Often meant losing popularity ground with Z.
He knew we (especially me) had a no nonsense attitude. While we loved him very much, he would still be punished for wrongdoings because I was so strait laced. I would not go to the extent of calling myself a tiger mom because I also over indulged him a fair bit.
I was, however, a very persuasive person. It was either an occupational hazard or I already enjoyed doing so, and hence, my choice of profession.
According to DISC profiling, I was considered to possess both “D” & “I” traits. D for direct, demanding and domineering. I for influencing and intuitive. I toggled between both traits so that really made parenting fun in a socio-experimental manner.
I usually played the “I” card but when Z pushed the limits, I would be forced to play the “D” role. I always thought about what it meant to be a really good parent. Was it to give in to my child all the time and be the apple of his eye? Or was it to be an unpopular parent but ensure that he would grow up to be a motivated, disciplined but thinking individual? Or was it possible for me to bridge the two?
I would be lying if I said becoming the unpopular parent did not pinch. However, I also did not want Z or X to grow up and become so spoilt that they believed everything in life was an entitlement. By being able to provide comfort for a child was a show of a parent’s success and capabilities, but what I really wanted was for Z and X to be capable in their own rights and not join the strawberry generation. At least, Mr H agreed to partake in the quest of bringing up useful beings and assisted to play the role of the firm parent so that I could enjoy the preferred parent status once in a blue moon.