Hypersensitivity...

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Ohh, nice use of the passive aggressive debate technique!

I get to make my point but you don't get a chance to respond because I have already deemed it not worth getting any further into.

Well done

*sigh*

If I had chosen to respond as I initially wanted to I would have been upset and emotional- so I stepped back- and I still get grief.

I support and love my son deeply- I encourage him all the time- he hates school. He has NO desire to succeed and learn. I struggle constantly and the idea that a kid will simply bloom into that kind of self motivated person with the right amount of love and support is insulting to me. As if somehow I am just not supporting and loving him unconditionally enough- so instead of getting into that mess I simply said I disagree and take exception to some of her theories.

The hassle is not worth the effort.

On edit- I know her comment was not a personal barb directed at me- hence my decision to refrain from reacting to it. That is not passive agressive- it was being prudent in my response.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

Everyone is born with a natural desire to learn and succeed. It is often driven out of them by the conditional acceptance of those around them. With support and unconditional love, I believe every child will do their best in everything they want to do.

I disagree pretty strongly with this.

Why does it have to be about winning or losing? My question is not, should one person win musical chairs or should everyone, my question is why musical chairs? Wouldn't it be a more fun game, if instead of everyone trying to snatch a chair and one person being sent away, all the kids try to fit into the remaining chairs?

No, I don't think that would be a more fun game. Not that musical chairs is all that fun. But why does it have to be one or the other?

Why are we drilling competition and the need to "win" into kids at such a young age? What's the point of that? I don't see it as anything but destructive.

I'd say it is because competition is a biological imperitive of our species and we might as well teach people to do it well, to do it with dignity, to do with within certain confines of "honor" or "good sportsmanship." To handle it appropriately when you don't win, and more importantly when you do. How not to let disappointment put you into a spiral of despair, how to persevere despite it.

I spend almost every single day being paid to "defeat" other people. I do it by working cooperatively with many people. They are complimentary, not contradictory skills.

[Not Afraid]

I'm glad I don't have kids.


I dislike greatly people who are competitive only for the sake of winning. There's just so much more to appreciate in life other than "winning". Winning has always seems so empty and unfulfilling on an event for me 90% or the time. Playing, however, is usually VERY satisfying.

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

I support and love my son deeply- I encourage him all the time- he hates school. He has NO desire to succeed and learn.

I'm glad that you realize that I wasn't trying to insult you. Hating school, and having no desire to succeed and learn are two very different things. School is a destructive environment for many kids. There is no such thing as an ideal situation, or a perfect way to parent, so perhaps we should leave this particular area of discussion.

As for the rest of the competition comments, I'm not against competition. I do find it unnecessary for small kids. If a kid is of an age where they can understand winning and losing and choose to participate in a sport then I think that is great. Sports are lots of fun. I'm not sure why a four year old should be pushed to compete though. It seems odd that competition plays such a small part of adult life (personal competition, not business competition) yet we try and put our kids in front of it constantly.

Life throws so many disappointments at us constantly. I find it pointless to set kids up for those sorts of things. They happen naturally. You may as well say, "Kids at school are going to make fun of your big nose anyways. I'm going to start making fun of it myself now so that it isn't a big deal when the other kids do it."

There WILL be times when the ice cream truck passes by before you can get your money out, or when another kid has something that they don't, it just happens. Kids don't have to be taught how to handle disappointment by us setting it up for them. They'll have more than enough opportunities by just growing up.

I probably should have learned by now not to get involved in discussions on kids with people whose thoughts are so entrenched in mainstream thinking. (I don't mean that as an insult, but none of you seem to be willing to think outside the box.) In my particular circle of parenting friends, none of us punish or reward or engage our kids in competition (they're all only three or four) and they are all excellent kids that are faced with disappointment and handle it pretty gracefully.

I've known many teens and adults who are sore losers yet they've been competing all their lives.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

(I don't mean that as an insult, but none of you seem to be willing to think outside the box.)

The way I think is shaped in majority by the way I was raised. And seeing as I grew up never having been shielded from competition and possess what I consider to be a healthy attitude toward competition, winning, and losing, I am forced to conclude that exposure to competition isn't what produces sore losers and arrogant winners. Rather, it's attitude toward competition that shapes it. Therefore, I simply can't agree with you that pointedly avoiding competition is a necessary component in raising an adjusted child. I'm not arguing that it's detremental to do so, but based on my experience, I see no compelling reason to take that step.

As I've said in other dicussions, I don't put much stock in whether something is mainstream or not mainstream. If you consider my conclusions "not outside the box", I couldn't care less. I strive to come to my conclusions independent of the box. Sometimes they fall within it, sometimes they don't. Oh well.

[tracilicious]

Yeah, I grew up with competition as well. I enjoy board games and various other forms of competition, but I still remember how much musical chairs sucked. The competition of our youths and the competition of today seems completely different, though. Parents push their kids to be the best from an insanely young age. I just don't get it. I won't shield my kids from competition, but I see no reason to push them into it either.

I disagree pretty much completely with everything my parents did. I'm ok in spite of being raised by them, not because of it. I see this as a benefit in some ways, as it's a fresh start on thinking about ways I want to raise my kids. In general, I think you can make loads of mistakes and still have productive adults. I still have ideals though. There is an entire body of research to back up that competition has the opposite effect of what we desire in kids. I'll see if it's available online when I have more time tonight.

[Not Afraid]

I was always placed in competitive situations as a child. It seems EVERYTHING I was involved with in some way was competitive - dance competitions, piano competitions, beauty pagents, casting calls, etc. I think one of the reasons I had such low self esteme when I was in my late teens up until about my early 30's was due to the "banging my head against the wall" competitions I was thrust into. It all seemed a losing battle for me and all it taught me was to hate the activity I was involved in.

I'm sure this is not the case of all children, but it sure did a hoot of damage to me as a child and took many years to un-do. I think it would've been different if I learned to love te activity first and the competitive part was secondary. It is something I had to learn for myself much later in life. I'm just glad I was able to learn it.

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

In my particular circle of parenting friends, none of us punish or reward or engage our kids in competition (they're all only three or four) and they are all excellent kids that are faced with disappointment and handle it pretty gracefully.

Let's get down to cases here. Are we talking JW? Waldorf? Single mothers in housing projects? I assume not the latter, though when I did live among the projects during law school, I saw a lot of well-adjusted looking little kids of whom little was expected and who seemed to be handling their lot well. Then they grew up.

If Waldorf, the Waldorf parents I know obsess, worry and fetishize their child's development more than any other parents I've met.

I can't really say whether I agree with you without a sense of what kind of disappointments you expect your kids to be able to endure. Knowing a little something of your background, I am suspecting that they are fairly minimal. The sense I get from your post is not that the kids are learning to handle disappointment well; it's that they are learning that there is not much in this worldy world worth aspiring to or being excited about. (In the Enneagram, that's a type 5--the unenlightened Buddha. It's what I test as.)

I will agree that competition and performances for three and four year-olds are to be avoided. They don't get it, and it's an f*****' bore for the adults. A photo op to be sure, but not worth the weekly shlep.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

Parents push their kids to be the best from an insanely young age. I just don't get it.

But that's what I'm talking about. It's not the competition, it's the parental attitude. And that's where this all started. Yes, I agree that pushing competition, and specifically pushing a "win, win, win!" attitude is bad. But I just don't believe that the remedy to that is to remove competition, or redefine competition to "everyone's a winner". I believe the remedy is to encourage personal accomplishment within the framwork of competition with winning and losing being merely part of a set of factors to guage progress and success. I don't suppose our ideal are as far apart as this discussion is making it seem. I don't plan on signing my proginy up for AYSO as soon as they squirt out. I just don't feel a need to put as much stock in actively avoiding competition as you appear to.

And for the record, I hated musical chairs growing up. It's a stupid game. But I think that's mostly because no one seemed to ever be able to agree on a decent set of rules (oh yeah, learning how rules can make order out of chaos, another good lesson to be learned from competition).

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Let's get down to cases here. Are we talking JW? Waldorf? Single mothers in housing projects?

If Waldorf, the Waldorf parents I know obsess, worry and fetishize their child's development more than any other parents I've met.

Lol. None of the above. I'd rather put my kids in soccer when they are six months old than hang out with JW parents, and I have a whole other set of issues with Waldorf philosophy (that probably only you and I would be interested in discussing, so I'll shut up about it).

I guess if I have to categorize my parenting friends the best I can do is this: Most of us have read a book called Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn, that stresses working with kids rather than doing to kids, and we practice it to the best of our ability. We are all committed to gentle discipline (which means teaching, not punishing) and in general we avoid praising (which probably sounds more hands off than it is - we'll say, "you did it!" rather than, "good job!"). Some of us will homeschool/unschool. I doubt any of our kids has ever had a pop tart. I guess you can just call it crunchy. Though I'm not sure how that is relevant to this discussion.

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

I can't really say whether I agree with you without a sense of what kind of disappointments you expect your kids to be able to endure. Knowing a little something of your background, I am suspecting that they are fairly minimal. The sense I get from your post is not that the kids are learning to handle disappointment well; it's that they are learning that there is not much in this worldy world worth aspiring to or being excited about. (In the Enneagram, that's a type 5--the unenlightened Buddha. It's what I test as.)

I'm not sure how you would get that sense from my post. I expect my kids to be able to handle any disappointment that comes their way. Some will be small some will be large, but I also expect them to succeed in just about everything they do.

I find it ridiculous that you think they wouldn't get excited about anything. That's the whole point of this whole parenting system is so that kids retain their zeal for learning and their excitement about life. My three year old can tell you things about dinosaurs that I didn't even know. He drew the insides of his intestines yesterday. His penchant for geeking out about things is almost scary. I imagine that one day he will like something enough to want to compete. I just don't see the point of stinking musical chairs and setting kids up for disappointment. I'd rather give them the tools they need for success.

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

But that's what I'm talking about. It's not the competition, it's the parental attitude. And that's where this all started. Yes, I agree that pushing competition, and specifically pushing a "win, win, win!" attitude is bad. But I just don't believe that the remedy to that is to remove competition, or redefine competition to "everyone's a winner". I believe the remedy is to encourage personal accomplishment within the framwork of competition with winning and losing being merely part of a set of factors to guage progress and success. I don't suppose our ideal are as far apart as this discussion is making it seem. I don't plan on signing my proginy up for AYSO as soon as they squirt out. I just don't feel a need to put as much stock in actively avoiding competition as you appear to.

If a game is going on that he wants to participate in, then he's more than welcome to. I just don't see the point of setting them up for competition so early. But yes, having everyone win a game that clearly isn't designed for that is dumb. I think that kids are smart enough to know that. There are plenty of games where there is no need for everyone to be a winner or a loser. They are just games you play for fun.