DS1 thinks DS2 gets away with everything

[MegBusset]

Sure this is fairly standard teenage stuff but I'm still fairly new to the teen years so could use some perspective!

DS1 and DS2 are 14 and 12, get along well enough most of the time, like most brothers know exactly how to wind each other up. Are well behaved and generally lovely, and no SN. They do have spats but nothing out of the ordinary that I've noticed and can each give as good as they get.

DS1 has always been super sensitive especially to anything that he perceives as an injustice. His injustice scales are very finely tuned especially when it comes to DS2! In his ideal world I would intervene in every minor sibling annoyance or squabble.

DS2 OTOH is much more laid back and quick to forget squabbles. (Admittedly not a teen yet so this may change!) Can be annoying and does know exactly how to push DS1's buttons.

Example: over the weekend we have some friends over and DSes are on the Switch with other kids. An argument breaks out because DS1 wants to play a game in a serious way and DS2 is just messing about with it in an annoying way.

I come in and suggest that they find a different game to play that everyone can enjoy. DS1 and DS2 again start squabbling about the first game. I say (a bit more firmly) that with guests in the house we are not going to argue over a game and to find something different to play.

DS1 stomps off for the rest of the afternoon and at bedtime is still very upset, tears etc because in his opinion I let DS2 get away with 'spoiling the game', "he always does this" etc. Why should he get away with it with no punishment.

I try to explain to him that actually it was one minor squabble after they'd been playing nicely for ages, which they usually do, and that perhaps it is better to focus on the positive times he has with his brother rather than store up a list of grudges? But find myself having to justify why I didn't bawl DS2 out in front of a room full of guests.

DS2 meanwhile has forgotten the whole thing and gone happily to bed!

So not quite sure if I handled this right or could have done something different. I have Read How To Talk etc and generally try to listen to all their woes but was I bu to expect them to sort this out without all the drama?

I always say you’re not the same, why should I treat you the same. I treat you both fairly, but not the same.

@Temp023

I always say you’re not the same, why should I treat you the same. I treat you both fairly, but not the same.

Omg you r my new inspirational hero this is fabulous!!!

I was your DS1 as a child and early teen - obsessed with 'fair' treatment between me and my younger brother. I used to complain, sulk and bear grudges for weeks. I really believed he was treated more favourably in so many situations.
In reality, he did have the advantage of me going first (so our naturally cautious patents had relaxed in a number of areas by the time it came to him, because I had proved it was safe to do so) and we were just very different - he is a much more laid back, water off a duck's back, sunny type of personality.
If it is any consolation, I grew out of it about 14 - just matured and lived my own life and stopped bothering about how that compared to his life.
I would encourage them in different interests and groups of friends, make sure you are being fair, and hold the line as calmly as you can.

DS1 stomps off for the rest of the afternoon and at bedtime is still very upset, tears etc because in his opinion I let DS2 get away with 'spoiling the game'
It's about different opinions. DS1 thinks the game should be played 'properly'. DS2 thinks it's a game and that means having fun by exploring sideways. Neither is right, neither is wrong.

However, DS1 needs to think about who had the worst afternoon - the straight-laced or the laissez-faire child.

I think the game example comes down to how the guests want/expect to play. Was it the case that the friends came round expecting to play properly (eg complete a quest or similar) and dc2 was just dicking around meaning none of them could do what they'd agreed they would do?

Tbh I don't think any of the guests were that bothered about watching DS1 play this game. (In his head they were all enthralled but I didn't read the room like that!) He is not the best at picking up social cues in this kind of situation.

I think the older child always feels they are treated more unfairly than the younger. Looking back I suspect they are correct. I did get away with murder most of the time!!

My advice would be to really listen to what DS1 is saying. Find a time where it’s just you and him. Go for a walk perhaps as it’s always easier, for teens particularly, to talk without eye contact. See if you can find some compromises and make a few adjustments.

Although my children are younger I
always accept if I’ve been unfair and don’t try to justify my decisions. Sometimes just having things heard and acknowledged is as good as having got it right in the first time.

You could also be a little bit Devils Advocate and hear him out and say that next time they have guests electrical devices stay in the drawer. If there are certain toys or devices that cause regular problems I just say no to them completely at certain times. Games consoles in the morning before school is a no for us as it puts the kids in a crappy head space before school.

"However, DS1 needs to think about who had the worst afternoon - the straight-laced or the laissez-faire child."

Exactly this. He made a huge fuss over something that barely even registered on my tell-off-ometer. However for him it's the principle and I do appreciate that he genuinely felt frustrated. I don't want to give him the impression that his feelings don't matter.

"You could also be a little bit Devils Advocate and hear him out and say that next time they have guests electrical devices stay in the drawer."

Lol, they are just as capable of being stubborn and inflexible over a board game or any other activity

I actually see DS1's point. He's playing the game properly; DS2 comes along and spoils it, and you just revert to "oh just play something else". DS2 is not bothered about the game anyway so this doesn't affect him - it disproportionately affects DS1.

If they were playing snakes and ladders and DS2 decided to invent a rule that you went up snakes and down ladders and DS1 complained that they were ruining the game, would your response be that they should just play something else? Or would you tell DS2 to play following the rules? Or suggest that they have 1 game with actual rules and 1 game with alternate rules?

If your response to strife is always to distract and move away, rather than actually resolving the cause of strife and DS1 feels (whether this is accurate or not) that DS2 is always the one causing the problems, I'd agree that this is favouring DS2.

Yes, I'd tend to agree with UseratRandom's post, op.

"If they were playing snakes and ladders and DS2 decided to invent a rule that you went up snakes and down ladders and DS1 complained that they were ruining the game, would your response be that they should just play something else? Or would you tell DS2 to play following the rules? Or suggest that they have 1 game with actual rules and 1 game with alternate rules?"

An interesting comparison. I think I would say that they need to agree a way to play, and if they can't agree then they need to find something to play that they can agree on. (Playing snakes and ladders with snakes going down and ladders up is not inherently superior to the other way around! It's just a different way to play.)

But there’s another lesson that needs to be played out here too. Life IS unfair, it’s full of small and large injustices and if your eldest is going to overreact to everyone of them he’s going to struggle as an adult.

I can remember clearly coming to that realisation myself around his age. It was a real gut buster. I think I was bleating to my father about something and he just blurted out ... ‘life is unfair, get used to it’. Fucking hell it was like he’s told me Santa had died. Sometimes you just have to suck it up and get on with things, which is what I think you’re getting at.

@MegBusset

"If they were playing snakes and ladders and DS2 decided to invent a rule that you went up snakes and down ladders and DS1 complained that they were ruining the game, would your response be that they should just play something else? Or would you tell DS2 to play following the rules? Or suggest that they have 1 game with actual rules and 1 game with alternate rules?"

An interesting comparison. I think I would say that they need to agree a way to play, and if they can't agree then they need to find something to play that they can agree on. (Playing snakes and ladders with snakes going down and ladders up is not inherently superior to the other way around! It's just a different way to play.)

Ah but there are rules to the game and if DS2 is purposely not adhering to the rules and DS1 wants to, I can see why he’d be pissed off.

So I would say to DS2 that unless he plays by the official rules or rules that all players had agreed to he needs to go find something else to do. If he said no then I’d offer to sit down and play with DS1.

Yes exactly, it is to try to pick your battles. There is a long list of stuff which I absolutely would not let either of them get away with (from violence, deliberate destruction of stuff, etc down to invading privacy, calling names, disparaging each other). It's this low level stuff which he is quite right to call out but not to take to heart and nurse a list of all the minor wrongs (I say again he is just as capable of winding up DS2, but that's water off a duck's back).

& in general actually they have a really good relationship compared to many siblings, so really it's about getting a sense of perspective. Perhaps I'm just expecting too much of him in that respect.

You admit that your DS2 was 'being annoying' playing the game and because you stopped them, that meant your DS1 losing out on the game so I can see his point here. Especially as it sounds as if DS2 winding DS1 up always means that whatever they are doing is stopped and they are told to find something else to do. DS1 is always losing out in that scenario.

What happens when you tell DS2 to stop winding DS1 up?

I'm with DS1 here. He was obviously invested in the game and trying to play it properly. DS2 loses interest and starts winding DS1 up by playing it incorrectly. DS1 was rightly annoyed by it, why does DS2 get to change the rule arbitrarily because he wants too. When trying to sort it, you make them both turn it off. In reality DS2 wasn't bothered anyway, and DS1 had the frustration of not only his game being spoilt but it being removed too. All because DS2 didn't want to play it properly anymore.

If you were playing pontoon as a family and DS2 started taking more cards at his turn, or looking at what was next on the pile or deciding actually 25 was what was needed, you wouldn't just tell him the game needed to be played differently, you'd tell him to play properly or not play at all. There was no difference in this.

Generally DS2 would be told to stop being annoying and like a pp says, given the option of playing nicely or having to go do something else. (The same when DS1 winds up DS2 - it's not a one way street.)

On this occasion with a house full of guests, I expected them to prioritise not making guests feel uncomfortable by bickering, and finding a compromise.

I do wonder if being too scrupulously fair / equal about every last thing brings a bit of a lack of resilience / flexibility when you have to suck it up on occasion.

But in the house full of guests why couldn't you just tell DS2 to stop it and come off the game?

It's a valuable lesson to learn, but a hard one if you're someone who likes to stick to the rules. If you're doing an activity in a group, and one person is dicking around, and the rest of the group are fine with that, you have to choose how to respond. Generally you can't change the behaviour of that one person. You might be able to charm or persuade them / the rest of the group to take it seriously. But complaining that it's not fair rarely works.

Whose friends did you have over? I think the problem here is expecting a 12 yo and a 14 yo to ‘play together’ with their friends. Also calling them both teens is a bit rubbish considering yout DS2 isn’t and is a young 12 too.. You need to treat your DS2 more like a child and absolutely pull him up on rude behaviour (which this is) and you need to relax a bit with your 14 yo and try and see things more from his pov.

I do appreciate all the input and responses here.

I do think the game is not really the issue - it's the principle. A parenting decision happened that DS1 did not agree with, over something very minor. On another occasion it would go in DS1's 'favour' and DS2 would feel put out. However where DS2 shakes these off, DS1 nurtures a list of grievances. I would like them to realise 1) it's not a flipping competition for who gets their way more or has the last word; 2) it's important to keep a sense of perspective on disputes and talk rather than sulk their way round it; 3) they have not done too badly wrt siblings and try to focus a bit more on all the fun times they have together, which is most of the time!

@MegBusset

Sure this is fairly standard teenage stuff but I'm still fairly new to the teen years so could use some perspective!

DS1 and DS2 are 14 and 12, get along well enough most of the time, like most brothers know exactly how to wind each other up. Are well behaved and generally lovely, and no SN. They do have spats but nothing out of the ordinary that I've noticed and can each give as good as they get.

DS1 has always been super sensitive especially to anything that he perceives as an injustice. His injustice scales are very finely tuned especially when it comes to DS2! In his ideal world I would intervene in every minor sibling annoyance or squabble.

DS2 OTOH is much more laid back and quick to forget squabbles. (Admittedly not a teen yet so this may change!) Can be annoying and does know exactly how to push DS1's buttons.

Example: over the weekend we have some friends over and DSes are on the Switch with other kids. An argument breaks out because DS1 wants to play a game in a serious way and DS2 is just messing about with it in an annoying way.

I come in and suggest that they find a different game to play that everyone can enjoy. DS1 and DS2 again start squabbling about the first game. I say (a bit more firmly) that with guests in the house we are not going to argue over a game and to find something different to play.

DS1 stomps off for the rest of the afternoon and at bedtime is still very upset, tears etc because in his opinion I let DS2 get away with 'spoiling the game', "he always does this" etc. Why should he get away with it with no punishment.

I try to explain to him that actually it was one minor squabble after they'd been playing nicely for ages, which they usually do, and that perhaps it is better to focus on the positive times he has with his brother rather than store up a list of grudges? But find myself having to justify why I didn't bawl DS2 out in front of a room full of guests.

DS2 meanwhile has forgotten the whole thing and gone happily to bed!

So not quite sure if I handled this right or could have done something different. I have Read How To Talk etc and generally try to listen to all their woes but was I bu to expect them to sort this out without all the drama?

Wow, you could be describing my two (except they are a bit younger). My DC1 is exactly like your DC1 - they hit the roof at any perceived unfairness or slight. I keep trying to explain that screaming, shouting and hitting etc will never get them anywhere in life. It's a bit of a slog...

So watching with interest for any useful tips.

I am with ds1 on this ..but I don't really understand ...were the guests just meant to be watching them play?