BlogHer - competition - Comments

The thing I remember about

izaday — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:17:36 -0600

The thing I remember about losing is I will never be good at everything. I will never win at everything. And therefore I expect to lose occasionally and when I do I remind myself that experience is what you get when you don't get what you want. In essence I am still winning just in a different way.

Heidi
eramblings.net

The more comfortable you get with losing, the less it hurts.

Rita Arens — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 11:37:28 -0600

I totally agree. The reason I want my daughter to learn to lose is because I think the more you do it and realize your life didn't end, the more Zen you get about it. It doesn't suck to lose if you were looking at the activity as an experiment and the outcome was more curiousity than self esteem. I don't know if that's a teachable skill, but I'd like to try to model it.

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak.

Its better to lose than...

mashadutoit — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 04:38:38 -0600

This is quite interesting.

Maybe there is something in looking at the choices one makes when confronted with the chance of losing.

I'm not sure if "failing" is the same as "losing", but bear with me for a bit:

When I was busy with my masters thesis, sometimes the only thing that kept me going was the saying "Its better to fail than to quit". I know - it sounds negative.

But when I was struggling on a exam project, and that little voice went "you might as well give up, you are going to fail anyway" I would think "well, its better to fail than to quit" and carry on. And not fail.

Possibly the thing here is not how one feels about losing (quite a natural feeling after all) but how you act upon that fear. Many people dont start something, or give it up, out of fear of failure. They call themselves perfectionists. "I wont do it if its not going to be perfect". or " I wont do it if I'm not the best there is".

But that's just warped thinking. By quitting, or not even trying, you are failing FOR SURE.

I dont think its going to work to deny that losing sucks. And certainly one must learn to deal with it, once it happens. But even more important, you need to deal with the possibility of losing even before it happens.

And not spend your life avoiding risk.

Go with your strength!

Coach Jamie — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 08:18:33 -0600

Take it from a mom who couldn't care less about competitive sports. I am a 70's chick! But I raised a daughter, who at age 7, brought a notebook with her to instructional softball games, to keep score. These were softball games where the adults tell the kids it is a tie game each week, so that everyone learns but doesn't get their feelings hurt. I was embarrassed that she didn't just enjoy the fun of playing with the other girls, but my daughter would say, "Mom that was not tie- we won!" Winning was fun for her. Sometimes kids are just born that way! I have come to appreciate her competitve nature. At age 25, she is very successful in the business world and seems to do fine socially, as well. She still will say that she hates to lose at anything -even cards! As a mom I have come to value her qualities and recognize them as strengths!Coach Jamie Does this mean Ihave become my mother? www.myparentingsource.com

Losing gracefully depends on the child and the situation

moonfever0 — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 22:47:42 -0600

My son loves competitive sports and even when they lose, he's OK with it. But when it comes to a board game, he will totally lose his mind if he loses. Perhaps he knows that in a team situation, he isn't completely responsible for the team winning or losing.

My daughter is the opposite. When she loses a board game, she says, "OK you win" cheerfully. But she absolutely hates teams sports. One season of dragging her to soccer was enough for both of us.

So perhaps competitive sports would be good for your daughter as she may act like my son (although drawing the analogy of losing gracefully in soccer and applying it to board games is totally lost on him).

Angela at mommy bytes
BlogHer Contributing Editor in Mommy & Family Cribsheet

My sister jo was like that...

kazari — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:48:11 -0600

She's ultra-competitive, but when we were younger, she wouldn't play any games unless she thought she'd win. She did well in athletics at highschool, but only after she HAD to do it in primary school.

She did gymnastics for a while and loved it - when you start gym, it isn't really competitive at all.

The thing about losing is

magsmadison — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 19:29:59 -0600

The thing about losing is that it makes us work to improve. I love the work part. We try different things, talk to different people, find a way to at least be SATISFIED with something.

LIke me realizing I'll never play professional baseball, but I can talk the game like a guy. That is satisfying to me.

Good points

Britt Bravo — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:55:15 -0500

Hi Candelaria,

Thanks for sharing your insights about the pros and cons of nonprofits' collaborating. Perhaps an alternative solution is not that more existing nonprofits should merge, but that people who have ideas for new ones should see if they can collaborate with old ones before they start a whole new organization.

Collaboration works and costs

Candelaria Silva — Fri, 16 May 2008 17:04:38 -0500

Two non-profits that do arts-related work in Boston have voted to merge. There will not be an immediate cost savings although tehre will eventually. They have collaborated on projects for years and while their work is complimentary, it is not the same. Having worked with the EDs of both organizations, the sad truth is that oen of the will be out of a job after the transition period and so will another staff member or two. (They are tiny.) That is the aspect of merging that is not so nice.

As for collaboration, I think that collaboration is key for organizations to do effective work especially when they have budgets that don't really cover the tremendous work they do - a situation that many non-profits are in. That said, for collaborations to work there usually has to be a "lead" collaborator. definied, one that will make sure that deadlines are met, follow-up is completed, etc.

Foundations are certainly encouraging more non-profits to co-locate, collaborate, and even merge. In a free society, one can get an idea for a program and create one's own organization. I don't think that's unhealthy. I regret that as a society we spend so much more on war than we do on forces for positive change in the world.

Candelaria - Good and plenty!

the stare

Musemother — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:12:57 -0500

you've put something into words that I have known about but never articulated before. good for you for not succumbing to feeling judged; the answer is another equally forthright 'stare' right back, I would guess.

jenn/musemother