To expect a 4 year old to know right from wrong?

[Bubbaloo]

I went over to a friend the other week with both my ds's,who are 26 months and 4 months old.She also has 2 boys-a nearly 2 year old and a nearly 4 year old and both her boys drove me mad from the moment we arrived.Ds2 was asleep in his car seat but they wouldn't leave him alone and were prodding and poking him so much that they scratched his face.After a few minutes they woke him up and we had screaming for about 40 minutes.I explained he was trying to sleep,but they took no notice and were even climbing over me to get to ds2 when I took him out of his carrier.Anyway,the boys eventually went and played in the garden and ds2 went to sleep again.After an hour or so my friend did us some lunch.Beforehand her eldest boy must've asked me 5 times if ds2 was going to have lunch with them and I explained that he had no teeth,was still a baby at 4 months old and that he only drank milk.He seemed to understand.While the boys were eating their lunch and ds2 was asleep I went into the kitchen to get my coffee and within about 2 minutes he was screaming.I went back into the living room to find her eldest son bent over ds2's car seat and I couldn't believe what I saw-ds2 had 2 large chunks of cheese and bread shoved in his mouth and bread all over his top.I was absolutely livid and told my friends boy off,telling him that it was naughty aswell as dangerous and that the baby could've choked.I was even more annoyed due to the fact I had explained to him earlier that he only has milk.After about another 20 mins ds1 was getting tired so I made my excuses and left...pronto.
My friend has since emailed me but I haven't replied yet as I'm still really wound up.
AIBU to expect her son to know right from wrong,when it's already been explained to him?

It is fascinating (and scary), how subtle our social engineering can be. IMO girls and boys have similar desires to explore and nurture.

I am like you I haven't made up my mind, I am sort of on the leaning towards men and women do generally approach things differently but for some reason find it depressing to think that children would. Guess it boxes them in at such an early age.

I suspect it is now impossible to escape our social stereotypes but I think probably if we could then we'd find that it is more of an individual personality thing rather than based on gender.

Very interesting book/diary called 'there's a good girl' based on a Mother's observations on gender stereotyping in the early years.

PS I remember offering Yr 7 pupils (mostly boys. A difficult class in a difficult school in Tottenham) a choice between pink or white paper for a task and being surprised that they all - bar two - chose pink.

(sorry for digression from OP)

I'm undecided.

My DS has an interesting way of interpreting instructions. He can follow instructions to the letter (if he wants to) but we need to be careful about how we word then. For example, when DH and I told him 'Don't touch the oven, it is hot!', he immediately went and wrapped a tea towel around his hands to open the over door - he interpreted this instruction mean that he could touch it if he protected his hands.

There are some children I would trust with a newborn, but my DS would not be one of them. He is too curious. Also, when he is with other boisterous (sp?) any common sense goes out the window...

As for yelling at a friend's child... well my best friend and I have DCs that all get on well together, and we tend to take turns at yelling at them collectively so hopefully no harm done?

It is silly if you take it down to the bare bones and think what colour actually is. It's just something that makes the world more interesting and variable. It's not a logo or motif; it's not a sign of our identity. And yet so so many boys are AFRAID of pink. Not so prevelent with girls I don't think.

How interesting about the paper, though. Could that be because white is seen as normal and boring paper? Or maybe once one had chosen it, the others felt easier and more free to do so.

Anyway, I also apologise for severe tangeant from OP!!!

But go to any kids shop and see the baby clothes. Pink and butterflies and hearts for 'Girls 6mth-3yrs' and Cars and 'I am a Little Monster' slogans, blue and green for the Boys.

I rea;lly do think boys and girls are different in nature, sorry but I do, and I think it does everyone a disservice to pretend that they're not, or it's all social conditioning. Of coiurse elements are. DS2's favourite colour was pink right up until he started school, now he tells me 'I didn;t really like pink mummy I liked yellow, but I couldn't say it', and his favourite colour is blue. I think the way in which they play is very different and that's related to testosterone (see below).

I don't think that being different means that they can't achieve the same things, or that one has a lesser ability. I think boys have a far greater need to move than girls. Usually girls have better language skills (and that's related to testosterone levels). You have to recognise the role testosterone has on behaviour.

'a far greater need to move than little girls'

Wish someone would tell that to my heading-for-the-stairs-at-7-mths dd...

The only reason I sort of buy into the testosterone thing is that boys seem stupider. But I think it's probably more our social set-up. Not purposeful sterotyping, just the way things are.

Ok, gonna start another thread on this where we can debate away.

Its all very interesting!

If pink/blue behaviour is entirely nurture then why is it only boys who pick up sticks in the woods?

ps - I was a 'tomboy' who played with cars, not dolls...

My ds2 had a Barbie for his birthday when he was 2...

ds1's favourite 'toy' was a carpet sweeper...

But they pick up sticks and I never felt the urge!

(my dd picks up sticks in the wood. As a girl, we used to throw them in the river and watch them float)

Anyway, wanted to say - I have started a new thread in behaviour and development!

Come on over and lets leave this thread to the original question

Up until about the 1840s pink was always the colour you dressed boys in (or was it the 1880s? Can't remember - anyway, some time in the c19.) You would never have seen a girl in pink.

Yes, gess, I said some was down to nature - chemical differences, hormone differences. Women are naturally conditioned to be nurturing and caring, whereas men are naturally the protectors and the ones that win the food. That's what nature dictates, anyway. But there's also social conditioning involved in how children behave - girly or tomboying, poncy or laddish. They can wear pink or blue, play with cars or dolls. Stereotypes dictate what is right/wrong/acceptable for boys and girls to do.

I spent 4 years studying this and still can't decide which aspect is more dominant. I actually think nature is more dominant, but I can't base that on much other than my own opinion, experience as a nanny and studies. I haven't done any research whatsoever.

Yes, remember reading that somewhere, LB. Boys also wore dresses, same as girls, until the 20th century.

testosterone has quite a large effect on language

here for a lay article. Simon Baron-Cohen has even linked testosterone levels in the womb to the development of autism (with poor language and social skills). It might work for HFA/AS, not sure.

IIRC thre are differences in face processing as well between boys and girls. and boys have fewer cross connections at the corpus callosum which means they tend to process things like language differently. That's related to testosteron exposure in the womb.

There are hyptheses that the reason that things like ADHD are 4 times more common in boys is because of the role of testosterone.

It doesn't mean that girls don't climb stairs, but testosterone exposure in the womb alters brains, and does lead to differences. This may then be added to by culture.

4 to 5 year old boys have a testosterone surge which does mean their behaviour is different to girls. If you give girls testosterone they behave differently as well (not that you would without good reaosn as it would be unethical!).

LOL I should be working. I start my PGCE soon and have to get my maths knowledge topped up!

Your last post is really interesting, gess. Also on my degree, we looked at the more prevelant nature of ADHD these days, and some studies linked it to greater TV consumption where images move faster, dictated by better technologies. Some studies say that children are so transfixed by these fast-moving images and loud noises, that when something slower and more sedate happens, they get bored, and may also get hyperactive after being psyched up by these programmes. But they never held too much weight with me, because children who watch next to no TV get ADHD, too. I always considered it to be to do with chemicals in the brain and maybe stimulated by external factors like TV. But who knows.

i can trust my 4 utear old ds not to hurt the baby.he was 2.5 when i had dd2 and hit her/threw things at her a fair few times(whilst i was holding her or she was in her bouncy chair).eventually he grew out of that behaviour(and dd2 is now getting her revenge),and knows exactly how hes meant to be around babies.but children of that age are unpredictable,and i would never have expected the hobnob incident.

i do think boys and girls have different natures.my dd2 is in no way girly,she play fights with ds2 and they play car-crashes etc.ds2,despite being a 'lad',loves playing with dolls.

i find the difference is in things like concentration,my girls(well,dd1 and dd2)will happily concentrate on one task or one toy,but the boys seem to flit from one thing to another.and girls seem to be more independant,wanting to do things for themselves froman early age.my dds seem to have more concept of others' feelings than my ds's as well.

Gess - I have heard autism described as the extreme version of maleness. Not sure where that leaves the girls with ASD!

So divastrop, isn't that because your children are different? Rather than it being attributed to their gender?

Interesting article Gess.

oh the TV stuff has been linked ot autism as well (because its more common in places where it rains). The resarch was done by some economists, was not published in a peer reviewed journal and is (imo) utter bollocks. Scans have shown that children with SDHD have brains that are 'wired' differently. The corpus callosum (mentioned below) can have very poor connections in autism.

I agree diva with the differences you've mentioned. Most teachers will tell you that boys find it harder to sit still. Maybe in a school environment the problems with language become more apparent. There's a whole host of articles now on kinaesthetic learning which is a style that often suits boys (not necessarily ds2).

niece- that's Simon Baron-Cohens stuff on prenatal testosterone exposure- it can apply to girls as well- it;s just talking about different 'type' of brain-= female type and male type. I don't think it applies across the spectrum. It may be relevant for AS. SBC may disagree with me.

I think differences in concentration and things like that are down to nature. But whether boys like blue or pink and play with cars or dolls, is not down to nature.

I also think ADHD links to the make-up of the brain; am just relaying what we looked at on my degree (child psychology and education).

I am not sure that it will ever be easy to untangle the nature/nuture debates. You only have to look at families with same-sex DC like mine (2 boys) and you can see that they are totally different regardless of the fact that they appear to have been brought up the same way, as much as birth order will allow.

You can say that a dc was born with a certain disposition, suggesting that the behaviour is nature, but we have no idea how they were affected whilst in the womb by environmental factors or the mother's physical and psychological experience of one pregnancy compared with another.

To go back to the OP, I don't personally think the gender is the issue here. Girls are just as capable of behaving the way the boys did in this case. It is more a question of how they are brought up and how their behaviour is managed. I still think the OP was not unreasonable for being upset when the 3.11 y.o. didn't do as he was told. I would have expected my DS of the same age to leave the baby alone and he is the more boisterous of my two boys. I am shocked that the mother did nothing about it when her child had actually gone as far as to scratch the baby. I would have been mortified if one of my children did that.

Girl in pink
images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=mam.org/images/collections_euro_cotes.jpg&imgrefurl= mam.org/collections/earlyeuropean_detail_cotes.htm&h=398&w=300&sz=72&hl=en&start=206&tbnid=7CMUlY55v F_JkM:&tbnh=124&tbnw=93&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgainsborough%2Bportraits%2Bof%2Bchildren%26start%3D200%26 gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

Boy in pink (the baby)images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=www.takeonepicture.org/img/photos/picture/graham.jpg&imgref url=www.takeonepicture.org/picture/previous_graham.html&h=358&w=403&sz=71&hl=en&start=6&tbnid =AQd_ZVJbJuwJ1M:&tbnh=110&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3DHogarth%2BGraham%2BChildren%26gbv%3D2%26svnum% 3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

I think YANBU at all.