How would you deal with this?

[Catherineanne]

Has anyone faced this yet? How did you address it? Or how would you?

I have never had to face that particular question with my daughter, although we had a transexual in our church when she was about 9. That led to a few discussions.

When she was younger I made sure I never told her a lie, but I also did not always answer certain questions first time. Young children often say things in passing, and then forget about them. With questions of this delicate nature I would count to three; wait until I heard the question the third time and then give an age appropriate answer.

The first two times I would just say something like, 'That is unusual, isn't it?' or 'How interesting!' Nothing that actually committed me to a point of view.

I usually found that by the third mention it was time to sit down and talk.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Well, I never meant that one should say they are friends.

Would it be untrue? When explaining a complex social situation like this to a small child, simpler is better, in my opinion. To an adult, the word "friend" tends to have different implications than it does to a child. Certainly, I would not introduce my wife to someone as my "friend," but on the other hand, my wife is my best friend. I don't think you need to really get any deeper than that with a kid.

 

[rusmeister]

Would it be untrue? When explaining a complex social situation like this to a small child, simpler is better, in my opinion. To an adult, the word "friend" tends to have different implications than it does to a child. Certainly, I would not introduce my wife to someone as my "friend," but on the other hand, my wife is my best friend. I don't think you need to really get any deeper than that with a kid.

I think it IS untrue. VERY untrue. It sets up, in the very beginning, in the mind of a small child, the idea of adults living together, yet being friends. While this IS possible, at some point they will begin to discover the truth, AND whether they consciously remember what you said or not, the idea of calling a sexual relationship "friendship" will be firmly implanted. That is what has happened to most kids in the world already; it is rooted in the language of "boyfriend" and "girlfriend"; it is now very difficult, living in society, to teach differently and have such teaching hold.

It is better to say that they are living together and helping raise the child than to call them "friends".

How many people here are familiar with the ancient Greek words for love and/or CS Lewis's book, "The Four Loves"? (People who are/have will quickly get my meaning.)

 

[Hledam]

Hi,
I agree, that kids should get the truth, because if not, one day they´ll say "you didn´t tell the truth". But its not easy. Maybe the most difficult thing is to find the right moment for such explanation. And you should be prepared for their "detailed" questions ...... like "and do they kiss like you and Daddy ?" etc.
I will have to solve this problem in my own family...my husband after ten years of marriage fell in love with a young man...and I really don´t know, how to explain that to our children. It will be difficult and I would appreciate any smart ideas "how to..."
Or maybe you know someone to whom happened such thing ???
Thank you.

 

[Ignatius21]

Hi,
I agree, that kids should get the truth, because if not, one day they´ll say "you didn´t tell the truth". But its not easy. Maybe the most difficult thing is to find the right moment for such explanation. And you should be prepared for their "detailed" questions ...... like "and do they kiss like you and Daddy ?" etc.
I will have to solve this problem in my own family...my husband after ten years of marriage fell in love with a young man...and I really don´t know, how to explain that to our children. It will be difficult and I would appreciate any smart ideas "how to..."
Or maybe you know someone to whom happened such thing ???
Thank you.

Lord have mercy

I can't imagine the horrible spot you're in...I will pray for you. And sadly, no, I have no ideas how to explain that to children. I don't know how to explain that to myself. God be with you, and please do keep hanging around on the forums, if nothing else people will pray for you.

But yes, kids are very perceptive and even little ones will start to ask those awkward questions. And it's made even more awkward by the fact that many of these "couples" do not wish to hide what they think of as a legitimate romance. Telling my kid "they just raise the girl togther" will kinda break down when they see the two women kiss at the school, like any other couple might. Or when they become friends with the girl, and we find ourselves invited to a birthday party, or he really wants her to come to his, and now we've really got an awkward situation on our hands

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hi,
I agree, that kids should get the truth, because if not, one day they´ll say "you didn´t tell the truth". But its not easy. Maybe the most difficult thing is to find the right moment for such explanation. And you should be prepared for their "detailed" questions ...... like "and do they kiss like you and Daddy ?" etc.
I will have to solve this problem in my own family...my husband after ten years of marriage fell in love with a young man...and I really don´t know, how to explain that to our children. It will be difficult and I would appreciate any smart ideas "how to..."
Or maybe you know someone to whom happened such thing ???
Thank you.

ugh, Lord have mercy.

prayers for you!

 

[MKJ]

The only thing I have to add is that most five year olds are not able to reliably determine when they need to e discrete, even if they have it explained to them - they just don't have all the social cues in place to do it. So I would be hesitant to say anything that they might reproduce for others in a very inappropriate way or situation.

At that age, I would just say that those are the two people who are raising him and leave it at that.

 

[Dorothea]

I don't have any advice. Everyone gave good advice already.

Hi,
I agree, that kids should get the truth, because if not, one day they´ll say "you didn´t tell the truth". But its not easy. Maybe the most difficult thing is to find the right moment for such explanation. And you should be prepared for their "detailed" questions ...... like "and do they kiss like you and Daddy ?" etc.
I will have to solve this problem in my own family...my husband after ten years of marriage fell in love with a young man...and I really don´t know, how to explain that to our children. It will be difficult and I would appreciate any smart ideas "how to..."
Or maybe you know someone to whom happened such thing ???
Thank you.

Lord, have mercy.

 

[rusmeister]

I also agree with the consensus; I tink MKJ said it best.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don't follow? MKJ's advice doesn't seem in line with your views on it, Rus? Where do you agree?

I also agree with the consensus; I tink MKJ said it best.

 

[HalupkiMonster]

I was in that same situation when I was in elementary school, in the late 1990s. I was just starting school, and I always saw the two women together with my classmate, their adopted daughter.

I really didn't think anything of it, but my mother just told me that the two women were married because they loved each other, and that they adopted my classmate. Short and sweet.

I'd avoid putting any political agendas on your child as many parents do when confronted with this type of thing. My mother didn't affirm or bash the womens' relationship, just told me what it was.

 

[rusmeister]

I don't follow? MKJ's advice doesn't seem in line with your views on it, Rus? Where do you agree?

She said:

At that age, I would just say that those are the two people who are raising him and leave it at that.

I agree completely.

It depends on how far your child pushes the questioning and what they are capable of understanding, but our aim should be to keep it as short as possible, and truthful.

 

[desertfathersincense]

I have raised three children - 1 of my own and 2 others. This came up in all three cases. Heres what I said and it worked in all three cases:

The world is full of differnent kinds of families. Even in the church there are some families that just have one mommy or daddy and not both. Well, out in the world, outside of our home and our family, people do things differently than we do.

(Hey look!!! there's a bunny!!!)

 

[rusmeister]

That would work for me, DFI, except I don't think we should be identifying them as a family, as the same kind and type of relationship that we have. So with the kids, I'd leave the term "family" out of it. Otherwise, the same. The bottom line is that some people do not do as we do, and that is the main line to hold.

 

[MKJ]

I think it is possible to over-think it too. Most young kids are really not looking to have deep thoughts on such things, that will come later. They tend to be looking for a name or simple explanation. Often they don't try to think about the meaning of it at all and probably are not really able to.

I remember the first time I really clued into the idea of homosexuality was when I was about 12 and watched Kiss of the Spider-Woman. And even then, I was not really thinking about whether people ought to do it so much as noticing that they did. (Though that may be because I was too busy trying to puzzle out communism and why it was creating such a fuss.)

 

[Fotina]

Can you just say they are homosexual, or same-sex couple, and say they'll understand when they get older? It's different circumstance than the single-parent family, adoptive, or other parents, so the accurate name is necessary imo, with explanation when child can handle.

 

[rusmeister]

I think there is always going to be a problem in attempting to discuss socially-approved immorality with our children. there is the tremendous danger that the child will perceive this as what is normal in the sense of "acceptable" (by Christians). When I look at the fall of sexual morality over the twentieth century and its trajectory in the near future, I see that parents obviously had and have similar trouble discussing divorce and relations outside of marriage, and that as the morality continues to fall, it gets increasingly difficult. Divorce has always had a legitimate place in society, though it had always been tiny until the last century, but open adultery and fornication posed new problems, and we have become used to resorting to euphemisms and fictions. As we ourselves become jaded to all kinds of sin, it becomes increasingly impossible to prevent the same thing from happening to our children (as long as we do not withdraw from the secular society that has ceased to be Christian).

Looking ahead, how will we explain polygamous and "open" relationships? I can never forget the nervous breakdown I personally witnessed of a seven-year old girl, whose parents were "swingers", over that relationship (one of the things that eventually drove me to faith). Although it may seem incredible to many now, as openly tolerated homosexual relationships seemed to people fifty years ago, how will we explain pedophiliac or bestial relations openly proclaimed as normal?

There obviously must come a point where we must admit that we must tell our children that intolerable things are intolerable, and, with our children, will have to face the consequences of defying what society approves. Since protecting our children is important, it is obvious that they must be withdrawn from public schools. As long as we think we may bring up our children in the way they should go by turning them over to an institution of professional strangers with a mandate to teach the normality of abnormality, we will be divided in our own hearts.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Yep, as soon as they say, "daddy, what does GAY mean?" you just say, "hey, so how 'bout them Bears this year, eh?"

She said:



I agree completely.

It depends on how far your child pushes the questioning and what they are capable of understanding, but our aim should be to keep it as short as possible, and truthful.

 

[Macarius]

Rus,

I really don't think that there are a lot of children from conservative Christian households who doubt that conservative Christian culture thinks homosexuality is immoral or contrary to God's plan. Even with the use of post-modern terms, the message seems to have gotten through loud and clear. The problem isn't the terminology, it runs deeper into the sociological changes wrought by post-modernity and globalization. Insisting on not calling homosexual couples a "family" isn't going to turn the tide, it just makes us look like jerks.

The use of the terminology you so strongly argue against may communicate that society at large views such-and-such as normative, but children are remarkably perceptive. They pick up rather effectively what their parents and church believe about things (even the attitudes and dispositions we'd rather they not pick up).

Inevitably, two things will be true for most children in Christian families: they will be aware of what the Church teaches about same sex unions, and aware that the Church (in America) stands against the trajectory of "mainstream" society.

From there, they'll have to make a choice. We all, ultimately, have to make a choice.

In the end, regardless of what language we use to describe things, our kids will have to make a decision. By the time they are ready to do that, they are old enough to have had a longer conversation on the subject (a conversation which we, as parents, should be pro-active in pursuing); and the longer the conversation, the less important it is that a particular word is used or not used. Refusing to call same sex unions a "family" or demanding the use of the term "sodomy" rather than "homosexuality" will not, in an extended conversation or over the course of someone's lifetime, stop them from understanding that society views homosexual families differently from Christians.

I honestly think it makes no difference. If anything, the intentional use of such negative language sets the Christian up as someone trying to "poison the well," - it makes us look judgmental and bigoted. I would rather utilize the mainstream terminology, and have a long enough conversation to get to the point that terminological problems fade in significance.

It ultimately doesn't matter if you call a red rose "blue" if you have a long enough time to explain that, when you say "blue" what you mean is what society calls "red."

 

[rusmeister]

Rus,

I really don't think that there are a lot of children from conservative Christian households who doubt that conservative Christian culture thinks homosexuality is immoral or contrary to God's plan. Even with the use of post-modern terms, the message seems to have gotten through loud and clear. The problem isn't the terminology, it runs deeper into the sociological changes wrought by post-modernity and globalization. Insisting on not calling homosexual couples a "family" isn't going to turn the tide, it just makes us look like jerks.

The use of the terminology you so strongly argue against may communicate that society at large views such-and-such as normative, but children are remarkably perceptive. They pick up rather effectively what their parents and church believe about things (even the attitudes and dispositions we'd rather they not pick up).

Inevitably, two things will be true for most children in Christian families: they will be aware of what the Church teaches about same sex unions, and aware that the Church (in America) stands against the trajectory of "mainstream" society.

From there, they'll have to make a choice. We all, ultimately, have to make a choice.

In the end, regardless of what language we use to describe things, our kids will have to make a decision. By the time they are ready to do that, they are old enough to have had a longer conversation on the subject (a conversation which we, as parents, should be pro-active in pursuing); and the longer the conversation, the less important it is that a particular word is used or not used. Refusing to call same sex unions a "family" or demanding the use of the term "sodomy" rather than "homosexuality" will not, in an extended conversation or over the course of someone's lifetime, stop them from understanding that society views homosexual families differently from Christians.

I honestly think it makes no difference. If anything, the intentional use of such negative language sets the Christian up as someone trying to "poison the well," - it makes us look judgmental and bigoted. I would rather utilize the mainstream terminology, and have a long enough conversation to get to the point that terminological problems fade in significance.

It ultimately doesn't matter if you call a red rose "blue" if you have a long enough time to explain that, when you say "blue" what you mean is what society calls "red."

Hi Mac,
I do NOT say that our children do not know what we teach, so I think you'veread me somewhat wrong. I'm saying that they absorb what they are being taught outside of our home, and that over time, society's - the world's - message tends to win, certainly in the short and young adult term. It may be that when they are old, they will return to "the way that they should go", but how much damage will have been done in the meantime?

The terminology is both the symptom and the enabler of the sociological changes. Yes, insisting on right language may make us look like jerks. Calling sin "sin" is certainly going to make us look like jerks, though we try to speak the truth in love, we must nevertheless speak the truth.

So the choice our children make, of we allow them, as children, to be inundated with the lie as the truth, will be a loaded choice. It's not at all a fair fight.

I do accept that some language mght have to be changed to speak the truth. So I DO think we must not call a parody of the family a family, but acknowledge that terms like "sodomy" must be replaced when the truth can no longer be discerned in them. But I DO agree with you that we, as adults, have to speak to other adults where they are, and that the law of charity might demand, in specific situations, that we temporarily accept the language of the Enemy.

In any event, we need to hold distinct how we talk to adults that deny our morality and how we teach our children to see things. I agree that we need to be as compassionate as possible, but not that the choice of words does not matter. It matters a great deal. And charity should dominate, but not to the point of misleading people.