Dennis Prager Radioshow Listeners Germany

talking about everything in life

Dennis Prager Radioshow Listeners Germany random header image

Another legacy of the feel-good generation: kids and our desire that they love us

April 16th, 2008 by cris · 3 Comments

Nowadays, we seem to think the most important thing when relating to our kids is that they feel good. We want the kids to love us by all means.
What makes me say that?

We think that the primary goal of a parent is to be loved by the kid. Of course, that is important, too, but not on the first place. The most important thing is that they grow into morally healthy adults. There are so many times when, as a parent, one has to admonish, or even punish the child. Who won’t be thrilled with us in those moments, for sure. But as much as we love them, we still have to not let that get in the way of properly raising them. Let’s face it, one cannot be a good parent, teacher, president, or any leader, for that matter, if the desire to be loved is the main driving force.

Sometimes we give the kids too much credit, we consider them as having too much understanding of life as we do. A friend of mine was telling me that the kids in the kindergarten are not told by the educators when to have lunch, because the children “know” it. Sure, that’s all the five year old children have in mind, having lunch. Not to mention that the pop-culture is flowing with examples of kids who outsmart the parents, or manage to do the everything better when the parents are not involved.

Some other way we want the kids to “feel good” is by allowing them to call adults by name. A five year old calling a maybe forty or fifty year old by name!? What’s wrong with that!? Aunts, uncles, the friends of the kids’ parents, even grandparents, it doesn’t matter.
“Well, the child can be respectful even if he calls the adults by name”. Sure, like Dennis says, you have to have went to college to believe that. The kid can address an adult like he does his colleague mates, but he will be just as respectful. This is in my opinion wishful thinking. Again, we give them too much credit.
We believe of course that our thoughts and beliefs influence our actions but never that our acts influence our thoughts. Dennis is right. Do good and you’ll become a better person. Act happy and you’ll become happier. The larger context is, in my opinion, the belief so many of us have that all that matters is our heart, while our actions have much less importance: “I respect him, so it doesn’t matter how I address to him”. “I believe in my heart, so I don’t have to go to church or associate myself with other people with similar beliefs”. “I love my country in my heart, so on the national day it’s OK to watch sports the whole day, I don’t even need to put out the flag”. “I love her or him in my heart, so why marry, since it’s just a piece of paper”

The non-English speaking people have another problem (in my opinion). Apart from calling adults by name, they can address them informally, too. Like in German, instead of “Sie”, “du”. The same, like with calling the adults by name, most of the people don’t have any problem with that. We “evolved”. We are open-minded now. Is it good for the kids? No (in my opinion) but it doesn’t matter. Does it feel good? Yes, sir, the kids love us for that. We, the adults, have become their peers.

Why am I saying that it hurts the kids? Because it is unnatural, narcissistic, and stupid.
Why don’t we apply the same rationale for our teachers? Let’s call our teachers by name. After all, we could be just as respectful if we do, isn’t it? Or, why do we address our president with “Mr. President” !? Wouldn’t “Horst” or “George” be just as good?

Dennis was talking about two types of relationships: horizontal (between friends) and vertical (pretty much everything else). He  was basically meaning those who educate or raise us when he mentioned the vertical. Even if many of the adults don’t educate the children who address them by name, I think the children should still “keep” those adults in the second category.

I don’t, of course, advocate the same for the parents. I find it OK to address them informally (”du”). Calling them by name I find inappropriate, though.
Sure, many things that old-fashioned (I believe it’s mostly them) parents did were not so great. Like, for instance, the parents that are never wrong. So they never apologize to the kids. Ever. I am not saying that 20 years ago the parenting was great, and now it stinks. Of course not. But now very few would acknowledge that there is a problem with this “let’s call all adults by name” thing.

I don’t like how “aunt Clara” sounds, either, especially if the aunt is 30. I’m not in favor of it.
I don’t have a solution for this whole thing.
All I want is that we start acknowledging that we have a problem.

Disclaimer: I had in mind for some time now to write that. What gave me the final push was talking to a friend (whom I thank for it). And, in case she reads it, I hope she won’t mind that I enclosed some of her reasoning here (even though I have heard much of this reasoning before). It was not meant to offend anybody personally.

Tags: Miscellaneous

3 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Füchsin // Apr 17, 2008 at 1:52 pm

    Ja, ich bin Deiner Meinung - ein Problem ist dabei aber, dass man abwägen muss zwischen den (richtigen) Vorstellungen, die man hat und dem, was in der Gesellschaft, in der das Kind aufwächst, üblich ist. Ansonsten siezt das Kind möglicherweise Leute, die von allen anderen selbstverständlich geduzt werden und das Kind wird zum Außenseiter. Oder anders herum: das Kind empfindet die Diskrepanz zwischen dem Anspruch der Eltern und dem Anspruch seines sonstigen sozialen Umfelds so stark, dass es seine Eltern nicht mehr ernst nehmen kann uns über deren Ansprüche und Ansichten (innerlich) nur noch lacht.

    Als Familie ist man immer auch eingebunden in sein Umfeld, und das kann es schwer machen oder leicht - je nach Umfeld …

  • 2 cris // Apr 18, 2008 at 10:16 am

    I didn’t say it’s easy. It’s just that right now, any of my arguments (and I guess, other, either) are not accepted as such. You could make an argument both ways. But the traditional way is dismissed as “extreme” and that’s the end of the discussion.

  • 3 Füchsin // Apr 18, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    “extreme” ist das Ende der Diskussion - stimmt. Es ist aber die Frage, ob “extreme” nicht vielmehr heißt, dass demjenigen, der Dich so nennt, die Argumente ausgegangen sind!

    Es gibt im Moment eine Art Gegentendenz zum Mainstream, die durchaus ‘alte Werte’ wiederentdecken. Das zeigt sich z.B. im Erfolg von Büchern wie
    “Lob der Disziplinin” von Bernhard Bueb (ein ehem. Rektor eines superteuren Elite-Internats). Aber das ist sicher die Minderheit.

Leave a Comment