Mary Mapel

My parenting isn't at all fear based. It is also not
denial based. I also don't believe in censoring my
sons natural curiousity about learning anything he
wants to learn. If he is old enough to ask the
question then he is old enough to have the answer even
if it is a difficult topic. At a young age of five he
knows all about reporduction, same sex marriages,
death, etc... I have supported him in learning all of
this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
more, not less.

It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
on this list is that i want to control what he desires
to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
that he was neither looking for or ready to witness.
Of course children aren't going to look for
pornography on the web, nor are they looking for
violence on tv or in the print media. But these
things exist in what originally appears as the most
innocent of places.- Have none of you received spam
with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
line with a surprise on the other end? Have none of
you gone to what is termed a family movie and
witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
see? Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
showing the negative effects on children of violence
in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
there?

I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
childhood nightmares. This society is getting more
and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
really think that there is no link with premature
expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
Exposure to material that a child isn't emotionally
mature to handle can be overwhelming, and has the
possibility of stifling rather than assisting the
emotional/spiritual development of the child. This
isn't just my opinion it is substantiated by not only
my work, but the many, many respected leaders in the
alternative healing community, and those in the
psychological community as well. I have included a
basic link about the negative effects of cartoons
alone.
http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm


I don't need any of you to agree with me on this,
however, i do want to make the distinction that i am
not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
innoscence. From this he both needs and deserves my
protection.


-- In [email protected], "J. Stauffer"
<jnjstau@g...> wrote:
> <<<< Do you believe that your monitoring is all that
stands between them and
> porn?
> > I've had three five year olds who weren't
"monitored" in the way I think
> you might be describing, and yet they didn't even
like romance or kissing.
> They only liked stories/movies/websites with kids,
dogs, cartoons... >>>>
>
> I totally agree with Sandra on this point. I have 5
kids who have complete
> and unlimited access to the computer, video games,
television, pay-per-view.
> Nobody is even interested in watching R rated movies
that have the rating
> due to sexual content.
>
> Fear based parenting is not the best of all options.
>






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/

Christine ONeal

Mary Mapel <marymapel@...> wrote:

"Rape, assaults, etc...
are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
the possibility of other peaceful resolutions."

Is this really true? My understanding was that all violent crimes had been on the decline for decades. Do you have statistics to back this up? Humans have been violent for as long as history exists. People were stoned in the streets, beheaded, human sacrifices were made, none of these things happen in this culture on a daily basis. Are you sure we are really more violent now than in the past?

Christy O





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Mary Mapel <marymapel@...>
writes:
> Have none of you received spam
> with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> line with a surprise on the other end?

Long before Rain wanted her own email address, I was getting those. So,
I'd read email, and she'd be around, and I'd snort and comment about how
clever these porn spammers thought they were, and share some of the more
creative attempts with her (or anyone else who was around). By the time
she did get her own email address, all I did was mention that if she
didn't know the person she was getting email from it was probably spam,
especially if they didn't say her name. I'm pretty sure she's just
deleted all the porn spam she's gotten, although once she commented that
the supposed "hot 16 yr old" had the same name as someone we knew, and
once she asked what a word meant.

In other words, in an unschooling family the issue was not a big deal.

> Have none of
> you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> see?

When Rain was 2 1/2 we went to see a movie about a dragon, I think Sean
Connery was the voice of the dragon... I can't remember the title, but
think 1995 movies and someone will. Anyway, I thought it was G or PG-ish,
and got there and realized that it was R-ish, with some fairly gruesome
violence... but Rain was really liking the story so she didn't want to
leave, so we sort of muddled through. There was a guy who I think got
stabbed through the eye and died, that was my clue that this was maybe
not a PG movie. That was upsetting... but after that she covered her eyes
during any scenes that looked potentially gory and I told her what was
going on and when it was over, and that worked out okay.

If I had known I would have warned her ahead of time, and she could have
been closing her eyes for the first gory part, but we did work it out,
and the next time I researched more, and I'm pretty sure she wasn't
traumatized for life... okay, she's saying she was but she's laughing and
admitting that she doesn;t even remember it ;-)

> Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> showing the negative effects on children of violence
> in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> there?

Actually, the studies I'm aware of showed that a subset of the children
in these studies became more violent after seeing violent shows... which
makes you wonder what was going on with that subset. I'll bet none of
them were unschoolers. And in the studies, the kids weren't asked if they
wanted to see the shows, or if they wanted someone sitting with them to
tell them when the scary parts were coming so they could not watch. We
did that for years...
>
> I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> childhood nightmares.

My daughter never needed counseling, despite having access to all of
these things.

> This society is getting more
> and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> are increasing.

Violent crime is actually descreasing. Rape reports have increased, but
most experts believe that it's the reporting that has increased, not the
number of rapes itself.

>We are going to war without exploring
> the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> really think that there is no link with premature
> expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?

Didn't we do the same thing 35 years ago?

> i do want to make the distinction that i am
> not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> innoscence.

The media isn't alive, it isn't doing these things to your son. He is, or
should be, the active participant, determining which media he wants in
his life and to what degree. If he isn't, you are censoring him.

Dar

J. Stauffer

<<<<<<I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> childhood nightmares. This society is getting more
> and more immune to violence.>>>>>

I am a recovering therapist myself. I worked for over 15 years in the field
and was rabid about "protecting" my children from all kinds of "dangers". I
say recovering because being an unschooling mom and being your child's
therapist are mutually exclusive terms.

Our society is not getting more and more immune to violence. We actually
live in a world that is safer than it has ever been throughout history. You
might want to check your facts on that one. Think Crusades, think 1700's
America, think biblical times. We are much safer than we would have been
then.


You have 2 mutually exclusive statements in the same email.
<<<< I have supported him in learning all of
> this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> more, not less.>>>>

indicating that you trust your child to know the level of his own curiosity
and where his comfort zones are and this:

<<<It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> that he was neither looking for or ready to witness. >>>

Then you say that you decide when he is ready and what he is looking for.

Julie S.---who no longer thinks that psychology is all it is cracked up to
be



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:10 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] healthy boundaries and scanning material


> My parenting isn't at all fear based. It is also not
> denial based. I also don't believe in censoring my
> sons natural curiousity about learning anything he
> wants to learn. If he is old enough to ask the
> question then he is old enough to have the answer even
> if it is a difficult topic. At a young age of five he
> knows all about reporduction, same sex marriages,
> death, etc... I have supported him in learning all of
> this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> more, not less.
>
> It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> that he was neither looking for or ready to witness.
> Of course children aren't going to look for
> pornography on the web, nor are they looking for
> violence on tv or in the print media. But these
> things exist in what originally appears as the most
> innocent of places.- Have none of you received spam
> with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> line with a surprise on the other end? Have none of
> you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> see? Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> showing the negative effects on children of violence
> in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> there?
>
> I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> childhood nightmares. This society is getting more
> and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
> the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> really think that there is no link with premature
> expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
> Exposure to material that a child isn't emotionally
> mature to handle can be overwhelming, and has the
> possibility of stifling rather than assisting the
> emotional/spiritual development of the child. This
> isn't just my opinion it is substantiated by not only
> my work, but the many, many respected leaders in the
> alternative healing community, and those in the
> psychological community as well. I have included a
> basic link about the negative effects of cartoons
> alone.
> http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm
>
>
> I don't need any of you to agree with me on this,
> however, i do want to make the distinction that i am
> not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> innoscence. From this he both needs and deserves my
> protection.
>
>
> -- In [email protected], "J. Stauffer"
> <jnjstau@g...> wrote:
> > <<<< Do you believe that your monitoring is all that
> stands between them and
> > porn?
> > > I've had three five year olds who weren't
> "monitored" in the way I think
> > you might be describing, and yet they didn't even
> like romance or kissing.
> > They only liked stories/movies/websites with kids,
> dogs, cartoons... >>>>
> >
> > I totally agree with Sandra on this point. I have 5
> kids who have complete
> > and unlimited access to the computer, video games,
> television, pay-per-view.
> > Nobody is even interested in watching R rated movies
> that have the rating
> > due to sexual content.
> >
> > Fear based parenting is not the best of all options.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Mary Mapel

so it sounds like your daughter was emotionally ready to handle
it. If a child isn't, are you suggesting to still give access? All i am
saying is if a child isn't ready for the unexpected content, they
should not be given it. Of course there is some trial and error
here, but really? If it is clear they are not ready, dont' you
protect?-

-- In [email protected], freeform@j... wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Mary Mapel
<marymapel@y...>
> writes:
> > Have none of you received spam
> > with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> > line with a surprise on the other end?
>
> Long before Rain wanted her own email address, I was getting
those. So,
> I'd read email, and she'd be around, and I'd snort and
comment about how
> clever these porn spammers thought they were, and share
some of the more
> creative attempts with her (or anyone else who was around).
By the time
> she did get her own email address, all I did was mention that if
she
> didn't know the person she was getting email from it was
probably spam,
> especially if they didn't say her name. I'm pretty sure she's just
> deleted all the porn spam she's gotten, although once she
commented that
> the supposed "hot 16 yr old" had the same name as someone
we knew, and
> once she asked what a word meant.
>
> In other words, in an unschooling family the issue was not a
big deal.
>
> > Have none of
> > you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> > witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> > see?
>
> When Rain was 2 1/2 we went to see a movie about a dragon, I
think Sean
> Connery was the voice of the dragon... I can't remember the
title, but
> think 1995 movies and someone will. Anyway, I thought it was
G or PG-ish,
> and got there and realized that it was R-ish, with some fairly
gruesome
> violence... but Rain was really liking the story so she didn't
want to
> leave, so we sort of muddled through. There was a guy who I
think got
> stabbed through the eye and died, that was my clue that this
was maybe
> not a PG movie. That was upsetting... but after that she covered
her eyes
> during any scenes that looked potentially gory and I told her
what was
> going on and when it was over, and that worked out okay.
>
> If I had known I would have warned her ahead of time, and she
could have
> been closing her eyes for the first gory part, but we did work it
out,
> and the next time I researched more, and I'm pretty sure she
wasn't
> traumatized for life... okay, she's saying she was but she's
laughing and
> admitting that she doesn;t even remember it ;-)
>
> > Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> > showing the negative effects on children of violence
> > in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> > there?
>
> Actually, the studies I'm aware of showed that a subset of the
children
> in these studies became more violent after seeing violent
shows... which
> makes you wonder what was going on with that subset. I'll bet
none of
> them were unschoolers. And in the studies, the kids weren't
asked if they
> wanted to see the shows, or if they wanted someone sitting
with them to
> tell them when the scary parts were coming so they could not
watch. We
> did that for years...
> >
> > I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> > counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> > with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> > childhood nightmares.
>
> My daughter never needed counseling, despite having access
to all of
> these things.
>
> > This society is getting more
> > and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> > are increasing.
>
> Violent crime is actually descreasing. Rape reports have
increased, but
> most experts believe that it's the reporting that has increased,
not the
> number of rapes itself.
>
> >We are going to war without exploring
> > the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> > really think that there is no link with premature
> > expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
>
> Didn't we do the same thing 35 years ago?
>
> > i do want to make the distinction that i am
> > not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> > tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> > advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> > innoscence.
>
> The media isn't alive, it isn't doing these things to your son. He
is, or
> should be, the active participant, determining which media he
wants in
> his life and to what degree. If he isn't, you are censoring him.
>
> Dar

Mary Mapel

Not so mutually exclusive, Juia. Since i am an AP i have listened
to him, taken in to account what he has already told me, and then
help ensure that he is supported in these limits.

> You have 2 mutually exclusive statements in the same email.
> <<<< I have supported him in learning all of
> > this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> > more, not less.>>>>
>
> indicating that you trust your child to know the level of his own
curiosity
> and where his comfort zones are and this:
>
> <<<It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> > scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> > on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> > to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> > to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> > learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> > that he was neither looking for or ready to witness. >>>
>
> Then you say that you decide when he is ready and what he is
looking for.
>
> Julie S.---who no longer thinks that psychology is all it is
cracked up to
> be
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@y...>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:10 PM
> Subject: [AlwaysLearning] healthy boundaries and scanning
material
>
>
> > My parenting isn't at all fear based. It is also not
> > denial based. I also don't believe in censoring my
> > sons natural curiousity about learning anything he
> > wants to learn. If he is old enough to ask the
> > question then he is old enough to have the answer even
> > if it is a difficult topic. At a young age of five he
> > knows all about reporduction, same sex marriages,
> > death, etc... I have supported him in learning all of
> > this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> > more, not less.
> >
> > It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> > scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> > on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> > to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> > to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> > learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> > that he was neither looking for or ready to witness.
> > Of course children aren't going to look for
> > pornography on the web, nor are they looking for
> > violence on tv or in the print media. But these
> > things exist in what originally appears as the most
> > innocent of places.- Have none of you received spam
> > with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> > line with a surprise on the other end? Have none of
> > you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> > witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> > see? Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> > showing the negative effects on children of violence
> > in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> > there?
> >
> > I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> > counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> > with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> > childhood nightmares. This society is getting more
> > and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> > are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
> > the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> > really think that there is no link with premature
> > expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
> > Exposure to material that a child isn't emotionally
> > mature to handle can be overwhelming, and has the
> > possibility of stifling rather than assisting the
> > emotional/spiritual development of the child. This
> > isn't just my opinion it is substantiated by not only
> > my work, but the many, many respected leaders in the
> > alternative healing community, and those in the
> > psychological community as well. I have included a
> > basic link about the negative effects of cartoons
> > alone.
> > http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm
> >
> >
> > I don't need any of you to agree with me on this,
> > however, i do want to make the distinction that i am
> > not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> > tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> > advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> > innoscence. From this he both needs and deserves my
> > protection.
> >
> >
> > -- In [email protected], "J. Stauffer"
> > <jnjstau@g...> wrote:
> > > <<<< Do you believe that your monitoring is all that
> > stands between them and
> > > porn?
> > > > I've had three five year olds who weren't
> > "monitored" in the way I think
> > > you might be describing, and yet they didn't even
> > like romance or kissing.
> > > They only liked stories/movies/websites with kids,
> > dogs, cartoons... >>>>
> > >
> > > I totally agree with Sandra on this point. I have 5
> > kids who have complete
> > > and unlimited access to the computer, video games,
> > television, pay-per-view.
> > > Nobody is even interested in watching R rated movies
> > that have the rating
> > > due to sexual content.
> > >
> > > Fear based parenting is not the best of all options.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Dana Matt

--- Mary Mapel <marymapel@...> wrote:
> so it sounds like your daughter was emotionally
> ready to handle
> it. If a child isn't, are you suggesting to still
> give access? All i am
> saying is if a child isn't ready for the unexpected
> content, they
> should not be given it. Of course there is some
> trial and error
> here, but really? If it is clear they are not
> ready, dont' you
> protect?-
>
Mary, I think the point is that the children are able
to decide what they need, and what they can handle,
and THEY can make a point to steer away if they feel
they need to. A child perhaps, if they were afraid of
a scary show, would say "Mom, can we not watch that
movie at night, because it gives me nightmares"....NOT
the parent saying "You aren't allowed to watch this at
night because it might give you nightmares"....The
child is equally protected in each instance, but only
one child is empowered with freedom to make choices...

Dana
(in Montana)
> -- In [email protected], freeform@j...
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Mary
> Mapel
> <marymapel@y...>
> > writes:
> > > Have none of you received spam
> > > with links to pornographic sites, an innocent
> subject
> > > line with a surprise on the other end?
> >
> > Long before Rain wanted her own email address, I
> was getting
> those. So,
> > I'd read email, and she'd be around, and I'd snort
> and
> comment about how
> > clever these porn spammers thought they were, and
> share
> some of the more
> > creative attempts with her (or anyone else who was
> around).
> By the time
> > she did get her own email address, all I did was
> mention that if
> she
> > didn't know the person she was getting email from
> it was
> probably spam,
> > especially if they didn't say her name. I'm pretty
> sure she's just
> > deleted all the porn spam she's gotten, although
> once she
> commented that
> > the supposed "hot 16 yr old" had the same name as
> someone
> we knew, and
> > once she asked what a word meant.
> >
> > In other words, in an unschooling family the issue
> was not a
> big deal.
> >
> > > Have none of
> > > you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> > > witnessed more violence than your child was
> ready to
> > > see?
> >
> > When Rain was 2 1/2 we went to see a movie about a
> dragon, I
> think Sean
> > Connery was the voice of the dragon... I can't
> remember the
> title, but
> > think 1995 movies and someone will. Anyway, I
> thought it was
> G or PG-ish,
> > and got there and realized that it was R-ish, with
> some fairly
> gruesome
> > violence... but Rain was really liking the story
> so she didn't
> want to
> > leave, so we sort of muddled through. There was a
> guy who I
> think got
> > stabbed through the eye and died, that was my clue
> that this
> was maybe
> > not a PG movie. That was upsetting... but after
> that she covered
> her eyes
> > during any scenes that looked potentially gory and
> I told her
> what was
> > going on and when it was over, and that worked out
> okay.
> >
> > If I had known I would have warned her ahead of
> time, and she
> could have
> > been closing her eyes for the first gory part, but
> we did work it
> out,
> > and the next time I researched more, and I'm
> pretty sure she
> wasn't
> > traumatized for life... okay, she's saying she was
> but she's
> laughing and
> > admitting that she doesn;t even remember it ;-)
> >
> > > Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> > > showing the negative effects on children of
> violence
> > > in cartoons, let alone the many other programs
> out
> > > there?
> >
> > Actually, the studies I'm aware of showed that a
> subset of the
> children
> > in these studies became more violent after seeing
> violent
> shows... which
> > makes you wonder what was going on with that
> subset. I'll bet
> none of
> > them were unschoolers. And in the studies, the
> kids weren't
> asked if they
> > wanted to see the shows, or if they wanted someone
> sitting
> with them to
> > tell them when the scary parts were coming so they
> could not
> watch. We
> > did that for years...
> > >
> > > I know that these things have lasting impact. I
> have
> > > counseled for well over 20 years helping
> families deal
> > > with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and
> simple
> > > childhood nightmares.
> >
> > My daughter never needed counseling, despite
> having access
> to all of
> > these things.
> >
> > > This society is getting more
> > > and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults,
> etc...
> > > are increasing.
> >
> > Violent crime is actually descreasing. Rape
> reports have
> increased, but
> > most experts believe that it's the reporting that
> has increased,
> not the
> > number of rapes itself.
> >
> > >We are going to war without exploring
> > > the possibility of other peaceful resolutions.
> Do you
> > > really think that there is no link with
> premature
> > > expossure to these topics and this alarming
> fact?
> >
> > Didn't we do the same thing 35 years ago?
> >
> > > i do want to make the distinction that i am
> > > not censoring my son, i am censoring the media
> that
> > > tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and
> take
> > > advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting
> his
> > > innoscence.
> >
> > The media isn't alive, it isn't doing these things
> to your son. He
> is, or
> > should be, the active participant, determining
> which media he
> wants in
> > his life and to what degree. If he isn't, you are
> censoring him.
> >
> > Dar
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion
> Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/fHIqlB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
>
=== message truncated ===





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/

J. Stauffer

<<<<<All i am
> saying is if a child isn't ready for the unexpected content, they
> should not be given it. Of course there is some trial and error
> here, but really? If it is clear they are not ready, dont' you
> protect?->>>>

There is a difference between protecting and controlling. Zach, age 10, is
an anxious guy. Has been since the day he was born. He gets stuff in his
head and worries about it. So if some show is coming on that I think might
cause problems for him, I mention it. But I certainly don't stop him from
watching it.

Zach watched Jurassic Park at a friend's house. He loved the movie but it
freaked him out. He was scared for me to leave the house at all for several
days. We were in the library and he saw the movie and wanted to rent it. I
reminded him of his reaction in the past but he wanted it, so he got it. He
watched it probably 40 times in a weekend. He wasn't scared anymore. He
took control of a situation and handled it exactly opposite of how I would
have suggested he do it....and it turned out perfect.

When the second LOTR came out on video, we bought it. The older kids had
seen it and plugged it in right away. All the kids were in the living room
watching the show and I was in the kitchen next door. I look around and
there was Michelle, then 3yo. She said she didn't like the movie, it was
kinda scary and she was going to help me instead.

Kids are much, much smarter about their own preferences than we give them
credit for.

Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 1:52 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: healthy boundaries and scanning material


> so it sounds like your daughter was emotionally ready to handle
> it. If a child isn't, are you suggesting to still give access? All i am
> saying is if a child isn't ready for the unexpected content, they
> should not be given it. Of course there is some trial and error
> here, but really? If it is clear they are not ready, dont' you
> protect?-
>
> -- In [email protected], freeform@j... wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Mary Mapel
> <marymapel@y...>
> > writes:
> > > Have none of you received spam
> > > with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> > > line with a surprise on the other end?
> >
> > Long before Rain wanted her own email address, I was getting
> those. So,
> > I'd read email, and she'd be around, and I'd snort and
> comment about how
> > clever these porn spammers thought they were, and share
> some of the more
> > creative attempts with her (or anyone else who was around).
> By the time
> > she did get her own email address, all I did was mention that if
> she
> > didn't know the person she was getting email from it was
> probably spam,
> > especially if they didn't say her name. I'm pretty sure she's just
> > deleted all the porn spam she's gotten, although once she
> commented that
> > the supposed "hot 16 yr old" had the same name as someone
> we knew, and
> > once she asked what a word meant.
> >
> > In other words, in an unschooling family the issue was not a
> big deal.
> >
> > > Have none of
> > > you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> > > witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> > > see?
> >
> > When Rain was 2 1/2 we went to see a movie about a dragon, I
> think Sean
> > Connery was the voice of the dragon... I can't remember the
> title, but
> > think 1995 movies and someone will. Anyway, I thought it was
> G or PG-ish,
> > and got there and realized that it was R-ish, with some fairly
> gruesome
> > violence... but Rain was really liking the story so she didn't
> want to
> > leave, so we sort of muddled through. There was a guy who I
> think got
> > stabbed through the eye and died, that was my clue that this
> was maybe
> > not a PG movie. That was upsetting... but after that she covered
> her eyes
> > during any scenes that looked potentially gory and I told her
> what was
> > going on and when it was over, and that worked out okay.
> >
> > If I had known I would have warned her ahead of time, and she
> could have
> > been closing her eyes for the first gory part, but we did work it
> out,
> > and the next time I researched more, and I'm pretty sure she
> wasn't
> > traumatized for life... okay, she's saying she was but she's
> laughing and
> > admitting that she doesn;t even remember it ;-)
> >
> > > Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> > > showing the negative effects on children of violence
> > > in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> > > there?
> >
> > Actually, the studies I'm aware of showed that a subset of the
> children
> > in these studies became more violent after seeing violent
> shows... which
> > makes you wonder what was going on with that subset. I'll bet
> none of
> > them were unschoolers. And in the studies, the kids weren't
> asked if they
> > wanted to see the shows, or if they wanted someone sitting
> with them to
> > tell them when the scary parts were coming so they could not
> watch. We
> > did that for years...
> > >
> > > I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> > > counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> > > with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> > > childhood nightmares.
> >
> > My daughter never needed counseling, despite having access
> to all of
> > these things.
> >
> > > This society is getting more
> > > and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> > > are increasing.
> >
> > Violent crime is actually descreasing. Rape reports have
> increased, but
> > most experts believe that it's the reporting that has increased,
> not the
> > number of rapes itself.
> >
> > >We are going to war without exploring
> > > the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> > > really think that there is no link with premature
> > > expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
> >
> > Didn't we do the same thing 35 years ago?
> >
> > > i do want to make the distinction that i am
> > > not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> > > tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> > > advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> > > innoscence.
> >
> > The media isn't alive, it isn't doing these things to your son. He
> is, or
> > should be, the active participant, determining which media he
> wants in
> > his life and to what degree. If he isn't, you are censoring him.
> >
> > Dar
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

J. Stauffer

<<<<<Not so mutually exclusive, Juia. Since i am an AP i have listened
> to him, taken in to account what he has already told me, and then
> help ensure that he is supported in these limits.>>>>

But again, you have set yourself up as the expert on him, rather than him
being the expert on him.

Julie S.---expertness on others being why she thinks psychology isn't so
great

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 1:55 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: healthy boundaries and scanning material


> Not so mutually exclusive, Juia. Since i am an AP i have listened
> to him, taken in to account what he has already told me, and then
> help ensure that he is supported in these limits.
>
> > You have 2 mutually exclusive statements in the same email.
> > <<<< I have supported him in learning all of
> > > this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> > > more, not less.>>>>
> >
> > indicating that you trust your child to know the level of his own
> curiosity
> > and where his comfort zones are and this:
> >
> > <<<It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> > > scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> > > on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> > > to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> > > to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> > > learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> > > that he was neither looking for or ready to witness. >>>
> >
> > Then you say that you decide when he is ready and what he is
> looking for.
> >
> > Julie S.---who no longer thinks that psychology is all it is
> cracked up to
> > be
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@y...>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:10 PM
> > Subject: [AlwaysLearning] healthy boundaries and scanning
> material
> >
> >
> > > My parenting isn't at all fear based. It is also not
> > > denial based. I also don't believe in censoring my
> > > sons natural curiousity about learning anything he
> > > wants to learn. If he is old enough to ask the
> > > question then he is old enough to have the answer even
> > > if it is a difficult topic. At a young age of five he
> > > knows all about reporduction, same sex marriages,
> > > death, etc... I have supported him in learning all of
> > > this at the level he indicates he wants to know. Not
> > > more, not less.
> > >
> > > It seems that when i talk about protecting my son by
> > > scanning the material he has access to, the assumption
> > > on this list is that i want to control what he desires
> > > to learn. That isn't the case at all. In fact I want
> > > to make it safe for him to learn what he wants to
> > > learn, and not be surprised or harmed by those things
> > > that he was neither looking for or ready to witness.
> > > Of course children aren't going to look for
> > > pornography on the web, nor are they looking for
> > > violence on tv or in the print media. But these
> > > things exist in what originally appears as the most
> > > innocent of places.- Have none of you received spam
> > > with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
> > > line with a surprise on the other end? Have none of
> > > you gone to what is termed a family movie and
> > > witnessed more violence than your child was ready to
> > > see? Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
> > > showing the negative effects on children of violence
> > > in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
> > > there?
> > >
> > > I know that these things have lasting impact. I have
> > > counseled for well over 20 years helping families deal
> > > with behaviour problems, domestic violence, and simple
> > > childhood nightmares. This society is getting more
> > > and more immune to violence. Rape, assaults, etc...
> > > are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
> > > the possibility of other peaceful resolutions. Do you
> > > really think that there is no link with premature
> > > expossure to these topics and this alarming fact?
> > > Exposure to material that a child isn't emotionally
> > > mature to handle can be overwhelming, and has the
> > > possibility of stifling rather than assisting the
> > > emotional/spiritual development of the child. This
> > > isn't just my opinion it is substantiated by not only
> > > my work, but the many, many respected leaders in the
> > > alternative healing community, and those in the
> > > psychological community as well. I have included a
> > > basic link about the negative effects of cartoons
> > > alone.
> > > http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't need any of you to agree with me on this,
> > > however, i do want to make the distinction that i am
> > > not censoring my son, i am censoring the media that
> > > tries to invade my son's natural curiosity and take
> > > advantage of his desire to learn by exploiting his
> > > innoscence. From this he both needs and deserves my
> > > protection.
> > >
> > >
> > > -- In [email protected], "J. Stauffer"
> > > <jnjstau@g...> wrote:
> > > > <<<< Do you believe that your monitoring is all that
> > > stands between them and
> > > > porn?
> > > > > I've had three five year olds who weren't
> > > "monitored" in the way I think
> > > > you might be describing, and yet they didn't even
> > > like romance or kissing.
> > > > They only liked stories/movies/websites with kids,
> > > dogs, cartoons... >>>>
> > > >
> > > > I totally agree with Sandra on this point. I have 5
> > > kids who have complete
> > > > and unlimited access to the computer, video games,
> > > television, pay-per-view.
> > > > Nobody is even interested in watching R rated movies
> > > that have the rating
> > > > due to sexual content.
> > > >
> > > > Fear based parenting is not the best of all options.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> > > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

badolbilz

>
>
>Zach watched Jurassic Park at a friend's house. He loved the movie but it
>freaked him out. He was scared for me to leave the house at all for several
>days. We were in the library and he saw the movie and wanted to rent it. I
>reminded him of his reaction in the past but he wanted it, so he got it. He
>watched it probably 40 times in a weekend. He wasn't scared anymore. He
>took control of a situation and handled it exactly opposite of how I would
>have suggested he do it....and it turned out perfect.
>
>
>
>
My oldest dd (almost 8) wanted to watch Jurassic Park. I explained that
the dinosaurs seemed very real and that she might be scared. She wanted
to anyway so we got the DVD which was great because before we all
watched the movie we watched how they made the movie. After watching
that, we all watched the film and it was fine. Since then we've had
movie marathons with all three Jurassic Parks. It was always a given
that if someone was upset they could leave or the movie could be turned off.

One of my best friends has a dd who desperately wants to see this movie.
Her mother has forbidden it since she says it will give her dd
nightmares. So this movie has joined a large amount of others that this
girl cannot watch, including the Wizard of Oz which upset her dd at 3
yrs. Her dd is now 13. In my opinion, my friend is doing a great deal
more harm withholding these movies than if she's sit with her dd and
watch them with her. It's a darn good thing this woman has other
redeeming qualities, because these actions make me struggle sometimes to
hang onto this relationship and keep my mouth shut.

Heidi

[email protected]

On Wed, 26 May 2004 18:52:14 -0000 "Mary Mapel" <marymapel@...>
writes:
> so it sounds like your daughter was emotionally ready to handle
> it. If a child isn't, are you suggesting to still give access?

I'm not sure what "it" we're talking about here (email? scary movies?)
but if she's wanting access, I give her the facts and she decides if
she's emotionally ready to handle it, not me. If it turns out she isn't,
I'm there to help, and we adjust.

>All i am
> saying is if a child isn't ready for the unexpected content, they
> should not be given it. Of course there is some trial and error
> here, but really? If it is clear they are not ready, dont' you
> protect?-

This sounds like what many men used to say about their wives... and some
still do, I suppose.

Dar

Elizabeth Hill

**

So this movie has joined a large amount of others that this
girl cannot watch, including the Wizard of Oz which upset her dd at 3
yrs. **

I was also thinking about The Wizard of Oz. Back in the Sixties (as the older among you will remember) this used to be on TV in the US once a year. I remember being quite intimidated by the wicked witch and watching some parts of the movie from *behind the couch*, and I did that for a couple of years running. Maybe even three years running. (Hey, I still think the winged monkeys are pretty creepy. <g>)

But I think this supports the idea that kids have some control over their experiences. (I had a couch and I used it. I didn't need the movie banned.)

However, taking kids to the movie theater and *making* them stay because the parent wanted to stay would likely cause more problems than having the same movie on in the living room. A theater is typically darker and louder and kids aren rarely free to move around.

FYI, I no longer hide behind the couch, but I don't like being scared, so I do sometimes slide pretty far down under a blanket. <g>

Betsy

PS I happen to have a kid who only has nightmares very rarely. If he was expressing fears at night I might feel differently about hunting for the cause, even though a direct cause and effect relationship would be hard to prove.

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/26/04 11:12:21 AM, marymapel@... writes:

<< Have none of you received spam
with links to pornographic sites, an innocent subject
line with a surprise on the other end? >>

I've never gone to any of the sites.

From the time my kids had e-mail, we showed them that there would be "junk
mail" and just to delete things that were obviously being sent to lots of
people. We didn't treat it like anything that won'd jump out and surprise them, and
neither did they, and so it never did.

-=-Have none of you gone to what is termed a family movie and
witnessed more violence than your child was ready to see? -=-

No, because I've never taken my children to movies they didn't request or
that I hadn't checked out somewhat first. Most of our viewing is at home, and
nobody is "made" to watch videos or DVDs. Anyone can go in and out, pause,
mute...

-=-Do none of you read the 1000 or more studies
showing the negative effects on children of violence
in cartoons, let alone the many other programs out
there? -=-

1000 or more? If there are that many, which I seriously doubt, I bet over
800 had to do with people getting higher degrees in education and having to do
some "original research" (or what can pass as research in education
departments).

What matters when school looms large is not the same as what matters when
school isn't even on the horizon.

-=-Do you
really think that there is no link with premature
expossure to these topics and this alarming fact? -=-

Do you really think unschoolers are no different from the people you've
counselled for 20 years? The people on this list are not your domestic violence,
premature exposure candidates. And attachment parents all grouped together
lole lives, all three combined, than I used to have in a year. Two or three
each, ever, maybe. They don't have to sleep where they don't want to sleep.
They can get up and be with others any time.

-=-Exposure to material that a child isn't emotionally
mature to handle can be overwhelming, and has the
possibility of stifling rather than assisting the
emotional/spiritual development of the child. -=-

This isn't an issue with the unschoolers here, or at unschooling.com, or the
other lists I'm on or have been on.

-=- This
isn't just my opinion it is substantiated by not only
my work, but the many, many respected leaders in the
alternative healing community, and those in the
psychological community as well. -=-

Really? Did you or respected leaders expose children to things they weren't
emotionally prepared to handle? Or did you just see effects and peg a cause
after the fact?

If you have a boogie man in mind, you can blame him for lots of things. If
you don't have a control group and an exposed group (if you didn't take
innocent children and show them horrible things to measure before and after) it
wasn't too damned scientific, was it? So go easy with that "substantiated" word
when you mean "theorized."

-=- i am
not censoring my son, i am censoring the media -=-

Censoring has a specific meaning; you're censoring nothing, except in the
controlling-input sense. Your son's thoughts aren't yours to control, and you're
not "censoring the media." You're limiting your son's access.


Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/26/04 11:23:36 AM, christy_imnotred@... writes:

<< "Rape, assaults, etc...
are increasing. We are going to war without exploring
the possibility of other peaceful resolutions."

<<Is this really true? My understanding was that all violent crimes had been
on the decline for decades. Do you have statistics to back this up? Humans
have been violent for as long as history exists. >>

Good point.

This morning I was reading at an anti-spanking site, and there was a summary
of the laws that have been changed over the past few hundred years. Pillories
(where others could come by and take a whack at a convicted criminal were
outlawed long ago. Wifebeating was legal not so long ago. Rape within marriage
wasn't even a concept until fairly recently. Corporal punishment in schools
used to be VERY common. Spanking is outlawed in MANY countries, and more
every year.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin4.htm

Opposition to corporal punishment of children at Religious Tolerance site


Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/26/04 3:42:11 PM, jnjstau@... writes:

<< expertness on others being why she thinks psychology isn't so

great >>

I think lots of what has been discovered/proposed/theorized about cognition
and human development have made kids' lives better, though (except when they
live with people who think that's all a bunch of bullhockey and that if kids
don't cooperate they're just being obstinant, manipulative or disobedient).

Holly was telling me about a friend of hers who put her rats down for a nap.
She was visiting with her pets rats, and all the rats had been playing
together, but the visitor declared it time for her rats' nap and held her hand over
their bed/box and didn't let them out for a while, until they'd been quiet a
while. I had known that; I'd been in there for part of it.

What I heard tonight was that for some offense inside her rats' travelling
cage, she had waggled her finger in the face of one of Holly's rats and said "We
don't do that here."

Holly reported it with blinky big eyes, amazed that someone could really
think it was the least bit sensible.

So maybe psychology and behavioral science isn't so bad when it suggests that
rats don't understand English, that "we don't do that here" isn't the thing
to say to a creature in its own home ANYway and ... gosh, I don't know what
more can be said. But as play therapy goes, wasn't that a heck of a display of
"how it ought to be"? Long-awaited visits can be interrupted for a nap, and
finger-wagging will get the serious attention of men and mice (or girls and
rats) [NOT].

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/26/04 10:28:35 PM, ecsamhill@... writes:

<< But I think this supports the idea that kids have some control over their
experiences. (I had a couch and I used it. I didn't need the movie banned.)
>>

Good point.

One time Kirby and some other little kids were goofing around and starting to
play a little rough and Marty was five or six. They were "going to get him"
in some joking way or other. He grabbed me by the arms from behind as I
passed by, held me in front of him and said with great stage-humor, "I have a
mom and I know how to use it!"

Hilarious. <g>

But even without a couch. . .

Here's something that was taped to the side of my cook-book shelf for years,
and fell next to my computer the other day, so I might as well transcribe it
for you all.

It's from The Little Zen Calendar, by Workman Press. 2/18/98 <g>

(Quote:)

Master Kangan pointed to the sea and said to Daichi: "You speak of mind over
matter--then let's see you stop those boats from sailing."

Wordlessly the young disciple pulled the shoji screen across their view.

The Master smiled and put the shoji back into position. "You had to use your
hands."

Silently Daichi closed his eyes.

(Endquote.)

Sandra

Angela

My kids have always like scary movies. When Lilly was two her favorite was
The Wizard of Oz. And both loved the part in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang when
the child catcher came to catch the kids. Both girls like to play shoot em
up games with Daddy too. Both girls have always enjoyed having me lay with
them while they go to sleep. I always have. My bed is always open to them
or if they ask I always come into their room and sleep with them. Neither
girl has ever had a nightmare that they are aware of. I attribute that to
the fact that they feel safe when they go to sleep. They aren't forced to
lay in bed allowing their imaginations to run wild concerning what might be
under the bed. Maybe it's just a coincidence. Maybe not.

Angela
game-enthusiast@...


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/27/2004 12:28:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ecsamhill@... writes:
However, taking kids to the movie theater and *making* them stay because the
parent wanted to stay would likely cause more problems than having the same
movie on in the living room. A theater is typically darker and louder and kids
aren rarely free to move around.<<<<<<


Right. I heard stories about people actually throwing up in the theatre when
they saw _The Exorcist_. I'm not a fan of scary movies (love the books,
though!), so I didn't go see it. But it was one of the first movies to come out on
HBO in the '75 or '76, and I watched it from the comfort of my sofa snuggled up
with a blanket.

I thought, "What's all the hullabaloo?" But then I realized how much scarier
it would have ben in a big, dark theatre.

~Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

J. Stauffer

<<<< I thought, "What's all the hullabaloo?" But then I realized how much
scarier
> it would have ben in a big, dark theatre. >>>>

I saw "The Exorcist" at the drive-in. I was freaked....but in a good way
<grin>.

Julie S.

----- Original Message -----
From: <kbcdlovejo@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 6:36 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Re: healthy boundaries and scanning material


> In a message dated 5/27/2004 12:28:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> ecsamhill@... writes:
> However, taking kids to the movie theater and *making* them stay because
the
> parent wanted to stay would likely cause more problems than having the
same
> movie on in the living room. A theater is typically darker and louder and
kids
> aren rarely free to move around.<<<<<<
>
>
> Right. I heard stories about people actually throwing up in the theatre
when
> they saw _The Exorcist_. I'm not a fan of scary movies (love the books,
> though!), so I didn't go see it. But it was one of the first movies to
come out on
> HBO in the '75 or '76, and I watched it from the comfort of my sofa
snuggled up
> with a blanket.
>
> I thought, "What's all the hullabaloo?" But then I realized how much
scarier
> it would have ben in a big, dark theatre.
>
> ~Kelly
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/27/04 9:35:03 AM, jnjstau@... writes:

<< <<<< I thought, "What's all the hullabaloo?" But then I realized how much

scarier

> it would have ben in a big, dark theatre. >>>>


I saw "The Exorcist" at the drive-in. >>

I saw it in an old velvet-seat theater the first weekend, when people didn't
know what was going to happen. Big theater, balcony, full. The Highland, on
Central (Rt.66) in Albuquerque.

I've been in theaters when the mood of the crowd was light, but that night it
was not. People were disturbed, and afraid. When the movie was over, people
weren't chattery. They were stunned, and spooked.

Most of the parking at that theater is around the back, and the side streets
are dark. (One side has a Wendy's now, all lit up, but in those days, nothing
open, nothing light.)

People seemed afraid of the dark, afraid of the big dark wall of the theater,
afraid of each other, afraid to say anything, afraid of their cars.
Everyone's auras just sucked into them and they were trying to be invisible, to be
magically elsewhere. Nobody was laughing about it.

I was 19 or 20, and with three friends in my VW bug. We were to let one out
at his small apartment (behind a garage, not in an apartment building) and the
other three of us would've gone back to dorms.

We walked him in, and were afraid to leave and he didn't want us to leave.
We slept two on the bed and two on the floor right next. Took a long time to
go to sleep.

We weren't feigning fear, we were bone-chilled scared.

So...
I always categorized that as a scary, disturbing movie.

A couple of years ago, one of Marty's friends brought it over and a dozen or
so people watched it at once. Holly wanted to, so I stayed. Kirby didn't
want to, so he went and played video games elsewhere.

Nothing was scary. The kids were laughing, pointing out the old-fashioned
special effects, discussing the datedness of costumes and such. It didn't scare
them.

Holly and I watched Psycho recently. Holly thought it was hilarious. It di
dn't scare her.

Part of the scary experience of a movie has got to be the mood of people
around. And is it dark and are kids alone? Bad time for a scary movie. Remote
control in hand so it can be paused or muted or run back? No comparison to
being stuck between and among frightened adults in a dark theater.

Apples and oranges, I think.

I wanted Marty and Holly to see The Birds because there are references to it
in so many parody and cartoon things they know. We watched it in daylight,
discussing how they did things. It was on DVD and there were discussions of
special effects.

I think when somene who was scarred and scared by seeing Jaws in a theater
too young might think they need to protect their child from the same movie, but
at home with a remote is just too different.

Sandra

Diana Tashjian

This may be a weird question. Would you feel any different if your
children were boys? I have always done something similar with Nick. In
our case, Nick and I start out in my bed, reading for about an hour
and then falling asleep. When Rob (ds) comes to bed (he's a nite owl
and we're not!) he lugs Nick to his own (loft) bed in his own room and
then comes to bed. Nick is fine with this.

But now that Nick's getting older (he just turned 11) this arrangement
is beginning to feel like something I don't want to admit to anyone
outside the family! (It reminds me of the days when Nick was still
nursing occasionally as a pre-schooler: not something I felt I could
comfortably do in public!)

I think part of the issue for us is that Nick is an only child and has
no siblings to keep him company if he were to try to fall asleep in
his own room...

For those of you who have older boys and have done the family bed
thing, any comments?

Thanks,
Diana Tashjian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela" <game-enthusiast@...>

<snip>
Both girls have always enjoyed having me lay with
> them while they go to sleep. I always have. My bed is always open
to them
> or if they ask I always come into their room and sleep with them.
<snip>

Angela

Diana wrote:
This may be a weird question. Would you feel any different if your
children were boys?

Diana,
It's hard to speculate about something like that but it doesn't seem like it
would feel differently to me if my girls were boys. I don't really talk
about our sleeping arrangements with people (except a couple of close
friends) not because I am embarrassed but because it just doesn't usually
come up.

Diana wrote:
But now that Nick's getting older (he just turned 11) this arrangement
is beginning to feel like something I don't want to admit to anyone
outside the family!

If you are comfortable with the arrangement but just not comfortable talking
about it, just don't bring it up.



Diana wrote:
I think part of the issue for us is that Nick is an only child and has
no siblings to keep him company if he were to try to fall asleep in
his own room...

My oldest is only 9 and she has rarely gone to sleep without me in the same
room. I think that this helps the girls to feel secure. My mother never
slept alone. As a child she shared a bed with a sister. As a teen she
shared a bed with her grandmother, whom she lived with to help care for her.
Then she married my father and slept with him.

Angela
game-enthusiast@...



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/28/2004 11:38:10 AM Central Standard Time,
dtashjian@... writes:
For those of you who have older boys and have done the family bed
thing, any comments?


~~~

My 10 yo boy still sleeps with me most of the time. He'd rather not,
sometimes, but he is the last kid in the house, ane he gets lonely, too. He is very
gradually growing out of it, I think.

I know other families where the 15 and 11 yo boys still bunk in on the floor
or the bed with the rest of the family. My own boy cousins when I was growing
up would still come into my aunt's room in the middle of the night and crash
on the floor even up to the time they moved out!

I think everyone having their own bed and having to stay there is highly
overrated in this country. No one has to know that your boy sleeps with you.
It's natural and has a natural evolution to the end, and the end will be
different for everyone.

Karen


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tracie Kowalski

>>>>For those of you who have older boys and have done the family bed thing,
any comments?





I don't have older boys, but I do have three boys and all are still in our
bed. I know many people (non-AP parents for the most part) think that the
concept of Family Bedding is "abnormal" and that the child will be scarred
or damaged or will never have "proper" sleeping habits; I have to bite my
tongue. Your comment,



>>>>this arrangement is beginning to feel like something I don't want to
admit to anyone outside the family!



struck a chord with me as I am about to exit a MOMs group that I found great
comfort in four years ago. Our lifestyles are completely divergent,
parenting, schooling and just the fact that we respect our children as
people/individuals with minds of their own (I couldn't think of the right
word here.) It's funny I really didn't notice this so much when my older
boys were younger, but as of late, I feel I can't share anything with these
women without being put under the microscope. It astonishes me that I
didn't notice the differences before. It really only became evident to me
as my boys grew to an age where everyone else's children were starting
school. Then the separation became quite apparent as have the differences
in our children. I rarely tell people much about our personal lives, maybe
mentioning that we home school, definitely NOT referencing unschooling
because of the uncomfortable atmosphere it generates. Not on our part, but
theirs.



Tracie



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

I have two boys, both little, they have both always been welcome to sleep with us whenever they need or want to. I hope that never changes.

I read an article once in Mothering that was all about touch and the taboos that our society has placed on simple touch.

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0838/is_1999_Sept/ai_60947819

It's not about a family bed, but it really opened my eyes and helped me to let go of a lot of ideas and notions I had kicking about in my head, and helped me to relax, and enjoy the fact that my boys like to cuddle with us, and that they feel safe and secure being in our bed with us.

~Rebecca
--
You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help."
-Calvin



> In a message dated 5/28/2004 11:38:10 AM Central Standard Time,
> dtashjian@... writes:
> For those of you who have older boys and have done the family bed
> thing, any comments?
>

Diana Tashjian

I know what you mean. I sometimes wonder what my family's life would
be like if I weren't able to get some support from email lists. I
don't think I would be able to live as differently from our friends
and family as I do without this support...

Weakly yours,
Diana Tashjian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tracie Kowalski" <tracielynn@...>

<snip>
> struck a chord with me as I am about to exit a MOMs group that I
found great
> comfort in four years ago. Our lifestyles are completely divergent,

<snip>
I rarely tell people much about our personal lives, maybe
> mentioning that we home school, definitely NOT referencing
unschooling
> because of the uncomfortable atmosphere it generates. Not on our
part, but
> theirs.

Dana Browning

My 3 yob sleeps with us and the girls (15 and 12) sleep in there beds, on the couch, on my floor, with each other. Where ever they are comfy.
Dana
-----

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]