You can't reason with a child as they are perfectly happy to just tune out and ask why? why? why? why?
Being taught that being a prick has consequences past a 15 second scolding is important, a spank on the bum helps with that
there is nothing at all mutually exclusive about reasoning with a child but also being firm at the end of the day, jesus christ
there is a spectrum between lax, authoritative, and authoritarian. almost all established human growth and development literature stresses either positive or negative reinforcement for learning and discourages punishment.
that is, the people whose job it is to study learning encourage an authoritative style. spankies are hardly necessary.
I'm not saying be a complete authoritarian, believe me
but I'm saying that bargaining and bribing a child doesn't work because they do try to weasel more and more as time goes by and a person naturally will become more and more lax in enforcement and such
you can't promise a kid that he'll get cookies if he's nice to his sister because while he may start out fine, he'll turn back to his old ways and then be outraged when he's not given his cookies
he's a child, he doesn't understand the relationship, but he knows he wants to do both
Sorry, I should have known I wouldn't be able to shut up once I got started - the example you're citing here is a bad one to encourage in children, you're right. The child doesn't understand the relationship between sister-cookies because it isn't a sensical one, it's one that you've hoped will work to solve the problem. However, presenting a slightly different cause and effect to the child can be effective. Say, "If you're nice to your sister, your sister will feel good about sharing her things with you. Would you want to share with your sister if she was hitting you? Of course not! When your sister has ice cream and you ask her for some, and she feels bad because you're hitting her, she won't give you any. When we're nice to others, they want to be nice back to us. When we're mean to others, how do they act toward us?"
...this is totally shitty to enforce when the other kid is a little bastard, of course.
I don't think we disagree, really, I'm just advocating a stance as a parent where the children know and appreciate that your verdict is the final one, but are willing to accept this because they are given understandable and reasonable commands, with the knowledge that their opinion is important to the parent, even if it won't change the bottom line.
Lost Salient on
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
0
Raneadospolice apologistyou shouldn't have been there, obviouslyRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
they start to associate the behavior not as something that is the right thing to do, but as something they should do in order to get what they want
that's an awful attitude
"Don't get into any fights at school and we'll get icecream"
it doesn't address why the child is doing X behavior, it simply just wants it to go away, later when they can get the reward themselves or a replacement reward, their behavior remains uncontested and has never been examined
I'm not saying be a complete authoritarian, believe me
but I'm saying that bargaining and bribing a child doesn't work because they do try to weasel more and more as time goes by and a person naturally will become more and more lax in enforcement and such
you can't promise a kid that he'll get cookies if he's nice to his sister because while he may start out fine, he'll turn back to his old ways and then be outraged when he's not given his cookies
he's a child, he doesn't understand the relationship, but he knows he wants to do both
Bribing may often be bad, but what about teaching the child the concept of reward for work? That's a very important thing to learn. We know that one of the key things that makes a job rewarding is a clear link between effort and reward. If you can effectively teach this to a child, you can perhaps help engender in them an internal sense of motivation for hard work.
You're right that you shouldn't bribe to get the minimum of acceptable behavior -- that should be standard (but also explained, and given with moral instruction), but rewards can be good.
Also, bargaining can be more complex than this. What about if you propose limits on something -- say a new technology you don't understand very well (it's gonna happen to us all someday), and your child convincingly lays out why your assumptions are wrong, using evidence to make his/her case, and paints a persuasive picture that your concerns are unfounded.
I think embedded in your argument is an assumption that the parent is always right, which isn't necessarily true, and again I think that assumption is perhaps a result of the way you were parented. It teaches a rather inflexible deference to authority which can be disadventageous later in life.
treat kids as people, because they are people. yes that's good
but they're still children, they're not smart, they've been alive for less than a decade, they literally don't know anything!
Don't be a complete hardass but do show that you are in charge
I...guess we agree then!
Being condescended to was one of the things I always always always hated when I was a kid. it's why I always loved my teachers so much, because they were usually the only adults that would give two shits about what I had to say or thought.
sooo any time this 'lol kids think they're people' stuff comes up it gets me bristley
so many bristles
Tarranon on
You could be anywhere
On the black screen
0
Raneadospolice apologistyou shouldn't have been there, obviouslyRegistered Userregular
You can't reason with a child as they are perfectly happy to just tune out and ask why? why? why? why?
Being taught that being a prick has consequences past a 15 second scolding is important, a spank on the bum helps with that
there is nothing at all mutually exclusive about reasoning with a child but also being firm at the end of the day, jesus christ
there is a spectrum between lax, authoritative, and authoritarian. almost all established human growth and development literature stresses either positive or negative reinforcement for learning and discourages punishment.
that is, the people whose job it is to study learning encourage an authoritative style. spankies are hardly necessary.
I'm not saying be a complete authoritarian, believe me
but I'm saying that bargaining and bribing a child doesn't work because they do try to weasel more and more as time goes by and a person naturally will become more and more lax in enforcement and such
you can't promise a kid that he'll get cookies if he's nice to his sister because while he may start out fine, he'll turn back to his old ways and then be outraged when he's not given his cookies
he's a child, he doesn't understand the relationship, but he knows he wants to do both
Sorry, I should have known I wouldn't be able to shut up once I got started - the example you're citing here is a bad one to encourage in children, you're right. The child doesn't understand the relationship between sister-cookies because it isn't a sensical one, it's one that you've hoped will work to solve the problem. However, presenting a slightly different cause and effect to the child can be effective. Say, "If you're nice to your sister, your sister will feel good about sharing her things with you. Would you want to share with your sister if she was hitting you? Of course not! When your sister has ice cream and you ask her for some, and she feels bad because you're hitting her, she won't give you any. When we're nice to others, they want to be nice back to us. When we're mean to others, how do they act toward us?"
...this is totally shitty to enforce when the other kid is a little bastard, of course.
I don't think we disagree, really, I'm just advocating a stance as a parent where the children know and appreciate that your verdict is the final one, but are willing to accept this because they are given understandable and reasonable commands, with the knowledge that their opinion is important to the parent, even if it won't change the bottom line.
but that's not dealing/bribery, that's reasoning, which is different, that's addressing the issue and examining the cause. That's not what we're talking about. That's creating and teaching empathy and sympathy to a child, which is fantastic
you can't promise a kid that he'll get cookies if he's nice to his sister because while he may start out fine, he'll turn back to his old ways and then be outraged when he's not given his cookies
Also I want to point out that this works in reverse for spanking
You can't threaten a kid that he'll get spanked unless he's nice to his sister, because he'll fail to understand the underlying moral premise and only understand that he wants to do both.
I think you just don't have much experience with kids who are well-behaved because they want to be, because they dislike the feelings of guilt or remorse that come from being bad. But they exist! If you can give your kids a conscience, it will do most of the parenting for you!
they start to associate the behavior not as something that is the right thing to do, but as something they should do in order to get what they want
that's an awful attitude
"Don't get into any fights at school and we'll get icecream"
it doesn't address why the child is doing X behavior, it simply just wants it to go away, later when they can get the reward themselves or a replacement reward, their behavior remains uncontested and has never been examined
it sort of depends on how old they are
I really want to say this system would be acceptable to a degree in younger children but I will defer to the other people who think it would be bad until I brush up :v
Tarranon on
You could be anywhere
On the black screen
0
Raneadospolice apologistyou shouldn't have been there, obviouslyRegistered Userregular
I think you just don't have much experience with kids who are well-behaved because they want to be, because they dislike the feelings of guilt or remorse that come from being bad. But they exist! If you can give your kids a conscience, it will do most of the parenting for you!
okay well this is just a very snide and backhanded insult
thanks, bname, bringing the class to anotherwise decent discussion
they start to associate the behavior not as something that is the right thing to do, but as something they should do in order to get what they want
that's an awful attitude
"Don't get into any fights at school and we'll get icecream"
it doesn't address why the child is doing X behavior, it simply just wants it to go away, later when they can get the reward themselves or a replacement reward, their behavior remains uncontested and has never been examined
it sort of depends on how old they are
I really want to say this system would be acceptable to a degree in younger children but I will defer to the other people who think it would be bad until I brush up :v
well i did say we were working with children, and sub 2 year olds don't really understand any sorts of links like this, I'd say it works like this until the early teens and preteens when children start seeing that shift into puberty and the whole freaking mess of ideas, emotions, and changes that THAT brings
I think you just don't have much experience with kids who are well-behaved because they want to be, because they dislike the feelings of guilt or remorse that come from being bad. But they exist! If you can give your kids a conscience, it will do most of the parenting for you!
okay well this is just a very snide and backhanded insult
thanks, bname, bringing the class to anotherwise decent discussion
? It wasn't intended as such.
Obviously most kids develop a conscience at some point.
I'm just saying if you train your efforts more explicitly and earlier on their internal motivation, through reason and positive reinforcement, that they become self-regulating much faster and remain so through their teen years if you did it right.
It's much easier and much better than having to enforce external consequences all the time. Takes more work in the short-run, but better in the long run.
I think you just don't have much experience with kids who are well-behaved because they want to be, because they dislike the feelings of guilt or remorse that come from being bad. But they exist! If you can give your kids a conscience, it will do most of the parenting for you!
okay well this is just a very snide and backhanded insult
thanks, bname, bringing the class to anotherwise decent discussion
? It wasn't intended as such.
Obviously most kids develop a conscience at some point.
I'm just saying if you train your efforts more explicitly and earlier on their internal motivation, through reason and positive reinforcement, that they become self-regulating much faster and remain so through their teen years if you did it right.
It's much easier and much better than having to enforce external consequences all the time. Takes more work in the short-run, but better in the long run.
i actually have to apologize I read your post incorrectly
and yet i am too lazy to edit
yeah you need to talk to kids, I am in no way advocating a "my way or the highway" mentality, as that just causes friction and blind directionless rebellion (or complete complacence which is just as bad)
they start to associate the behavior not as something that is the right thing to do, but as something they should do in order to get what they want
that's an awful attitude
"Don't get into any fights at school and we'll get icecream"
it doesn't address why the child is doing X behavior, it simply just wants it to go away, later when they can get the reward themselves or a replacement reward, their behavior remains uncontested and has never been examined
it sort of depends on how old they are
I really want to say this system would be acceptable to a degree in younger children but I will defer to the other people who think it would be bad until I brush up :v
I would not say, "If you don't get into fights we can have ice cream," to my students (who are between 2 and 5) because it is establishing a direct link between two things that are not related in the real world. And also because it's basically saying that not doing something they shouldn't do in any scenario is going to earn them a reward. On the other hand, I often explain to my class that if they cannot follow the rules of the classroom they will have to leave the classroom and not do any of the fun things we do in the classroom for the rest of the day.
Anecdotal, I know.
I suppose the real difference is whether you're establishing a punishment/reward scenario or a cause-and-effect one.
Lost Salient on
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
eastern european and black are pretty much the only games in town for huge tits but not grossly obese
Backwardsname on
0
Lost Salientblink twiceif you'd like me to mercy kill youRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
...also it should be noted that when 2 to 5 year olds fight, it's more along the lines of "HE SAID A BAD WORD" + "SHE WAS PUSHING ME" + on-cue tears than blood splatter in an alley behind the school dumpsters
Lost Salient on
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
0
Raneadospolice apologistyou shouldn't have been there, obviouslyRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
things have changed since i was a kid
we fought with punches and kicks and pro wrestling moves that actually sometimes fucking worked
handy hint: giving someone a DDT will actually hurt them a lot more than it hurts wrestlers!
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
edited July 2010
what's wrong with kids fighting, anyway? like, obviously it shouldn't be encouraged, and should actively be discouraged of course, but it's not like it's the worst fucking possible thing if some kids get in a scuffle. god damn, stop coddling your children.
Metzger Meister on
0
Raneadospolice apologistyou shouldn't have been there, obviouslyRegistered Userregular
we fought with punches and kicks and pro wrestling moves that actually sometimes fucking worked
handy hint: giving someone a DDT will actually hurt them a lot more than it hurts wrestlers!
My cousins and I discovered that the Sharpshooter really fucking hurts.
dude so does the figure 4 leg lock
probably what lends to so many kids thinking wrestling is real
the moves are real as shit!
I know, right!? After the Sharpshooter Incident (there was crying and punishment involved) we were all too chicken to try a suplex or something like that. Which is probably for the best because some of those moves are really ridiculously dangerous.
we fought with punches and kicks and pro wrestling moves that actually sometimes fucking worked
handy hint: giving someone a DDT will actually hurt them a lot more than it hurts wrestlers!
My cousins and I discovered that the Sharpshooter really fucking hurts.
dude so does the figure 4 leg lock
probably what lends to so many kids thinking wrestling is real
the moves are real as shit!
I know, right!? After the Sharpshooter Incident (there was crying and punishment involved) we were all too chicken to try a suplex or something like that. Which is probably for the best because some of those moves are really ridiculously dangerous.
dude yes like half of them are completely intended to break someone's fucking neck
one hundred percent of my fights start out with me mouthing off, getting bonked on the nose, getting dizzy, and then whoops the teacher's on us and I'm in detention for a week
Tarranon on
You could be anywhere
On the black screen
0
Lost Salientblink twiceif you'd like me to mercy kill youRegistered Userregular
what's wrong with kids fighting, anyway? like, obviously it shouldn't be encouraged, and should actively be discouraged of course, but it's not like it's the worst fucking possible thing if some kids get in a scuffle. god damn, stop coddling your children.
Well
If they want to fight with their siblings at home that's their and their parents' business, whether or not I agree with it.
But since I and my school would be liable for any injuries they received while under my supervision, I'd rather they not actively engage in fisticuffs during that time.
Lost Salient on
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
I only really got verbally teased as a kid, shoved a few times and had a rock the size of a football chucked, and hit, my head. Oh and all those basketballs that one time. Aaand falling off a tire swing with three other kids when we tried to get it vertically upright. We succeeded. So did gravity.
But the only time I've had blood drawn in a fight was at Karate, got kicked directly in the face.
Really I've had it quite easy, still no broken bones, twists or sprains.
Posts
Sorry, I should have known I wouldn't be able to shut up once I got started - the example you're citing here is a bad one to encourage in children, you're right. The child doesn't understand the relationship between sister-cookies because it isn't a sensical one, it's one that you've hoped will work to solve the problem. However, presenting a slightly different cause and effect to the child can be effective. Say, "If you're nice to your sister, your sister will feel good about sharing her things with you. Would you want to share with your sister if she was hitting you? Of course not! When your sister has ice cream and you ask her for some, and she feels bad because you're hitting her, she won't give you any. When we're nice to others, they want to be nice back to us. When we're mean to others, how do they act toward us?"
...this is totally shitty to enforce when the other kid is a little bastard, of course.
I don't think we disagree, really, I'm just advocating a stance as a parent where the children know and appreciate that your verdict is the final one, but are willing to accept this because they are given understandable and reasonable commands, with the knowledge that their opinion is important to the parent, even if it won't change the bottom line.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
that's an awful attitude
"Don't get into any fights at school and we'll get icecream"
it doesn't address why the child is doing X behavior, it simply just wants it to go away, later when they can get the reward themselves or a replacement reward, their behavior remains uncontested and has never been examined
Bribing may often be bad, but what about teaching the child the concept of reward for work? That's a very important thing to learn. We know that one of the key things that makes a job rewarding is a clear link between effort and reward. If you can effectively teach this to a child, you can perhaps help engender in them an internal sense of motivation for hard work.
You're right that you shouldn't bribe to get the minimum of acceptable behavior -- that should be standard (but also explained, and given with moral instruction), but rewards can be good.
Also, bargaining can be more complex than this. What about if you propose limits on something -- say a new technology you don't understand very well (it's gonna happen to us all someday), and your child convincingly lays out why your assumptions are wrong, using evidence to make his/her case, and paints a persuasive picture that your concerns are unfounded.
I think embedded in your argument is an assumption that the parent is always right, which isn't necessarily true, and again I think that assumption is perhaps a result of the way you were parented. It teaches a rather inflexible deference to authority which can be disadventageous later in life.
I...guess we agree then!
Being condescended to was one of the things I always always always hated when I was a kid. it's why I always loved my teachers so much, because they were usually the only adults that would give two shits about what I had to say or thought.
sooo any time this 'lol kids think they're people' stuff comes up it gets me bristley
so many bristles
On the black screen
but that's not dealing/bribery, that's reasoning, which is different, that's addressing the issue and examining the cause. That's not what we're talking about. That's creating and teaching empathy and sympathy to a child, which is fantastic
Also I want to point out that this works in reverse for spanking
You can't threaten a kid that he'll get spanked unless he's nice to his sister, because he'll fail to understand the underlying moral premise and only understand that he wants to do both.
I think you just don't have much experience with kids who are well-behaved because they want to be, because they dislike the feelings of guilt or remorse that come from being bad. But they exist! If you can give your kids a conscience, it will do most of the parenting for you!
it sort of depends on how old they are
I really want to say this system would be acceptable to a degree in younger children but I will defer to the other people who think it would be bad until I brush up :v
On the black screen
okay well this is just a very snide and backhanded insult
thanks, bname, bringing the class to anotherwise decent discussion
fuck yes
do you need some recommendations
well i did say we were working with children, and sub 2 year olds don't really understand any sorts of links like this, I'd say it works like this until the early teens and preteens when children start seeing that shift into puberty and the whole freaking mess of ideas, emotions, and changes that THAT brings
no
no it's been covered
this only seems to work if you turn off your suspension of disbelief, like superman
? It wasn't intended as such.
Obviously most kids develop a conscience at some point.
I'm just saying if you train your efforts more explicitly and earlier on their internal motivation, through reason and positive reinforcement, that they become self-regulating much faster and remain so through their teen years if you did it right.
It's much easier and much better than having to enforce external consequences all the time. Takes more work in the short-run, but better in the long run.
why? They're real as can be
so real
i actually have to apologize I read your post incorrectly
and yet i am too lazy to edit
yeah you need to talk to kids, I am in no way advocating a "my way or the highway" mentality, as that just causes friction and blind directionless rebellion (or complete complacence which is just as bad)
well shit dogg you gotta go with the real ones
they be a bit chunkier but it's all good they wear it well
I would not say, "If you don't get into fights we can have ice cream," to my students (who are between 2 and 5) because it is establishing a direct link between two things that are not related in the real world. And also because it's basically saying that not doing something they shouldn't do in any scenario is going to earn them a reward. On the other hand, I often explain to my class that if they cannot follow the rules of the classroom they will have to leave the classroom and not do any of the fun things we do in the classroom for the rest of the day.
Anecdotal, I know.
I suppose the real difference is whether you're establishing a punishment/reward scenario or a cause-and-effect one.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
unless they're russian or something
eastern european and black are pretty much the only games in town for huge tits but not grossly obese
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
we fought with punches and kicks and pro wrestling moves that actually sometimes fucking worked
handy hint: giving someone a DDT will actually hurt them a lot more than it hurts wrestlers!
My cousins and I discovered that the Sharpshooter really fucking hurts.
dude so does the figure 4 leg lock
probably what lends to so many kids thinking wrestling is real
the moves are real as shit!
I know, right!? After the Sharpshooter Incident (there was crying and punishment involved) we were all too chicken to try a suplex or something like that. Which is probably for the best because some of those moves are really ridiculously dangerous.
Either that or fighting something in the hospital with a flamethrower
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/registry/wishlist/1A4GKH199FBMU/ - My wishlist
talk about skewed priorities
On the black screen
dude yes like half of them are completely intended to break someone's fucking neck
one hundred percent of my fights start out with me mouthing off, getting bonked on the nose, getting dizzy, and then whoops the teacher's on us and I'm in detention for a week
On the black screen
Well
If they want to fight with their siblings at home that's their and their parents' business, whether or not I agree with it.
But since I and my school would be liable for any injuries they received while under my supervision, I'd rather they not actively engage in fisticuffs during that time.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
Everyone should get in at least one fight. It's very empowering to discover that you aren't made out of glass after all.
Jesus, yes. Like the powerbomb. Who thought it was a good idea to show people walking away from one of those to children?!
I mean yeah it hurts like shit
but you're actually feeling pretty good because you're
1) just so amazed that you got punched in the face
2) kinda pleased that you didn't go down
did somebody engage in fisticuffs with you Rane?
which happened before i was 10, dude
But the only time I've had blood drawn in a fight was at Karate, got kicked directly in the face.
Really I've had it quite easy, still no broken bones, twists or sprains.