Tag Archives: polite

My kid is superior to Baby Jesus

This holiday season, similar to the past few holiday seasons, many of us received a card with somebody’s kid on it, and by somebody’s I do not mean Mary’s. By somebody’s, I mean relatives’, friends’, coworkers’, and even distant acquaintances, clients’, or other people we do business with.

Since the printing companies made this kind of service available (and are now licking their lips at the profit they make from narcissistic people), American parents replaced Baby Jesus with their own kids. Where there used to be Mary and Joseph bending over newborn Jesus in the crèche, or Santa Claus, a snowman, or a Christmas tree, they paste pictures of their own kids instead. Most of the people who do this consider themselves Christians, yet, they replace their God with their own offspring. By doing so, they pass a message that their kid is more important than the Nativity, Santa, and all the snowmen and trees in the world. Doesn’t it seem a bit arrogant?

I have never seen these kinds of cards in any other culture. With the general secularization and commercialization of Christmas in many contemporary societies, using winter landscapes, playful penguins, reindeers, Santas, and decorated trees are more often seen than the Nativity, but none of the societies I know took it as far as replacing the above with their own kids.

Sending a card with one’s kids on it to their grandparents or to someone else who knows and likes them is not as shocking, although even in this case a normal card could be used and the pictures given or sent separately. However, it is really ridiculous to give these kinds of cards to coworkers or someone they just do business with. Even the relatives that do not know these kids, have seen them once in their lives, and do not remember their names, or do not care about them at all should not be bombarded with their pictures, and the front of a Christmas card is the least appropriate place to put them. It is like telling people “look what a miracle I am and these are little carbon copies of my precious and special self” or “look at what an eighth wonder of the world I produced”. The purpose of sending these kinds of cards is not to make the recipients happy but to please the senders’ vanity and to indulge their own overinflated ego.

The truth is that most people do not really care and do not really want to see those kids’ cards. If they say “awww, that’s so cute!” upon receiving them, that is because they are too polite, too mendacious, or too harassed by the kid-obsessed society into silence to tell the arrogant author of the card (and of the kids on it): “nobody actually wants to see your kids”. What would the authors of the kid cards say if their childfree coworkers or business partners sent them a Christmas card with an ultrasound picture of their permanent birth control on it? I purposefully do not give an example of the childfree people’s pets on a card because these would trigger patronizing and condescending comments: “Poor Lucy, she does not know the joy of parenthood so she uses the ersatz of her cat”. An ultrasound picture of a permanent or long-term birth control method is a more accurate equivalent and many American parents should in fact get some of them for a couple of holiday seasons in a row to actually understand how ridiculous and inappropriate their cards with kids’ pictures are.

Kids’ pictures do not belong on Christmas cards, unless it is Mary’s kid whose birth is celebrated on that day. The cards should remain with Santas, snowmen, winter landscapes, Christmas trees, and Nativities on them. I know that most people in this kid-obsessed country will not be assertive enough to tell the sender of an unsolicited card with kids on it that they do not really want to receive this kind of a card; that a Christmas-related picture on it would be much more appropriate and desired. If this is the case, they may post or send this article instead and hope that the arrogant parent of the kid(s) on the card understands the allusion.

The unconditional love myth

Childfree people in America often get nagged by those with kids about unconditional love. People who have kids imply in a very intrusive way that if their interlocutors choose not to have a kid, nobody will love them unconditionally. “Who will love you unconditionally?” or “You will never know what unconditional love is” it goes. But do American parents really experience unconditional love from their kids? Their behavior shows that they not only do not, but the kids’ love, if any, is strongly conditioned by bribes and concessions from their parents.

Seeing American parents kowtowing to their kids throws a shadow of doubt on their unconditional love statements. Do they really believe it, in spite of their behavior that proves the contrary? If so, they must be really naive. Do they not see that what they call “unconditional love” actually depends on constant bribing and catering to the kid?

It is very easy to observe anywhere in public places that American parents are scared that their kids will not love or even like them. They do not make any demands for proper and respectful behavior for fear that their precious snowflake will not like it and, in turn, not like the parent who made the demand. They beg the kid instead of giving clear and strict orders and put themselves at the mercy of the spoiled, bratty kid. “Please, please, would you please, you are hurting my feelings, please do not scream this much, do not hurt my feelings, please, please, please” is their way of telling a two or three year old to stop ear-piercing screaming in a public place where silence is a standard required behavior. “Keep quiet”, “stop it” or “quiet, right now!” with a strict, serious face (and an immediate smile after the kid complies) is enough to get a normal, well-trained kid to comply, and this is what millions of people all around the world successfully do. However, Americans not only lack those skills, they are also too insecure and have a constant need to kowtow to the kid for fear it will not love them. So, where is the unconditional love?

American parents do not require the kid to eat what they decide is good for it but give it too many choices, often unhealthy, and let the kid that is too young to make such decisions eat whatever it wants, just because it wants to. Wherever food is served, it is easy to notice frequent scenes of this kind. I also remember an article published quite a few years ago about a woman from California (actually occurred before the more recent case in San Francisco) who started an action to ban within the whole town a fast food meal choice that included a toy just because her two year old kid was harassing her (her own term) to buy it. This behavior is not only a terrible lack of child-rearing skills and the spine to say “no”, but also the mother’s insecurity that the kid will not love her. So, is this the unconditional love?

Americans stuff their kids’ mouths with candy bribes whenever they can and at a single kid’s whim. They fulfill kids’ orders obediently and immediately. They buy tons of toys just because the deity kid requested them, played with them for a short time, and after dumping them in a far corner to be forgotten, made requests for new ones that the insecure parents obediently bought. Even worse, if the parents buy a toy the king or queen does not like, they get yelled at, thrown insults at, and jump into the car to get the right one, terrified that the little dictator will not like them. Companies play marketing tricks on parents’ insecurity by offering more and more toys and tons of plastic add up in landfills, ruining our common heritage – the environment – just because someone who has a kid does not want to say “no”. So, where is the kid that loves unconditionally?

Love normally includes respect. American kids, however, disrespect their parents severely, and the parents let them do it terrified that they may not get “unconditional” love if they bring the kid to order. I heard kids, starting at a very young age, disrespect parents in public places with unmentionable insults, “stupid” being the lightest of them. I have heard young kids talk back to their parents in such a shameless and aggressive way that a normal parent in any other culture would react immediately with proper punishment. I have read outrageous stories of very young kids abusing their parents verbally and physically (no, not teens with criminal backgrounds, but preschool and early elementary school kids of middle and upper middle class parents), with parents doing nothing to counteract it, just complaining about it. I was appalled to see kids actually beat their parents in public places with no reaction on the adults’ side. So, does unconditional love really involve verbal and physical abuse?

In so many societies around the world, parents teach and train their kids strictly. They make demands and requests, they make the kids work, they punish the kids for any attempt of disobedience and disrespect, they are never at kids’ whim, to not kowtow to them, do not obey kids’ orders (kids would never dare to give orders to adults, they may only kindly ask), they would never let a kid talk back to them, not to mention a kid hitting an adult. Those kids do not have expensive toys and happily rely on what they invent to play with. They do not have designer clothes, some of them barely have any hand-me-down clothes at all. They do not get candy bribes, extracurricular classes, or expensive vehicles with permanently unemployed mothers to drive the kids.

Yet, these kids are happy, polite, and respectful. They love and obey their parents, respect them and, in the lack of reliable social security systems, take good care of them when they get old (nursing homes in these societies are scarce or nonexistent). It is a result of parents’ wisdom in loving and disciplining the kids accordingly. It is the child rearing skills passed on from generation to generation, leaned by living one’s life in a participating society, without succumbing to any fads of “parenting styles” but also the confidence that results from these skills. These parents are not insecure or terrified that their kids will not like them. They are sure of their kids’ unconditional love which indeed has no conditions or requirements just as their parents and grandparents were sure and confident.

Love is not about bribing. If a bribe is needed to get something, it is corruption, not love, and by no means is it unconditional. Worshiping and bribing kids, putting them on a pedestal as the center of the universe, and kowtowing to them is harmful for both the kids and the society as a whole. It spoils the kids, makes them extremely rude, self-centered, and entitled. Just look around, this deplorable result is clearly visible (and especially audible) in all sorts of public places. Kids must be disciplined wisely, by responsible, confident adults not terrified or insecure that the kid will not like them. The unconditional love will follow as a result of the proper child rearing process.

Kids must behave respectfully on public transportation

Recently I read an article by an entitled New York City mother describing her kid’s rude behavior on a bus, i.e. singing or talking loudly, that treated this rudeness not only as normal, but also as desirable and required other passengers to put up with it without a word of disapproval. She called it teaching her daughter how to be a strong woman. Excuse me? Last time I checked in a dictionary, strong was not a synonym of rude or disrespectful.

All kids should be taught to behave respectfully on public transportation from a very young age. A two year old kid must be able, and in most cultures in the world, is able to react to simple adult commands like “be quiet” or “sit still” and distinguish a bus from a playground. It is important that children learn what they see around them and it is natural to be excited about it, but on a bus, the only form of expressing excitement by adults or children is whispering.

The entitlement of the author goes beyond all possible limits when she suggests that if someone does not like her precious snowflake’s unacceptable behavior, he or she should move to a different part of the bus or get off and take a taxi. No, dear lady, you are seriously wrong. It is not the polite person offended by kid’s rudeness who should get off, it is you, if you do not want to respect other passengers. It is your duty to control your kid ,and if you refuse or fail to do it, it is you who should get off and take a taxi.

Unfortunately in kid-obsessed America, this kind of entitled and selfish behavior of a parent of an ill-mannered kid is not unusual. It is especially noticeable on New York City subway and buses. I witness it day after day, year after year. Children behave outrageously: talk very loudly, scream their lungs off, jump like monkeys or run wild, remain seated while adults, and especially senior citizens, are standing, do not cover coughs and sneezes, slobber the handles all over (no wonder swine flu was spreading so fast in NYC), touch people with dirty, sticky of saliva hands, etc. They are always accompanied by adults, yet these adults not only do nothing to bring their kids to order, but also encourage rudeness, for example, a guy I saw tickling the kid to scream even louder although the actual noise level was already unbearable and unacceptable. Young kids are also brought to public transportation by their irresponsible parents after midnight, which should not happen. Parents sometimes bring kids in strollers, and while on the train, take them out and put them on a separate seat while adults are standing. This is also unacceptable.

Other passengers are afraid to point out kids’ rudeness because entitled, hostile parents harassed them into silence. As if their silence was not enough, I saw people unduly give their seats to 7-10 year old, healthy kids that just a second ago had the energy to run wild.

When the subject of rude children in public places comes up, someone kid-obsessed wanting to direct the conversation to something else usually brings up people who talk loudly on their cell phones in public places. These people just forget to mention that the obnoxious cell phone talkers are these obnoxious, screaming, never disciplined children twenty, thirty, or forty years later, equally disruptive as during their childhood, just in a different way. Their parents failed to teach them respectful behavior in due course and the selfishness and disrespect continues, only the means change. No, someone’s rude behavior on the phone does not authorize someone else’s kid to be disrespectfully loud or jumpy. Both are highly unacceptable. Cell phone talkers should not be used as an excuse.

When I was a kid, children starting in first grade were riding public buses (there were no school buses) alone without accompanying adults. They were required to stand still and quiet. If they failed to comply, any of the adults would reprimand them. Kids’ rudeness did not happen too often, but on those rare occasions when it did happen, other passenger’s order enforcement was immediate and unavoidable.

I have used public transportation in many European and African cities, and I have never seen something like this. What attracted my attention in Europe is that parents keep children away from other passengers whenever possible. For example, when there are two seats next to each other (obviously assuming that there are no adults standing) and one of them is next to a person, the adult takes the later, thus separating the kid from that person, while Americans tend to do the opposite, put the kid next to the person and let it touch and slobber on him or her.

Another interesting point is the privilege of the kid riding free of charge. In many European cities, young children (under 4-6 years old, depending on the system) are not required to pay a fare under the condition that they do not take a separate seat. This tradeoff is very fair, but American parents would obviously want it all – take the privileges without the duties.

Also, it is very rare that a kid is loud, obnoxious, or jumpy on European buses, trams, or subway trains. Kids sometimes try it, but are brought to order in the same second. Sometimes I have seen parents quiet a kid down before it actually starts making any noise, apparently they know the kid, and they know what is coming.

All children, starting from the youngest age, must be taught to behave politely on all kinds of public transportation. They must be required to sit still and quiet; absolutely no screaming. They must give up their seats for adults, especially for senior citizens (with the obvious exceptions of disabled or ill kids), and if there are seats available, sit still and quiet with hands off the mouth, and no touching people. It is the adult’s responsibility to hold the kid and other people should not be burdened by it. It is the adult’s responsibility to keep the kid respectfully quiet, and if he or she fails, anyone should freely require to impose order and respect. Parents should not wait five minutes, or even one minute, to quiet the kid down; they should do it in the same second when it starts making noise other than a whisper. It is the parent’s responsibility to teach their kids the clear difference between a bus and a playground.

Polite people should not remain silent about kids’ rudeness. They should strictly and immediately require parents to discipline the child and to stop the disruption. Long commutes, stressful work environments, very early or very late working hours make subway or bus rides miserable enough. There is no need to put up with ear-piercing screams, singing, or to remain standing while a healthy obnoxious princess is seated. People have a sacred right to defend themselves from kids’ and parents’ rudeness, entitlement, and selfishness and should make use of the right as often as necessary.