By thebiteof87 - 22/07/2015 06:32 - Australia - Melbourne

Today, I was reading a picture storybook to a kindergarten kid. She could pronounce more words than me, and corrected me. I'm about triple her age. FML
I agree, your life sucks 15 770
You deserved it 26 907

Same thing different taste

Top comments


Yes, better late than never I suppose... apparently OP never took the phrase "stay in school, kid" seriously.

No one seems to entertain the thought that she may not be naturally English-spoken

The fact that it doesn't say that they're speaking English negates your point, #103.

I'm just saying the book may not be in her native language. Just a thought

Yet the author wrote the FML in perfect English

illiteracy can put a damper on your mood pretty quickly when compared to a kid who can read. huh?

Lmao OP probably isn't able to comprehend what illiteracy even means...

Tell her you have an accent that prevents you from pronouncing certain words (:

I see that your intentions are noble, but were I you, I really wouldn't side up with someone who couldn't read as well as a kindergartener.

I couldn't have said that any better myself.

You need to go back to school. Right now.

Sounds like they are 15, so they are probably still in school. They need to start paying attention in school, though.

so they have worse English than a 5 year old?!?


Little kids learn fast. I've seen three year olds who are starting to read already.

That's actually a normal age to start reading.

Were you trying to talk like Steve Irwin?

An Australian accent isn't the same thing as not being able to read as well as a kindergartener dude.

A07 48

This is why you should read more books

And OP should keep a kindergartener close, in case he/she has difficulty in reading any words.

Hooked on Phonics or something similar might help OP out. Reading silently and reading aloud are two different things. I'm assuming OP can comprehend the words-- just not pronounce them. I always have students that have trouble sounding out new words (I teach high school English). One reason is that in the past 20 years, there was a big push in education away from teaching young children phonetics, in favor of a "whole language" approach to learning to read. While you could argue pros and cons to both approaches, the result of not specifically teaching phonetics is that people taught with the whole language approach often have trouble breaking down words into their various speech/sound parts. I'm not trying to say people taught one way are smarter, it's just that some people were taught using a different approach to language. My degrees are in linguistics and education, so I find this kind of thing fascinating. The push now in education is towards teaching phonetics again. Of course, reading books is always a great solution to all of life's problems. At least, it's always my solution :)

shmaxwell 7

Yes hukt on fonics werked fur me

kindergardeners are about 3 or 4 if your triple her age that means ur like 9 or 12...

duckie227 22

That's preschool age. You have to assume a kindergartner is 5 or 6 which would make the OP 15-18 years old.

Daelynn_17 19

#12 That's assuming that her math is in order and it's not as bad as her reading. Otherwise hooked on phonics and first in math might be a better option for OP instead of FML. lol

Not in Australia, kindergarten is daycare so around 4 years old. 5 year olds go to prep school which is similar to American Kindergarten

She posted from Australia and in Oz kindy kids are 3-5. We have it opposite to America, Kindy first then Pre-school then Prep

Uh... Maybe it's regional, but I'm from Australia and kindergarten is definitely after preschool, and is ages 4 - 6.

Kindergarten is definitely 3 and 4 year olds. Well, in Victoria it is. Then primary school is ages 5-12. High school is 13-18. But since I started school when I was 4 instead of 5, I was 6 years old in grade 2 and definitely capable of reading difficult words.

4 and 5 in Canada, and the majority of the world. I'm not too up on how it is in Australia, but it should be fairly similar.

Set aside an hour every day to read books. Not websites, apps or magazines. Full-length books. You'll get back into the swing of things.

Talis99 26

People need to read more anyway. Not just so this embarrassment doesn't happen but for enjoyment! Read about anything. People, animals, places, fiction, even games, just read.

Not trying to be combative, but I don't necessarily agree. Clearly it's not something people enjoy or else they would do it more, so why should they do it for entertainment? Books are by far the weakest medium we have. Before you say "Use your imagination!" and whatnot, that's just an excuse for when the material isn't compelling enough to speak for itself. A book, while useful for learning, in my eyes, is an incomplete form of entertainment because it lacks the proper stimulation for the senses.

You don't need to stimulate all the sense though. Movies, while visual, can't be touched, smelled, etc. A good book doesn't really suffer from not being visual, though it can take a little while to get back into it and appreciate it if you haven't read in a while. Hell, even then, there are some brilliant graphic novels and picture books that combine visuals and storytelling if you really need something more than words.

Personally I love graphic novels though I have to admit, I think there are some books that would actually suffer from the addition of pictures or other stimulation. Throwing as many different types of stimulation as you can at someone isn't always helpful and often means that they can't fully appreciate each one. That can then lead to not as much thought and effort being put into creating each part. Although everyone has different hobbies, many people simply don't enjoy reading because they're not reading the right books.

Also, while everyone obviously has likes amd dislikes and some people will just naturally like reading more than others, I think that many people who claim not to like reading simply haven't found the right book for them. Nothing like seeing a reluctant reader finally find a book they like and then devouring the whole series in a week. :)

That thought is wrong. That's like saying people who claim not to like hiking haven't found the right trail.

I love to read. Always have. I'll admit, it's a huge turn off when people say "I don't read". I'll read anything-- classics, poetry, YA, children's books, non-fiction. I actually read the information pamphlets that come with medication (prescribed *and* OTC). Books can hold my interest more than a lot of movies or tv shows. And video games? Eh. My brother, however, hates to read-- mainly because he has a learning disability that makes reading difficult for him. He enjoys sports (and man-- he knows his baseball stats. Something I could never get the hang of). He likes cooking (he's got quite the refined palate). He likes video games (a lot of them give me motion sickness). It doesn't mean I'm smarter than him-- people enjoy different things (though I am book smarter than him-- I can totally beat him at trivia. Unless it's about sports. Or cooking. Or video games). Reading is difficult for some people-- for some, it's not pleasurable. I could get all scientific-- the act of reading builds neural connections in the brain, which makes the brain stronger, builds vocabulary, builds empathetic traits, etc.... I can't imagine a life where I couldn't read or if reading was a constant, frustrating struggle. I do believe, though, in the power of books and that there is a book out there for everyone-- one that will change your life and perspective. Who knows? Maybe I would enjoy hiking if I found the right trail for me.

It's a huge turnoff to me when people say they couldn't accept somebody who doesn't read or that there's only a reader who hasn't found the right book. I don't get all snooty and morally superior about my hobbies being the pinnacle of human entertainment, so I don't know why readers do. It's not a universal interest, nor is music (although some people pretend that is as well).

CanyonRose 16

Apparently you're bad at math too. Unless you're 12 years old, you're more than triple a kindergartener's age.

CanyonRose 16

I realize that I, too, am bad at math. Forgot that they're 5-6 years old. So very sorry please don't attack me Internet.

The Internet accepts your humble apology.

Even still, a 12 year old should be significantly better at reading than a 5 year old.

Actually, you were right the first time, as.12 is triple of 4, and kindergarten starts when the children are 3/4.