Small boys, rough play and being kept in at playtime...

[Pantone363]

Ok I want honest opinions (OP you are a twat and in the wrong are fine ).

I had a phone call after school today from DS teacher regarding an incident yesterday.

DS and some other children were playing tag (although more likely the grab each others coats swinging them round kind of tag). Some girls were playing too. DS caught one girl and pushed/pulled her to the ground (there's no evidence today she wasn't playing along doing the same thing to the boys). The girl then says that DS and 3 other boys kicked her whilst she was on the floor. DS admits pulling her to the ground but says he didn't kick her.

All 4 boys have lost their lunchtimes today and tomorrow and then breaktime for the next two days.

I have a few problems with this

1. She was playing along fine, if it was my DD I'd be telling her not to play tag with the boys if she can't suck it up if they get a bit rough.
   

1. DS swears blind he didn't kick her
   

1. Nobody else saw the kicking, theres no evidence other than this girls report to her mother.
   

1. Where were the playground staff?
   

1. I can't see that keeping 4 boisterous 5 yr old boys in all day is going to help anyone.
   

I've made DS write the girl a card saying sorry for pulling her over.

Am I being a job for thinking this is poorly handled and just point the finger at the rough naughty boys?

[lljkk]

Left

[DeWe]

If it was my ds (who can be rough) I would be telling him that pulling someone to the ground was worthy of losing his play, boy or girl and whether they were playing a game or not.

Losing the playtime is partually to give them a time to think about why they shouldn't have done it, partually to give the victim some comfort and confidence in knowing that it won't happen at the next play time.

I think (and I would do if it was my ds) that is a reasonable reaction, even taking acount that they may not have kicked her-and most year R boys would deny it, probably even if they'd been caught red handed as it were.

[NeoMaxiZoomDweebie]

Pantone. When we tell girls OR boys that they have been hurt in a game and that then offenders are punished, we are telling them that they have RIGHT to be safe in all environments and with other children. And that NOBODY is allowed to hurt them.

You appear to think that "rough play" is some sort of magical password which removes all rules.

[desertgirl]

Surely the truth is not as black and white as children having the right never to be hurt in play? If a child is playing rugby and is hurt during a legitimate play, he or she needs to accept that it basically goes with the territory.

Obviously this wasn't "legitimate play" as such but if you exclude the kicking, it sounds like an inevitable part of that sort of game. Which is not restricted to boys - I understand why schools have to ban the sort of wild games that kept my generation supplied with bruises, but I do also think it's a bit of a shame.

[NeoMaxiZoomDweebie]

You're maybe correct in that desert BUT the OP keeps separating this into a gender issue.

She says in her last post

What are we teaching girls when we say "here's a group of boys playing rough, you can play with them and also play rough but as soon as you get hurt you can cry to the teacher, not be punished yourself for playing rough and that's fine

Which is bollocks. What she's doing is victim blaming. Which is a sick thing for a woman to do.

[Grammaticus]

Rough play has no place in a school playground and your son deserved to be pulled up for what he did, regardless of kicking or not kicking. You did the right thing with the card, well done. I hope you have kept your thoughts about the rest to yourself because you might be being a little bit of a twat. And I say that with love

[pictish]

That's a good point.

You have a daughter too - do you want to encourage the idea that girls have no right to complain when boys maltreat them? Because this is where it starts...in infancy.

Do you allow your son to play rough with his sister? I assume they do play together sometimes. Is it ok for her to be hurt by her brother, even though, as you say yourself, she doesn't like rough play?
I hope not.

It's not alright for him to hurt or intimidate this girl either.
Don't cast aspersions about the validity of her complaint. Stop victim blaming. Stop regarding boys as the undisputed kings of the playground, while girls should know their place.
What are you teaching your own daughter with this attitude?

Think.

[cory]

So OP, what will your reaction be when it is a boy who complains about not liking to be pushed over and kicked?

My ds got to the stage where he didn't want to go to school at all because one of the larger and more boisterous boys in the class was always pushing him over. Should he have been told not to play with other boys?

There are plenty of physical outlets for boys (and girls) which do not involve anybody getting hurt. Children need to learn to restrict themselves to these. It will take time and sometimes accidents happen, but they still need to learn.

At dc's school they were always told that you have to tell an adult when anybody is being hurt or frightened. This was a good rule, easy to understand and remember, and it did mean that the children had to learn to organise their play so that nobody did get hurt or frightened.

[desertgirl]

Dweebie, I think the language was wrong but sympathise with her principle. If it were not for the kicking which (assuming it occured) does change the picture, you have several kids playing a game which involves making each other fall over. One gets hurt by a fall. The others get punished. I am not convinced this actually sends the right message to anyone; if the hurt one were my child, I hope I would be saying 'well you shouldn't have been playing games which are banned at school; you know that if people keep falling over then someone will end up hurt'. And to the others, 'you shouldn't have been playing banned games, and when someone gets hurt you should stop and help them not keep playing' (assuming they did) - surely this is what most people would do at home? or not?

Basically they were all at fault - in that they were playing the banned game - they should all have been punished; you don't get a free pass just by getting hurt, and it doesn't make you a victim. Or at least you say 'well she has punished herself by getting hurt' or something, to acknowledge that she was also involved in the banned activity. And it would be exactly the same if it were one of the boys who was hurt....

The boys and girls language is just over generalising - more boys than girls probably do fall into the 'likes rough games' camp and more girls than boys probably prefer the quieter games, though my DS and DD are oddities and both generally play far more with friends of the other gender.

[desertgirl]

[Pantone363]

Desertgirl exactly.

What I was trying to get across is that if I come to you and say "let's play this game that involves pulling each other over" and you agree and then we do it for a while but you then get hurt, is it fair that I then get in trouble when you were a willing participant all along?

The fact that it was a girl is relevant because I don't think had it been a boy they would have been punished to the extent they have. And I do tell my daughter not to come crying to me if she plays rough with DS and gets hurt. She is choosing to do something that she knows is intrinsically rough!

[Pantone363]

Obviously it would be a different reaction if DS tackled or hurt her out of the blue without her consenting to the game

[NeoMaxiZoomDweebie]

Pantone if you think for one minute that a little boy complaining of being pushed over and then kicked would not have resulted in the same actions then you are either paranoid or deeply sexist.

She was playing a game she NEVER "consented" to being pushed on the floor and then kicked.

[GibberTheMonkey]

I always find it a little crazy that they punish restless little people by taking away their ability to let off steam. Seems a completely counter productive way to make them behave better to me.

[Sheshelob]

As someone who was sister to a "rough" brother, I can say that if the lesson isn't taught early, it may never be learned. I had to tell my brother aged 25 that giving me a dead arm was assault, and he wasn't allowed to do it.

And my brother is a nice guy. He just grew up in a household where he wasn't ever properly punished for hitting his sister.

My son is a big boy for his age. I am already trying to foster good, gentle physicality in him. The letting off steam argument is bollocks. There are plenty of other ways for children to let off steam than stamping on people or wrestling on the floor like idiots.

Training boys to be aggressive is a throw back to a world where we had land wars to fight. It is a construct, and it is about time we all grow up.

[YoniSingWhenYoureWinning]

Bloody hell.

Let's just say both you and your son have a few tough life lessons coming down the track.

Good luck with that.

[pictish]

She - I can totally relate to that. My older brother assaulted me regularly, yet was never brought to task because 'all siblings fight'.
I remember him booting me in the knee when I was 14 and he was 20 and me crashing to the floor in agony. If I ever hit him back, he would simply hit me back again with dreadful force. I was physically terrified of him.

My mother never saw it for what it was.

[pictish]

And I do tell my daughter not to come crying to me if she plays rough with DS and gets hurt.

I have no words.

[NeoMaxiZoomDweebie]

Pictish neither do I and all this crap from a woman who has both sexes.

[desertgirl]

pictish - why do you think that a participant in something which means someone is likely to get hurt is a 'victim'? This is not you and your bullying brother, this is kids of the same age, at an age where the physical differences are far less marked.

DD bites DS (thankfully nobody else) She is always told off (and punished in some way) for this. However if the two of them were fighting, ie both trying to hurt each other, they are both told off and DS gets a lot less sympathy, even though he is still a 'victim' as IF you fight, you WILL get hurt, and there are other, better, options for dealing with annoying little sisters.

Similarly with rough play - someone will get hurt; usually not intentionally but it's going to happen. IF you participate in a game of 'chase' where people end up on the floor, you WILL end up on the floor and it may well hurt. It isn't victimhood.

[MadeOfStarDust]

I always find it a little crazy that they punish restless little people by taking away their ability to let off steam. Seems a completely counter productive way to make them behave better to me.

They are being punished - AND all the other children are getting some respite from "rough play"...

[Sheshelob]

It's really interesting, though. My DS' best friend is a girl who sometimes hits. For her, it is just seen as a phase she will grow out of, an anomaly. My DS has also started hitting, and I'm slightly staggered by the way it is excused away as boy behaviour.

How can we expect to eradicate violence at the hands of men if we as parents don't deal with it when they are boys?

[Secondme]

I think I can actually see what you are trying to say (or at least see some good in your words). The girl was joining in with the game. Pulling, pushing, generally being quite boisterous with the boys.
My dd and when I played boisterous games with boys, at any age, you decide to be boisterous. You can't join in with a boisterous game and then not expect it to be boisterous.
The girl didn't give her consent to be pulled to the floor obviously but in that kind of game she can't expect to be untouched. Now, I do not think it is her fault in any way, she can't say that
If any other child willingly joins in (boy or girl) it's fair for them to complain they don't like it when they get hurt? She willingly joined in. Ok, it's not right for her to be hurt but if she sees the game, sees it's boisterous and then joins in, she is being boisterous too. My dd used to join in with the boys games, some very violent, but said that she was joining in with being boisterous so couldn't complain about the boys doing it. IYSWIM? What I was trying to get across is that if I come to you and say "let's play this game that involves pulling each other over" and you agree and then we do it for a while but you then get hurt, is it fair that I then get in trouble when you were a willing participant all along? I agree with this. Regardless of gender, this is what happened. If you think about it, it could have just as easily been ops son that was hurt.
I might be completely wrong but just trying to see what op might have been trying to say.
Sorry for the overuse of the word boisterous.

[GibberTheMonkey]

Madeofstardust

No problems with them being punished. Just find it odd the way they do it.

[Secondme]

Didn't mean to write she can't say that sorry.