5 ms·

When it comes to dishes, there is one thing I have found that seems to work universally for children and adults alike: give them ownership. They have their own

When it comes to dishes, there is one thing I have found that seems to work universally for children and adults alike: give them ownership. They have their own set of dishes, and it is made clear that it is their responsibility to clean them and keep them, and to not have them be in the way of others trying to do the same. If your dish is not clean, you must clean it before it can be used. Things get hairier when it comes to pots and pans and other such common use items, but I have found that the second part of the above helps here too: make sure you're not blocking others from keeping their stuff clean. This leads to washing as you go, to caring for your stuff, and to a sense of pride in your work. inb4 commies /s

kqr 5y ago
Here comes the commie: This is something I'm struggling with personally. My firstborn is just about the age where he is starting to exhibit territoriality around things he is currently using. To what extent do I want to reinforce the idea of private property in the home? Philosophically, I'm definitely against it. Practically, it seems like it has certain benefits and drawbacks and I don't know which are stronger. I have no idea! Opinions, please.
- dotancohen 5y ago
  Things he is using, you definitely want to encourage the territoriality. Otherwise there is a real risk of bullying when he goes to kindergarten and preschool. But things that he is not currently using should definitely be shared. I'm guessing that your son is about two years old (based on my three children's behaviour at that age), so he should already be in daily contact with non-family children but not yet experienced bullying. So for that I'll mention how i think about it: bullying is how humans determine who is the Alpha Male. It is natural and expected. So don't try to shield your son from it, rather, prepare him for it.
  - kqr 5y ago
    Correct at all counts. He's two, and I certainly notice that he (and his peers) are starting to experiment with violence as a tool for managing relationships with people and things. My instinct was also the "take turns using things, but don't assert property rights of things that aren't used". Where I'm hesitant is some things have incredible emotional value to one person but not to others -- is it not nice to ask others to respect that? Something else that troubles me is that I certainly don't act that way -- there are many things my wife and I brought into our relationship that we still consider private property, mainly for convenience ("her" drawer is organised according to her needs, for example). Another thing is purely linguistic habit. While my wife is very good at asking e.g. "can I taste the ice cream" I'm used to phrasing the question as "can I taste your ice cream".
    - dotancohen 5y ago
      Your remaining questions I don't have answers for )) Maybe ask me something about Python? Your example of linguistic habit is excellent, because it demonstrates that the language we use is both descriptive of how we perceive our surroundings, and prescriptive in influencing behaviour. Maybe ask "can I taste the ice cream" but offer "you can taste my ice cream". Children are wiser than us, instead of perceiving a mixed signal I find they usually figure out how to interpret things in surprising ways - that goes for my own children and other peoples' children. They are far more plastic and have less preconceived "bins" to interpret things. The truth is, most of our questions regarding raising the kids we will not ever get answers for. That's fine, the kids are learning along the way just as we are.
    - pdpi 5y ago
      I think “your ice cream” is perfectly appropriate. The flip side to seeing wealth as communal is that you need to respect the division when it happens. As custodian of the family’s money, you bought everybody ice cream. But some of that ice cream is now yours. It’s your fair share of the ice cream, you picked the flavours and the sprinkles and what not, because it was for you. It’s entirely appropriate, and indeed desirable, to assert ownership over that. Not respecting boundaries is a Bad Thing. What you can, and should, teach on top of that is generosity. “This is my ice cream and mine alone, but you can taste it if you like.” That sort of idea. It’s your decision to share, but sharing your ice cream with me means you get to see my smile as I try that really good flavour you asked for, and that smile is really valuable.
  - chaosite 5y ago
    Alpha/Beta/Sigma/Omega/Upsilon male is discredited pseudo-scientific bullshit, and it is a bad idea to base one's personal philosophy on it. I also disagree that bullying is natural, but if even if it is, that still does not mean it should be accepted, tolerated, or encouraged (which you are implying).
    - kqr 5y ago
      I disagree. While the alpha male terminology seems a bit oversimplified, the fact remains that all sorts of violence, be it physical, verbal, or social (e.g. preventing someone from joining in the play) is a tool people use in varying degrees to influence relationships. It's a dangerous tool, because it's so stupid. Beating someone is effectively saying "I don't care how well reasoned your arguments are, now you pretend to listen to me instead." But this stupidity is both its weakness and its strength. Violence is a very complicated tool, and I think people need some exposure to it (on both sides of it) to understand when its appropriate and (more frequently) when it's uncalled for. This does not mean it's tolerated or encouraged -- quite the opposite! It's important to be the role model that teaches children all the circumstances in which it's wrong! But pretending it serves no social function makes, I think, you a worse teacher. By completely denying the upsides of violence you become less trustworthy as a teacher, because even children can see the obvious short-term upsides!
    - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
      This. Dominance hierarchies exist, but aren’t alpha, beta whatever. We aren't wolves, we’re more like bonobos.
      - glogla 5y ago
        Not even wolves are this way. In their family lives, wolves have lifelong monogamous relationships. In their pack lives, wolves have kind of "situational leadership" where they know that wolf X is the best tracker and wolf Y is the best hunter so they follow wolf X to find prey and wolf Y takes lead to hunt it. Other than that, they are pre-democratic - if most of pack wants to do something, the rest follows.
    - 5y ago
  - gumby 5y ago
    I wouldn’t overfit on bullying. It’s a hazard to be taught, as is traffic, but hardly the dominant culture. Having been a parent in multiple cultures / countries and talked a lot about parenting with family members in others, Americans seem to talk more than others about bullying yet tolerate it much more than most others.
    - pmarreck 5y ago
      Speaking as someone who was a teen in the 80's in the United States: The only way to stop a school bully (a person who has learned to use force for personal gain) is with a bigger "bully" (another stronger student, or an administrator who has more force). Therein lies the rub: Might makes right. There's no stable system of sheep because the most wolf-like of them will always emerge to take advantage of the others. You see this in behavior across species, there's like an "aggression equilibrium"; too many wolves result in too much bloodshed; too few and a single wolf obtains an outsize share of resources/social/reproductive capital, or what have you (and thus perpetuates their aggressive genes). Witness every communist system put into place so far: What was envisioned was a system of equals, but nature abhors a vacuum so what you end up getting is a bunch of people considered equals, and a dictator above them all. And truly, I learned this lesson early on only because of bullying (towards me): The school administration did nothing. The teachers did nothing. I was left to fend for myself... and this is what I learned: If you screw up the courage to stand up to a bully ("display your readiness to use force"), they will often back down. In some cases they will ONLY back down if you resort to physicality (the proverbial "fist to the face"). I learned this lesson again and again- I've had my wrist broken by a bully, but at least he never messed with me again. And as an adult, I've applied this, not in the direct use of force but in the fact that your will is what counts- when fighting traffic tickets, it's you vs. the system. It shouldn't be surprising that 100% of the bullies I knew (who because I'm a peaceable sort, I actually friended on FB years later) became Republicans. But some of them also became leaders in various things. My main bully, however, was apparently a troubled sort himself, and ended up taking a shotgun to his own head in front of his family. Spent a week in the ICU before giving up the ghost. Before this happened, I randomly ran into him at a bar. I didn't recognize him at first because he had gained a lot of weight, but one look in the eyes (the eyes always contain the identity of the individual when nothing else does, for some reason) and he immediately said "Let me buy you a beer". I accepted.
- csw-001 5y ago
  Not sure this is a perfect solution but in our house we let the kids pick one or two items that are “always yours”, everything else is considered communal and must be shared. It’s a framework to build on as they get older - some things are shared (toys) somethings are not (underwear, water bottles, Mom’s laptop). For what it’s worth we still have daily “not sharing” arguments…
jozvolskyef 5y ago
I had this idea as a kid, but my family weren't convinced: As a child, I was perplexed as to why my mother and brother would allow dirty dishes to pile up in the sink, rather than placing them in the dishwasher. My brother, in particular, seemed to have no regard for keeping the kitchen clean. After unsuccessfully attempting to convince them that the dishwasher was a superior system, I resorted to washing only the dishes I used myself, and refusing to wash most of the others. 20 years later, my mother claims I never washed dishes, and that my brother did all the work.
- watwut 5y ago
  Isn't the case that brother ended up washing/putting away also mom's and dad's dishes along with common dishes (pots, salads). If you always do only strictly own dishes and someone else does the rest, that someone is in fact doing more dishes - except at different time.
  - jozvolskyef 5y ago
    It is true that my brother did the washing up for our mum, but I would argue that a lot of the work was due to avoidable inefficiency (he was a firefighter arsonist; half the kitchen would be covered in oil when he used a pan, and mum would just see the mess, not who made it, and then he'd be get the credit for cleaning it), and that I contributed roughly the amount that I consumed, because back then I would offset the occasional shared meal by occasionally doing the washing up for everyone.

kqr 5y ago

Here comes the commie: This is something I'm struggling with personally. My firstborn is just about the age where he is starting to exhibit territoriality around things he is currently using. To what extent do I want to reinforce the idea of private property in the home? Philosophically, I'm definitely against it. Practically, it seems like it has certain benefits and drawbacks and I don't know which are stronger. I have no idea! Opinions, please.

dotancohen 5y ago
Things he is using, you definitely want to encourage the territoriality. Otherwise there is a real risk of bullying when he goes to kindergarten and preschool. But things that he is not currently using should definitely be shared. I'm guessing that your son is about two years old (based on my three children's behaviour at that age), so he should already be in daily contact with non-family children but not yet experienced bullying. So for that I'll mention how i think about it: bullying is how humans determine who is the Alpha Male. It is natural and expected. So don't try to shield your son from it, rather, prepare him for it.
- kqr 5y ago
  Correct at all counts. He's two, and I certainly notice that he (and his peers) are starting to experiment with violence as a tool for managing relationships with people and things. My instinct was also the "take turns using things, but don't assert property rights of things that aren't used". Where I'm hesitant is some things have incredible emotional value to one person but not to others -- is it not nice to ask others to respect that? Something else that troubles me is that I certainly don't act that way -- there are many things my wife and I brought into our relationship that we still consider private property, mainly for convenience ("her" drawer is organised according to her needs, for example). Another thing is purely linguistic habit. While my wife is very good at asking e.g. "can I taste the ice cream" I'm used to phrasing the question as "can I taste your ice cream".
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    Your remaining questions I don't have answers for )) Maybe ask me something about Python? Your example of linguistic habit is excellent, because it demonstrates that the language we use is both descriptive of how we perceive our surroundings, and prescriptive in influencing behaviour. Maybe ask "can I taste the ice cream" but offer "you can taste my ice cream". Children are wiser than us, instead of perceiving a mixed signal I find they usually figure out how to interpret things in surprising ways - that goes for my own children and other peoples' children. They are far more plastic and have less preconceived "bins" to interpret things. The truth is, most of our questions regarding raising the kids we will not ever get answers for. That's fine, the kids are learning along the way just as we are.
  - pdpi 5y ago
    I think “your ice cream” is perfectly appropriate. The flip side to seeing wealth as communal is that you need to respect the division when it happens. As custodian of the family’s money, you bought everybody ice cream. But some of that ice cream is now yours. It’s your fair share of the ice cream, you picked the flavours and the sprinkles and what not, because it was for you. It’s entirely appropriate, and indeed desirable, to assert ownership over that. Not respecting boundaries is a Bad Thing. What you can, and should, teach on top of that is generosity. “This is my ice cream and mine alone, but you can taste it if you like.” That sort of idea. It’s your decision to share, but sharing your ice cream with me means you get to see my smile as I try that really good flavour you asked for, and that smile is really valuable.
- chaosite 5y ago
  Alpha/Beta/Sigma/Omega/Upsilon male is discredited pseudo-scientific bullshit, and it is a bad idea to base one's personal philosophy on it. I also disagree that bullying is natural, but if even if it is, that still does not mean it should be accepted, tolerated, or encouraged (which you are implying).
  - kqr 5y ago
    I disagree. While the alpha male terminology seems a bit oversimplified, the fact remains that all sorts of violence, be it physical, verbal, or social (e.g. preventing someone from joining in the play) is a tool people use in varying degrees to influence relationships. It's a dangerous tool, because it's so stupid. Beating someone is effectively saying "I don't care how well reasoned your arguments are, now you pretend to listen to me instead." But this stupidity is both its weakness and its strength. Violence is a very complicated tool, and I think people need some exposure to it (on both sides of it) to understand when its appropriate and (more frequently) when it's uncalled for. This does not mean it's tolerated or encouraged -- quite the opposite! It's important to be the role model that teaches children all the circumstances in which it's wrong! But pretending it serves no social function makes, I think, you a worse teacher. By completely denying the upsides of violence you become less trustworthy as a teacher, because even children can see the obvious short-term upsides!
  - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
    This. Dominance hierarchies exist, but aren’t alpha, beta whatever. We aren't wolves, we’re more like bonobos.
    - glogla 5y ago
      Not even wolves are this way. In their family lives, wolves have lifelong monogamous relationships. In their pack lives, wolves have kind of "situational leadership" where they know that wolf X is the best tracker and wolf Y is the best hunter so they follow wolf X to find prey and wolf Y takes lead to hunt it. Other than that, they are pre-democratic - if most of pack wants to do something, the rest follows.
  - 5y ago
- gumby 5y ago
  I wouldn’t overfit on bullying. It’s a hazard to be taught, as is traffic, but hardly the dominant culture. Having been a parent in multiple cultures / countries and talked a lot about parenting with family members in others, Americans seem to talk more than others about bullying yet tolerate it much more than most others.
  - pmarreck 5y ago
    Speaking as someone who was a teen in the 80's in the United States: The only way to stop a school bully (a person who has learned to use force for personal gain) is with a bigger "bully" (another stronger student, or an administrator who has more force). Therein lies the rub: Might makes right. There's no stable system of sheep because the most wolf-like of them will always emerge to take advantage of the others. You see this in behavior across species, there's like an "aggression equilibrium"; too many wolves result in too much bloodshed; too few and a single wolf obtains an outsize share of resources/social/reproductive capital, or what have you (and thus perpetuates their aggressive genes). Witness every communist system put into place so far: What was envisioned was a system of equals, but nature abhors a vacuum so what you end up getting is a bunch of people considered equals, and a dictator above them all. And truly, I learned this lesson early on only because of bullying (towards me): The school administration did nothing. The teachers did nothing. I was left to fend for myself... and this is what I learned: If you screw up the courage to stand up to a bully ("display your readiness to use force"), they will often back down. In some cases they will ONLY back down if you resort to physicality (the proverbial "fist to the face"). I learned this lesson again and again- I've had my wrist broken by a bully, but at least he never messed with me again. And as an adult, I've applied this, not in the direct use of force but in the fact that your will is what counts- when fighting traffic tickets, it's you vs. the system. It shouldn't be surprising that 100% of the bullies I knew (who because I'm a peaceable sort, I actually friended on FB years later) became Republicans. But some of them also became leaders in various things. My main bully, however, was apparently a troubled sort himself, and ended up taking a shotgun to his own head in front of his family. Spent a week in the ICU before giving up the ghost. Before this happened, I randomly ran into him at a bar. I didn't recognize him at first because he had gained a lot of weight, but one look in the eyes (the eyes always contain the identity of the individual when nothing else does, for some reason) and he immediately said "Let me buy you a beer". I accepted.
csw-001 5y ago
Not sure this is a perfect solution but in our house we let the kids pick one or two items that are “always yours”, everything else is considered communal and must be shared. It’s a framework to build on as they get older - some things are shared (toys) somethings are not (underwear, water bottles, Mom’s laptop). For what it’s worth we still have daily “not sharing” arguments…

jozvolskyef 5y ago

I had this idea as a kid, but my family weren't convinced: As a child, I was perplexed as to why my mother and brother would allow dirty dishes to pile up in the sink, rather than placing them in the dishwasher. My brother, in particular, seemed to have no regard for keeping the kitchen clean. After unsuccessfully attempting to convince them that the dishwasher was a superior system, I resorted to washing only the dishes I used myself, and refusing to wash most of the others. 20 years later, my mother claims I never washed dishes, and that my brother did all the work.

watwut 5y ago
Isn't the case that brother ended up washing/putting away also mom's and dad's dishes along with common dishes (pots, salads). If you always do only strictly own dishes and someone else does the rest, that someone is in fact doing more dishes - except at different time.
- jozvolskyef 5y ago
  It is true that my brother did the washing up for our mum, but I would argue that a lot of the work was due to avoidable inefficiency (he was a firefighter arsonist; half the kitchen would be covered in oil when he used a pan, and mum would just see the mess, not who made it, and then he'd be get the credit for cleaning it), and that I contributed roughly the amount that I consumed, because back then I would offset the occasional shared meal by occasionally doing the washing up for everyone.