Re: Siblings as friends
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:52 pm
You're just saying that because you know the redheads of the family.krebscout wrote: Genuine, if you're reading this, I'd love to see your input. Your relationship with your family is the envy of the town, or at least my small section of it. You know that I believe your house is just like the Weasley's.
I don't think my parents had a strategy, but they're both very easy-going, and as a result, so are we. They're the opposite of helicopter parents, perhaps bordering on negligent even, and that really worked for us. I think major factors in all us kids getting along were/are closeness in age, there being a lot of us, and us being poor. It's like what you said about being bored together - we didn't take big family vacations. Instead, we spent most of our time playing in the backyard where the picnic table became a pirate ship and we had a giant pile of plywood we were allowed to make anything we wanted out of. My parents largely left us to our own devices, and I think that's very important. Also, between the eight of us kids we only had two rooms, so we were four and four for a long time. As a result, everything was fairly communal - I only remember having a handful of toys or stuffed animals that were mine.
We're all about two years apart, or every other grade in school, so there was a lot of overlap in friends, especially those people who were between us in age and could swing either way. That's how I snagged you as a friend, actually. Plus, most of us are girls, which makes the overlapping friend thing feasible. We also didn't have very many youth in our ward, so my sisters and I routinely made up half the YW. There was no going off with just the mia maids, because we didn't have enough people for that.
We all get along fairly well, but there are divisions, or rather, there are sub-groupings amongst us. 1, 2, and 3 are a unit as the oldest children, and then 2 and 3 always had their own thing going on because they're closest in age. 4 was always bullied by 3, so she spent more time with me (5). I'm closest to the siblings on either side of me (4 and 6), but I'm also the oldest of the youngest four, so I was the de facto leader of 6,7, and 8. 6 and 7 played tennis in HS and grew close as a result. 1, 2, 3, and 4 did drama and/or choir, but there was never anything competitive about it; they just did what they were good at.
We all had siblings we thought were mean, or bossy, or we had nothing in common with, but it didn't matter because there was always someone else to play with. If 4 was busy I could hang out with 6 and vice versa. If they were both busy, I had 7 and 8 as back-ups. Sheer numbers meant that everyone had someone to be buddies with. If someone was a jerk they had to stop being a jerk real quick if they wanted someone to play with, because we had other options and they knew it.
Today I get along pretty well with everyone except #1 who has a way of talking about really personal things like they're not personal, and I don't know how to deal with that. I have three awesome sisters here at BYU with me, but I'm moving soon, and I'm just now realizing that I've never been apart from my closest siblings. When 4 went off to school I had 6. Then I left for school and was reunited with 4. Then 6 came out and the three of us were all together again. I've been away from home for six years, and I've been married for over three of those years, but leaving my sisters behind doesn't sit well with me - I feel like I'm leaving for college all over again.