[ctidd]

Forcing your children to eat things they aren't comfortable with is not a hack. Please do not do this. There is a significant difference between providing a positive environment for your child to encounter new foods and forcing them, physically or otherwise, to eat them.

[kbenson]

There's something to be said for this, but I also don't think the GP literally meant forcing them. Forcing children to eat something can cause aversion and eating problems. That said, I am a fan of strongly incentivizing thought promising a later treat for the first few times there's something new to try that I want them to give a fair shake to.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> but I also don't think the GP literally meant forcing them

We only have the GP's words: and at face value, as they should be taken, they do seem to literally mean that.

[kbenson]

To a degree. Hyperbole and idioms are a normal part of communication, as is learning to decipher meaning from them.

If someone said something along the lines of "I would kill my son if they did that", would you take that literally, or as a hyperbolic idiom meaning they would be mad at them and punish them?

I think the actual meaning of the statement in question is ambiguous given the above, and providing for the option that you misinterpreted someone's meaning when condemning their speech likely does a lot to keep the discussion civil and useful.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

parents actually killing their child is rare. Parents actually making their child eat specific food, with threat of physical force, not so rare. You don't have to search for a figurative meaning where none is needed.