Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Hating to Lose at Games was: Brag on Kirby
[email protected]
One thing we did sometimes was to play from the beginning so that one person
would win. "Let's let Holly win" and then all moves would be made with that
goal in mind. It doesn't make the game easier or harder, just different.
There were times I said "Kirby, it's not fun to play with you when you're not
willing to possibly lose." I wish I'd thought of something better to do, but
I didn't, and the other two kids weren't that way.
DD wasn't like this, but our eight-year-old son always has taken games
and wining very seriously. We've done versions of both of these coping ideas.
When we'd modify a game to his overt advantage, we'd rechristen the
game. We hoped it would help prevent him from confusing what we were doing with
the regular game, figuring he'd also need to be able to play the real game
according to common rules, with other people who don't love him like we do! <g>
So when the family would go out to play baseball in the back yard, and
he got ALL the at-bats while we had to play the field (he was too little to
pitch anyway) we all called it "Evan Baseball" -- frankly, this turned out to
help us, too, to focus on "playing with him" instead of getting caught up in
actually playing baseball. We three, dad, mom and older sister, all are
first-borns and extremely task-oriented, so we can do just about anything as long as
we stay clear on what the task really is!
Evan became a big baseball fan last fall, during the unusually
thrilling run-up to the 2003 World Series. We watched the Cubs and Red Sox on tv with
him, and he was able to gradually understand for himself, with no loss of
face, what little resemblance Major League Baseball bore to what he'd been
"winning" in the backyard.
We've used this same idea in reverse when he's losing at a game we
haven't modified and renamed. Say he's having a bad run of luck at Monopoly and
demands extra turns or announces he'll just owe the rent, without the agreement
of his landlord. We explain that those rules don't belong in this game, but
maybe he wants to negotiate new rules for a different game, or we could go play
some other game entirely? But that it's not fun for anyone to just abandon the
rules in the middle of a game you're losing.
Also whenever WE are losing, we all model ways to keep enjoying the
game anyway -- over-the-top jokes about our imminent doom, theatrical wailing
with a big smile and a wink, bestowing extravagant titles like Landlord of the
Universe, loudly plotting revenge for the rematch we demand, et cetera.
I'd say no matter what game we're playing, we tend to turn the whole
thing into theatre, egging each other on, improvising, trading roles, doing
bits of dialog from famous characters or stories. (Sometimes we do have more fun
losing than winning! <g>) JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
would win. "Let's let Holly win" and then all moves would be made with that
goal in mind. It doesn't make the game easier or harder, just different.
There were times I said "Kirby, it's not fun to play with you when you're not
willing to possibly lose." I wish I'd thought of something better to do, but
I didn't, and the other two kids weren't that way.
DD wasn't like this, but our eight-year-old son always has taken games
and wining very seriously. We've done versions of both of these coping ideas.
When we'd modify a game to his overt advantage, we'd rechristen the
game. We hoped it would help prevent him from confusing what we were doing with
the regular game, figuring he'd also need to be able to play the real game
according to common rules, with other people who don't love him like we do! <g>
So when the family would go out to play baseball in the back yard, and
he got ALL the at-bats while we had to play the field (he was too little to
pitch anyway) we all called it "Evan Baseball" -- frankly, this turned out to
help us, too, to focus on "playing with him" instead of getting caught up in
actually playing baseball. We three, dad, mom and older sister, all are
first-borns and extremely task-oriented, so we can do just about anything as long as
we stay clear on what the task really is!
Evan became a big baseball fan last fall, during the unusually
thrilling run-up to the 2003 World Series. We watched the Cubs and Red Sox on tv with
him, and he was able to gradually understand for himself, with no loss of
face, what little resemblance Major League Baseball bore to what he'd been
"winning" in the backyard.
We've used this same idea in reverse when he's losing at a game we
haven't modified and renamed. Say he's having a bad run of luck at Monopoly and
demands extra turns or announces he'll just owe the rent, without the agreement
of his landlord. We explain that those rules don't belong in this game, but
maybe he wants to negotiate new rules for a different game, or we could go play
some other game entirely? But that it's not fun for anyone to just abandon the
rules in the middle of a game you're losing.
Also whenever WE are losing, we all model ways to keep enjoying the
game anyway -- over-the-top jokes about our imminent doom, theatrical wailing
with a big smile and a wink, bestowing extravagant titles like Landlord of the
Universe, loudly plotting revenge for the rematch we demand, et cetera.
I'd say no matter what game we're playing, we tend to turn the whole
thing into theatre, egging each other on, improvising, trading roles, doing
bits of dialog from famous characters or stories. (Sometimes we do have more fun
losing than winning! <g>) JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]