Is it better to be the younger or older sibling?

youngest is always the best you can be the sweet innocent one yet so annoying.

I'm the oldest and I think it stinks! I had to break ground, so to speak....eveything was such a big deal with me. From things I wanted to do but wasn't allowed to getting into trouble, everything was such a big deal and I got treated quite harshly whereas my brothers got to do much more and didn't get such harsh treatment.

I was the youngest in my family with two older sisters. I always felt like I had no say in anything, and my sisters teased me constantly for various things, mostly for matters that were different for boys than for girls. I think I would have turned out better if I had a brother, younger or older than me.

The older sibling gets blamed for everything, have to take care of the younger sibling, and when you get your stuff broken your parents refuse to do anything about it, are expected to be there for parents all the time, and never recognized for your own talents but expected to like everything you are told.

As a younger sibling you can break anything and everything and not get in trouble, you are free to do anything and everything you want, you are not held responsible for any of your own actions no matter what damage it creates for family and are not expected to be the shoulder to cry on when mom and dad are fighting.

Yes I think I would have preferred being a younger child but if my idiot sibling was the one in charge I think I might have been dead since they are one of the most irresponsible people on planet earth. To be honest I would have liked being an only child better.

Being a second, third, fourth child gives you a free ride. You are ignored and get away with anything and no one holds you accountable for anything. You are free to like what you like and will never get in trouble. As an older child you are expected to take care of your family, your parents and your sibling, you are held responsible for other peoples mistakes along with your own, and if you break something you pay the price for it.

I'm the oldest, and I don't really have any complaints about it.

I was the oldest of 3, was my siblings protecter and keeper. Got a lot of childcare experience out of it but I would say it would have been better to have been one of the younger siblings, considering they got away with more whereas I didn't get away with much, haha.

Younger is better. You learn from all of the fuck up mistakes your older siblings make :)

being the youngest is best when you have a good brother that treats you well and introduces you to stuff before other kids well get to. otherwise it would be better to be the oldest

Older ones get technology first, then as it progresses so that people that are younger siblings are completely behind technologically. The little ones can't annoy their siblings because they would beat the crap out of them. Anyway, oldest is best, I am youngest (of 2).

Being younger I get away with stuff and can learn from my older sibling's mistakes but I sometimes get treated like a child and am lonely now my brother has moved out cos we have a 3 year age gap =(
I guess middle would be best cos you still have someone to play with etc, but I only have one older brother =/

I like being a middle child because I get to be a younger sister and an older sister. If you're youngest you'll never be an older sibling, and if you're oldest you'll never be a younger sibling.

In the long-term I think the eldest get the most our of it as they are put into a leadership position which normally becomes clear in later life so is a massive advantage.

However when you're young, your parents are normally more relaxed so you get away with a lot more a lot earlier.

TL;DR - Longer term oldest. Short term eldest.

I'm the eldest and there were 4 younger than me. I was a skivvy and took beatings to save them. I didn't know how to play or be selfish, and I waited until I was 32 before I had a child of my own. I spent my whole childhood raising kids - yet was expected to do well at school too! I was then expected to provide financially to help raise them all - paying outrageous telephone bills etc.

The younger ones had a totally different experience and for all my work as a surrogate mother to them - they don't even remember me as they were growing up! So, I was taken for granted by both generations. Glad to be the hell out of it!!!

I'm the eldest and always having to be responsible for my younger siblings curtailed a lot of my fun when I was a kid. But, on the bright side, I think it helped make me a caring person who looks out for others.

From conversations with them, they found it hard at school having me as an elder brother. I made a bit of an impression on the teachers and when they later taught my sister and brother, they'd notice the surname and politely ask, "Oh, are you related to Dappled?" They learned to dread the question because it put a huge amount of pressure on them. Teachers seem to assume they'd be good at the same things I was. They were, and are, good at other things and had they been the eldest they'd have got more recognition for their talents, rather than living in my shadow.

being the youngest is hard for me cuz i have to live up to my older brothers academic career which is a 96% average through basically all of highschool. At times i wish i had a younger sibling so i can show them what a real brother is like after being treated like shit by my big bro :/

I don't think it would make much of a difference. I'm younger yet I have a higher responsibility compared to my sister...

Well, I wouldn't know which would be better, because I've never been the oldest. But being the youngest, I guess its not that bad. I think the middle child is the one who gets the most attention in my family.

I am the youngest and I like it. There are perks. But it is also annoying to always be treated like a child.