Is this correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very confusing to a 3 year old. They are just starting to master the differences in body parts. I don’t think the nanny is being age appropriate. The answer is vague and leaves the kid confused. I know my four year old would immediately want to know which ones don’t have which body parts and could just imagine him pointing to everyone he sees and asking me loudly whether that one has a vagina or not.

Imagine the boy had said "Women have babies." and then the nanny said "Well, some women have babies and some women do not." Something tells me you would not have concerns about this being too confusing, and it's the exact same concept. The way preschoolers learn to think beyond black and white is through experience of things that are not black and white.

And the way to handle a child asking in public whether certain people have vaginas is to say "That's a private part. We don't talk about private parts in public."

I think this would be too confusing. You don’t talk to three year olds like that. If they say, “dogs say ‘woof, woof’” you don’t correct them or discuss the different types of barks a dog might make.
Something tells me that you don’t know a lot of three year olds.

Why is it bad for a kid (or anyone) to be confused? I think this is a good lesson that things are not always black and white. I doubt thinking about it will keep the 3 year old awake at night or cause any issues for him. It may just be something that he thinks or asks about again later and that’s ok.

Lots of things are confusing. Kids are still trying to make sense of the world. They are trying to put things into categories that they can understand so that they can gain a little confidence to go out into the world.
And of course it would cause issues for a kid if, instead of making the world simpler for them, every time they had a question you gave a confusing and nebulous answer.

That’s all fine but it’s also good for kids to know that not everything or everyone fits into a certain category. The only reason not to let them know that there is ambiguity is because of our own insecurities not because that’s what’s best for the kid. I can see how this could be a bit confusing for a kid. But you act like being a little confused is a bad thing; it’s not. It just helps kids/all people learn how to think more deeply about something and understand that the world doesn’t all fit into neat little categories and that’s ok,

No. it isn't.

I am guessing you aren't a parent, because if you were, you would know this. But you can read a little on child development if you wish.
Little kids make sense of the world by putting things into categories. If you tell them 200 times a day that there aren't categories and life is gray and nebulous, it isn't good.

Yes. You can help an 8 year old think a little more deeply, but not a 3 year old.

DP. My four year old wants to put things in categories sure and sometimes I support that and sometimes I challenge it. I can't imagine that any parent doesn't introduce some complexity or ambiguity into their kid's categories of the world. You're supposed to be helping them learn to think, not just validating whatever schema they develop at age 3.

If she says "girls wear skirts" I'll push back on that, and I imagine most people would. The same goes for genital questions. My four year old knows trans people closely and she's much LESS confused by that ambiguity than she is by the fact that I sometimes call her coat a jacket.

Yeah. I think you are kind of crazy.

You can just let her call it a coat if she wants to. You don't need to argue with a child about the difference between coats and jackets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very confusing to a 3 year old. They are just starting to master the differences in body parts. I don’t think the nanny is being age appropriate. The answer is vague and leaves the kid confused. I know my four year old would immediately want to know which ones don’t have which body parts and could just imagine him pointing to everyone he sees and asking me loudly whether that one has a vagina or not.

Imagine the boy had said "Women have babies." and then the nanny said "Well, some women have babies and some women do not." Something tells me you would not have concerns about this being too confusing, and it's the exact same concept. The way preschoolers learn to think beyond black and white is through experience of things that are not black and white.

And the way to handle a child asking in public whether certain people have vaginas is to say "That's a private part. We don't talk about private parts in public."

I think this would be too confusing. You don’t talk to three year olds like that. If they say, “dogs say ‘woof, woof’” you don’t correct them or discuss the different types of barks a dog might make.
Something tells me that you don’t know a lot of three year olds.

Why is it bad for a kid (or anyone) to be confused? I think this is a good lesson that things are not always black and white. I doubt thinking about it will keep the 3 year old awake at night or cause any issues for him. It may just be something that he thinks or asks about again later and that’s ok.

Lots of things are confusing. Kids are still trying to make sense of the world. They are trying to put things into categories that they can understand so that they can gain a little confidence to go out into the world.
And of course it would cause issues for a kid if, instead of making the world simpler for them, every time they had a question you gave a confusing and nebulous answer.

That’s all fine but it’s also good for kids to know that not everything or everyone fits into a certain category. The only reason not to let them know that there is ambiguity is because of our own insecurities not because that’s what’s best for the kid. I can see how this could be a bit confusing for a kid. But you act like being a little confused is a bad thing; it’s not. It just helps kids/all people learn how to think more deeply about something and understand that the world doesn’t all fit into neat little categories and that’s ok,

No. it isn't.

I am guessing you aren't a parent, because if you were, you would know this. But you can read a little on child development if you wish.
Little kids make sense of the world by putting things into categories. If you tell them 200 times a day that there aren't categories and life is gray and nebulous, it isn't good.

Yes. You can help an 8 year old think a little more deeply, but not a 3 year old.

DP. My four year old wants to put things in categories sure and sometimes I support that and sometimes I challenge it. I can't imagine that any parent doesn't introduce some complexity or ambiguity into their kid's categories of the world. You're supposed to be helping them learn to think, not just validating whatever schema they develop at age 3.

If she says "girls wear skirts" I'll push back on that, and I imagine most people would. The same goes for genital questions. My four year old knows trans people closely and she's much LESS confused by that ambiguity than she is by the fact that I sometimes call her coat a jacket.

Yeah. I think you are kind of crazy.

You can just let her call it a coat if she wants to. You don't need to argue with a child about the difference between coats and jackets.

Did I say I argued with her? If I say "get your jacket" and she says "my coat!" I say "yep, same thing." If that seems crazy to you, I don't know what to say. Kids can understand that something has two names.

For trans issues, my daughter had to learn; the person she called "mommy" for almost three years came out as trans. She learned the new name and pronouns without any issue (I've used the wrong pronouns much more recently than she has). I'd much rather explain the ambiguity of names changing than explain that she only has one parent now because my spouse killed himself, which was where things were heading before the transition. All my reading on child development tells me that would be worse than dealing with some complexity.

[Anonymous]

My 3 year old has recently gotten into the “where’s mommy’s penis” phase. So I explained the basic anatomical difference between boys and girls. I wouldn’t be upset if someone gave him the response the nanny gave, but it’s not something I’m actively bringing up at this point. We’re still working on pooping on the potty, so I’m just not ready to tackle transgender identity and genitalia yet. However, with both our 3 y/o and older child, we have had general conversations about how a lot of girls have long hair, but some where it short. And vice versa (some boys like to wear long hair)

We’ve dispelled the myth of colors having gender (e.g. pink is an everybody color, not just a girl color). Also, anyone can like sports, dance, art, etc. So we’re laying the foundation for understanding that they (and others) don’t need to fit a specific gender mold. And that sometimes men and women fall in love and sometimes men and men, and women and women.

But as far as body talk, I’m just working on the basics still. I’m more worried about establishing that these are personal parts that we have a right to privacy to. And at some point we’ll have the sex talk.

We’ll get into the rest of it as they get older. I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to introduce the concept earlier though if your kid seems ready.

[Anonymous]

There's no argument here that isn't also an argument for not teaching your kid that some families have two dads or only one parent or no parents and only grandparents. That's all ambiguity and complexity to the categories most kids develop that a family is a mom, a dad, and kids. Somehow most kids manage to figure out that that's not true before they're eight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Gay mom with a very gender neutral daughter and she has what may be a transgender friend. He is biologically a boy and calls himself a boy but likes girls clothing and and more feminine activities. Having said that, unless your 3yo son has a specific transgender person in his life I think he is too young to understand this concept. I would have left it as he understood it.

This exactly.

Nope. Three is exactly the right age to start understanding this concept. Three is when gender identity is forming.
Being a "gay mom" doesn't make you an expert on gender, you know this right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Team nanny here. It’s both the age appropriate and correct answer. Don’t listen to anyone who tells you otherwise.

Agree. What she said was factually correct. Don't underestimate your kids. How is it any different from saying "some kids have mommies and daddies, but other kids have two mommies or two daddies, or even just one parent? But all parents love their kids?"

There is plenty we can explain in kid appropriate ways. They understand a lot. Let's give them credit. And have some faith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very confusing to a 3 year old. They are just starting to master the differences in body parts. I don’t think the nanny is being age appropriate. The answer is vague and leaves the kid confused. I know my four year old would immediately want to know which ones don’t have which body parts and could just imagine him pointing to everyone he sees and asking me loudly whether that one has a vagina or not.

Imagine the boy had said "Women have babies." and then the nanny said "Well, some women have babies and some women do not." Something tells me you would not have concerns about this being too confusing, and it's the exact same concept. The way preschoolers learn to think beyond black and white is through experience of things that are not black and white.

And the way to handle a child asking in public whether certain people have vaginas is to say "That's a private part. We don't talk about private parts in public."

I think this would be too confusing. You don’t talk to three year olds like that. If they say, “dogs say ‘woof, woof’” you don’t correct them or discuss the different types of barks a dog might make.
Something tells me that you don’t know a lot of three year olds.

Why is it bad for a kid (or anyone) to be confused? I think this is a good lesson that things are not always black and white. I doubt thinking about it will keep the 3 year old awake at night or cause any issues for him. It may just be something that he thinks or asks about again later and that’s ok.

Lots of things are confusing. Kids are still trying to make sense of the world. They are trying to put things into categories that they can understand so that they can gain a little confidence to go out into the world.
And of course it would cause issues for a kid if, instead of making the world simpler for them, every time they had a question you gave a confusing and nebulous answer.

That’s all fine but it’s also good for kids to know that not everything or everyone fits into a certain category. The only reason not to let them know that there is ambiguity is because of our own insecurities not because that’s what’s best for the kid. I can see how this could be a bit confusing for a kid. But you act like being a little confused is a bad thing; it’s not. It just helps kids/all people learn how to think more deeply about something and understand that the world doesn’t all fit into neat little categories and that’s ok,

No. it isn't.

I am guessing you aren't a parent, because if you were, you would know this. But you can read a little on child development if you wish.
Little kids make sense of the world by putting things into categories. If you tell them 200 times a day that there aren't categories and life is gray and nebulous, it isn't good.

Yes. You can help an 8 year old think a little more deeply, but not a 3 year old.

DP. My four year old wants to put things in categories sure and sometimes I support that and sometimes I challenge it. I can't imagine that any parent doesn't introduce some complexity or ambiguity into their kid's categories of the world. You're supposed to be helping them learn to think, not just validating whatever schema they develop at age 3.

If she says "girls wear skirts" I'll push back on that, and I imagine most people would. The same goes for genital questions. My four year old knows trans people closely and she's much LESS confused by that ambiguity than she is by the fact that I sometimes call her coat a jacket.

Yeah. I think you are kind of crazy.

You can just let her call it a coat if she wants to. You don't need to argue with a child about the difference between coats and jackets.

Did I say I argued with her? If I say "get your jacket" and she says "my coat!" I say "yep, same thing." If that seems crazy to you, I don't know what to say. Kids can understand that something has two names.

For trans issues, my daughter had to learn; the person she called "mommy" for almost three years came out as trans. She learned the new name and pronouns without any issue (I've used the wrong pronouns much more recently than she has). I'd much rather explain the ambiguity of names changing than explain that she only has one parent now because my spouse killed himself, which was where things were heading before the transition. All my reading on child development tells me that would be worse than dealing with some complexity.

That is a lot for a 3 year old, and any family, to go through. I hope your spouse is getting the help he needs, and that help is ongoing, Transition isn't a cure all for suicidal ideation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Gay mom with a very gender neutral daughter and she has what may be a transgender friend. He is biologically a boy and calls himself a boy but likes girls clothing and and more feminine activities. Having said that, unless your 3yo son has a specific transgender person in his life I think he is too young to understand this concept. I would have left it as he understood it.

This exactly.

Nope. Three is exactly the right age to start understanding this concept. Three is when gender identity is forming.
Being a "gay mom" doesn't make you an expert on gender, you know this right?

This is exactly why you shouldn't introduce the concept at 3; their gender identities haven't formed yet. They are not fully set in most kids until 5, sometimes 8. Kids don't need parental interventions to develop their gender identities...unless you're saying that you can shape your kid's gender identity before it's fully developed, which sounds like what you mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very confusing to a 3 year old. They are just starting to master the differences in body parts. I don’t think the nanny is being age appropriate. The answer is vague and leaves the kid confused. I know my four year old would immediately want to know which ones don’t have which body parts and could just imagine him pointing to everyone he sees and asking me loudly whether that one has a vagina or not.

Imagine the boy had said "Women have babies." and then the nanny said "Well, some women have babies and some women do not." Something tells me you would not have concerns about this being too confusing, and it's the exact same concept. The way preschoolers learn to think beyond black and white is through experience of things that are not black and white.

And the way to handle a child asking in public whether certain people have vaginas is to say "That's a private part. We don't talk about private parts in public."

I think this would be too confusing. You don’t talk to three year olds like that. If they say, “dogs say ‘woof, woof’” you don’t correct them or discuss the different types of barks a dog might make.
Something tells me that you don’t know a lot of three year olds.

Why is it bad for a kid (or anyone) to be confused? I think this is a good lesson that things are not always black and white. I doubt thinking about it will keep the 3 year old awake at night or cause any issues for him. It may just be something that he thinks or asks about again later and that’s ok.

Lots of things are confusing. Kids are still trying to make sense of the world. They are trying to put things into categories that they can understand so that they can gain a little confidence to go out into the world.
And of course it would cause issues for a kid if, instead of making the world simpler for them, every time they had a question you gave a confusing and nebulous answer.

That’s all fine but it’s also good for kids to know that not everything or everyone fits into a certain category. The only reason not to let them know that there is ambiguity is because of our own insecurities not because that’s what’s best for the kid. I can see how this could be a bit confusing for a kid. But you act like being a little confused is a bad thing; it’s not. It just helps kids/all people learn how to think more deeply about something and understand that the world doesn’t all fit into neat little categories and that’s ok,

No. it isn't.

I am guessing you aren't a parent, because if you were, you would know this. But you can read a little on child development if you wish.
Little kids make sense of the world by putting things into categories. If you tell them 200 times a day that there aren't categories and life is gray and nebulous, it isn't good.

Yes. You can help an 8 year old think a little more deeply, but not a 3 year old.

DP. My four year old wants to put things in categories sure and sometimes I support that and sometimes I challenge it. I can't imagine that any parent doesn't introduce some complexity or ambiguity into their kid's categories of the world. You're supposed to be helping them learn to think, not just validating whatever schema they develop at age 3.

If she says "girls wear skirts" I'll push back on that, and I imagine most people would. The same goes for genital questions. My four year old knows trans people closely and she's much LESS confused by that ambiguity than she is by the fact that I sometimes call her coat a jacket.

Yeah. I think you are kind of crazy.

You can just let her call it a coat if she wants to. You don't need to argue with a child about the difference between coats and jackets.

Did I say I argued with her? If I say "get your jacket" and she says "my coat!" I say "yep, same thing." If that seems crazy to you, I don't know what to say. Kids can understand that something has two names.

For trans issues, my daughter had to learn; the person she called "mommy" for almost three years came out as trans. She learned the new name and pronouns without any issue (I've used the wrong pronouns much more recently than she has). I'd much rather explain the ambiguity of names changing than explain that she only has one parent now because my spouse killed himself, which was where things were heading before the transition. All my reading on child development tells me that would be worse than dealing with some complexity.

That is a lot for a 3 year old, and any family, to go through. I hope your spouse is getting the help he needs, and that help is ongoing, Transition isn't a cure all for suicidal ideation.

Of course not, we're doing great and thriving, much better than before, but obviously he'll need to mental health treatment for the rest of his life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She didn’t go into any details, just left the door open for future discussions at an age- and circumstance-appropriate moment. Totally fine.

Exactly this. and that’s how we handle things in our home as well. another poster mentioned how small children like to put things into categories. That’s what kids do. So I gave enough information for her to be able to categorize but also try to leave the door open that there isn’t much in life that’s absolute. And that makes for a much more interesting and fun conversation. It seems to me that your nanny handled this beautifully. And I imagine she moved onto the next topic and good pacing as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very confusing to a 3 year old. They are just starting to master the differences in body parts. I don’t think the nanny is being age appropriate. The answer is vague and leaves the kid confused. I know my four year old would immediately want to know which ones don’t have which body parts and could just imagine him pointing to everyone he sees and asking me loudly whether that one has a vagina or not.

Imagine the boy had said "Women have babies." and then the nanny said "Well, some women have babies and some women do not." Something tells me you would not have concerns about this being too confusing, and it's the exact same concept. The way preschoolers learn to think beyond black and white is through experience of things that are not black and white.

And the way to handle a child asking in public whether certain people have vaginas is to say "That's a private part. We don't talk about private parts in public."

I think this would be too confusing. You don’t talk to three year olds like that. If they say, “dogs say ‘woof, woof’” you don’t correct them or discuss the different types of barks a dog might make.
Something tells me that you don’t know a lot of three year olds.

Or maybe you don’t. Some dogs, like Granny’s say arf arf. And what does Aunt Tina’s puppy say? What about Uncle Randy’s husky?

That’s what you say to your 3 year old?

Sometimes, I go to the teen forum and I wonder how so many great parents have kids who are defiant, smoking pot, etc. Then I read posts like this, and I remember why.

You'll have to draw the lines for me for correlating talking about different kinds of sounds a dog could make with smoking pot!
Who knew "Arf Arf" is a gateway to drugs!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn’t go into any details, just left the door open for future discussions at an age- and circumstance-appropriate moment. Totally fine.

Exactly this. and that’s how we handle things in our home as well. another poster mentioned how small children like to put things into categories. That’s what kids do. So I gave enough information for her to be able to categorize but also try to leave the door open that there isn’t much in life that’s absolute. And that makes for a much more interesting and fun conversation. It seems to me that your nanny handled this beautifully. And I imagine she moved onto the next topic and good pacing as well.

Kid: People have hands.

Adult: Not all people. Some people don't have hands. You could lose a hand at any moment. What a fun conversation we're having now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn’t go into any details, just left the door open for future discussions at an age- and circumstance-appropriate moment. Totally fine.

Exactly this. and that’s how we handle things in our home as well. another poster mentioned how small children like to put things into categories. That’s what kids do. So I gave enough information for her to be able to categorize but also try to leave the door open that there isn’t much in life that’s absolute. And that makes for a much more interesting and fun conversation. It seems to me that your nanny handled this beautifully. And I imagine she moved onto the next topic and good pacing as well.

Kid: People have hands.

Adult: Not all people. Some people don't have hands. You could lose a hand at any moment. What a fun conversation we're having now.

That’s a pretty awful example. Thalidomide and all. I’m not even trying to be cheeky. It’s not a clever response. There is nuance to answering many kid questions. This isn’t one that we need to dig in about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn’t go into any details, just left the door open for future discussions at an age- and circumstance-appropriate moment. Totally fine.

Exactly this. and that’s how we handle things in our home as well. another poster mentioned how small children like to put things into categories. That’s what kids do. So I gave enough information for her to be able to categorize but also try to leave the door open that there isn’t much in life that’s absolute. And that makes for a much more interesting and fun conversation. It seems to me that your nanny handled this beautifully. And I imagine she moved onto the next topic and good pacing as well.

Kid: People have hands.

Adult: Not all people. Some people don't have hands. You could lose a hand at any moment. What a fun conversation we're having now.

Do your kids really not know about people with disabilities? One of my daughter's favorite books is about a woman who loses her legs. She doesn't have any trouble understanding that most people have legs but some people don't. She asks about the disability accommodations she sees in the world all the time and we talk about the people who need, curb cuts or handicapped parking spots or whatever. Hell, some kids don't have hands and they go to school with other kids who figure it out! It's weird to act like "knowing some people don't have hands" is too much to ask of a kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn’t go into any details, just left the door open for future discussions at an age- and circumstance-appropriate moment. Totally fine.

Exactly this. and that’s how we handle things in our home as well. another poster mentioned how small children like to put things into categories. That’s what kids do. So I gave enough information for her to be able to categorize but also try to leave the door open that there isn’t much in life that’s absolute. And that makes for a much more interesting and fun conversation. It seems to me that your nanny handled this beautifully. And I imagine she moved onto the next topic and good pacing as well.

Kid: People have hands.

Adult: Not all people. Some people don't have hands. You could lose a hand at any moment. What a fun conversation we're having now.

That’s a pretty awful example. Thalidomide and all. I’m not even trying to be cheeky. It’s not a clever response. There is nuance to answering many kid questions. This isn’t one that we need to dig in about.

There are no kids alive today that have lost hands due to thalidomide, but way to clutch your fake pearls to deflect from the real conversation. You need to let your kids know their genitalia isn't just going to fall off. They need to know that their body parts won't suddenly change to girl or boy parts, which is a common thought that kids have at this age. There is comfort in absolutes for young kids, and it is a real psychological need. No reason to discuss gender ambiguity at 3 any more than we should discuss the fact that we could lose body parts due to diabetes or infection (which is way more common). Both are true, but it's best to save that conversation for when they're older and have more context to process it.