Mamas and Babies

Most children and politicians see things in two categories: Black and white. Either it is or it isn’t. It’s a toy, or it’s in the way. It’s edible, or it’s not. It’s okay to play with, or I’ll get in trouble for touching it. Many children are then able to add the subcategories of “not worth getting in trouble for touching it,” and “stuff as much of it in my mouth before I’m caught.”

Abbie separates things into mamas and babies. Give her two similar objects to compare, and she’ll proudly declare one the mama, and one the baby.

I’m not sure where Abbie picked up this habit. My best guess is from the book “I Love You as Much…” Every page features a different set of mother/child animals with the words “said the mother (animal) to her child, I love you as much as…” It’s a relaxing read that teaches children about animals while reinforcing a loving environment. These days she shuns it in favor of books about counting and/or dinosaurs, though there was a time* when we’d repeatedly flip through the pages, pointing out animals as we went. Eventually she realized that the big animal was the mama, and the little animal was the baby, and she’s applied that concept to virtually every comparative situation.

This habit is heartwarming when she correctly identifies a mother/baby situation. For example, the “Spot” books are about a dog named Spot, and his mother frequently appears in a supporting role. She’ll correctly name the baby Spot, and the mama Spot. Never mind that only the baby is named Spot, and he’s more preschool aged than a baby; that’s cute.

This habit gets a little weird when she sees a group of babies and declares one the mama. She has a book about puppies, and when two of them appear on one page, the bigger one is the mama. That’s strange, but I can at least understand the logic. I’m baffled by a Boynton book called “Barnyard Dance” when she looks at a page of identical chicks, and designates one specific chick that’s standing by itself as the mama. I guess mamas aren’t always part of the group.

This habit gets downright bizarre when applied to inanimate objects. When looking at triangles in a book of shapes the big one is the mama, and the smaller ones are babies. Not that her habit is limited to books. During snack time, the whole Goldfish are mama fishies, and the broken ones are baby fishies. While looking at my hands, she might call a big scratch “mama owie,” and little scratches “baby owies.” This is ironic since she’s usually personally responsible for many of those scratches.

The big mystery in this is where are the daddies? I’ve heard her call a big object daddy instead of mama a few times, but she usually defaults to calling every bigger object mama. You might think that a child with a male primary caregiver would be more cognizant of the father’s role in life, but nope. She just keeps happily plugging along with her mama and baby categories. Perhaps she would recognize and object as the daddy if it yelled at the baby for being in the refrigerator.

* And a blog post.