Trickery

Sure, it's normal for young kids to ask "why" virtually all of the time, but, with my son Michael, he actually expects a logical answer to every "why" question that he asks. Over the past year, I've learned that if I say "no, because [some logical reason]" instead of just plain old "no," then I actually have a chance of avoiding a million and one whinny "whys". Here are some examples:

Michael: "Mommy can I have more crackers?"
Me: "No, because they're all gone."

Michael: "Mommy, can I go over to that [dangerous] swing set [overlooking a rocky ledge]?"
Me: "No, because I think a really mean dog lives over there."

Michael: "Mommy, can I sleep in your bed tonight?"
Me: "No, because sometimes there are spiders in my bed."

Well, I'm in a bit of a bind because he is starting to catch on to me. Now when I say that we're all out of some food item that he wants, he asks to see the empty wrapper or container. He wants proof. And, he's only three-years-old. Not good.

I guess I need to think of some new tricks, the veracity of which can't be proven one way or the other. Or, perhaps, just keep some empty wrappers on hand, learn how to bark like a vicious dog and get some scary-looking plastic spiders for my bed.

Why, you might ask, didn't I just stick with plain old "no means no"? It certainly worked for my parents, along with "do as I say, not as I do," "because I said so," "we're not the so-and-so family so their rules don't apply here," and other familiar old-school parenting quotes. I guess I thought that maybe I was just a little bit smarter - using reason and diversion instead of authority and intimidation - but I'm not so sure now. Ahhh, back to the drawing board, I guess!