turned into props rather than being valued for who they are. - Erosion of educational rights
The ideological rejection of schooling, without legitimate reason, not only limits children’s development but undermines their fundamental right to education, peer learning, and future opportunities. - Compassion fatigue and distrust
Repeated public staging of idyllic or tragic family narratives may eventually lead audiences to become cynical or sceptical about genuine expressions of parental pride or hardship. In the long run, this harms both families and communities by weakening trust.
In Summary
What might appear online as heart-warming scenes of devotion can, under closer examination, conceal troubling dynamics: emotional dependence, restricted growth, cult-like control, and the instrumental use of children. At every level – psychological, social, and ethical – the child’s individuality, rights, and future risk being overshadowed by the parent’s need for validation.
True parental strength lies not in public performance or constant self-affirmation, but in quietly enabling children to grow into independent, resilient, and socially capable individuals.
* All quotations are taken from publicly available online sources and are used here strictly for the purposes of commentary, critique, and analysis, in accordance with the right to quotation.