..to think there is nothing wrong with being a "pushy" parent (Part 2)

[Xenia]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1770750-To-think-that-there-is-nothing-wrong-with-being-a-pushy-mum?pg=40

Just in case anyone wanted to continue the thread which just got too full.

Didn't you know Clifton? Kids do football because they love it but kids do music because their pushy parents force them to.

A while ago a mum started a thread about how she had a teenage DS that was slacking. He would spend his evenings playing PC games, watching YouTube videos and texting mates and basically ignoring his school work. Wise MNetters turned with advice about limiting or eliminating his PC time. There were even suggestions of bribery and threats to take away his mobile.

However, insert the word 'pushy' into the OP and you get people going on about how it's wrong for parents to want their kids to do well and that the parent should support the kid rather than push the kid academically. Then there is all the stuff about pushy MC parents pushing DCs down an academic path even though they don't want to follow that path.

I must admit to being very . In one scenario it's ok for a mum to threaten, cojole or even bribe a DC. In the other, it isn't. And the difference between the two is?

Agree Habba. I also find it amusing when somebody claims that I am robbing my kids of their childhood. They get more experiences and fun than I ever had with my "relaxed" parents.

If classical music - performing it - has been one of he biggest pleasures of your life (as it has been for me) why would anyone not want their children to learn instruments and sing? Singing makes people happier - you use your lungs, you mix with others in choirs. I don't think my children have learned instruments etc because it will get them jobs. It is mostly because it's fun although grades 6 - 8 do get you UCAS points which might help on some jobs applications in due course and I suppose some university courses if your A level results themselves are not up to much.

Some skills are difficult and take a load of hard work - that is not a problem. Many good things come in life with hard work. One reason I do pretty well if I have worked for nearly 30 years without any maternity leaves whilst having 5 children so not surprising that commitment pays dividends. If you put the effort into things you get good and you can apply that no doubt to computer games and learning where to source cocaine and a load of other skills that we might not think quite so useful.

Clifton, Habba and I just had a long, thread-dominating conversation about this, and I don't want to keep reiterating it and get in the way of posters on a new thread. But since you asked, I'll just point out that you, in your original post, framed the whole discussion of pushy parenting around the issue of Oxbridge and middle class professions:

"I've noticed a lot of people on mumsnet think that we are still in the 20th century and you can get to Oxbridge from a mediocre school without much effort. AIBU to think that the world is much more competitive now and there is no choice but to push DC to achieve?"

"DH is an Oxbridge graduate. He absolutely hates his job and quite unhappy about it (he works in finance). Yet it pays for a nice house in a nice location, kids schools, holidays, me being a SAHM."

You then went on to stress that you were very keen for your DCs to begin learning the violin at the age of three, because you believe that learning the violin (in particular) at this age is beneficial for brain development.

I then pointed out that a lot of the hype about no longer being in the "20th century" and the fear that you can't "get to Oxbridge from a mediocre school without much effort" is totally over the top - but drives a lot of pushy parenting, including the belief that extra curricular activities are very important for university/professional entry.

Of course lots of kids enjoy playing music. But getting worked up about Oxbridge and the 21st century when your DC is three is pretty over the top

My oldest is 13 and I got 10 year old twins (outs herself).

I am not worried about the three year old just yet.

You were talking about your rationale for having your DC start music lessons at 3.

To be honest, at 10 and 13 it's a bit over the top too. Their real talents and interests are most likely yet to reveal themselves/be discovered.

Headsdown - wait a minute. Are you really saying it's a bit over the top having music lessons at 10 and 13????

No, I'm saying that worrying about Oxbridge, fretting over the fact that we live in a 'competitive' world, and getting angsty about whether or not they will become middle class professionals is over top, at 10 and 13.

I agree that age 3 is over the top (sorry Clifton) but why is 13 over the top?

DS started the violin at nearly 6. He wanted to learn the piano at 7 but I didn't see the point since his hands were too small. He eventually startied aged 9. At aged 10 we got him Guitar Hero on the Wii for his birthday. He fancied being a rock guitarist so he bugged us for an electric guitar plus lessons.

By the time DS was 13 he was an advanced musician in the first two instruments and intermediate in the guitar. All this time the extent of my pushy-ness was to nag him to practice in between weekly lessons.

I fail to see how any of this is OTT particular since all this was DS's choice.

Gosh, I am not saying that 13 is over the top-to-early to take music lessons.

I'm just saying that it is OTT to get strung out about whether or not they will get to Oxbridge/become middle class professionals, and what a parent can do to 'push' them to that very specific goal, when they are hardly in their teens, let alone three.

Recently there was a thread about GCSE triple science. The OP's DD wasn't selected by the school to do triple science and the OP wanted to know the impact of this on her DD's dreams of studying X at university. The feedback from MNetters who were academics was that it weakens the DD's application.

Well, I bet that mum wished that she got a bit 'angsty' about her DD's subjects before she was 13 and had failed to be selected for triple science.

Heads - that's a funny term you keep using ad nauseum. middle class professionals You seem to use it in the way some people use the phrase in trade.

Is your contempt spread equally between all professions? Or just those you deem middle class? And which ones, exactly, are they?

This thread, and its predecessor, have both been fascinating. They really have.

Habba - there have been many many such threads. So it's possible we are remembering different iterations of this age old dilemma. But often it's more about the mother's dream of what the child might go on to study than the child's own plans or dreams.

Heads - why do you keep injecting "middle class" into all/most of your points? The latest being "middle class professionals". Are you saying that not only do we pushy parents want our DCs to be solicitors for example, we want them to be MC solicitors

I didn't see the last thread but am interested in this... marking place. I am apparently 'pushy' for doing a bit of research on the best preschools local to me rather than sending DS to the closest. I suspect I will be classified as pushy based on this, I thought I was doing the bare minimum!

Habba - eh? Being a solicitor is a middle class profession. If you are a solicitor then you are a middle class professional, there's no two ways about that. The OP was very clear about wanting her children to enter middle class professions.

Some spheres of work are middle class and some are not - what's controversial about that?

I agree with Russians on this - often it's more about the mother's dream of what the child might go on to study than the child's own plans or dreams.

I don't see why people are getting het up about the fact that I've pointed out that class is a big part of the way the OP framed the conversation on the last thread. It's obvious.

Heads - most people just call them 'the professions' because generally speaking, the professions form a class subset. To call them 'middle class professions' implies that you think there are some upper and some working class professions. And I'm intrigued as to what those might be.

I find that, more and more often, people are using the word profession or professional to apply to any specialised type of work - or to express the view that they (or someone else) is very good at it.

I hear people talking about 'professional footballers'; 'professional cleaning service'. Are these traditional middle class jobs, no, they're not. Am I going to turn round to someone who uses that word and say, "I think you'll find that's not actually a profession"? The word professional is being used every more loosely, and in that context there's no great harm in being more specific.

Also, there are many, many middle class jobs which are not 'professions' in the more old fashioned sense. If you're going to be strict about the word, then someone working in arts administration at a high level, is not a professional, though the job would generally be thought of as middle class.

Many people would still dearly like to see their DCs enter one of 'the professions' because of the cachet they believe they still hold. In that context, it's not so unusual to talk about "middle class professions" and lots of people do.

I think you'll find that people who are actually members of the professions don't though. :) Just because many people misuse a term doesn't actually change its definition, this isn't one of those instances where a term can change its meaning through useage.

Incidentally, I don't know a single colleague, either in the UK or internationally, who hopes their kids will follow them. Obviously I don't know what every single person I have ever worked with hopes for their kids, just the ones I get on well with - but still. We all seem to be taking the view that our kids will likely be doing stuff we (or anyone else) haven't even thought of, yet. Possibly involving SPACE. Or similar.

People's use of a term does change its meaning. That's another debate entirely, but the definition of words is flexible and does change with use.

Your posts read like you're being a teensy bit snide for the sake of being snide - is it not the right, posh term? Do you want to point out that I'm making some big mistake?

Fact is, is not an uncommon expression, used by lots of people who comment on these issues, and for good reason, since we're not in the 1950s anymore, and the job market doesn't look quite the same.

The OP talked about wanting her DCs to go into Finance like their dad. I don't recall her referring to "middle class professions".