Struggling to defend my age appropriate beliefs(26 Posts)
Our DD is almost 3 years. I struggle to defend my parenting beliefs with family members and even the child minder.
I'm keen to see her remain a little girl as long as possible. Trips to theme parks and having her nails painted are great for when she's 6 years + but they are not something I'd like our little girl doing at her age. As my sister says... You can't protector from this, it will happen. It's my thought that this doesn't mean you shouldn't try and actually I don't get WHY everyone else is so keen for her to grow up so quickly.
I'm not sure trips to theme parks have anything to do with age.
Am not sure why the theme parks are an issue with you. Have you any other examples of what you mean?
Theme parks? My Dd is 4 and loves a theme park - we've recently been to paultons park home of props pig and legoland. She loved both.
She's very much still a little girl even though she has lip gloss and nail varnish to play dress up with along with dressing up outfits etc. isn't part of play pretending to be grown up? Eg pretend cooking etc
I agree with you about theme parks. If she's too little to go on the vast majority of the rides (which WILL be the case for a toddler somewhere like Thorpe Park or Alton Towers) then WTF is the point of taking her?(You don't mention having older DC as well, which obviously would be a different situation).
I have a 5 year old and 1 year old and wouldn't take them to a big theme park because surely there's nothing they could go on? So that's not really a belief, it's just a practical consideration. I'd take them to Peppa Pig World (if it wasn't so expensive!).
I don't really see nail varnish as an issue personally either, can you articulate what you want to protect against here? If my 5 year old wants painted nails, and I can trust him not to smudge/lick them, then I don't mind.
What about Peppa Pig world and Cbeebies Land? They're both theme parks...
Why are theme parks something from which a three year old needs to be protected? I personally think they're ghastly, but we took our three year old to Thomas Land this summer, and to be honest, if he had been much older, it would have been too juvenile for him. And he is currently sporting sparkly silver nail varnish on his toes because he wanted it when I was painting mine. I don't think it has made him unduly sophisticated. He ran out to show the bemused postman this morning.
My 3yr old dd could go on about 90% of the rides at Legoland.
By the way interesting first post OP...
What on earth does a child need protecting from at a theme park?
and Wtf is wrong with nail polish. dress up is normal fir boys and girls at three. It's nail polish not eye brow tattoos
Depends on why you object to these things.
Theme parks ...... If you think they're too expensive, fair enough. What if offered to take her at my cost? The money is no longer an issue. Many of the amusements are age or height restricted - so no-ones trying to get a three yo on to the world's scariest roller coaster.
Same goes for the nail polish ....
Both perfectly reasonable activities - but you might find it easier to justify your views if you could articulate the reasons.
I think it's perfectly okay to say you don't feel comfortable with it and to respect that. I hate nail polish on children as well although I find it impossible to articulate why, so it is one of those 'your child, your rules' things!
I quite agree OP I think most of us have ideas of what we would like or not like our children to do when they are younger, whether it is ear piercing, wearing nail varnish, visiting certain places. We didn't take ds to Alton Towers until he could go on most rides and we also visited Drayton Manor for Thomasland when he was younger with my niece who was not tall enough to go on rides and led to a rather upsetting day. I'm not taking dd there either until she is tall enough(have a large age gap) to go on these rides.
As parents we all have our own ideas about what is appropriate.
Theme parks are very expensive, so it seems entirely reasonable to me not to want to take a toddler to one (unless you have older DC who are desperate to go.) Toddlers are mostly happy with a wander round the park or a big cardboard box to play in FFS.
I must confess I don't understand why you would object to those specific things on age-appropriateness grounds.
If nail varnish is ok for a 6 year old,it's ok for a 3 year old. I have boys and girls and they have all been partial to a bit of nail varnish since the were teeny tiny (18 months or so). Generally though I dislike "serious" make up, as opposed to playing with it as a creative process, until children are rather older.
Theme parks - well I think they are rather wasted on little children,
and I will do anything to avoid such hell though DS 2 loved Legoland when he was 3.
I'm more bothered about stuff like books, films, music videos and games, listening to the news....
Thank you all for your responses.
I didn't think it would be a popular view.
It's annoying me I feel so strongly about both nail varnish and theme parks.
I guess the theme park has a number of reasons, much of what has been said already. As I see it... Encouraging such expense at a young age, when it's really not needed or appreciated is unnecessary and may set up a number of expectations for future. Also if she see's it all now, what will be new to her when she's older when she's better position to enjoy and appreciate it more. We have to keep her entertained and at least until she's a teenager and try to avoid the "i've been everywhere and done everything, nothings new or exciting!" typical teenage attitude for as long as we can. I really also worry that she won't enjoy it - at the moment she gets scared of the hand dryer in public toilets. Both me and my partner have never liked theme parks either. So I feel we are missing the point of them somewhat.
The more I think about it the more I feel I am right in saying no... not yet. Even if my sister kindly offered to take her.
Nail varnish. Hmmm... I'm feeling abit more lienant having consumed the above opinions. I think play is great and I guess nail vanish as apart of this is ok. Providing it doesn't esculate into full on make up, obsession with appearance etc that some young girls develop. I suspect the younger children are introduced to 'vanity' the increased likelihood of an issue developing. But I'm no scientist! Possibally a little paranoid and overprotective though. Note to self: need to chill out abit. Worked that one though... thank you.
I don't see why you need to justify these parenting decisions, though, OP. The fact that you hate theme parks is enough of a reason not to want to go to them - though I think there's a bit of a disconnect between what you clearly mean by 'theme parks' and the very much aimed at pre-schoolers parks some others mean (Peppa Pig World, Thomas Land) - and your feelings on nail varnish are hardly unusual or controversial.
My three year old son has varnish on his toes but I won't do his fingernails because he's likely to chew it off, and the only varnish I have is ghastly cheap, probably toxic stuff from PoundLand and the like. But it is definitely just 'dressing up' for him, along the line of face painting or his Fireman Sam costume.
I understand the theme park thing. My DDs are 11 and 7 and the older one has been to a theme park once with Brownies...that's it! We just don't "do" them.
They're bloody expensive and places aren't always as good as they're advertised. Ignore OP.
There your decisions.
Some theme parks are designed for the littlies though, and she will be getting a bit old when 6. However there is no law that says anyone has to go to a theme park, if you don't like them then thats fine. I usually do them via Tescos vouchers or Nectar points - never pay full price.
Nail polish is fine imho, but if you don't like it (or she doesn't then fine). But if you won't let her and she wants to she will probably do what I did, and paint her nails with felt tips.
Putting an arbitrary age for any experience seems a bit odd to me.
Sorry There - they are (hope the pedants don't spot it).
I think it is fine to say "as a family we don't do theme parks, we don't really enjoy them and they are very expensive". TBH I feel much the same.
However, I'm not sure that refusing to take your DD anywhere new or offer her new experiences so you can save up those experiences for when she is bored a teen is going to work. Pick new experiences that you all enjoy and let her try new stuff - it won't spoil her and if you don't then you will be missing out a a huge amount of joy watching small children exploring their world with joy and excitement.
I have a 16 and a 10 yo, both girls. Both of whom still enjoy loads of stuff.
Nail varnish - I'm with you on that, as I think it is 'growing them up' too fast. But then I don't wear it anyway, so they have never just wanted it to 'copy Mummy'. We left it until around age 9 when they could be trusted to not spill it in their bedrooms.
Theme parks - I think it is OK for you to say you don't think they are good value for money, especially if you don't like them yourself so you are paying more just for your DD's enjoyment. But Paulton's Park near Southampton is fantastic for 3 year olds. And children under 1m high get in free, and you don't need to spend any money once you're in there. Also, there is some research (if I remember correctly) saying that children who have been to theme parks are more likely to be confident or something, as they have done slightly scary things and survived.
You have to do a lot of things before kids get bored with them. We had season tickets for about 3 years in a row for Paultons before the novelty ran out, and after a few years break I have just got them again for DD2.
We do a fair amount with ours, but both were still delighted to go to Disney Paris last year for the first time.
On the other hand, if you were talking about age appropriate films, clothes, books etc I would be right with you. I really don't get why so many parents are happy for their 7 yos to watch 12-rated films.
But you can't just make them 'wait' for everything, as things have a 'best age' and you need to do it then. e.g. Paultons isn't really designed for teenagers, it is designed mainly for 3-12.
I have no idea what the 'been everywhere, done everything not excited by anything' teenager thing is?
I don't know any teenagers like that.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.