Because I Said So

Our fourth-grade teacher must have been friends with another fourth-grade teacher in another town. That’s the only reason I can think of why each of us was assigned a penpal in the other teacher’s class. My penpal was named Paul, and I remember nothing about him. I wrote to him because I was supposed to, and he wrote back to me because he was supposed to.

Toward the end of the school year, our teachers arranged a special treat: The penpals would get to meet! In preparation for the grand event, we were assigned to prepare a lunch box labeled with our penpal’s name, and to decorate it with complimentary adjectives starting with their first initial. Naturally, I hit the dictionary in order to come up with as long a list of “P” words as I could: patient, peaceful, perky, personable, perspicacious….

My teacher inspected the lunch box and told me that one of the adjectives — pathetic — would have to go.

“Why?” I said. “The dictionary says that pathetic means ‘deserving of pity.’ Why wouldn’t he deserve pity?” I imagined that if Paul broke his arm, I would say something like, “Poor Paul! It must really hurt,” to which my teacher would respond by snarling, “No! Don’t pity him! He doesn’t deserve it!”

I’d hate to be the teacher who had to explain to a fourth-grader the subtle difference between pity and compassion. Fortunately, I’m not that teacher — but then again, neither was my actual teacher, who engaged in her usual mode of problem-solving: “Don’t argue. Just get rid of the word pathetic.”

It’s understandable that in many situations, adults may lack the time, patience, or even the ability to explain sophisticated concepts to kids. That’s why every child eventually becomes resigned to hearing the all-purpose response, “Because I said so.” But I can still feel the sense of anger and helplessness that came from being deprived of an explanation.

When I was a third-grader, I won a contest by writing an essay about how great the American system of government was. (This was at a time when such sentiments were still expressed without irony or embarrassment.) I remember highlighting the idea that American citizens govern themselves by saying, “If the people want a road around Lake Whozit, the people get a road around Lake Whozit!” My prize for rhetorical gems like these was that I got to read the essay aloud to a school assembly.

Shortly before the public reading, my teacher told me that she needed to make a slight revision in the essay. It was in the section where I talked about the three branches of the federal government. I had written, “The Congress makes the laws, the Supreme Court makes sure the laws are constitutional, and the President carries out the laws.” She rearranged the sentences to say, ““The Congress makes the laws and the President carries out the laws. The Supreme Court makes sure the laws are constitutional.”

That seemed like a crazy revision. First of all, her phrasing wasn’t nearly as elegant as mine. But more important, her rewrite seemed to say that the Supreme Court determines whether a law was constitutional after it had been carried out. To me, it was evident that the system couldn’t possibly work that way. Surely the president wouldn’t want to enforce a law before knowing whether it was constitutional. If things really worked in the backwards order that the teacher was suggesting, then it was a stupid system, and why would I want to boast about it in an essay?

When I told the teacher that she must be mistaken, she assured me that she wasn’t, and that I should read the essay in the way that she had revised it. I did, but without nearly as much enthusiasm as the line about Lake Whozit.

Nobody clarified for me that judicial review was not called for in the Constitution, and that the Supreme Court rules on a law’s constitutionality only if someone challenges the law in court and the challenge works its way up through the appeals process. Again, I can understand why — that’s a pretty complicated thing to try to explain to an eight-year-old. But I was left with the embarrassment of having to read an essay aloud that I supposedly had written, but that I didn’t fully understand or stand behind.

I have no children of my own, and the classes I’ve taught have all been at the college level, so I’ve had fewer situations than most adults in which I’ve had to resort to saying “Because I said so.” I’ve still had to hear it, though — usually when I’ve asked a customer service representative why the company had done something unconscionable, and the representative replies, “Because that’s our policy.” It still makes me as angry now as it did when I was a child.

3 responses to “Because I Said So”

  1. Leesy Taggart says:

    I felt my heart start to beat a little faster and my breathing get a little shallower just reading your essay. NOTHING used to make me more furious as a child, and few things will draw sarcastic, rude responses from me now than ‘because I said so’ or ‘just do it’. I vowed NEVER to say that to my children, and I do believe that I’ve said it much less frequently than it was said to me – at least I hope so. Something in me wonders whether that’s because my children were more susceptible to reasoned explanations and requests the first time than I was. If my mom were still alive, I’d ask her and hold my breath until she answered.

    • Mark S says:

      Leesy, I have no doubt that on those rare occasions when you did have to say “Just do it” to your children, it was with the understanding that right now was a pressured time, and that you’d explain later — and then you did explain later. I’ll bet that the reason they were receptive to reasoned arguments is that you earned their trust.

  2. Lisa Rothman says:

    As you’ve probably already guessed, I have never said those words to my children and have actually enjoyed figuring out how to explain complicated concepts to them even when they were extremely young. What a wonderful opportunity to more deeply understand why something is important to me and share that value with my child. Governments also subject people to “Because I said so” all the time and this kind of demand energy inspires polarization and conflict rather than problem solving and connection regardless of whether progressives or conservatives are the ones in power. Does this mean that I oppose mask mandates? No – because this entire toxic, paternalistic system would need to be completely transformed for us to interdependently figure out how to keep ourselves healthy while giving people choices about how to make that happen. But I’m not at all surprised when people rebel against mandates of any kind.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *