[TCS-list] Re: 4 year old jawes

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

Here's a ~20-year-old TCS list post by DD. I'm intrigued by how his response challenges the parent's framing of the issue.

----- Forwarded message from David Deutsch <david....@QUBIT.ORG> -----

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 18:55:15 +0100
From: David Deutsch <david....@QUBIT.ORG>
Subject: Re: 4 year old jawes
To: T...@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

[Someone] wrote:

>I have a 4 1/2 old who bites. It started when he was around the
>age of 2, someone bit him and he learned that it gets attention.
>
>He has been kicked out of several preschools and it is a real
>problem. I took him to two therapists who said he has ADHD and
>needed medication. I strongly disagree. The only sign of ADHD
>was his impulsivity to bite. He does it when kids take away a toy
>or hurt him.
>
>WHAT SHOULD I DO ? ? I am a single mom struggling, his father
>has no part of his life. I think there are a variety of things
>contributing to this behavior, the instability, he has had surgeries,
>not having a male role model.
>
>Please I have tried soap in the mouth, spanking, time outs, biting
>back, nothing works with him and I am on my last thread. PLEASE
>HELP! !

By a strange coincidence, just before you joined the List we received the
following message from an anonymous 4 1/2 year old:

I have a single mom who puts soap in my mouth, spanks me,
bites me, sends me to pre-schools where the other children
hurt me and take my toys away -- and no sooner do I manage
to get out of one of them than she sends me to another. She
takes me to one doctor after another in the hope that they'll
say this is all caused by a disease that *I* have! And they do!
I haven't had an easy life in other ways either -- surgery, no
father ... but by far my biggest problem is my mom. Please,
I've tried everything but nothing works with her and I'm
hanging by my last thread -- I'm only 4 1/2 years old and this
has been going on for most of my life. I don't think I can take
much more. PLEASE HELP!!

Everyone on the List sympathised, but there was precious little we could
do. We agreed that there was only one piece of advice we could give:

"Bite everyone in sight, and wait and see what happens."

Small world, eh?

-- David Deutsch
http://www.qubit.org/people/david/David.html

[Elliot Temple]

On Mar 27, 2020, at 5:43 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here's a ~20-year-old TCS list post by DD. I'm intrigued by how his response challenges the parent's framing of the issue.

Yes. He had a bunch of other posts that challenged a parental frame. Here’s one on "changing our language habits” where the person requested criticism but I doubt they expected some of the major reframings. I write more after.


On Jul 6, 2001, at 6:42 PM, David Deutsch <david....@qubit.org> wrote:

> A Poster <anon...@TCS.AC> wrote on 7/7/01 2:43 am:
>
>> How do people go about changing from negative language, words, and phrases
>> that they are used to using to more positive, supporting language? These
>> language habits are deeply ingrained and slip out first without any
>> thought. Adults use this negative language on themselves, their spouses
>> and their children even though they don't want to anymore.
>>
>> Examples:
>
> Of course, it's more than language that has to change. Indeed, changing the
> language without changing the underlying impulse is likely to lead to
> disguised coercion. But, in the spirit of a puzzle:
>
>
>> You (or I) should,
>
> You (or I) should
>
>> have to, must, need to...
>
> I'd prefer ...
>
>> If you don't do this, you can't do that.
>
> Whether you do this or not, you can do that.
>
>> You have to do this first.
>
> Don't do this if you don't want to.
>
>> I can't believe you did that.
>
> I can't believe you did that.
>
>> Why can't you...
>
> Would you like to...
>
>> You can't do that now.
>
> Would it be OK with you if you did that later?
>
>> Stop that right now or else...
>
> Stop!
>
>> I'm not going to stand for that anymore.
>
> Ouch.
>
>> You'd better...
>
> I'd advise you to...
>
>> Although these adults believe in TCS and finding common preferences, too
>> many times, these phrases slip out at the beginning before the cp process
>> can even begin. What can they do to stop themselves and learn to use more
>> positive and open language?
>
> Mainly -- perhaps entirely -- by changing their attitude towards the child.
>
>> Spitting Fire
>
> Speaking reasonably

>
> -- David Deutsch
> http://www.qubit.org/people/david/David.html

Here’s an excerpt from another DD post where provides a poster with reframings of things other, hostile parents say (2001-07-13 on "Ideas about how to respond to parents who don't know TCS?"):


>> You shouldn't be spoiling your child or letting hir have hir own way all the time.
>
> Please take off that stupid tie and return the rest of that buttered toast:
> what makes you think you can always have your own way all the time?"
>
>> You must control your child or he/she'll manipulate you for the rest of your life.
>
> Rather s/he than you. Or do you disagree?
>
>> You are the boss so why let your child tell you what to do.
>
> If I am the boss, why are *you* telling me what to do?

- Elliot

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 08:16:19PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

> Here’s an excerpt from another DD post where he provides a poster with reframings of things other, hostile parents say (2001-07-13 on "Ideas about how to respond to parents who don't know TCS?"):

>>> You shouldn't be spoiling your child or letting hir have hir own way all the time.
>>
>> Please take off that stupid tie and return the rest of that buttered toast: what makes you think you can always have your own way all the time?"

I don't get this.

First of all, I'm confused by the un-matched quote at the end of the sentence. I guess it's a typo and it shouldn't be there, because the rest DD's responses below don't have any quotes.

Second, I don't get who is supposed to be talking to whom in DD's sentence. At first I thought it was supposed to be a child talking to a hostile parent, because children don't usually wear ties. But if that's the case, then I don't get the relevance of returning the rest of the buttered toast.

>>> You must control your child or he/she'll manipulate you for the rest of your life.
>>
>> Rather s/he than you. Or do you disagree?

I don't get this. Is DD suggesting that a correct version of the hostile parent's sentence would be something like: *Your child must control him/herself or he/she'll manipulate him/herself for the rest of his/her life.*?

Also, is the "Or do you disagree?" relevant to DD's point in the previous sentence ("Rather s/he than you"), or is he just checking to see if the person agrees?

>>> You are the boss so why let your child tell you what to do.
>>
>> If I am the boss, why are *you* telling me what to do?

I don't get this either. Is DD's sentence meant to be a reply to the hostile parent's sentence?

Assuming it is, there are at least two different meanings of "tell[ing] [someone] what to do". It can mean *giving someone orders* or *giving someone advice or suggestions*. I'll rewrite the above pair of sentences using my best guess as to which meaning was intended in each case:

Parent: *You are the boss, so why let your child [give you orders]?*

[Note: Parent's sentence is advice, not an order.]

DD: *If I am the boss, why are you [giving me orders]?*

Anyone have hints on a better way to read it?

I can analyze the above sentences grammatically if anyone thinks I'm missing something at the grammar level.

[Elliot Temple]

On Mar 28, 2020, at 5:36 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 08:16:19PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:
>
>> Here’s an excerpt from another DD post where he provides a poster with reframings of things other, hostile parents say (2001-07-13 on "Ideas about how to respond to parents who don't know TCS?"):
>
>>>> You shouldn't be spoiling your child or letting hir have hir own way all the time.
>>>
>>> Please take off that stupid tie and return the rest of that buttered toast: what makes you think you can always have your own way all the time?"
>
> I don't get this.
>
> First of all, I'm confused by the un-matched quote at the end of the sentence. I guess it's a typo and it shouldn't be there, because the rest DD's responses below don't have any quotes.

Yeah, I think it’s a typo.

> Second, I don't get who is supposed to be talking to whom in DD's sentence. At first I thought it was supposed to be a child talking to a hostile parent, because children don't usually wear ties. But if that's the case, then I don't get the relevance of returning the rest of the buttered toast.
>
>>>> You must control your child or he/she'll manipulate you for the rest of your life.
>>>
>>> Rather s/he than you. Or do you disagree?
>
> I don't get this. Is DD suggesting that a correct version of the hostile parent's sentence would be something like: *Your child must control him/herself or he/she'll manipulate him/herself for the rest of his/her life.*?
>
> Also, is the "Or do you disagree?" relevant to DD's point in the previous sentence ("Rather s/he than you"), or is he just checking to see if the person agrees?
>
>>>> You are the boss so why let your child tell you what to do.
>>>
>>> If I am the boss, why are *you* telling me what to do?
>
> I don't get this either. Is DD's sentence meant to be a reply to the hostile parent's sentence?
>
> Assuming it is, there are at least two different meanings of "tell[ing] [someone] what to do". It can mean *giving someone orders* or *giving someone advice or suggestions*. I'll rewrite the above pair of sentences using my best guess as to which meaning was intended in each case:
>
> Parent: *You are the boss, so why let your child [give you orders]?*
>
> [Note: Parent's sentence is advice, not an order.]
>
> DD: *If I am the boss, why are you [giving me orders]?*
>
> Anyone have hints on a better way to read it?
>
> I can analyze the above sentences grammatically if anyone thinks I'm missing something at the grammar level.

These are responses the TCS parent (the poster DD is replying to) could say back to the hostile parent.

Search for the full post for more context.

Elliot Temple
www.fallibleideas.com

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 05:45:51PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

> On Mar 28, 2020, at 5:36 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 08:16:19PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

>>> Here’s an excerpt from another DD post where he provides a poster with reframings of things other, hostile parents say (2001-07-13 on "Ideas about how to respond to parents who don't know TCS?"):

>>>>> You must control your child or he/she'll manipulate you for the rest of your life.
>>>>
>>>> Rather s/he than you. Or do you disagree?
>>
>> I don't get this. Is DD suggesting that a correct version of the hostile parent's sentence would be something like: *Your child must control him/herself or he/she'll manipulate him/herself for the rest of his/her life.*?
>>
>> Also, is the "Or do you disagree?" relevant to DD's point in the previous sentence ("Rather s/he than you"), or is he just checking to see if the person agrees?

> These are responses the TCS parent (the poster DD is replying to) could say back to the hostile parent.
>
> Search for the full post for more context.

The full post started off with this:

> I would like some suggestions/ideas on how I can respond back to parents who do not know anything about TCS and question my parenting style.

That's helpful. I noticed now that much of the helpful context in that sentence is also summarized in the post's title, which Elliot quoted earlier ("Ideas about how to respond to parents who don't know TCS?").

One of the example statements the parent wanted help responding to was this:

>>>>> You must control your child or he/she'll manipulate you for the rest of your life.

DD replied:

>>>> Rather s/he than you. Or do you disagree?

Ok, I think I figured this out. DD means: *It's better for me to be manipulated by my child than by you.* This draws attention to the hostile parent's attempt at manipulation.