In my experience, yes. It may have something to do with the fact that I am also the eldest.
For example, I wasn't allowed a laptop until I was 15 because my parents were suspicious about the Internet. Once I got one and thy realised it wasn't that bad, my brother was allowed one aged 11..
That said, they're not *that* overprotective. I've started going abroad with a friend. I've been to Germany, Sweden and Norway with him and have also been to Cornwall, Edinburgh and America without them. This year, I'm going to Amsterdam and France.
Although I am almost 18 now, I started these trips aged 15. I definitely can't imagine my brother (he's 14) being allowed to do something like that. In fact, I went to London with friends aged 13. The furthest my brother's allowed is to Stevenage..
Last edited by TattyBoJangles; 16-04-2012 at 16:14.
I was allowed to go home on my own in year 7. Home was only 40mins by train.
When I was in year 9, the first sister joined my school.
2 years later, the second sister joined the school.
Both sisters got picked up everyday from year 7-9.
Definitely. My mum won't let me take the train through a rough area in the evening (around 10pm). Fair enough. But then she complains that she has to drive me everywhere.
I said 'well, if you don't want to drive me, why can't I take the train or the bus or something, then' and she pulled the usual 'it's a bad area' line. I then responded that my friend who is three years younger than me (I'm 19, he's 16) took the train home alone near midnight through a bad area and he was fine. And she replied 'yes, but he's a boy.'
She's definitely more protective of me because I'm female.
It seems that several my male friends got mollycoddled by their mums at uni, they were always being given loads of food by their parents and checked up on all the time. Some went home every weekend and their mums were fine with doing all their washing for them. No girls I knew received/needed this treatment. Maybe fathers protect daughters and mothers protect sons. I don't get why; if I had sons I'd make them learn basic washing/self-feeding skills without the excuse of "boys will be boys".
At the moment, no, Im mostly protective of my littlest son.....because he's 2, whereas my daughter is 6, so a lot more independent.
When they get older, I dunno who I'll be the most protective of. Chances are I'll probably always be just a smidgen more protective of my youngest until they are all adults. Simply because he's the youngest. I mean, he'll be 12 when my daughter is 16. Obviously a kid just starting high school is much more of a "baby" than somebody in their GCSE year.
Once they are all grown up though, I should imagine I'll treat them all the same. I certainly don't molly-coddle Lydia any more than I do with Alex or Jason just because Lydia is a girl.
I couldn't tell you from any personal family experience since I only have sisters and no brothers, but I'm guessing that since females are a bit more at risk from sexism and sexual assault than males, then yeah maybe your statement holds some truth.
My parents are more protective of my sisters. I think as a parent I would be as well, I don't mean to sound like a chav but I think boys have a better idea of what goes on in the street than girls, a lot of girls are naive and can't read people as well.