Anti-authoritarian parenting style and socionics types

[Pa3s]

My theory is that either those types who don't value or irrational types (because of the usually more 'democratic' leadership style) are prone to use this parenting style. I rather think it's connected to the first possibility.

I'm personally very sceptical of this, even if most people don't prefer this parenting style anymore. It's doesn't help children to learn the typical social behaviour, on the contrary, they often become tyrannic and reject any form of authority or order. But these are necessary things in a working environment.

What do you think?

[ashlesha]

i'd have to know more precisely what you mean by "anti-authoritarian" to comment with much specificity, but i could see a possible trend here. i tend to be more on the liberal side in my parenting behavior and i also remember slackermom saying something about this. (i think on the wiki, so idk if its still there?) as for my own parents, though, my LII dad was extremely authoritarian and my IEI mom didn't really believe in rules at all, so its not a trend i would use to type with very conclusively.

edit: i was just thinking of Se valuing...taking rationality/irrationality into account as you did, my parents behavior would still fit into your theory, ya.

[Singu]

Anti-authoritarian parents are neurotic.

[ashlesha]

ok, i don't think i know what anti-authoritarian parenting means.

a couple things, though. i think an overly authoritarian parenting style is also likely to push a kid to reject authority and a more moderate environment is optimal. and i'm trying to figure out what was meant by the working environment comment...would you say that the primary responsibility of a parent is to prepare their children for the work world?

[FDG]

I don't have children, but when I will, I'll definitely try to be as anti-authoritarian as I can (obviously, this means that I will have to be authoritarian if they're really crossing the line...). I wouldn't mind if my children disliked the "typical social order". I dislike it myself, in many ways.

Besides, I also strongly believe in "nature over nurture" when it comes to character development. I've seen horrible children / men coming out of absolutely normal/perfect families, and vice versa. Probably, something which might be equally (if not more) important would be checking out who they end up befriending, even though ultimately such a thing can't be controlled, either.

My parents are ISxjs and I believe they are not particularly authoritarian. They probably didn't need to be, either, since I've never displayed particularly wild behavioral tendencies.

My "pet theory" is that ExTx children have the worst response to authoritarian parenting, while IxFx children have the "best" response. I have an ESTp acquaintance, which I could otherwise define as psychologically "fine", which set his own house on fire when he was 10-11, in response to a strong quarrel with his father.

[CILi]

Question #1: Anti-Authoritarian = ?

A) Anal and way too authoritative of their kids

B) Lax and not authoritative of their kids at all

C) Anarchic and actively fighting "authorities" in their lives

[FDG]

Question #1: Anti-Authoritarian = ?

A) Anal and way too authoritative of their kids

B) Lax and not authoritative of their kids at all

C) Anarchic and actively fighting "authorities" in their lives

I would say B) with an implied hint of C).

[Pa3s]

i'd have to know more precisely what you mean by "anti-authoritarian" to comment with much specificity, but i could see a possible trend here.

Hmm, I just noticed there isn't even an english Wikipedia article about that... well, at least as far as I can see. Anti-authoritarian parents believe it's utterly wrong to set certain rules for the child. There are different characteristics for this behaviour. Some might treat their children as equals (as if they already were grown-up and fully aware of every consequence of their actions) or others who seem to ignore parenting at all and leave their childrens development to chance (which is the worst case).

a couple things, though. i think an overly authoritarian parenting style is also likely to push a kid to reject authority and a more moderate environment is optimal. and i'm trying to figure out what was meant by the working environment comment...

Overly authoritarian parenting often causes the children to become authoritarians in their later life, some might even use physical punishment, which I absolutely reject. Authoritarian parenting is actually about as bad as the anti-a style. There is middle way of parenting, which is still based on the parents as authorities, but unfortunately, there is no appropriate english term to describe it.

would you say that the primary responsibility of a parent is to prepare their children for the work world?

I expected this question. The answer ist no, of course not. But it's important to show the child how it should deal with real-life problems and so on.

I would say B) with an implied hint of C).

Correct.

My parents are ISxjs and I believe they are not particularly authoritarian. They probably didn't need to be, either, since I've never displayed particularly wild behavioral tendencies.

It's exactly the same in my case.

[pianosinger]

My style has been to seek a balance. It is important for parents to maintain some authority over their children, but in a way that encourages them to safely develop their independence over time.

For example, my 3 yo is told point-blank not to go into the street without holding an adult's hand. This is to keep him safe, as he does not yet understand all the fine points of crossing the street or how to do so safely every time. When he is older, however, he will know enough to safely cross the street by himself. I won't be making him hold my hand still when he's eight.

[pianosinger]

My parents are ISxjs and I believe they are not particularly authoritarian. They probably didn't need to be, either, since I've never displayed particularly wild behavioral tendencies.

This was me, too. I had a lot of freedom as a kid, that my ESFp sister did not because she was much more prone to "push the envelope" in a way that could have gotten her into trouble.

My "pet theory" is that ExTx children have the worst response to authoritarian parenting, while IxFx children have the "best" response. I have an ESTp acquaintance, which I could otherwise define as psychologically "fine", which set his own house on fire when he was 10-11, in response to a strong quarrel with his father.

This is something that scares me, having an ESTp child. He is so strong-willed. He responds to my discipline pretty well, as long as I am reasonable and consistent with him. But, he certainly has no qualms about getting physical, and he is constantly forcing me to push back with my Role Se, which gets old really quick. And it's hard to be consistent every time. And his ILI daddy has even less control over him than I do.

He will hit or shove his baby brother until he starts to cry. And when I ask him why he did it, he says, "Because I like to!" He enjoys arousing an emotional reaction out of other people. And it doesn't help, I suppose, that neither his daddy nor I are Fe-valuing.

So, in our household, neither my husband or I swear or use foul language-- EVER. And yet, the other day Daddy was driving home with our son and he started screaming the F-word over and over at the top of his lungs! Yep, he's going to be an interesting challenge, that boy...

[Pa3s]

Just to make this clear: I don't support authoritarian parents. As I said above it's as contraproductive as people who raise their child in an anti-authoritarian way, in my opinion. Here is a picture which maybe illustrates the general situation better:



Key:
caption: parenting styles
up/down: warmth/affection (devotion)
left/right: control/guidance
red: permissive
blue: neglecting
yellow: 'authoritative'
green: authoritarian
(the words in yellow and green seem to be synomyms in English. In German, the maybe aren't, even if I never heard the yellow one before as a special term.)

[ashlesha]

Overly authoritarian parenting often causes the children to become authoritarians in their later life, some might even use physical punishment, which I absolutely reject. Authoritarian parenting is actually about as bad as the anti-a style. There is middle way of parenting, which is still based on the parents as authorities, but unfortunately, there is no appropriate english term to describe it.

according to a psychology class i was in, the middle way is termed authoritative. there were studies cited where it was shown that permissive parenting is least effective and authoritative is most effective. i dont know how exactly that was measured, though. i feel kind of silly for not mentioning this earlier, lol.

My style has been to seek a balance. It is important for parents to maintain some authority over their children, but in a way that encourages them to safely develop their independence over time.

For example, my 3 yo is told point-blank not to go into the street without holding an adult's hand. This is to keep him safe, as he does not yet understand all the fine points of crossing the street or how to do so safely every time. When he is older, however, he will know enough to safely cross the street by himself. I won't be making him hold my hand still when he's eight.

this seems like the sanest kind of parenting imo.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I don't have children, but when I will, I'll definitely try to be as anti-authoritarian as I can (obviously, this means that I will have to be authoritarian if they're really crossing the line...). I wouldn't mind if my children disliked the "typical social order". I dislike it myself, in many ways.

Besides, I also strongly believe in "nature over nurture" when it comes to character development. I've seen horrible children / men coming out of absolutely normal/perfect families, and vice versa. Probably, something which might be equally (if not more) important would be checking out who they end up befriending, even though ultimately such a thing can't be controlled, either.

My parents are ISxjs and I believe they are not particularly authoritarian. They probably didn't need to be, either, since I've never displayed particularly wild behavioral tendencies.

My "pet theory" is that ExTx children have the worst response to authoritarian parenting, while IxFx children have the "best" response. I have an ESTp acquaintance, which I could otherwise define as psychologically "fine", which set his own house on fire when he was 10-11, in response to a strong quarrel with his father.

I am IxFx and a product of authoritarian/controlling parenting (by ESE and possible LSI), along with physical/mental abuse. It aggravated any authority issues I already had.

[April]

My mother is ENFp and had an extremely passive approach to parenting to the point where I felt like I basically took care of myself (e.g., making my own meals, getting myself ready in the morning, catching the bus on my own since she would sleep in). There weren't really any rules except I was supposed to tell her where I was at all times. I think her approach was encouraged, in a way, by my teachers. Even in 2nd grade, if my teacher had to leave the room for a few minutes, she would announce to the class that I was in charge (how fucked up as I look back on it!). I think she regrets all of this, because she has said to me multiple times in my adult life, "I'm sorry I never let you be a kid."

[HERO]

Essays on Parenting, Families, and Procreation - Healing from Childhood Trauma

Especially in the modern Western world, there are often no sharp distinctions between overly authoritarian and overly permissive parenting styles. There are parents who may at times be neglectful and self-absorbed; at other times relatively caring and loving; at other times emotionally unstable, angry, and even violent; etc.
As a general rule, the most violent, criminal, and homicidal people had the least in terms of genuine love, caring, and honesty in early childhood, and were forced to undergo the greatest degrees of hypocrisy, poisonous pedagogy, violence, idiocy, magical thinking, etc. without a helping witness. Of course this may often not be solely attributable to the biological parents (despite the legacy of abuse often extending for generations in families), and whether or not the children are adopted, you still have to take into account their pre-birth experiences, birth experiences, what forms of separation or abandonment took place after birth and to what extent, what negative experiences took place due to medical technology and hospitals, and then you also have to factor in siblings, caregivers, random strangers, family members, babysitters, teachers, etc. And of course, all kinds of seemingly mundane and trivial things, ranging from parents' attitudes to their children to how they took care of them (whether they truly listened to them, took them seriously, respected them) and everything in between. Of course, the less enlightened and more traumatized the parent, the more likely they'll use their child as a "poison container" -- a receptacle for their buried emotions and repressed memories/traumas.
Parents often unconsciously repeat the same parenting styles as their parents. If their parents had a bad parenting style, then they are less likely to have as bad a parenting style if they had a helping or enlightened witness. I think I read somewhere how they recorded mothers with their infant daughters, and then when those daughters grew up they also recorded them with their children, and they found that they acted the same way with their children that their mothers did with them.

Psychohistory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The best and most recent child-rearing mode is the Helping Mode. '...helping children reach their own goals in life, rather than "socialize" them into fulfilling parental wishes. Less psychological manipulation, more unconditional love. Children raised in this way are far more empathic towards others in society than earlier generations.'

CH 4 pp 132 - 146 - FOUNDATIONS OF PSYCHOHISTORY


Another important point is that emotions and realities shouldn't be hidden, yet at the same time they shouldn't be unconsciously acted out on one's children in a destructive fashion. Often times, parents and family members are unable to take responsibility for their actions and mistakes, and it's their children who must pay the price. Of course, people who idealize oppression, lies, pain, suffering, hypocrisy, corruption, destructiveness, and/or violence gild it in a semblance of virtue and absurd righteousness and are experts at dissembling an open-minded, liberal, and/or socially responsible-caring-conscientious personality.

[silverchris9]

The best and most recent child-rearing mode is the Helping Mode. '...helping children reach their own goals in life, rather than "socialize" them into fulfilling parental wishes. Less psychological manipulation, more unconditional love. Children raised in this way are far more empathic towards others in society than earlier generations.'

...gonna have to go ahead and call bs on that one. If it were the "best" mode, don'tcha think it would have been discovered before? Or at least that it would have occurred at least once before the twentieth century finally discovered, once and for all, how to raise children?

All those quotes are nice and all... but they come from a place of rather obvious bias, which sort of irritates me...

Anyway, with raising children, obviously I don't know what to do, and I'm not a parent yet so I have no way of finding out. But as with all things, the middle ground is probably the best one. Of course children need some discipline and guidance. And of course that can be taken overboard. Finding a balance is key. I'm not sure where that balance is though.

[golden]

...gonna have to go ahead and call bs on that one. If it were the "best" mode, don'tcha think it would have been discovered before? Or at least that it would have occurred at least once before the twentieth century finally discovered, once and for all, how to raise children?

All those quotes are nice and all... but they come from a place of rather obvious bias, which sort of irritates me...

Anyway, with raising children, obviously I don't know what to do, and I'm not a parent yet so I have no way of finding out. But as with all things, the middle ground is probably the best one. Of course children need some discipline and guidance. And of course that can be taken overboard. Finding a balance is key. I'm not sure where that balance is though.

Well, a couple of points on this:

Maybe the parent as helper is the quote-unquote best mode. It's the philosophy I've adopted with my child. Nonetheless, it's very, very difficult to do.

What makes it the best? There's no such thing, perhaps, as a single best mode for all people and all times, but it may be the best way to parent in response to the current trend of human consciousness and western social pressures and needs.

"They come from a place of obvious bias"--maybe. But what is the nature of the bias? I'm not sure I can articulate what the bias is.

Even if the quoted material is more or less correct, it's idealistic, pointing to "what" rather than "how."

The most common mainstream view of parenting styles I've seen recognizes three categories: authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive. The middle ground in this construct is the authoritative mode, in which the parent provides a strong psychological "container" for the child without breaking his/her spirit. That would be the how, I suppose.

[tcaudilllg]

Extremist positivists are always authoritarian: they go to extremes to see their child behave they way they want them to behave.

Extreme negativists are always permissive: they feel they cannot (or should not) control their children.

Authoritative is the goal; however there are multiple perspectives on permissive parenting.

So it's mostly an issue with a political basis.

Of course Ts will be a little stricter and colder than Fs. (although the coldness is not in itself acceptable... duality is important here and the T has a responsibility to seek it).

[krieger]

Authoritarian towards big-picture and long-term issues, not towards small things. Avoid micromanagement, but assert your superior wisdom towards the situation so it doesn't go to waste.

[silverchris9]

Well, a couple of points on this:

Maybe the parent as helper is the quote-unquote best mode. It's the philosophy I've adopted with my child. Nonetheless, it's very, very difficult to do.

What makes it the best? There's no such thing, perhaps, as a single best mode for all people and all times, but it may be the best way to parent in response to the current trend of human consciousness and western social pressures and needs.

"They come from a place of obvious bias"--maybe. But what is the nature of the bias? I'm not sure I can articulate what the bias is.

Even if the quoted material is more or less correct, it's idealistic, pointing to "what" rather than "how."

The most common mainstream view of parenting styles I've seen recognizes three categories: authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive. The middle ground in this construct is the authoritative mode, in which the parent provides a strong psychological "container" for the child without breaking his/her spirit. That would be the how, I suppose.

Hmmm... perhaps I agree with the bit about western society and consciousness, etc.

As far as obvious bias, I was just talking about the negativity attached to "magical thinking" and the positive connotation of "liberal, and/or socially responsible-caring-conscientious," and the assumption that "empathy" is inherently a superior virtue to those that might be instilled by other parenting methods.

I mean... yeah, you should help your own child be his or her own person, sure. But that's a "what" that is so vague and disconnected from "how" that it just about ceases to be a "what" at all. To some extent you do have to socialize your children, because there are some things you're just not going to learn without examples. I mean, you socialize your children by feeding them, thereby teaching them that their needs can and will be provided for. You socialize your children by talking to them, and by talking to others in their presence. In a larger sense, you socialize them by how you relate to other adults, especially the other parent (if available). So yeah... socialization happens whether your want it to or not. At least some of it has to be consciously giving your child a good example or positive guidance, I think. Shrug. I mean... kids don't come into the world knowing that it's impolite to laugh at someone's toupee, but it's probably something you should teach them, just in case.

[inaLim]

There was a punishment thread that I was going to reply to but I dont see it anymore, so I'm bumping this one.

My parents - Alpha or Delta, not ST. Dad xII authoritarian-ish. Not blatantly authoritarian, but trying to reason with him is pointless, so he may as well be.

Spanking and grandma (IEI) being upset were the only thing I responded to.

I think I would've done best with permissive parenting style w/ spanking as a consquence and worst with talk whether it was authoritarian or anti-authoritarian (due to both my type and my iffy ITR with my parents)

[The Reality Denialist]

If people think that we can not be here peacefully from the beginning then I suggest the following: Extinction.

[Sol]

Types prefer methods of influence according to strong functions.
The differ in how strictly and directly they express this influence.
J-S should be the most "authoritarian" in common sense of the term. Se value may add also.

[Aster]

I’m not authoritarian at all. Well sometimes I try to be but it never works out. Like I’ll tell them “You are grounded for life! For ever!” When I’m mad so of course they don’t take me seriously. My 11 year old gets mad at me for not disciplining my 8 year old and tells me she feels like she has to take matters into her own hands. She’ll get mad I ‘don’t do anything’ and then start running after my 8 year old. Basically I just tell them why they shouldn’t do what they are doing and expect it to be enough. My two oldest don’t really get in trouble, but my 8 year old daughter who is prob EIE is a bit of a challenge, but very funny and clever. My life is a circus. I seriously feel like I’m sitting at the mad hatters table in wonderland 24/7, but it’s alll good.

my husband is much more authoritarian but I try not to get him involved unless things get way out of hand. For example I had food poisoning and was sitting on my bed. I just had got my youngest in bed, and they came in there getting in my face, jumping on my bed, and hitting my stomach to be funny. I told them to get out but they ignored me and decided we were going to watch a girly movie. I told them if they didn’t get out, I was going to call their father. They didn’t believe me and laughed yeah right. So I called him and they high tailed it out of there as soon as the phone started ringing. And he’s on the other end saying leave your mother the hell alone. Anyway, I don’t get why they listen to him and not me. they just don’t take me seriously. They even told me so. I would just like some sympathy from them in my plight as a parent and hope they cooperate. They usually do, but sometimes they are pain in the butt kids lol

[Aramas]

Permissive parenting is pretty rare. It's difficult to spoil a child.

I was raised in an environment that was so deeply controlling that I never bothered testing limits or exploring. Pretty much any activity outside my head was off limits or subjected to harsh or mocking criticism.

I've made a decision to never have kids, so I don't have to worry about parenting stuff.

[Aster]

My parents weren’t authoritarian at all, either. My dad, prob an Ip Te type wasn’t really that involved and my mom (maybe ESE) just let me do whatever I wanted. I didn’t have any rules. But they also never taught me responsibility. I didn’t ever get in trouble, and when I did do something ‘bad’ I never got caught because I was pretty good at covering my tracks...and I think my mom was willfully ignorant, which was a large part of it.

[ouronis]

I think I'd be authoritarian in the sense of not taking any shit and making sure my kid behaved appropriately with other people, but regarding desires, hobbies, etc. I couldn't give less of a shit unless they were part of a destructive drive.

My parents were only authoritarian when they were personally frustrated with my behavior - otherwise, they had a pretty laissez-faire attitude of their own. One is LSI and the other one Idk what they are.

[Lolita]

My dad is LSI-N and wasn't authoritarian but I did get corporal punishment at the behest of my mom. My mom is SEE-D and she was authoritarian and wanted my dad to be strict on me and impose more rules and structure on me. She ended up doing that and didn't like that my dad didn't back her up because she has to be the "bad guy" while my dad spoiled me.

I'm fairly authoritarian with my god-children. I do discipline them more than their parents. Everything has to have a reason. I want them to articulate why they should get something or have something. Their parents just give them stuff because they feel proud they can financially support their kids. I'm sorta the drill sergeant when I come over (but a really fun one). I make them work for their "rewards."

I don't think parenting style has to do with cognitive type, but it could possibly be a subtype of a type.

[Disturbed]

Under frustration, I would be, but I strongly oppose authoritarian parenting styles.

ILE-Ti are actually quite strict if they're not psychopaths, but they don't have to resort to punishment because they know how to prevent everything (they prevent a lot). But psychopathic ILE-Ti are permissive.

ESI-Fi is way more authoritarian in parenting than ESI-Se even though I despise authoritarian parenting styles.

Don't know about any of the other gammas.

Betas vary hugely from each other. LSI-Se psychopaths wouldn't be strict.

LSE-Te are probably pretty strict as IEE-Ne are, but the latter often don't have surviving kids.