"You can tell them no..."

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Oh, right. Sorry, didn't mean to make it sound like such an ultimatum. I've got a list of "social parks" and a list of "leave me the heck alone parks". The kid or dog will still get to play. We just don't go to the "social parks" if they are in the mood to play by themselves. This kind of situation happens at the crowded parks. I've never seen it happen at my "leave me alone parks". Generally they're on their best behavior at the "social parks" because those have the best toys and that's what we're there for specifically. And "the best toys" means it is a situation in which how they interact with the people around them matters.

If they need space, they need space. I see it as sort of the same as picking a hiking trail for myself. I'm not going to pick the most popular one if I don't want to interact with people. I'm going to pick the one where the few people I will run into are just fine with a short nod as we pass, one where I'm really unlikely to run into loud chatty groups.

Oh ok gotcha on the ultimatum part.

I see it as a personal decision you've made though in avoiding the more highly crowded parks at certain times and it seems to work for you which is great. But I personally can't apply your technique to all people.

I'll just be honest I've never been to a crowded park where people around each other expect one another to interact. I've seen plenty of times where kids go off and play with each other and they've just met. But I've also seen kids all by themselves on the playground equipment, going across one part of the park to the other part via stepping stones in water by themselves, etc. Neither is wrong in my book.

As for on a hiking trail...just about no one in my neighborhood (unless they personally know them and are friends with them) will talk to each other when they are out walking (which we have a lot of people do that); you might see someone briefly nod as if a non-verbal 'hello', they might say 'hi' or they may say nothing. The park behind my neighborhood (that will one day connect up with my neighborhood) is the same. People walk all the time without interacting with others. Most of the time people are using that time for themselves you know to take a breather and destress.

Could honestly just be differences in our experiences and areas though.

 

[Westcoastwild]

Oh ok gotcha on the ultimatum part.

I see it as a personal decision you've made though in avoiding the more highly crowded parks at certain times and it seems to work for you which is great. But I personally can't apply your technique to all people.

I'll just be honest I've never been to a crowded park where people around each other expect one another to interact. I've seen plenty of times where kids go off and play with each other and they've just met. But I've also seen kids all by themselves on the playground equipment, going across one part of the park to the other part via stepping stones in water by themselves, etc. Neither is wrong in my book.

As for on a hiking trail...just about no one in my neighborhood (unless they personally know them and are friends with them) will talk to each other when they are out walking (which we have a lot of people do that); you might see someone briefly nod as if a non-verbal 'hello', they might say 'hi' or they may say nothing. The park behind my neighborhood (that will one day connect up with my neighborhood) is the same. People walk all the time without interacting with others. Most of the time people are using that time for themselves you know to take a breather and destress.

Could honestly just be differences in our experiences and areas though.

Very likely a difference in areas. Before I moved to my current location, this stuff wouldn't have even been on my radar. But I live in a much more urban settings now- lots of pedestrians, fewer people with backyards.

The walking thing is pretty close to my experience too, except in the summer when the tourists clog the really popular trails. Again, not something that would have occured to me, and actually something I usually don't hate because it makes me feel safer. But the atmosphere of the trail changes- largely because they don't follow the same unspoken rules as the locals do for the other 9 months of the year.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I think there's a middle ground here, at the playground. It doesn't have to be either socialize or don't go.

No, you don't HAVE to play with the other kids, but don't be offended if they ask to play with you. Just say no.

No, you don't HAVE to share with the other kids, but don't be outraged if they ask you to share. Just say no.

Well I wasn't the one used the "if you don't want to interact with other kids then we won't go to the park"....so yeah I agree with you on it doesn't have to be either socialize or don't go which I said that.

True you don't need to be offended on either side really. Kids don't need to be offended if another kid(s) comes up and asks them to play and kids don't need to be offended if another kid says no they don't want to play. Same for the sharing part.

But part of the issue is if you are teaching your child that if another kid is at the park with a toy(s) it means 1) that they want to play with you 2) that they want to share their toy(s) with you.

The original post was quite correct in one thing - it's absolutely okay to say no.

Where the poster goes off the rails is in her characterization of the other children as "greedy" and "tattletales" and "snowflakes" and her apparent expectation that they should not even have come running up to her child in the first place. She really doesn't seem to like children (hers naturally being the exception).

Well to be fair I never defended the mom as a person. I actually did say she was probably over exaggerating the situation. But I also said that for me I was choosing to pay attention to her overall message of no her kid doesn't and shouldn't be forced to share his toy rather than the mom is this and the mom is that. I understand that for other posters they don't appreciate the mom and her actions/words/story/whatever as a whole.

Yes, her child is free to play alone at the park if that's his wish. Or to play with just the one little girl (several years younger than him, by the look of that photo), that he gets along with. But since he has chosen to come to the park (a place where youngsters socialize), neither he nor his mother should be surprised or offended if other children run up to him when he shows up with an armful of toys. The two of them just need to make it clear to them that he's not interested in being sociable.

On this I think we'll just agree to disagree. That's mostly because I'm not under the mindset that because he went to a park with toys that he should share. I agree that neither should be offended but honestly I personally would have to say I would be reacting to the child who asked to play with the toys and/or the reaction to the parent. If both are polite then no reason for me to be anything but polite nor should my child be anything but polite. But if the child asks to be play with my child's toy in a way that comes across as in expectation or whatnot then that would slightly change things. So would too if the parent steps in and tells me "you know you're at a park you should have your kid share his toys with others".

Also, her "sandwich" analogy was terrible. If he'd walked into the park munching on a sandwich, I guarantee none of the other children would have asked him to share it. No one wants your chewed-on sandwich, lady!

Well that is true.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Very likely a difference in areas. Before I moved to my current location, this stuff wouldn't have even been on my radar. But I live in a much more urban settings now- lots of pedestrians, fewer people with backyards.

The walking thing is pretty close to my experience too, except in the summer when the tourists clog the really popular trails. Again, not something that would have occured to me, and actually something I usually don't hate because it makes me feel safer. But the atmosphere of the trail changes- largely because they don't follow the same unspoken rules as the locals do for the other 9 months of the year.

Ok we'll just chalk it up to difference in experiences and areas

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

I think that no matter where you live, there is no social contract that says you must be sociable or interact with others just because you go to a public place. By that same token, one cannot be shocked if while in public others DO try to interact!

I think it's just a matter of being respectful -- in how we approach people, and/or in how we decline to interact further.

My deep thought for the night...

 

[Westcoastwild]

I think that no matter where you live, there is no social contract that says you must be sociable or interact with others just because you go to a public place. By that same token, one cannot be shocked if while in public others DO try to interact!

I think it's just a matter of being respectful -- in how we approach people, and/or in how we decline to interact further.

My deep thought for the night...

Now, that, I can totally agree with!

 

[Magpie]

On this I think we'll just agree to disagree. That's mostly because I'm not under the mindset that because he went to a park with toys that he should share. I agree that neither should be offended but honestly I personally would have to say I would be reacting to the child who asked to play with the toys and/or the reaction to the parent. If both are polite then no reason for me to be anything but polite nor should my child be anything but polite. But if the child asks to be play with my child's toy in a way that comes across as in expectation or whatnot then that would slightly change things.

I think part of the disconnect here comes from the fact that, from her description, I envisioned little boys asking the way little boys ask - boisterous, in-your-face, and blunt, but not anything I'd characterize as "rude". They clearly thought her son was bringing his toys to the park to play with them. When he didn't, being nice boys, they turned to his mom for clarification (something she characterized as "being a tattletale").

If the boys hadn't been nice, they likely wouldn't have come running up to see him the moment he entered the park. They'd have waited until he was away from the protective eye of his mum, then they'd have knocked him down and taken his toys. (I've seen this, too, at the park!)

"Polite" takes time to learn. For young children (age six, or so), I really think their behaviour was quite polite. But, to be fair, I wasn't there. It's more that when I read the article, my reaction was, "I know who the snowflake here is, and it's not those little boys!"

So would too if the parent steps in and tells me "you know you're at a park you should have your kid share his toys with others".

I'd likely have the same reaction as you, if someone actually said that to my face at the park. I find it noteworthy that the other mothers' never actually said anything to the OP. She's assuming she knows their opinion based on what she interpreted as "dirty looks".

 

[tzolkin]

Funny you should say that... at my kids' elementary school, they are expressly not allowed to say no if another child wants to join into a game at recess. Not allowed. Ever. Playing a 4-person game and you have 4, and someone else wants to join? Figure out a way to make it a 5-person game. Or take turns... during your already-too-short recess, spend half of it standing around while you wait for your turn in the game you started. It's a tad much. And it doesn't prepare these kids to deal with the reality that sometimes you're not invited to join the game... the team... the school... the company... Must admit that DS12 is happy to be in middle school now, and DD10 is looking forward to MS next year.

My kids over the years talked about how it seemed to them that the school routinely confused "bullying" with a kid being mean once or having a bad day. While true bullying is HORRIBLE, and there is plenty of evidence that it can do lasting damage, I think we're currently in a state of over-correction. At least where we live.

Yes, this has been our experience as well. I think the kids would often just stop playing to avoid being forced to play with someone they didn't want to, which is really unfortunate. I remember one of my kids had an issue with a boy who was just obnoxious, made fun of people, was way too rough (pushing, throwing things, etc) but according to the "rules" they were required to let him play with them. It's really ridiculous when the bully is the one being protected by the "anti-bullying" policies.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Wow, this thread is really getting 'sticky'!

Okay, my thoughts on the basic message and viewpoint have absolutely nothing to do with any analysis and approval and assumptions of everything personal about this mother.
I totally agree with the message/viewpoint!

Second, a number of kids (plural) assertively coming up to his boy with the expectation that he share his toys, automatically reaching (perceived grabbing) shows me that that they are not being taught how to be polite... While this is an assumption, I do admit that... This tells me that these boys are being raised in a mindset that I have mentioned... 'global entitlement'.

If the other mothers were in earshot, and heard the OP trying to support her son and let him know that he had permission to 'just say no', and they did not step in with a "We must be polite, we don't get to just play with another person's things unless they invite/offer...." And the OP, seemed to get the feeling that there were 'dirty looks' instead... than that tells me a lot.

When my son was in 1st grade, in school, he was like the OP's kid seems to be, and liked to play more by himself. Even alongside other kids... (there is a name for this) but not an overwhelming group dynamic. He was having a hard time navigating these social situations. His teacher actually mentioned to me that it was okay if he didn't want to share and play with others... Even in the classroom with the classroom toys. At the time, I felt that in the group/public classroom situation, he would not be allowed to do this, and would be told 'everybody can play'. But, this teacher really surprised me!!! She understood that there should be no absolute mandate to engage in group play.

I actually see this perceived mandate as a problem, as it encourages peer pressure, pack mentality, group-think, etc...
I totally, and 100% percent, agree with this mothers basic message.
No question and no apology.

In the past I have mentioned another situation that my son encountered before. There was one of these more aggressive bully types of kid. He was significantly younger than my son.... Not in the same peer age-range. He would use this kind of attitude and 'play' to get away with being a physical and aggressive bully. It was bad. I eventually witnessed him assault my son, jumping him from behind... Guess what, the other parents seemed to take the 'they should all be friends and play together' as a way to justify what was going on. Like I should encourage my son to 'play with him'....

You know what I said at that time... And I quote... "My son is ** years old now... I am not setting up playdates...."

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Yes, this has been our experience as well. I think the kids would often just stop playing to avoid being forced to play with someone they didn't want to, which is really unfortunate. I remember one of my kids had an issue with a boy who was just obnoxious, made fun of people, was way too rough (pushing, throwing things, etc) but according to the "rules" they were required to let him play with them. It's really ridiculous when the bully is the one being protected by the "anti-bullying" policies.

My kids had EXACTLY this experience as well!! Irony...

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I think part of the disconnect here comes from the fact that, from her description, I envisioned little boys asking the way little boys ask - boisterous, in-your-face, and blunt, but not anything I'd characterize as "rude". They clearly thought her son was bringing his toys to the park to play with them. When he didn't, being nice boys, they turned to his mom for clarification (something she characterized as "being a tattletale").

If the boys hadn't been nice, they likely wouldn't have come running up to see him the moment he entered the park. They'd have waited until he was away from the protective eye of his mum, then they'd have knocked him down and taken his toys. (I've seen this, too, at the park!)

"Polite" takes time to learn. For young children (age six, or so), I really think their behaviour was quite polite. But, to be fair, I wasn't there. It's more that when I read the article, my reaction was, "I know who the snowflake here is, and it's not those little boys!"

It's true polite does take time. I think we can probably agree that even at a young age there are varying degrees of politeness though. Many parents teach their young ones please and thank you from a young age so at the very least "can I play with your toy please" is doable...I mean really just splitting hairs here but still.

I don't think I would villify the other children either making them out to seem like bullies who would have knocked him down and taken his toys but the children can still verbalize in a forceful way (whether they realize it or not).

I can see the tattletale thing really both ways...I've seen many many kids though who do go to adults with the intent to make the kid give them what they want. I would probably lean more towards that then a clarification situation. Only going off of her story (which yes it's already been said many times it could be an exaggeration or falsehood but still) the child ran off to the mom and said that her son wasn't sharing. I'm not sure I can argue in my head that he was just looking for clarification from the boy's mom. But as neither one of us was there neither one of us was wrong in our interpretation

Sure I can see the kids assuming he brought his toys to the park to have everyone play with them that just goes back to teaching that not everyone wants to interact even at a park. I don't think that means a child then should never go up to another child to ask and play it just means they may be able to react in a better way when another child says he doesn't want to play or he doesn't want to share. Telling a child that other children are at a park to play with them is an easy way to set up the crux of the matter where a child gets really upset or really frustrated that another child won't play with them or won't share their toy with them because to them their parents told them that's exactly what a child is doing if they come to a park and if they come to a park with toys in their hands.

ETA: Though I will say the mom could have easily had this discussion of "it's ok you don't have to share if you don't want to" before actually getting to the playground with the other kids and that may have avoided or lessened the level of upsetness (umm is that a word lol) her son was having.

I'd likely have the same reaction as you, if someone actually said that to my face at the park. I find it noteworthy that the other mothers' never actually said anything to the OP. She's assuming she knows their opinion based on what she interpreted as "dirty looks".

That's very true she is assuming and it isn't the worst case scenario where the parent actually verbalizes what they are really thinking. I do think however that most people who are given a dirty look can safely assume that the person giving you the look disapproves of what you are doing though what level of disapprovement is unknown. Could be the mom is reacting to that. Now in my day to day life if I get a dirty look I can choose to ignore it or I can choose to react to it so certaintly the mom could have chosen to ignore it and spoken to her childen in a different manner.

 

[Magpie]

I can see the tattletale thing really both ways...I've seen many many kids though who do go to adults with the intent to make the kid give them what they want. I would probably lean more towards that then a clarification situation. Only going off of her story (which yes it's already been said many times it could be an exaggeration or falsehood but still) the child ran off to the mom and said that her son wasn't sharing. I'm not sure I can argue in my head that he was just looking for clarification from the boy's mom. But as neither one of us was there neither one of us was wrong in our interpretation

Very true!

I'm mainly suspicious because in one breath she's close enough to talk to her child, but in the next she's far enough away that one of the boys has to "run" to her in order to "tattle".

Also that photo she staged is hilarious. Her little knight grandly presenting his toys to that tiny girl. I wonder if the boy standing on the right is intended to be one of the same pack of awful, greedy boys, now properly shamed and put in his place?