If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
Answering both Rosalie's post and Banty's post together, since they're
both contained in this one: Banty wrote: In article , Rosalie B. says... wrote: IMHO he should have been paying attention to what was going on so that it did not get to the point where she was on her last nerve. Possibly. But the way the OP was presenting this was not "Ack, I was stressed out and said something I shouldn't and regret it now" It was more like "How unreasonable of him to be annoyed at me! Jeez, you see what I have to put up with!" [...] Your husband did not walk up to you and start jumping in with unsolicited advice. You asked him what he thought and he told you. Actually she didn't really ask him for a solution. She was really asking for help and support. That's not the way it came across at all. First of all she says something needs to be done. Maybe she didn't mean that as asking for a solution, but it's sure as hell the way it sounds to me, and I wouldn't blame him for taking it that way. Then she tells him that she wants HIM to deal with it. That's not asking for help and support - it's asking for him to come up with a solution. And then she complains that he won't brainstorm. Brainstorming isn't help and support, it's... guess what? Looking for solutions. He gave her a solution that HE could do, but she couldn't. Just because the first solution is rejected does not mean that the dialogue has to end there. Of course it doesn't - that's the point! When he asked her what she wanted to do, she told him that she wanted him to deal with it. That isn't dialogue; it's cutting off dialogue. If someone said that to me I'd hear it as "Sort it out for me - I don't want to talk about it further." I'm guessing that that's probably how it sounded to him, too. If you don’t want a solution, don’t ask for one. If you ask for one, don’t complain because the one he comes up with isn’t good enough. Of course, you don’t have to accept it if you don’t like it. But the way that conversation sounded to me - whether you meant it that way at the time or not - is that you came up to him, dumped the problem in his lap, washed your hands of it, and then acted as though he was somehow at fault for not being happy to take on the job of drawing up as long a list of solutions as it takes to come up with whichever one meets your approval. That wasn't the way it sounded to me. It sounded to me as if she tried to deal with something and he deliberately ignored all of it. (He was interested in his toast.) And then we he was asked, he gave it no thought whatsoever. OK. This is what I'm really not getting he He can't come up with a solution that suits her (although he does have one unsuitable solution). She can't come up with a solution that suits her (or any other suggestions, even ones that don't work out). Somehow, this gets interpreted as *him* giving it no thought whatsoever and *her* being hard-done-by. Huh?? The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - 1. WHERE does all this nitty stuff about whose idea and not validating it immediately means it was shot down and therefore of course the whole matter gets dropped COME FROM?? Not me, so I have no idea why you raised this point (apparently) in response to the post I made. [...] 2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. I see this kind of problem way more in men than in women, but that doesn't mean this is how guys work. Take two guys carrying a heavy piece of furniture though a door. If one guy said "lets do it end up" and the other guy says "naw I got one of these through a house like this by turning it sideways" and starts moving to get it sideways, the first guy does NOT put his end down and walk away. Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. That would be more like: First guy: "Let's do it end up." Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" So... how do guys generally respond to someone who's acting like the second guy? I don't know, but I'm guessing that it's *not* invariably a warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another solution." They might *at most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually the first guy goes along with the second guy's move to get the piece in sideways. Er, yes. Because, in the scenario you gave, the second guy gave a suggestion instead of just expecting the first guy to come up with all the ideas and deal with something that it's supposed to be *both* their job to deal with. If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get the damn thing moved through the door! Too right. And if the second guy won't go with his suggestion OR come up with one of his own but just acts like it's somehow entirely the first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, then that isn't getting the furniture moved. This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. I don't see where it's either. If you're walking away from a family problem See, again - this is what I don't get! He comes up with one solution. She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM to deal with it. How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the conversation and validate all your input, I don't think that's the problem at all. I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem that neither of them could think of a solution for, she didn't treat it as a shared problem. She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. Now that said, folks should be aware of when they're stepping on each other a lot and get each other frustrated by details of their interaction. But to write it off as "she didn't follow these rules a. b. c., so he's justified in throwing up his hands about it" is in itself pretty silly. Which would be why I didn't say anything of the sort. All the best, Sarah -- http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com "That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
In article , Sarah Vaughan says...
The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - 1. WHERE does all this nitty stuff about whose idea and not validating it immediately means it was shot down and therefore of course the whole matter gets dropped COME FROM?? Not me, so I have no idea why you raised this point (apparently) in response to the post I made. I SAID "the whole conversation". I didn't SAY "you, Sarah, what you said", I SAID "the whole conversation". But I do agree with Rosalie that a lot of the problem is the inaction; that the problem was right there and he wasn't doing anything about it. Even if he wasn't doing anything about it at this particular moment, if he *did* step in, let say, about 1/2 the time, I don't think this conversation would have happened. [...] 2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. I see this kind of problem way more in men than in women, but that doesn't mean this is how guys work. Take two guys carrying a heavy piece of furniture though a door. If one guy said "lets do it end up" and the other guy says "naw I got one of these through a house like this by turning it sideways" and starts moving to get it sideways, the first guy does NOT put his end down and walk away. Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. That would be more like: First guy: "Let's do it end up." Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" Now wait. Let's really make this analogous. :::furniture sitting there in front of the door:: ::furniture sitting there in front of the door:: ::first guy gets the dolly and places it up, and props open the door:: ::second guy is eating a sandwich:: ::wait:: ::wait:: First guy: "Really need to move this furniture, and I need your help." Second guy: "Just prop it on the dolly and push it through." First guy: "I don't think I can do that." Second guy: "So HOW do you want to do it". First guy: "Look I don't really care, but it's not getting over the threshold of the door if I try to just push it through and it's a two man job to lift it". Second guy (peeved): "So, HOW do you WANT to get it through the door!?" First guy: "I don't KNOW! I just need YOUR HELP to deal with it!" Second guy: "I already TOLD you how I'd deal with it!" Is that how men work if there's something to be done and they're really set to do it? Nope. Parenting is a two man job. (So to speak...) So... how do guys generally respond to someone who's acting like the second guy? I don't know, but I'm guessing that it's *not* invariably a warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another solution." I dont' think they talk that way much to begin with ;-D Sure the OP got whiney. But do you think the first guy above had no reason to be a bit miffed at the second guy's off-the-cuff unworkable idea (after his not doing anything for awhile with the work to be done under his nose), and should have it all together to come up with a plan each and every time? Phooey. If the conversation *even gets to that*, there's been a problem. Which is one of Rosalie's points. They might *at most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually the first guy goes along with the second guy's move to get the piece in sideways. Er, yes. Because, in the scenario you gave, the second guy gave a suggestion instead of just expecting the first guy to come up with all the ideas and deal with something that it's supposed to be *both* their job to deal with. Speaking *in general* (I actually was *not* trying to offer an exact analog in that post), when men need to get something done, all this stuff about whose idea was offered (even in response to being asked for help) goes by the wayside pretty quick as they work it out to get it done. That was my point. Mostly in response to agsf's ideas about how supposedly this is how one has to work with men - not step on their solutions if you don't have a better one right at hand because they're, whateve. If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get the damn thing moved through the door! Too right. And if the second guy won't go with his suggestion OR come up with one of his own but just acts like it's somehow entirely the first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, then that isn't getting the furniture moved. NO. My POINT is - in getting things done, they DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT ****. Not if they're interested in getting the job done. If one guy has all the ideas, fine. This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. I don't see where it's either. If you're walking away from a family problem See, again - this is what I don't get! He comes up with one solution. She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM to deal with it. How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? Oh good grief. She has no ideas, he has an unworkable one. What should happen? Lessee - - He should be all peeved that she didn't take his unworkable solution 'cause she didnt' have a better one. or maybe..... consider.... They talk it over and come up with a solution that IS workable! because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the conversation and validate all your input, I don't think that's the problem at all. I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem that neither of them could think of a solution for, she didn't treat it as a shared problem. She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. I think she was miffed that he was doing *nothing* with the problem right in earshot. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
In article , Banty says...
In article , Sarah Vaughan says... Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. That would be more like: First guy: "Let's do it end up." Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" I decided - let's *take* that the way you have it! First guy: "Let's do it end up." OK ... Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." OK ... First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Well, OK, but it's not like the second guy now *has to* solve it. (Which is what I get from some of this - he rejected the first idea, now it's 'in his court' somehow.. why is that.) Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." OK ... so.. First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Again, what's with this "you didn't like my idea - your turn" stuff? First guy can come up with a second idea (really, it's not like they're playing a board game or something!), or he can describe his first idea more to explain how it isnt' so awkward, or...or... Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" Which is the whiney response to his testy one. Then is goes downhill from there... Banty |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
On Apr 21, 4:11*pm, Sarah Vaughan wrote:
Answering both Rosalie's post and Banty's post together, since they're both contained in this one: Banty wrote: In article , Rosalie B. says.... wrote: IMHO he should have been paying attention to what was going on so that it did not get to the point where she was on her last nerve. Possibly. *But the way the OP was presenting this was not "Ack, I was stressed out and said something I shouldn't and regret it now" *It was more like "How unreasonable of him to be annoyed at me! *Jeez, you see what I have to put up with!" [...] Your husband did not walk up to you and start jumping in with unsolicited advice. *You asked him what he thought and he told you. Actually she didn't really ask him for a solution. *She was really asking for help and support. That's not the way it came across at all. Especially to us men. *First of all she says something needs to be done. *Maybe she didn't mean that as asking for a solution, but it's sure as hell the way it sounds to me, and I wouldn't blame him for taking it that way. When my wife pulls one of these on me, I usually have to step back, recalculate the argument and determine if this is one of those issues. *Then she tells him that she wants HIM to deal with it. *That's not asking for help and support - it's asking for him to come up with a solution. *And then she complains that he won't brainstorm. *Brainstorming isn't help and support, it's... guess what? *Looking for solutions. At this point she's a bitch. *He gave her a solution that HE could do, but she couldn't. *Just because the first solution is rejected does not mean that the dialogue has to end there. Of course it doesn't - that's the point! Exactly! *When he asked her what she wanted to do, she told him that she wanted him to deal with it. *That isn't dialogue; it's cutting off dialogue. *If someone said that to me I'd hear it as "Sort it out for me - I don't want to talk about it further." *I'm guessing that that's probably how it sounded to him, too. If it was so simple. It's more like "Sort it out for me now, and no, I don't like your first solution. And guess what, since you don't have another answer, you failed as a problem solver (and as a man)." At this point we get ****ed off. If you don’t want a solution, don’t ask for one. *If you ask for one, don’t complain because the one he comes up with isn’t good enough. *Of course, you don’t have to accept it if you don’t like it. *But the way that conversation sounded to me - whether you meant it that way at the time or not - is that you came up to him, dumped the problem in his lap, washed your hands of it, and then acted as though he was somehow at fault for not being happy to take on the job of drawing up as long a list of solutions as it takes to come up with whichever one meets your approval. That wasn't the way it sounded to me. *It sounded to me as if she tried to deal with something and he deliberately ignored all of it. (He was interested in his toast.) *And then we he was asked, he gave it no thought whatsoever. * OK. *This is what I'm really not getting he He can't come up with a solution that suits her (although he does have one unsuitable solution). * She can't come up with a solution that suits her (or any other suggestions, even ones that don't work out). *Somehow, this gets interpreted as *him* giving it no thought whatsoever and *her* being hard-done-by. *Huh?? The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - 1. WHERE does all this nitty stuff about whose idea and not validating it immediately means it was shot down and therefore of course the whole matter gets dropped COME FROM?? Not me, so I have no idea why you raised this point (apparently) in response to the post I made. [...] Neither have I. 2. *I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. Yes we do. *I see this kind of problem way more in men than in women, but that doesn't mean this is how guys work. *Take two guys carrying a heavy piece of furniture though a door. *If one guy said "lets do it end up" and the other guy says "naw I got one of these through a house like this by turning it sideways" and starts moving to get it sideways, the first guy does NOT put his end down and walk away. Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. *That would be more like: First guy: "Let's do it end up." Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Second guy: "I don't KNOW! *I want YOU to deal with it!" So... how do guys generally respond to someone who's acting like the second guy? *I don't know, but I'm guessing that it's *not* invariably a warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another solution." It's more like "You figuire it out, I'm going to take a ****." Then when the first guy gets back from the bathroom, the first words will be "Well, did you think of something yet?". First guy says no, then they try it end up. If first guy says yes, then second guy tries his method and if it fails, goes back to the end up method. If the end up method fails, then they would research it or reapproach the situation. Maybe use the back patio door instead of the front door. *They might *at most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually the first guy goes along with the second guy's move to get the piece in sideways. Er, yes. *Because, in the scenario you gave, the second guy gave a suggestion instead of just expecting the first guy to come up with all the ideas and deal with something that it's supposed to be *both* their job to deal with. *If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get the damn thing moved through the door! Too right. *And if the second guy won't go with his suggestion OR come up with one of his own but just acts like it's somehow entirely the first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, then that isn't getting the furniture moved. Exactly! This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. I don't see where it's either. It's not pride. This will probably come to no suprise to you ladies, but 99% of my ideas get shot down with my wife in these situations. My pride is not affected at all. I just chalk it up to you women being illogical. *If you're walking away from a family problem See, again - this is what I don't get! *He comes up with one solution. She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM to deal with it. *How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? And if we pull that level of expectation from our wives, we will have hell to pay. because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the conversation and validate all your input, I don't think that's the problem at all. It's not. *I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem Especially one that she initiated... that neither of them could think of a solution for, she didn't treat it as a shared problem. *She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. 100% correct. Your house husband must be so proud of you! Now that said, folks should be aware of when they're stepping on each other a lot and get each other frustrated by details of their interaction. *But to write it off as "she didn't follow these rules a. b. c., so he's justified in throwing up his hands about it" is in itself pretty silly. Which would be why I didn't say anything of the sort. All the best, Sarah Both of your responses are correct and that is what I was trying to explain. Even as I was reading the couch analogy I already formulated the same response you gave. Normally, I don't jump into a thread in which I agree with, but damn, it was perfect and in the way I wanted to get the message across. Now if they understand your response and not mine, I will be jealous. Not bad for an oppressed woman. Regards... |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these
responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for advice!). Conclusions: 1.) I should have been more honest, and flat out said, 'I just don't have it in me to deal with this right now, so will you?' 2.) But if I had just said that, and my husband went ahead and forced the soap-thing right then, I would have stopped him. 3.) The actual problem that I need to address with my husband is this: It's exhausting to be in charge of all the 'behavior modification' with four boys; I need help. 4.) The bigger problem (harder to solve) is that although I need help, I am not willing to watch my husband (who IS an amateur at behavior modification, and tends to stick to ideas even when they don't work)... I'm not willing to watch him run roughshod over the boys in a fit of anger. I'm not trash-talking him, I'm stating a fact: when something doesn't work, he just gets mad and tries to force it, and if he can't force it he accepts defeat. 5.) Because of # 4, it is ridiculous to expect #1. So # 3 is how it will stay. Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive myself. Sighhhhh |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
Responding to:
I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem.... "Especially one that she initiated..." "She" didn't initiate the problem. The problem was a 10- year-old swearing. And no, not a stepchild or foster child, which are the only reasons (although sorta lame ones) that I can think of to exempt the dad from having to care. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
mom0f4boys wrote:
Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for advice!). Conclusions: 1.) I should have been more honest, and flat out said, 'I just don't have it in me to deal with this right now, so will you?' 2.) But if I had just said that, and my husband went ahead and forced the soap-thing right then, I would have stopped him. 3.) The actual problem that I need to address with my husband is this: It's exhausting to be in charge of all the 'behavior modification' with four boys; I need help. 4.) The bigger problem (harder to solve) is that although I need help, I am not willing to watch my husband (who IS an amateur at behavior modification, and tends to stick to ideas even when they don't work)... I'm not willing to watch him run roughshod over the boys in a fit of anger. I'm not trash-talking him, I'm stating a fact: when something doesn't work, he just gets mad and tries to force it, and if he can't force it he accepts defeat. 5.) Because of # 4, it is ridiculous to expect #1. So # 3 is how it will stay. Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive myself. Sighhhhh Well, of course that's the issue. I'm always a little surprised at these discussions. It's not like we don't know a thing or two about parenting. While it's true that kids vary and parents vary and there's room for some differing styles out there, it simply isn't true that parenting is an "anything goes" proposition. We do know that some things are just flat out ineffective and inappropriate. If someone at work waltzed up to me and proclaimed that we were going to do things in an ineffective and inappropriate way, he'd be roundly ignored at best by any sensible business people. And yet, somehow just because a parent wants to stick his or her nose in and spew nonsense about child rearing, he or she has to be treated like a delicate flower? I don't think so. *Especially* when it comes to child rearing, there's an obligation to make a credible stab at proposing an effective and appropriate solution. I wouldn't say that someone who proposes something asinine in ignorance should be ridiculed, but certainly the proposition doesn't merit serious consideration of adoption! I think where you went astray was in implying to your DH that the only problem with his solution was that you were too squeamish to adopt it. You implied the problem was with *you*, not with the proposed solution. Now, had you put it on the table that the proposed solution was an inappropriate child rearing practice, you may well have been attacked and put on the defensive, so I can understand why you wouldn't be keen to take that approach, but had that happened, it would just show that your expertise in child rearing was being devalued. If your experience and expertise had been respected, your opinion on the validity of the proposed solution would have had some weight. That's the problem with this whole setup--yeah, the child rearing is supposed to be mom's work, but Lord High Diletante can come in any time and make decrees with little or no expertise and his positions are to be respected and adopted. Huh? Talk about faulty logic. If I'm stuck on how to solve a thorny engineering problem, that doesn't mean that Joe Blow off the street's off-the-cuff solution has equal merit with my attempts or that I can't recognize an inappropriate solution when I see one. This whole dilemma only comes about because parenting is seen as something where there is no body of knowledge and no skill, so anyone can proffer solutions with equal validity. While some parenting is common sense, there *is*, in fact, a body of theoretical knowledge as well as a body of practical experience gained through the day to day experiences with a particular child. Best wishes, Ericka |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
In article ,
mom0f4boys says... Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for advice!). WHY did you bring it UP if you didn't want advice?? What am I supposed to do about it. (That's all they do, bitch, bitch, bitch..) Banty ;-) |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
In article ,
mom0f4boys says... Responding to: I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem.... "Especially one that she initiated..." "She" didn't initiate the problem. The problem was a 10- year-old swearing. And no, not a stepchild or foster child, which are the only reasons (although sorta lame ones) that I can think of to exempt the dad from having to care. Yeah see that's the problem outlook - childrearing is *your* project, so bringing up an issue to you DH is "initiating a problem". Banty |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
about "bitching"
In article , Ericka Kammerer
says... mom0f4boys wrote: Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for advice!). Conclusions: 1.) I should have been more honest, and flat out said, 'I just don't have it in me to deal with this right now, so will you?' 2.) But if I had just said that, and my husband went ahead and forced the soap-thing right then, I would have stopped him. 3.) The actual problem that I need to address with my husband is this: It's exhausting to be in charge of all the 'behavior modification' with four boys; I need help. 4.) The bigger problem (harder to solve) is that although I need help, I am not willing to watch my husband (who IS an amateur at behavior modification, and tends to stick to ideas even when they don't work)... I'm not willing to watch him run roughshod over the boys in a fit of anger. I'm not trash-talking him, I'm stating a fact: when something doesn't work, he just gets mad and tries to force it, and if he can't force it he accepts defeat. 5.) Because of # 4, it is ridiculous to expect #1. So # 3 is how it will stay. Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive myself. Sighhhhh Well, of course that's the issue. I'm always a little surprised at these discussions. It's not like we don't know a thing or two about parenting. While it's true that kids vary and parents vary and there's room for some differing styles out there, it simply isn't true that parenting is an "anything goes" proposition. We do know that some things are just flat out ineffective and inappropriate. If someone at work waltzed up to me and proclaimed that we were going to do things in an ineffective and inappropriate way, he'd be roundly ignored at best by any sensible business people. And yet, somehow just because a parent wants to stick his or her nose in and spew nonsense about child rearing, he or she has to be treated like a delicate flower? I don't think so. *Especially* when it comes to child rearing, there's an obligation to make a credible stab at proposing an effective and appropriate solution. I wouldn't say that someone who proposes something asinine in ignorance should be ridiculed, but certainly the proposition doesn't merit serious consideration of adoption! I think where you went astray was in implying to your DH that the only problem with his solution was that you were too squeamish to adopt it. You implied the problem was with *you*, not with the proposed solution. Now, had you put it on the table that the proposed solution was an inappropriate child rearing practice, you may well have been attacked and put on the defensive, so I can understand why you wouldn't be keen to take that approach, but had that happened, it would just show that your expertise in child rearing was being devalued. If your experience and expertise had been respected, your opinion on the validity of the proposed solution would have had some weight. That's the problem with this whole setup--yeah, the child rearing is supposed to be mom's work, but Lord High Diletante can come in any time and make decrees with little or no expertise and his positions are to be respected and adopted. Huh? Talk about faulty logic. If I'm stuck on how to solve a thorny engineering problem, that doesn't mean that Joe Blow off the street's off-the-cuff solution has equal merit with my attempts or that I can't recognize an inappropriate solution when I see one. This whole dilemma only comes about because parenting is seen as something where there is no body of knowledge and no skill, so anyone can proffer solutions with equal validity. While some parenting is common sense, there *is*, in fact, a body of theoretical knowledge as well as a body of practical experience gained through the day to day experiences with a particular child. The essential problem is WHY is one parent the neophyte? If both parents take ownership of the job of childrearing, one won't be the neophyte. (So, the one who hasn't been involved has only him/herself to blame for the ideas getting less weight). The thing that's hard to apply, whether both are truly involved or not, is to distinguish what really is a bad idea as in truly ineffective or even damaging, and when it really is a matter of differences in style and personality and how people pretty universally prefer whatever idea they thought of. Banty |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
COVER BLOWN: "Capital Resources Institute" is the name of a right wing "family values" org who want violence to be allowed against certain kids | zeez[_2_] | Solutions | 1 | August 23rd 07 03:39 AM |
Surgeons "maimed" brain damaged child to "convenience" caregivers, health advocate charges | Jan Drew | General | 0 | January 15th 07 08:43 PM |
Surgeons "maimed" brain damaged child to "convenience" caregivers, health advocate charges | Jan Drew | Kids Health | 0 | January 15th 07 08:43 PM |
"Insane" "Defined" By Criminal Minds As 'Ability To Perceive Them' {HRI 20040422-V2.6} - (Version 2.6 on 7 Feb 2006) | Ma¢k | Kids Health | 0 | February 15th 06 06:11 AM |