Friends, friends' parents, and their rules and restrictions
Genevieve Raymond
I've been lurking for awhile, and am ready with my first question!
We've been largely unschooling our 6-year old twins, but only recently
really falling (in a really wonderful way) into radical unschooling. In the
past I shared the same restrictions with my parent friends (my kids'
friends' parents) with regard to food and video games (never very strict,
but definitely limited). Now that we've let go of these limits, it's made
for some interesting dynamics when we have friends over. As you can
imagine, some of the kids are pretty into the video games when they come
over, and seem pretty fascinated by the fact that my kids will just offer
them sweets (without asking or having to sneak!)
One concern I have is that some parents who are largely abolitionists when
it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
here, even though everyone has a good time (and the parents are very good
friends of ours.) I don't want my kids to lose time with friends because
their friends' parents are parenting differently.
Another concern is whether I should be the respecting rules, restrictions,
whatever that my friends have set up for their kids. I have to admit that I
experience quite a bit of delight getting to say to these children, "Of
course you can go play a video game!" or "Of course you can have that
cookie!" (and seeing the delight in their eyes). But I guess I have a bit
of a fear that I'm going to mess up some dynamic in their household or even
more, make the parents resentful of me.
One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with a
friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
play with them for their video games. Oi, how to handle that one?
My close friends know about this journey we're on, but as you know, if
you're not fully engaged in radical unschooling, the beautiful logic behind
it just isn't that apparent. I think to some of them, they think that we're
lifting restrictions so that our kids will no longer obsess over
games/sweets because games/sweets are inherently bad. Like it's a tactic to
get them to stop these troublesome behaviors rather than an attempt to
provide a variety of choices to my kids and accept the choices that they
make without judgement.
I'm curious how you all have handled differences in parenting styles with
both your children's friends and their parents.
Thanks,
Genevieve
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We've been largely unschooling our 6-year old twins, but only recently
really falling (in a really wonderful way) into radical unschooling. In the
past I shared the same restrictions with my parent friends (my kids'
friends' parents) with regard to food and video games (never very strict,
but definitely limited). Now that we've let go of these limits, it's made
for some interesting dynamics when we have friends over. As you can
imagine, some of the kids are pretty into the video games when they come
over, and seem pretty fascinated by the fact that my kids will just offer
them sweets (without asking or having to sneak!)
One concern I have is that some parents who are largely abolitionists when
it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
here, even though everyone has a good time (and the parents are very good
friends of ours.) I don't want my kids to lose time with friends because
their friends' parents are parenting differently.
Another concern is whether I should be the respecting rules, restrictions,
whatever that my friends have set up for their kids. I have to admit that I
experience quite a bit of delight getting to say to these children, "Of
course you can go play a video game!" or "Of course you can have that
cookie!" (and seeing the delight in their eyes). But I guess I have a bit
of a fear that I'm going to mess up some dynamic in their household or even
more, make the parents resentful of me.
One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with a
friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
play with them for their video games. Oi, how to handle that one?
My close friends know about this journey we're on, but as you know, if
you're not fully engaged in radical unschooling, the beautiful logic behind
it just isn't that apparent. I think to some of them, they think that we're
lifting restrictions so that our kids will no longer obsess over
games/sweets because games/sweets are inherently bad. Like it's a tactic to
get them to stop these troublesome behaviors rather than an attempt to
provide a variety of choices to my kids and accept the choices that they
make without judgement.
I'm curious how you all have handled differences in parenting styles with
both your children's friends and their parents.
Thanks,
Genevieve
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tina Tarbutton
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Genevieve Raymond <
genevieve.raymond@...> wrote:
I've always provided in abundance without really asking what the rules were
at home, however I do ask the kids and/or parents (depending on ages) about
allergies so we don't run into a medical issue.
With games, when my son was younger I asked the parents and or kid about
ratings on movies and video games and what was allowed in their home, only
because I didn't want them seeing or hearing something on a game/movie at my
house, repeating it at home and me ending up with an angry parent breathing
down my neck. As my son and his friends got older I stopped asking.
Occasionally someone will say they're not allowed to watch XYZ or play XYZ
because of the rating and we'll find other options but normally it's a
non-issue.
Tina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
genevieve.raymond@...> wrote:
> **I've handled food and video games separately and in different ways. Food
>
>
> I'm curious how you all have handled differences in parenting styles with
> both your children's friends and their parents.
>
>
I've always provided in abundance without really asking what the rules were
at home, however I do ask the kids and/or parents (depending on ages) about
allergies so we don't run into a medical issue.
With games, when my son was younger I asked the parents and or kid about
ratings on movies and video games and what was allowed in their home, only
because I didn't want them seeing or hearing something on a game/movie at my
house, repeating it at home and me ending up with an angry parent breathing
down my neck. As my son and his friends got older I stopped asking.
Occasionally someone will say they're not allowed to watch XYZ or play XYZ
because of the rating and we'll find other options but normally it's a
non-issue.
Tina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-One concern I have is that some parents who are largely abolitionists when
it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
here, even though everyone has a good time (and the parents are very good
friends of ours.) I don't want my kids to lose time with friends because
their friends' parents are parenting differently.-=-
My kids were good at those things early on. We would always discuss, before other kids came over, what strategy my kids would like to take as to what activities and foods were offered. The factors were what their parents allowed at home, how those kids were with different things, generosity on our part, avoidance on our part (as seemed tactful and beneficial for the group as a whole). So we didn't discuss it with those terms, but one kid loved ice cream at our house. One wanted to do art stuff. One wanted to ride bikes or roller blade. One liked to dress up and do plays, so we would get the costume box out and he would always want to be the princess. (Seriously; we accommodated a cross-dressing six/seven year old whose mother would have freaked out.) One family of four kids couldn't get through the living room if the TV was on, so we'd have it off when they got there, and they were scatter to the yard, the kids' room, the kitchen easily. Maybe later one of my kids would turn a video on, depending on how things went and how long they were going to be there.
Engage your kids in the issues and possible options.
-=-One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with a
friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
play with them for their video games. Oi, how to handle that one?-=-
Instead of envisioning an idealistic play date, maybe they could be reminded that the one kid really will want to play video games, and do they want to have a gaming partner for a while. IF the games are fun, or more fun, with that kid, then it's a good deal! If the games are not as fun with that kid, then eh.
There were times we had another kid over and just let him play games by himself. It was like a charity situation, where a kid without games at home used ours sometimes. I spun it so my kids felt really generous.
-=-I think to some of them, they think that we're
lifting restrictions so that our kids will no longer obsess over
games/sweets because games/sweets are inherently bad. Like it's a tactic to
get them to stop these troublesome behaviors rather than an attempt to
provide a variety of choices to my kids and accept the choices that they
make without judgement.-=-
Let them think that. Cravings ARE cut down by bingeing. It's bad enough to challenge their actions and rules without going a further step and challenging their beliefs just because their kids are visiting. :-)
Sandra
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
here, even though everyone has a good time (and the parents are very good
friends of ours.) I don't want my kids to lose time with friends because
their friends' parents are parenting differently.-=-
My kids were good at those things early on. We would always discuss, before other kids came over, what strategy my kids would like to take as to what activities and foods were offered. The factors were what their parents allowed at home, how those kids were with different things, generosity on our part, avoidance on our part (as seemed tactful and beneficial for the group as a whole). So we didn't discuss it with those terms, but one kid loved ice cream at our house. One wanted to do art stuff. One wanted to ride bikes or roller blade. One liked to dress up and do plays, so we would get the costume box out and he would always want to be the princess. (Seriously; we accommodated a cross-dressing six/seven year old whose mother would have freaked out.) One family of four kids couldn't get through the living room if the TV was on, so we'd have it off when they got there, and they were scatter to the yard, the kids' room, the kitchen easily. Maybe later one of my kids would turn a video on, depending on how things went and how long they were going to be there.
Engage your kids in the issues and possible options.
-=-One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with a
friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
play with them for their video games. Oi, how to handle that one?-=-
Instead of envisioning an idealistic play date, maybe they could be reminded that the one kid really will want to play video games, and do they want to have a gaming partner for a while. IF the games are fun, or more fun, with that kid, then it's a good deal! If the games are not as fun with that kid, then eh.
There were times we had another kid over and just let him play games by himself. It was like a charity situation, where a kid without games at home used ours sometimes. I spun it so my kids felt really generous.
-=-I think to some of them, they think that we're
lifting restrictions so that our kids will no longer obsess over
games/sweets because games/sweets are inherently bad. Like it's a tactic to
get them to stop these troublesome behaviors rather than an attempt to
provide a variety of choices to my kids and accept the choices that they
make without judgement.-=-
Let them think that. Cravings ARE cut down by bingeing. It's bad enough to challenge their actions and rules without going a further step and challenging their beliefs just because their kids are visiting. :-)
Sandra
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
plaidpanties666
Genevieve Raymond <genevieve.raymond@...> wrote:
You can also have specific video-game gatherings or movie marathons. That lets parents make up their mind each time. Even parents who are strict about movies or games will sometimes agree to a specific event or party.
And you can also ask if the parents would rather play dates be at their house - ask up front rather than setting all the kids up for disappointment over "maybe they can come play".
---Meredith
> One concern I have is that some parents who are largely abolitionists whenYou could plan other things to do - set up other kinds of games, party-type fun things like Twister or face painting or outside fun like Nerf wars. Offer those other things right away so that the kids aren't defaulting to video games. That way your friends aren't set up to be uncomfortable and the kids still have fun.
> it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
> here
You can also have specific video-game gatherings or movie marathons. That lets parents make up their mind each time. Even parents who are strict about movies or games will sometimes agree to a specific event or party.
And you can also ask if the parents would rather play dates be at their house - ask up front rather than setting all the kids up for disappointment over "maybe they can come play".
> One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with aYeah, that can be frustrating! Again, have other things planned and offer those first. Depending on the situation, it may be easier to put all the controllers away when certain kids visit. That's something we did with one of Mo's friends for awhile, because he'd go right to the playstation and put in a game and then be very unpleasant if Mo wanted to do something else or play a different game - and he didn't always choose 2-player games. So I suggested to Mo that we try putting the controllers up and we did that a few times... maybe three times before she wanted to try leaving them out and redirecting him in other ways. Now she gets him out on the trampoline first thing and when they're done with that George invites him into the kitchen to make cookies - he looooooves to get his hands all gooey, and loves George's cookies so that works well (and Mo doesn't like goo on her hands so its kind of a thrill for George to get to play in the kitchen with this little guy). Once our little friend has blown off some steam and had a snack, he's much more easy-going about playing a video game.
> friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
> play with them for their video games.
---Meredith
sheeboo2
We've dealt with these issues as well, especially with a close friend for whom TV/computers and food are controlled. He sees our home as a sanctuary of free choice, but it greatly effects his desire to play and our enjoyment of having him visit. When here, he wants to raid the pantry and watch TV or play video games, and not much of anything else. Since our daughter gets to do these things whenever she wants to, she wants their visits to be focused on playing together.
What we've done is put all contraband foods away when he's here, and make a "rule" that TV or computer games are for the last hour of the visit. Noor asked for this rule, and it is much kinder for her to have us be the bad guys, so she isn't constantly in the position of having to say she doesn't want to do that (TV/computer) now.
I asked many of the same questions you did some time back. Here's the thread:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/message/59428
Brie
What we've done is put all contraband foods away when he's here, and make a "rule" that TV or computer games are for the last hour of the visit. Noor asked for this rule, and it is much kinder for her to have us be the bad guys, so she isn't constantly in the position of having to say she doesn't want to do that (TV/computer) now.
I asked many of the same questions you did some time back. Here's the thread:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/message/59428
Brie
[email protected]
I have welcomed countless numbers of unfree children into our home through playdates, birthday parties, and general neighborhood-running-through-the-house-mayhem over the past few years. I have watched the faces of these unfree children light up when they encounter freedoms that they have been unaccustomed to. If it helps, the responses of the parents of these kids have largely fallen into one of two categories: 1) many are so NOT tuned into their kids, so NOT conscious that they have no idea what their kids are up to...so the bliss of their kids in my home is a secret pleasure that their children benefit from...and 2) those that DO notice the "unusual" freedoms their kids are experiencing have, for the most part, accepted the difference as an occasional abberation from their childrens' typical life experience...in which case, I get to sigh with happiness that their kids get to feel, just for a moment, what it feels to be free:)
Kirsten
-- In [email protected], Genevieve Raymond <genevieve.raymond@...> wrote:
Kirsten
-- In [email protected], Genevieve Raymond <genevieve.raymond@...> wrote:
>
> I've been lurking for awhile, and am ready with my first question!
>
> We've been largely unschooling our 6-year old twins, but only recently
> really falling (in a really wonderful way) into radical unschooling. In the
> past I shared the same restrictions with my parent friends (my kids'
> friends' parents) with regard to food and video games (never very strict,
> but definitely limited). Now that we've let go of these limits, it's made
> for some interesting dynamics when we have friends over. As you can
> imagine, some of the kids are pretty into the video games when they come
> over, and seem pretty fascinated by the fact that my kids will just offer
> them sweets (without asking or having to sneak!)
>
> One concern I have is that some parents who are largely abolitionists when
> it comes to digital media will be uncomfortable with their kids playing over
> here, even though everyone has a good time (and the parents are very good
> friends of ours.) I don't want my kids to lose time with friends because
> their friends' parents are parenting differently.
>
> Another concern is whether I should be the respecting rules, restrictions,
> whatever that my friends have set up for their kids. I have to admit that I
> experience quite a bit of delight getting to say to these children, "Of
> course you can go play a video game!" or "Of course you can have that
> cookie!" (and seeing the delight in their eyes). But I guess I have a bit
> of a fear that I'm going to mess up some dynamic in their household or even
> more, make the parents resentful of me.
>
> One last concern--yesterday, for the first time after a play date with a
> friend, my kids expressed the worry that a certain friend only wanted to
> play with them for their video games. Oi, how to handle that one?
>
> My close friends know about this journey we're on, but as you know, if
> you're not fully engaged in radical unschooling, the beautiful logic behind
> it just isn't that apparent. I think to some of them, they think that we're
> lifting restrictions so that our kids will no longer obsess over
> games/sweets because games/sweets are inherently bad. Like it's a tactic to
> get them to stop these troublesome behaviors rather than an attempt to
> provide a variety of choices to my kids and accept the choices that they
> make without judgement.
>
> I'm curious how you all have handled differences in parenting styles with
> both your children's friends and their parents.
>
> Thanks,
> Genevieve
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-I have welcomed countless numbers of unfree children into our home ...-=-
I don't think "unfree children" is a good designation to use.
-=-... their kids get to feel, just for a moment, what it feels to be free:) -=-
We can give our kids a lot of choices, but we can't "make them free" beyond the bonds of our responsibilities for and to them.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I don't think "unfree children" is a good designation to use.
-=-... their kids get to feel, just for a moment, what it feels to be free:) -=-
We can give our kids a lot of choices, but we can't "make them free" beyond the bonds of our responsibilities for and to them.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
I didn't say that I "make them free". I said that they get to experience what free feels like. Also...Could you elaborate on what you mean by not feeling that "unfree" is a good designation? It would be appreciated!
Thanks!
Kirsten
Thanks!
Kirsten
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-I have welcomed countless numbers of unfree children into our home ...-=-
>
> I don't think "unfree children" is a good designation to use.
>
> -=-... their kids get to feel, just for a moment, what it feels to be free:) -=-
>
> We can give our kids a lot of choices, but we can't "make them free" beyond the bonds of our responsibilities for and to them.
>
> Sandra
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-I didn't say that I "make them free". I said that they get to experience what free feels like. -=-
The implication seemed to be that the other family/families made them "unfree."
Unschooling should be about learning first. It exists because of laws about compulsory attendance or compulsory education. It exists because of school reform research into the open classroom. Countries that created school laws did so because they were free to do so. A country (or state or province) acts as a democratic person (or some kind of person) and makes decisions about how to spend its money and what to require of people. Within the regulations of where a person lives, there are limitations.
No one lives with pure freedom to do whatever they want to. There's no place for that to exist.
There are also expectations and requirements. There are things parents are expected by law to do for their children or they risk losing custody. Parents choose various ways to interpret and manage those requirements, but no parent is free to disregard them altogether.
A family can share decisionmaking with their kids, and give them lots of options, and that can be very healing, soothing, and great for emotional and mental growth when it's done well and the kids also feel safe and well attended.
"Unfree" sounds link a whoop-it-up insult. It sounds like a celebratory comparison of an extreme difference. That doesn't add to careful thought or compassion for your children (partly because it didn't come from careful thought or compassion on the part of the parent). If a child is sad or limited or not used to options for ANY reason (poverty, social circumstances) it doesn't help to define that as "unfree."
If kids visit and you let them have some candy or watch a movie, see it as candy or a movie, rather than as a change in their natural state of being.
That's what I was thinking. It's off topic. It twists the world in a non-helpful way. It's not about unschooling.
Maybe others here will be able to help clarify, too.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The implication seemed to be that the other family/families made them "unfree."
Unschooling should be about learning first. It exists because of laws about compulsory attendance or compulsory education. It exists because of school reform research into the open classroom. Countries that created school laws did so because they were free to do so. A country (or state or province) acts as a democratic person (or some kind of person) and makes decisions about how to spend its money and what to require of people. Within the regulations of where a person lives, there are limitations.
No one lives with pure freedom to do whatever they want to. There's no place for that to exist.
There are also expectations and requirements. There are things parents are expected by law to do for their children or they risk losing custody. Parents choose various ways to interpret and manage those requirements, but no parent is free to disregard them altogether.
A family can share decisionmaking with their kids, and give them lots of options, and that can be very healing, soothing, and great for emotional and mental growth when it's done well and the kids also feel safe and well attended.
"Unfree" sounds link a whoop-it-up insult. It sounds like a celebratory comparison of an extreme difference. That doesn't add to careful thought or compassion for your children (partly because it didn't come from careful thought or compassion on the part of the parent). If a child is sad or limited or not used to options for ANY reason (poverty, social circumstances) it doesn't help to define that as "unfree."
If kids visit and you let them have some candy or watch a movie, see it as candy or a movie, rather than as a change in their natural state of being.
That's what I was thinking. It's off topic. It twists the world in a non-helpful way. It's not about unschooling.
Maybe others here will be able to help clarify, too.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
plaidpanties666
Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
I've been thinking about this - it struck me as insulting, too, but it got me thinking specifically about different kinds of prejudice and the difference between phrases like "disabled people" and "people with disabilites". A little bitty difference in the way you use words can shift the way you think about other people.
Kids who are in school or homeschooling are still kids, still people with thoughts and feelings. They aren't broken someday-people who you get to fix so they can be better someday-people. They're guests in your home. If being in your home brings them joy, you've been a lovely hostess. That's enough.
---Meredith
>********************
>> "Unfree" sounds link a whoop-it-up insult. It sounds like a celebratory comparison of an extreme difference
I've been thinking about this - it struck me as insulting, too, but it got me thinking specifically about different kinds of prejudice and the difference between phrases like "disabled people" and "people with disabilites". A little bitty difference in the way you use words can shift the way you think about other people.
Kids who are in school or homeschooling are still kids, still people with thoughts and feelings. They aren't broken someday-people who you get to fix so they can be better someday-people. They're guests in your home. If being in your home brings them joy, you've been a lovely hostess. That's enough.
---Meredith
Joanna
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
They will feel guilty at the same time that they may lunge for the candy bar. An increase in resentment toward their parent won't help them feel more free--it might even make them feel more trapped. Only their legal guardian is in a position to grant more freedoms.
Joanna
>If what you mean by free is that they can make their own choices, then I'd still argue that it isn't true that they can experience what free feels like. Radical unschooling (or freedom in your analogy) works because there is a partnership between parent and child. If you, as the hostess, provide a visiting child with choices that they know their parents won't approve of, then there is more disharmony between that child with their parent.
> -=-I didn't say that I "make them free". I said that they get to experience what free feels like. -=-
>
They will feel guilty at the same time that they may lunge for the candy bar. An increase in resentment toward their parent won't help them feel more free--it might even make them feel more trapped. Only their legal guardian is in a position to grant more freedoms.
Joanna
> The implication seemed to be that the other family/families made them "unfree."
>
> Unschooling should be about learning first. It exists because of laws about compulsory attendance or compulsory education. It exists because of school reform research into the open classroom. Countries that created school laws did so because they were free to do so. A country (or state or province) acts as a democratic person (or some kind of person) and makes decisions about how to spend its money and what to require of people. Within the regulations of where a person lives, there are limitations.
>
> No one lives with pure freedom to do whatever they want to. There's no place for that to exist.
>
> There are also expectations and requirements. There are things parents are expected by law to do for their children or they risk losing custody. Parents choose various ways to interpret and manage those requirements, but no parent is free to disregard them altogether.
>
> A family can share decisionmaking with their kids, and give them lots of options, and that can be very healing, soothing, and great for emotional and mental growth when it's done well and the kids also feel safe and well attended.
>
> "Unfree" sounds link a whoop-it-up insult. It sounds like a celebratory comparison of an extreme difference. That doesn't add to careful thought or compassion for your children (partly because it didn't come from careful thought or compassion on the part of the parent). If a child is sad or limited or not used to options for ANY reason (poverty, social circumstances) it doesn't help to define that as "unfree."
>
> If kids visit and you let them have some candy or watch a movie, see it as candy or a movie, rather than as a change in their natural state of being.
>
> That's what I was thinking. It's off topic. It twists the world in a non-helpful way. It's not about unschooling.
>
> Maybe others here will be able to help clarify, too.
>
> Sandra
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
plaidpanties666
"Joanna" <ridingmom@...> wrote:
In a sense, it's also making use of the ways in which those kids have been limited - offering things that their parents have already made valuable by limiting them. That's arguably less about offering freedom and more a matter of manipulating them with their baggage - buying their affections. And as Joanna's suggesting, that could undermine their relationship with their parents all the more. Maybe. Could.
Which isn't to say you shouldn't be welcoming and kind! Just to be thoughtful about the ways in which you're extending kindness - it's not kind if it's subtly dismissive and hurtful, even if you have the best of intentions.
---Meredith
> If you, as the hostess, provide a visiting child with choices that they know their parents won't approve of, then there is more disharmony between that child with their parent.********************
In a sense, it's also making use of the ways in which those kids have been limited - offering things that their parents have already made valuable by limiting them. That's arguably less about offering freedom and more a matter of manipulating them with their baggage - buying their affections. And as Joanna's suggesting, that could undermine their relationship with their parents all the more. Maybe. Could.
Which isn't to say you shouldn't be welcoming and kind! Just to be thoughtful about the ways in which you're extending kindness - it's not kind if it's subtly dismissive and hurtful, even if you have the best of intentions.
---Meredith
[email protected]
A quick and genuine thank-you to Sandra and Meredith for your responses. Your words have helped me to realize that as a family who made the decision to leave the school system a few years back, I have swung too far to another extreme in some of my ways of thinking...about "schooled kids", about parents that have too many rules...and it is showing in the language I am using about certain situations. This has given me much to contemplate and absorb.
Kirsten
Kirsten
--- In [email protected], "plaidpanties666" <plaidpanties666@...> wrote:
>
> Sandra Dodd <Sandra@> wrote:
> >
> >> "Unfree" sounds link a whoop-it-up insult. It sounds like a celebratory comparison of an extreme difference
> ********************
>
> I've been thinking about this - it struck me as insulting, too, but it got me thinking specifically about different kinds of prejudice and the difference between phrases like "disabled people" and "people with disabilites". A little bitty difference in the way you use words can shift the way you think about other people.
>
> Kids who are in school or homeschooling are still kids, still people with thoughts and feelings. They aren't broken someday-people who you get to fix so they can be better someday-people. They're guests in your home. If being in your home brings them joy, you've been a lovely hostess. That's enough.
>
> ---Meredith
>