Love and Logic Parenting: "I love you too much to argue"

[Frylock]

At the Love and Logic website, in a blurb where they summarize their method, they say that when a kid tries to argue with you, you should simply say "I love you too much to argue," and repeat this every time they continue the attempt, til they stop trying. I see this expression even referred to by L&L advocates around the net as a "mantra."

My question is, is that expression really used in L&L in the way I just described, or is the blurb I read far to oversimplified for me to think I have an accurate understanding?

I ask because the practice as I currently understand it seems terrible, almost to the point of horrific. I feel like I'd be destroying my kid's mind and self-esteem if I did that. A bit melodramatic of me to say that, maybe, but it's the direction my feelings go in when I think of doing that to my kid...

It feels like I'd be saying "I don't care about your opinions and I'm going to call that lack of caring 'love' to make myself feel better about it."

[TriPolar]

Never tried it with my kids, but essentially it's the technique I use to prevent spending my entire life arguing with my wife. It's not that I don't care about her opinions, it's just that they're wrong, and I don't want to hear about them

[overlyverbose]

Wow. I hope that's not what they actually mean and that it's something they're only saying internally. That seems like it would inhibit the kid from understanding how to argue, too. Any idea what the age range is for this? It seems like that would only work in very dangerous situations and only for an 18-24 month old.

If I tried something like that, even my 2.5 year old would tell me to stop saying the same thing over and over. She's been hip to avoidance tactics since she was 20 months old, if not younger, and always calls me on it.

[Truman Burbank]

I'm not familiar with it, but if my kids don't get some leeway in expressing themselves and asserting themselves with me, how are they going to be adept at those skills in the real world when I launch them? Overvaluing compliance to exclusion of all else is a mistake in parenting, I think.

[Farmer Jane]

I argue with my kid. Not in a bad way, just an exchange-of-ideas way. Sometimes it's about 7 year old philosophy and sometimes it's about a punishment I doled out. Eventually, I may stop the conversation, but I'd never do the whole, "I'm too lazy to explain it to you" bit.

[Alessan]

Sounds kind of passive-aggressive, don't you think?

I argue with my kid, until one of us is convinced, or I've had enough and say, "Because I'm your father and you do what I say."

[PJMom]

I would hope this is only said as a last resort when the child has offered reasonable rebuttals to every other explanation (but Grandma says...) or when prolonging the discussion will lead to a missed important opportunity (the last bus of the day is leaving momentarily and explaining why we must be on it rather than take a cab, like we usually do, would cause us to miss it). I'd prefer something like, "you make a good point, but it's important that we do this now and I'll try to explain better later." "I love you too much to argue" probably has the same intent, but it does sound lame.

[perfectparanoia]

I will argue (or discuss) things with my kids to a point.

If it is about something in their life (a problem with the kids at school, learning about the world) we will discuss and lightly argue until the cows come home.

If it is about the fact that I won't let them do something, they do not get to argue about it. When Daddy or I say no, we mean no. (In fact, our mantra is usually, 'I said no and I meant it.')

I imagine if I said, 'I love you too much to argue with you,' my daughter would be angrier than she already was about not getting to do whatever.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Alessan

Sounds kind of passive-aggressive, don't you think?

I argue with my kid, until one of us is convinced, or I've had enough and say, "Because I'm your father and you do what I say."

The classics are really the best aren't they?

My favorite was "I'll _____ you!"

Son: I want more Gummy Bears!

Me: I'll Gummy Bear you!


They're rolling eyes were adorable. I can't wait for them to have their own mouthy brats to deal with.

[steronz]

You know that point when you're arguing with a kid and you find yourself saying, "Because I said so?"

This just replaces that, in a nutshell. I don't think it's intended to be used right out of the gate, and that's definitely not how it gets used in my house.

Kids will get wrapped up in an argument and forget the big picture (well, adults do too, I guess), and at some point you can't keep arguing the same point, so you need to snap them out of it. You can either do it with authority (because I said so, now go put on your shoes) which breeds more confrontation, or you can do it with empathy (I love you too much to argue, and if you don't help me out I won't have energy to play with you later) which gets the kid to think about their own behavior and how it affects that family dynamic.

That's the idea at least. I'm not 100% sold on it, but "I love you too much to argue" is no less effective than "Because," in my experience.

[hogarth]

If my parents tried that on me as a kid:

(a) it would probably just make me more angry (along the lines of someone saying "lalalala, I can't hear you!")

(b) I would probably flip it around and use it on my parents ("I'm eating ice cream for supper" "No, you're not allowed to" "I love you too much to argue" <goes off to eat ice cream>)

[Alessan]

I don't want my son to associate love with not getting what he wants.

[Blackberry]

I generally think Love & Logic is a good method. I agree with most of it. But the "I love you too much to argue" thing has always bugged me. There is no logic to that statement and I think respectful arguing with someone you love is perfectly fine and a good thing to learn. That doesn't mean kids can argue with their parents all they want, but L&L needs to come up with a better response to kids that won't take no for an answer, that goes with the rest of the method.

They also used to advocate spanking, but not any more. Like I said, it's a good method, but definitely not perfect.

[Hello Again]

Originally Posted by steronz

or you can do it with empathy (I love you too much to argue, and if you don't help me out I won't have energy to play with you later) which gets the kid to think about their own behavior and how it affects that family dynamic.

Interesting, but I have my doubts about whether that phrase really communicates the intended message. How does saying something that's solely about yourself, demonstrate empathy? It sounds totally self-serving (in order to preserve my notion of myself as a nice person, I will stop discussing this.) In fact, it seems somewhat shaming in a passive aggressive way (the flip side of "I love you too much to argue" is, "If you argue, you don't love me enough").

In my mind, actual empathy would look something like, I understand you don't feel satisfied with my answer about why you can't have a pet frog, but I've made my decision. But whatever, I'm no expert.

[amanset]

As the kid it would annoy the fucking tits off of me, which may not really be a good parenting technique.

[Yllaria]

Originally Posted by steronz

You know that point when you're arguing with a kid and you find yourself saying, "Because I said so?". . .

Or you could try, "Parental arbitrariness: an unfortunate but inherent component of the parent/child contract."

Hey, it builds their little vocabularies.

[steronz]

Originally Posted by Hello Again

In my mind, actual empathy would look something like, I understand you don't feel satisfied with my answer about why you can't have a pet frog, but I've made my decision. But whatever, I'm no expert.

That sounds nice and all, and probably works great on a 10 year old, but 4 year olds don't argue rationally. That would have absolutely no effect on a raging child.

If I've had any success in parenting, it's been my ability to defuse a tantrum or sidestep an argument. Toddlers and young children get worked up for different reasons than adults do, and there's different tools for diverting their attention and calming them down. At some point, a parent has to be the bad guy, and the kid's gonna get upset. There's no right way to handle that anger, and "I love you too much to argue" is just one tool in my tool box that I use. There's definitely a wrong way, though.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a mantra, nor would I recommend using it like one.

[Hello Again]

Originally Posted by steronz

That sounds nice and all, and probably works great on a 10 year old, but 4 year olds don't argue rationally. That would have absolutely no effect on a raging child..

I wasn't under the impression this approach was for tantrumming 4 year olds. I was indeed thinking of an older child. But regardless, I don't see how it involves "empathy" at all. Its a technique, and maybe its a great technique, but it doesn't seem to be one that one that explicitly recognizes the feelings of the child (which is what empathy is, not "not getting mad" or "diverting the emotional energy")

[Smeghead]

I go with "I paid for your food, which means I technically own every cell in your body."

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Alessan

Sounds kind of passive-aggressive, don't you think?

Originally Posted by Alessan

I don't want my son to associate love with not getting what he wants.

Yes and yes.

Bad enough to use a passive-aggressive technique like "winning" an argument by just repeating a phrase until the other person gives up. Because good parenting is teaching your kid the secret to winning an argument is refusing to listen to what the other guy is saying.

But having the phrase be telling the other person you love them? That goes into the Passive-Aggression Hall of Fame.

"I'm going to use my love for you as a weapon against you."

[steronz]

Originally Posted by Hello Again

I wasn't under the impression this approach was for tantrumming 4 year olds. I was indeed thinking of an older child. But regardless, I don't see how it involves "empathy" at all. Its a technique, and maybe its a great technique, but it doesn't seem to be one that one that explicitly recognizes the feelings of the child (which is what empathy is, not "not getting mad" or "diverting the emotional energy")

The point of L&L isn't that you show empathy for the child, it's about teaching the child to show empathy for you. "I love you too much to argue" is an attempt to get them to understand what's going on in your head, and why you're shutting down the argument. I'm not sure if it's the best way to teach empathy, but it's a lot closer than "because I said so." FWIW, they also recommend things like, "all this arguing is making me tired," and then you leave the room to go lie down. The idea is to make your kids realize that their behavior has an affect on you, and that you're not just some kind of food-and-discipline machine.

[cher3]

What does that even mean?

I agree that calling something love doesn't make it love. "Because I said so" at least has the merit of being honest.

[overlyverbose]

Why can't you just explain why you're saying no? Saying I love you too much to argue doesn't provide any information. It doesn't teach anything about logic (i.e., this is why we're not doing this) - all it does is shoot them down.

I'm all for stonewalling when appropriate, but not before providing some sort of explanation. It sucks when no one will tell you why they're behaving the way they are, especially when you're a kid and you have to listen to all the adults around you.

[steronz]

Originally Posted by overlyverbose

Why can't you just explain why you're saying no? Saying I love you too much to argue doesn't provide any information. It doesn't teach anything about logic (i.e., this is why we're not doing this) - all it does is shoot them down.

I'm all for stonewalling when appropriate, but not before providing some sort of explanation. It sucks when no one will tell you why they're behaving the way they are, especially when you're a kid and you have to listen to all the adults around you.

The phrase is, "I love you too much to argue," not, "I love you too much to have a calm, rational discussion." If your kid is willing to talk rationally, by all means, talk rationally. Generally arguments start out as discussions, and then one person escalates it to an argument. With kids, this happens right about the time they realize they're not going to get their way. Arguing with kids is pointless, so if they try to escalate the discussion to an argument, you respond with this catchphrase instead of joining in.

I think you have this picture of kids asking their parents legitimate questions, and the parents responding with dickish stonewalling. That's not the intent of Love and Logic.

Now, "don't get into arguments with your kids" might seem like basic parenting advice, but some people need it. And even for people who might not think they need it, when you have a bunch of little kids and you're 10 minutes late for the birthday party, and somebody doesn't want to put on pants and holy shit, who spilled milk all over the place.... catchphrases can come in handy.

[Chipacabra]

I have friends that use this method with their spouses. I, personally, am a little horrified when they're basically saying "I love you == You're wrong and I don't want to talk to you anymore."

[perfectparanoia]

Originally Posted by steronz

Now, "don't get into arguments with your kids" might seem like basic parenting advice, but some people need it. And even for people who might not think they need it, when you have a bunch of little kids and you're 10 minutes late for the birthday party, and somebody doesn't want to put on pants and holy shit, who spilled milk all over the place.... catchphrases can come in handy.

Until you actually have kids, maybe. Once you do and they're verbal, of course they are going to try to argue with you.

It's when they win that you probably have a problem.

[Blackberry]

They don't say to do it instead of explaining your reasoning to your child. IIRC, they recommend it if you've already explained and your kid won't let it go and accept your answer. Still, I don't get what loving your kid has to do with it. I don't want to argue with my kid because it's pointless and annoying, not because I love her.

[Taomist]

Sounds like the opposite of most of my relationships, ie I didn't love them ENOUGH to argue with them. I'd just...go do my own thing. That's one thing that's different about my husband, or about me regarding my husband. I *will* argue with him about things that are important, no matter how pissed we get. The other option leads to all kinds of issues.

[WordMan]

I know nothing about that website or their intent. I can say that I use that approach in some specific instances - for instance, my teenaged kids get worked up and can't let go of an issue. There are clear ways they can approach the issue with far less stress - and I state those. But the kid is NOT really focused on finding a solution - they are struggling with their emotions.

So they hear what I say, but are actually needing to vent and kind of itching for confrontation because it will get their emotions out. So, if I get to a point where my logical explanation is just being met with emotional confrontation, I will fall back on "okay, I hear you - I love you and don't want to argue about this."

More often than not, by later that day or the next day, they have cooled down and we can talk practically about some of the logic / solution points I stated.

[stretch]

The website says:

Originally Posted by loveandlogic.com

Putting an End to Arguing and Backtalk

Does it ever seem like children carry around a little book called, “Arguing for Fun and Profit?” To put an end to this draining behavior, experiment with repeating the same loving Love and Logic “one-liner,” regardless of what your child says. The key, of course, is to maintain a soft, empathetic tone of voice. Listed below are some examples:

“I love you too much to argue.”
“Probably so.”
“I know.”
“I bet it feels that way.”
“What do you think you’re going to do?”
“What did I say?”
“I don’t know. What do you think?”
“There’s no time for making kitten britches.” (Some of the most effective one-liners are really strange!)

It seems to me they advocate these "one liners" when your kid is in 'I'm going to die on this hill' mode rather than anytime your kid wants to discuss something with you. Seems reasonable to me.

[Omar Little]

There's a difference between having a discussion to clarify things and arguing. L&L typically views arguing as a power struggle between the child and the parent. The child will keep coming up with excuses or alternatives, even after you have made your decision to try and gain some power in the discussion. Instead of continuing the argument with your kid over the issue, after you've made up your mind, you use that phrase or something else like it to essentially end the conversation.

[overlyverbose]

Originally Posted by stretch

The website says:



It seems to me they advocate these "one liners" when your kid is in 'I'm going to die on this hill' mode rather than anytime your kid wants to discuss something with you. Seems reasonable to me.

This makes more sense to me.

Part of my problem with the "I love you too much to argue" line is that it sounds so damn trite. It reminds me of the saying "Love means never having to say you're sorry." I hate that saying - it's dead wrong and it's annoying as hell. Oh, well. As a parent I find myself saying and doing things that would've made me cringe before I had kids. While I still disagree with the sentiment, if it prevents you from getting into an all-out screaming match with a kid, it's got some worth.

[raspberry hunter]

Originally Posted by Hello Again

In my mind, actual empathy would look something like, I understand you don't feel satisfied with my answer about why you can't have a pet frog, but I've made my decision. But whatever, I'm no expert.

Originally Posted by steronz

That sounds nice and all, and probably works great on a 10 year old, but 4 year olds don't argue rationally. That would have absolutely no effect on a raging child.

I don't see why it would have any less effect than "I love you too much to argue," except maybe that Hello Again's version is longer (and that's OK too; subsequent iterations could just be "I understand, but we're not going to argue about it any more"). And as the kid gets older, the kid might start understanding it, and (in my case more important) the parent will also get practice in empathy for when the kid turns 10.

I've only got a 2-year-old, though, so I'm sure I could be totally off base on this -- I'm still stuck on dealing with tantrums by saying "I can't understand you when you're yelling and screaming," rinse and repeat Ten Thousand Times. (Which seems to work as well as anything else on the Little One, which is to say not particularly well, but better than other things we've tried.)

[hogarth]

Originally Posted by stretch

It seems to me they advocate these "one liners" when your kid is in 'I'm going to die on this hill' mode rather than anytime your kid wants to discuss something with you. Seems reasonable to me.

The idea of trying to disarm a tantrum seems perfectly reasonable, but unthinkingly repeating the same phrase over and over again just sounds irritating.

I think "I know" is the least objectionable one listed. I think I've even tried that one on my wife on several occasions...

[steronz]

Originally Posted by raspberry hunter

I've only got a 2-year-old, though, so I'm sure I could be totally off base on this -- I'm still stuck on dealing with tantrums by saying "I can't understand you when you're yelling and screaming," rinse and repeat Ten Thousand Times. (Which seems to work as well as anything else on the Little One, which is to say not particularly well, but better than other things we've tried.)

Off topic, but typically when a toddler is upset, it's extra frustrating to him when it appears that nobody can figure out why he's upset. If they want to stay up and you tell them to go to bed, they figure that you must not actually understand that they want to stay up. Then the tantrum starts. To diffuse the situation, try walking him through what's happening in a way that shows you understand their wishes:

"You want to stay up?"

<Uncontrollable sobbing>

In a more sympathetic tone of voice, "You want to stay up?"

<Through sobbing, "Yeh-eh-eh-aaaaaaaaa">

"You want to stay up even though I told you to go to bed?"

<Sniff, "Yeah">

"You don't want to go to bed, you want to stay up?"

<Calm now, "Yeah">

"But it's bed time, you need to go to bed."

<Sobbing starts again, but less intense.>


Repeat that 3 or 4 times and the tantrum is gone. It's repetitive and strange, but it works. And eventually they grow out of it.

/amateur psychology mode off

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by steronz

Off topic, but typically when a toddler is upset, it's extra frustrating to him when it appears that nobody can figure out why he's upset. If they want to stay up and you tell them to go to bed, they figure that you must not actually understand that they want to stay up. Then the tantrum starts. To diffuse the situation, try walking him through what's happening in a way that shows you understand their wishes:

"You want to stay up?"

<Uncontrollable sobbing>

In a more sympathetic tone of voice, "You want to stay up?"

<Through sobbing, "Yeh-eh-eh-aaaaaaaaa">

"You want to stay up even though I told you to go to bed?"

<Sniff, "Yeah">

"You don't want to go to bed, you want to stay up?"

<Calm now, "Yeah">

"But it's bed time, you need to go to bed."

<Sobbing starts again, but less intense.>


Repeat that 3 or 4 times and the tantrum is gone. It's repetitive and strange, but it works. And eventually they grow out of it.

/amateur psychology mode off

I can confirm that this worked for my kids as well. It really does seem like a lot of the frustration is about not feeling understood rather than just not getting their way.

Teaching children a bit of sign language before they can talk also helps in this regard.

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by stretch

The website says:



It seems to me they advocate these "one liners" when your kid is in 'I'm going to die on this hill' mode rather than anytime your kid wants to discuss something with you. Seems reasonable to me.

Thanks--that's not what I was reading, and the page you found does give a little more context.

I'm still not on board with the catchphrase/mantra approach. If it comes down to that I'd rather just say "I'm not going to talk about this anymore" and then--not talk about it anymore.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally Posted by Frylock

I'm still not on board with the catchphrase/mantra approach. If it comes down to that I'd rather just say "I'm not going to talk about this anymore" and then--not talk about it anymore.

Me: "I'm done talking about this."
Three-year-old daughter: "No you're not! You're NOT done talking about this! Daddy, you're NOT done talking about this!" rinse and repeat.

But it's still the phrase of choice for me when I'm done with an argument.

[Stendhal Syndrome]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

The classics are really the best aren't they?

My favorite was "I'll _____ you!"

Son: I want more Gummy Bears!

Me: I'll Gummy Bear you!


They're rolling eyes were adorable. I can't wait for them to have their own mouthy brats to deal with.

My husband did this!

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Stendhal Syndrome

My husband did this!

I learned that from my father. It worked a little different with him. If you said anything else you got smacked. My kids just got thrown off by it. After a while they went pre-emptive:

Son: I want more Gummy Bears!

Son: Yeah, I know, you'll Gummy Bear me.

[raspberry hunter]

Originally Posted by steronz

Off topic, but typically when a toddler is upset, it's extra frustrating to him when it appears that nobody can figure out why he's upset. If they want to stay up and you tell them to go to bed, they figure that you must not actually understand that they want to stay up. Then the tantrum starts.

Thanks for this -- I will have to try it out. I haven't been doing precisely this, so hopefully it will help.

We have an additional problem, though, in that often nobody can figure out why she's upset. She's a little control freak right now, so she's liable to get upset about Mommy walking in front of her, or because she forgot to step on the brick tiles on the way home as is her little ritual, or because Mommy tried to help her take her pants off when she didn't want help. No really, these are all things that have triggered the half-hour tantrum, and in each of these cases I was willing to do what she wanted but had no idea what was bothering her until she calmed down enough to tell me.

(Weirdly, she doesn't tend to have tantrums about going to bed or normal things like that. I mean, she refuses to do it, but she doesn't have tantrums about it. I suppose we'll get that in another year or so... sigh.)

[Omar Little]

Originally Posted by raspberry hunter

We have an additional problem, though, in that often nobody can figure out why she's upset. She's a little control freak right now, so she's liable to get upset about Mommy walking in front of her, or because she forgot to step on the brick tiles on the way home as is her little ritual, or because Mommy tried to help her take her pants off when she didn't want help. No really, these are all things that have triggered the half-hour tantrum, and in each of these cases I was willing to do what she wanted but had no idea what was bothering her until she calmed down enough to tell me.

These sound like OCD symptoms.

[Cheesesteak]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

These sound like OCD symptoms.

Nah, at this point, it's just control freak. At 2, they know they want things done a certain way, and can't deal well with things not going the way they want. They also aren't necessarily going to know that they haven't communicated to you what they want, so they only see you doing it ALL WRONG, and they throw a fit.


Sometimes there's just no explaining your way out of a tantrum.

No, dear, you can't take mommy's rings to the park, they'll get lost.
I'll hold them really really tight
No, they'll still get lost, you can play with them here
I want to bring them
No
Rings Rings Rings Rings!

Rings Rings Rings Rings!
Excuse me, I need a stiff drink

[Lissla Lissar]

It sounds like being a 2-3 year old to me. They're all OCD.

[Hello Again]

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak

Nah, at this point, it's just control freak. At 2, they know they want things done a certain way, and can't deal well with things not going the way they want. They also aren't necessarily going to know that they haven't communicated to you what they want, so they only see you doing it ALL WRONG, and they throw a fit.

Not only that, even when they can communicate clearly what they want, they don't understand what's possible and what isn't. I've seen kiddos melt down because rocks can't fly. BUT I WANT THEM TO!!! Or because once you eat a pancake, that pancake is gone. NO BRING IT BACK (err...).

Parents, I salute you all.

[overlyverbose]

Originally Posted by Hello Again

Not only that, even when they can communicate clearly what they want, they don't understand what's possible and what isn't. I've seen kiddos melt down because rocks can't fly. BUT I WANT THEM TO!!! Or because once you eat a pancake, that pancake is gone. NO BRING IT BACK (err...).

Parents, I salute you all.

Yeah, my son once got pissed that we couldn't go to Mickey Mouse's Clubhouse. Even though it's a cartoon and doesn't exist anywhere, even at Disney World. That didn't matter to him because, dammit, he wanted to go there!