Re: Parenting advice needed

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

First my son tried to explain that his body did it all by himself. Uh,
no. That didn't fly. He tried to explain it in more detail, but I told
him that there just wasn't any scenario where he wasn't responsible for
what happened to his body while he was in it.

Dally, you are displaying religious intolorance!

You didn't accept demonic posession as an adequate explanation??

That's funny. Give the kid points for being creative.

Quoted message said:

We can't allow him to hurt anyone else at school, nor will we accept
another kid hurting him. School is a kid-safe zone. I think I conveyed
that adequately. But we are still stuck trying to figure out how to get
out of a bad dynamic in a first grade classroom.

One of the things that I taught in my women's self defense classes in how to
draw attention to your situation while in public. A scream can work wonders
sometimes. The creep backs off then.

If there is in fact a "bad dynamic" in that first grade classroom, I would
march right down to that school and demand they give your son an acceptable
response to the situation. After all, what options does the kid have?

Can he sort of yell, use hand gesture, etc to draw attention to a situation
that could only be resolved by kicking before? Give the kid some options.
Don't just yell at him. Seems like a problem for the school to look at as
well.

You are not being a hardass here. Just being practical. After all, just
what options is the school offering you to take care of this situation.

And it ain't cuz you son has a penis either. Get that boy [censored] out of your
head. It is a kid factor. He needs to learn appropriate behavior. And at
the same time, he should feel safe. If he doesn't, something is wrong. You
don't wanna mess the kid up. And I would raise [censored] until the
situation is resolved.

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ranieri said:

Kicked him in the face? Geez. Unless your little fella is a budding
martial arts whiz, it sounds like the kickee was already on the ground
when your boy delivered a kick to the face. IMO, this goes beyond putting
a bully in his place and strikes me as some pretty anti-social behavior.

My understanding was that the annoying kickee-to-be was crawling around
under my son's work table bugging him.

Quoted message said:

What could be the cause of this pent up rage?

Well, it's not terribly pent up, now is it?

Heh - no I guess not.

Quoted message said:

First my son tried to explain that his body did it all by himself. Uh,
no. That didn't fly. He tried to explain it in more detail, but I told
him that there just wasn't any scenario where he wasn't responsible for
what happened to his body while he was in it.

As far as I can tell, my kid kicked because kicking seemed like a
satisfying way to achieve his objectives at that moment.

We obviously need to socialize the boy a bit more. But I'm stuck with
basic biology: boys are aggressive. It seems a bit silly to pretend he's
never going to get physical with a kid who is bugging him.

This sounds too familiar. An old friend of mine has a son, now in 8th grade,
who was recently expelled from school for stabbing a kid with a pencil. Of
course this wasn't the first time he'd done anything like this. Starting in
kindergarten or 1st grade his mom's take on it was always- hey, boys are
aggressive by nature, the other kid was bugging him so what do you expect?
etc. In other words, enabling him to avoid responsibility for the act.

It's not silly to expect him to refrain from aggressive behavior - in fact,
you'll be doing him a disservice if you tolerate anything less.

Ranieri said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We obviously need to socialize the boy a bit more. But I'm stuck with
basic biology: boys are aggressive. It seems a bit silly to pretend he's
never going to get physical with a kid who is bugging him.

Quoted message said:

This sounds too familiar. An old friend of mine has a son, now in 8th grade,
who was recently expelled from school for stabbing a kid with a pencil. Of
course this wasn't the first time he'd done anything like this. Starting in
kindergarten or 1st grade his mom's take on it was always- hey, boys are
aggressive by nature, the other kid was bugging him so what do you expect?
etc. In other words, enabling him to avoid responsibility for the act.

It's not silly to expect him to refrain from aggressive behavior - in fact,
you'll be doing him a disservice if you tolerate anything less.

Fair enough. I'm listening.

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out
to) his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
been able to solve.

Dally

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out to)
his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
been able to solve.

Typical Liberal. Always interfereing where it is unnecessary.

We are dealing with two different environments. One is school. The other is
home.

As a first grader, he needs to learn that school is different from home.
Also different than older brother.

If the guys are getting along, don't screw up a good thing.

Do not set up a nanny state at home.

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ranieri said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We obviously need to socialize the boy a bit more. But I'm stuck with
basic biology: boys are aggressive. It seems a bit silly to pretend he's
never going to get physical with a kid who is bugging him.

Quoted message said:

This sounds too familiar. An old friend of mine has a son, now in 8th
grade, who was recently expelled from school for stabbing a kid with a
pencil. Of course this wasn't the first time he'd done anything like
this. Starting in kindergarten or 1st grade his mom's take on it was
always- hey, boys are aggressive by nature, the other kid was bugging him
so what do you expect? etc. In other words, enabling him to avoid
responsibility for the act.

It's not silly to expect him to refrain from aggressive behavior - in
fact, you'll be doing him a disservice if you tolerate anything less.

Fair enough. I'm listening.

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out to)
his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
been able to solve.

You could force him to watch violent videos while under the influence of
nausea-inducing medication.

Dally <[email hidden]> wrote:

re a kick in the face

Quoted message said:

the annoying kickee-to-be was crawling around
under my son's work table bugging him. [...] I told
him that there just wasn't any scenario where he
wasn't responsible for what happened to his body
while he was in it. [...] School is a kid-safe zone. [...]

If the kid is crawling under a table and picking at his classmates,
well, that's what I call "poking a dog with a stick".

While I agree that your child is absolutely responsible for what he
does, the other boy is equally responsible for his behavior.

And *a friend of mine who is a teacher* has told children something
like, "If you poke a dog with a stick, don't be surprised when you get
bit."

That's not, obviously EXCUSING the dog's behavior, but it's certainly
explaining it. I'll just bet that my teacher friend would offer
something like, "KUDOS TO YER KID!" however anti-pedagogically-sound
and inappropriate that compliment may seem.

Quoted message said:

still stuck trying to figure out how to get out of a bad
dynamic in a first grade classroom.

Teachers are often sorely outnumbered and things happen very quickly,
too. The offending child/bully was UNDER the table and, therefore, not
so easily seen, right? Or allegedly so? Regardless, your son and the
other child should be seated so that future contact is limited, imo.
In a class of 20 to 30 students, neither child will be socially
disadvantaged by being separated from one student.

And in related trivia: My friend the teacher was also amused by a
student who was intent on saving his classmate from being defined as a
"punk". The child was crying about something and his classmate told
him to knock it off with something like, "Stop that or people will
think you're a punk."

Some might think that's mean-spirited, while others would say it
sounds like a backbone-building bit of advice and rather profound
coming from a pre-teen.

--
Curt
http://curtjames.com/

Lee Michaels <[email hidden]> wrote:
(snipped here and there)

Quoted message said:

intolorance[...]posession

Uh, the story (elsewhere in this thread) was cute, but march yourself
to the MFW Word Wall, please.

Intolerance and possession, thank you.

Quoted message said:

A scream can work wonders sometimes.

This is not one of those times. Classrooms are loud enough without
each and every child screaming at the top of their lungs when a
classmate annoys them or crawls under a table. Yeah, thanks again.

Quoted message said:

Seems like a problem for the school to look at as well.

After all, just what options is the school offering you to
take care of this situation.

I do agree, however, with all of that.

Again, separating the boys (Dally's kid from the - hopefully *former*
after his perhaps well-deserved kickindaface - bully) would be my
suggestion. And speciall attention to be paid to the offending child
(that'd be face boy, in my book and not Dally's child, fwiw).

--
Curt
http://curtjames.com/

Lee Michaels said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes
out to) his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one
is always annoying the other - never seriously harming each other,
but a surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To
solve Sammy's problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling
dynamic that I've never been able to solve.

Typical Liberal. Always interfereing where it is unnecessary.

We are dealing with two different environments. One is school. The
other is home.

As a first grader, he needs to learn that school is different from
home. Also different than older brother.

If the guys are getting along, don't screw up a good thing.

Do not set up a nanny state at home.

I was going to say something similar, without the "typical liberal"
crack. Fighting at home and fighting at school are really different
situations. Not that you should allow your children to fight at home
🙂, but the real trick is to teach your boy that fighting at school is
right out. Chances are good that Sammy has already learned that,
assuming that you came down on him hard enough over this incident.

Boys are aggressive by nature, but they aren't animals. They can
learn that being in public (and especially being in school) requires a
different set of rules.

Jason

Curt James said:

Dally <[email hidden]> wrote:

re a kick in the face

Quoted message said:

the annoying kickee-to-be was crawling around
under my son's work table bugging him. [...] I told
him that there just wasn't any scenario where he
wasn't responsible for what happened to his body
while he was in it. [...] School is a kid-safe zone. [...]

If the kid is crawling under a table and picking at his classmates,
well, that's what I call "poking a dog with a stick".

While I agree that your child is absolutely responsible for what he
does, the other boy is equally responsible for his behavior.

I think it's important to understand that this is information I garnered
from my son, and it's perfectly possible he is playing me. He
wouldpaint the picture in as rosy of terms as possible.

In the end, I'm sure there was more than random kicking happening, but
I'm really not sure what it was.

Dally

Lee Michaels said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out to)
his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
been able to solve.

Typical Liberal. Always interfereing where it is unnecessary.

Quoted message said:

Do not set up a nanny state at home.

Ha! That's a good one.

The rule in our house used to be "don't bug Mummy when she's working
unless there's blood." It turns out there is blood surprisingly often
in our house so we changed it to "arterial spurting."

Do you remember Lucas Buck telling people I let the dog watch the kids?
There's a bit of truth to that. I've got a home office so they can
come home afterschool and play with the dog, practice their instruments,
laze about fighting with each other... but it's not like I welcome them
with a kiss and a cookie and monitor what they do. No, there's two
hours or so of after-school before-Mom-is-done time when they're largely
unsupervised, although I'm in the building.

No, my strategy with the boys is to let them work it out. There was a
time when I had to intervene for the safety of the baby, but it's six
years later and the baby packs a wicked punch (and kick) now and his
brother knows karate-blocking and I just opt out of the job of
negotiating between them.

But this is where it comes back to haunt me: I let the boys be physical
without sending them to a shrink or for mediation therapy or what have
you. Perhaps I should have made it more clear to them that it's not
okay to be physically aggressive.

Dally

Dally said:

Lee Michaels said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out to)
his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
been able to solve.

Typical Liberal. Always interfereing where it is unnecessary.

Quoted message said:

Do not set up a nanny state at home.

Ha! That's a good one.

The rule in our house used to be "don't bug Mummy when she's working
unless there's blood." It turns out there is blood surprisingly often
in our house so we changed it to "arterial spurting."

Do you remember Lucas Buck telling people I let the dog watch the kids?
There's a bit of truth to that. I've got a home office so they can
come home afterschool and play with the dog, practice their instruments,
laze about fighting with each other... but it's not like I welcome them
with a kiss and a cookie and monitor what they do. No, there's two
hours or so of after-school before-Mom-is-done time when they're largely
unsupervised, although I'm in the building.

No, my strategy with the boys is to let them work it out. There was a
time when I had to intervene for the safety of the baby, but it's six
years later and the baby packs a wicked punch (and kick) now and his
brother knows karate-blocking and I just opt out of the job of
negotiating between them.

But this is where it comes back to haunt me: I let the boys be physical
without sending them to a shrink or for mediation therapy or what have
you. Perhaps I should have made it more clear to them that it's not
okay to be physically aggressive.

It's not OK for them to be boys?

"JMW" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dally said:

Lee Michaels said:

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

>Part of the problem is the abuse that Sammy takes from (and dishes out
>to)
>his older brother. They've got a nudgy dynamic where one is always
>annoying the other - never seriously harming each other, but a
>surreptitious kick is pretty normal in Sammy's world. To solve Sammy's
>problem I'm going to have to unravel a sibling dynamic that I've never
>been able to solve.

Typical Liberal. Always interfereing where it is unnecessary.

Quoted message said:

Do not set up a nanny state at home.

Ha! That's a good one.

The rule in our house used to be "don't bug Mummy when she's working
unless there's blood." It turns out there is blood surprisingly often
in our house so we changed it to "arterial spurting."

Do you remember Lucas Buck telling people I let the dog watch the kids?
There's a bit of truth to that. I've got a home office so they can
come home afterschool and play with the dog, practice their instruments,
laze about fighting with each other... but it's not like I welcome them
with a kiss and a cookie and monitor what they do. No, there's two
hours or so of after-school before-Mom-is-done time when they're largely
unsupervised, although I'm in the building.

No, my strategy with the boys is to let them work it out. There was a
time when I had to intervene for the safety of the baby, but it's six
years later and the baby packs a wicked punch (and kick) now and his
brother knows karate-blocking and I just opt out of the job of
negotiating between them.

But this is where it comes back to haunt me: I let the boys be physical
without sending them to a shrink or for mediation therapy or what have
you. Perhaps I should have made it more clear to them that it's not
okay to be physically aggressive.

It's not OK for them to be boys?

Doncha know John??

Hillary plans to outlaw testicles when she becomes Commander In Chief!!

(That was positively scary to put that name and title in the same sentence.)

Lee Michaels said:

Hillary plans to outlaw testicles when she becomes Commander In Chief!!

What will she do with hers?

Quoted message said:

(That was positively scary to put that name and title in the same sentence.)

Will you imbeciles drop it? She is NOT, will NOT, ever run.