Teen cousin nonstop tickling DC, 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

This is bullshit. White women who cross the street when they see my well- dressed, professional AA DH also have a gut instinct that they are in danger, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything to be afraid of. OP hasn’t said anything nefarious. She can put a stop to it, of course, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong going on.

Like I said, her brain doesn't know why she's uncomfortable, she just is. So she can put a stop to it. Sounds like you and I both agree. Comparing this to the awful structural racism in our society that causes women to cross the street when they see your husband is off topic, a a straw man, and frankly inflammatory. I don't think you've read the book I mentioned, which is a great parenting book.

The street-crossing happens because of ingrained racism, the discomfort with tickling is because of ingrained sexism: You think guys are predators. But some boys just like kids and enjoy making them laugh or doing whatever the kid indicates is fun for them.

Or your nephew is creep in training. I dunno. But your gut can deceive you.

Or your gut can be correct. One option protects your child, one exposes your child. One protects your child with no bad effect on the cousin, one leaves your child open to events we all know occur. I will point out that we are talking about a 5 yo who essentially has no agency. No one is suggesting anyone shame the cousin, rather OP may change the circumstances in direct or indirect ways to stop the tickling, including merely saying "stop the tickling". OP is 100% in the right as a parent re: who may or may not touch her child. Attempting to call this "ingrained sexism" assumes most predators are not male, which in fact, statistically they are, but is moot as we are talking about OP's parenting instinct, which is why she should act and which should always be noted. Not always followed, but always noted.

I'm curious as to why it's so important to continue to allow this cousin to engage in unwanted touching of a little kid. What are we worried about here? That "no" is not OK? Ingrained sexism, indeed.

It's not unwanted by the kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP—read this thread from a couple of weeks ago. Same situation:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/981932.page#20259177

I'm pretty sure it's the same op with a sick fetish

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

But the child has their own instinct, their own gift. That must also be listened to and encouraged to develop.

[Anonymous]

Just say "we don't do tickling in our family, could you find another way to play and be silly?"

It's not hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

But the child has their own instinct, their own gift. That must also be listened to and encouraged to develop.

Adding onto what I wrote, make sure you teach your kids about private parts and no one touches them (except themselves in their bedroom or bathroom, a doctor when you are present, etc.). Bright lines rules about no go zones really help kids establish their own boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

This is bullshit. White women who cross the street when they see my well- dressed, professional AA DH also have a gut instinct that they are in danger, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything to be afraid of. OP hasn’t said anything nefarious. She can put a stop to it, of course, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong going on.

Like I said, her brain doesn't know why she's uncomfortable, she just is. So she can put a stop to it. Sounds like you and I both agree. Comparing this to the awful structural racism in our society that causes women to cross the street when they see your husband is off topic, a a straw man, and frankly inflammatory. I don't think you've read the book I mentioned, which is a great parenting book.

The street-crossing happens because of ingrained racism, the discomfort with tickling is because of ingrained sexism: You think guys are predators. But some boys just like kids and enjoy making them laugh or doing whatever the kid indicates is fun for them.

Or your nephew is creep in training. I dunno. But your gut can deceive you.

Or your gut can be correct. One option protects your child, one exposes your child. One protects your child with no bad effect on the cousin, one leaves your child open to events we all know occur. I will point out that we are talking about a 5 yo who essentially has no agency. No one is suggesting anyone shame the cousin, rather OP may change the circumstances in direct or indirect ways to stop the tickling, including merely saying "stop the tickling". OP is 100% in the right as a parent re: who may or may not touch her child. Attempting to call this "ingrained sexism" assumes most predators are not male, which in fact, statistically they are, but is moot as we are talking about OP's parenting instinct, which is why she should act and which should always be noted. Not always followed, but always noted.

I'm curious as to why it's so important to continue to allow this cousin to engage in unwanted touching of a little kid. What are we worried about here? That "no" is not OK? Ingrained sexism, indeed.

It's not unwanted by the kid.

NP. Street-crossing analogy PP is correct, which is probably why you are so triggered and defense. Just because someone is uncomfortable doesn't mean something bad is happening. And in this case, the child wasn't uncomfortable. OP could put a stop to it, but this is no different than getting a "bad feeling" about a guy in a parking lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP—read this thread from a couple of weeks ago. Same situation:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/981932.page#20259177

I'm pretty sure it's the same op with a sick fetish

Yeah, I wonder about this poster.

[Anonymous]

I think many of the naysayers don't understand how molestation works. The person does not feel your child's private parts in front of family. There is a gradual, every so slow breakdown of boundaries all while gaining the trust of anyone who would question it. Tickling can be grooming behavior. I would be more concerned if the child said no and it was ignored, but still OP had every right to stop it.

I have a creepy sibling who is highly regarded in a field working with children. There have been many instances with my own kids and my brother's kids where we had to step in and stay stop for things as simple as she was playing with the babies toes and the baby didn't like it or she tickled and the child said to stop and she would not. She forces kisses and hugs ans we jump in. We will not allow her alone with our children. She is always offering to babysit cousin's kids-sounds so generous, but after observing her with the kids they have all said no. My mother becomes hysterical with rage anytime and aunt or uncle has implied she is creepy in how she watches and obsessed over other people's kids. My mother has yelled at me and my brother for never allowing her to be alone with our kids. She has never molested anyone that we know of, but her boundaries are just off and my gut feeling is something is wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

This is bullshit. White women who cross the street when they see my well- dressed, professional AA DH also have a gut instinct that they are in danger, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything to be afraid of. OP hasn’t said anything nefarious. She can put a stop to it, of course, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong going on.

Like I said, her brain doesn't know why she's uncomfortable, she just is. So she can put a stop to it. Sounds like you and I both agree. Comparing this to the awful structural racism in our society that causes women to cross the street when they see your husband is off topic, a a straw man, and frankly inflammatory. I don't think you've read the book I mentioned, which is a great parenting book.

The street-crossing happens because of ingrained racism, the discomfort with tickling is because of ingrained sexism: You think guys are predators. But some boys just like kids and enjoy making them laugh or doing whatever the kid indicates is fun for them.

Or your nephew is creep in training. I dunno. But your gut can deceive you.

Or your gut can be correct. One option protects your child, one exposes your child. One protects your child with no bad effect on the cousin, one leaves your child open to events we all know occur. I will point out that we are talking about a 5 yo who essentially has no agency. No one is suggesting anyone shame the cousin, rather OP may change the circumstances in direct or indirect ways to stop the tickling, including merely saying "stop the tickling". OP is 100% in the right as a parent re: who may or may not touch her child. Attempting to call this "ingrained sexism" assumes most predators are not male, which in fact, statistically they are, but is moot as we are talking about OP's parenting instinct, which is why she should act and which should always be noted. Not always followed, but always noted.

I'm curious as to why it's so important to continue to allow this cousin to engage in unwanted touching of a little kid. What are we worried about here? That "no" is not OK? Ingrained sexism, indeed.

It's not unwanted by the kid.

Different poster. True and I would be more concerned if a child's "no" was ignored, but having worked with families where a child was sexually abused, sometimes the kid really enjoys the attention until it crosses a line. Tickling is something that is no longer considered all in good fun when it goes on too long. You are repeatedly touching someone in a way that causes a sometimes involuntary response. It's too easy to accidentally touch the wrong area or not so accidentally and it easily go from fun to creepy in a second. OP had every right to step in. That said, this is a teen not a grown up and boundaries can be so nebulous. I would absolutely keep on eye on things and not let them be alone together, but it is absolutely plausible this is a clueless teen who just enjoys making the kid laugh and doesn't realize his hands are an inch or 2 away from being in a questionable place.

[Anonymous]

Belly tickling in public that the kid was enjoying is really not at all suspicious. He kept doing it because the kid kept laughing.

I think OP has some personal background or some view of DH's family that she's not sharing (fair enough) that is coloring her view here, because nothing she described is "off" at all.

[Anonymous]

^^PP again. I'm not saying OP was wrong to stop the tickling because it made her uncomfortable. But this is definitely not an issue I would "follow up" in any way. This is particularly true if self-reflection tells you your view of these interactions may be heightened for some reason that you haven't shared.

[Anonymous]

Peels of laughter is a joyful sound. It feels great to be the once to bring out that sound in another. Chances are no harm was intended.

At the same time if it felt wrong to you, then fine to call a pause to it and explore why you feel that way.

[Anonymous]

I would not leave the teen and child alone. Maybe it was innocent and teen thought kid was having a good time, maybe it wasn't.

I was sexually abused by the teen brother of a teenaged babysitter, so I know what I am talking about. Most teen guys don't want to hang around little kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would not leave the teen and child alone. Maybe it was innocent and teen thought kid was having a good time, maybe it wasn't.

I was sexually abused by the teen brother of a teenaged babysitter, so I know what I am talking about. Most teen guys don't want to hang around little kids.

Actually, you don't know what you are talking about you can only relate to your experience. For you, to criminalize all teenage boys is just flat out wrong. And teenagers boys included do play with their younger cousins and do not molest them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your instinct that something is off here is never to be ignored. Read “The Gift of Fear”. Gavin DeBecker says it beautifully: “your gut doesn’t know *why* you have this feeling, only that you have it to protect you (or your children).” You don’t need to examine this too closely. Your brain saw something it didn’t like out of protection for your son. Enough said.

This is bullshit. White women who cross the street when they see my well- dressed, professional AA DH also have a gut instinct that they are in danger, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything to be afraid of. OP hasn’t said anything nefarious. She can put a stop to it, of course, but that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong going on.

Like I said, her brain doesn't know why she's uncomfortable, she just is. So she can put a stop to it. Sounds like you and I both agree. Comparing this to the awful structural racism in our society that causes women to cross the street when they see your husband is off topic, a a straw man, and frankly inflammatory. I don't think you've read the book I mentioned, which is a great parenting book.

The street-crossing happens because of ingrained racism, the discomfort with tickling is because of ingrained sexism: You think guys are predators. But some boys just like kids and enjoy making them laugh or doing whatever the kid indicates is fun for them.

Or your nephew is creep in training. I dunno. But your gut can deceive you.

Or your gut can be correct. One option protects your child, one exposes your child. One protects your child with no bad effect on the cousin, one leaves your child open to events we all know occur. I will point out that we are talking about a 5 yo who essentially has no agency. No one is suggesting anyone shame the cousin, rather OP may change the circumstances in direct or indirect ways to stop the tickling, including merely saying "stop the tickling". OP is 100% in the right as a parent re: who may or may not touch her child. Attempting to call this "ingrained sexism" assumes most predators are not male, which in fact, statistically they are, but is moot as we are talking about OP's parenting instinct, which is why she should act and which should always be noted. Not always followed, but always noted.

I'm curious as to why it's so important to continue to allow this cousin to engage in unwanted touching of a little kid. What are we worried about here? That "no" is not OK? Ingrained sexism, indeed.

It's not unwanted by the kid.

Different poster. True and I would be more concerned if a child's "no" was ignored, but having worked with families where a child was sexually abused, sometimes the kid really enjoys the attention until it crosses a line. Tickling is something that is no longer considered all in good fun when it goes on too long. You are repeatedly touching someone in a way that causes a sometimes involuntary response. It's too easy to accidentally touch the wrong area or not so accidentally and it easily go from fun to creepy in a second. OP had every right to step in. That said, this is a teen not a grown up and boundaries can be so nebulous. I would absolutely keep on eye on things and not let them be alone together, but it is absolutely plausible this is a clueless teen who just enjoys making the kid laugh and doesn't realize his hands are an inch or 2 away from being in a questionable place.

Yes lets teach our children that all the relatives are molesters and that they have been abused and are now traumatized.