What is "strict" and is it good?

strict, from my point of view, is ultimately about grooming him to be a member of society. I agree that letting him choose his own style is fine. Being strict with things like please and thank you - I would be happy if kids all just asked nicely for something (Can I have some help here) without having to say please and thank you necessarily (May I please have some help, thank you). Respect for adults is a little more tricky. While I whole-heartedly don't want kids to be brow-beaten into 'yes, sir' and 'yes, ma'am', speaking only when spoken to, etc, I do think they should be taught to listen to adults. We have a lot of trouble in the wealthier than average town I work in with kids who totally disregard teachers.

all i can say is dont be too strict.

with age comes knowledge.

with knowledge comes responsibility.

dont make your kid lose their childhood because you want them to be perfect. when they get old will they look back and feel a sense of dread? of never having that freedom of care or worry? or will they be beset with anger that they never got to do "anything" and when they got older they were forced into a society where they are never goin to have that freedom from worry, or anxiety?

mistakes are a must. just mitigate the damage caused.

I prefer to think of myself as firm, but yeah, I pick my battles too. Respect is a big deal, and so is following directions, especially where safety is involved. Grown up words are not allowed but then my definition of grown up word is probably looser than most. Its ok for Duckie to say, as he likes now to say, I have to go take a crap. As long as he is not using language disrespectfully.

I see what littlek refers to. I am imagining what these kids will be like when they get a little older.

Hm, I see "strict" a bit different. To me it means following through with
rules or discipline when they're not obeyed.

Teaching kids manners is part of their education they get at home and in
school, so I don't see it as strict.

Re: What is "strict" and is it good?


I would suggest to you that this is sufficient. I was raised this way. I was also raised to launder and iron my own clothing, and was required to turn out dressed in a manner which met the standards my grandmother set for us. But i don't think that was important in character building--i do think that following basic rules of behavior and being courteous builds character, and useful social skills. I rather suspect that Mo will develop an interest in his appearance at such time as he feels it will be important in his socializing.

The good sisters were strict. I went to grammar school in the forties. Uniforms, hands folded at desks, raise hand if you wish to be called on, even in first grade. It started with morning line-up, prepared you for the army. Say 'yes, sister, no, sister', known to all as yes stir no stir. I don't really resent the grammar school elements of strictness, but then I was a goody two shoes back in the day. An individual nun could handle large classes, and I mean large, but I do remember some efforts to get us to think for ourselves and verbalize it.

My resentment goes more to the rigidity of my girls' high school in the late fifties. I'm probably still pushing their nose in it, fifty years later. Miss Hanbury's social etiquette classes were just the tip of the iceberg.

On clothes - like many things, I think it's ... interesting to learn and watch the social rules/mores so you break them intelligently and use them as seems befitting. Turns out I'm quite interested in style, which is ironic to me.

An old boss once told me that all that matters is style, and I don't remember my words but I set him straight right that minute (that work place was fun, great talks). But, time passing, I get what he meant, in the larger sense of style, not at all about clothes, not phoniness.

Mo's teachers are often very complementary of his manners. He does have good manners. Around the house he usually has nice manners but can sometimes be a little tyrant -- which always lands him in trouble -- for which he does apologize. And when he apologizes he is able to explain what he is apologizing for (as required so I know that he is not just apologizing to get out of whatever trouble he is in).

I don't think I have to worry about too strict as I'm getting the feeling that I'm maybe not strict enough.

(I'm going to get to FreeDuck in just a second...)

I think my follow through is good. I am an enforcer. Rigidity/predictability is pretty important around here which is why picking my battles is so important.

Words. Words are a big deal around here.

I'm really flexible with music and games for Mo. He listens to some real rock music and I do allow some "T" rated games and Mo picks up some interesting vocabulary from them. We OFTEN have conversations about what is/is not okay for public usage. I'm always very honest with him about what he's hearing.

For example:

He's been playing a Simpon's game and has asked me about the words: sepia toned, crop circle, endorse, manufacture, harvest; but he has also asked about "fry your but off".

His favorite song right now is Green Day's "American Idiot" and he has asked about hysteria, propoganda, agenda, media, but also about mindfuck and faggot. (This is the song he is currently working on in drum class, at his request.)

We have discussed what all the words mean and I have told him which are okay to use and which aren't and I think he does a good job of using them, or not using them. (I have asked around.)

Does this have to do with strictness?

When he wants his friends to hear the song/play the game I always tell him "No", that it isn't okay until the friend's parents say it's okay because each parent gets to make decisions for their own kid.

I think this is one of those hopelessly subjective things that could start an interesting conversation (looks like that's on its way already) but can't really be answered in any neat, tidy, conclusive way.

So much is context, for example. "Strict" among my students in L.A. was much different than "strict" in my current community.

I agree about picking battles, and I foster a certain independence/ not-going-with-the-flowiness in sozlet. So in some senses I'm purposely not strict. I don't want her to be a podkid, same as everyone else.

But I do think -- and littlek alluded to this too -- that some parents go to far with the whole idea of "I'm not strict, I'm letting my kid do his/her own thing." I don't think, from what you've said, that you (Boomer) do that, but in terms of general discussion of the word "strict" and whether it's a good thing, I think it can be. I see kids who just don't have the boundaries and direction they need, and who flounder as a result.

Finishing a thought, knowing I was off on a tangent re the getting along business -

A lot of people on a2k have style, re developed personalities and modes. Well, I guess all of us do.
Playing by the rules for the learning period gives one time to work out one's own pros and cons.
Some learn to play with them sooner.
Some don't get why there are these stupid rules in the first place thus having trouble remembering them even if wanting to.
And some have non routine abilities and disabilities, which a lot of the rest of us could learn from.

Strict is either:

"What one does oneself" if one thinks strictness is good

"Tougher than one is oneself" if one thinks strictness is not good.


I suspect, if you are the subject of gossip, that you are suffering the immemorial problem of folk not understanding that one is dealing with problems in a child that one did not cause, rather than problems which you have created for yourself.

I stand corrected -- that's an answer that manages to be both brief and pretty darn conclusive! (I agree.)

Just read your last post, Boomer. That reminded me of me with my niece. She has turned out quite okay.. not all wrought by me, natch, but I didn't ruin her life. (for those who don't know, very troubled mother, somewhat regimental though well meaning father).

I think I am generally sympatico with both soz and boomer. I think limits are important and I think boomer provides that.

About words... that was just the first thing that came to mind when I started thinking about the things that I let my kids do that other parents probably dont, and that they probably think are mistakes on my part. For instance, I let my kids watch this. Several times. I havent quite figured out my formula for what they can and cant watch, but so far it seems that sex and violence is out, adult language is ok as long as it does not infer sex and violence, and humor trumps everything. Still, they understand (and test) the boundaries of what is appropriate outside of the house and there are consequences for that.

I sometimes imagine what other parents say about my parenting style. Often I worry that its not good. And I make plenty of mistakes outside of that for which I am embarrassed if they are witnessed. But in general I believe the proof is in the pudding. My kids are growing into the kinds of people I want them to be -- bright, funny, responsible, respectful, kind, and happy -- and I think others see that too. And from what I can see of Mo from here, it looks like you are doing just fine in that direction.

This sums up a brief thought I had when reading the initial post, but couldnt quite grab a hold of. Well said.

Sharp comment from Dlowan.

Yeah, discussion in the library DVD section the other day:

E.G.: But it's PG-13...

Me: Lemme see. [Examines back] Yeah but it's not BAD PG-13, just dirty jokes PG-13.

Every relationship is different. One kid responds to a look, another may need to be jolted to attention. So if what you're doing feels right, never mind the questions.

Strict? Who says you have to be strict? Maybe Mo responds to the way you've developed - in that case, why worry? As long as he's learning and developing the way you intend, you're doing just fine.

I have some to say, but not time to say it right now.

Parenting styles: Authoritarian, Permissive, Neglectful, Authoritative.

Authoritative is the way to go, and it sounds like that's what you do.

:-)

Remember that from my early childhood education textbooks.

Yep on authoritative.

Smiling because I'm remembering 22-yr-old me forming all of these parenting theories based on textbooks -- but book-learnin' isn't TOTALLY useless!