Re: [unschoolingbasics] CL
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/20/2006 12:56:51 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
But what if you had wanted to live in the country specifically outside the
city because you hated the air quality and traffic noise; he wanted to live in
the city to have a shorter commute? <<<<<<<<
You can find solutions to air quality and traffic noise that would also not
increase a person's commute. Might have to look outside the box for it.
Moving to the country isn't the only choice in this scenario. Seeing it as the
only choice only makes it harder to find a solution. We have found it easier
to look at the needs (air quality, land, less traffic noise, with no longer
commute to work).
If this gets too off topic....from the basics of unschooling...Ren please
just tell us and we will gladly take it to the CL list. LOL. We talk about
this stuff all the time there so not in any way off topic.
I think for many people Radical Unschooling and Consensual Living are pretty
close. But I know Radical Unschoolers that do not live consensually.
Thanks,
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected] writes:
But what if you had wanted to live in the country specifically outside the
city because you hated the air quality and traffic noise; he wanted to live in
the city to have a shorter commute? <<<<<<<<
You can find solutions to air quality and traffic noise that would also not
increase a person's commute. Might have to look outside the box for it.
Moving to the country isn't the only choice in this scenario. Seeing it as the
only choice only makes it harder to find a solution. We have found it easier
to look at the needs (air quality, land, less traffic noise, with no longer
commute to work).
If this gets too off topic....from the basics of unschooling...Ren please
just tell us and we will gladly take it to the CL list. LOL. We talk about
this stuff all the time there so not in any way off topic.
I think for many people Radical Unschooling and Consensual Living are pretty
close. But I know Radical Unschoolers that do not live consensually.
Thanks,
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ren Allen
"If this gets too off topic....from the basics of unschooling...Ren
please just tell us and we will gladly take it to the CL list. LOL. We
talk about this stuff all the time there so not in any way off topic."
I think it's a great topic for discussion actually. Because althout I
think if a CL family watched us interacting, they'd think we were CL
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't compromise in some way at least some of the time.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
please just tell us and we will gladly take it to the CL list. LOL. We
talk about this stuff all the time there so not in any way off topic."
I think it's a great topic for discussion actually. Because althout I
think if a CL family watched us interacting, they'd think we were CL
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't compromise in some way at least some of the time.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: starsuncloud@...
I think it's a great topic for discussion actually. Because althout I
think if a CL family watched us interacting, they'd think we were CL
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't compromise in some way at least some of the time.
-=-=-=-=
But Ren, that's the same attitude people take with *us* when they come
here to discuss unschooling.
For example, many people have written nearly the same thing about
unschooling:
"Although I think if another family watched us interacting, they'd
think we were unschooling
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't teach in some way at least some of the time."
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?
When "it's just semantics" enters the arena, it's time to start
*thinking*---not debating.
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
From: starsuncloud@...
I think it's a great topic for discussion actually. Because althout I
think if a CL family watched us interacting, they'd think we were CL
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't compromise in some way at least some of the time.
-=-=-=-=
But Ren, that's the same attitude people take with *us* when they come
here to discuss unschooling.
For example, many people have written nearly the same thing about
unschooling:
"Although I think if another family watched us interacting, they'd
think we were unschooling
for the most part. I find some of the ideas more about an "ideal"
rather than what is reality. Because I've never met a family that
doesn't teach in some way at least some of the time."
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?
When "it's just semantics" enters the arena, it's time to start
*thinking*---not debating.
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
wuweimama
--- In [email protected], kbcdlovejo@... wrote:
process is very different. When there is a decision maker creating a
compromise, it is different than if everyone has equal authority, for
instance. The other is the focus on how the solution is created:
finding a 'lowest common denominator' or 'meeting everyone's needs'.
The first doesn't neecessarily meet everyone's needs, but may not be
"opposed" by anyone. The second addresses needs and is *welcome* by
everyone.
We focus on win/win solutions by identifying needs and then creating a
solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with. It
feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are going
to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a mutual
solution, not defending their solution or needs.
Pat
> Can > you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?***I do agree with Ren that the solution may appear the same; but the
>
process is very different. When there is a decision maker creating a
compromise, it is different than if everyone has equal authority, for
instance. The other is the focus on how the solution is created:
finding a 'lowest common denominator' or 'meeting everyone's needs'.
The first doesn't neecessarily meet everyone's needs, but may not be
"opposed" by anyone. The second addresses needs and is *welcome* by
everyone.
We focus on win/win solutions by identifying needs and then creating a
solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with. It
feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are going
to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a mutual
solution, not defending their solution or needs.
Pat
Ren Allen
~~
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
If someone is manipulating a person into compromise, that's not what
I'm talking about at all. That's not a true compromise anyway....we're
now onto bribery, manipulation NOT problem solving, negotiation and
compromise.
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
If someone is manipulating a person into compromise, that's not what
I'm talking about at all. That's not a true compromise anyway....we're
now onto bribery, manipulation NOT problem solving, negotiation and
compromise.
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
Ren Allen
~~When there is a decision maker creating a
compromise, it is different than if everyone has equal authority, for
instance. ~~
Aha, maybe this is where I'm having a communication breakdown.
Compromise is not decided by me or dh (the only time I really step in
to stop something is over safety, and then we discuss how to approach
the situation together to solve whatever issue is there). Compromise
here is reached by discussion of all parties involved.
Good example; We all drove a friend home this evening. Jalen was
sitting in back with friend and a brother until we dropped the friend
off. The boys were frustrated with his intensity and very loud voice
and wanted to move up front (our van has 8 seats, 3 in the far back)
to get away from him.
Jalen was pissed off that they moved up because he probably felt a bit
rejected and he wanted to sit by Trevor. Trevor wanted to be as far
away from him as possible. We sat in the driveway for a good 5 minutes
discussing options;
Trading seats with Sierra, sitting up front and having Daddy move to
the back, sitting in the middle between Jared and Trevor etc.....
He was initially screaming so much that every option just pissed him
off. So we sat. We waited. We offered options for everyone. Other kids
came up with their own options. He finally calms down enough to really
hear. Markus moves to the back and Jalen gets the front seat which
made for a calm and quiet ride home.
Every person discussed options. The people willing to move in order to
make it work, offered up their seats (Sierra, Markus and Jared). The
ones that were pissed off and unwilling to negotiate sat and waited
(Trevor). It all worked out, but it wasn't some parental compromise
decided FOR anyone. We're all part of the process......I still see
compromise being part of the method of coming to mutually agreeable
soluations. Maybe it's a word choice...I don't know. I know I've
"given up" certain things over the years by choice. If it really
bothered me I'd find another soluation. I don't think giving up some
sleep for my baby is a bad thing...in fact, I really LOVED that
snuggly nursing time at night, though my body desperately needed sleep
at times.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
compromise, it is different than if everyone has equal authority, for
instance. ~~
Aha, maybe this is where I'm having a communication breakdown.
Compromise is not decided by me or dh (the only time I really step in
to stop something is over safety, and then we discuss how to approach
the situation together to solve whatever issue is there). Compromise
here is reached by discussion of all parties involved.
Good example; We all drove a friend home this evening. Jalen was
sitting in back with friend and a brother until we dropped the friend
off. The boys were frustrated with his intensity and very loud voice
and wanted to move up front (our van has 8 seats, 3 in the far back)
to get away from him.
Jalen was pissed off that they moved up because he probably felt a bit
rejected and he wanted to sit by Trevor. Trevor wanted to be as far
away from him as possible. We sat in the driveway for a good 5 minutes
discussing options;
Trading seats with Sierra, sitting up front and having Daddy move to
the back, sitting in the middle between Jared and Trevor etc.....
He was initially screaming so much that every option just pissed him
off. So we sat. We waited. We offered options for everyone. Other kids
came up with their own options. He finally calms down enough to really
hear. Markus moves to the back and Jalen gets the front seat which
made for a calm and quiet ride home.
Every person discussed options. The people willing to move in order to
make it work, offered up their seats (Sierra, Markus and Jared). The
ones that were pissed off and unwilling to negotiate sat and waited
(Trevor). It all worked out, but it wasn't some parental compromise
decided FOR anyone. We're all part of the process......I still see
compromise being part of the method of coming to mutually agreeable
soluations. Maybe it's a word choice...I don't know. I know I've
"given up" certain things over the years by choice. If it really
bothered me I'd find another soluation. I don't think giving up some
sleep for my baby is a bad thing...in fact, I really LOVED that
snuggly nursing time at night, though my body desperately needed sleep
at times.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/20/2006 12:14:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
<<<<But see, that sounds like rhetoric to me. Meeting underlying needs is
great, but you still aren't getting exactly what you want initially. I
still want a dog, but I don't have one.
My love for Markus is greater than my need for a greyhound. So
everything in my life is exactly what I choose. But that involves
compromise of some things we'd like. Dh would like our house to be
spotless....spotless....<WBR>he realizes that the other family membe
ideas so he meets that need in some creative ways, none of which
involve having our home be ultra-tidy or nattering at the other people
living here.
I can think of SO many day to day solutions we've come up with that
work great, but involve a bit of "giving up"......again, not a
negative thing to us. I see giving to and for others something that is
healthy when done for the right reasons.
I also think parents SHOULD give up some of their own needs in order
to meet the needs of their child. That's part of being a parent. My
very real NEED for sleep is not as important as a babies need to
nurse. I see it as giving my child what they need, my CHOICE and yet I
ignore my biological need for sleep to do that. <<<<<
You know, I really think it is great that you have worked out solutions that
you and your family are happy with. I just know that there are other
solutions, as well, that do not involve "giving up" what you want. We have
discussed, a couple of times, the sleep issue as well as the pet issue. It is
amazing, when you start throwing out different solutions and don't think someone
has to "give up" what they want, how creative people can be. It just makes
me smile each and every time to see how people can think so far outside the
box.
For some people "giving up" what they want leaves them feeling empty or
taken advantage of, and they then feel guilty.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected] writes:
<<<<But see, that sounds like rhetoric to me. Meeting underlying needs is
great, but you still aren't getting exactly what you want initially. I
still want a dog, but I don't have one.
My love for Markus is greater than my need for a greyhound. So
everything in my life is exactly what I choose. But that involves
compromise of some things we'd like. Dh would like our house to be
spotless....spotless....<WBR>he realizes that the other family membe
ideas so he meets that need in some creative ways, none of which
involve having our home be ultra-tidy or nattering at the other people
living here.
I can think of SO many day to day solutions we've come up with that
work great, but involve a bit of "giving up"......again, not a
negative thing to us. I see giving to and for others something that is
healthy when done for the right reasons.
I also think parents SHOULD give up some of their own needs in order
to meet the needs of their child. That's part of being a parent. My
very real NEED for sleep is not as important as a babies need to
nurse. I see it as giving my child what they need, my CHOICE and yet I
ignore my biological need for sleep to do that. <<<<<
You know, I really think it is great that you have worked out solutions that
you and your family are happy with. I just know that there are other
solutions, as well, that do not involve "giving up" what you want. We have
discussed, a couple of times, the sleep issue as well as the pet issue. It is
amazing, when you start throwing out different solutions and don't think someone
has to "give up" what they want, how creative people can be. It just makes
me smile each and every time to see how people can think so far outside the
box.
For some people "giving up" what they want leaves them feeling empty or
taken advantage of, and they then feel guilty.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Michelle Leifur Reid
On 11/20/06, wuweimama <wuweimama@...> wrote:
I only have 3 children and we go through this often. Each person has
a reason why they prefer the front seat. You even listed some of
those reasons: ability to see better, control of the music or air,
the need to be not touching someone else, too much or too little
light. Like Ren if I were to have to work through to a consensual
agreement everytime we left the house we would never get out of the
driveway. So we have compromised by agreeing that everyone gets a
turn throughout the trip. We rotate at different stops. It does mean
that someone has to give up those things that are important for them
every third stop (and you wouldn't believe some of the stops I have
created to make sure everyone got a chance up front.) It's working
for us and everyone feels valued at having their needs met at least a
third of the time while we are out and about. Everyone feels that
their need is as important as the next person's, but I don't have a
double wide car to accomodate everyone's need to be up front all the
time.
I also think of our "cat box compromise." No one likes doing the cat
box. Everyone loves the cats. We've agreed that we will each take a
turn rotating whose day it is (we do it by age, just so we remember
whose day it is) It makes for three happy cats and five people who
know that they only have to do the cat box every fifth day. We
aren't hard core about it and will cover for someone who has the flu
or went to bed early or just got busy and forgot (or that person will
offer to do it early the next day so the box doesn't get too bad).
The alternative would be that we would either have a very smelly house
with one person upset that they were always having to do the gross job
even though 2 other people technically owned 2/3 of the cats or we
don't have cats. Since we have agreed that cats are important to us
we worked towards a solution so that no one person had all the
responsibility. It also assures that at least twice a week an adult
is doing a thorough job. :)
Michelle - the one who used to be the one grumbling about having to
always do the cat box even though none of the cats are technically
hers :-)
> We focus on win/win solutions by identifying needs and then creating aI keep thinking of Ren's example of everyone wanting the front seat.
> solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with. It
> feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are going
> to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a mutual
> solution, not defending their solution or needs.
>
I only have 3 children and we go through this often. Each person has
a reason why they prefer the front seat. You even listed some of
those reasons: ability to see better, control of the music or air,
the need to be not touching someone else, too much or too little
light. Like Ren if I were to have to work through to a consensual
agreement everytime we left the house we would never get out of the
driveway. So we have compromised by agreeing that everyone gets a
turn throughout the trip. We rotate at different stops. It does mean
that someone has to give up those things that are important for them
every third stop (and you wouldn't believe some of the stops I have
created to make sure everyone got a chance up front.) It's working
for us and everyone feels valued at having their needs met at least a
third of the time while we are out and about. Everyone feels that
their need is as important as the next person's, but I don't have a
double wide car to accomodate everyone's need to be up front all the
time.
I also think of our "cat box compromise." No one likes doing the cat
box. Everyone loves the cats. We've agreed that we will each take a
turn rotating whose day it is (we do it by age, just so we remember
whose day it is) It makes for three happy cats and five people who
know that they only have to do the cat box every fifth day. We
aren't hard core about it and will cover for someone who has the flu
or went to bed early or just got busy and forgot (or that person will
offer to do it early the next day so the box doesn't get too bad).
The alternative would be that we would either have a very smelly house
with one person upset that they were always having to do the gross job
even though 2 other people technically owned 2/3 of the cats or we
don't have cats. Since we have agreed that cats are important to us
we worked towards a solution so that no one person had all the
responsibility. It also assures that at least twice a week an adult
is doing a thorough job. :)
Michelle - the one who used to be the one grumbling about having to
always do the cat box even though none of the cats are technically
hers :-)
Danielle Conger
Ren Allen wrote:
up and really choosing an even better option?
I don't think compromise needs to enter into the equation, especially
when people trust in the process of finding a win/ win solution and are
developmentally able to negotiate, wait and brainstorm.
Those are the things that I see most frequently act as roadblocks to our
win/ win problem solving. (And, I should point out that
"developmentally" isn't limited by age.)
you're able to engage and trust in the problem solving process--and,
imo, that's the hardest part--then compromise doesn't come into play at all.
I don't see it as an issue of semantics at all, though I will agree with
Ren that there are moments in my life when the process itself breaks
down, and I step in with stopgap measures. Though even then, I try
really hard not to lose sight of the process itself--it's more like
buying time or creating space for the process to resume.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
>Oooh, really? There's no difference between choosing to give something
> ~~
> You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
> you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
>
> No, I really don't!!
> If someone is manipulating a person into compromise, that's not what
> I'm talking about at all. That's not a true compromise anyway....we're
> now onto bribery, manipulation NOT problem solving, negotiation and
> compromise.
>
up and really choosing an even better option?
I don't think compromise needs to enter into the equation, especially
when people trust in the process of finding a win/ win solution and are
developmentally able to negotiate, wait and brainstorm.
Those are the things that I see most frequently act as roadblocks to our
win/ win problem solving. (And, I should point out that
"developmentally" isn't limited by age.)
>Well, I don't believe that a true win/ win is a compromise at all. *If*
>
> I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
> that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
> rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
> comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
> I really don't see it as a big deal.
>
you're able to engage and trust in the problem solving process--and,
imo, that's the hardest part--then compromise doesn't come into play at all.
I don't see it as an issue of semantics at all, though I will agree with
Ren that there are moments in my life when the process itself breaks
down, and I step in with stopgap measures. Though even then, I try
really hard not to lose sight of the process itself--it's more like
buying time or creating space for the process to resume.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
Lesa
I want to thank everyone for this discussion. It's been interesting to see
everyone's though process.
Lesa M.
My Blog: http://lifeacademy.homeschooljournal.net
My eBay Store: http://store.auctiva.com/lesajm
-------Original Message-------
From: Ren Allen
Date: 11/20/06 18:28:42
To: [email protected]
Subject: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
~~
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
If someone is manipulating a person into compromise, that's not what
I'm talking about at all. That's not a true compromise anyway....we're
now onto bribery, manipulation NOT problem solving, negotiation and
compromise.
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
everyone's though process.
Lesa M.
My Blog: http://lifeacademy.homeschooljournal.net
My eBay Store: http://store.auctiva.com/lesajm
-------Original Message-------
From: Ren Allen
Date: 11/20/06 18:28:42
To: [email protected]
Subject: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
~~
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
If someone is manipulating a person into compromise, that's not what
I'm talking about at all. That's not a true compromise anyway....we're
now onto bribery, manipulation NOT problem solving, negotiation and
compromise.
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ren Allen
~~For some people "giving up" what they want leaves them feeling empty
or taken advantage of, and they then feel guilty.~~
And maybe it's vocabulary again....because if "giving up" made me feel
that way, it wouldn't be a very healthy choice. I see my giving as a
choice I'm happy to make. If I wasn't...I'd figure out another way.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
or taken advantage of, and they then feel guilty.~~
And maybe it's vocabulary again....because if "giving up" made me feel
that way, it wouldn't be a very healthy choice. I see my giving as a
choice I'm happy to make. If I wasn't...I'd figure out another way.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: starsuncloud@...
~~
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
-=-=-=-
I heard that from you several years ago when you were trying to figure
out teach vs learn! <bwg>
-=-=-=-=-
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
-=-=-=-
And I never said we live consensually. <g> I think my family is one of
those radical families Pam was talking about who don't live
consensually---I'm really a dictator. <beg>
I've seen Pam with her boys---it's pretty sweet. They've been working
at it a while, so it's natural and...second nature.
Like unschooling now for us. It's natural---we can't imagine any other
way to be.
I'd like to get there with CL, but I would need to put in more effort.
Just like everything: if it were easy, everyone would be doing it. I'm
guessing it takes a lot of work---at first. Just changing the
vocabulary is tough! <g> And the *last* thing *I* need is another
LIST! <G>
Things move fairly easily here---no sibling issues. All the boys (Cam,
Dunc, & Ben) are pretty easy-going---I can imagine it would take *much*
more work with high needs kids who struggle with even small issues. We
have bigger problems when friends are over. Not that it can't be done!
Just that I wouldln't know where to start.
Like unschooling, just because *you* can't see it, doesn't mean it
can't exist. Some people llive a radical unschooling life. Some people
can live consensually as well.
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
From: starsuncloud@...
~~
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?~~
No, I really don't!!
-=-=-=-
I heard that from you several years ago when you were trying to figure
out teach vs learn! <bwg>
-=-=-=-=-
I've been at your house and heard "stop now", I know there are issues
that come up about running around the pool and food eaten in certain
rooms at certain times that are not cool. That's normal stuff that
comes up.......how is a compromise NOT being used in those situations?
I really don't see it as a big deal.
-=-=-=-
And I never said we live consensually. <g> I think my family is one of
those radical families Pam was talking about who don't live
consensually---I'm really a dictator. <beg>
I've seen Pam with her boys---it's pretty sweet. They've been working
at it a while, so it's natural and...second nature.
Like unschooling now for us. It's natural---we can't imagine any other
way to be.
I'd like to get there with CL, but I would need to put in more effort.
Just like everything: if it were easy, everyone would be doing it. I'm
guessing it takes a lot of work---at first. Just changing the
vocabulary is tough! <g> And the *last* thing *I* need is another
LIST! <G>
Things move fairly easily here---no sibling issues. All the boys (Cam,
Dunc, & Ben) are pretty easy-going---I can imagine it would take *much*
more work with high needs kids who struggle with even small issues. We
have bigger problems when friends are over. Not that it can't be done!
Just that I wouldln't know where to start.
Like unschooling, just because *you* can't see it, doesn't mean it
can't exist. Some people llive a radical unschooling life. Some people
can live consensually as well.
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Ren Allen
~~
I don't see it as an issue of semantics at all, though I will agree with
Ren that there are moments in my life when the process itself breaks
down, and I step in with stopgap measures.~~
Maybe that's part of it for me.....dh thinks I see the exceptions
rather than the process. I guess there's a part of me that says "I'm
not buying into that if it can't work all the time!":)
If we're talking about a process though, then we are constantly trying
to find win-win solutions where everyone has equal say and whose needs
matter. I'm seeing many times when reality collides with the process
and something needs to be done in the moment. Am I focusing too much
on the exceptions? Because I see it happen in every RU family I know!!
I see it as compromise, but NOT as a compromise handed down by an
authority figure.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
I don't see it as an issue of semantics at all, though I will agree with
Ren that there are moments in my life when the process itself breaks
down, and I step in with stopgap measures.~~
Maybe that's part of it for me.....dh thinks I see the exceptions
rather than the process. I guess there's a part of me that says "I'm
not buying into that if it can't work all the time!":)
If we're talking about a process though, then we are constantly trying
to find win-win solutions where everyone has equal say and whose needs
matter. I'm seeing many times when reality collides with the process
and something needs to be done in the moment. Am I focusing too much
on the exceptions? Because I see it happen in every RU family I know!!
I see it as compromise, but NOT as a compromise handed down by an
authority figure.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
Danielle Conger
Ren Allen wrote:
of word choice. To me, in this instance, it's not about "compromise" but
about "prioritizing."
No, in every situation, people aren't going to be able to have every
need, desire, want met. And maybe this is where TCS (taking children
seriously) folks get worked up over the notion of "core needs."
Sometimes we might have multiple needs: a need to sit in the coolest
place in the van, a need to sit next to our momentary favorite person, a
need for peace and quiet. All of those needs may not be able to be met
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of needs.
Sometimes people who emphasize taking children seriously emphasize the
need to take the initial expression of need/ want/ desire at its surface
value. I agree with that to a large degree when the alternative means
dismissing that surface expression for a need/ want/ desire that the
person doesn't consent to having: i.e. my child is pitching a fit
because he doesn't want a nap, but I, as his parent, can better judge
his need than he can.
But, I don't agree that our initial need/ want/ desire is always the
most accurate expression of our underlying need/ want/ desire. I think,
rather, that there's often a knee-jerk/ reactionary/ defensive quality
to our initial expressions that further investigation/ brainstorming/
introspection can excavate (ooh, that's a dirty rhetorical trick because
I know Ren respects the action of excavating).
Does that make any sense? Does that clarify things any? (And again, I
may be totally muddying the waters somewhere in between what Ren and Pam
and Pat are trying to express.)
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
>Yes, for me, in this nicely detailed description, it would be a matter
>
> Every person discussed options. The people willing to move in order to
> make it work, offered up their seats (Sierra, Markus and Jared). The
> ones that were pissed off and unwilling to negotiate sat and waited
> (Trevor). It all worked out, but it wasn't some parental compromise
> decided FOR anyone. We're all part of the process......I still see
> compromise being part of the method of coming to mutually agreeable
> soluations. Maybe it's a word choice...I don't know. I know I've
> "given up" certain things over the years by choice. If it really
> bothered me I'd find another soluation. I don't think giving up some
> sleep for my baby is a bad thing...in fact, I really LOVED that
> snuggly nursing time at night, though my body desperately needed sleep
> at times.
>
of word choice. To me, in this instance, it's not about "compromise" but
about "prioritizing."
No, in every situation, people aren't going to be able to have every
need, desire, want met. And maybe this is where TCS (taking children
seriously) folks get worked up over the notion of "core needs."
Sometimes we might have multiple needs: a need to sit in the coolest
place in the van, a need to sit next to our momentary favorite person, a
need for peace and quiet. All of those needs may not be able to be met
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of needs.
Sometimes people who emphasize taking children seriously emphasize the
need to take the initial expression of need/ want/ desire at its surface
value. I agree with that to a large degree when the alternative means
dismissing that surface expression for a need/ want/ desire that the
person doesn't consent to having: i.e. my child is pitching a fit
because he doesn't want a nap, but I, as his parent, can better judge
his need than he can.
But, I don't agree that our initial need/ want/ desire is always the
most accurate expression of our underlying need/ want/ desire. I think,
rather, that there's often a knee-jerk/ reactionary/ defensive quality
to our initial expressions that further investigation/ brainstorming/
introspection can excavate (ooh, that's a dirty rhetorical trick because
I know Ren respects the action of excavating).
Does that make any sense? Does that clarify things any? (And again, I
may be totally muddying the waters somewhere in between what Ren and Pam
and Pat are trying to express.)
>--
>
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
Ren Allen
~~All of those needs may not be able to be met
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of
needs.~~
Gawd Danielle! YOu have this amazing way of succinctly analyzing what
I'm trying to say....but not as well apparently.
I see no discussion about prioritizing of needs with CL. THAT may be
the thing I'm missing. There are times we DO need to prioritize needs
(again, not decided by me, but by a discussion/excavation process).
I have to admit that sometimes I'm reading the CL stuff and thinking
"but do they have a family of 6 with at least one child dealing with
sensory/processing issues??" I DO believe in the process that I read
about. I just don't see how it won't breakdown in real life
moments....when we need to prioritize needs or take immediate action.
I definitely see how the process can begin again, after the
moment......it's the moments I'm seeing as a stumbling block I guess.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of
needs.~~
Gawd Danielle! YOu have this amazing way of succinctly analyzing what
I'm trying to say....but not as well apparently.
I see no discussion about prioritizing of needs with CL. THAT may be
the thing I'm missing. There are times we DO need to prioritize needs
(again, not decided by me, but by a discussion/excavation process).
I have to admit that sometimes I'm reading the CL stuff and thinking
"but do they have a family of 6 with at least one child dealing with
sensory/processing issues??" I DO believe in the process that I read
about. I just don't see how it won't breakdown in real life
moments....when we need to prioritize needs or take immediate action.
I definitely see how the process can begin again, after the
moment......it's the moments I'm seeing as a stumbling block I guess.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
Sylvia Toyama
You'll argue heartily about the difference between teach and learn. Can
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?
When "it's just semantics" enters the arena, it's time to start
*thinking*-- -not debating.
******
I do see the difference between the two, I just don't think compromise is a bad thing. I simply don't believe that every conflict/disagreement can be solved thru mutual agreement. Sometimes the competing desires really are mutually exclusive.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro-*Terms
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
you not see a different between compromise and mutual consent?
When "it's just semantics" enters the arena, it's time to start
*thinking*-- -not debating.
******
I do see the difference between the two, I just don't think compromise is a bad thing. I simply don't believe that every conflict/disagreement can be solved thru mutual agreement. Sometimes the competing desires really are mutually exclusive.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro-*Terms
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sylvia Toyama
We focus on win/win solutions by identifying needs and then creating a
solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with. It
feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are going
to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a mutual
solution, not defending their solution or needs.
*****
I think this is the part that seems most daunting to me. I don't trust that my needs are going to be met -- I'm not sure I'm capable of that level of trust in anything or anyone. It's not fair to ask someone to always be willing/able to accommodate my needs. Neither do I feel up to the task of guiding everyone thru the process to meet everyone's needs. It feels like a huge undertaking.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Don't quit your job - take classes online and earn your degree in 1 year. Start Today
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with. It
feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are going
to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a mutual
solution, not defending their solution or needs.
*****
I think this is the part that seems most daunting to me. I don't trust that my needs are going to be met -- I'm not sure I'm capable of that level of trust in anything or anyone. It's not fair to ask someone to always be willing/able to accommodate my needs. Neither do I feel up to the task of guiding everyone thru the process to meet everyone's needs. It feels like a huge undertaking.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Don't quit your job - take classes online and earn your degree in 1 year. Start Today
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ren Allen
~~Sometimes the competing desires really are
mutually exclusive.~~
Yes and sometimes people involved aren't in a place where they feel
like finding creative solutions. Sometimes a person isn't even
develpmentally ABLE to find a mutually agreeable solution. Jalen is 5
and really can't even hear a person talking when he's in certain
states. Removing him from the stimulus triggers is the ONLY way to
reach him and give him space to process his very intense emotions.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
mutually exclusive.~~
Yes and sometimes people involved aren't in a place where they feel
like finding creative solutions. Sometimes a person isn't even
develpmentally ABLE to find a mutually agreeable solution. Jalen is 5
and really can't even hear a person talking when he's in certain
states. Removing him from the stimulus triggers is the ONLY way to
reach him and give him space to process his very intense emotions.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
wuweimama
--- In [email protected], Sylvia Toyama <sylgt04@...>
wrote:
Pat:
It> feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are
going> to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a
mutual> solution, not defending their solution or needs.>
Sylvia:
that level of trust in anything or anyone.>>>
Pat responds:
***Sylvia, I felt this same distrust coming into adulthood, modelled
by my parents. My childhood didn't lead toward trusting anyone, or
myself. I have actively choosen Trust over Fear as part of my journey.***
Sylvia:
<<<It's not fair to ask someone to always be willing/able to
accommodate my needs.>>>
Pat responds:
***I don't feel anyone else is responsible for meeting my needs.
However, what I have experienced is that when I trust others enough to
ASK them for what I need, I create an opportunity, without compulsion,
for them to help to meet my needs, of their own choosing. I don't
*expect* anyone to 'be willing/able to accomodate my needs'. I have a
Trust in the Universe to provide for my needs. So, I believe that my
needs will be able to be met without compulsion or coercion of others.
Sylvia:
<<< Neither do I feel up to the task of guiding everyone thru the
process to meet everyone's needs. It feels like a huge undertaking.>>>
Pat:
***I have learned to trust the process. And in our family, everyone
works together to create solutions which meet each other's needs. It
is so much LESS of an undertaking than when I was trying to meet my
own needs alone (pre-dh). And waiting for others to meet my needs
could be a long wait, unless I *ask* for what I need. Other's Trust
that I won't *compel* them to meet my needs; and they are not
reluctant to help me to creatively meet my needs. And I similarly work
to creatively meet other's needs. Living with Trust in win/win
solutions is much easier than other interpersonal relationship
dynamics, from my experience.
My experience has been that the process of living consensually
empowers and frees each person to Trust that their needs will be
addressed, and thus they can give freely also. Our son has been
effectively and creatively contributing solutions which address our
needs (and his own concurrently) since he was about 3.5 years old.
I agree, trust is a hard thing to extend. Trust was easy for ds; and
thus, I believe it makes living consensually easier, since we (dh and
I, pre-baby) have always lived this way. We just continued by
including ds's objections/needs/desires and wants into solution
creation and he learned to do the same while very young.
Pat
wrote:
Pat:
> We focus on win/win solutions by identifying needs and then creatinga> solution, not by determining which solution everyone can live with.
It> feels very different when everyone trusts that their needs are
going> to be heard and addressed. And everyone is working *toward* a
mutual> solution, not defending their solution or needs.>
Sylvia:
> I think this is the part that seems most daunting to me. I don'ttrust that my needs are going to be met -- I'm not sure I'm capable of
that level of trust in anything or anyone.>>>
Pat responds:
***Sylvia, I felt this same distrust coming into adulthood, modelled
by my parents. My childhood didn't lead toward trusting anyone, or
myself. I have actively choosen Trust over Fear as part of my journey.***
Sylvia:
<<<It's not fair to ask someone to always be willing/able to
accommodate my needs.>>>
Pat responds:
***I don't feel anyone else is responsible for meeting my needs.
However, what I have experienced is that when I trust others enough to
ASK them for what I need, I create an opportunity, without compulsion,
for them to help to meet my needs, of their own choosing. I don't
*expect* anyone to 'be willing/able to accomodate my needs'. I have a
Trust in the Universe to provide for my needs. So, I believe that my
needs will be able to be met without compulsion or coercion of others.
Sylvia:
<<< Neither do I feel up to the task of guiding everyone thru the
process to meet everyone's needs. It feels like a huge undertaking.>>>
Pat:
***I have learned to trust the process. And in our family, everyone
works together to create solutions which meet each other's needs. It
is so much LESS of an undertaking than when I was trying to meet my
own needs alone (pre-dh). And waiting for others to meet my needs
could be a long wait, unless I *ask* for what I need. Other's Trust
that I won't *compel* them to meet my needs; and they are not
reluctant to help me to creatively meet my needs. And I similarly work
to creatively meet other's needs. Living with Trust in win/win
solutions is much easier than other interpersonal relationship
dynamics, from my experience.
My experience has been that the process of living consensually
empowers and frees each person to Trust that their needs will be
addressed, and thus they can give freely also. Our son has been
effectively and creatively contributing solutions which address our
needs (and his own concurrently) since he was about 3.5 years old.
I agree, trust is a hard thing to extend. Trust was easy for ds; and
thus, I believe it makes living consensually easier, since we (dh and
I, pre-baby) have always lived this way. We just continued by
including ds's objections/needs/desires and wants into solution
creation and he learned to do the same while very young.
Pat
Sylvia Toyama
Pat:
I have learned to trust the process. And in our family, everyone
works together to create solutions which meet each other's needs. It
is so much LESS of an undertaking than when I was trying to meet my
own needs alone (pre-dh).
Sylvia:
For any process to work, everyone must be equally committed to it. How do you get kids who haven't lived that situation to become equally trustful and committed to it? For that matter, how do you get adults to that point? Also, it seems to me that CL is vastly easier with only one child, than with more children.
Pat:
And waiting for others to meet my needs could be a long wait, unless I *ask* for what I need.
Sylvia:
I'm not waiting for others to meet my needs. I'm also not in the habit of asking for my needs to be met -- certainly not from my children. Meeting my needs isn't their responsbility. Getting my needs met is my job, and no one else's. In all honestly, tho, I don't trust others to be willing/able to meet my needs. Then again, my real trust circle is very small.
As I type this, I realize I'm just not in a good head-space for such a heavy topic. Lots going on in my head right now, totally unrelated to anything being discussed here. When I'm in this space, I tend to look for a fight, just to have a release for the tension. I should walk away for a while -- at least until things quiet down for me.
Maybe I'll just read and explore CL later when I have more space for it. Thanks everyone for all the good discussion, it's given me lots to think about.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro-*Terms
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have learned to trust the process. And in our family, everyone
works together to create solutions which meet each other's needs. It
is so much LESS of an undertaking than when I was trying to meet my
own needs alone (pre-dh).
Sylvia:
For any process to work, everyone must be equally committed to it. How do you get kids who haven't lived that situation to become equally trustful and committed to it? For that matter, how do you get adults to that point? Also, it seems to me that CL is vastly easier with only one child, than with more children.
Pat:
And waiting for others to meet my needs could be a long wait, unless I *ask* for what I need.
Sylvia:
I'm not waiting for others to meet my needs. I'm also not in the habit of asking for my needs to be met -- certainly not from my children. Meeting my needs isn't their responsbility. Getting my needs met is my job, and no one else's. In all honestly, tho, I don't trust others to be willing/able to meet my needs. Then again, my real trust circle is very small.
As I type this, I realize I'm just not in a good head-space for such a heavy topic. Lots going on in my head right now, totally unrelated to anything being discussed here. When I'm in this space, I tend to look for a fight, just to have a release for the tension. I should walk away for a while -- at least until things quiet down for me.
Maybe I'll just read and explore CL later when I have more space for it. Thanks everyone for all the good discussion, it's given me lots to think about.
Sylvia
---------------------------------
Sponsored Link
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro-*Terms
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/20/2006 10:05:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
I'm reading the CL stuff and thinking
"but do they have a family of 6 with at least one child dealing with
sensory/processing issues??" <<<<
I personally do not. I have a family of 4. But I do know families who live
consensually with 4 and more children, and sensory issues as well.
:-)
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected] writes:
I'm reading the CL stuff and thinking
"but do they have a family of 6 with at least one child dealing with
sensory/processing issues??" <<<<
I personally do not. I have a family of 4. But I do know families who live
consensually with 4 and more children, and sensory issues as well.
:-)
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lesa
But with "prioritizing" aren't we saying that one persons needs have a
higher priority than another's?... at least in true compromise, everyone's
needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a mutual solution.
I'm no CL expert... I'm trying to grasp the nuances of it and a lot of it
seems like rhetoric to me. Compromise isn't a bad thing... I looked it up..
it comes from the latin com (together) and promittere (to promise).
Lesa
-------Original Message-------
From: Danielle Conger
Date: 11/20/06 23:07:33
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
Ren Allen wrote:
of word choice. To me, in this instance, it's not about "compromise" but
about "prioritizing."
No, in every situation, people aren't going to be able to have every
need, desire, want met. And maybe this is where TCS (taking children
seriously) folks get worked up over the notion of "core needs."
Sometimes we might have multiple needs: a need to sit in the coolest
place in the van, a need to sit next to our momentary favorite person, a
need for peace and quiet. All of those needs may not be able to be met
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of needs.
Sometimes people who emphasize taking children seriously emphasize the
need to take the initial expression of need/ want/ desire at its surface
value. I agree with that to a large degree when the alternative means
dismissing that surface expression for a need/ want/ desire that the
person doesn't consent to having: i.e. my child is pitching a fit
because he doesn't want a nap, but I, as his parent, can better judge
his need than he can.
But, I don't agree that our initial need/ want/ desire is always the
most accurate expression of our underlying need/ want/ desire. I think,
rather, that there's often a knee-jerk/ reactionary/ defensive quality
to our initial expressions that further investigation/ brainstorming/
introspection can excavate (ooh, that's a dirty rhetorical trick because
I know Ren respects the action of excavating).
Does that make any sense? Does that clarify things any? (And again, I
may be totally muddying the waters somewhere in between what Ren and Pam
and Pat are trying to express.)
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
higher priority than another's?... at least in true compromise, everyone's
needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a mutual solution.
I'm no CL expert... I'm trying to grasp the nuances of it and a lot of it
seems like rhetoric to me. Compromise isn't a bad thing... I looked it up..
it comes from the latin com (together) and promittere (to promise).
Lesa
-------Original Message-------
From: Danielle Conger
Date: 11/20/06 23:07:33
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
Ren Allen wrote:
>Yes, for me, in this nicely detailed description, it would be a matter
>
> Every person discussed options. The people willing to move in order to
> make it work, offered up their seats (Sierra, Markus and Jared). The
> ones that were pissed off and unwilling to negotiate sat and waited
> (Trevor). It all worked out, but it wasn't some parental compromise
> decided FOR anyone. We're all part of the process......I still see
> compromise being part of the method of coming to mutually agreeable
> soluations. Maybe it's a word choice...I don't know. I know I've
> "given up" certain things over the years by choice. If it really
> bothered me I'd find another soluation. I don't think giving up some
> sleep for my baby is a bad thing...in fact, I really LOVED that
> snuggly nursing time at night, though my body desperately needed sleep
> at times.
>
of word choice. To me, in this instance, it's not about "compromise" but
about "prioritizing."
No, in every situation, people aren't going to be able to have every
need, desire, want met. And maybe this is where TCS (taking children
seriously) folks get worked up over the notion of "core needs."
Sometimes we might have multiple needs: a need to sit in the coolest
place in the van, a need to sit next to our momentary favorite person, a
need for peace and quiet. All of those needs may not be able to be met
at the same moment, which then requires a need for prioritization of needs.
Sometimes people who emphasize taking children seriously emphasize the
need to take the initial expression of need/ want/ desire at its surface
value. I agree with that to a large degree when the alternative means
dismissing that surface expression for a need/ want/ desire that the
person doesn't consent to having: i.e. my child is pitching a fit
because he doesn't want a nap, but I, as his parent, can better judge
his need than he can.
But, I don't agree that our initial need/ want/ desire is always the
most accurate expression of our underlying need/ want/ desire. I think,
rather, that there's often a knee-jerk/ reactionary/ defensive quality
to our initial expressions that further investigation/ brainstorming/
introspection can excavate (ooh, that's a dirty rhetorical trick because
I know Ren respects the action of excavating).
Does that make any sense? Does that clarify things any? (And again, I
may be totally muddying the waters somewhere in between what Ren and Pam
and Pat are trying to express.)
>--
>
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Danielle Conger
Lesa wrote:
mutual solution, and the reality of many situations are that needs are
met consecutively rather than simultaneously. *First* we'll find a
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then we'll
go to the park.
Reality is that some needs *do* have a higher priority than others, but
that doesn't mean that the other needs get forgotten or ignored.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
>Prioritizing doesn't preclude addressing other needs or working out a
> But with "prioritizing" aren't we saying that one persons needs have a
> higher priority than another's?... at least in true compromise, everyone's
> needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a mutual solution.
>
mutual solution, and the reality of many situations are that needs are
met consecutively rather than simultaneously. *First* we'll find a
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then we'll
go to the park.
Reality is that some needs *do* have a higher priority than others, but
that doesn't mean that the other needs get forgotten or ignored.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
Lesa
Yes, but isn't that still compromise?
Oh, the nuances of words... it actually makes me chuckle.
Lesa
-------Original Message-------
From: Danielle Conger
Date: 11/21/06 14:04:39
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
Lesa wrote:
mutual solution, and the reality of many situations are that needs are
met consecutively rather than simultaneously. *First* we'll find a
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then we'll
go to the park.
Reality is that some needs *do* have a higher priority than others, but
that doesn't mean that the other needs get forgotten or ignored.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Oh, the nuances of words... it actually makes me chuckle.
Lesa
-------Original Message-------
From: Danielle Conger
Date: 11/21/06 14:04:39
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [unschoolingbasics] Re: CL
Lesa wrote:
>Prioritizing doesn't preclude addressing other needs or working out a
> But with "prioritizing" aren't we saying that one persons needs have a
> higher priority than another's?... at least in true compromise, everyone's
> needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a mutual solution.
>
mutual solution, and the reality of many situations are that needs are
met consecutively rather than simultaneously. *First* we'll find a
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then we'll
go to the park.
Reality is that some needs *do* have a higher priority than others, but
that doesn't mean that the other needs get forgotten or ignored.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
wuweimama
--- In [email protected], "Lesa" <lesajm@...> wrote:
everyone's> needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a
mutual solution.
looked it up..> it comes from the latin com (together) and promittere
(to promise).
that for another. I don't prioritize that my needs are of a "higher
priority" (more important) than another's. So, I agree, that
consensual solutions do not "prioritize" one person's needs above
another's. We work to create solutions where Everyone's wants and
needs are equally valid, discussed, considered and addressed. No one's
needs are a "higher priority". I believe in *consensus* "everyone's
needs are addressed". Compromise, generally implies mutual
concessions. Positive consent, or creating solutions which are
preferable to both individuals, is a very different process.
I imagine by 'rhetoric', you mean that 'this sounds good, but doesn't
really happen', or something along the lines of disbelief in the
process working. The process of creating solutions which address
everyone's needs to satisfaction and agreement can, and does, happen
many, many times a day in our home. Living consensually, like
unschooling, is a paradigm shift which takes time to integrate, in
order to become 'second nature'. If there are specific issues which
seem daunting to create mutual agreement about, please feel welcome to
consider discussing them on the CL list.
Pat
>a> higher priority than another's?... at least in true compromise,
> But with "prioritizing" aren't we saying that one persons needs have
everyone's> needs are addressed and everyone tries to work out a
mutual solution.
>of it> seems like rhetoric to me. Compromise isn't a bad thing... I
> I'm no CL expert... I'm trying to grasp the nuances of it and a lot
looked it up..> it comes from the latin com (together) and promittere
(to promise).
>Lesa, I believe that I can only prioritize my own needs. I can not do
> Lesa
that for another. I don't prioritize that my needs are of a "higher
priority" (more important) than another's. So, I agree, that
consensual solutions do not "prioritize" one person's needs above
another's. We work to create solutions where Everyone's wants and
needs are equally valid, discussed, considered and addressed. No one's
needs are a "higher priority". I believe in *consensus* "everyone's
needs are addressed". Compromise, generally implies mutual
concessions. Positive consent, or creating solutions which are
preferable to both individuals, is a very different process.
I imagine by 'rhetoric', you mean that 'this sounds good, but doesn't
really happen', or something along the lines of disbelief in the
process working. The process of creating solutions which address
everyone's needs to satisfaction and agreement can, and does, happen
many, many times a day in our home. Living consensually, like
unschooling, is a paradigm shift which takes time to integrate, in
order to become 'second nature'. If there are specific issues which
seem daunting to create mutual agreement about, please feel welcome to
consider discussing them on the CL list.
Pat
Ren Allen
~~*First* we'll find a
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then
we'll go to the park.~~
And in doing this, naturally every single day, one person often says
"yeah, I'll wait to do________ so we can_________"
Compromise.
They didn't really give up anything, just made a concession to help
everything flow. That's what compromise is about. I can't imagine NOT
prioritizing certain needs. The child that is crying in pain gets
attention before the child that needs some hot chocolate made. They
also get attention before I continue painting. I decided in that
moment, that their needs are greater. Choices.
The child that wants hot chocolate right now, may or may not care that
someone is crying in pain (they may have caused the pain even, and be
feeling justified at the moment) but I still prioritize the need.
I may say "I'll make the hot chocolate after I help Sierra" and that
wasn't a consensual act at all. I'm not going to wait around for
consent in some cases. I'm going to do what needs to be done. And I'm
not going to analyze the heck out of whether it's consensual or
not........I'm going to decide what's important and do the thing!
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then
we'll go to the park.~~
And in doing this, naturally every single day, one person often says
"yeah, I'll wait to do________ so we can_________"
Compromise.
They didn't really give up anything, just made a concession to help
everything flow. That's what compromise is about. I can't imagine NOT
prioritizing certain needs. The child that is crying in pain gets
attention before the child that needs some hot chocolate made. They
also get attention before I continue painting. I decided in that
moment, that their needs are greater. Choices.
The child that wants hot chocolate right now, may or may not care that
someone is crying in pain (they may have caused the pain even, and be
feeling justified at the moment) but I still prioritize the need.
I may say "I'll make the hot chocolate after I help Sierra" and that
wasn't a consensual act at all. I'm not going to wait around for
consent in some cases. I'm going to do what needs to be done. And I'm
not going to analyze the heck out of whether it's consensual or
not........I'm going to decide what's important and do the thing!
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
Danielle Conger
Ren Allen wrote:
Everyone *is* getting what they need. No one is conceding anything,
which by definition means giving up, yielding or begrudgingly
acknowledging. It's a pretty negatively laden term, imo.
Pat says she doesn't prioritize other people's needs, only her own, but
I don't think it's possible to mother multiple children without setting
priorities. There are lots of ways to multi-task, but not everything can
fall in that category at every moment. I haven't yet figured out how to
be in two places at one time.
I agree that the problem solving process itself can become coercive,
which is something Ren pointed out in another post.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
>See, I don't see this as compromise or concession. *shrug*
> ~~*First* we'll find a
> bathroom, *then* we'll explore. First we'll drop someone off, then
> we'll go to the park.~~
>
> And in doing this, naturally every single day, one person often says
> "yeah, I'll wait to do________ so we can_________"
> Compromise.
>
> They didn't really give up anything, just made a concession to help
> everything flow. That's what compromise is about. I can't imagine NOT
> prioritizing certain needs.
>
Everyone *is* getting what they need. No one is conceding anything,
which by definition means giving up, yielding or begrudgingly
acknowledging. It's a pretty negatively laden term, imo.
Pat says she doesn't prioritize other people's needs, only her own, but
I don't think it's possible to mother multiple children without setting
priorities. There are lots of ways to multi-task, but not everything can
fall in that category at every moment. I haven't yet figured out how to
be in two places at one time.
I agree that the problem solving process itself can become coercive,
which is something Ren pointed out in another post.
--
~~Danielle
Emily (9), Julia (7), Sam (6)
http://www.organiclearning.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Connections: ezine of unschooling and mindful parenting
http://connections.organiclearning.org
Ren Allen
~See, I don't see this as compromise or concession. *shrug*~~
YEah, but it feels like it to the child that wanted X right NOW and
chose to wait so the other person could have Z. Happens all the time.
One person is feeling cruddy and needs Mum close by, another person
needs me to drive to the store.
One person wants to go to Best Buy for a video game, another person
wants to go to the park but we only have limited time before Mum has
to work.
Someone wants to run to the grocery so we can make X and I'm very tired.
Sure, we get to everything eventually, but it comes by means of
concession. I don't get (nor does anybody) everything we want all of
the time in the moment. That means sometimes a person isn't thrilled
about the prioritizing that naturally happens. But it happens. And I
don't always get consent for it either.
I remember in talking about Sam, you made the comment once that the
girls made enough concessions for him and you weren't willing to ask
them to do _________(can't even remember what it was now).
Same here. My kids concede things they'd prefer in order to assist
Jalen many times. Leaving the park the other day was their priority,
not his. In order to balance it all, I asked them to compromise their
immediate need of leaving in order to help Jalen get what he needed.
It wasn't mutual consent. They weren't wanting to stay. But they COULD
see that it was important to another family member and agreed to wait.
That's compromise to me. Not getting exactly what you want all the
time, but knowing you're heard, you're important and your views matter.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
YEah, but it feels like it to the child that wanted X right NOW and
chose to wait so the other person could have Z. Happens all the time.
One person is feeling cruddy and needs Mum close by, another person
needs me to drive to the store.
One person wants to go to Best Buy for a video game, another person
wants to go to the park but we only have limited time before Mum has
to work.
Someone wants to run to the grocery so we can make X and I'm very tired.
Sure, we get to everything eventually, but it comes by means of
concession. I don't get (nor does anybody) everything we want all of
the time in the moment. That means sometimes a person isn't thrilled
about the prioritizing that naturally happens. But it happens. And I
don't always get consent for it either.
I remember in talking about Sam, you made the comment once that the
girls made enough concessions for him and you weren't willing to ask
them to do _________(can't even remember what it was now).
Same here. My kids concede things they'd prefer in order to assist
Jalen many times. Leaving the park the other day was their priority,
not his. In order to balance it all, I asked them to compromise their
immediate need of leaving in order to help Jalen get what he needed.
It wasn't mutual consent. They weren't wanting to stay. But they COULD
see that it was important to another family member and agreed to wait.
That's compromise to me. Not getting exactly what you want all the
time, but knowing you're heard, you're important and your views matter.
Ren
learninginfreedom.com
[email protected]
One person is feeling cruddy and needs Mum close by, another person
needs me to drive to the store.
One person wants to go to Best Buy for a video game, another person
wants to go to the park but we only have limited time before Mum has
to work. <<<<<<<<<
I personally would not prioritize someone else's wants or needs. I would
not say that the "cruddy feeling" person's need for me to be there is more
important that the store is for the other person. To them it might not be more
important.
Just as an example, because you threw them out there. This is where I think
when you are in a mindset of compromise and already believe that someone
will give up something, you would only see maybe a couple of solutions. Maybe
the person feeling cruddy will have mom by their side and the store will wait.
OR one person will get to go to best buy while the other gives up the park
or the park instead of best buy. etc.
If it were me we would talk about the store and the cruddy feeling. Maybe
it would be fine for the "cruddy feeling" person if someone he knew came over
for a few minutes and sat with him while I took "another" person to the store
for a few minutes. Maybe dad can take a few minutes off his lunch break to
either pick up whatever it is at the store or come home to sit with the
"cruddy feeling" person. Maybe dad could pick it up on his way home or we could
go out after dad gets home. Maybe a friend could go to the store. etc, etc.
No one HAS to give up what they want, and when you know there is a solution
out there and are used to working toward it, more possibilities and solutions
show up. I know my boys are both good at working out very creative
solutions. You tend to not get stuck and say "there is no solution to this problem so
one of us must give up something".
The second situation you mentioned with Best Buy and the park, we might look
at our schedule to see if either something we are doing before or after can
be moved to "make" more time for Best Buy and the Park, we might want to come
back to either one after we do whatever that is limiting our time, it is
near the holidays stores are staying open later maybe we could do what ever else
there is to do and then come back to town to go out to supper and hang at
Best Buy (we love Best Buy here>>>:-)) Maybe what we want at Best Buy can be
ordered or looked at online so it will only take a minute or no time in the
store. Maybe a friend can come by with her kids and take one to the park while
I go with the other to Best Buy and then swing by the park after to pick
that person up. Maybe the other way around, maybe one would like to hang with a
friend and his mom at Best Buy while I take the other person to the park.
Maybe since we do have limited time we would postpone both until the next day
when we have much more time and can do both for as long as we like. etc.
Many, many more options than just one person must sacrifice what they want to
do.
Anyway those are just a couple of examples. And those are some of the
things people bring to the CL list. Situations they may feel stuck in, that having
another perspective on things may open up more possible solutions and gets
you back in the right mind set. I think we all have times when we just don't
see a solution, sometimes we are too close, too invested in a certain outcome
maybe. But no one is perfect and it does help to bounce things off of other
people. It helps to see others working out different solutions even if the
same thing isn't happening in your home. And it works in a variety of homes,
there are people on that list who are not even homeschoolers and a couple
who don't even have children.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
needs me to drive to the store.
One person wants to go to Best Buy for a video game, another person
wants to go to the park but we only have limited time before Mum has
to work. <<<<<<<<<
I personally would not prioritize someone else's wants or needs. I would
not say that the "cruddy feeling" person's need for me to be there is more
important that the store is for the other person. To them it might not be more
important.
Just as an example, because you threw them out there. This is where I think
when you are in a mindset of compromise and already believe that someone
will give up something, you would only see maybe a couple of solutions. Maybe
the person feeling cruddy will have mom by their side and the store will wait.
OR one person will get to go to best buy while the other gives up the park
or the park instead of best buy. etc.
If it were me we would talk about the store and the cruddy feeling. Maybe
it would be fine for the "cruddy feeling" person if someone he knew came over
for a few minutes and sat with him while I took "another" person to the store
for a few minutes. Maybe dad can take a few minutes off his lunch break to
either pick up whatever it is at the store or come home to sit with the
"cruddy feeling" person. Maybe dad could pick it up on his way home or we could
go out after dad gets home. Maybe a friend could go to the store. etc, etc.
No one HAS to give up what they want, and when you know there is a solution
out there and are used to working toward it, more possibilities and solutions
show up. I know my boys are both good at working out very creative
solutions. You tend to not get stuck and say "there is no solution to this problem so
one of us must give up something".
The second situation you mentioned with Best Buy and the park, we might look
at our schedule to see if either something we are doing before or after can
be moved to "make" more time for Best Buy and the Park, we might want to come
back to either one after we do whatever that is limiting our time, it is
near the holidays stores are staying open later maybe we could do what ever else
there is to do and then come back to town to go out to supper and hang at
Best Buy (we love Best Buy here>>>:-)) Maybe what we want at Best Buy can be
ordered or looked at online so it will only take a minute or no time in the
store. Maybe a friend can come by with her kids and take one to the park while
I go with the other to Best Buy and then swing by the park after to pick
that person up. Maybe the other way around, maybe one would like to hang with a
friend and his mom at Best Buy while I take the other person to the park.
Maybe since we do have limited time we would postpone both until the next day
when we have much more time and can do both for as long as we like. etc.
Many, many more options than just one person must sacrifice what they want to
do.
Anyway those are just a couple of examples. And those are some of the
things people bring to the CL list. Situations they may feel stuck in, that having
another perspective on things may open up more possible solutions and gets
you back in the right mind set. I think we all have times when we just don't
see a solution, sometimes we are too close, too invested in a certain outcome
maybe. But no one is perfect and it does help to bounce things off of other
people. It helps to see others working out different solutions even if the
same thing isn't happening in your home. And it works in a variety of homes,
there are people on that list who are not even homeschoolers and a couple
who don't even have children.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Michelle Leifur Reid
On 11/22/06, Genant2@... <Genant2@...> wrote:
wouldn't be done later. I really see her talking about *at this
moment* "*At this moment* I only have time to go either to Best Buy
or the park" Perhaps the choice is Best Buy because someone has a
desire for a specific thing and it works better with our schedule *at
this moment* and we will go to the park later or tomorrow or this
weekend. I don't see this as one person has to completely give up
what one wants. I see this as somoene having to help her family make
decisions on how we can best reach everyone's wants and needs where we
are now. Sometimes that means that we have to prioritize everyone's
needs/wants. Who is to say that the person going to the store won't
decide that the store isn't that important right now as his/her
sibling really just needs to cuddle with mom and that person remembers
how important cuddle time was for him/her the last time s/he was sick.
I see nothing wrong with asking someone else to wait on something in
consideration of another person.
We recently went through this. We've all been battling the flu in our
house and last week Emily (who had finally recovered) was really
needing to be outside in clean fresh air. She really wanted to go to
the nature trail at the university, but Mary Elayne *really* was
feeling badly and Keon was coughing horribly. They are both old
enough to stay by themselves, but both needed Mommy at that moment.
While disappointed that she couldn't go to the nature trail, Emily
decided that she could walk down to the local neighborhood park
instead. School was still in session and she would have the park to
herself mostly. This weekend we made a point of going to the nautre
trail. Emily still got her fresh air even though it wasn't exactly
what she wanted *and* she eventually got the nature trail as well.
MIchelle - who had more written but gmail ended my session and I lost it :(
>I didn't see anywhere in what Ren was saying that the park or Best Buy
>
> The second situation you mentioned with Best Buy and the park, we might look
> at our schedule to see if either something we are doing before or after can
> be moved to "make" more time for Best Buy and the Park, we might want to come
> back to either one after we do whatever that is limiting our time, it is
> near the holidays stores are staying open later maybe we could do what ever else
> there is to do and then come back to town to go out to supper and hang at
> Best Buy (we love Best Buy here
wouldn't be done later. I really see her talking about *at this
moment* "*At this moment* I only have time to go either to Best Buy
or the park" Perhaps the choice is Best Buy because someone has a
desire for a specific thing and it works better with our schedule *at
this moment* and we will go to the park later or tomorrow or this
weekend. I don't see this as one person has to completely give up
what one wants. I see this as somoene having to help her family make
decisions on how we can best reach everyone's wants and needs where we
are now. Sometimes that means that we have to prioritize everyone's
needs/wants. Who is to say that the person going to the store won't
decide that the store isn't that important right now as his/her
sibling really just needs to cuddle with mom and that person remembers
how important cuddle time was for him/her the last time s/he was sick.
I see nothing wrong with asking someone else to wait on something in
consideration of another person.
We recently went through this. We've all been battling the flu in our
house and last week Emily (who had finally recovered) was really
needing to be outside in clean fresh air. She really wanted to go to
the nature trail at the university, but Mary Elayne *really* was
feeling badly and Keon was coughing horribly. They are both old
enough to stay by themselves, but both needed Mommy at that moment.
While disappointed that she couldn't go to the nature trail, Emily
decided that she could walk down to the local neighborhood park
instead. School was still in session and she would have the park to
herself mostly. This weekend we made a point of going to the nautre
trail. Emily still got her fresh air even though it wasn't exactly
what she wanted *and* she eventually got the nature trail as well.
MIchelle - who had more written but gmail ended my session and I lost it :(