Grammar school group-think

I've observed this stuff a lot too (as I'm sure you know...)

As is my answer with most of these things, I think it's more complicated than simple yes/ no. I do think that some things are innate (with most but not all children of a given gender) -- there was just some study about this with monkeys.

But I think the innate part can be greatly amplified or not according to upbringing.

Sozlet is also a gender-boundary crosser at playtime -- according to her teachers, she was the only child at preschool who would regularly play with both boys and girls.

That's all slightly separate from new kid vs. established patterns, though. That tends to be a more general thing, from what we've observed. When we first moved here, sozlet was having a really tough time because the kids were just kind of "I don't know you" and not paying attention to her. That's all happening again, sort of -- she's gone from being the absolute center of attention at preschool (with kids vying for her attention and waiting their turn to get at her) to kids at the pool not really knowing her and not really being interested in knowing her. That's changing, partly because she has enough good connections (Dolly and Pearl, etc.) who she sees in playdates and she's not getting too stressed about it, and kids are getting to know her more. It will change more as she starts a local class for kids entering kindergarten, and then a lot more once she's actually in school -- we've been kinda cut off because the preschool doesn't have many local kids, they're mostly from one or two communities over.

(Last night we went to a thing where there was one kid from preschool this year and one kid from preschool last year, and she spent most of her time with those two.)

There are differences in the way boys and girls play that can't be ascribed to anything but basic biology.

I say this as one with a liberal pedigree and good lefty credentials. I certainly don't think this has anything to do with how we should raise boys and girls... but there is a undeniable difference. Of course each child should be raised individually.

I first was convinced there was a biological when good liberal friends with kids of around 3 and 4 made a real effort to avoid any gender difference. This included giving the same toys which included dolls. These kids were kept from TV and the family had only liberal friends.

Even in this family, the boys dolls used there dolls for rough play, sports adventures or war (frowned upon) while the girls nurtured theirs. The dolls of the boys all lost their heads quickly.

My friend was reluctantly convinced that there was something basic and biological going on.

I think if you spend a lot of time with groups kids you will see definate differences... and if you are in a liberal circles it is clear that these differences are more than can be explained by inculturation.

Here's the monkey study I was thinking of:

http://www.theolympian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051208/NEWS/51208023

Interesting!

My old neighbor and I used to be amazed that Mo and Curley played "guns" as we weren't sure where they even had exposure to guns. Still fingers, sticks, golf clubs - everything was gun worthy.

I always thought girls were tougher with the new kid/established pattern thing but today kind of knocked that out of me. The girl group was a lot more welcoming and flexible. The boy group was entirely opposite.

The monkey study is a total trip. This comment really stuck out to me:



Perhaps that is along the lines of welcoming v. not.

The welcoming (or not) seems to be a general kid thing in our experience. Both genders have done the cold shoulder, both genders have been welcoming. If there is any single factor that is predictive, I'd say it would be only child vs. a kid with sibling(s), especially if the sib(s) are close in age. Only children (boys and girls) seem to have generally been the ones who have broken out of the "I don't know you, and I'm busy, so I'll just ignore you" thing most reliably.

Garrison Keeler tells this great story about when his daughter was very little he decided he would not force the stereotypical toys upon the children in his family. So one Xmas he gets his daughter a little play tool set and he gets his nephew a boy doll. Within minutes his daughter is walking around cradling the plastic hammer in a blanket and his nephew had riped off the arm of the doll and is pointing it at people like a gun yelling "bang bang you're dead!".
It's just in the hormones.

I would have guessed just the opposite, soz. My experience has been that onlys seem to be a bit shyer around other kids.

I'm going to have to do some eyewitness research on that one.

It would totally go down like that at my house, Green Witch. I remember working a US map with Mo. Tennessee was always a gun but Florida and California and Oklahoma would do in a pinch.

Yeah, my onlies hypothesis is totally anecdotal, so who knows.

Our sample of two sure ain't shy though, are they? ;-) (Wait, is Mo an only? I consider him so because of his upbringing, but I guess he isn't, strictly speaking... ah, so complicated...)

The siblinged (I know that's not a word, I'm rushing this in before getting to bed) kids we know seem to be more insular -- not shy, exactly, just less outward-oriented. As in, they deal with new kids fine, not shy or scared or whatever, they just aren't as interested.

There is a joke about guns in our family. When I was growing up guns (and anything that had anything to do with violence) were strictly forbidden in our house.

We laugh about it now... because it didn't stop violent or war play. The sole benefit was that it helped develop our creativity as everything, from fruit to tinker toys to sports equipment became a gun, bomb or other implement of destruction.

I think the forbidden fruit effect probably increased the violence-themed games we played... but we were very imaginative about it.

This from Soz makes total sense to me...
The siblinged (I know that's not a word, I'm rushing this in before getting to bed) kids we know seem to be more insular -- not shy, exactly, just less outward-oriented. As in, they deal with new kids fine, not shy or scared or whatever, they just aren't as interested.

Interesting topic for a few reasons. We did gender last weekend in early childhood psych. I grew up in a household where gender roles were not pressed upon us kids, though my mother was a housewife and my dad brought home the bacon. We were told we could be whatever we wanted to be and gender never mattered.

In the early childhood class, we learned that kids at a certain stage in development were very rule-oriented. I can't remember the age, but I think it's 5-7 or so. It didn't take into account gender. Then, we learned about gender, but it was focused on social/academic differences (girls gossip, boys don't. Girls are emotional bullies while boys are physical bullies. Boys need movement built into the school day while girls can sit and learn.......).

But, with the niece and nephew I care for during the day I see a big difference. Allowing for 'every kid is different', the difference falls squarely along gender lines. My nephew learned to pshoo pshoo various gun type thing though we never played this way with him. It's possible he got it from TV, but he really doesn't watch much TV that includes violence like that. He hits and kicks things repeatedly (trees, bushes, rocks - the dog until we stop him). And he initiates rough-house play.

You're probably right, soz.

I consider Mo an only and our sampling clearly shows that onlys aren't shy. Still, I'm going to watch for this in future contacts.

Hey littlek - I'd be very interested in knowing if the "rules" age differs between boys and girls. Most of the kids at the playground were between the ages of 7-10. The boys played organized, rule-bound games; the girls were like a play-amoeba, the game constantly riffed and changed, very fluid.

When I watch Mo play I am often reminded of CalvinBall from the old Calvin and Hobbes comic where the game rules were made up as they went along.

I thought of the same thing watching the girls play.

I wonder if boys indoctination into team sports might account for some of this.

(I know, I know, a lot of girls play on sports teams too.)

Bookmarking. I have one of each and there are distinct differences in the way they play and the way they learn, but they both cross gender lines and make friends of either sex frequently. My girl plays with toy hammers, my boy has a stuffed kittycat that he sleeps with and is very kind to, when he's not hurling her over the balcony.

My kids are siblinged, so I'm not sure if any of this applies to Mo or the neighborhood kids. The duckie, age 6, is very rules-oriented. He's also a very poor sport in competitive games, but he tends to be very inclusive. His current thing is Pokemon, and extremely rigid and (to me) complicated card game which I know for a fact he does not understand. He just makes up his own rules, often on the fly, and combines them with the rules he does understand. He also cares A LOT about what older boys are doing and what they think of him. The ducklet is a an adventures-with-sticks girl. If we're outside she'll find a stick and then just be off poking things and playing pretend. She plays with everyone, according to her teachers, but she hasn't attached herself to anyone -- that's probably age-appropriate but I don't really know.