Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
Wow.
Sweet contribution.
I wasn't trying to contribute to the discussion. My apologies.
Oh please let it rain today.
Those that can be trusted can change their mind.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
It's not easy to parent a situation where your 5 year old son wants to wear dresses to school.
Liberal types might insist it should mean nothing and they are correct; however, realists are grounded in the fact that in most cases, a small boy wearing a dress to school becomes socially ostracized- they are correct as well.
I wouldn't entertain the idea of my son wearing a dress to school for a moment: not because I think dresses are for girls... more because I would hate for my son to deal with the heap of abuse that will inevitably come his way before he has the chance to develop socially.
Whatever choices parents wish to make is fine with me, however don't think for a second everybody out there is open minded like many here on the MT. In fact, most are ignorant and their ignorance is capable of irreparable harm to a child.
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,113
It's not easy to parent a situation where your 5 year old son wants to wear dresses to school.
Liberal types might insist it should mean nothing and they are correct; however, realists are grounded in the fact that in most cases, a small boy wearing a dress to school becomes socially ostracized- they are correct as well.
I wouldn't entertain the idea of my son wearing a dress to school for a moment: not because I think dresses are for girls... more because I would hate for my son to deal with the heap of abuse that will inevitably come his way before he has the chance to develop socially.
Whatever choices parents wish to make is fine with me, however don't think for a second everybody out there is open minded like many here on the MT. In fact, most are ignorant and their ignorance is capable of irreparable harm to a child.
Good point about AMT. I think we should take into consideration that not all places in the real world are the same. In a small conservative town in the middle of the Bible belt, you would have more difficulty making the decision to let the kid wear the dress. The example I gave happened in a place where I'm guessing it was no big deal. And where such things are more socially acceptable, that's the place where change can start. In fact, many social changes do start in areas that are more progressive and they spread from there.
"A pessimist is simply an optimist in full possession of the facts."
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
It's not easy to parent a situation where your 5 year old son wants to wear dresses to school.
Liberal types might insist it should mean nothing and they are correct; however, realists are grounded in the fact that in most cases, a small boy wearing a dress to school becomes socially ostracized- they are correct as well.
I wouldn't entertain the idea of my son wearing a dress to school for a moment: not because I think dresses are for girls... more because I would hate for my son to deal with the heap of abuse that will inevitably come his way before he has the chance to develop socially.
Whatever choices parents wish to make is fine with me, however don't think for a second everybody out there is open minded like many here on the MT. In fact, most are ignorant and their ignorance is capable of irreparable harm to a child.
This is exactly my point, the judgement of deviation from normalcy comes from the parent, not the children. If there weren't so many parents with such old-fashioned modes of thinking, children wouldn't think twice about it. It reminds me of the old days when women were kept in the kitchen, it may not be nearly so extreme, but it is rooted in the same place.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
It's not easy to parent a situation where your 5 year old son wants to wear dresses to school.
Liberal types might insist it should mean nothing and they are correct; however, realists are grounded in the fact that in most cases, a small boy wearing a dress to school becomes socially ostracized- they are correct as well.
I wouldn't entertain the idea of my son wearing a dress to school for a moment: not because I think dresses are for girls... more because I would hate for my son to deal with the heap of abuse that will inevitably come his way before he has the chance to develop socially.
Whatever choices parents wish to make is fine with me, however don't think for a second everybody out there is open minded like many here on the MT. In fact, most are ignorant and their ignorance is capable of irreparable harm to a child.
Good point about AMT. I think we should take into consideration that not all places in the real world are the same. In a small conservative town in the middle of the Bible belt, you would have more difficulty making the decision to let the kid wear the dress. The example I gave happened in a place where I'm guessing it was no big deal. And where such things are more socially acceptable, that's the place where change can start. In fact, many social changes do start in areas that are more progressive and they spread from there.
Nice points Thirty and Brian.
Change has to start somewhere, and I think kids are more willing to accept then some might admit. Sometimes I think we don't give them enough credit.
Also think of how far we have come with these issues in such a short period of time, it's quite exceptional when you think about it.
If you've ever been a kindergarten/preschool teacher (as my mom was for decades), you know that kids of that age come to school in all manner of odd clothing - tutus with rubber boots, batman capes, you name it. The other kids might be briefly interested, particularly if they like the look, but otherwise they pretty much ignore it and go about their business. They're at an age where most things are still new and different. At 5, a boy in a dress would mostly be causing a reaction amongst the other parents, not in the classroom.
Many parents would take the view that their child could choose to wear from within the range of what is generally accepted garb in the classroom and then decide for themselves if they like or dislike the reaction this brings, if any. No kid is going to face endless torment for wearing a dress at age 5.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
That is just making ridiculous assumptions. First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries. Ridiculous. Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,113
If you've ever been a kindergarten/preschool teacher (as my mom was for decades), you know that kids of that age come to school in all manner of odd clothing - tutus with rubber boots, batman capes, you name it. The other kids might be briefly interested, particularly if they like the look, but otherwise they pretty much ignore it and go about their business. They're at an age where most things are still new and different. At 5, a boy in a dress would mostly be causing a reaction amongst the other parents, not in the classroom.
Many parents would take the view that their child could choose to wear from within the range of what is generally accepted garb in the classroom and then decide for themselves if they like or dislike the reaction this brings, if any. No kid is going to face endless torment for wearing a dress at age 5.
On Halloween day in kindergarten we wore our costumes to school. Our teacher told us we could take our costumes off at nap time. I thought she said we HAD to take them off and, obedient little ditz that I was, I took mine off and found myself standing there in nothing but my little tighty whities. Now you would think this would lead to much razzing but the only one who noticed was me (in tears) and my teacher who said I could put my costume back on. So I think you're right, oftenreading, I don't think 5 year olds care about that kind of stuff.
"A pessimist is simply an optimist in full possession of the facts."
I wear skirts sometimes. Mostly when backpacking, idiots that had idiot parents make it too much hassle for everyday life. Some people call them kilts, I don't see the difference. A skirt is incredibly comfortable, practical, and has huge advantages over pants and shorts, particularly in active life...climbing, biking, biking, etc.
I wish more people weren't so stodgy, practicality would have men in skirts often if it weren't for medieval gender indentity baloney.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
That is just making ridiculous assumptions. First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries. Ridiculous. Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
You call it a ridiculous assumption. I call it an educated guess.
Would you be so supportive of a parent who allowed their five year old to wear an NRA T-shirt to school? What about one with an anti-abortion message on it? It's a fine line between fostering independence and promoting a political agenda.
Would it not be easier for all involved to simply not have a dress as an option in the boys closet to wear to school? As a parent just step back and wait for the boy to come to you and ask to wear a dress to school. Would that not foster independent thinking and decision making with no parental influence? We already have dress codes in some schools, do we want dress codes for all?
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
That is just making ridiculous assumptions. First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries. Ridiculous. Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
You call it a ridiculous assumption. I call it an educated guess.
Would you be so supportive of a parent who allowed their five year old to wear an NRA T-shirt to school? What about one with an anti-abortion message on it? It's a fine line between fostering independence and promoting a political agenda.
I don't have any problem with those scenarios. You can't escape "politics", the whole idea of these zones where you don't discuss real issues is something that is only supported by those who are afraid of open minds IMO. Religious people don't want to talk religion with non-believers because they can't make sound ppoints in a debate, it's just what they believe. I think people who don't want to talk politics are the same.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
That is just making ridiculous assumptions. First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries. Ridiculous. Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
You call it a ridiculous assumption. I call it an educated guess.
Would you be so supportive of a parent who allowed their five year old to wear an NRA T-shirt to school? What about one with an anti-abortion message on it? It's a fine line between fostering independence and promoting a political agenda.
I don't have any problem with those scenarios. You can't escape "politics", the whole idea of these zones where you don't discuss real issues is something that is only supported by those who are afraid of open minds IMO. Religious people don't want to talk religion with non-believers because they can't make sound ppoints in a debate, it's just what they believe. I think people who don't want to talk politics are the same.
You wouldn't have a problem with any of those scenarios. I would have a problem with all of them. This isn't about where you can and can't discuss politics or religion, etc. It is about using children as pawns in those discussions.
If you've ever been a kindergarten/preschool teacher (as my mom was for decades), you know that kids of that age come to school in all manner of odd clothing - tutus with rubber boots, batman capes, you name it. The other kids might be briefly interested, particularly if they like the look, but otherwise they pretty much ignore it and go about their business. They're at an age where most things are still new and different. At 5, a boy in a dress would mostly be causing a reaction amongst the other parents, not in the classroom.
Many parents would take the view that their child could choose to wear from within the range of what is generally accepted garb in the classroom and then decide for themselves if they like or dislike the reaction this brings, if any. No kid is going to face endless torment for wearing a dress at age 5.
Correct. But it's a little more complex than that.
I agree that initially, the problem is not within most kids themselves. The problem is created in the conversations the kids have with their parents and the impressions kids develop of others based on 'table talk'.
While kids might be of the mindset to not notice the irregularity of the child's preference for clothing, that mindset will change when parents of other children begin to exert their influence. This will inevitably happen- mark my words. As I said before... the general public is ignorant. In many more supportive cases, the liberal portion of the general public is tolerant towards such behaviours provided the irregular behaviour is at an arm's length: no sleep overs, no invites to birthday parties, and no encouragement for their children to befriend the 'odd' kid in any meaningful way outside of being friendly when around them.
I'm not promoting the need for gender normative behaviour... I'm saying at age 5, we need to protect a little. And yes... I understand that by protecting these kids... we inevitably reinforce the very attitude that is damaging. If you wish for your kid to be a martyr... feel free; however, it would be a mistake to think your child can have the chance of being the catalyst for a cosmic shift in the prevalent attitude in time to keep your child from the harm they will likely face.
But isn't it up to us parents to teach our children to accept others as they are? If we as parents back down and "conform" to the accepted standard will anything ever change?
This reminds me of a conversation that I had with the admin of my buying coop. When he learned that I was a public school teacher, he couldn't believe it because he assumed that I would be the only person with 'alternative' views on food and how hard that must be to be surrounded by people that didn't understand and probably mocked me for my food choices. And I said, that, yes, it is difficult but opting out doesn't change the way our society currently views healthier food choices. The only way is to lead by example.
I don't want to use my children as pawns in a political battle but I also don't want to teach them that it is ok to accept things the way they are currently.
Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and type it?" I don't know!
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
That is just making ridiculous assumptions. First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries. Ridiculous. Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
You call it a ridiculous assumption. I call it an educated guess.
Would you be so supportive of a parent who allowed their five year old to wear an NRA T-shirt to school? What about one with an anti-abortion message on it? It's a fine line between fostering independence and promoting a political agenda.
I don't have any problem with those scenarios. You can't escape "politics", the whole idea of these zones where you don't discuss real issues is something that is only supported by those who are afraid of open minds IMO. Religious people don't want to talk religion with non-believers because they can't make sound ppoints in a debate, it's just what they believe. I think people who don't want to talk politics are the same.
You wouldn't have a problem with any of those scenarios. I would have a problem with all of them. This isn't about where you can and can't discuss politics or religion, etc. It is about using children as pawns in those discussions.
I think you are selling children way way short. You act as if they don't have genuine thoughts and feelings. There is no magic age where suddenly you have an amount of wisdom that gives you access to serious discussions. I know adults who are less wise than some 5 year olds, less nuanced and informed on some issues than kindergarten kids, but their age grants them the right of an opinion.
I'm no suggesting kids should have free reign to rule their own lives, but a totalitarian style of pparenting can only lead to that which you are arguing against, which is using children as extensions of your own beliefs.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
Why would you assume that a parent who permits their child to wear a dress to school is unable to say no in other instances? Perhaps the parent simply doesn't view it as an issue of concern. Given all the many possible points of contention that can come up between parent and child, I would say that the details of clothing choice are generally among the least important. Even young children are capable of making some choices and should be given lots of opportunity to do so and to feel the effects of their choices (such as being too cold if they wear shorts in winter, too wet if they refuse to wear a rain jacket, etc.). Otherwise, they have no basis by which to judge how to make choices when they get older and the stakes are higher.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
Why would you assume that a parent who permits their child to wear a dress to school is unable to say no in other instances? Perhaps the parent simply doesn't view it as an issue of concern. Given all the many possible points of contention that can come up between parent and child, I would say that the details of clothing choice are generally among the least important. Even young children are capable of making some choices and should be given lots of opportunity to do so and to feel the effects of their choices (such as being too cold if they wear shorts in winter, too wet if they refuse to wear a rain jacket, etc.). Otherwise, they have no basis by which to judge how to make choices when they get older and the stakes are higher.
I wouldn't send a child to school in shorts to teach them the lesson that it is too cold. Nor would I send them without a rain jacket. Remember, we are talking about the specific example of sending a boy to school in a dress. There are plenty of situations where it makes sense that you would let the child learn the lessons you are speaking of. The backyard on a Saturday afternoon, a trip to the store, etc. School isn't one of them.
That you are going to say no sometimes and that they might not always understand why is also a lesson all children should learn. That isn't totalitarian or authoritarian. That is parenting. I do think that is lost here, and I do question what else these parents are saying yes to if they are saying yes to this.
Wearing a dress to school isn't the same as wearing pajamas or shorts in January. Dress vs. Jeans is gender specific, that's what you have a problem with, the blurring of those lines. It's okay to admit it offends you. But you shouldn't be offended. It's no big deal.
The only thing that offends me is parents who are unwilling or unable to say no to their children. Part of the deal you signed up for when you had kids. If you are unable to tell your child "No, you cannot wear that dress to school" then you are probably unable to tell your child no about much else.
You don't like the shorts or pajamas, then how about this: Wearing a dress to school = wearing a Halloween costume to school in April. Both are inappropriate because both are distractions. A boy wearing a dress to school is a distraction that would disrupt any classroom of five year old's in this country. If you want to let your child run around the backyard in a dress, go for it. Don't send them to school that way and impact other children.
The problem here isn't the dress or the child, it is the parents. Thanks though for trying to declare what I have a problem with and what offends me. We can't all be as enlightened as you.
Still not a good example, a Halloween costume is not normal school wear and a dress is. Gender specificity is the only real gripe in the issue. The only reason a boy wearing a dress in school would be a distraction is because of parents (like you?) who try to dictate to their own children what is aacceptable in other people's children, thereby pushing societal and gender roles on kids who haven't yet discovered who they are and what they want to be.
No, the dress would be a distraction because even at age five children would realize that it was out of place. Much the same way they would if the boy showed up in a Halloween costume. Teacher's have a hard enough job without that kind of distraction. It's not about parents dictating what is acceptable or even about transgender children. (My apologies to the OP.) It is about a five year boy telling his parents he wants to wear something unacceptable to school. In that regard it is no different than pajamas or shorts in January. It is up to the parents to say no.
Maybe someday boys wearing dresses will be a societal norm. That day is not today.
So at age 5 children are capable of understanding gender roles but not where they fit in them? Are you suggesting societal norms arise spontaneously? It seems to me that they come from parents' interpretions of the things their children see and ask about.
I'm suggesting it is up to the parents to tell a five year old boy he cannot wear a dress to school. When that child is older and capable of making his own decisions, and if that child still wants to wear a dress to school, then good for that child. If doing so, in time, changes social norms, then good for society. But a five year old boy is not old enough to make such a decision, and shouldn't be used by his parents or anyone else in this way to make a statement.
By refusing to allow the child to wear a dress it is YOU who is the parent that is using the child to make a statement!
If you let your five year old boy wear a dress to school to prove a point then you are indeed using that boy to make a statement.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
Why would you assume that a parent who permits their child to wear a dress to school is unable to say no in other instances? Perhaps the parent simply doesn't view it as an issue of concern. Given all the many possible points of contention that can come up between parent and child, I would say that the details of clothing choice are generally among the least important. Even young children are capable of making some choices and should be given lots of opportunity to do so and to feel the effects of their choices (such as being too cold if they wear shorts in winter, too wet if they refuse to wear a rain jacket, etc.). Otherwise, they have no basis by which to judge how to make choices when they get older and the stakes are higher.
I wouldn't send a child to school in shorts to teach them the lesson that it is too cold. Nor would I send them without a rain jacket. Remember, we are talking about the specific example of sending a boy to school in a dress. There are plenty of situations where it makes sense that you would let the child learn the lessons you are speaking of. The backyard on a Saturday afternoon, a trip to the store, etc. School isn't one of them.
That you are going to say no sometimes and that they might not always understand why is also a lesson all children should learn. That isn't totalitarian or authoritarian. That is parenting. I do think that is lost here, and I do question what else these parents are saying yes to if they are saying yes to this.
School - not the right place to learn lessons.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
Those that can be trusted can change their mind.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Liberal types might insist it should mean nothing and they are correct; however, realists are grounded in the fact that in most cases, a small boy wearing a dress to school becomes socially ostracized- they are correct as well.
I wouldn't entertain the idea of my son wearing a dress to school for a moment: not because I think dresses are for girls... more because I would hate for my son to deal with the heap of abuse that will inevitably come his way before he has the chance to develop socially.
Whatever choices parents wish to make is fine with me, however don't think for a second everybody out there is open minded like many here on the MT. In fact, most are ignorant and their ignorance is capable of irreparable harm to a child.
If there weren't so many parents with such old-fashioned modes of thinking, children wouldn't think twice about it.
It reminds me of the old days when women were kept in the kitchen, it may not be nearly so extreme, but it is rooted in the same place.
If you let him wear the dress simply because he wants to and you don't want to say no, then you are likely not saying no in other instances when you should.
Neither of these scenarios is one to be applauded.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Change has to start somewhere, and I think kids are more willing to accept then some might admit. Sometimes I think we don't give them enough credit.
Also think of how far we have come with these issues in such a short period of time, it's quite exceptional when you think about it.
Many parents would take the view that their child could choose to wear from within the range of what is generally accepted garb in the classroom and then decide for themselves if they like or dislike the reaction this brings, if any. No kid is going to face endless torment for wearing a dress at age 5.
First you assume that everyone understands wearing a dress is inappropriate, so allowing him to do so in the first case is proving a point. That is backwards, it is not allowing the dress that is making the statement, the statement being that dresses are inappropriate. Allowing the dress is making a non-ststatement, that clothes aren't Very important.
Second, you assume that if someone wants to foster independence and creativity by allowing a child to dress themselves they can't possibly be a parent who sets bboundaries.
Ridiculous.
Is your parenting style the only appropriate one?
Some people call them kilts, I don't see the difference.
A skirt is incredibly comfortable, practical, and has huge advantages over pants and shorts, particularly in active life...climbing, biking, biking, etc.
I wish more people weren't so stodgy, practicality would have men in skirts often if it weren't for medieval gender indentity baloney.
Would you be so supportive of a parent who allowed their five year old to wear an NRA T-shirt to school? What about one with an anti-abortion message on it? It's a fine line between fostering independence and promoting a political agenda.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
As a parent just step back and wait for the boy to come to you and ask to wear a dress to school. Would that not foster independent thinking and decision making with no parental influence?
We already have dress codes in some schools, do we want dress codes for all?
Or am I missing something? It seems so - I hope so!
Religious people don't want to talk religion with non-believers because they can't make sound ppoints in a debate, it's just what they believe. I think people who don't want to talk politics are the same.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
I agree that initially, the problem is not within most kids themselves. The problem is created in the conversations the kids have with their parents and the impressions kids develop of others based on 'table talk'.
While kids might be of the mindset to not notice the irregularity of the child's preference for clothing, that mindset will change when parents of other children begin to exert their influence. This will inevitably happen- mark my words. As I said before... the general public is ignorant. In many more supportive cases, the liberal portion of the general public is tolerant towards such behaviours provided the irregular behaviour is at an arm's length: no sleep overs, no invites to birthday parties, and no encouragement for their children to befriend the 'odd' kid in any meaningful way outside of being friendly when around them.
I'm not promoting the need for gender normative behaviour... I'm saying at age 5, we need to protect a little. And yes... I understand that by protecting these kids... we inevitably reinforce the very attitude that is damaging. If you wish for your kid to be a martyr... feel free; however, it would be a mistake to think your child can have the chance of being the catalyst for a cosmic shift in the prevalent attitude in time to keep your child from the harm they will likely face.
Here I thought "normative" was related to this
This reminds me of a conversation that I had with the admin of my buying coop. When he learned that I was a public school teacher, he couldn't believe it because he assumed that I would be the only person with 'alternative' views on food and how hard that must be to be surrounded by people that didn't understand and probably mocked me for my food choices. And I said, that, yes, it is difficult but opting out doesn't change the way our society currently views healthier food choices. The only way is to lead by example.
I don't want to use my children as pawns in a political battle but I also don't want to teach them that it is ok to accept things the way they are currently.
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
I AM MINE
Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and type it?" I don't know!
There is no magic age where suddenly you have an amount of wisdom that gives you access to serious discussions. I know adults who are less wise than some 5 year olds, less nuanced and informed on some issues than kindergarten kids, but their age grants them the right of an opinion.
That you are going to say no sometimes and that they might not always understand why is also a lesson all children should learn. That isn't totalitarian or authoritarian. That is parenting. I do think that is lost here, and I do question what else these parents are saying yes to if they are saying yes to this.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."