You don't need obedience and rules to have good behaviour.

The difference is the framing, not the outcome. The author is saying you shouldn't just say "Don't shout in the cinema." and expect them not to do it because you told them. You should say "Shouting in the cinema will ruin the film for other people." and expect them not to do it because they understand they are impacting others.

I see the kind of parenting being described all the time - the "because I said so" parent. I get that sometimes kids are unreasonable and won't take a reasoned argument, but many parents never try or give up forever, and that means the child isn't learning or understanding why they are doing or not doing things, just (at best) forming a habit that may or may not persist when the parent isn't there.

My parents taught me by explaining - treating me like a person with little experience, not an animal to be trained.

The point is, rules shouldn't be needed - they should be logical conclusions from the things you are teaching them. Yes, sometimes you have to step in (because they misunderstood something, or messed up the logic), but that's the exception, not the rule, and it's fixed by teaching, not demanding obedience. The parenting style that expects children never to question their parents is just astounding to me, how are they meant to learn?

> I see the kind of parenting being described all the time - the "because I said so" parent.

Wandering the topic a bit, I'm reminded of a book [0] which argues that sometimes "because that's what I want" is actually better and more-honest than making up a reason like "because that's what good little children do."

So I'd like to propose a hierarchy of

1. Explain what practical or empathetic concern drives you to make the request, so they can learn to emulate your logic.

2. Ask them to do it because you desire it.

3. Explain with a "you should always" story that involves badness or guilt which isn't actually the logic you used to reach that decision.

[0] "When I Say No, I Feel Guilty" by Manuel J. Smith

"Because that's what I want" is a perfectly good reason - your children should absolutely be learning you are a person like them, and they should aim to help any person achieve what they want if it is reasonable for them to do so. It's not at all the same as "because I said so", which is a claim of authority.

Of course, you also shouldn't just frame everything that way, otherwise they won't understand the reasons they should want to do things, and because if it is a "want", that should be weighed up against what other people want and how important it is to them, fairness, etc... which is probably a more complex problem than most.

I think the point is to try to be the most honest and clear that you can about the situation and consequences.

With that you don’t need a hierarchy:

1 and 2 are the same, you just have shallower arguments in 2

3 is not an option IMO, it really should be 2: you can plainly say “I can’t explain, but that’s what I believe is right” and let the kid decide what they want to do.

This helps if the kid doesn’t take your side: if you’re not happy with outcome, there was clear a warning, making an eventual punishment more fair;

Or if they happen to be right, you don’t lose credibility as you were transparent about your standpoint and you can make it right to them.

I don’t agree. TBH I haven’t read the whole article, but as a parent raising two kids with this approach, The trick is to explain. It’s not rules as in « it’s forbidden to do this or that » but rather to explain why you don’t do that.

You don’t behave well because you must, you behave well because it’s the kindest way to do.

As stated, children are not stupid, and if you treat them as person and not as inferior human, a lot of good things can come out of this :-)

I also think that trust is better than obedience, and that insight is better than rules. Sometimes there can be a rule first and insight later, such as "don't run into the road until you're old enough to understand why", but when the trust is there, and parents generally "practice what they preach", when they themselves act out of trust and insight rather than out of obedience to arbitrary rules, it helps. It doesn't mean the child will magically understand everything on first attempt without hiccups, but when parents lack too much grounding and confidence, that makes it really hard on kids.

IMO it's demanding too much of both parents and children to expect that in 100.0% of all situations, but at least as something to strive towards I find it very important. Parents can be stressed out or confused, they can be under pressure from other adults, life can throw all sorts of curve balls and often we have to make do with what we have at that time. And that's fine; parents thinking they're bad parents just because they're not "perfect", or because life isn't perfect even though they did nothing wrong per se, also erodes trust and makes the whole enterprise harder than it needs to be. So at the very least, one has to trust that one can get to a place where one can trust themselves, and be on the way to that. Kids notice that, and adults can save themselves a lot of trouble by not lying to them, which is only possible if they aren't lying to themselves. "Because I say so" should never be the final statement, at least make it something like "right now because I say so, but I'll explain when things are less hectic" etc. Kids smell weakness and dishonesty, as they should. It's okay to be weak sometimes, but dishonesty is not.

When I was a kid, I didn't take shit from anyone, but I also respected the adults who didn't take shit from me. And I still remember plenty of such occasions fondly, mostly teachers; but one time I was arguing with a friend, you might say we had a fight, and some random stranger bought us two ice cream cones and said to play nice (our parents were present, he wasn't a creep, it was in a holiday resort). I told him "das kannst du dir in die Haare schmieren", which you could translate as "shove it up your ass", but literally means "you can smear that into your own hair". He proceeded to smear the ice cream cone into my hair. Slowly, in a friendly way, while smiling, but that's still what he did. I was awestruck. I wasn't even mad, I instantly respected the person. And our parents laughed, too; I guess these days, with the wrong parents, he would have the cops called on him. But he just took me seriously, he didn't treat me "like a child", that's how it felt to me. It's hard to explain, and the anecdote is really silly I know. But that actually happened, and I'll always cherish the memory ^^

You have a very naive idealistic view of the world. A lot of bad things HAVE come out of such views of the world.

That's quite clearly not what the author is suggesting.

Honestly, I suspect you'd probably like them. The fact is that trying to apply any parenting philosophy, however false, is on average going to be an improvement over current parenting. Children are starving for attention and interaction with adults. But parental attention is elsewhere, despite the fact that being with children is about the most fun and satisfying thing there is.

Being loud on playground is officially ok.

I’d be worried about a kid being quiet on the playground. Those are the ones up to something mischievous lol

Yes. We have the concept of "inside voices" or "outside voices".

I believe that letting kids get their loudness out outside is essential for them to learn to be quiet and respectful inside.

My niece has this obnoxious fucking horn she "plays" all the time. We've told her that she's allowed to play it all she wants, she just has to do it outside (so our ears don't bleed).