As parents, we ask ourselves why on a daily basis.   Why is my boy wearing panty hose?

Why can’t my sons coexist for more than 11-seconds without someone getting injured?

Why does my child feel it is necessary to wear his “Incredible Hulk” costume under his school clothes but not have the same conviction when it comes to socks and underwear?

Why do those things that could cause grave bodily harm fascinate my children?  E.g. steak knives, ninja throwing stars and my gas powered weed-whacker

Why don’t bubble-wrap and Styrofoam packing peanuts fascinate my kids?  Research demonstrates that there is not a single case of a person losing an eye while manipulating packing peanuts, they appear to be fairly benign, and thus my children have no interest in them.

The word “Why” permeates our parental vocabulary and therefore it should be no surprise that it becomes the most used word in our children’s lexicon.  We teach them this word and then curse them for using it; in the Marine Corps we call this a “self licking ice-cream cone”.

If you’re a parent then you have felt the sting associated with the word “Why”.  If you’re not a parent then the following information may prepare you for what lies ahead.

The child’s “Why mechanism” may be one of the most common points of dismay among parents of every culture, ethnicity and even species; it transcend time and is documented in early cave drawings as facilitating the extinction of the dinosaurs.  Bottom line this is some powerful stuff.

If you think your kids will be different then your wrong.  No one is immune, you are not special and your child may not be as advanced as you are leading Grandma to believe.  These are cold hard facts.  Listen, and listen closely, your kids will torture you with the word “Why” for the majority of their adolescence and the best that you can do is try to weather the storm.

Mackinley’s “Why Mechanism” is the most finely tuned verbal assault weapon that I have ever encountered.  There is no counter measure to its awesome power, when on the receiving end you can only hope to minimize the damage or deflect its destructive force in another direction.  I have included a dialogue of a conversation that Mack and I engaged in while driving from Maryland to

North Carolina (avoid long car rides at all cost).

Mackinley:  “Daddy are there bears in these woods?” 

Daddy:  “Yes, buddy there are.” 

Mackinley:   “Why?” 

Daddy:  “Because that is where bears live.” 

Mackinley:  “Why don’t they live in houses?” 

Daddy: “Because they are bear. People live in houses. Bears live in the woods.” 

Mackinley:  “Why?” 

Daddy:  “Because housing cost are too high in this area and most bears are unemployed and unable to compete for the limited affordable housing that is available.” 

Mackinley:  “Why?” 

Daddy:  “Well buddy rent is high because the job market in this area is really strong which means higher income for most people thus driving up the cost of living to include rent and housing prices.” 

Mackinley:  “Why?” 

Daddy:  “Well son, it’s all about supply and demand and economic stability, this area is rich in textile mills and industry, thus providing plenty of jobs to persons who will not eat their employer when faced with having to do an unpleasant task.” 

Mackinley:  “Why?” 

Daddy:  “Because I said so Mack.” 

Mackinley:  “Why?”

Daddy:  “Because I am “DAD”, all-knowing and all-powerful in this SUV, and when you’re old and trapped in an SUV with your 5-year old son then you can make claim to being all-knowing as well, until that time you’re going to take my word for it, good to go?” 

Mackinley:  “Daddy, are there alligators in these woods?” 

This is a brief synopsis of what it is like to be trapped in an SUV with a child who has learned to articulate the word “Why”.  Mack’s goal was to numb my brain until I slipped into a coma at which point he would have escaped from his car seat, taken over the vehicle and driven to “Toys-R-Us”, I am sure of this, but I have no concrete proof of his intentions, if I knew for sure I would put the screws to him by placing him in “Time out” (I know I am a dangerous man).

I used this example because it demonstrates several different attempts to counter Mackinley’s assault.  First, I answered with logic.  This technique suggests of course that children are capable of understanding logic.  Now, why would I try to use logic on a person who refers to himself as spider man every time he achieves nudity?

My next counter was to stymie him with more information than his little mind could process.  This is a more appropriate technique, however nine out of ten times my boys don’t hear a word I say anyway.  You must realize that when the “Why” mechanism is engaged the listening mechanism (if it even really exist) is tuned to a completely different frequency.

Finally, I attempted the old “I am the parent and what I say is final”, Ha! Who am I kidding.

The only truly effective technique to counter “Why” questions is to answer every single question with complete and utter nonsense. It may not be very fulfilling at that moment, but some day when they attempt to answer an SAT question with the information that you provided you’ll get your revenge.  Good luck.