Birth order character traits/problems

[Anonymous]

OP…if this really recurs as frequently as your post implies, I would suggest the common denominator is not their birth order, the common denominator is you.

[Anonymous]

What total garbage this post is. What about a “baby” of the family that wasn’t at all wanted and became the object of severe abuse? Want to explain THAT family dynamic? How incredibly stupid and myopic you are. I guarantee you that person was never spoiled from being doted on. As an adult, you should try harder not to make broad sweeping generalizations about people based on something as ridiculous as birth order. You and those that have to deal with you will be better off for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP…if this really recurs as frequently as your post implies, I would suggest the common denominator is not their birth order, the common denominator is you.

DP. You’re an idiot.

[Anonymous]

I can’t believe how triggering this post is for some people!

I do get what you’re saying OP, but I think big families are on the rare side so you’re getting a lot of people responding about their experiences with 2 or 3 kid families which doesn’t apply. You’re also getting a lot of projection!

As a parent, just among my kid’s friends I have noticed that in big families the parents can hold the line for the first 3 or 4 kids then it’s almost like they throw their hands up and give up. There’s also an element of the older kids who can be 10+ years older than the youngest having an almost aunt/uncle relationship than a sibling relationship with the youngest. If you’re raised in a way where you’re always getting taken care of, you lose a lot of motivation for responsibility. It’s also easy not to see the background work since someone else always does it.

[Anonymous]

I don’t generally pay attention to birth order, but have noticed that my closest friends/people I get a long with well tend to be oldest children (I’m also an oldest child).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed a trend with only children. My FIL is one and a once-close friend of mine. They are both very self centered and make everything about them and seem to have trouble with empathy. Relationships with them are very one sided - it’s about you being their support with little support in return to you.

Agree with this. I have one close friend who I’ve know forever that is an only child, and throughout our friendship the things that would cause me to take a break from her was her selfishness and how self centered she was. It got much, MUCH better when she had kids though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t generally pay attention to birth order, but have noticed that my closest friends/people I get a long with well tend to be oldest children (I’m also an oldest child).

Opposite for me. Youngest in family and almost all of my close friends throughout life, and my spouse, are the youngest. My first-born child hangs out almost entirely with other first-borns, and my youngest child almost entirely with youngest or younger siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What total garbage this post is. What about a “baby” of the family that wasn’t at all wanted and became the object of severe abuse? Want to explain THAT family dynamic? How incredibly stupid and myopic you are. I guarantee you that person was never spoiled from being doted on. As an adult, you should try harder not to make broad sweeping generalizations about people based on something as ridiculous as birth order. You and those that have to deal with you will be better off for it.

Actually I’ve read the baby of the family is either completely spoiled or completely abused. Obviously there are outliers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The youngest needs to *insist* on a peer relationship with everyone, with siblings once they are all adults.

Op, it may be their journey of understanding this importance and executing it may be getting in your way.

If they have traits of being "the baby" make sure you aren't drawn to this, initially, to dominate or care take. That's not going to work long term - that is not what they really want and they know that's not best for them.

Why would having peer relationship be unusual once everyone is adult?

It’s normal fur mist but the youngest will always be treated as younger not a peer. It creates an imbalance of power. The baby either retreats or fights which is why many youngest are “loud” talkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t generally pay attention to birth order, but have noticed that my closest friends/people I get a long with well tend to be oldest children (I’m also an oldest child).

Opposite for me. Youngest in family and almost all of my close friends throughout life, and my spouse, are the youngest. My first-born child hangs out almost entirely with other first-borns, and my youngest child almost entirely with youngest or younger siblings.

Pp here. I guess it makes sense that same birth order people tend to gravitate towards one another then. I’ve noticed the same with my two DCs. But interestingly, both DC’s best friends are only children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t generally pay attention to birth order, but have noticed that my closest friends/people I get a long with well tend to be oldest children (I’m also an oldest child).

I'm a middle child, with 6 siblings. I find middle children to be more understanding, patient, cooperative, effective negotiators and independent thinkers than first borns or "babies".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The youngest needs to *insist* on a peer relationship with everyone, with siblings once they are all adults.

Op, it may be their journey of understanding this importance and executing it may be getting in your way.

If they have traits of being "the baby" make sure you aren't drawn to this, initially, to dominate or care take. That's not going to work long term - that is not what they really want and they know that's not best for them.

Why would having peer relationship be unusual once everyone is adult?

It’s normal fur mist but the youngest will always be treated as younger not a peer. It creates an imbalance of power. The baby either retreats or fights which is why many youngest are “loud” talkers.

DH is the youngest by about 10 years and I definitely see this dynamic when he is with his family. Older brothers don’t treat him as an adult peer, and he accepts that. He lets them treat him like the kid brother he is, and it’s a little hard to watch.

[Anonymous]

I find first borns entitled and bossy. Sadly, I married one.

- signed, “the baby” of the family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find first borns entitled and bossy. Sadly, I married one.

- signed, “the baby” of the family

I don’t know about entitled, but bossy, type “A” types for sure.

-first born

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t believe how triggering this post is for some people!

I do get what you’re saying OP, but I think big families are on the rare side so you’re getting a lot of people responding about their experiences with 2 or 3 kid families which doesn’t apply. You’re also getting a lot of projection!

As a parent, just among my kid’s friends I have noticed that in big families the parents can hold the line for the first 3 or 4 kids then it’s almost like they throw their hands up and give up. There’s also an element of the older kids who can be 10+ years older than the youngest having an almost aunt/uncle relationship than a sibling relationship with the youngest. If you’re raised in a way where you’re always getting taken care of, you lose a lot of motivation for responsibility. It’s also easy not to see the background work since someone else always does it.

Nailed it.