I have to disagree with you on this one Sundae Girl, separation anxiety is a very common trait in babies that age. It's the time that they are learning that they are actually separate from the world. In order to feel safe and secure, they want to have that familiar face in their field of view. Perfectly normal.

We need a drum roll, we got a nature vs nurture discussion about to start! :corn:

A definition of manipulate.

ma·nip·u·late /məˈnɪpyəˌleɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[muh-nip-yuh-leyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object), -lat·ed, -lat·ing. 1. to manage or influence skillfully, esp. in an unfair manner: to manipulate people's feelings.
2. to handle, manage, or use, esp. with skill, in some process of treatment or performance: to manipulate a large tractor.
3. to adapt or change (accounts, figures, etc.) to suit one's purpose or advantage.
4. Medicine/Medical. to examine or treat by skillful use of the hands, as in palpation, reduction of dislocations, or changing the position of a fetus.

As you can see, you can choose to view the definition in a negative light if you want, and of course, no one wants to think of babies in a negative light. They're so cute and cuddly and smell nice and they're basically viewed as angelic little creatures who wouldn't harm a fly.

As a parent, I can tell you that I was manipulated by my children when they were babies. What parent can resist for long if their child is crying, even when they've been fed, changed, bathed and fluffed up beyond all niceness...and they still cry. You may even have been cuddling them for hours previously also.

Yes a baby will cry to let you know it wants something. Whether or not it's reasonable is where the manipulation comes into play. Sometimes a baby is simply trying to get more of what it likes, and believe it or not, sometimes we as adults fall for it. This behaviour if indulged often will usually lead to a parent of a two year old complaining that the child just doesn't seem to listen to anything it's told.

I could cite you papers all day on the psychology of children and babies, but it'll be easier for you to do the research yourself if you don't believe me.

When it all comes down to it, whether you like it or not, babies manipulate the adults around them in order to get what they want, just like every other living thing in this planet. Behaviour modification in order to achieve a goal is something learned right for the begining, although it could be argued that some people never learn how to change their behaviour in order to get what they want. ;)

When you allow yourself to be "manipulated" it leads to secure attachment which innoculates against all manner of ick in their lives. Bravo!

my two have grown to adulthood still liking me, talking to me, and still loving me. I'd like to say that's proof, but -- I think they do all that in spite of me!

No, but they do it with a stiff upper lip

And do they keep their pinkie fingers up when they're breastfeeding?

Aliantha, you left out the most common meaning ascribed to "manipulate" that I found in ALL definitions:

To influence or manage shrewdly or deviously

To tamper with or falsify for personal gain

To control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one's own advantage

To change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one's purpose

To control somebody or something: to control or influence somebody or something in an ingenious or devious way

To falsify something: to change or present something in a way that is false but personally advantageous


Babies can't be spoiled and they don't know how to manipulate.

From the The Science of Parenting

Aliantha, I read and reread your post, and I sincerely think we just don't completely agree on what constitutes "manipulation". I'm not willing to get into such an argument.

We agree on what babies do, what kids do. We agree on what parents do. We agree on examples of of cause and effect with babies and parents. That's good.

I just don't agree that I'm being manipulated, or that you're being manipulated for that matter. Not by a baby. By my own guilty conscience, by the voice of my parents in my head, by my spouse, sure. Not by the baby, though. Identical circumstances, identical responses, different reactions. I'm not a puppet or a pawn or a victim, I'm just a long suffering parent, just like you.

I agree with you--they're devious sometimes, the rascals. And the very definition of selfish--unquestionably. And I often feel like a sucker for their charms. I *am* a pushover for them. Dang, they wear me out. But they're just being babies, not little Machiavellis.

Stormieweather, I just wanted to applaud your remark. Bravo.

Awwwww...

Ali, its just a word.

Treasenuak, don't let anybody here get you down. It's been a long time since most of them had actual babies, and they've forgotten the timelines.

The American Academy of Pediatrics agree: you can't spoil a "baby" under the age of six months. But the first year is a time of huge development, and a ten-month-old (the age of Treasenuak's baby) is very, very different from a six-month-old (the age of my youngest right now.)

At ten months old, my son could walk, say a couple of words, hit, bite, and scream angrily when he was told "no." I assure you, that "baby" could try to manipulate us, and required a certain amount of age-appropriate discipline.

Try and picture the difference between that and a six-month-old "baby," who is likely still eating solely from a bottle and cannot even crawl.

I got my definition from dictionary.com. I simply cut and pasted the first list of definitions. There were 7 others after, but I felt the first on the list should be fine.

Of course you can attribute manipulative behaviour to devious behaviour is you like. It makes the word sound 'bad'. That's fine.

Let's use a different phrase then.

Babies are completely capable of 'modifying' their behaviour in order to get what they want whether it is a need or not.

You can argue your personal beliefs on how to raise a child as much as you like and quite frankly, I more or less agree with you however, my argument is that children and babies do 'modify' their behaviour in order to get their own way.

If you don't think you've ever been manipulated by a child or babys' behaviour, that's ok. Maybe you're a super parent, but I wouldn't believe you if you said you hadn't. Human beings are born with an inherant selfishness and they'll do just about anything to get their own way, particularly as a baby when they are the centre of their own universe. Maybe it sounds terrible, but it's the truth.

I never suggested babies are evil or that they are being anything but babies. It's just that babies are little humans and they respond to every single little outside trigger. They learn very quickly and most of us are blissfully unaware that someone much smaller and cuter has more control than we do.

Have a look at a day in the life of any parent who's with a newborn baby. Ask them who the household revolves around. Think about how you react every time you hear a baby cry. Most of us automatically believe the baby must need something, but that's not always the case. Sometimes they just want something, and as parents, we all us different techniques to modify these behaviours in turn when we realize that the baby is fine. We start to show the baby ways to amuze itself. We turn on an overhead mobile or some music to calm the child. I'm saying that babies do what they do, and from the moment they're born, they start testing boundaries and figuring out where they fit in the world. They're not evil or devious at all. They're just finding out how smart their parents are.

Yesterday SonofV brightened my day with this unsolicited announcement, delivered with a touch of surprise (or perhaps that was me projecting...):

"Nobody in my class watched the debate last night!"

I must say I was proud of his pique. The night before we'd all watched the debate together, and he was hanging in there with us (Tink and me), listening to what they said, and generally copying our reactions. We all went for a walk after the program and I used the quiet time to ask him some questions about the debate. I can't remember the exact dialog, but he answered them all handily.

I asked him what the debate was all about, and he said they were trying to persuade people. What do you mean, persuade? You know, like if I asked you to loan me $50, and I said because I needed it that would be persuading. What people? The people in the audience and everybody in the country. I was astounded at this perceptive answer. How are they trying to persuade the people? (paraphrasing here, sorry) I'm going to be a good president, and the other guy is a poopyhead. Basically he understood that persuading can be effective as a pull and as a push.

I did have to check his enthusiasm when he answered one of my first questions "What did you think of McCain?" "He's a dick." ::eek: Ahh... no. He's not a dick, he wants the best for the country, but I don't agree with his choices or with his methods. SonofV shocked me with his, ahem, candor. I tried to get him back up out of the mud. I think there is no permanent damage.

of course. up your nostril, usually.