Let’s look at birth order as handed down to us from the psychologists. There are two methods of divvying up birth order.
Both theories take the only child as separate and have some things to say about this position. It is of course closest to the eldest born in both theories because let us not forget, the eldest child was an only child for some time.
In the first theory, there is a distinct personality to the 2nd born, 3rd born and 4th born. Then an unexplained miracle occurs and the 5th born is exactly like the 1st born with no time spent being an only child. The 5th born can only dream of being an only child. The cycle inexplicably repeats with the 6th born being like the 2nd born and the 7th born being like the 3rd etc.
In the 2nd theory of birth order, the oldest is differentiated from the youngest and the middle children. There can be as high as 15 middle children in some extreme families, but none of these children are seen to be much different.
I think birth order psychologists are lazy and the aforementioned helps to prove this. Full disclosure, I am a 6th child and a middle child. As well I also have step family.
The first theory claims I should be like my oldest sister, the 2nd born in my family. She is no longer with us, may she rest in peace, but I don’t think any in my huge family have said I’m much like her. Comparison is more likely to be drawn between me and our 1st born or 3rd born since the three of us are heavy readers. So, I sincerely believe that when the psychologists came up with this birth order theory, they very lazily said it just repeats after 4 kids.
These psychologists could easily have said they don’t know or even that it just gets too expensive to continue the studies past 4 children because they are rare and becoming scarcer in our modern world.
But they didn’t say this so I say they are being lazy. Making all middles the same is blatantly lazy, too.
So with me being 6th, middle, and step I think psychology is saying to me I am a riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a conundrum.
Not only that, but saying the cycle repeats itself as in the first theory, I think they have overzealously generalized just to ‘complete’ a theory. This is like me generalizing that since birth order psychologists are lazy, that all psychologists are lazy.