Why is it that I'm not allowed to play M games... :'( The game is funny from what I've seen of it!
It's probably because of your parents.
The odd thing is, my parents are the exact opposite. :P My parents let me play/watch whatever I want, but I'm the one who rarely looks at stuff rated T. :P
I wish I could play that game! And you're right, it is my parents! They won't even let me watch an R movie, and I'm a teenager! (Well, I have seen a few, which were with their permission...)
My mom wanted me to watch Bridget Jones' Diary a couple years ago, but I didn't want to. :P
How is that for backwards? XD
Eh, my mom doesn't restrict me TOO much...but she doesn't encourage things with high ratings either. ;P
I talked my mom into seeing Waiting, with Dane Cook, and she saw how much they sweared, and took me out! We then went to another movie, and then she brought me back in because the other one would get out like an hour later... And then I watched it on DVD without her knowledge...
Doing things behind parents' backs is never a good idea. :P
Ditto.
True! It's not good! I do feel guilty sometimes after doing somethings! I am trying to stop it! (If I can! XD)
Don't worry lad, once you turn seventeen you'll be able to see an R-rated movie without feeling guilty. :P
I hope so! I have a few years ahead of me though! :(
Ew, R-rated movies. :P
I can't lie to save my life. XD If I just pretend to tell a lie I can't even make eye contact. :P I start blushing and everything! XD
Well, it sounds like you have a good conscience Rosella. ;)
If parents place too many restrictions (especially on teenagers) most will rebel and do the opposite anyway
I had a really easy upbringing, ok some things I wasnt allowed to do like clubbing until i was probably 17.5 lmao (shhh) even though friends were out much earlier, but hey it was for my own safety. As far as ratings go...I watched the Rocky Horror and stuff like that when I was really young lol, hense my warpedness :D
Quote from: Kimmie on May 13, 2006, 01:22:57 AM
If parents place too many restrictions (especially on teenagers) most will rebel and do the opposite anyway
I had a really easy upbringing, ok some things I wasnt allowed to do like clubbing until i was probably 17.5 lmao (shhh) even though friends were out much earlier, but hey it was for my own safety. As far as ratings go...I watched the Rocky Horror and stuff like that when I was really young lol, hense my warpedness :D
I watched that movie three years ago and it scarred me for life!! :o :P
I'm not a good liar either! I do kind of smile when I lie, because I can't hold it in that well... My parents were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Death, and I saw the scene where the guy ripped out another guy's heart, and after that, I had bad dreams for a long time! And I was five or so!
I had a pretty easy upbringing as well. Of course, if I ever did anything bad, I'd get beaten in some form or another. :P
As for movies, I'm not sure when I watched my first R-rated one, but it must have been one on TV way before I was the legal age to watch. XD Actually, I remember a lot of movies we watched that would give me nightmares, lol.
But after some point, I stopped having them, and now suspense/thriller movies are probably my favourites! I don't care much for horror flicks, and I never really jumped on the whole gory-violent videogame thing, even when it became mainstream.
Quote from: Deloria on May 13, 2006, 04:28:44 AM
Quote from: Kimmie on May 13, 2006, 01:22:57 AM
If parents place too many restrictions (especially on teenagers) most will rebel and do the opposite anyway
I had a really easy upbringing, ok some things I wasnt allowed to do like clubbing until i was probably 17.5 lmao (shhh) even though friends were out much earlier, but hey it was for my own safety. As far as ratings go...I watched the Rocky Horror and stuff like that when I was really young lol, hense my warpedness :D
I watched that movie three years ago and it scarred me for life!! :o :P
For some reason, I feel like I saw that when I was REAAAAAAAAALLY little, but I don't remember any of it. :P
yeh I watched RHPSS when i was yong too... i remmber asking my mom what the heck a transvestite was..lol. then i wasnt allowed to watch Movies like that for a loong time.
but if you having problems just tell your parents that if they dont like whats in it then tell them to sit in for like 5 minutes while you play it. but try to do stuff that isnt gory/violent etc. then they mgith say yes.
Isn't this thread about parents? I never got into violent games either. Adventure was good enough for me!
Quote from: dark-daventry on May 13, 2006, 11:41:41 AM
Isn't this thread about parents? I never got into violent games either. Adventure was good enough for me!
Depends, do you consider QFG violent?
turning a old wizard into a cat that is really violent. How dare that young lad Alexander to transform an old wizard. :P
Quote from: icarus on May 13, 2006, 12:54:15 PM
turning a old wizard into a cat that is really violent. How dare that young lad Alexander to transform an old wizard. :P
An old, crippled wizard who did nothing to the boy except punish him when he disobeyed! How dare he! :P
The nerve of some kids... so ungrateful these days... you try to give em chores and a roof over their head and what do they do? ::)
Quote from: dark-daventry on May 13, 2006, 07:48:16 AM
I'm not a good liar either! I do kind of smile when I lie, because I can't hold it in that well... My parents were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Death, and I saw the scene where the guy ripped out another guy's heart, and after that, I had bad dreams for a long time! And I was five or so!
Psst: It is Temple of Doom. BTW, I saw that movie when I was little and I was freaked out by the eyeball(s) in the soup.
I don't know my indiana jones movies that well!
Quote from: Oldbushie on May 13, 2006, 02:07:47 PM
The nerve of some kids... so ungrateful these days... you try to give em chores and a roof over their head and what do they do? ::)
Unbelivable! XD ::)
Uhh....I have parents.
Psst... this isn't the "I Have" thread. :P
Quote from: dew7 on May 13, 2006, 05:27:08 PM
Quote from: dark-daventry on May 13, 2006, 07:48:16 AM
I'm not a good liar either! I do kind of smile when I lie, because I can't hold it in that well... My parents were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Death, and I saw the scene where the guy ripped out another guy's heart, and after that, I had bad dreams for a long time! And I was five or so!
Psst: It is Temple of Doom. BTW, I saw that movie when I was little and I was freaked out by the eyeball(s) in the soup.
Ugh. I hated that part, I also wasn't thriled about the skulls filled with (was that ice-cream? :P)
:X I want to be sick! XD
I'm very thankful that I slept through all of the Indiana Jones movies I could've watched. :P
You're the lucky one!
Eyeballs usually freak me out (I cannot watch people putting contacts in) but I've gotten better about it.
Getting back to topic:
As far as BEING a parent....
I've tried really hard to be like and not like my own parents in so many ways!
I let my kids taste "adult" beverages when they're home with me. I enjoy watching movies they want to see (when they're home with me.) I like reading the books they want to read (Harry Potter to Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) but I will never approve of them hiding a book from me. I don't restrict their Internet sites, but I don't approve of them shutting the doors while they're using the computer.
Does this make me a good or a bad parent?? I don't know, but it's the only parent I know how to be.
I have helped to raise my two younger siblings, and Valanice, I happen to agree strongly with your way of parenting.
It's how my mom and dad raised me, and it's how I plan on raising my own children when and if I have them.
Kelsey, your mom ROCKS! I hope you realize that.
Yeah! She does rock! I think it makes you a good parent not putting too many restrictions on them but still drawing the line.
LOVE rocking parents! Valanice, I think you've done well :) If you respect your kids, they will respect you back...that's my view anyway :)
Quote from: Zelly on July 24, 2006, 06:47:05 PM
Kelsey, your mom ROCKS! I hope you realize that.
Oh, I do. XD
I love my mom. XD
Quote from: Valanice on July 24, 2006, 06:41:24 PM
Getting back to topic:
As far as BEING a parent....
I've tried really hard to be like and not like my own parents in so many ways!
I let my kids taste "adult" beverages when they're home with me. I enjoy watching movies they want to see (when they're home with me.) I like reading the books they want to read (Harry Potter to Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) but I will never approve of them hiding a book from me. I don't restrict their Internet sites, but I don't approve of them shutting the doors while they're using the computer.
Does this make me a good or a bad parent?? I don't know, but it's the only parent I know how to be.
While the internet wasn't a problem when I was growing up, my folks did raised me that way too and I hope to do the same when/if i have kids.
Quote from: Valanice on July 24, 2006, 06:41:24 PM
Does this make me a good or a bad parent?? I don't know, but it's the only parent I know how to be.
Definitely a good one. Of course, I'm not a parent yet, but having a perfect balance between independence and discipline is really best for childhood development. My parents were really strict with me (and I was never a delinquent child :P), but keep in mind that every kid rebels at some point to prove their independence. I'm not exactly sure what my rebelling was or if I'm even out of that phase yet, since it feels like only now am I able to achieve the dreams and aspirations I've always wanted.
Anyway, I would say the best parent is someone that is not too strict nor too lenient. It's someone that's fully involved and aware with their child's life as much as possible. :) And while that involvement will decrease as the child matures, if you form a strong bond from birth, it will remain no matter what. 8)
Like some of the people here, my parents put few restrictions on me(in terms of movies, TV, books, etc.). Like Kelsey, I also never "took advantage" of it(and also chose not to watch movies that my parents said were "okay" ;P). This doesn't apply so much to everything else(in general, my raising was quite strict)... :P
I don't quite agree about it being a positive stance to take though(as some have stated)... I would place it on an individual basis. With some people, I have seen such a stance have the opposite effect(and death at a very young age being the result, for that matter). I mean... there are many "good kids" that had a less than ideal upbringing(and vice-versa). Although, in general, I support stricter parenting(especially as I have seen too many parents take a "hands off" approach... ;P).
and I don't think I ever hit the "rebelling" stage. It's either that, or I've been in it so long I never noticed(;P). I have acted independent since as far back as I can remember(note that this is not the same thing as rebelling), and I never felt anything to prove.
I never really went through a "rebellious" phase in the stereotypical sense, but since my family doesn't really approve of TSL (or any of my TSL achievements) and since I couldn't really care less about their approval, I guess one could consider that rebellious. 8)
Quote from: Yonkey on July 27, 2006, 06:04:44 AM
I never really went through a "rebellious" phase in the stereotypical sense, but since my family doesn't really approve of TSL
:-\
Nor does mine, but I still can't see why not. :P
I don’t know if there is a “right way†that will work for everyone. I’m sure we’ve all seen the exceptions to the “ruleâ€. I do believe in a certain level of strictness but I think the best way to explain the way I see it is “Active parentingâ€: Parents who know what their kid are doing, where their going, who with, and adhere to the rules they set. There is a certain level of trust a parent should have in their child but the child also has to show they deserve that trust. I know it can be hard to be open with parents at time because we think they can’t understand the situation and I’ll admit that there are some things we’ve been through that they haven’t but in the grand sum of things most of what we’re experiencing they have too. Parents do try to protect their children, and rightly so in many cases, it can be hard for them to not want to protect but as their children mature they have to recognize that they need to trust their young adults and let them understand the responsibilities that go along with that trust and that’s where an openness between parent and child come in and why I call it “Active Parentingâ€.
Quote from: dark-daventry on May 13, 2006, 07:48:16 AM
I'm not a good liar either! I do kind of smile when I lie, because I can't hold it in that well... My parents were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Death, and I saw the scene where the guy ripped out another guy's heart, and after that, I had bad dreams for a long time! And I was five or so!
The first time i watched jurassic park i had nightmares ;P
Go figure :P
I had nightmares when I was Jurassic Park! It was really scary... XD
But I agree; it's important to be a part of and take interest in a child's life. :)
Heh, I think I had a couple dreams about Jurassic Park too, but I only remember the raptor part as being scary. Of course, once you see a Making Of video for the movie and find out they're all fake, the scariness kind of disappears. :P
To get back on topic, there are actually four classes of parents:
- authoritarian/strict
- indulgent/permissive
- authoritative/responsive
- uninvolved/detached
Basically the first type are for parents that are more like drill sargeants. The second are complete opposites of the first, basically allowing the children to make their decisions. The third is somewhat a mixture of the first two. And the last is basically a parent that acts as if they don't have a child.
Research shows that while the first one produces the most "efficient" results in terms of engraving morals, ethics and values, the third style best helps children to grow up into outstanding adults. If you remember sitcoms of the early 90's, most of the parents on those shows would be #1, #2 or #4, but then turn into #3 near the ending, to illustrate a cheesy lesson of some kind. :P
I personally found them to be a bit too unrealistic, since parents don't usually switch so drastically from one class to the other, but I guess it made good TV. ;P
I had one of each for a while of groups 1 and 2.
But things got better as I got older, except recently through no fault of their own they've both pretty much become #4, and all the parenting is left to me.
Edit:
And Farq. Sorry bro didn't mean to forget you :P
Quote from: Zelly on July 27, 2006, 05:36:37 PM
recently through no fault of their own they've both pretty much become #4, and all the parenting is left to me.
Sorry to hear that Zelly
Quote from: Yonkey on July 27, 2006, 04:49:04 PM
To get back on topic, there are actually four classes of parents:
- authoritarian/strict
- indulgent/permissive
- authoritative/responsive
- uninvolved/detached
Interesting list My definition does sound a lot like three.
Quote from: Yonkey on July 27, 2006, 04:49:04 PM
To get back on topic, there are actually four classes of parents:
- authoritarian/strict
- indulgent/permissive
- authoritative/responsive
- uninvolved/detached
Isn't that a BIT simple/closed-minded... to state that there are exactly 4 types(as fact, instead of saying they are usually classified into 4 types)? I could even name the same concept with a different number of types. ;-D
I would really like to know why so many of the "great thinkers"(at least from Grecian to modern times) always placed people into 4 types... :P
The world shall never know...Quote from: Yonkey on July 27, 2006, 04:49:04 PM
the third style best helps children to grow up into outstanding adults.
That is extremely vague, you know that("outstanding adults" is not defined)? Either bad wording or bad research. ;P
I actually didn't make those four up, you can Google around and find them too. :P
And there's no other classification:
Either you're too strict, or too generous, or inbetween, or indifferent. Inbetween is the closest thing to being a combination, but the other 3 are discrete states. In other words, you can't be both too strict and too generous, or you'd be inbetween. You can't be indifferent and something else, because then you wouldn't be indifferent. And so on. :P As for why 4, that's the total number of possible outcomes from any logical statement (i.e. true, false, both, neither). XD
By "outstanding adults", I guess I mean grow up into someone that's self-sufficient, well-rounded, and able to live a normal life. Of course "outstanding adults" is vague, since to be outstanding is subjective. None of our parents were born outstanding or perfect, so that's why it's very rare to see extremely talented or gifted that weren't born that way. I obviously can't say that if you listen to your mom and eat green beans at the age of 4, you'll grow up to become a rich and famous spam junkie. :P All I've read is what you won't degrade to when you have good parents.
But having good parents alone won't make you "outstanding" either. There are a lot of social and economic factors that influence one's success and direction in life, and again, each person has a different definition of success so it's certainly subjective and not 100% predictable. 8)
But some things are obvious. If a child is physically abused, research shows they will most likely abuse someone else when they become old enough. But it depends on the individual. Not all victims of abuse grow up into criminals or worse. It is just a very common trend that the most serious repeat offenders are those that were abused/over indulged/neglected as a child.
QuoteI actually didn't make those four up, you can Google around and find them too. :P
I am quite aware of this.
“they are usually classified into 4 types”
“always placed people into 4 types”
QuoteAnd there's no other classification:
Considering the subject matter(which is not concrete/solid by any means), I find that statement quite strong. Under any circumstance, I won’t argue the point.
My posts may simply be a result of your odd switching of the meanings of words(“parent”/“parenting” and perhaps the meaning "strict" and "lenient"). Whether or not this is so, it is how it seems from here. I assume, going by past statements, that you are referring to
disciplining as
parenting(not meant to say that I disagree with such a use, I am only seeking clarification), instead of meaning the general/overall sense. Perhaps you assume disciplining is the primary characteristic of parenting, which I will not disagree with(unless you believe it is important enough to completely overshadow other characteristics), but it should still be clarified(to make no distinction is a poor way of communicating a concept). I simply mean parenting, or “child rearing,” has more characteristics than the strictness/leniency of disciplining a child. Despite that it may have little connection , I will name a similar but different classification used for parents. Due to its old age, popularity, general modern acceptance(in one form or another), and readily available online material(so that anything I say can be researched/”double-checked” by those reading this, if they wish to do so), I will use the Humours/Temperaments as an example. As previous concepts of the Humours, as they relate/pertain to parenting, are not as well defined, anything I say after this sentence is based on David Keirsey’s work(as I understand it). He classified them as the following:
Individuator-wishes his children to be individuals, and raises them accordingly
Harmonizer-wishes for children to have a good “self-image,” and wishes to form an unusually strong bond with children(the second partly in order to aid in reaching the first)
Liberator-prefers the “hands off” approach, and generally doesn’t mind what path their children choose(not meant to say they don’t take part in their children’s upbringing, only that they are the least inclined to point the child down a certain path of their choosing)
Socializer-In general, wish their children to take on characteristics of their social order, and seek to make them “good people”(”good citizens” may be a more appropriate term, as it is based more on tradition/society than plain morality).
These 4 classifications also apply to children, although, obviously, the characteristics change with the role(each “parenting style” affecting each “child type” differently…in general).
You can largely argue, though I wouldn’t, that some relate to the classification you have stated, but it would still be 4 instead of 3(“non-parenting“/”detached” is not taken into consideration). “Detached” is not needed(in this case) because, for all practical purposes, they are not “parenting,” it is not considered a “healthy” decision(“well developed” people are assumed), or it is not a parenting style(it is the lack of one)… whichever way of thinking you prefer.
I will admit the purpose of this system/classification named, and the information it takes into account, is quite different from the one you named(this one is more general and takes more details into account, while the one you named is of a far more specific nature)… but as you named “classes of parents,”(“disciplining styles” was not stated, it was used in the general sense) I see no reason to limit it on the basis of strictness/leniency.
To be fair, the Humours were originally based on the concept of the 4 classic elements(which could correspond with the 4 possibilities you named quite well, at least in their wet/dry characteristics).
QuoteAs for why 4, that's the total number of possible outcomes from any logical statement (i.e. true, false, both, neither). XD
That may fit what you are speaking of, but not what I was speaking of. You are viewing a single characteristic(which would allow this thinking more readily, if only in that it can be formed into a single statement), versus the whole(making such reasoning far more difficult to use, as no single statement can be made which fits its entirety… unless you wish to go through a long series of deductive questions/statements).
QuoteI guess I mean grow up into someone that's self-sufficient, well-rounded, and able to live a normal life.
I thought you were naming the results of research. Your sources do not have a solid definition, or are you combining the results of multiple sources(so that you must define it yourself)?
my parents are #3 all of the way. i can basically do what i want, but i have to ask their permission. i usually can do whatever it is though. but when it comes to M games or R movies, they just stop me. i even wrote to a playstation magazine to see if they could "help" me. :P
Hehehe, well yes, while I wouldn't say parenting = disciplining, however being strict and lenient doesn't strictly refer to discipline. There's also strict parents that usually are associated with "tough love", and lenient parents known as "people pleasers". Neither of which has to do with child discipline, but more with their own personalities formed by how they were raised.
However, even looking at the classifications you mentioned, while they are child-focused, they are manifested through discipline. A baby grown up in complete isolation would actually not survive beyond the age of 5. Research performed on Russian orphans whose parents neglected (or the orphanage itself; I cant remember) the children grew up to be socially inept, tempermental and unable to even speak at the age of 6 or older. Logically, this is because without nurturing/parenting, a child may mature physically but not mentally or emotionally. Without a strong parental bond, a child is more likely to experiment with illegal substances, crime, immoral/unethical acts and so forth. As an aside, this is also why Freud always blamed people's mothers for people's personality disorders. The mother-child relationship is formed from birth, and anything less than ideal will result in any personality anamoly imaginable, as per one of his famous quotes: "There are no accidents". And while he was speaking from a purely psychological perspective, that statement is true both scientifically and spiritually as well.
Quote from: Louisiana Night on July 30, 2006, 08:59:19 PM
I thought you were naming the results of research. Your sources do not have a solid definition, or are you combining the results of multiple sources(so that you must define it yourself)?
Well, it's a combination of what I learned in Applied Psychology as well as Logic and Algebra. I was hoping you'd ask for further explanation of why 4, XD So here is the mathematical explanation of the 4 parent-class theory:
Any atomic statement is boolean, that is, it can
only be true or false. All human beings (parents or not) are predominantly passive or aggressive, though realistically we are both. So, the total number of possible outcomes from two boolean variables is its product. In our case:
n = (passive or not) * (aggressive or not)
n = 2 * 2
n = 4
Another way to see this is to look at all linear combinations of people that are both passive and aggressive:
| Person | Passive? | Aggressive? |
| 1 | F | T |
| 2 | T | F |
| 3 | T | T |
| 4 | F | F |
Persons 1-4 correspond directly with the 4 Parent classes I mentioned earlier. Logically, there is no other possible combination, and each line is known as a partition over the equivalence class of all human beings, or each line is mutually exclusive but are all contained within the set of all human beings.
Now, people can argue that class 4 should not exist, because it's not possible to be neither passive or aggressive. In my example, the case #4 corelated to someone who, for all intensive purposes, is
not a "parent", even though biologically he or she may be a mother or a father. Since there are plenty of children in this world who do not have nurturing parents, their child rearing would definitely fall under class 4, meaning their personalities will be influenced by other factors which may or may not agree with what present society deems as moral.
Now, you'll notice that I'm linking aggressive with strict and passive with lenient. This was more for just for simplicity sake, but that was why I was intentionally vague. Passivity and aggressiveness are subjective as well, and differs from individual to individual
because of parenting. :P
Quote from: Yonkey on July 31, 2006, 07:20:51 AM
However, even looking at the classifications you mentioned, while they are child-focused, they are manifested through discipline.
Only in part. For example, the "Individuator" is the least likely of the 4(by far) to offer "emotional support." The "Harmonizer" is the opposite, to the point they can be "clingy."(unhealthily emotionally involved) Not that they will not have a role in disciplining, only that they also play a part a major role elsewhere.
Quote from: Yonkey on July 31, 2006, 07:20:51 AM
I was hoping you'd ask for further explanation of why 4, XD
Hoping a BIT too much, if you believe I asked(I asked why you defined "outstanding adults" in such a personal fashion). :P
I understood the concept. XD
Quote from: Louisiana Night on July 31, 2006, 01:56:40 PM
Hoping a BIT too much, if you believe I asked(I asked why you defined "outstanding adults" in such a personal fashion). :P
I understood the concept. XD
Hehe, well the
first thing you asked was why there's always a rule of 3 or 4 with these kinds of things. So I was just explaining why. XD
yonkey, i have a comment about your table. the second column is t, t, f, f and not f, t, t, f. :P
Whoops. *updates* XD
I think he wants it to read
T T
T F
F T
F F
Since that's the way we learned it in Geometry. ;P
i may have passed geometry, but i failed reading. ;P
That wasn't the way I defined them though. :P