Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think that girl babies/toddlers as much more independent than boy babies/toddlers

35 replies

doradaisy · 12/04/2011 23:41

I have a 3 and half year old DD and 11 month old ID twin boys.

My daughter was showing a more independent streak even as a baby - taking the spoon off me when feeding herself, holding her bottle, reaching for toys and pulling them off me/other children.

The boys are great, doing mostly the same things she was at this age, sitting up, smiling, etc. However, they seem much more easy going, have bit less initiative. For example, they can hold their bottle, but are happier for me to do it whereas my daughter wanted to hold her own bottle!!

My daughter is like that even now, want to do everything herself and can be quite bossy!!

In some ways, boys are easier babies as they are quite happy to wait and/or let me put them in the buggy whereas my daughter used to kick up a bit more! (maybe it's a twin thing too?)

Have heard a lot from friends/creche workers that girls more independent.
Am just doing a little mumsnet survey. Are girls more independent as babies and toddler than boys? Or is it personality?

(little aside: interesting how girls seem to be leaders as children but strangely don't get top jobs in politics/academia??)

OP posts:

BitOfFunnyBunny · 12/04/2011 23:45

I'll get in first with "the plural of anecdote is not data", shall I?

Booandpops · 12/04/2011 23:47

No girls are more bloody minded. Have to be to put up with boys. Starts young. ;-)

fatlazymummy · 12/04/2011 23:48

I never noticed. I think it's probably just another stereotype. Of course these things tend to be self fulfilling, if we expect girls to be more independent then we will probably give them less help, therefore they will learn to help themselves quicker.

Morloth · 13/04/2011 00:06

What BOF said, my anecdata is the opposite, my boys are off and going asap, whereas the little girls I know tend to prefer to sit with their mums etc.

DS1's first real sentence was 'I will do it with myself' and DS2 has a meltdown if anyone tries to actually feed him now, you have to either put the food in front of him or at the very most hand it to him.

My two are currently playing Ben 10 while I MN, that seems pretty independant for a 12 month old IMO.

expatinscotland · 13/04/2011 00:08

YABU. My girls are far, far less independent than my son and always were.

Maryz · 13/04/2011 00:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MadamDeathstare · 13/04/2011 00:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

cat64 · 13/04/2011 00:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

cjdamoo · 13/04/2011 01:01

Kids are all different I have 4 boys two of who were very independent and actually the oldest I swear, could have raised himself he really didnt seem to need me for anything.

anonymosity · 13/04/2011 01:47

Yes I agree OP and my firstborn is a DS, my 2nd a DD. Barely an age gap between them. She dresses herself, he does not. And so on.

TechnoKitten · 13/04/2011 01:58

2 boys, so only experience of girls is my niece. As far as I can tell, they all wanted to dress/feed themselves/"do it by myself!" around the same ages.

Both my boys are very independent and happy to entertain themselves with made up toys and stories and have done so since they were tiny. I think mine are more easy going than my niece (who could have the most amazing 3 year old meltdowns) but that may be personality rather than gender.

52Girls · 13/04/2011 07:03

I think it's down to personality.

I have two very independent boys.

Megatron · 13/04/2011 07:36

I believe it's personality and environment too. My DD is much more independent than her older DS but with my neice and nephew it's the other way round. I'm a nursery nurse and judging by the children (age 2-3) that I work with I don't thnk you can generalise at all.

redstripeyelephant · 13/04/2011 08:29

I think it's personality. My DD1 was always fiercely independent, my DD2 is a clingy little mummy's girl.

Judging by my own anecdotal evidence I could conclude that blonde curly-haired children are independent while dark-haired children are not

Bonsoir · 13/04/2011 08:30

It's hardly news that girls, on average, develop a little earlier and more quickly than boys.

Flowerpotmummy · 13/04/2011 08:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

heliumballoons · 13/04/2011 08:46

Only got one child, a boy, who was always able to do things independently. He was able to hold his own bottle (4oz one) at 4 months - but still liked/let me to feed it to him. He was however more laid back than friends DD's, he could do things but would wait until I was ready/ it was time and is still like that now whereas friends who all have DD's (poor DS!) go on and on until they get what it is they're waiting for.

Its not a girl/boy thing though. Its a personality/parenting thing. Like anything when faced with a hypothesis you can think of children/parents/Drs etc who fit the discription.

chutneypig · 13/04/2011 08:55

Purely anecdotal of course but my daughter is definitely more independent than her brother, always has been. They are twins.

As DD is heading out the door with her brother behind her, I'd better go!

exoticfruits · 13/04/2011 08:58

Down to the individual-also more likely in the eldest.

chicletteeth · 13/04/2011 09:00

My youngest (15 months sounds like your daughter), my eldest not so much but then he had nobody to lead by example (other children that is!)

I have twin brothers, my mum said they were "lazy" babies. They were happy with each other and didn't care about interacting more than they had to!

They barely spoke 'til they were four; they had their own twin language!

YABU - it's a sweeping generalisation quite frankly, purely based on anecdotal evidence.

TrillianAstra · 13/04/2011 09:03

Your sample size is not big enough.

You may also be influencing how babies/toddlers act by how you behave to them, given that you expect them to act differently.

YABU

TrillianAstra · 13/04/2011 09:05

Morloth love your word "anecdata"!

NestaFiesta · 13/04/2011 09:06

YABU. I'm tired of people thinking they knopw how half the babies in the world behave just becasue they've got one of each or their friends have a girl but they have a boy etc. Boys do this, girls do that.

It's boring and proves nothing. All babies and children are unique in their own way.

LiquoriceLila · 13/04/2011 09:11

YABU I have two boys, one was quite content to let me feed him etc, the younger was - and still is- fiercely independent. Totally depends on the child not the gender.

Restrainedrabbit · 13/04/2011 09:12

I have two girls and a boy (boy in the middle) and would say that it is possibly more an eldest child thing. You need the older one to grow up quicker and do things for themselves so you (sub?) consciously push them more, makes your life easier with no's 2/3 etc. Also with your first you can't wait to get to the next stage whereas with subsequent children you maybe baby them more?

Just a half baked theory based on nothing but flim flam and observation!

Flip

1 2