or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Interaction at the coffee shop - what would you have done?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Interaction at the coffee shop - what would you have done? - Page 8

post #141 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyka View Post
I think the point of these toys is to give the children something to do while the parents relax. and I think kids using a toy is exactly the same as people using a table.
I think we established way back that the "point" of the place varies in what they offer in terms of play areas. The one I'm thinking of has a 4 THOUSAND square foot play area. It is basically an indoor park, with several large play structures (along with the toys). The point is to let kids play. The coffee is an after thought. It's much different than a coffee shop with a few toys in the back corner. I was thinking of a similar situation, but agree it's a little different when there is only one or two toys.

And I still disagree that toys are tables.
post #142 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by contactmaya View Post
I always wonder why its the younger one that has to be redirected. The toddler has as much right to be interested in the boat, and the big kids to their own play. Its not a matter of not respecting the big kids' right to their own game without the toddler, but there's a conflict. So you go back to the basics, 'public toys are for sharing', thats how you resolve the dilemma.....
Whoever interrupts needs to be redirected, regardless of age. Age was secondary in this scenario.
post #143 of 191
My son is 23 months, and in the situation described I would have definitely re-directed him.
post #144 of 191
Its probably all been said, but wanted to offer my perspective again here, because I have 2 kids of similar age difference, and…. prior to having kids I spent alot of time in cafes. (very very little since)

In general-small table is for one person.(and friend)
Large table is for sharing, even with strangers.
Sometimes in large crowds, you could ask a stranger to share a small table, but they are within their rights to refuse. (unless you’re in Vienna or Tokyo, where it is expected, but not in Paris. Sometimes its ok in New York)
Large sofa, you share with strangers.
Large chair intended for one person, you dont.

So, if a table is intended for one person (or a couple) then they have the right to that. If its large, then you are expected to share.

Easy to apply the same principle to toys. If its a large toy (large enough for 3 or 4), then, so be it. If its a small toy,intended for 1, then someone else has to wait their turn. Its simple. (not like a chess board, which is a game intended for 2, or a game in which participants are expected to interact with each other) If the boat was large enough for 3 or 4, then interaction is not a requirement.

As for not forcing to share, i agree with that ( i also think that its not right to force a 21 month old to do something else, there’s only so much redirection you can use without it being disrepectful imo)

But its not about forcing to share, its about functioning within a social setting which requires respecting certain codes of behviour. I dont just go up to someone and start drinking from their coffee cup (why not?)
By the same principle, i dont hog a table intended for several people, and tell them noone else can sit there. (or large plastic boat intended for 3 or 4)

As for the barbecue, i would welcome a small child into the conversation because its a party, and they are at it. If that requires some tolerance, then i consider tolerance a virtue. What if the person were say, handicapped in a way that impeded conversation with initial person? Or lets say, didnt speak the language well? I would, by the same principle, welcome them into the conversation. If this was frustrating, and i wanted to continue my conversation with other person, i would eventually find away to do that. It might mean, i would have to go somewhere private.
Im not a believer in excluding children from conversations.

Oh, and i am taking OP's word that boat was large enough for 3 or 4. Some pp's seem to be doubting her word on that, and using this as the basis for their arguments against what she did. But since only the OP was there, then i think the only thing you can do, is take her word for it.
There's also an assumption that toddler wanted to play with big kids. Maybe yes, maybe no. If toddler tried to play with them, then you could say, 'they are playing their own game'. But toddler still has right to be in boat.
Oh, and as for redirection of toddler, that was definitely and option. OP, you could have done that, but
i dont think there was any obligation. Equally, said mother could have come over and explained to her older kids that toy was intended for 3 or 4, please move over and make room.

Maybe the best scenario-mother comes over, and says to kids, this toy is for sharing, , but, and ask OP and toddler, do you think they could play by themselves for a little while? (looking little toddler in the eyes, and showing some respect)(instead of walking off in a mumbling huff…course, just assuming, maybe they were about to go anyway)

I spend all day every day doing this kind of thing with my 2 kids with this age difference.

I see it like this, no matter what the age, we have the right to do certain things, and be who we are,and that’s not wrong.5yo’s or 21m olds. Sometimes there are competing interests, so you go back to whats fair, or the social standard (like not drinking from someone else coffee cup…)


.....i think a large toy that is big enough for sharing, in a public space, is just that.....
post #145 of 191
I think you were right in your response. I also think the mother was correct to guide her child quickly to stand up for herself. It sounds like the kind of thing you do when you know that your preschool child may react very angrily towards another child grabbing their toy. My dd is just now starting to realize that younger kids are different in their sharing abilities and she still has absolutely no patience for them.
post #146 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britishmum View Post
If the toddler comes to the toy after other people have it, she needs redirecting. If an older child comes to a toy after a toddler has it, he/she is asked to wait, if the toddler prefers not to share it. Although the fact is, toddlers have a far shorter attention span and ability to plan and sustain play, so yes, it is often easier to redirect a toddler than require a group of older children to alter their play.

The toys are for sharing. Sharing sometimes means waiting for your turn. It does not mean that everyone can play with the same thing at the same time, whether or not all the kids agree. That is the part of this 'rule' that I don't think is logical.

ITA that children learn through interacting with others of different ages and in different groups. But that doesn't mean that they have to have this experience every time they approach other children. They will not fail to gain social skills if sometimes in a public place they are redirected from a group of older children, who, after all, are also learning from their game. It's all a question of balance and common sense, and in this case, I really can't see why the OP's toddler should have been allowed to muscle in on a toy that other children were playing with. As it worked out, the older children had to stop their game, and the OP's child did not get to interact, so there you go. You can't force children to play together, and if it's not going to happen, it's better to help the older kids maintain their game while occupying the toddler elsewhere for a while.
All of this is true. I suppose i am thinking of a toy, that is large, and intended for sharing, because it is for '3-4'. Could be any toy. In my experience, when a 4yo hogged a toy, and i kindly (but did not think i was obligated to) redirected my toddler, the toy was a large tunnel, that was definitely intended for many children. It was not a matter of waiting for a turn, Some toys are meant for several kids to play with at once. Thats what im thinking of, when OP says 'large boat'

I dont think anyone did anything wrong in this scenario, OP included. And when i experienced something similar, i redirected my toddler...still think i could have asked big kid to share, but i didnt bother.
post #147 of 191
the 2yr old was being a 2 yr old yes but the 4 and 5yr olds were also acting their age imo. my dd is 7 and while most ties she has no priblem playing with younger kids, sometimes she just doesn't want to and I don't see why she should. In this case I don't think either of the parents were wrong to be honest.
I think the OP itdentifies and knows the behaviour of her kids age group cuz that's what she accustomed to. Her kid isn't yet 4 or 5 so she doesn't really know what's normal behaviour for that age....they don't always want to play with younger kids. Yes it was a public setting but if they were playing a specific game with the pirate ship they were well within their right to say "we just want to play with this by ourselves for now".
The OP should've just redirected her kid saying something like, "you'll get to play wih it in a few mins when they're done" loud enough for the other parent to hear so she gets the point.
I think sometimes we make the whole "kids playing together" thing too much of a big deal. 9 times out of 10 if you let kids playon their own they figure out their differences and find a way to play.
post #148 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by contactmaya View Post
As for not forcing to share, i agree with that ( i also think that its not right to force a 21 month old to do something else, there’s only so much redirection you can use without it being disrepectful imo)
But it's okay to disrespect the older kids who do not want to play with the toddler and who had the toy first?

Quote:
As for the barbecue, i would welcome a small child into the conversation because its a party, and they are at it. If that requires some tolerance, then i consider tolerance a virtue. What if the person were say, handicapped in a way that impeded conversation with initial person? Or lets say, didnt speak the language well? I would, by the same principle, welcome them into the conversation.
You are an adult. A lot more is expected and understood by adults than by children 4 and 5 years old.

Quote:
Oh, and i am taking OP's word that boat was large enough for 3 or 4. Some pp's seem to be doubting her word on that, and using this as the basis for their arguments against what she did.
No one was doubting her word - we were trying to determine if it was a play IN structure or a play WITH toy. There is a difference. (And I'm personally still not clear as to what it was)
post #149 of 191
Also keep in mind, how many kids could play happily and freely with the pirate ship is just an opinion. How many kids can fit around a toy happily with room to play is different if it is their friend from if it is a stranger. it makes a difference how coordinated the kids are, how big they are, what kinds of movements are involved. it also matters how many pirates, guns, cannons, treasure chests etc were available. my neighbors barbie house was easily big enough for six kids to fit around but it would have changed how they played. and she did not want a four year old (me specifically) messing with her dream house, interupting her and her friends play and there was not a barbie for me. and I was four. fine motor skills were not my strong suit. It may have been big enough for six best friends to play with but not enough room for a four year old who had never played with a barbie before. Size is relative.
post #150 of 191
By any chance were you at the Riverview cafe? I'm there all the time and I see scenes like that played out all the time. I would have done the same thing if I felt fit, and not worry about it later.
post #151 of 191
I would've redirected my child/children. Partly because it's rude for them to just barge into whatever's already going on between the first two (yes I get it that a under-2 doesn't know that, but it doesn't make it less true and if I allow/excuse it now, really, when do you stop?) And partly because after watching the mom react to my child that way, I wouldn't want my kid playing with hers anyway. There's a way to handle the situation of your little child coming and taking a toy from hers, that was not it.
post #152 of 191
Hey, this thread is still around! For those who seem to suggest that all children must play together willingly, can you explain to me why you believe this? If you believe it's different for children, as opposed to adults, with respect to public space and objects, why is it different? I'm having trouble understanding the presumption that children of all ages, differing abilities and interests must interact if they are in the same place.
post #153 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by contactmaya View Post
Oh, and i am taking OP's word that boat was large enough for 3 or 4. Some pp's seem to be doubting her word on that, and using this as the basis for their arguments against what she did. But since only the OP was there, then i think the only thing you can do, is take her word for it.
The confusion is that the OP said 3-4 children could fit around it comfortably but also said her 21MO could've picked it up and moved it. Those two don't necessarily work together for me, so I'm imagining a large toy you can play with but that isn't intended for parallel play the way a play structure is.
post #154 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalmamaof1 View Post
By any chance were you at the Riverview cafe? I'm there all the time and I see scenes like that played out all the time. I would have done the same thing if I felt fit, and not worry about it later.

It was! Are you in Minneapolis, too?
post #155 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree View Post
Hey, this thread is still around!
I know, seriously, right? I think this is the longest thread I've ever followed on mothering! (longest duration, not longest # of comments).
post #156 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyka View Post
Also keep in mind, how many kids could play happily and freely with the pirate ship is just an opinion. How many kids can fit around a toy happily with room to play is different if it is their friend from if it is a stranger. it makes a difference how coordinated the kids are, how big they are, what kinds of movements are involved. it also matters how many pirates, guns, cannons, treasure chests etc were available. my neighbors barbie house was easily big enough for six kids to fit around but it would have changed how they played. and she did not want a four year old (me specifically) messing with her dream house, interupting her and her friends play and there was not a barbie for me. and I was four. fine motor skills were not my strong suit. It may have been big enough for six best friends to play with but not enough room for a four year old who had never played with a barbie before. Size is relative.
Most likely OP took that into consideration, and therefore suggested sharing...
post #157 of 191
Not necessarily. If you are used to parenting a toddler, you may not understand what typical preschooler/kindergartener play looks like.
post #158 of 191
If the pirate ship really was big enough for all to play with, I would have said that we all need to share. Honestly though, if he had pulled it away, I would have told my DS that we need to wait our turn to play with it and tried to distract him. At 21 months that probably would have worked. Now at four, nope. If he wanted to play with it he would have stood there until they either finished or let him play...of course he would now ask them to let him play.
post #159 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by slylives View Post
It was! Are you in Minneapolis, too?
Longfellow neighborhood, I knew it was the riverview----I hate that damn pirate ship toy
post #160 of 191
I now must immediately go out and buy all those pirate ships.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Interaction at the coffee shop - what would you have done?