# "Boys are just more aggressive..."



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

How does this statement strike you? Do you agree? Disagree? Is it a huge generalization? Does it bother you?

Here's the kicker for me...
Do you believe that what people say and believe to be true can actually become such?? (i.e. can a child become increasingly aggressive whent this statement is increasingly repeated??)

WHat are your thoughts?


----------



## 425lisamarie (Mar 4, 2005)

I really don't like gender specific phrasing. I don't think it's true, I see it in my own already. DS is very calm, sweet, playful but not even rough. DD, whoa, watchout is all we know









I had to nip something in the butt with my sister's BF. Everytime they come over or we are around them, DS will get hurt or something and cry a little, and Kobie has to yell out that "he's a tough guy, or something." Finally at Christmas I said "Don't you day that to a little hurt boy, I would cry to if I got hurt." I don't really let him around. He has to much an idea of what boys should be. And I absolutely think you can mold someone buy what you tell them they *are*. It really gets me.


----------



## maciascl (Nov 11, 2004)

This is something I've been giveing alot of thought lately as my little guy is increaseingly turning everything into a gun or sword etc... I don't want to believe that this is a true statement, but I was starting to give up hope. However after talking to some friends about it. I think it is a societal thing that we push on our children w/o even realizing it. My friend has some studies to back this up. I will try to get them from her.

Now with all that said. I do believe that boys in general are more physical, active etc... But agresive I think is how society has channeled this energy.

Sorry for the bad spelling NAK


----------



## ShaggyDaddy (Jul 5, 2006)

I am a big fan of thinking about the evolution of our society and how our lifestyle is influenced by biology and vice versa.

The human brain is influenced by hormones. Those hormones can specifically manipulate feelings and emotional state. We know that certain hormones can influence an individuals behavior to be more agressive/angry/sad/happy/whatever they alter your thought process, and influence your actions. We also know that males and females produce different levels of different hormones.

I don't see why it is such a big deal to say that the expected behavior for an average boy is going to be different from an average girl. Of course everyone is all over the spectrum, but it is a medical condition and an unusual thing if a boy has less testosterone than a girl. Testosterone is proven to have many effects on the body, not the least of which is an increased tendancy toward agression.

Statistically and chemically speaking males are more agressive than females. Of course there are many many exceptions, but I think as long as we realize it is a generalization and not an excuse or a free pass it is o.k.

I am not advocating that we should just say "oh, boys will be boys" or anything like that, but I think it is important to empathize with him and realize that he might have to try harder to controll his agression than his sister does.


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

deleted**


----------



## milkamama (May 14, 2005)

wow. what an interesting topic. i know in general my boys (3.5 and 2) are more physical and active than the girls we tend to socialize with (most of them are in the same age range). not necessarily more aggressive, but more physical. the girls tend to be more vocal and my boys tend to be more physical...this is not true in every situation even with the same children...but generally this happens.

quote from op:
_Here's the kicker for me...
Do you believe that what people say and believe to be true can actually become such?? (i.e. can a child become increasingly aggressive whent this statement is increasingly repeated_

have you heard of, read about the secret...the law of attraction (loa)? when you ask this question, the loa comes to mind. YES, i personally strongly believe that what you think, say, believe is what comes to you. just food for thought.

i will revisit this...my boys are thinking this is not computer time for mom!

peace


----------



## jake&zaxmom (May 12, 2004)

I read something in a book called _Protecting the Gift_ recently that I thought was interesting.

I will have to summarize because it was a library book and I've already returned it, but it basically said that boys and men are "trained" by society to avoid expressing "weak" emotions (fear, uncertainty, sadness) and that anger and or aggression is the only acceptable alternative emotion or action. A girl is not socially penalized or questioned for being fearful or crying, but a boy might be by other boys or men.

I'm not sure that I agree 100% but it's something to think about.

I have two boys and I'm always telling them that there are a lot of ways to be a man. Some men are bookish and intellectual. Some men are very physically accomplished, sports talented, etc. Some men are a mix of those characteristics with other unique qualities mixed in. Some men are gentle, caring and sensitive, some men have trouble expressing that and strive to be fierce protectors, the list goes on... But it's all good







:


----------



## stacey2061 (Feb 1, 2006)

i think that boys are wired to be more physical and girls more verbal. you can be aggressive both ways. i guess you could say boys in general are more physically aggressive, of course i'd never say ALL boys are one thing or another.


----------



## 425lisamarie (Mar 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stacey2061* 
i think that boys are wired to be more physical and girls more verbal. you can be aggressive both ways. i guess you could say boys in general are more physically aggressive, of course i'd never say ALL boys are one thing or another.









Exactly the opposite for us. It just varies person to person, more than gender to gender IMO


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jake&zaxmom* 
A girl is not socially penalized or questioned for being fearful or crying, but a boy might be by other boys or men.


I really like the descriptions you give your children about the many ways to be a man. I'd love to see more moms of boys giving their offspring this kind of freedom of vision.

I do want to disagree with the book's conclusion that girls are not penalized for crying or expressing weakness. Bullies, girls and boys, seek out and exploit weakness in others regardless of gender. A girl who cries at school will be tormented.


----------



## greenjenny (Jun 13, 2005)

I disagree - maybe the parents of those boys allow them to be more agressive, but I don't think it is built in. My nephews are all way more agressive and wild than my son. They are allowed to fight and swordfight and watch Rocky movies







: My son who is not allowed those things is much more serene-Just the way I like him!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

My son is definitely not "more agressive" lol. He is probably one of the least agressive children that I know. I have a friend who has a son who is very non-agressive as well. Our two sons are a great pair









I do believe the self-fulfilling prophesy thing. That type of thing is talked about a lot in the Continuum Concept. If you expect a child (or if the child feels that you expect him/her to) to be agressive, he/she will.

I do think that the genders are wired differently, but I really don't think that can be translated into any hugely generalized ideas about genders.


----------



## RBinTEX (Apr 16, 2004)

I agree with Shaggydaddy. Boys and men are different from women and girls. I don't know that my boys are more aggresive, but they are definitely more physical. The girls are more verbal.

Can you influence a child's behavior by how you treat them? Sure. For good or ill.

I don't believe that all gender differences are learned, though. And I'm really glad for the differences!


----------



## Doodlebugsmom (Aug 1, 2002)

My ds isn't more aggressive than dd. I wouldn't really call either of them aggressive toward other people. They do get quite aggressive with each other from time to time though.







Ds is different in that he seems to have a need to be more physically active and loud. He also seems to be a bit competitive and really into sports and such. Until they were old enough to choose their own toys and activities, I kept everything as gender neutral as possible.

However, I don't think that boys are generally louder, more physically active or more competitive than girls. Mine just turned out that way.


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

I remember reading the results of a study of childhood agression...

The researchers found that up to age 3, girls and boys commit "aggressive acts" at exactly the same rates, and in the same ways.

After the age of about 3, they commit aggression at the same *rates* but in different *ways*. Girls channel their aggression into social aggression (the "mean girls" phenomenon, for example -- exclusion and namecalling), while boys continue to mostly use physical aggression.

But our society tends to define "aggression" almost purely in physical terms; think of it - "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." Well, names *can* hurt, a long time after bones heal.

As to why that is? Probably a combination of socialization and genetic differences, with a *lot* more of it being socialization than most people are willing to accept.


----------



## Marsupialmom (Sep 28, 2003)

Aggressive, IMO, is a poor word choice. I think boys are more physical and girls are more verbal agressive. I think our society likes to turn heads towards how woman are negatively agressive.

I recommend you read Brain Sex. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...49809EC588EEDF

http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n11/m...ro-homens.html


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Before I had kids, I had child development classes. I entered parenting believing these behaviours were all about environment.

I have two boys, with a girl in the middle. My real life experience with my kids leads me to believe boys are more likely to wave around sticks, throw rocks, and try to solve things by hitting and shoving than girls.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

I think that if you take boys and girls as GROUP, you will find that boys, on the whole, tend to be more active and more physical in their play and their interests than girls. BUT within the group there is a wide variation of normal - so you will find girls who are highly active and physical; you will find boys who are less active and highly verbal. But the 'average' for boys is more physical than the 'average' for girls.

As Shaggydaddy said, the biology tends to produce more active, less verbal boys. It's no surprise, that language disorders for example, are much more common in boys than girls. It's the mixture of biology (brain structure), hormones and who knows what else coming in.

But, biology aside, there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. I try to be very careful about what I say about my kids. Our son is very sensitive, and very slow to warm up. It's a real struggle for me to keep him from being labeled shy. He's not shy. He's slow to warm up. And I don't want him to think of himself as shy, because I think that can become handicapping or an 'excuse' not to try new things. Ditto for aggression.


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

deleted**


----------



## mommyofboys3 (Feb 8, 2007)

i have 3 boys and the older 2 are aggressive but i have seen girls just like them??


----------



## straighthaircurly (Dec 17, 2005)

While I do think there is an element of truth to the statement, I can't figure out what is the point of people making such generalizations. I do think that repeating it or changing our expectations of a kid simply based on gender rather than our values and their inherent individual personality is very dangerous. I know I hated the assumptions that were made about me as a girl growing up (not by my family but by other people). The differences within a particular gender are far greater than the differences between the "average" of each gender.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

No, I don't think so. I think boys and girls both have the same capacity for aggression, but social and cultural norms shape that aggression into different behaviors. I think in our Western society, some level of physical aggression is tolerated out of boys because it's perceived as masculine, where the same aggression in girls is channeled elsewhere with phrases like "it's not ladylike to hit" and "that's not what young ladies do!" Those aggressive behaviors in girls are then channeled into verbally aggressive and "catty" behavior.


----------



## hhurd (Oct 7, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
Before I had kids, I had child development classes. I entered parenting believing these behaviours were all about environment.

I have two boys, with a girl in the middle. My real life experience with my kids leads me to believe boys are more likely to wave around sticks, throw rocks, and try to solve things by hitting and shoving than girls.

I've had a similar experience. I entered parenting thinking there were few substantial differences between boys and girls, and I beleived the differences that are evident were learned. Fast forward five years and my thinking has reversed.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I don't know - I am amazed at how like dh my son is. DH often wears a "blank face" - you don't know whether he is sad, angry or happy by looking at his face. Smiles flash across, but that's not his natural state. DS is like that too - some days I don't know if ds is happy or not. They really haven't been around each other a ton - I would have thought he would mirror me more, but apparently it is genetic or he knows that he's a boy or something...

I definately notice he plays different. He's more aggressive about nursing than dd. He will rip the shirt off me or any woman that holds him when he wants to nurse - any boob will do! While dd was high need, she had a whiney cry. DS screams bloody murder. But other things he seems less aggressive. He crawls very carefully where dd would just barrel ahead. He seems more reflective - if you can tell that about an 8 month old. Like he thinks before he acts where dd would just try to figure it out and force it as she goes.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Neoma* 
Those aggressive behaviors in girls are then channeled into verbally aggressive and "catty" behavior.

Which IMHO is can be just as hurtful and destructive if not more.


----------



## YogRasFam (Mar 2, 2006)

ok- i am the other friend. my dd is verbally abusive? i am not sure what this entails? just becuase she says no?
i have never kept track of what my friends have said about my kid.
ok- he pushed her off a ladder- so, i got upset-
my apologies.
-end


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

deleted**


----------



## YogRasFam (Mar 2, 2006)

and generalizations about being aggressive- ok- i admit maybe i've used that language before.
my apologies again.
hope we can go on from here...


----------



## YogRasFam (Mar 2, 2006)

peace begins in the community.
peace begins with us.


----------



## Teensy (Feb 22, 2002)

Each of my children was given a Pat the Bunny book at birth. Two of them ripped their copy to shreds - pulled off the cloth, ripped pages in half, pulled at the ring hole until it ripped, etc. One child sat nicely patting the bunny and gently placing a finger in the ring hole. That book is still in prefect condition, whereas the others were destroyed by the time the child was 18 months.

Guess which one was gentle? Yup, that's right - the girl.

Now do you really think there was ANY encouragement or approval in my house of a toddler tearing up a book? No friggin way.

Like some PP, I have definitely seen more physical aggression in my boys than my daughter and would agree with the statement.


----------



## BedHead (Mar 8, 2007)

I think it's probably a mixture of biological tendency and environmental/societal influences that makes boys more 'aggressive' if you want to use that term. I know there's been studies done on XYY males being more aggressive

http://www.scienceclarified.com/disp...-XY-males.html


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I wonder what my girl's deal is then? - she is tearing books to shreads, and she loves to read! But if she sees the opportunity to tear - tear she will. I had a girl cousin who was like that, while I still have my toys from childhood, because I took great care of them (and am protecting them from dd!!)


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

Yep, my dd shows way more agression, or physical play, than ds did at her age. Dunno if it's because she's around it more, or just natural tendencies. Probably a bit of both.


----------



## hempmama (Dec 16, 2004)

*2bluefish*- a quarter of all brains are wired opposite sex. Maybe your girl has a boy wired brain? Hormones come into play at certain times in their lives (4 is one testosterone rush, puberty is another), but I think a lot of people's observed experience of boys being more aggressive than girls is both their own unconscious stereotyping and way more importantly, the rest of the world's. Parents are the most important influence, but they aren't the only one, not by a long shot.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Nooooo, she's all girl. She's more girly than I am. She's into shoes! I have no idea where she got that - I own 2 pair! LOL. She's just going through a tearing paper stage. :-D Maybe she wants to scrapbook!

Just the more I think about it, the less I buy it. The boys were far nicer to me in school than the girls. Girls were definately agressive toward me. And to this day I feel more comfortable with men than with women, even though I would not at all consider myself a tom boy. I dunno.


----------



## Mom2J (Oct 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dillonandmarasmom* 
How does this statement strike you? Do you agree? Disagree? Is it a huge generalization? Does it bother you?

Here's the kicker for me...
Do you believe that what people say and believe to be true can actually become such?? (i.e. can a child become increasingly aggressive whent this statement is increasingly repeated??)

WHat are your thoughts?

Tell that to my son who got full on shoved down at the playground by a little girl!


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:

If you expect a child (or if the child feels that you expect him/her to) to be agressive, he/she will.
But I also think it's important to remember that many of us expected calm, _non_-aggressive children and got quite the opposite









IMO, there's a large aspect of biology innate to boys, but then there's also a big element of temperament and environment. I know girls who are totally aggresive and boys who are non-aggressive







I would probably feel more comfortable with the statement "some _people_ are just more aggressive" or maybe something like "everyone's different"


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

It really bugs me. I mean there might be some truth to it. But who knows. Either way, I think it's so inaccurate to say, because not all boys are aggressive and not all girls are not. I think it bothers me because I see a LOT of tolerance for boys being aggressive, where anything slightly rough around girls is just not treated the same way.


----------



## frenchie (Mar 21, 2006)

I think by nature, boys are more agressive...yet my son is a very gentle kid...and I believe that he inherited that trait from me. He cried once because he accidentally killed a spider...I was exactly the same as a child. My husband on the other hand, was burning bugs with magnifying glasses and pouring salt on snails and slugs to watch them shrivel up and die.

I was a tomboy, and had a lot of male friends through elem. up to high school...and I have to say that I really do find boys to be more physically agressive in general. However, girls can be BRUTAL!! Not so much in a physical sense, but in an emotional/verbal sense. Girls play mind games, form cliques, are very exclusionary, judgemental and just downright mean. This is why I had very few girlfriends growing up. I'd rather be knocked over by a boy, than called a name by a girl.
I would conclude that boys are more physically agressive in general, and girls are more emotionally agressive in general.


----------



## elanorh (Feb 1, 2006)

I read Real Boys (Pollack) awhile ago and it really resonated with me. Mom and Dad raised us in quite non-gender-specific ways (in a lot of ways anyway). We (girls) were expected to be tough ....

I think that it's a combination of nature and nurture, but I think that nurture often has a larger impact than people would like to believe.

One of my sisters has two girls and a boy. She's *always* talking about how mechanical/mathematical/strong/boyish he is. Being around her kids - I don't see any differences that way between him and his sisters (although he does enjoy working on stuff with his dad more). And - he's definitely the sweetest and most nurturing of her kids. He's amazing, at 7 years of age, with his toddler (girl) cousins.







. Just plays how they want, shepherds them along, no coaching or anything from the adults, he just knows what to do.

Another sister has a girl and a boy. Her girl is SO girl. Her son is only a year old but it's interesting how situations where she'd have described her daughter as frustrated or sad, she describes her son as mad or angry.

Our eldest is about a year older than her dd -- and she's super-physical, I think many would describe her as "aggressive." It worries me when she's around other kids (even 3 years older), despite her thin little bod, she's tough and she loves to wrestle and roughhouse. To the point where we've been really working HARD on "Ask first before wrestling!" has become a huge part of our parenting litany for the past few months. She's got a tender little heart and is sweet as can be .... but she plays well with boys.

I guess in the end I wonder how much of my nephew's personality is projected onto him by my sister; and how much of my other sister's kids' personalities are also being projected and expected onto them. At the same time - dh and I probably projected a bit of Ina's personality on her, too. We wanted our children to be tough, and confident, and so on.

In the end, I really think that it's dangerous to use "Boys are aggressive" or "Girls are shy" as descriptors, because children can buy into it. And it's wrong to use it as an excuse for behavior which is inappropriate. Whether a child is naturally 'aggressive' or not, it's a parent's job to help the child learn how to relate positively and respectfully with peers and adults.


----------



## gr8fulmom (Jun 27, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *georgia* 
But I also think it's important to remember that many of us expected calm, _non_-aggressive children and got quite the opposite









IMO, there's a large aspect of biology innate to boys, but then there's also a big element of temperament and environment. I know girls who are totally aggresive and boys who are non-aggressive







I would probably feel more comfortable with the statement "some _people_ are just more aggressive" or maybe something like "everyone's different"

















: I would consider myself anything but aggresive and I have three boys who are definitely very physical and my eldest ds has always been on the aggressive side... the stuff with my eldest started when he was very young and it has always been a struggle for me as often I simply do not understand and cannot relate to his behaviours... I struggled with issues such as gun play etc. (we did not allow them in the house, but he would use sticks, his fingers whatever) and finally came to realize that by completely rejecting this side of him, he would feel simply rejected and/or would want to hide from me.... instead I believe I need to accept him wholely including his aggressive side maintaining and honest trusting relationship so that I can influence and guide him in his choices in this regard... so we bought a punching bag and boxing gloves and we worked out rules around certain types of play that respect everyones's needs etc... anyone







by point is... some kids ARE wired this way and environment can definitely be a huge influence (we shudder to think what my ds might be like raised by a punitive family) but some kids are at very different starting points! I don't know if this is a boy or girl thing... I would be more apt to say that boys are more physical than girls in general but that some kids are inherently more aggressive by nature...


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

I've seen plenty of aggressive girls

I have only boys though so maybe I can't tell









I think children are different. boys may be active in a different way but I'm not sure if that's even true.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Neoma* 
where the same aggression in girls is channeled elsewhere with phrases like "it's not ladylike to hit" and "that's not what young ladies do!" .

Now see, my dh has done the exact opposite. He's taught the boys "don't hit" but taught DD it's OK to hit a boy who is bothering her. Yet, she's an avowed pacifist and the boys, even when they're sitting still, gravitate to books, movies and games with battles. I do think there's a genectic basis.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
Now see, my dh has done the exact opposite. He's taught the boys "don't hit" but taught DD it's OK to hit a boy who is bothering her. Yet, she's an avowed pacifist and the boys, even when they're sitting still, gravitate to books, movies and games with battles. I do think there's a genectic basis.

You might be right, and truthfully we'll never have a definitive answer..but in my own personal experience I've seen that girls are just as aggressive as boys, it's just channeled differently. It seems more noticable in older kids, where boys will resort to rough housing, pushing, physical attacks, girls have been conditioned that it's not "proper" to do so, and resort to mudslinging, rumors, humiliation, and outright abusive dialogue. So, I suppose it depends on what kind of aggression you're talking about. Boys are prone to be more physically aggressive, but girls have just as much *capacity* for aggression as boys do. I say this in general..there are numerous exceptions to any generalization. I was never one for rumors and verbal put-downs, but I was always ready for a fight as a young kid/teenager, and there's always the kids who are completely non-aggressive, either through personality or through upbringing.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

I do believe there are differences, but I'm not sure it's easy to find words which articulate it best.


----------



## crb (Aug 22, 2005)

Just to say how the social aspect is so interesting - I do believe there are biological differences, but it would seem, in our society, that they would be less important - we are not "hunter gatherers" any longer - jobs are mostly non-gender specific.
So it is interesting how much we still play up the differences. With dd I was surprised how many baby clothes indicated that (girls are) spoiled, a princess, beautiful, cute, etc. With ds I was equally surprised that 0-3 month clothing would proclaim him a "champ" or "little hero", slugger, etc. My family and in-laws comment all the time that ds (1 y.o.) is "all boy" - whatever that means! I find him to be similar to his (female) cousin, but she is certainly never called "all boy"! I do see him having a different level of interest in balls, toy cars, etc. - but also that people treat that interest differently - all smiles and comments that I am sure are picked up on. When he drags around a doll and asks for help getting it's dress on and off and kissing it, etc., the grandparents make no special comment. So I can see how, even subtly and at such a young age, there is social pressure (or expectation, desire . . .?) to meet some standard that really isn't even usefull in our society anymore. So interesting!
I totally agree that there are different types of agression - the whole "queen bee" stuff from a few years ago about the verbal hierarchy of girl groups and the parallels to male groups but based on verbal control, manipulation, intimidation, etc. This is an extreme - just as I think really aggressive males is probably an extreme element . . .


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Thinking about it, I'm just not fond of the word aggressive to begin with. I will generally try and find another word esp. when describing children...sometimes assertive, sometimes something else....maybe aggressive just has too much baggage for me







?


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

In my observations, in toddlehood, boys are somewhat more inclined to express themselves physically and girls more verbally, but I really am not sure how much of that is biological. I theorize that there may be "something" about boys that makes language develop later, which then means that they communicate through physicality because it's what they have available.

Generally, I believe pretty strongly that a lot of this is environment and parental response, and unlike many people, I find that nothing about parenting DD (3) has proved me wrong yet. We have tried to raise her pretty gender-neutral, and so far we have a child who would indeed be seen as neither stereotypically girly nor stereotypically boyish. She's just herself. I constantly observe parents who I'm sure don't believe themselves to be enforcing gender standards doing just that.

Yes, by the way, the statement does make me bristle a little. in part because it often seems to be said as an excuse or in a way that suggests the person is actually sort of proud of the aggression in some deepseated way.


----------



## hhurd (Oct 7, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hazelnut* 
I think it bothers me because I see a LOT of tolerance for boys being aggressive

I want to move where you live because it seems quite the opposite to me. There seems very little tolerance of boys "agressiveness" (or physicality) where I am. The active boys compare very unfavorably to the girls in my son's preschool.


----------



## BabyBlisskisses (Mar 15, 2007)

I have one little boy who is super agressive and one is really sensitive. i think it just depends on the childs temperment not gender. but i do think that boys are more likely to be of that temperment.


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

Really? I think boys are generally allowed to be physical through sports very early on, and girls are not as much. Although, my oldest is still very young and only in preschool, so I can't give sweeing generalizations about how boys are treated in school and such. But I see it a lot at the playground, and especially in my (very traditional, kinda sexist) big family of in-laws. They think it's cute when the older boys teach my son to push and tackle (I hate it) and then reprimand him when he does this to the girls and doesnt' know the difference. There are just so many double standards. Once a mom was literally saying "they're just so good" while her oldest had the youngest in a headlock. That just makes me laugh.


----------



## Mountaingirl3 (May 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hempmama* 
*2bluefish*- a quarter of all brains are wired opposite sex. Maybe your girl has a boy wired brain?

I've also read about the "20%" of boys who have more typically female temperments and vice versa. This is separate from gender identification and is unrelated to sexuality. I think my dd#2 is in the 20% of girls who have a lot of "boyish" traits. She clearly identifies herself as a girl, loves princess stories, fairies, pink and dresses. Yet, she has been very forceful and high-physical-energy since babyhood. As a toddler, she would run towards me, slam into me, and literally knock me over. She hugs hard, wrestles hard, loves to use tools, and competes with teeth bared.

It's about 80% of people who fall a bit more neatly into the gender stereotypes. Like pps, I thought gender was mostly environment until I had kids and started researching. Now, I think biology creates gender variety with brain chemistry etc.

This thread has many wise comments about boys which are helpful to me because after a typical girl and a less-typical girl, we have a boy. The testostorone burst of age 3 hasn't happened yet, but he does absolutely love objects in motion--balls/cars/trucks/trains--even though we de-emphasized them and our house is full of dolls/kitties/teasets/books. He will play with dolls if I help him, but you can just tell that his true passions are throwing, climbing and vehicles. When dh comes home, ds pushes past him to say hello to the "vroom-vroom" (dh's car) first.

I loved what a pp had to say about the different kinds of ways to be a man. Another pp mentioned that a boy will feel rejected if the aggressive part of him is rejected. Food for thought.


----------



## Mountaingirl3 (May 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *georgia* 
Thinking about it, I'm just not fond of the word aggressive to begin with. I will generally try and find another word esp. when describing children...sometimes assertive, sometimes something else....maybe aggressive just has too much baggage for me







?

I agree. Synonyms for aggressive are--combative, hostile, attacking, destructive, warlike etc.

Assertive and forceful lean more towards decisive/determined/purposeful. I hope all my children grow up to stand-up for themselves, and be passionate about what they think is right.

How about "physically confident" or "athletic"? I love that my daughter is always pushing her body to see what it can do.

Other words with positive conotations:
enthusiastic
dynamic
gutsy
bold
lively
powerful

I've heard many children, especially boys, called "physical", "energetic" or "active" when these were clearly negative labels, so those words have started to sound less positive.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

I have two boys who are both very physical and active, but neither one is what I would consider aggressive.

When I think of aggressive, I think more of a personality trait than a gender one. I've seen aggressive girls and passive boys, and vice versa.

Nurture can definitely play a role. I know a few boys who are "trained" by their fathers to be very macho, and what I would call aggressive, in the way they interact with people.

But again, in all the preschools and playgroups and gymnastics classes and park days I've attended, I would definitely chalk "aggressive" up to personality, not gender. (In fact, there is one very aggressive little girl in our gymnastics class right now that ds2 is terrified of.)


----------



## luv my 2 sweeties (Aug 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *oceanbaby* 
I have two boys who are both very physical and active, but neither one is what I would consider aggressive.

When I think of aggressive, I think more of a personality trait than a gender one. I've seen aggressive girls and passive boys, and vice versa.

Nurture can definitely play a role. I know a few boys who are "trained" by their fathers to be very macho, and what I would call aggressive, in the way they interact with people.

But again, in all the preschools and playgroups and gymnastics classes and park days I've attended, I would definitely chalk "aggressive" up to personality, not gender. (In fact, there is one very aggressive little girl in our gymnastics class right now that ds2 is terrified of.)









:

Nature vs. Nurture debates sometimes frustrate me because it seems so clear to me that _both_ are at work at the same time. In fact, most research into genetics is finding that the two factors are intertwined to a degree scientists did not expect until recently.

My ds is very active (i.e. moving constantly) and physical, which sometimes translates into actions that might look like agression, but seldom carry the malice that the word implies. He has friends with whom he enjoys quite rough and tumble play, which tends to be his favorite type of play. With less action-oriented children, he will play much more quietly and gently in order to accomodate their play style or as a break for himself from the more active play. Is he "agressive" or "empathetic and cooperative"? Both? Over all, he fits many "boy" stereotypes, which was not something I expected before I met him.









My dd, on the otherhand, exhibits more traits that one might deem "gender neutral". She isn't into "girly" things like princesses, fairies, clothes, or dolls, nor does she fit the "tomboy" profile. She prefers books and games and thinks like a scientist. She has always been highly verbally skilled -- from talking early and well, to now reading at advanced grade levels.

I'm convinced part of these tendencies are nature -- otherwise wouldn't both my dc's be either "neutral" or "stereotypical"? -- but I know some are nurture as well. My dd might be wired to be more verbal than my ds, but it helped that she was the first child and got my undivided attention (and conversation) as a baby and toddler. Had ds been born first, perhaps the verbal "gap" between them would have been smaller. Both ds and dd get encouragement for their athletic efforts, but ds gets the heartfelt "wow, he's good!" He is naturally gifted in this area and other people's spontaneous positive reacon further encourages him to do it more. DD gets these kind of compliments on her reading ability and her vocabulary, not because she's a girl, but because they are areas of strength that naturally draw comment.

The upshot of all of this is that as they grow older, the tendencies that nature gave them get channeled by nurture and personal experience into something more solid in their personality. I think this is natural, and not necessarily a bad thing, as long as we don't use "nature" as an excuse for antisocial or unhealthy behavior. And yes, the expectations of our culture -- for good and ill -- come into play as well. Short of living in a cave, we can't avoid that entirely. I try to shelter my kids from the worst of the cultural influence for as long as possible, but it gets harder and harder to avoid as they get older.


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

I guess I consider "aggresive" to be negative b/c I think of it not just as physical, but physical and aggressive, i.e. not just running around a lot and being physical, but pushing, shoving, tackling, etc.


----------



## msiddiqi (Apr 28, 2005)

My girl cousin who is the same age as DS hit him every opportunity she got, and he never retaliated, just came to me. DS never hits anyone, except me when he gets fustrated, which I think is pretty normal for his age (2yo) since he has a hard time expressing himself. I think that a lot of generalizations are made based on society's definition of a boy vs girl. And I think a lot of parents steer those kids in those directions. Definitely, there are some boy-ish things that are innate but I think a lot of it is subconsciously programmed into children.


----------



## crunchy_mama (Oct 11, 2004)

I think there are some innate differences between the sexes. I also feel that certainly the environment has some part to play as well. However, I want to say I find some of these posts very offensive. Especially the implication that aggresive boys must be trained to be that way. I have a friend who has a very aggressive/physical boy- he is always trying to knock down the other kids, etc etc. They do not own a tv, neither parent is anything but gentle, mild mannered friendly people. My friend won't even read many fairy tale type books that are the least bit scary or physical. He has never stayed with anybody but his parents, and most all the time with his mom. I try to be a gentle momma myself, but I do own a tv and am not near as strict with restricting physical things as she is. My lil' guy is physical, but hasn't been very aggressive, never been a biter, and has only on pretty rare occasion hit anyone. He is mostly just happy go lucky gregarious type.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchy_mama* 
I think there are some innate differences between the sexes. I also feel that certainly the environment has some part to play as well. However, I want to say I find some of these posts very offensive. Especially the implication that aggresive boys must be trained to be that way. I have a friend who has a very aggressive/physical boy- he is always trying to knock down the other kids, etc etc. They do not own a tv, neither parent is anything but gentle, mild mannered friendly people. My friend won't even read many fairy tale type books that are the least bit scary or physical. He has never stayed with anybody but his parents, and most all the time with his mom. I try to be a gentle momma myself, but I do own a tv and am not near as strict with restricting physical things as she is. My lil' guy is physical, but hasn't been very aggressive, never been a biter, and has only on pretty rare occasion hit anyone. He is mostly just happy go lucky gregarious type.

I hope you don't think I feel that boys are "trained" to be aggressive. I've said repeatedly that biology certainly plays a small part in it, but that SOCIETY AS A WHOLE (not the individual parent!!! I cannot say this clearly enough, because we all know that it is not just parents that influence children, especially as they grow older!) which helps to channel the innate capacity in all humans for aggression into different behaviors. That's all I'm trying to say. Boys are more physically aggressive, girls seem to be more verbally aggressive. That's all. <----- ETA: THIS IS A SWEEPING GENERALIZATION, there are numerous exceptions. I feel like if I don't clarify this until I'm blue in the face, someone, somewhere, is going to take it upon themselves to be deeply offended and think that I'm an evil sexist hater of boys or girls or both.

Please, don't anyone think I'm trying to blame parents for their children's aggressive/assertive/rambunctious/whatever flavor of word you feel like using today behavior. That's not what I'm trying to say at all.

Edit again:


----------



## msiddiqi (Apr 28, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchy_mama* 
I think there are some innate differences between the sexes. I also feel that certainly the environment has some part to play as well. However, I want to say I find some of these posts very offensive. Especially the implication that aggresive boys must be trained to be that way. I have a friend who has a very aggressive/physical boy- he is always trying to knock down the other kids, etc etc. They do not own a tv, neither parent is anything but gentle, mild mannered friendly people. My friend won't even read many fairy tale type books that are the least bit scary or physical. He has never stayed with anybody but his parents, and most all the time with his mom. I try to be a gentle momma myself, but I do own a tv and am not near as strict with restricting physical things as she is. My lil' guy is physical, but hasn't been very aggressive, never been a biter, and has only on pretty rare occasion hit anyone. He is mostly just happy go lucky gregarious type.

If you're talking about my post, I'm sorry if that's what you got from it. I meant that there ARE some parents who do push their boys towards that, not by any means all parents. I know some aggressive boys who are just like that, and their parents are very AP and gentle. My cousin, who is a girl, was never pushed towards being aggressive, she just is that way.
I think any kind of 100% generalization of anyone is wrong regardless. These things are super complicated, it's hard to make a blanket statement about any of it.


----------



## Aeress (Jan 25, 2005)

There has been alot of research into boy brains and girls. Boys brains typically look different than a girls. I try to remember that boys may, MAY, react, handle emotions differently than girls. They may have a higher need to bang, bump and run than girls but then again they may not. I think how the differences in boys and girls are handled will have the biggest impact on the child.


----------

