mary bryson

Hi Everyone! I've been lurking here only a couple of weeks but felt
the need to jump in here.

I have a daughter with so many food allergies that the board certified
ped allergist we took her to asked me what I was gonna do about it (of
course then he proceeded to write a really bad review of me in the
files you are not supposed to see...)...long story that's not relevant
here. (She literally tested positive to every food in the American
diet...until they ran out of blood sample...)

I have always let my kids have pretty much whatever they want...within
limits set by DH & myself out of necessity (severe eczema is no picnic
for anyone let alone a 2 yr old). As she's grown older we've allowed
her more & more choices (expanding those limits) to the point that she
currently eats whatever she wants to...IF she wants to. She reads
labels for the worst allergens (in our case soy is the worst) and asks
questions even at restaurants (she is 9 in a couple of weeks).

In our home we only keep items that are "safe" for her (thankfully no
one else has food allergies or it'd be really difficult, but not
impossible)...that way whenever we are out & about she can choose
whether or not to eat the "bad" foods. She knows what they are & that
if she eats them she will prolly be taking Benadryl (which she hates
because it makes her soooo tired).

I believe that as the parents it is our responsibility to decide what
is in our children's best interest and therefore we make the initial
choice of what to bring into the home and she can choose anything from
that...

We have the responsibility to ensure our daughter's safety & if an
allergy is bad enough to cause problems (even if they are not
life-threatening...quality of life is a valid issue in my mind) then
WE are responsible for managing it...UNTIL such time as they can
manage it themselves. When they are little they should not have to
shoulder the burden of an allergy and avoiding the offending
foods...WE should do that until they can learn by talking/explaining
things to them & providing them "safe" choices.

I have a friend that also has a daughter about the same age with
allergies & she has always restricted/limited what, when, etc. She's
always sneaking off the eat the "forbidden fruit" and she doesn't
really know what or why she can't have it.

DD does not eat anything different from anyone else, because we as a
family only eat items that are safe FOR HER until she is old enough to
understand & accept that others do not have to be selective. (all for
one & one for all!) We've always felt it unfair to have DD eat
something that we wouldn't eat ourselves so...

I think this has helped her more than anything...seeing us eat the
same foods without the comments all the time about wouldn't it be nice
if we could have...she just thinks these are normal foods. :)

My kids make such good choices when eating that it sometimes puts me
to shame... :D

No one in our house has a sweet tooth (although good chocolate is the
one exception)...which is really awful for someone that loves to bake
desserts. :( No one eats them so I make enough to quell my need to
bake then freeze for those times we can't/don't bake.

Sorry this has gotten so long...I'll go back to lurking now...

Mary in Poulsbo

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/24/2005 7:11:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,
brysonslearningathome@... writes:
DD does not eat anything different from anyone else, because we as a
family only eat items that are safe FOR HER until she is old enough to
understand & accept that others do not have to be selective. (all for
one & one for all!) We've always felt it unfair to have DD eat
something that we wouldn't eat ourselves so...

I think this has helped her more than anything...seeing us eat the
same foods without the comments all the time about wouldn't it be nice
if we could have...she just thinks these are normal foods. :)
I love this attitude! This is the perfect example (IMHO) of unschooling with
comrades (your family members). I don't see anything wrong with stacking the
deck with healthy foods, modeling (as long as it's sincere and silent) and
sticking together by not eating things one of the family "can't have". That's
teamwork!

To fill the home with kool-aid, soda, food with additives etc. is to grow a
child who will possibly develop a taste for them. I am all for allowing a child
to eat whatever they want - out of all healthy choices. I would never ever
buy those foods/drinks and that is not because I'd limit my child, but because I
loathe those foods and the companies that produce them. I think being
socially and nutritionally responsible does help shape a child's eating
habits........and to me that is a good thing. I was a bit taken aback to find out that many
people on this list buy soda, junk food etc. If not just for the
non-consumerist, non-peer pressured lifestyles I was figuring you all lead.

If you've seen "Supersize Me" or read any of the health reports then you know
that fast food can be addicting. I think it's wrong to assume just because a
child is unschooled they cannot become addicted to something that is added to
food to make it addicting. I am not saying they definitely will either. But
it's a gamble.

If my child couldn't have milk but I knew they loved milk based products and
kept them in the house anyway I would expect temptation. I would feel
terrible! I would find substitutes that tasted like the milk based products so he/she
would be sated.
Have you ever tried coconut milk ice cream? It is even better than milk based
ice cream!
I got the recipe on mothering.com

That said, I am a newbie/lurker here. I did wait my two weeks :)
I hope it's OK if I jump in..........I love reading the threads on this list.
My daughter is only 10 months old but I think I am already unschooling
(nursing on request, practicing elimination communication, co-sleeping, babywearing,
cue following, unlimited comforting) so I thought I'd like to hear others
experience and participate when I can.


Amy - Future unschooling mama to Emerson Sage


"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.

Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Yahoo! Groups Links





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

Angela S

<<<I think being
socially and nutritionally responsible does help shape a child's eating
habits........and to me that is a good thing. I was a bit taken aback to
find out that many
people on this list buy soda, junk food etc. If not just for the
non-consumerist, non-peer pressured lifestyles I was figuring you all
lead.>>>



But we don't live in a bubble. So even though my kids really only ask for
foods they've tried (so far- they are 8 and 10), they do try stuff at other
people's houses. So, that would mean that when my child comes home and asks
for Poptarts, because she had them at my brother's house, that I would have
to be controlling and say "no" to keep my house full of only nutritionally
healthy foods. Controlling what my child eats, isn't going to strengthen my
relationship with them, in fact, it's going to break it down and possibly
create food issues at the same time. I think it's better to have many
healthy options at my house, to respect my child's love of Poptarts by
buying them, and to model good eating habits and discuss nutrition
(occasionally) with them. I think when your oldest child is still a baby,
it's hard to know what you will do with them when they are older. At least
I've changed my views a lot since my kids were babies.



Angela ~off to throw some Poptarts into the toaster

game-enthusiast@...



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

[email protected]

I was a bit taken aback to
find out that many
people on this list buy soda, junk food etc. If not just for the
non-consumerist, non-peer pressured lifestyles I was figuring you all
lead.


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

In the same way that I don't call some books "educational" and others
"crap," I don't call some food "healthy" and some "junk."

That doesn't mean I think all publications are equally valuable. I don't
shop in bookstores with a blindfold on and just buy the first book I pick up
that feels good in my hand. It doesn't mean I can't tell the difference
between apples and Apple Jacks. If I tell a child that an apple will cure him and
Apple Jacks will kill him, I'd be a big liar.

Some parents DO speak of food in very extreme terms, and branding anything
"junk" is a good example of that.

Pop Tarts are bought here about once every two years, for a big campout.
The next year, the leftovers from the year before are usually still around,
which is why not EVERY year. The kids like the strawberry or cinnamon/brown
sugar pop tarts, not the sprinkly sparkly pink stuff. In northern New Mexico
there are two traditional foods that are the traditional precursors of
poptarts. One is a Hispanic fruit pie, not quite as flat, called a couple of things,
but "empanadas," sometimes. It will have jelly or preserves in a round
piece of dough folded over and crimped shut and baked. Then there's a Pueblo
Indian version often made with a prune filling, but sometimes other fruit,
usually made in the winter (Christmas and winter feasts) and they're made flat in
a pan and sliced. They're as flat as pop-tarts, but the edges aren't sealed.
In Europe in the Middle Ages such little pies were common too, and still in
bakeries you can find them, but they tend to be fatter and raised now, maybe
partly because the storage and transportation of bakery-to-home-in-a-car
isn't much problem and they don't need to be flat and stackable.

It's easier to just declare it "junk."

But as to peer pressure, my kids don't eat ANYthing because of peer
pressure, but a lot of people I know who shun certain foods or t-shirts with cartoon
characters or modern pop music or video games do clearly and absolutely pick
those attitudes up from peer pressure, and often from mothering groups where
the goal is to be more-natural-than-thou.

The first assumption of people who know we have sodas and cookies is
probably to think that the kids wake up and lunge for them, or have a soda in one
hand and a cookie on the other and a dopey grin all day. At the moment, there
are homemade lemon cookies in the cookie jar and a bowl of dum-dums (all the
flavors Holly doesn't like, and they sit and sit; Keith will eventually take
them to work and leave them on the snack table).

What I saw eaten yesterday was tuna & egg salad on homemade bread, grilled
cheese on that bread, leftover spaghetti, a boca burger (Holly made her own
while Keith and I were out getting free scrapwood), Marty and Kirby went to a
friend's family birthday dinner (friend turning 22, celebrated at home with
parents and grandparents and three or five friends, two of which were my teen
boys). Holly and I had sourdough English muffins with cream cheese and
cherry butter. She drank milk, I had tea.

My kids make better food choices than my husband does, and I think it's
directly attributable to his growing up with limitations, measurement, pressure
to finish, pressure to STOP, and shaming. He learned to eat at home and then
eat elsewhere too. He ate to feel better. My kids only eat when they're
hungry. They don't eat for emotional comfort. They don't even eat socially.
They're all really fine with going to a restaurant with hungry friends and
just having a drink instead of a meal. They're not "dessert trained." They
will say, "No thanks, I've already eaten," instead of eating even if it's their
favorite food.

It's amazing.

But it couldn't happen unless they had real freedom of choice.

I wrote it better here:

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

Holly says the ice cream we have in the freezer is too sweet. She had
chocolate milk last night and said there was too much chocolate in it, so she
divided it and made chocolate milk for someone else with half of it. She usually
prefers plain milk.
Plain milk tastes WAY better if it's your choice than if does when it's plain
because someone else wouldn't let you put chocolate in it.
Without free choice, how can a person choose what is plain and good?
(continued here: _http://sandradodd.com/respect_
(http://sandradodd.com/respect)
but it's not just about food, it's about abundance and awareness and
respect)
Sandra




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

Jackie Chovanes

On Mar 25, 2005, at 7:05 AM, Angela S wrote:

> But we don't live in a bubble. So even though my kids really only ask
> for
> foods they've tried (so far- they are 8 and 10), they do try stuff at
> other
> people's houses. So, that would mean that when my child comes home
> and asks
> for Poptarts, because she had them at my brother's house, that I would
> have
> to be controlling and say "no" to keep my house full of only
> nutritionally
> healthy foods. Controlling what my child eats, isn't going to
> strengthen my
> relationship with them, in fact, it's going to break it down and
> possibly
> create food issues at the same time.

And, it's not only my relationship with my kids that I'm concerned
about. My kids try "junk" foods primarily at my mother's house, and
for the most part, they are content to eat them there, and don't really
ask for them at home. But, we live 10 hour's drive away from my Mom,
and she loves to send the girls packages -- which they love to get, of
course :-). This is where most of the candy in my house comes from. I
could tell my mom not to put candy in the package, and she would
respect my wishes, but I feel like that would be interfering
unnecessarily in her relationship with my kids, and their relationship
with her. I want my kids to have a wonderful, close, loving
relationship with their Nonni, and I know from personal experience that
providing material things is the way she expresses love best. (It's
not the only way, but it is the dominant one.) I could focus on the
fact that that's not the way I think is best, yadda yadda, but really,
I think my kids will be better off eating a little more candy and
feeling like they have a mother who is happy for them when they get
treats in the mail, rather than one who takes part of the fun out of
their relationship with their grandma.

Jackie Chovanes
jchovanes@...

Danielle Conger

==But we don't live in a bubble. So even though my kids really only ask
for foods they've tried (so far- they are 8 and 10), they do try stuff
at other people's houses. So, that would mean that when my child comes
home and asks for Poptarts, because she had them at my brother's house,
that I would have to be controlling and say "no" to keep my house full
of only nutritionally healthy foods. Controlling what my child eats,
isn't going to strengthen my relationship with them, in fact, it's going
to break it down and possibly create food issues at the same time. I
think it's better to have many healthy options at my house, to respect
my child's love of Pop tarts by buying them, and to model good eating
habits and discuss nutrition (occasionally) with them. ==

No, we don't live in a bubble, but nor do we live in a binary world
where the only options are buy Poptarts and not buy Poptarts.

I have a son who is sensitive to corn syrup, which means that on a
regular basis we do not have food with corn syrup in the house, though
he's free to choose whatever he'd like when we're out. I tell him when
a food likely has corn syrup in it, and sometimes he'll choose to skip
it, other times he'll eat it. It's pretty hard to escape in the world of
restaurants and hotels, so we'll all notice a significant difference by
the end of a vacation. It's not a life or death thing, so we're lucky in
that.

This has meant that at home we do an incredible amount of
experimentation. We've found so many wonderful substitutes for most
snack foods and treat foods, that none of us miss corn syrup and, in
fact, find we PREFER foods without it because other foods taste too
sweet. Breyer's ice cream is delicious, Nature's Path makes a very tasty
oreo cookie, I make many foods from scratch. There are choices out there
that can satisfy both taste and health.

Point is, if my kids came home from a friend's house, asking for
poptarts, we'd go on a mission to find some we liked and that felt
healthy to us. We'd buy all the brands we could find that didn't have
corn syrup and do taste tests. We'd try making our own at home. There
are lots of other options, and if we couldn't find one that satisfied,
then we'd likely decide that the poptarts would be a once in a while
treat rather than something we'd have in the house as a regular choice.

There's something in between villifying foods as evil and eating them
thoughtlessly. Not all foods are created equal. Some foods do more to
help our bodies than other foods. The danger, as I see it, is when we
begin to confuse in our own minds and in our words the "research shows"
kind of stuff with absolute truth for all people and all bodies at all
times.

Not all research is created equal, and it's quite easy to go out and
find research saying how bad soy is and how good soy is, how bad meat is
and how good meat is. It's just not a definitive science. When I share
information with my kids or use information to guide my own choices, I
try to keep that really clear in my mind and my words.

Western medicine used to advocate bleeding as the best practice for many
problems; crazy thing is, it worked some of the time for things like
high blood pressure. Chemotherapy is currently Western medicine's best
answer to many cancers, and I have no trouble believing that folks in a
hundred or two hundred years will look back on that practice and think
quackery at best and barbarity at worst.

Balance. Best information while realizing that most information is
fallible. Moderation. Options.

--Danielle
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 6:24:40 AM Mountain Standard Time,
danielle.conger@... writes:

There's something in between villifying foods as evil and eating them
thoughtlessly. Not all foods are created equal. Some foods do more to
help our bodies than other foods. The danger, as I see it, is when we
begin to confuse in our own minds and in our words the "research shows"
kind of stuff with absolute truth for all people and all bodies at all
times.


=============

Right.

And much "truth" about food turns out to have been false, so relying on any
professional dietary advice is a danger. Recommendations are changed
frequently. I think younger people don't realize that at first and so are more
likely to become deeply invested in what they know about nutrition. As they get
older and live through a couple of changes and "oopses" and "we now know
that..."s, they can be calmer. Some people manage to find calm while they're
still young. <g>

The first health food store I ever saw was in Albuquerque in 1970. It was a
big deal. It had shelves and shelves of powdered additives and pills. The
first natural foods co-op I ever saw was in Albuquerque in 1971 or 72. It
was barrels and barrels (cardboard barrels, mostly) of bulk grains and nuts,
stored in an iffy half-outside building, and I was there in the spring when
the wind was blowing sand and dust around. Hippies who were living without
running water were leaning over those big barrels and reaching their hands down
in there. It was picturesque, but not a picture of sanitation. I was young
and was afraid of both manufacturing places (where were those powdered
additives from, and what was IN there?) and of random germs and dirt.

Yet I've eaten all kinds of foods and lived past the age of 50.

When I was going to LLL, I was involved in a couple of mothering groups on
the side (inspired by but not LLL). It was interesting to see which moms were
uber-controlling, and what their justifications were, and how their kids
responded. Even very young kids can be pretty sneaky and resistent in the face
of unreasonable and constant "no" or "you don't need that" or "that's not how
we live." It seemed sometimes that a mom would be way more concerned with
how impressed the other kids were that her child was wearing all organic
naturally-dyed cotton than that her child really needed to pee, or was getting
mosquito bites and wanted to go home. If they were mindful, it was too often
mindful of their image in the presence of strangers, not mindful of the
immediate needs of their children.

-=-Not all research is created equal, and it's quite easy to go out and
find research saying how bad soy is and how good soy is, how bad meat is
and how good meat is. It's just not a definitive science.-=-

Milk was (probably still is in some places) forced on kids when I was going
to school. "Drink your milk" wasn't really an option. They tried to force
us to eat canned spinach and stewed plums (which I could handle now if I were
pressed to, but could NOT at the age of ten). Now it's known that LOTS of
people shouldn't have cow's milk. It's worse for them than having nothing.
It's not "healthy" or "nutritious." Still occasionally I find reference in
advice to pregnant women that they MUST drink milk, so they can make milk.
That's just stupid.

The four food groups were replaced by the food pyramid. That lasted 20
years or less, and has been revamped, and the modern scientific news that
resulted in a four-level pyramid rather than a 2x2 block to model the correct
balance of food intake has been replaced by... what? What shape is "right"
nutrition now?

Cheese is great food for some people, and not for others.
Cabbage is great for some people and turns others into crampy fart stations.
Tomatoes are WONDERFUL for those who like them and digest them well.
They're not crucially necessary for any creature (but maybe hornworms).

Helping children learn early to be flexible and to really feel what their
body might need (more juice or fruit? Protein? Bread or noodles? Something
hot and smoothe? Crunchy and salty?) is a gift far beyond teaching them rules
and categories and what is "junk"/poison and what is perfect. Perfection
isn't one-size-fits-all.

Sandra






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

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 5:29:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jchovanes@... writes:
I think my kids will be better off eating a little more candy and
feeling like they have a mother who is happy for them when they get
treats in the mail, rather than one who takes part of the fun out of
their relationship with their grandma.

Jackie Chovanes
jchovanes@...
this is absolutely true, however there are candies out there that are made
with organic stuff that are just as fun and tasty. I think the real fun is
getting goodies in the mail........not the fact that they are "hersheys" or
"cadbury" or whatever.
kwim?
maybe grandma could find better choices of candy (like an organic dark
chocolate or fruit leather) or send a fun trinket.
who doesn't love mail?
especially fun stuff from a loved one.......

-Amy

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




"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.

Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Yahoo! Groups Links





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

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 4:43:41 AM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
but it's not just about food, it's about abundance and awareness and
respect)
Sandra
absolutely! (I trimmed this post far too much)
I agree that we need to be aware (key word).
I should have mentioned that my big thing is that the food be organic and
preservative free (and i know it's almost impossible to be 100% when out but we
try to be mindful even then).
Other than that, if my daughter wanted to eat 20 cookies in a row that were
organic (preferably made by me, health food store second choice) I wouldn't bat
an eye. I do this myself on occasion.
But since unschooling is about being mindful and respectful I think we have
to respect people, animals and the earth as well. We need to be aware of where
our food came from and how it was prepared. I would certainly not keep an
animal chained in my back yard, feed it diseased animal parts even though it is a
vegetarian, and force it to give me milk or eggs and then cruelly kill it.
I would encourage my child not to eat products that were produced in that way
until they could see for themself where it comes from. Mindful. Today we are
so removed from where our food comes from that we just see it packaged so
beautifully and think it's great. We don't see the years of suffering that took to
get that burger or the 1,000 rotten oranges they had to pasteurize to get
their juice, or the "tomato flavor" they had to add to your franken-tomato to
make it taste like one again!
Unschooling is about being creative too and what is more creative than making
your own pop tarts or going on a journey to find better ones? Like you said a
pop tart is nothing more than fruit filling with dough and icing. It can be
done.
It's not as though the child is saying I will ONLY eat KELLOGS brand pop
tarts. They just tried something and maybe they liked the fruit part, maybe the
middle, maybe the icing (i remember eating them when i was a kid and the dough
tasted yucky to me). Experimenting is fun.
I would never tell my daughter that she couldn't have something but I would
find better alternatives. I agree with the pp that said my daughter is still
young and that I will have new challenges to face when she comes home from a
friend's house and wants a hot dog.
Absolutely. I will get the least disgusting organic hot dog I can find.
I should add that I'm not a vegetarian. I don't have all organic clothing. I
am not proud of that but I do eat organic and I think that makes a difference.
The animals are leading a more natural life and they are not full of
antibiotics/preservatives etc. I buy raw milk products and grass fed animals. I do try
to make sure my clothes didn't come from a kid in a sweatshop.
I try to think about the healthiest people and what they eat: lots of
veggies/fruits/fermented stuff/wine/fish etc. I think about what I am: a human. I
have a long digestive track, not a short one so I don't think I was designed to
eat much meat. I don't have sharp teeth for tearing flesh. I think we've
adapted which is fine but I don't need steak every night. I eat mostly
fruits/veggies/fish/chicken some grains/legumes. I try to live this way.
I am far from perfect.
My husband is a chef and where he works they do not buy organic. If I eat
there I get the fish.
Someone mentioned the "more natural than thou" attitude around mothering.com
and I have experienced this first hand!
Some of the people I've met have this attitude and I can assure you that I do
not.
I just want the best for my family, my body and the world.......
Is that too much? lol
I thought for sure in the unschooling group (who are bucking an entire system
that is wrong) would back me up on this.

-Amy

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




"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.

Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Yahoo! Groups Links





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

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 9:44:03 AM Mountain Standard Time,
lovelifenyc@... writes:

-=-I should have mentioned that my big thing is that the food be organic and

preservative free -=-

We could tell. <g>
It might be worth remembering that it's YOUR big thing, and might not be
your child's, longterm.

-=-But since unschooling is about being mindful and respectful I think we
have
to respect people, animals and the earth as well.=-

Something will come first. One priority will be greater than the other.
Too many children fall by the wayside while their own parents vainly try to
save OTHER people's children on other continents.

-= I would certainly not keep an
animal chained in my back yard, feed it diseased animal parts even though it
is a
vegetarian, and force it to give me milk or eggs and then cruelly kill it.
=-

Nobody does, not in their back yards, right?
Not all large-scale farms or dairies do either.
This is a cause of yours that's not about natural learning or unschooling,
not in so direct a way that we should pursue it at length here, though.

-=- Like you said a pop tart is nothing more than fruit filling with dough
and icing. It can be
done.=

I didn't say anything about icing.
My point was that pop tarts are not "junk." They are a commercial version
of a traditional food.

I was hoping to make the point that kneejerk reactions are often more a
product of peer pressure than not, and that it's good to take a broader view of
what is and isn't healthy and good and natural.

-=-Someone mentioned the "more natural than thou" attitude around
mothering.com
and I have experienced this first hand!
Some of the people I've met have this attitude and I can assure you that I
do
not.
. . . .
I thought for sure in the unschooling group (who are bucking an entire
system
that is wrong) would back me up on this.-=-

Well, you're just clearly more natural than we are.
Than some of us, maybe. At least about food.

We probably know things you could use knowing about natural acceptance and
trust of children as whole beings who can learn to make good decisions if they
get the opportunity.

And if we stay on topic, it should always come back to learning and how
children learn.

-=-I thought for sure in the unschooling group (who are bucking an entire
system
that is wrong) would back me up on this.-=-

Which entire system do you think unschoolers are bucking?
Which entire system do you think is wrong?


Sandra









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

Elizabeth Hill

**

I think the real fun is
getting goodies in the mail........not the fact that they are "hersheys" or
"cadbury" or whatever.
kwim?**

I really like chocolate, but my mom put vegetarian "beef" jerky in my Christmas stocking. Kind of hard to appreciate the sentiment, even though I know she spent more.

Betsy

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: lovelifenyc@...

I thought for sure in the unschooling group (who are bucking an entire
system
that is wrong) would back me up on this.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I bet you'd get more back-up on *this* topic on a conservative
school-at-home group. Those overcontrolling folks that they are.

We're for NOT controlling our kids! We want them to learn to make these
choices themSELVES.

Did someone else control *your* eating? How did you come to these
conclusions?


~Kelly

Joyce Fetteroll

On Mar 25, 2005, at 11:26 AM, lovelifenyc@... wrote:

> But since unschooling is about being mindful and respectful I think we
> have
> to respect people, animals and the earth as well.

Unschooling is being mindful and respectful of our children. Going
beyond that is a different set of values and philosophies.

That's not to say we can't have many goals and many values. But when
they come in conflict, one needs to be the priority. And here with
unschooling that priority is our children. Respect means respecting our
children's choices even when they aren't the choices we'd make.

> I will get the least disgusting organic hot dog I can find.

And if it doesn't satisfy like a real hot dog with all the filler and
additives?

> The animals are leading a more natural life and they are not full of
> antibiotics/preservatives etc. I buy raw milk products and grass fed
> animals.

Which is admirable. And there are ways to live our values without
sending the message "You can choose differently but you're wrong if you
do."

And there are ways to live that make it difficult for others to come to
their own understanding.

What if your husband became Born Again Christian and set up sort of a
wall of Christianity you had to navigate through before reaching the
rest of the world. If you wanted to listen to eminem because you were
curious what all the controversy was about, he'd bend over backwards
trying to find all the Christian music that sounded like it for you to
try. If you wanted to read the next Harry Potter, he'd find similar
Christian titles. If you got curious about Buddhism he'd feel the need
to remind you of how the world really is (e.g., his values) which
obviously you weren't quite understanding because if you did understand
then Buddhism wouldn't look at all interesting to you.

When kids are young and trusting that we know everything, we can delude
ourselves into believing that just telling them our truth is enough for
it to become their truth. But it can't be their truth if they don't
have the freedom to explore beyond it.

If that doesn't sound like you that's okay. We shouldn't be talking
about you ;-) We should be talking about the *idea* of how to respect
our children's choices while living our own values. Like how does a
vegetarian stay true to her values while allowing her children to make
their own choices about whether or not to eat meat? If she's vegetarian
for moral reasons, she's going to want her children to know about
slaughterhouse conditions. But should she?

Joyce

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/26/05 5:53:43 AM, fetteroll@... writes:

<< If she's vegetarian
for moral reasons, she's going to want her children to know about
slaughterhouse conditions. But should she? >>

When people obsess about something, they internalize it and it starts to eat
them from the inside out way worse than coca cola in its most
virulent-urban-mythological form could ever do.

Here's something that goes around in Christian, pagan, Buddhist and humanist
circles all:

One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that goes on
inside people. He said, "My son, the battle is between two wolves.  One is Evil.
It is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt,
resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, hate, superiority, and ego.

  "The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility,
kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith."

  The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather,
"Which wolf wins?"

  The old Cherokee simply replied, "The one you feed."

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 9:03:02 AM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
-=-But since unschooling is about being mindful and respectful I think we
have
to respect people, animals and the earth as well.=-

Something will come first. One priority will be greater than the other.
Too many children fall by the wayside while their own parents vainly try to
save OTHER people's children on other continents.
I couldn't agree more. Again, this is not how I operate. Charity and love
begin at home. I don't save my best for the "company"......I give that to my
family every day. I'm not out saving the world and not my family........they are
my very first priority, but I think it's wrong to live in a bubble. We have to
think about how our actions affect others but not neglect ourselves in the
process.
I grew up in a family like this. I fell by the wayside while my mom was
"doing good" for others. She was always nasty at home........much like living with
an alcoholic.

Which entire system do you think unschoolers are bucking?
Which entire system do you think is wrong?

I think unschoolers are keeping their children home for positive reasons. To
give their children the best and let them find their own happiness and desire
to learn. I think they are more concerned about family than having the state
babysit their child.
When I say "bucking" I am referring to the constant butting of heads with
others about their ideas. The system being school.
I'm anticipating a struggle because I am not supported in my views by many
people around me.
See above about my mom.......

-Amy


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

[email protected]

I wrote:

Which entire system do you think unschoolers are bucking?
Which entire system do you think is wrong?



In a message dated 3/26/2005 10:18:55 AM Mountain Standard Time,
lovelifenyc@... writes:

-=-I think unschoolers are keeping their children home for positive reasons.
To
give their children the best and let them find their own happiness and
desire
to learn.-=-

Interestingly, there are conservatives who assume that all homeschoolers are
conservative Christian pro-lifers who are homeschooling to protect their
children from worldliness and evil influences like Harry Potter and video games
and secular humanism.

Then there are born-again new-age liberals (many also converts) who assume
that all unschoolers are bike-riding TV-shunning natural-fiber peaceniks whose
dogs have decided to go vegetarian too.

Some are. But that's another issue, and I question whether when they say
"we decided..." that the dog REALLY had a full say in the issue.

The assumption that because my kids have Nintendo-logo t-shirts (and Sinfest
and Strongbad and My Little Pony) that I am a victim and purveyor of
corporate commercialist evil, and because they eat Hebrew Nation hot dogs that I am
a cow murdering fiend who should be in prison comes around from time to time,
but it doesn't bother me.

I think of the little boy whose My Little Pony was removed overnight and
replaced with a Waldorf-approved wooden horse, and I think
1) the mom made a WHOMPING huge mistake
2) she should read The Velveteen Rabbit and Pinnochio to herself over and
over in shame
and
3) she wasn't an unschooler anyway

-=-I'm anticipating a struggle because I am not supported in my views by
many
people around me.
-=-

It will help to focus on what your views are then, and your priorities.
We can help, if you want help.

Lots of ideas are here already available to read:
_http://www.unschooling.com/cgi/discus/board-newmessages.cgi_
(http://www.unschooling.com/cgi/discus/board-newmessages.cgi)
_http://sandradodd.com/unschooling_ (http://sandradodd.com/unschooling)
_http://unschooling.info_ (http://unschooling.info)

Sandra


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

jimpetersonl

Should knowing how the food we eat gets to our plates be something to
hide? (Or rather--vegetarian or not--don't city chidlren, too,
deserve to hold that knowledge?

Farm children know (obviously from daily experience) that food (meat
or vegetable) doesn't come in tidy saran-wrapped styrofoam packages.
Why deny that knowedge to children in the suburbs or urban settings?
It's a basic need; it seems that we should all have a basic idea of
how that need is filled.

I think, especially for unschoolers, that it's most respectful to give
children the experience and knowledge so that they can make informed
decisions. (I would say that same for basically any decision--take
abortion gag-rules, for example--how can a woman make an informed
decision without information? A diabetic make informed nutritional
decisions? Buying a car? Choosing an instrument to play?
Educational path to follow? Well--virtually any crossroad on the
journey of life).

~Sue



> If that doesn't sound like you that's okay. We shouldn't be talking
> about you ;-) We should be talking about the *idea* of how to
respect > our children's choices while living our own values. Like how
does a > vegetarian stay true to her values while allowing her
children to make > their own choices about whether or not to eat meat?
If she's vegetarian > for moral reasons, she's going to want her
children to know about > slaughterhouse conditions. But should she?
>
> Joyce

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/28/05 6:10:48 PM, jimpetersonl@... writes:

<< Should knowing how the food we eat gets to our plates be something to

hide? >>

There's a difference between information and propaganda intended to gross
people out.

<<I would say that same for basically any decision--take

abortion gag-rules, for example--how can a woman make an informed

decision without information?>>

Evenhanded information is good.

Scare propaganda isn't evenhanded information.

Young children aren't prepared to process frightening imagery well. Some
adults don't.
Young children aren't good at understanding the difference between simple
fact and scary exaggeration. Some adults aren't.

Sandra

jimpetersonl

The process of getting meat isn't pretty.
It's killing animals.
There's not real way around that.

At the same time, the process is not half as gory as most of the stuff
that regularly appears on television, so I think many kids handle the
truth of where meat comes from just fine.

Where is the imagery cut off? I mean, for example, shoving a chicken
into a cone and whacking off its head is a pretty standard and time
honoured method of slaughtering a chicken. Children for hundreds of
years have watched mom and grandma do it IRL, though I can see people
saying that beheading anything is frightening. How do you distinguish
between simple fact and scary exaggeration? How do you honour your
children's ability to decide what they can handle if you don't present
it to them? How do they learn to distinguish between simple fact and
scary exaggeration without being exposed to each?

~Sue


> Evenhanded information is good.
>
> Scare propaganda isn't evenhanded information.
>
> Young children aren't prepared to process frightening imagery well.
Some > adults don't.
> Young children aren't good at understanding the difference between
simple > fact and scary exaggeration. Some adults aren't.
> Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/29/2005 8:30:31 AM Mountain Standard Time,
jimpetersonl@... writes:

Children for hundreds of
years have watched mom and grandma do it IRL


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

Maybe, if they wanted to.

My grandparents killed a chicken every Sunday when I was a kid. We lived
right near them and went for Sunday dinner every Sunday. I did see the
feather-plucking (Papaw and a #4 washtub full of chicken feathers), but I never once
saw the killing, though I could've if I'd wanted to. I heard how he did it,
but chose not to watch. I've never heard of any young child being called
out to watch. Describing to a young child the details of food production for
the purpose of scaring him away from wanting that food seems cruel to me.

-=-At the same time, the process is not half as gory as most of the stuff
that regularly appears on television-=-

I don't know of anyone forcing kids to watch gory stuff on TV.

-=-How do they learn to distinguish between simple fact and
scary exaggeration without being exposed to each?-=-

If they're used to simple fact, an emotional presentation of scary
exaggeration will seem wrong. And if they never, ever come upon extreme emotional
arguments, good for them!

-=-How do you distinguish
between simple fact and scary exaggeration? -=-

Each person does it internally.
Some people don't do it very well.

-=- How do you honour your children's ability to decide what they can handle
if you don't present it to them? -=-

I thought you had children. Don't you?
Do you really present them with things you don't think they can handle, or
aren't sure if they can handle, and then gauge their reactions?
Are you suggesting others should?

Sandra



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

Pam Sorooshian

On Mar 28, 2005, at 9:14 PM, jimpetersonl wrote:

>
>
>
> The process of getting meat isn't pretty.
> It's killing animals.
> There's not real way around that.
>

The killing of the animals can be gentler or harsher - slaughterhouse
conditions can vary and the process of killing a single animal out on
the family farm is certainly not the same as the process of killing in
a slaughterhouse.

> At the same time, the process is not half as gory as most of the stuff
> that regularly appears on television, so I think many kids handle the
> truth of where meat comes from just fine.

Do your kids like to watch horrifying gory things on tv? Mine don't.
They avoid anything like that and they'd avoid visiting a
slaughterhouse, too. They don't have to visit a slaughterhouse to know
where meat comes from.

>
> Where is the imagery cut off? I mean, for example, shoving a chicken
> into a cone and whacking off its head is a pretty standard and time
> honoured method of slaughtering a chicken. Children for hundreds of
> years have watched mom and grandma do it IRL, though I can see people
> saying that beheading anything is frightening.

It was frightening to many of those children who were exposed to it,
too. Some children might be blase about it - others not at all. I've
heard adults tell about still having nightmares based on seeing animals
slaughtered when they were children. There were many other ways
children were "in on" harsh realities of life, in the past, too. Just
because it was done in the past is not a good argument for exposing
them to all the possible harsh realities of life today, when it isn't
necessary.

> How do you distinguish between simple fact and scary exaggeration?
> How do you honour your
> children's ability to decide what they can handle if you don't present
> it to them?

This is silly. Are you seriously arguing that you have to actually
expose your kids to things for them to be able to decide if they want
to be exposed to them? You don't know them well enough to predict? They
don't have enough imagination to figure it out without actually seeing
it?

> How do they learn to distinguish between simple fact and
> scary exaggeration without being exposed to each?
>
We're talking about PARENTS using scary exaggeration to freak their
kids out in order to persuade them to believe the way they, the
parents, believe.

Vegetarian parents using frightening horrifically scary stories of how
animals suffer when they're slaughtered in order to convince their 5
year old not to eat a hamburger.

If you think that IS a good idea, then I'd be interested in hearing how
that's worked out in your own family. But I think it is lame and
circular to make the argument that kids have to be exposed to things
for them to be able to decide if they want to be exposed to them.

> ~Sue
>
>
>> Evenhanded information is good.
>>
>> Scare propaganda isn't evenhanded information.
>>
>> Young children aren't prepared to process frightening imagery well.
> Some > adults don't.
>> Young children aren't good at understanding the difference between
> simple > fact and scary exaggeration. Some adults aren't.
>> Sandra
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
>
> Visit the Unschooling website and message boards:
> http://www.unschooling.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Robin

--- In [email protected], "jimpetersonl" <jimpetersonl@h...> wrote:
> How do you honour your
> children's ability to decide what they can handle if you don't present
> it to them? How do they learn to distinguish between simple fact and
> scary exaggeration without being exposed to each?


Well, I know one father in our homeschool group last year did a series on "Know Where Your Food Comes From". The parents and kids raised chickens from baby chicks, and eventually came the day when they killed them and had a chicken dinner - they went through the whole process. Many of the kids really enjoyed this. That's one way to expose kids to the actual reality of it. I know my two would have been *so* upset about it and would not be able to do that. That is how I was as a child - so sensitive to this kind of thing that even thinking about it bothered me (my aunt had a sheepskin rug that she still referred to as "Michael" - the lamb she raised for 4H, and that always freaked me out). That's why I became a vegetarian as soon as I had control over my own food (and I grew up for some years on a farm and my grandma whacked the heads off of chickens and they ran around the yard headless, so it certainly wasn't lack of exposure that made me so sensitive!). Both of my kids eat very little meat, by choice, and their main reason is that it bothers them to think about killing it.

For my kids, I think what I really try to do is avoid exaggerations and propaganda. When I was a vegetarian (which I no longer am), I explained my reasons for not eating meat in straightforward, yet not overly-gory ways. I made sure to explain that not all people are vegetarian, that I respect other peoples' right to make different choices. I also made sure to tell them that I thought eating meat was a very natural thing (witness all the carnivores in nature) and that most indigenous peoples didn't really have a choice to be vegetarian or not - the labor-intensiveness of a vegetarian diet in a natural setting is not something humans are well set up for. Without the ruminous stomachs of creatures like cows, we're not able to extract enough nutrients from plant matter efficiently so that the sheer act of gathering food would use up as much or more calories as could be gathered (except in areas of extreme abundance, like coastal areas). Thus, vegetarianism is largely supported by a modern lifestyle with modern farming methods. Even in my 20 years as a vegetarian, I didn't really see slaughtering an animal by slitting it's throat as anything much worse than, say, a lion smothering it by biting it's nose, dragging it over to its side, and other lions starting to eat it while it was still smothering.

Some friends of ours are ardent vegetarians, and instead of giving their kids information, they've told them what to believe. Thus, whenever their kids see someone eating meat, they start spouting off about how inhumane and cruel it is and all that. A couple of times I've offered to show them some National Geographic videos of lions killing wildebeest and described the process to them. They were a bit taken aback that this could be the way nature actually works. So, since their parents only gave them one way of looking at this, when faced with differing information it is confusing to them. They've been told absolutes, in a world in which there really aren't many. If killing animals is inhumane, then God sure set things up funny, eh? I think it's much better to give kids as reasonable and realistic information as you can - "Here's why I made the choices I did. Here's why other people might make different choices." - and then let them figure out what they believe from there.

Blue Skies,
-Robin-


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

Katy Jennings

I just wanted to comment on something, to clarify my original post and my position.

About my post, when I talked my son out of getting a hamburger, I used no scare tactics. I have never tried to scare him with scary or horrifying stories. I have told him that animals that live on feedlots, large scale "farms," are usually not humanely treated. I have talked more about the treatment of the living animals than the slaughter of them. In fact I don't think I have ever told him anything about the way they die, just that I think animals should be treated humanely while they are on this earth. As far as animals in the wild and lions smothering wildebeest, lions don't have the luxury (or the ability) to think about what is humane. We do. I firmly believe that if we can do it better, we should.

My vegetarianism is due to antibiotic and hormone use as well as treatment of animals. We have talked about antibiotics and hormones, he goes with me when I buy free-range eggs. I do eat the others occasionally, ie when I can't afford the free-range, but I have told him that when I can I will choose free-range and antibiotic free eggs, and antibiotic and hormone free milk or soy milk. He has seen me eat meat a few times in his life. If someone cooks for us, I pretty much eat what they cook. I am a single mom and money is tight, and if someone is generous enough to make us a meal, I eat what they cook. I think that is common courtesy, as long as we are not talking about an allergy. So, my original point to him was that if we have the choice (we are at a restaurant that does offer a veggieburger), we should choose the more organic/more humane alternative. BUT, I recognize that this is my opinion, which I was forcing on him, hence my feeling badly about it.

Katy

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

jimpetersonl

I do have children. My questions weren't about what *I* do (I know
what I do); they were about how others handle the same situation.

I think we should stick to discussing the *idea* of how to handle the
information about industrial food production instead of my particular
children.

~Sue

> -=- How do you honour your children's ability to decide what they
can handle
> if you don't present it to them? -=-
>
> I thought you had children. Don't you?
> Do you really present them with things you don't think they can
handle, or > aren't sure if they can handle, and then gauge their
reactions? > Are you suggesting others should?
>
> Sandra

Joyce Fetteroll

On Mar 29, 2005, at 7:41 PM, jimpetersonl wrote:

> IMy questions weren't about what *I* do (I know
> what I do); they were about how others handle the same situation.

If you want to argue a point but not share from your own life why would
you expect others to contribute from their lives?

> I think we should stick to discussing the *idea* of how to handle the
> information about industrial food production instead of my particular
> children.

If the questions don't arise from real kids and real situations then
it's a strawman discussion.

No one has said they do what you're arguing against (not telling kids
where food comes from). No one has said they support that idea. This
seems to be an argument for the sake of argument.

Joyce

jimpetersonl

I don't think anyone's suggested describing food production techniques
for the purposes of scaring children.
(I, for one, have not).

At the same time, it is likely that the simple, factual, knowledge of
industrial food production would likely have an impact on many
children (as it did, for example, on both me and my children).

Not all of my children are vegetarians.
Many are.
All of them are aware of their choices, the impact those choices have
on the environment, on others, and on their bodies.

I don't think information (giving it, getting it, or having it) is
cruel.

I also don't think the choice can be truly made without that information.

~Sue




> Describing to a young child the details of food production for
> the purpose of scaring him away from wanting that food seems cruel
to me.

> Sandra

Pam Sorooshian

On Mar 29, 2005, at 9:03 PM, jimpetersonl wrote:

> I don't think anyone's suggested describing food production techniques
> for the purposes of scaring children.
> (I, for one, have not).

Someone was suggesting that kids could BE scared by graphic
descriptions of slaughterhouses, etc., and that it wouldn't be very
nice to do that to kids just because a parent wants to convince them to
believe the way she happens to believe.

>
> At the same time, it is likely that the simple, factual, knowledge of
> industrial food production would likely have an impact on many
> children (as it did, for example, on both me and my children).

Depends on the kid and on what you mean by "simple, factual, knowledge"
and how it is imparted.
>
>
> Not all of my children are vegetarians.
> Many are.

Many? That makes it sound like you have a very large number of children
to use as a sample. How many is that?

> All of them are aware of their choices, the impact those choices have
> on the environment, on others, and on their bodies.

Isn't that nice. And they all got that awareness, when they were young,
by visiting slaughterhouses or getting "simple, factual, knowledge"
through graphic, gory descriptions?

>
> I don't think information (giving it, getting it, or having it) is
> cruel.

What information? We were talking about graphic, gory descriptions -
not just "information."
>
> I also don't think the choice can be truly made without that
> information.

If having ALL information was necessary, nobody would ever be able to
make a decision - we are always having to make choices in the face of
incomplete information. It isn't worth it to even attempt to gather ALL
information before making any decision.

My kids, for example, certainly know that meat is an animal - they
aren't stupid, they don't think it starts out in the grocery store
packaged in plastic. I dare say it is a rare person who gets to be very
old before they realize that eating meat is eating an animal. That's
enough for most people to know to make a choice about eating meat
versus not. It isn't a FULLY informed choice, but a "choice can be
truly made." And, over the years, my kids have investigated, to the
extent THEY were interested, the conditions under which the animals
were raised and slaughtered. One of them has been in 4H and experienced
raising of market animals - rabbits, sheep, pigs, calves, etc.

My role isn't to coerce them into learning about something whether
they're interested or not - my job is to support their interests and
make sure their world is big and filled with possibilities. THEY get to
control what they learn - and this is a perfect example of something
that might be fascinating to one kid and disgusting and scary to
another.

-pam

Joyce Fetteroll

On Mar 30, 2005, at 12:03 AM, jimpetersonl wrote:

> I don't think anyone's suggested describing food production techniques
> for the purposes of scaring children.
> (I, for one, have not).

It has come up though not recently.

And someone just posted a religious thread where here kids were being
told that if they don't believe in God that they'll go to hell. There
are parents who are afraid that their children might not choose to
believe as the parents do that think it's okay to use scare tactics to
get their kids to believe.

So what does a parent do when their beliefs are based on knowledge that
their kids might find traumatizing? Do they take a child's choice of
eating meat as a signal that the child is obviously not well enough
informed about slaughterhouses otherwise they couldn't possibly choose
meat? Do they pass on more and more graphic information until the child
finally "sees the light" and gives up meat? Do they repeat often that
people who don't believe in God are going to hell?

> At the same time, it is likely that the simple, factual, knowledge of
> industrial food production would likely have an impact on many
> children

And the answer is to use your own judgment and knowledge of your
children on how to answer their questions and what information to give
them.

But that's the answer to all our kids interactions with the world. Some
kids will be traumatized by Bambi. Some kids will think Dawn of the
Dead is cool. It would be cruel to show Dawn of the Dead (or Bambi) to
the first child. It would be controlling to limit the second child to
Bambi.

Do you have an example from your own life where you had problems
deciding what was too much and what was too little so we can have
something solid to discuss?

> I don't think information (giving it, getting it, or having it) is
> cruel.

Giving kids more information than they want won't help anyone unschool.

Giving kids information that will traumatize them for the purposes of
making them believe as a parent does *is* cruel.

> I also don't think the choice can be truly made without that
> information.

What information? What level of information is necessary? That beef
comes from cows? That terrorized cows are led to their deaths so you
can have a hamburger? "Information" is too vague. We need specifics --
and a real situation -- to have a meaningful discussion.

Joyce

TreeGoddess

On Mar 29, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Katy Jennings wrote:

-=-He has seen me eat meat a few times in his life. If someone
cooks for us, I pretty much eat what they cook. I am a single
mom and money is tight, and if someone is generous enough to
make us a meal, I eat what they cook. I think that is common
courtesy, as long as we are not talking about an allergy. -=-

I *think* this was discussed on this list a while back already (someone
LMK if I'm thinking of the wrong unschooling list). You might check
the archives for it if you're interested in finding it.

I am vegetarian (basically vegan). I would not eat meat simply because
it was served to me. I'm not being discourteous. I'm being me, being
true to myself, and not being ungrateful. Of course, if I were going
to someone's home for a meal I would be sure that they knew that I am
vegetarian and that they don't have to go out of their way to prepare
anything special for me. I'm more than happy to prepare a dish and
bring it to share -- and I'm OK if they don't want to eat any of it. I
wouldn't think that was rude AT ALL. Who am I to say what someone else
should eat? Who are they to assume that I'll eat whatever they put in
front of me? Eat what you want; leave the rest. Thank your host
genuinely and everything will be cool. :)

Just my experience,

-Tracy-

"Peace *will* enter your life, but you
need to clear a spot for her to sit down."

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

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/30/05 12:03:31 AM, pamsoroosh@... writes:

<< It isn't worth it to even attempt to gather ALL
information before making any decision. >>

Nor is it even possible to do so.

Sandra