Sandra Dodd

Several weeks ago I got a side e-mail from someone more familiar with
TCS ("Taking Children Seriously," a philosophy out of the U.K. that
has some overlap with unschooling), and I saved this, meaning to
comment:

-=-I'm happy to find and converse with "radical unschooler" folks like
yourself, even though I sometimes cringe at what people say about
other people in their families in a very public forum (and hope that
they've asked and been given permission to do so)-=-
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
========================================================================
Working on web pages today, I came to this one, which reminded me to
get back to this point:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
========================================================================
Deb Lewis once responded to this statement (below to the line):
***Thank you for trusting this list with personal information like
that. It helps me understand you better, and to have more confidence
in your advice.***

Anyone can come to my house and meet my kid and talk to him about
unschooling. Anyone can see my extensive dust collection, my stupid
dog, my hideous, pinching pigeon. That's all stuff I've talked about
here. I'm a real person, with a real kid. If I could make my scanner
work I'd put his picture up.
I don't know how I could help anyone thinking about unschooling if
they couldn't see into my life and as much as it's possible from an e-
mail list, see that the words I type are lived out here first, with a
genuine kid.

I'm in Deer Lodge, Montana. Anyone can come and visit.

We played at the river yesterday. We threw rocks at floating ice
chunks until we couldn't feel our fingers any more. We had a snowball
fight. We went sledding. We watched "Attack of the Crab Monsters" and
read about dinosaurs. We played Master Labyrinth and chess. We stood
on our heads. We made peanut butter and bird seed surprise for the
Flickers.

Today we're going to Grandma's house. She's making fresh tortillas and
we'll visit with Dylan's uncle because he's flying back to Anchorage
on Monday. We'll probably watch a movie there, too. I'll make a pan of
fudge to take along.

My real and happy kid says a lot more about unschooling than I could
ever convey by analyzing human nature. If I'm afraid to talk about my
real unschooling life, how will I single-handedly change the world for
the better? I've printed out my super hero license and I've sewn my
Tick suit. Now, Evildoers, Eat My Justice!

--------------

Deb's writing lives here: http://sandradodd.com/day/debl

---------------

I don't know the origins or traditions of TCS, but the sort of sharing
I was used to when I started unschooling was La Leche League, which
depends entirely on women sharing actual tales of bodily fluids, and
nursing babies right in front of other moms, and talking about their
children's functions and unusual traits and particular oddities. I
learned about unschooling from La Leche League leaders at first. I
was in a babysitting co-op made up entirely of LLL members (mostly
leaders), and as more of those families put their kids in school, what
was left of the group transitioned to being "The Goof Group," an
unschooling park day.

I have always shared. When I've talked to my kids about whether it
was okay to share something particular, they've almost always said
yes. Sometimes they didn't, and most of those times they came back
later and said "It's okay if you tell that."

So even though someone unfamiliar with this sort of learning (which
is, I believe, the natural way women learn from one another about all
SORTS of biological and social realities and have since long before
writing) was cringing and hoping, my children have known since they
were tiny that I had learned cool things from other families and other
newer families were learning cool things from knowing and watching and
hearing about my kids. They've always seemed quite proud of that
fact, and as they speak increasingly on panels at conferences, or
Holly's in the unschooling chats, or on video, I see that they've
grown up knowing they are living examples of a better way to be.



Years ago when a couple of people from the TCS group/discussions were
active at unschooling.com or AOL, we'd ask "like what?" and they had
"a rule" (for real) against talking about their real children. They
had decided it wasn't respectful to tell any stories about anyone else.

Honestly, if someone can't tell any stories, they have nothing to talk
about. They can read. They can throw in a philosophical point once
in a while, but unless they want to back up their beliefs with
evidence, this isn't the sort of discussion for them.

But I did want to reassure anyone with concerns that the reality of
women discussing how it's going with them and their children and
families is older than unschooling, for definite sure. Older than
"TCS." Older than boats.



Sandra

Tom Hall

Sandra Dodd wrote:
> Several weeks ago I got a side e-mail from someone more familiar with
> TCS ("Taking Children Seriously," a philosophy out of the U.K. that
> has some overlap with unschooling), and I saved this, meaning to
> comment:
>
> -=-I'm happy to find and converse with "radical unschooler" folks like
> yourself, even though I sometimes cringe at what people say about
> other people in their families in a very public forum (and hope that
> they've asked and been given permission to do so)-=-
> =

That was me. I do think this is an interesting subject for conversation,
and an interesting social dilemma that the widespread use of the
internet for communication and sharing between people has created.

> I don't know the origins or traditions of TCS, but the sort of sharing
> I was used to when I started unschooling was La Leche League, which
> depends entirely on women sharing actual tales of bodily fluids, and
> nursing babies right in front of other moms, and talking about their
> children's functions and unusual traits and particular oddities. I
> learned about unschooling from La Leche League leaders at first. I
> was in a babysitting co-op made up entirely of LLL members (mostly
> leaders), and as more of those families put their kids in school, what
> was left of the group transitioned to being "The Goof Group," an
> unschooling park day.
>

I understand your point of view, but an intimate group of women, sharing
personal experience "right in front of other Moms" is very different
from sending out a mass email to thousands of strangers. Should people
speak and share the same way in these two very different kinds of
communication?

> I have always shared. When I've talked to my kids about whether it
> was okay to share something particular, they've almost always said
> yes. Sometimes they didn't, and most of those times they came back
> later and said "It's okay if you tell that."
>
> So even though someone unfamiliar with this sort of learning (which
> is, I believe, the natural way women learn from one another about all
> SORTS of biological and social realities and have since long before
> writing) was cringing and hoping, my children have known since they
> were tiny that I had learned cool things from other families and other
> newer families were learning cool things from knowing and watching and
> hearing about my kids... (snip) ...

The key here for me is that you did ask. I don't cringe because I am
unfamiliar with this sort of learning, or with the kind of sharing that
an intimate group of women might use to learn from each other (despite
the common stereotyping, this does not only apply to women BTW - humans
of all genders and ages learn by intimate sharing with each other).

It makes me cringe because I believe it is rude to share the intimate
details of someone else's life to a huge number of strangers without
making sure it's OK. And although I'm sure it is OK for many people, for
many people it is not. I hope that common courtesy would dictate that
one would consider this when sharing personal details on a email list.

> But I did want to reassure anyone with concerns that the reality of
> women discussing how it's going with them and their children and
> families is older than unschooling, for definite sure. Older than
> "TCS." Older than boats.

But the internet and the new kinds of socialization it enables
are very new. Isn't the reality of women discussing how it's going with
them and their children and families in person to a group of their
personal friends a very different reality than discussing it on the
internet to a large and varied group of close friends, acquaintances and
strangers? Wouldn't one want to speak differently in these two very
different situations?

-Tom

Sandra Dodd

-=-I understand your point of view, but an intimate group of women,
sharing
personal experience "right in front of other Moms" is very different
from sending out a mass email to thousands of strangers. Should people
speak and share the same way in these two very different kinds of
communication?-=-

Only those who want to.

We're not requiring people to write ANYthing.

-=-The key here for me is that you did ask. -=-

I said I asked. How do you know that for sure? If I had people sign
an affidavit to go with every post to say they asked everyone involved
for permission, and then ran the post by them for approval, you still
wouldn't know for sure.

How do you know I didn't make up these kids, and that I'm not running
a twenty-year crazed scam?

-=-I don't cringe because I am
unfamiliar with this sort of learning, or with the kind of sharing that
an intimate group of women might use to learn from each other (despite
the common stereotyping, this does not only apply to women BTW - humans
of all genders and ages learn by intimate sharing with each other).-=-

It's more than "a common stereotype." At a basic level, as stripped
of culture as you can possibly squint to imagine it, children learn by
playing and climbing and asking lots of questions. Men learn to hunt
by hunting and to build by building. Women learn the nurturing and
reproductive information they need to know by talking about it, by
sharing examples and discussing what went wrong or right.

Men don't need to talk a lot to hunt together. They need to be pretty
quiet, in fact.
Women need to talk to remember and communicate where they saw those
yams growing, near where the berries were.

-=-It makes me cringe because I believe it is rude to share the intimate
details of someone else's life to a huge number of strangers without
making sure it's OK.-=-

It's find for you to cringe, and it's fine for you to believe that,
but it's not okay for you to try to shame us into doing what would
make you more comfortable. You can think the worst possible things
about me but it won't change the peace and joy of my family. No one
can take away the fact that Holly will be 18 in the fall and my kids
didn't go to school, and they read and they write and they are
respected by people younger, and their age, and older. (Unless I made
them up, I mean... And if I made them up who CARES what stories I
told about them?)

-=- And although I'm sure it is OK for many people, for
many people it is not. I hope that common courtesy would dictate that
one would consider this when sharing personal details on a email list.-
=-

"Common courtesy" isn't common (shared) if one group has a tradition
of sharing while another group considers it taboo.

-=--=-Older than boats.-=--=-
-=-But the internet and the new kinds of socialization it enables
are very new. Isn't the reality of women discussing how it's going with
them and their children and families in person to a group of their
personal friends a very different reality than discussing it on the
internet to a large and varied group of close friends, acquaintances and
strangers? Wouldn't one want to speak differently in these two very
different situations?-=-

Radio talk shows beat them to that. Counseling groups and church
groups where women share with strangers came decades before. AA/al-
Anon/Nar-Anon, those are sharing intimately with strangers. They
don't use their full names and they ask that the stories stay there.
Except for cases of court-ordered attendance, most people there are
there voluntarily, and they can pass.

No one has ever been court-ordered to participate in an unschooling
discussion.

If someone takes what I've written about my children and does
something evil with it, that is their transgression and discourtesy.

My purpose in telling these stories is not to show off or to pass
time. I'm sharing situations in which the philosophy by which we live
has created a certain kind of outcome which is not likely to occur
from other choices. I'm sharing particular parts of my life for
particular reasons. I'm not indiscriminately choosing three things a
day to tell without consideration for whether they have to do with
unschooling or not. I'm not sharing randomly or thoughtlessly.

Sandra




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

Jenny C

> But the internet and the new kinds of socialization it enables
> are very new. Isn't the reality of women discussing how it's going
with
> them and their children and families in person to a group of their
> personal friends a very different reality than discussing it on the
> internet to a large and varied group of close friends, acquaintances
and
> strangers? Wouldn't one want to speak differently in these two very
> different situations?


I have met a lot of the people that write in unschooling forums, IRL.
Does that change the dynamic at all? I put faces and body language to
people that I've been familiar with for a long time online only. I can
hear their voices and imagine the smiles they have.

If I were speaking with one of them IRL, I'd probably being saying more
and gesturing lots, since I do that, and they'd likely get way more
details than what I share online.

There have only been a few times that I haven't shared something because
the details are personal. That is common courtesy. I don't want to be
a rumor mill and sometimes talking about details can do that. I've done
it unintentionally before.

I've been reading and writing in these online forums for so long now,
that all the names and writing styles are familiar to me, familiar like
old friends are. When I went to the Life Is Good Conference, everyone
knew who Chamille was because I write about her. She was surprised that
people came and talked to her, simply because of that. It made her feel
welcomed and loved. If I'd never shared details about her, nobody would
have done that! It was the same for Margaux, but she didn't notice as
much because she assumes everyone will like her and talk to her.

Chamille has a boyfriend that she met because of an online friendship
with a complete stranger that happened to live nearby. She has very
good online friends that she met online and IM's and talks on the phone
with. Some of them, she's met IRL and some of them she only knows
online. She rarely hides her real self or the details of her real self,
none of her social profiles are set to private. She doesn't talk to
just anybody. She accpets friend requests based on lots of different
factors and rejects friend requests based on lots of other factors.

The ways in which she views relationships are very different than the
way I grew up. I only made friends with people nearby, in school,
church, and my neighborhood. Chamille makes friends with people that
she has things in common with, wether they are nearby or across the
planet. The only way to know that she has things in common is to share
the details.

Tom Hall

Sandra Dodd wrote:

> -=-I don't cringe because I am
> unfamiliar with this sort of learning, or with the kind of sharing that
> an intimate group of women might use to learn from each other (despite
> the common stereotyping, this does not only apply to women BTW - humans
> of all genders and ages learn by intimate sharing with each other).-=-
>
> It's more than "a common stereotype." At a basic level, as stripped
> of culture as you can possibly squint to imagine it, children learn by
> playing and climbing and asking lots of questions. Men learn to hunt
> by hunting and to build by building. Women learn the nurturing and
> reproductive information they need to know by talking about it, by
> sharing examples and discussing what went wrong or right.
>
> Men don't need to talk a lot to hunt together. They need to be pretty
> quiet, in fact.
> Women need to talk to remember and communicate where they saw those
> yams growing, near where the berries were.

In my experience, modern male and female roles and behavior have evolved
considerably beyond that of most hunter/gatherer societies. I think we
may have a basic disagreement here about innate vs. culturally taught
behaviors.

>
> -=-It makes me cringe because I believe it is rude to share the intimate
> details of someone else's life to a huge number of strangers without
> making sure it's OK.-=-
>
> It's find for you to cringe, and it's fine for you to believe that,
> but it's not okay for you to try to shame us into doing what would
> make you more comfortable. You can think the worst possible things
> about me but it won't change the peace and joy of my family. No one
> can take away the fact that Holly will be 18 in the fall and my kids
> didn't go to school, and they read and they write and they are
> respected by people younger, and their age, and older. (Unless I made
> them up, I mean... And if I made them up who CARES what stories I
> told about them?)

I don't think anything I said was trying to shame anyone about anything.
I didn't say bad things about you or the group. I didn't say anyone
should feel ashamed. I simply said what I think about this topic. I
stated it as my belief, not as a moral imperative. I asked what I
thought were a few interesting questions. If that causes someone to feel
shame, that is their own shame, and doesn't have anything to do with me.

>
> -=- And although I'm sure it is OK for many people, for
> many people it is not. I hope that common courtesy would dictate that
> one would consider this when sharing personal details on a email list.-
> =-
>
> "Common courtesy" isn't common (shared) if one group has a tradition
> of sharing while another group considers it taboo.

Exactly. If I was trying to berate you or the group I would use very
different language. I am not. I think it's interesting how people choose
to behave on the internet, and interesting to see how it's changed the
boundaries of what is considered public and what is considered private.
I think it's an interesting topic of discussion and an interesting
evolution in how humans behave.

Obviously, I make my own choices about what to read and write, as does
everyone on this list! And I'm here, and I'm reading and writing... you
can draw your own conclusions from that about what I think about the list.

-Tom

Tom Hall

That's one of the interesting things to me, how compelling virtual
interaction is. Stripped of our physical bodies, clothes, and
surroundings, we meet here or other virtual places using our words and
whatever other pieces of our reality we construct and show on facebook,
blogs, etc. And even with just that little bit of each other, we have
the sense that we know and understand each other and can share lives and
experiences in a meaningful way.

It's an amazing testament to human creativity, both on the part of those
who are doing the sharing and those who are experiencing it. And it's
totally shaking the foundations of human social interaction, which have
traditionally been based on all kinds of physical world cues to inform
us of status and our relative place in the world (not to mention the
incredible shrinking world).

Our children are growing up in a very different world, and they are
creating the social norms and customs for this world at the same time
they are inventing it.

Those who you have met IRL, did they seems like themselves?

Jenny C wrote:
>

> > But the internet and the new kinds of socialization it enables
> > are very new. Isn't the reality of women discussing how it's going
> with
> > them and their children and families in person to a group of their
> > personal friends a very different reality than discussing it on the
> > internet to a large and varied group of close friends, acquaintances
> and
> > strangers? Wouldn't one want to speak differently in these two very
> > different situations?
>
> I have met a lot of the people that write in unschooling forums, IRL.
> Does that change the dynamic at all? I put faces and body language to
> people that I've been familiar with for a long time online only. I can
> hear their voices and imagine the smiles they have.
>
> If I were speaking with one of them IRL, I'd probably being saying more
> and gesturing lots, since I do that, and they'd likely get way more
> details than what I share online.
>
> There have only been a few times that I haven't shared something because
> the details are personal. That is common courtesy. I don't want to be
> a rumor mill and sometimes talking about details can do that. I've done
> it unintentionally before.
>
> I've been reading and writing in these online forums for so long now,
> that all the names and writing styles are familiar to me, familiar like
> old friends are. When I went to the Life Is Good Conference, everyone
> knew who Chamille was because I write about her. She was surprised that
> people came and talked to her, simply because of that. It made her feel
> welcomed and loved. If I'd never shared details about her, nobody would
> have done that! It was the same for Margaux, but she didn't notice as
> much because she assumes everyone will like her and talk to her.
>
> Chamille has a boyfriend that she met because of an online friendship
> with a complete stranger that happened to live nearby. She has very
> good online friends that she met online and IM's and talks on the phone
> with. Some of them, she's met IRL and some of them she only knows
> online. She rarely hides her real self or the details of her real self,
> none of her social profiles are set to private. She doesn't talk to
> just anybody. She accpets friend requests based on lots of different
> factors and rejects friend requests based on lots of other factors.
>
> The ways in which she views relationships are very different than the
> way I grew up. I only made friends with people nearby, in school,
> church, and my neighborhood. Chamille makes friends with people that
> she has things in common with, wether they are nearby or across the
> planet. The only way to know that she has things in common is to share
> the details.

Schuyler

It's more than "a common stereotype." At a basic level, as stripped
of culture as you can possibly squint to imagine it, children learn by
playing and climbing and asking lots of questions. Men learn to hunt
by hunting and to build by building. Women learn the nurturing and
reproductive information they need to know by talking about it, by
sharing examples and discussing what went wrong or right.

Men don't need to talk a lot to hunt together. They need to be pretty
quiet, in fact.
Women need to talk to remember and communicate where they saw those
yams growing, near where the berries were.
---------

What Sandra wrote reminded me of a group of Japanese macaques who were studied I don't know when ago. Japanese macaques wash their food, like raccoons. In this group of macaques one female discovered that she could get the sand from rice by throwing it all in a creek and then scooping up the rice after the sand fell to the bottom of the creek. The researchers recorded the transmission of that knowledge and found that first all other macaques in Imo's age group learned the sand technique and then their mother's learned it and showed to their other children and last, and sometimes not at all, it was the older males who learned to use running water to separate grain and sand.

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

Pam Sorooshian

On 6/30/2009 9:12 AM, Tom Hall wrote:
> with the kind of sharing that
> an intimate group of women might use to learn from each other (despite
> the common stereotyping, this does not only apply to women BTW - humans
> of all genders and ages learn by intimate sharing with each other).
>
I don not agree - at least not in the conventional American culture and
not in the middle eastern culture my husband comes from. Men do not very
often share (with other men) intimate details of their lives, trading
concerns and offering supportive and/or helpful commentary. Some of you
know men who do that, I'm sure, but they are exceptions. What "I" notice
is that men are more likely to do that when there is a woman around who
gets it going, but pretty unlikely to initiate it on their own. My
husband has close friends of 20 or 25 years with whom he talks sports
and business and they even talk about their families, but they do not
analyze and share details of things they are concerned about, not at all
in the ways that are common among women. I am a statistician and
economist and have worked for years and years in a field in which I am
very often one of the few women in a group. Even in business, get a
group of mothers together and they will talk about their children -
their needs, their problems, their concerns. I honestly do not think I
have ever once been in a group of professional men - having lunch or
dinner, for example, and heard that kind of talk. In fact, working
mothers seem desperate to talk about their children, men mostly seem to
have other things on their minds.

-pam

Sandra Dodd

-=-In my experience, modern male and female roles and behavior have
evolved
considerably beyond that of most hunter/gatherer societies. I think we
may have a basic disagreement here about innate vs. culturally taught
behaviors.-=-

Perhaps, but no one taught me to listen to other women. In fact, I've
had a culture and a religion condemning "gossip," and treating all of
womens' communications as unworthy and frivolous and harmful. And yet
I have still sought out women to talk about issues concerning
childbirth, nursing, dealing with children and husbands and in-laws.

-=-I don't think anything I said was trying to shame anyone about
anything.
I didn't say bad things about you or the group. I didn't say anyone
should feel ashamed. I simply said what I think about this topic. I
stated it as my belief, not as a moral imperative.-=-

I wasn't going to name who said it. I was willing to present the ideas
in the absence of particular people, but you jumped up and claimed
it. I believe you were showing more judgment that you intended to,
and I know it was just to me, and I wasn't going to identify the
original author at all.

-=-I asked what I
thought were a few interesting questions. If that causes someone to feel
shame, that is their own shame, and doesn't have anything to do with me.
-=-

There were insinuations and values involved, and clearly I'm not at
all ashamed about the many years of volunteer work I've done helping
other people understand more peaceful ways to parent.

Sandra





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

Sandra Dodd

-=-Those who you have met IRL, did they seems like themselves?-=-

WHOA!!!!
Now you're asking for information that is NOT going to be helpful to
people understanding unschooling. NOW you're asking for what does
fall under gossip, and too personal, and potentially unkind.

People often tell good stories about other families they've met, but
you're inviting (on my list) people to tell negative stories. I hope
no one has done so, per your invitation, before reading this response.

Sandra

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

Sandra Dodd

-=-It's an amazing testament to human creativity, both on the part of
those
who are doing the sharing and those who are experiencing it. And it's
totally shaking the foundations of human social interaction, which have
traditionally been based on all kinds of physical world cues to inform
us of status and our relative place in the world (not to mention the
incredible shrinking world).-=-

This is historically invalid.

Many people met by written letter, by written introduction, in
centuries past, and even were engaged and married without meeting.
There are many stories of arranged marriages among European royalty,
and others; in India people still marry who have barely met.

But even among people of lesser means, there were long
correspondences that ended up in marriage.

A great deal of the exchange of philosophical and scientific
information in the Middle Ages and earlier was by letter between
people with similar interests or collections.

Even in the early 20th century, letter writing was the connecting
point of many friends, colleagues and collaborators. I have a friend
whose parents were missionaries in Pakistan, and his dad had a
correspondence with J.R.R. Tolkien, about language and culture. Maybe
about Sanskrit, I think.

It's fairly easy to exchange photographs and even videos online now,
in moments. Seeing correspondents 500 years ago involved miniature
paintings and locks of hair.

Sandra

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

Pam Sorooshian

On 6/30/2009 11:11 AM, Tom Hall wrote:
> I think we
> may have a basic disagreement here about innate vs. culturally taught
> behaviors.
>

Who cares? I mean, in the context we're speaking? I don't think it is
"taught" - not in the usual sense of the word, so I object to that
characterization on the grounds that it is important for unschoolers to
make a careful distinction between teaching and learning. But whether it
is part of a natural evolutionary process and therefore to be considered
"innate" or it is a learned part of our culture, that doesn't change the
reality that women seem to do this kind of discussion a whole lot more
than men do it.

And, I think it is sexist to oppose or discount the importance of this
kind of conversation where we discuss our own real children - because it
IS a female kind of thing to do.

-pam

Pam Sorooshian

What one event or moment from your school years would you "do over" and why?

Roxana is applying for a scholarship - the above is the essay question.
They are scoring based on: writing ability, creativity, originality, and
overall excellence. Equal weight on each of those. If there is a tie,
the winner will be one with the higher score in the "overall excellence"
category.

So - she's stumped. We thought maybe this would be an interesting thing
for this list - not directly about unschooling except that MY first
answer was that the reason she's so completely stumped is because she's
unschooled and therefore had no "school years." Even if we change the
question to say "childhood" instead of "school years," she's still
feeling completely stumped.

So - if you were in the place of an unschooled kid, what kinds of
moments or events might you come up with for this?

-pam

Sandra Dodd

-=-
Many people met by written letter, by written introduction, in
centuries past, and even were engaged and married without meeting. -=-

That's not what I mean to write, although there have been proxy
marriages.
I meant were engaged without meeting (and then married, probably in
person <g>).

Sandra

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

Sandra Dodd

-=-So - if you were in the place of an unschooled kid, what kinds of
moments or events might you come up with for this?-=-

-=-What one event or moment from your school years would you "do over"
and why?-=-
Maybe...
The moment I decided to learn in the company of my parents and
sisters, in the world at large, instead of going to elementary school.

But for Roxana (unless you've made her up), what about a musical-
theatre-related moment? When she started learning to play piano to
play the tunes?

Or her trip to London?
France?

OH WAIT!!!!

Do they mean "do over" to change and do differently maybe?

I was thinking "What was so great that you'd like to re-live it."

Sandra

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

Pam Sorooshian

On 6/30/2009 11:24 AM, Tom Hall wrote:
> That's one of the interesting things to me, how compelling virtual
> interaction is. Stripped of our physical bodies, clothes, and
> surroundings, we meet here or other virtual places using our words and
> whatever other pieces of our reality we construct and show on facebook,
> blogs, etc. And even with just that little bit of each other, we have
> the sense that we know and understand each other and can share lives and
> experiences in a meaningful way.
>

What we have left is not "just that little bit of each other," though.
The things stripped away are not the big bits of us.

Also - I don't "construct" pieces of reality to show on facebook. I know
lots of people who do that, but I don't. I do "show" pieces of my
reality - but I don't make them up to show them on facebook. I do
"choose" what to show - that doesn't mean it is "constructed" for that
purpose.

<

And even with just that little bit of each other, we have
the sense that we know and understand each other and can share lives and
experiences in a meaningful way.>

You are implying that we 'have the sense" but it isn't real? We have the sense that we understand each other and can share lives and experiences in a meaningful way? YOU may be fakin' it here, but I know I don't just have the "sense" that we are sharing in meaningful ways, I know we actually, in fact, ARE sharing lives and experiences in meaningful ways. People's lives are being changed in very significant ways - this isn't like the relationship I have with most of the people in my neighborhood where we wave at each other and ask how the kids are doing. No - THOSE are the superficial relationships I have - even though I know what kind of house they live in and what they look like and what clothing they wear - even though I can see those things about them, that doesn't contribute to more meaningful sharing - not at all. Maybe the opposite, in fact.

My kids, by the way, trust me to use my good judgment about what to say in public online in the same way I use my good judgment about what to say in public anywhere else. Because we talk quite openly about our kids, don't assume that we necessarily would blabber on about things to which they'd object.

Roxana says, "If you don't mention me by name when you're talking about me, online, it is harder for me to google myself."<G> My kids LOVE reading the things I wrote about them when they were younger and they are very very happy to have been of use in discussions that might have helped other kids have happier lives. My kids feel very grateful for the life they've gotten to live which is 100 percent due to unschoolers being willing to open up and share their own lives, online.

-pam

Sandra Dodd

-=-My kids feel very grateful for the life they've gotten to live
which is 100 percent due to unschoolers being willing to open up and
share their own lives, online.-=-

alleged unschoolers, sharing their constructed lives, perhaps.

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

Tom Hall

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-Those who you have met IRL, did they seems like themselves?-=-
>
> WHOA!!!!
> Now you're asking for information that is NOT going to be helpful to
> people understanding unschooling. NOW you're asking for what does
> fall under gossip, and too personal, and potentially unkind.
>
> People often tell good stories about other families they've met, but
> you're inviting (on my list) people to tell negative stories. I hope
> no one has done so, per your invitation, before reading this response.
>
> Sandra
>

A theoretical question only, and part of the discussion we were having.

Only if one assumes that it is OK to share personal information about others without regard to their feelings about it is there any danger to this question.

Tom Hall

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-It's an amazing testament to human creativity, both on the part of
> those
> who are doing the sharing and those who are experiencing it. And it's
> totally shaking the foundations of human social interaction, which have
> traditionally been based on all kinds of physical world cues to inform
> us of status and our relative place in the world (not to mention the
> incredible shrinking world).-=-
>
> This is historically invalid.
>
> Many people met by written letter, by written introduction, in
> centuries past, and even were engaged and married without meeting.
> There are many stories of arranged marriages among European royalty,
> and others; in India people still marry who have barely met.
>
> But even among people of lesser means, there were long
> correspondences that ended up in marriage.
>
> A great deal of the exchange of philosophical and scientific
> information in the Middle Ages and earlier was by letter between
> people with similar interests or collections.
>
> Even in the early 20th century, letter writing was the connecting
> point of many friends, colleagues and collaborators. I have a friend
> whose parents were missionaries in Pakistan, and his dad had a
> correspondence with J.R.R. Tolkien, about language and culture. Maybe
> about Sanskrit, I think.
>
> It's fairly easy to exchange photographs and even videos online now,
> in moments. Seeing correspondents 500 years ago involved miniature
> paintings and locks of hair.
>
> Sandra
>

Not the same thing at all. Completely valid. The internet and the connections it enables is categorically different from sending letters, books, papers and photographs through the mail.

Pam Sorooshian

On 6/30/2009 3:42 PM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
> alleged unschoolers, sharing their constructed lives, perhaps.
>
Oh, yeah. Perhaps.

Again, who cares? I listened as if they were real and I thought
(dangerous thoughts) and came to my own conclusions and made my own
decisions. If they were stories - made up lives - then they were good
stories. Nothing wrong with learning from a good story, is there? <G>

I'm still back on the idea that not being able to see our physical
bodies, clothing, and the kind of house we live in leaves just "bits" of
ourselves. Physical appearance and economic status are important bits?
Seriously?

-pam

Sandra Dodd

-=-Not the same thing at all. Completely valid. The internet and the
connections it enables is categorically different from sending
letters, books, papers and photographs through the mail. -=-

You had written -=-"it's
totally shaking the foundations of human social interaction, which
have
traditionally been based on all kinds of physical world cues to inform
us of status and our relative place in the world (not to mention the
incredible shrinking world).-=-

Based on that, your argument is invalid.
If you want to expand it, and if your discussion will help anyone on
this list understand unschooling, or even the interactions they have
online from which they learn about unschooling and parenting, feel
free to expand and expound.

I have always asked that people try to keep to things that will help
unschoolers, on this list. It's fine not to share stories or ask
useful questions, but it's not okay to hijack the list for other
purposes.

Sandra

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

Sandra Dodd

-=-A theoretical question only, and part of the discussion we were
having.

Only if one assumes that it is OK to share personal information about
others without regard to their feelings about it is there any danger
to this question.-=-

#1, It was NOT in any way "theoretical." Please be careful with your
writing here.
Perhaps you have not met anyone on this list, but I've met over a
hundred of them, and it's really none of your business what I thought
of whether they were the same in person as they had seemed on the list.

If you're going to ask a theoretical question, couch it in qualified
phrases.

#2, Was it a test, then? Did you want stories without names? MANY of
us would recognize even stories without names.

Sandra

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

emiLy Q.

> Those who you have met IRL, did they seems like themselves?

I'm not Jenny, but I'd like to answer this as I have met lots of people IRL
after "getting to know" them online.

Overwhelmingly, the people I have met - mostly through Yahoo groups that
I've been on and then kind of striking up an online off-list friendship,
then eventually meeting up when I'm in their area or they are in mine - seem
just like themselves when we meet IRL. Several of them actually say "I
can't believe how much you seem like YOU!" Or "You're just how I expected
you to be." This is not surprising to me, since I think I write much like I
speak.

My husband and I first met over a text-based chat program at our small
college (less than 800 students). We chatted for several hours a day for 3
days before we met in person. This was in 1995.

For the past several years I've lived in a small town or rural area and have
been increasingly less and less social IRL. I have been thinking about how
my in-person social skills have diminished and while I don't like it, I'm at
least glad to have the opportunity to meet and interact with people online.
As much as I would love to live amongst a thriving group of like-minded
people, I simply don't. If I didn't have online friends and groups with
which to pursue my interests, my life would be much, much less fun. I do
try to "practice" social stuff in person as much as I can/want to, and it
will get easier when my two year old doesn't require so much chasing! :)

-emiLy, mom to Delia (5.5) & Henry (2)
http://www.TheECstore.com

Sandra Dodd

-=-I'm still back on the idea that not being able to see our physical
bodies, clothing, and the kind of house we live in leaves just "bits" of
ourselves. Physical appearance and economic status are important bits?
Seriously?-=-

I think it's the most glorious part of discussions like these, that
someone's ideas have a strength and life separate from their BMW and
nice house, or untainted by their rusty 25 year old Toyota truck and
their apartment shared with college roommates.

Sandra

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

Pam Sorooshian

On 6/30/2009 11:11 AM, Tom Hall wrote:
> I don't think anything I said was trying to shame anyone about anything.
> I didn't say bad things about you or the group. I didn't say anyone
> should feel ashamed. I simply said what I think about this topic. I
> stated it as my belief, not as a moral imperative. I asked what I
> thought were a few interesting questions.
>
You said it makes you cringe. What we do here, on this list, on a daily
basis, makes you cringe?

< If that causes someone to feel shame, that is their own shame, and
doesn't have anything to do with me. >

. I doubt anybody here really cares that it makes you cringe, but if you
were someone they cared about (their parent or other loved one, for
example), then saying, that their behavior makes you cringe would be
shaming and, yes, it would indeed have something to do with you.

So - you don't like it that people talk openly about their families and
you don't feel responsible for the effect of your own words. Interesting
bits.

-pam

emiLy Q.

I have moments I'd like to do over -- moments I lied to my parents mostly
when I was 10-12. A specific one is that I planned a party at my house with
several friends and printed out invitations to it without telling my parents
about it. My mom saw an invitation and the party was canceled! :) I don't
know WHAT I was thinking, or why I did it in the first place - I honestly
can't remember anything about it except the moment my mom came up to me with
the invitation in her hand and the quizzical expression on her face.

That's about all I can come up with.

-emiLy


On 6/30/09 5:21 PM, "Pam Sorooshian" <pamsoroosh@...> wrote:

> What one event or moment from your school years would you "do over" and why?

Pam Sorooshian

Thanks Sandra. That was the pump priming Roxana needed. Here is what she
ended up with - sorry the formatting might be bad, probably, in an email.
She was limited to 250 words, by the way. This is just short of that.

-pam

****************

An English sonnet may be an unconventional (and extraordinarily nerdy)
choice for a scholarship essay, but I've never been a conventional
person (though, I've always been a nerd). As I considered the question
of what moment I would "do over," I kept thinking of Shakespeare's line
about man being the sum total of his experiences. That was what I wanted
to express - I can't change or redo anything in my past, because without
even the worst moments of my life, I would not be who I am today. Well,
I decided, the sonnet form worked pretty well for Shakespeare, so why
not for me? Therefore, without further ado (much of it about nothing),
here is

"Scholarship Sonnet No. 1"

To choose a moment that I'd want to be

Redone; one day that I could try again,

Sounds like the stuff of sci-fi books to me--

And we all know how those plots always end!

My life is not a list of past regrets,

Of things I wish undone or blush to hear.

I'd not unmeet one person that I've met,

Nor throw away a day, a week, a year.

I am the sum of all that's in my past,

Not just the good, I also am the bad,

Despite the times I wished to get through fast,

I don't regret the life that I have had.

No person's perfect, every life is mixed:

No moment would I wish gone, changed, or fixed.



-*********************************************
On 6/30/2009 3:21 PM, Pam Sorooshian wrote:
> What one event or moment from your school years would you "do over" and why?
>
> Roxana is applying for a scholarship - the above is the essay question.
> They are scoring based on: writing ability, creativity, originality, and
> overall excellence. Equal weight on each of those. If there is a tie,
> the winner will be one with the higher score in the "overall excellence"
> category.
>
> So - she's stumped. We thought maybe this would be an interesting thing
> for this list - not directly about unschooling except that MY first
> answer was that the reason she's so completely stumped is because she's
> unschooled and therefore had no "school years." Even if we change the
> question to say "childhood" instead of "school years," she's still
> feeling completely stumped.
>
> So - if you were in the place of an unschooled kid, what kinds of
> moments or events might you come up with for this?
>
> -pam
>
>
>
>
>
>

Sandra Dodd

-=My husband and I first met over a text-based chat program at our small
college (less than 800 students). We chatted for several hours a day
for 3
days before we met in person. This was in 1995.-=-

I have friends who met online in a text-based game one of them had
designed and was running. They played for a month or more before they
met at all. Their "romance" and flirtation happened mostly in real-
time text, in front of other people.

They've been married for twenty years or so and have three children.

Sandra

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

Tom Hall

> I have always asked that people try to keep to things that will help
> unschoolers, on this list. It's fine not to share stories or ask
> useful questions, but it's not okay to hijack the list for other
> purposes.
>

Actually, though I do think all of this is fascinating, I don't think it is all that useful in learning about unschooling, which is why I originally sent it to you as personal correspondence, rather than to the list.

I certainly didn't mean to hijack the list - I'll reply to the other posts offlist when I have time tomorrow.

-Tom

Sandra Dodd

-=-Actually, though I do think all of this is fascinating, I don't
think it is all that useful in learning about unschooling, which is
why I originally sent it to you as personal correspondence, rather
than to the list. -=-

What I brought to the list was not about you. It was about this list
and the different expectations people have and my own feelings about
sharing openly.

-=I certainly didn't mean to hijack the list - I'll reply to the other
posts offlist when I have time tomorrow.-=-

Participating on a philosophical discussion list isn't necessarily a
request for personal side mail, so because of the nature of the list,
I will ask that you *not* reply to other posts offlist.

The purpose of a group discussion is the participation within and on
the list.

Sandra

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