to think a lot of this “boy mum” stuff is a load of sexist nonsense?

[Cookiesandcream1989]

I’m always hearing people (on social media and in real life) talking about being “boy mums”, mostly saying how hard it is to raise boys as they are always being dangerous, loud, disruptive and disobedient, the tacit implication being that girls are quiet, do as they are told and that raising them is easy.

I have two girls, and I am not exaggerating when I say every single posts, video or anecdote of the supposedly “dangerous, madcap antics” “boy mums” have to deal with is something my girls do regularly. I’m thinking mostly of toddler/young children stuff. For example, I saw a video the other day of a child around 18 months trying to climb over a cardboard box and then tumbling off it (soft landing, no danger whatsoever), with a caption saying something like “see, this is what boy mums have to put up with!” and I’m just like… isn’t that just totally normal toddler behaviour for both sexes?? When my girls were that age I felt like they spent every minute of every day trying to climb up everything. My cousin posted one last week of her 3 year old splashing in some mud with a comment about being a “boy mum” and it was just such a massive eye-roll. As if little girl toddlers don’t love splashing around in mud every chance they get, too!

It's mostly just eye-rolling stuff, but it does actually sometimes annoy me, because I sometimes feel like people are assuming parents of girls have some sort of blessed easy life where we’re just sitting around getting our hair brushed, or relaxing while our perfect little angels play dollies, while “boy mums” are actually doing hard work, which is so far from the truth that it annoys me. My girls both come home from school/nursery covered in mud every day, they act like they are allergic to doing as they’re told, they climb, they jump, they playfight – and as far as I’ve seen of other girls, they are totally normal in this regard.

My in-laws especially are big on the whole “boys are loud and dangerous and misbehave and girls are quiet and obedient” thing (to the point where it comes up in conversation every time we see them🙄), and the weird thing is, our nephews on that side actually happen to be naturally very placid, introverted and timid, while it’s our girls who are climbing the walls, being rambunctious and rarely do as they’re told without a struggle. And yet still they go on about how boys are so “naughty” and hard work, and "girls don't misbehave" (verbatim quote from MIL!!!!) which I just find a bit insulting really, because if what they are saying is true, then it stands to reason that either we must have an easy life, or we must just be rubbish parents, because girls are supposed to be “naturally obedient” and yet we still have to put loads of work into getting ours to behave, so how hopeless must we be?

So, what’s the consensus? Is it true that boys are naturally naughtier and harder work, or is it sexist nonsense?

(For the sake of the poll, let’s stick to thinking about little children rather than older kids/teens.)

What fresh hell is this?

Boy Mums?

Yeah girls and boys can be different but 'Boy Mums'. Meh.

Er... what?! lol I have no idea how you have reached that conclusion from anything I have said... The reason it irritates me is because from what I've seen in my own life, the stereotypes just aren't true.

And, like I said in my OP, I take it particularly personally when people in my own life bang on about how much harder "boy mums" have it, thereby insinuating that me and DH have a much easier life as parents than they do, when I don't actually think we do at all.

I am delighted to have my girls, and I would have been delighted to have boys too (given that I personally believe that the way they turn out is more down to their own individual personalities and the way they are raised than their sex).

The "teen girls are all horrendous" is just as annoying a sexist stereotype as "all little boys are nightmares" is!

It's sexist nonsense which pigeon-holes children and sets expectations of them that they shouldn't feel obliged to meet - it also limits their opportunities.
I don't know if you ever watched Channel 4's documentary series "The Secret Lives of 4 year olds" (they also did 5, 6 and 7 year olds). It was a fascinating series that observed a whole range of young behaviour (and also showed how individual each of us is!). From memory, one of the things they did was to ask a group of 4 year olds who did different jobs: all of them (boys and girls) said a pilot would be a man and a ballet dancer would be a woman. 🙄Where are they getting this rigid thinking from when they haven't even started school yet?
It's the same with the sexist nonsense you're talking about. So girls are led to believe from a very young age that they should be compliant and well-behaved like "nice little girls" and boys can be adventurous (climbing trees and getting dirty).
I agree with you 100% OP - it would infuriate me too.

I'm a mum of both. The experience is different when they're adults because societal norms decree it so. If you're in any doubt try posting on here that you plan to treat your daughter to a city break while her DH stays behind with the children. Then try it again substituting son for daughter.

Overall I think it’s nonsense

I think something does change in you once you have a boy as you can see some things from a male point of view.

And it’s almost like you go through school, childhood etc as a boy (through your child’s eyes) which is a new perspective.

But I think those with only boys and those with one/ some of each align in that respect, and it’s mums with only girls who have the different experience.

I find it odd when people align the “one of eachers” with those who solely have girls.

The thread is about children, so either the child results are significant/persuasive or they aren't. Looking at adult results shouldn't change that either way.

It might of course tell us something about nature vs nurture, but even that's ambiguous.

The paper notes that comparing child and adult results is difficult (because methodologies changes).

But putting that aside, would the fact that adult differences are greater than child differences tell us....

i) ...it's nurture. Societal expectation takes their toll over time. We start out pretty equal in nature, but society/nurture warps that as we integrate into society.
ii) ...it's nature. Children are impressionable, but as people grow in confidence and freedom, the innate gender differences show through.
iii) ...something else. Both nature and nurture factors change fundamentally between childhood and adulthood (e.g. around sex, coupling, child-rearing, adult (male) violence), explaining the differences in some other way.

It depends what you mean. I think the Instagram “I’m a boy mum” etc thing is nonsense, but I don’t think it’s nonsense to say raising each is different.

And, like I said in my OP, I take it particularly personally when people in my own life bang on about how much harder "boy mums" have it, thereby insinuating that me and DH have a much easier life as parents than they do, when I don't actually think we do at all

Yes, but the point people are making is that "boy mums" (and I have NEVER used that phrase or seen it on SM as it sounds stupid) get just as many irritating comments about how girls stay with you, girl clothes are so much nicer, the bond is better, boys dont give a shit about you blah blah blah.

Do you really think mums of boys dont get those annoying comments just as much? Ive seen plenty of comments on this site about "ew I would never want a boy" etc etc

The comments might be different but we get them too!

Or the gut punch “a son is a son until he gets a wife!!!”

haha yes! a quote from the 1950s or whenever it was

There has been research on this both recent and much older. In the older research, women were given young children to hold and told that they were a boy or a girl. Regardless of their actual sex, the women described the babies they thought were girls as "fussy" or "restless" and attempted to settle and quiet them. When given different babies described as boys, the babies were described as "strong" and "active" and were encouraged to move and vocalise. The recent research was not as relevant, it was a TV thing about offering children toys. Toddlers who were described to the adult participants as boys were offered "boy toys" cars and construction stuff and the ones described as girls were offered dolls and cuddlies. Even more interesting, the children who chose the "wrong" things were redirected onto the "right" ones!

lol, a MN stereotype one.

It doesn't matter who you ask on MN, whether the comment is backed by scientific data from a billion sources, you'll ALWAYS get those MNers who will say "that's not true, mine is different".

Around 200 posts so far. Are we getting 200 disprovers out of 200 readers, or are we getting 200 disprovers out of 10,000 readers?

I'd love to see reliable data on this one.

@AngelicKaty

all of them (boys and girls) said a pilot would be a man and a ballet dancer would be a woman. 🙄Where are they getting this rigid thinking from when they haven't even started school yet?

They're not wrong, though, are they?

US ballet dancers (2021): 78% women, 22% men.
US pilots and flight engineers (2022): 94% men, 6% women.

That of course doesn't mean that only men/women should do those jobs. And we should stress that to children (who can be rigid thinkers).

But it does mean they are well-evolved to spot patterns, and possibly even that there is something innate that just makes it feel more natural to them that a pilot would be a man / dancer would be a woman.

(for avoidance of doubt: by 'natural', I don't mean 'good', I just mean natural. Lots of good things, lots of bad things, and lots of mixed things can be natural).

The sexism can be really damaging - the types that say girls are little flowers and boys are hurricanes will then chastise girls for getting muddy or being boisterous but excuse boys being destructive with “boys will be boys”. So the kids learn to behave based on what is expected of them.

My nephew was dirt phobic and gentle, my daughter is fearless, messy, unpredictable- we’re constantly trying to stop her skulling herself as she climbs everything she sees. When we pick her up from nursery she is always the muckiest. She loves dinosaurs, monsters, vehicles, butterflies and unicorns.

Stereotypes change over time. I doubt many of us would like to live our lives based on stereotypes of women from Victorian times, even though those stereotypes would no doubt have been considered proven at the time. In a hundred years time people won't want to live according to stereotypes caused by modern socialisation of children.

The study you picked to illustrate your point that gender differences are observable in young children does show significant or persuasive results that gender differences are observable in young children.

Oh yes, I totally agree. The way some people phrase it and go on about it is so dehumanising sometimes.

I like the "but it's perfectly normal" bit 😂. Next time my little boy does something he shouldn't no need for a difficult conversation- just oh well he's a boy.

The fact that some stereotypes differed in the past doesn't mean that modern stereotypes are false, nor that they have no innate component. It certainty doesn't tell us whether noticing, or conforming to, a stereotype is good or bad.

i) "matchstick makers are women": yes, most makers of matches were women (men did one bit of the process, women did most of the rest). That stereotype has gone because society has changed. It wasn't false.

ii) "women are innately suited to, or attracted to, making matches": I don't know enough about Victorian society or matchstick-making to judge this. Maybe yes, maybe no. It's not a moral judgement though.

iii) "women should make matches, men should not". This is absolutely not entailed by either i) or ii). It requires an extra value judgment. It's possible to believe both i) and ii) and to strongly disagree with iii).

@casapenguin

The study you picked to illustrate your point that gender differences are observable in young children does show significant or persuasive results that gender differences are observable in young children.

I agree (unless you've missed a "not"). That was the authors' conclusion too (and those of the authors of the underlying papers). I agree it also says the same for adults (albeit moreso, and in some dimensions not seen in children).

I agree gender differences are observable. First of all it's on average or in general. Not all boys or girls conform to stereotypes in every way. For example my sister preferred toy cars to baby dolls, my son likes rainbow outfits - this sort of deviation is very normal.

Secondly let's say there's a typical boy trait of playing sword fighting with sticks - I see boys doing this more than girls. I have a problem with people seeing this as 'naughty' or offering sympathy to me as a boy mum. I also don't think your daughter is better behaved than my son because she happens to like sitting and colouring in. And I also worry we don't expect or allow girls to just roll around in the mud etc..

So to agree there are gender differences isn't the same as agreeing boys are trouble and that either requires sympathy, acceptance or punishment.

Ok? Obviously I think that’s silly and harmful and sexist too… What part of anything I have said would suggest I don’t? They are two sides of the same sexist coin!

There might be something in this thought.

of course #notallboymums. but I do think people who are so performative about it are hiding some kind of insecurity/ disappointment.

But I don’t see why anyone has to make a thing about having just boys. It’s not that different. But everyone needs to fit a label these days or find a way to mark themselves as different or special.

I had a friend who always went on about how difficult it was having 3DC compared to me only having 2…‘it’s so much harder/ you wouldn’t understand/ it’s a big family thing…tedious af. Especially as her examples weren’t exactly unique. She maybe had a point about being outnumbered, but I think it was more about asserting her superiority as a parent .

Boys and girls act differently in groups.

I Volunteer to teach at My sport club,in primary schools etc and before the lesson starts when they are all togeher generally all the boys fight each other climb on things and rough house(even the calmer boys) whilst the girls either come chat to me, practice or sit and chat to each other.
But when they're by themselves individually I don't really see a difference. The one time when my class was misbehaving so badly it was mainly the girls.
That's just my experience there's definitely a difference in the way the interact in group settings.
But both girls and boys and are amazing :)
I think parenting boys and girls is different to teaching them If you get what I mean.