Tangential, but the line saying: "smiles are always free" reminds me of the often overlooked cost of emotional labour performed especially by the service industry. We should also acknowledge this small thing.
you're not wrong; nothing is free: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile_mask_syndrome
> ...subjects develop depression and physical illness as a result of prolonged, unnatural smiling.
A smile transforms from a sign of affection into just another mandatory part of a uniform.
In my house we must have a good attitude or be silent. It's fine to be angry or sad, just no crying or whining. Every request for a hug must be met with a hug.
I expect the emotional exercise to help workout the management of emotions and adjusting of attitude.
I'm not familiar with that. What is it?
I'm not Mormon. Not familiar with the culture.
Jesus cried twice in three years. There is a time and a place.
Gloating isn't permitted.
Most of the discussion and instruction are related to being able to integrate well with others.
I'm weird. Everyone is a little odd. Quirks aren't wrong but can be unattractive or situational inappropriate. Guidance is given.
Having grown up in a house like that and re-learning to express my feelings and being able to empathize with people close to me later in life - I ask you to take a harder look at that stance.
I appreciate your encouragement.
I wasn't taught that attitude was a choice. It was hard learned over many failures. My stress evaporated. My anxieties faded.
Crying for emotional manipulation is not permitted.
The kids can turn off the tears when they want if the manipulation is shown as ineffective
Meeting a tantrum with "I know you don't like the taste of vegetables, but they're an important part of growing up and you must eat them before having sweets." is different from "In this house, you cannot cry if there's no real pain."
There's no fine line between valid responses and manipulation. For manipulators, the pain FEELS real. The pain is a part of a learned behavior. Guiding those feelings instead of making a hard rule cutoff will have better results and build better trust.
On the one hand, I agree that it is important for children to learn that manipulation is not the best way to get the things that they want. On the other hand, I think it is also important for them to learn that they can trust their parents to be there for them when they truly feel they have a problem, even if it isn't physical pain, and even if it is really quite silly. But you don't want them to learn that they can't trust you, because someday they might have problems that aren't silly.
Today it might be "the socks you picked out for me aren't the right color and the boys at school will make fun of them". But tomorrow it might be a developing drinking or drug problem or early signs that a romantic interest is becoming abusive. If they learn they can't bug you about the socks, they might also learn that they can't bug you about those things either.
Those are well managed. I practiced tonight with name calling.
After preparing him I insulted my oldest.
I said "you have donkey breath"
I asked if what I said was true. "No." Okay. Now you have power and I have none. Lies cannot hurt you. Insults are lies. No one can harm you with words if you know who you are.
Your kids can't cry, or complain? And they have to give someone a hug even if they don't want to?
This all seems very unhealthy long-term.
No matter what, if they request a hug they get one. Mid punishment? During correction? They want a hug? Absolutely. Love and affection will never be denied.
Do you think the people you most admire in your own life and in the broader world, both current and historical, have emotional artificiality deeply engrained in them? For me, that is very much not the case.