If your response to other people crying is telling them to quit it, you're an asshole. If you do this to a child, you're less than that.
It's alarmingly common in Russia. Whenever kids start misbehaving in any way, their parents think they're in a duty to silence them, sit them down and not let them do anything beyond being a soulless impersonation of parents' best dreams. Such parental idiocy strikes me as both odd and completely understandable, though it by no means warrants it any kind of acceptance or appreciation.
It's odd because most parents wish good upon their children. Using that as a reference point and a bit of understanding of the world's workings, it shouldn't be difficult to figure out what do you do for your child. Don't eat too much candy because it might lead to diabetes, and you won't be able to eat more candies. Don't run with scissors because you can hurt others or yourself, and any fun you might have with those blades never worths more than well-being and health of anyone. Don't stay up late because it might upset your sensitive internal clock and you will have trouble waking up as a result. As an adult, you most likely know of those things - and that children are not reasonable, patient and self-controlling adults yet, so you'd have to apply some control to their lives while not restraining them otherwise so they'd understand risk and reward, and action and consequence, both very important for them as mature human beings.
Simple, right? Yet, we don't see all parents act this way, instead unleashing utter hell on their children which causes some to grow up misaligned socially, mentally or even physically, or even kill themselves.
And it's understandable, too: we're human beings, and human beings are prone to fear. Fear skews our minds, makes us think in ugly, destructive patterns which only serve to feed the parents' dark side of personality (which is our fears, anxieties, deeper wishes and urges which we hide from others because we're taught to see them as repulsive - everybody has this side). Many parents are terrified of the idea that their child, their precious child, will grow up anything other than perfect. Many are also terrified by the idea that their child will not listen to them, to their precious parents. Fear prevents those parents from seeing the periphery, the side-effects of their actions. They tear down and bash anything that may prevent the child from being perfect, and as they see their concernes fulfilled or averted, they rest from parenting, ignoring the rest of the consequences along with the child. It comes as a surprise to them later that their child, their precious little baby, now a full-grown adult who has finally found someone accepting of and loving them, abandons the parents because of their major assholery.
No wonder they're assholes, too! Their live sucks because they're now stuck with two persons they don't feel good about, their job most likely sucks but they have to work to sustain the family, their relationships suck and there are no well-meaning friends in their circle who'd tell them to stop fucking around and do their best... The list might go on. What's true of any bad person is that their lives suck and they aren't willing to take responsibility for it. Parents don't stop being mess-ups because they have a child or three to care about.
This understanding, however, is no excuse for the parent to continue the destructive lazy parenting they're involved in as if against their will. When a child cries, it needs something: love, care, appreciation, even simply attention. When they misbehave, they want to be recognized for their ability to make decisions and for them being a person rather than an extension of someone's wishful thinking. These two simple ideas alone can bring many children out of the parental slump because the adult that took it upon themselves to care for it might finally understand why do their children do all those nasty things. Why aren't we talking about at least that?
It may not be your duty to silence them but it is your duty to remove them from the restaurant, movie etc so others don't need to listen to your wailing child. On the opposite side, I do agree that people are much too quick to simply shut the kid up at any cost.
I always figured I could actually talk to the child as if they're another human being, reason with them as much as I can and with that, end not only the cry but also the underlying reason - there's always one; nobody does anything for no reason, that's just superstition talk from people who don't understand how people work. But... why would I want my child at a restaurant or in a movie theater when they're so young they'd be eager to cry? This doesn't make sense to me. You know your child is going to cry about something - that's what they are at the age, from what I can tell - so why drag them out of their comfort zone without their permission? It is as if you want them to cry and others - to listen. There are many ways to spend your time with a child that will take as much time as a restaurant walk or a movie watching that will take as much time of your life and may be more exciting than that. But then, I suppose, if you were to visit restaurants often, you would rarely see people who don't.
Try to think about this from the parents' perspective. They have a small child so they probably don't get out much. They're dying to just have a nice night out for once and they decide to go out to dinner or to a movie. Maybe it's been weeks since they've been out together. Are you really going to tell them to deal with it and just stay at home yet another night, just in case their child disturbs someone for a couple minutes during the outing? I do agree with you in the movie theater situation though - that's something that a really ruins the situation for the people watching the movie.But... why would I want my child at a restaurant or in a movie theater when they're so young they'd be eager to cry? This doesn't make sense to me.
I'd take those couple of minutes if I were to visit a restaurant with such a family - no big deal; if it makes the family happy, they're welcome - but more than that, and it quickly becomes annoying only because the parents don't have the stern hand to tell their child of the expectations they're under when the family is going out. If your child listens to you as you tell them that - or better yet, if the child is excited to take part in such an activity - then they'll be most welcome where I'm a guest as well. I'm not responsible for people who failed to establish authority over their child.Are you really going to tell them to deal with it and just stay at home yet another night, just in case their child disturbs someone for a couple minutes during the outing?
so relevant It's hard to speak about children without having them. It's harder to feel as if you have the ability or right to do so, while still not having them. I hit the latter trap a lot.
What a horrible thing to say. Just because we were fucked by our parents, we mustn't put any effort towards building a future where that won't happen? Equally, mustn't we put effort to be unlike our parents? We will have quirks no matter what we do, but that's true for the whole humanity. The poem's way is very passive, saying that we shouldn't propagate what attributes to a vicious circle when we have full power to break out of it instead. Staying there or staying away are both cowardice, and it's disrespectful to one's inner strength to promote them in any way. "Oh, give up on that". Oh yeah? Let me channel George Carlin for a minute: "Well, fuck you! Maybe you shouldn't have a chance to tell others that they're weak because you screwed yours up! Maybe you should just be left to rot and decompose, because you bring nothing to the humanity's progress and development!", and you know, he might be right. As much as the ruthless rhetoric makes me uncomfortable, I agree with the message: by not doing better, we agree to the shitty lives we get to angrily boast about to the same filthy people who did the same to their lives. I won't accept that kind of thinking just because things don't seem to move miles an hour: humanity isn't weak; it needs guidance.Get out as early as you can, // And don't have any kids yourself.
OK. So I'm not claiming to be an authority on the Larkin poem I linked, but I have never interpreted it to be very serious. More of a tongue-in-cheek sort of commentary on the inevitability of our flaws; that our parents give them to us, yes, and we can be petulant and blame them for that if we want but when our time comes we will do the very same and in fact cannot not screw up our kids. (Who has been perfectly parented? I say that person, maybe, might have a shot at not doing significant damage. But with only flawed models for reference, that is to say 'human beings', I don't believe it's very reasonable to insist or believe that anyone can parent better, or at least, parent without inflicting their own set of personality notches and shivers upon their kids.) Now, you definitely got a very different feeling out of this poem than I have. In typical English major fashion I don't believe I can say you're necessarily wrong; so long as you can prove your stance with quotes, paraphrases, references blah blah blah APA style citation JUST KIDDING, then there's gotta be grounds for validity there. I think we can strive to do better than our parents and I think we can also strive to make wise decisions about whether to even parent or not. I do believe that sometimes the better choice is not to parent. I was about to start off on what I think other people think about when they're trying to conceive, but I'll stop myself there because I don't plan on having kids and it's not fair to assume that my reproduction-free POV would really reflect accurately (or even without bias) what a set of wanna-be 'rents would think, feel, and do. I will however and instead say that I currently do not want to have children, historically have not wanted to have children, and while I recognize that this feeling may change in the future, my decision is as much a result of navel-gazing, personality-pondering, my own experiences as a child of flawed parents, my opinions as to whether my personality would mix well with tykes, and so on. And yes I may be tooting my own horn, but I think it is a better decision for me not to have children and I think that a full, considered, honest examination of whether you are truly well fit, personality-wise and so on, to be a parent, is the way to approach things. I think that it is more admirable to know oneself and one's limitations, to know when one cannot handle a task or adventure and gracefully decline the challenge, than to forge blindly ahead because. I feel much more secure with my decision than I think I would if I had not sat down and thought, "Let's face the realities of parenthood. And let's put them up against me. How's the fight? Who wins? Why is this a death match? Oh, no..." I esteem considered decisions. I honor that no one can know you as well as you know you, or I know me, and I must respect the decisions another makes for himself with that knowledge as much as I demand my own be accepted. Rants, rants.
I'm not saying anything against not having children, and it's admirable that you've put effort into introspection and came up with what's best for you. I am saying against other people thinking that they have the right to tell others whether they are a fit for parenting. You can suggest, you can point out, you can educate, you can do all of the above - but don't ever decide for others if they're mature enough to make their own decisions. I guess the poem got my guard up exactly for that reason. I beg to differ - not that we're all aren't flawed, but that you can do a better job than your parents, given enough education and effort on the matter. Being a parent is never easy - unless, of course, you decide to neglect your child, in which case I doubt you can be rightly called a parent in a context other than biological - but then, you're building a future for your child, so I believe the effort is worth. It's not to say that my way of things - flaws included - will not affect my child: they will, even if I try to be a completely different person, in which I'll certainly fail. It's to say that, with enough information, you can negate the negative aspects of your personality or divert your negative energy towards important things (for example, being stern with your child to teach him or her discipline - it requires both love and a certain level of rudeness, of denial of whims which both - and only both - will later lead to a more disciplined person, which, in my view, is better overall).But with only flawed models for reference, that is to say 'human beings', I don't believe it's very reasonable to insist or believe that anyone can parent better
If anyone's interested in a different take on this topic: The sound of children laughing?
http://www.thechildfreelife.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=24278 Everyone has things they can't stand. Which other people can't see a problem with. These latter people have environments they don't do well in. The people who do well in those environments look at anyone not fitting in like there's something wrong with them. We all live in bubbles. We all having varying sensitivities. And the complicated thing about life is figuring out how to fit into the world, when everyone else on this planet is laying claims on the things you hold dear. Seems to be inescapable.
I don't think personal preferences, wherever they stem from, have anything to do with patience, good will and respect when it comes to children. Why should it? Yes, children can be annoying, but so can be adult human beings. Children must get some slack since, unlike adults, they're still learning of the world around them, and one's job as a parent is to teach them the most valuable and most important lessons they've encountered on one's own. Growing to tolerate adults crying at every of their whims denied is not healthy, because it's accepted that by now, adults should know better. Granted, it doesn't make them know better in itself, but it doesn't make people around them more tolerable towards such an attitude, and I don't think it should. Children, on the other hand, will cry; it's not because they're somehow bad or unruly or any of the other mindless labels - it's because we're all born selfish and we grow to understand that other people's feelings and wishes matter, too. It's a parent's job to teach it to their child. I know it can be hard, and I know it can be daunting to have your child cry all the time - after all, you've grown to accept crying as a sign of despair, and seeing your child being desperate at all is a troubling picture to first-time parents. It doesn't indicate, however, that one mustn't engage with it at all: leaving it be and hope for it figure itself out will only deepen the problem, whatever it might be. I'm not saying against children crying at all: they should cry - it's healthy. I will tolerate that if I have to - for example, if the child is in pain from scratching their knee: it's fucking painful for a person who has yet to experience pain, so of course it will ensue an avalanche of emotions in a young mind. What I don't tolerate is parents being disrespectful towards their children by growing numb to their wishes. Tell them to "shut up" is a major sin of parenting, for you don't even care about the child when you do that, viewing them as some sort of organic growing toys to be the best you couldn't possibly hope to be because you feel so miserable. Our children are going to inherit the world we build while we're still capable, and then their children will do the same. Must we not provide them with some sort of good guidelines with our own behavior?