Julie Stauffer

<<Just because there is more than one truth doesn't mean there's no such
thing as bullshit---Sandra Dodd>>

I think I'm going to hang this on my fridge. It is a definite keeper.

Julie

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/27/01 11:15:42 AM, jnjstau@... writes:

<< <<Just because there is more than one truth doesn't mean there's no such
thing as bullshit---Sandra Dodd>>

I think I'm going to hang this on my fridge. It is a definite keeper. >>

Thanks.
It's original to me, but it's the second time I've used it. Once was in the
forum, I think. Or maybe it was in private e-mail, come to think of it...

Sandra

Sandra

"Everything counts."
http://expage.com/SandraDoddArticles
http://expage.com/SandraDodd

Bridget E Coffman

> DFM
> (Who is not a 'she' btw but seeing as you understood what I meant
> I'll
> forgive this once :-) )
>

I'm sorry, but I can't promise not to do it again. I tend to type
feminine pronouns when in doubt and occasionally even when I'm not in
doubt but not paying attention! You can feel free to refer to me as 'it'
or 'he' if you like.

Bridget


OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00
oo OO 00 oo
And the Geezer says:
"Back in my day, 'Astral Projection' meant mooning someone!"

Bridget E Coffman

> I don't consider *myself* to be better. I do consider the way that
we're
> "growing without schooling" to be better than the other options (i.e.,
> enforced 'schoolwork' of any sort). Like, duh. That's why we're doing
it
> this way. Why would you decide to do anything if you thought that the
> other choices were just as good?
>
> Daron

I consider what we are doing to be better FOR US. I would never
recommend it for others as a blanket this is the only way to go kind of
thing. I don't object to the person who says, "This is how my family
works, you might like to try it." I do object to the person who says,
"You are abusing your child if you aren't parenting exactly like me."

Here's an analogy of sorts, "I like cookies and cream ice cream. It's
really good and they just should stop making all those other flavors
because this is the one I like best and that means everyone should like
it best too." Different people are different. We have different needs,
lifestyles and desires. Because that is true, it is impossible to say
that only this one specific way of educating is the 'one right' way.
Hell, think about it, many of us left the ps system becaus ethe schools
refused to acknowledge that different kids learned in different ways.

Bridget

OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00
oo OO 00 oo
And the Geezer says:
"Back in my day, 'Astral Projection' meant mooning someone!"

Bridget E Coffman

> In a message dated 9/27/01 10:01:10 AM, lite2yu@... writes:
>
> << You want to be the "better"
> person/unschooler/mom, etc. Sandra? Go right ahead. . . >>
>
> HECK YES!
> I want to be better today than I was before. I want to be better
> next year than I am now.
>
> Sandra
>

Ah, Sandra, what you don't seem to know is that you sound like you are
saying, "Yes I am better than all of YOU."
Intentional or not, that is how you sound to at least some of us here.

Bridget

OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00 oo OO 00 oo OO oo 00
oo OO 00 oo
And the Geezer says:
"Back in my day, 'Astral Projection' meant mooning someone!"

[email protected]

<< Ah, Sandra, what you don't seem to know is that you sound like you are
saying, "Yes I am better than all of YOU."
Intentional or not, that is how you sound to at least some of us here. >>

If it sounds that way to you, you need more self confidence!
(Ah, but I will be jumped on for criticising you...
But if I don't, I just get jumped on for something I didn't do and take it
silently...)

<<"You are abusing your child if you aren't parenting exactly like me.">>

I think the implication was that you weren't unschooling, not that it was
abusive.

<<Here's an analogy of sorts, "I like cookies and cream ice cream. It's
really good and they just should stop making all those other flavors
because this is the one I like best and that means everyone should like
it best too." >>

Here's an analogy that actually works:

"My kids cry every time I give them ice cream; it's not working for us; I
have to make them eat ice cream; I finally found this website and would like
ideas for how to make my kids eat vanilla ice cream."

And the answers will NOT be ways to make them eat vanilla ice cream.
That would be HELPING the mom, not affirming her dead-end-rut problem.

She might not know there are other flavors.
She might not know kids don't HAVE to eat ice cream at all.

Sandra

"Everything counts."
http://expage.com/SandraDoddArticles
http://expage.com/SandraDodd

[email protected]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:28:17 -0400 Bridget E Coffman
<rumpleteasermom@...> writes:
> I consider what we are doing to be better FOR US. I would never
> recommend it for others as a blanket this is the only way to go kind of
> thing. I don't object to the person who says, "This is how my family
> works, you might like to try it." I do object to the person who says,
> "You are abusing your child if you aren't parenting exactly like
> me."

I haven't heard anyone say that.

I do think, though, that there are some things that are just better, and
pretending otherwise is dishonest. I don't think that everyone can
necessarily do the better thing, but one can at least acknowledge that
it's better.

In what circumstances do you think school-at-home would be better for any
kid than unschooling?

>
> Here's an analogy of sorts, "I like cookies and cream ice cream. It's
> really good and they just should stop making all those other flavors
> because this is the one I like best and that means everyone should
like
> it best too."

But you're talking about personal tastes. A better analogy, to me anyway,
would be someone saying, "I hit my kids when I don't like what they're
doing, and that works for my family, and we're all different, and my kids
have different needs and we have a different lifestyle, so you can't say
that non-violent parenting is better." Yes, I can. And do.

Daron
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/27/2001 10:07:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
freeform@... writes:


> I do think, though, that there are some things that are just better, and
>

I really resent the implication that because I dont have this belief that I
am dishonest or pretending. . . that is total lack of respect for anothers
views.



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

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/27/01 3:59:16 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> My kids cry every time I give them ice cream; it's not working for us; I
> have to make them eat ice cream; I finally found this website and would
> like
> ideas for how to make my kids eat vanilla ice cream."
>
> And the answers will NOT be ways to make them eat vanilla ice cream.
> That would be HELPING the mom, not affirming her dead-end-rut problem.
>
I think that I would like to respond to her by saying, "I understand where
you're at, I struggled with that one myself. I went through yadda yadda yadda
and I learned yadda yadda yadda and now we never make the kids eat ice cream.
It has worked wonders." This would allow her more space to listen, think it
over, try it on for size, keep it or discard it. And I'm not taking time and
energy from my own life to fix/change someone else's, but opening up my
heart/life/history to share with another human.

But if I said, "Well, the first thing you need to do is stop trying to
make them eat vanilla." that has an entirely different tone. I think it's
truth, but it doesn't allow the personal respect and freedom. And as the
counselors say, it's about using more *I* statements and less *you*
statements.

She might not know there are other flavors.
> She might not know kids don't HAVE to eat ice cream at all.
>
She might not, but apparently if she's come to this forum, she's aware of
*something*. She's already on the track to finding out that there's more out
there than she was previously aware of. She's probably looking for info that
someone has selflessly shared about their own life, knowledge and truth. If
she's looking, it doesn't need to be forced on her, if she's not, no amount
of forcing will matter. Same as with unschooling.

Brenda


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

Johanna SanInocencio

some kids DON'T LIKE ice cream!
Johanna
Life is the ultimate learning experience!
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 1505


>
> << Ah, Sandra, what you don't seem to know is that you sound like you are
> saying, "Yes I am better than all of YOU."
> Intentional or not, that is how you sound to at least some of us here. >>
>
> If it sounds that way to you, you need more self confidence!
> (Ah, but I will be jumped on for criticising you...
> But if I don't, I just get jumped on for something I didn't do and take it
> silently...)
>
> <<"You are abusing your child if you aren't parenting exactly like me.">>
>
> I think the implication was that you weren't unschooling, not that it was
> abusive.
>
> <<Here's an analogy of sorts, "I like cookies and cream ice cream. It's
> really good and they just should stop making all those other flavors
> because this is the one I like best and that means everyone should like
> it best too." >>
>
> Here's an analogy that actually works:
>
> "My kids cry every time I give them ice cream; it's not working for us; I
> have to make them eat ice cream; I finally found this website and would
like
> ideas for how to make my kids eat vanilla ice cream."
>
> And the answers will NOT be ways to make them eat vanilla ice cream.
> That would be HELPING the mom, not affirming her dead-end-rut problem.
>
> She might not know there are other flavors.
> She might not know kids don't HAVE to eat ice cream at all.
>
> Sandra
>
> "Everything counts."
> http://expage.com/SandraDoddArticles
> http://expage.com/SandraDodd
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

Fetteroll

on 9/27/01 10:09 PM, lite2yu@... at lite2yu@... wrote:

> I really resent the implication that because I dont have this belief that I
> am dishonest or pretending. . . that is total lack of respect for anothers
> views.

Perhaps the questioning feels like an attack and as though people are trying
to get you to change your mind. But people are really just trying to
understand. This philosophy raises a lot of questions and basically you're
the only one who can answer them.

The philosophy seems to be saying in a way what the Indian greeting
"Namaste" says: "I honor that place in you where the whole Universe resides.
And when I am in that place in me and you are in that place in you, there is
only one of us."

I can see how getting people to a place where they can feel that everyone's
soul is equal would be a peacefilled place. I can see respecting that people
are where they are because their journey has been much different. I can see
how someone feeling pride that their position is superior to other people's
could make the prideful person stop growing and self-examining.

I can see that judgementalism and pride can lead to some unhealthy places.
But I'm not seeing how eliminating judgementalism and pride -- if that's
what this philosophy is about -- doesn't have it's own pitfalls. (Which is
all that people are asking in their own way.)

How would your philosophy handle abusive, hurtful parenting and nurturing
parenting? I can't see how one isn't better than the other. How can eating
food not be better than eating sand? How can music not be better than
fingernails on a chalkboard?

Too often, I think, people judge things on a limited number of factors, eg,
a more expensive bigger house is better than a less expensive smaller house.
Yet there are hundreds of factors that could make the smaller house more
suitable in a particular situation. How does the philosophy avoid
acknowledging that more suitable isn't better? That pros outweighing cons
isn't better?

But sometimes one factor is all it takes, eg, a family style that creates
loving people versus one that creates hatefilled people.

I'm very confused and just trying to understand.

Joyce


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

[email protected]

From what I remember of reading, just the beginning of the book.
There is no cosmic right or wrong. That is something we humans have
invented. There is just experience. God wants to experience, and we
(which are really factors of him/it/....) are what is used to do that.
I'm sure lovemary will correct any misconceptions I may have gotten
from the first few chapters. I did find the book very interesting,
but my aunt stopped sending me the chapters she was photocopying so I
and others could read it, and I never went and got the book myself.

Joanna

--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., Fetteroll <fetteroll@e...> wrote:
> on 9/27/01 10:09 PM, lite2yu@a... at lite2yu@a... wrote:
>
> > I really resent the implication that because I dont have this
belief that I
> > am dishonest or pretending. . . that is total lack of respect for
anothers
> > views.
>
> Perhaps the questioning feels like an attack and as though people
are trying
> to get you to change your mind. But people are really just trying to
> understand. This philosophy raises a lot of questions and basically
you're
> the only one who can answer them.
>
> The philosophy seems to be saying in a way what the Indian greeting
> "Namaste" says: "I honor that place in you where the whole Universe
resides.
> And when I am in that place in me and you are in that place in you,
there is
> only one of us."
>
> I can see how getting people to a place where they can feel that
everyone's
> soul is equal would be a peacefilled place. I can see respecting
that people
> are where they are because their journey has been much different. I
can see
> how someone feeling pride that their position is superior to other
people's
> could make the prideful person stop growing and self-examining.
>
> I can see that judgementalism and pride can lead to some unhealthy
places.
> But I'm not seeing how eliminating judgementalism and pride -- if
that's
> what this philosophy is about -- doesn't have it's own pitfalls.
(Which is
> all that people are asking in their own way.)
>
> How would your philosophy handle abusive, hurtful parenting and
nurturing
> parenting? I can't see how one isn't better than the other. How can
eating
> food not be better than eating sand? How can music not be better
than
> fingernails on a chalkboard?
>
> Too often, I think, people judge things on a limited number of
factors, eg,
> a more expensive bigger house is better than a less expensive
smaller house.
> Yet there are hundreds of factors that could make the smaller house
more
> suitable in a particular situation. How does the philosophy avoid
> acknowledging that more suitable isn't better? That pros
outweighing cons
> isn't better?
>
> But sometimes one factor is all it takes, eg, a family style that
creates
> loving people versus one that creates hatefilled people.
>
> I'm very confused and just trying to understand.
>
> Joyce
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:09:36 EDT lite2yu@... writes:
>> freeform@... writes:
> > I do think, though, that there are some things that are just better,
and

> I really resent the implication that because I dont have this belief
that I
> am dishonest or pretending. . . that is total lack of respect for
> anothers views.

Perhaps this "implication" comes from your own fears, because it's not
coming from me. I, and others, disagree with your views on this matter.
Why is that so threatening?

This topic reminds me of Zen and the Art of Motorcyle Maintenance, the
topic of the whole book was quality/goodness/arete/virtue, chose your own
term. A basic idea, as I recall, was that we naturally know quality when
we see it, even if we can't define why something is good. Somewhere were
the lines: "And what is good, Phaedrus? And what is not good? Need we ask
anyone to tell us these things?" I think it's true, and I think it ties
in to unschooling - we naturally see good, know what is right, learn what
we need...

Daron
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/28/2001 11:36:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
freeform@... writes:



> Perhaps this "implication" comes from your own fears, because it's not
> coming from me. I, and others, disagree with your views on this matter.
> Why is that so threatening?
>



It was not coming from me. . . it came from a direct statement someone made
(I forget who) that it would be dishonest to have this belief. It is not at
all threatening to have someone disagree with me . . . just dont tell me I
am dishonest and pretending. Because that is discounting my feelings and
beliefs and telling me I am wrong for them, in my perception.

lovemary


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

Elizabeth Hill

Bridget E Coffman wrote:

> Ah, Sandra, what you don't seem to know is that you sound like you are
> saying, "Yes I am better than all of YOU."
> Intentional or not, that is how you sound to at least some of us here.
>

Some of that is in the reading, not the writing.

Posts can be read assuming any type of tone. Try printing a few posts
sometime and reading them aloud with different accents, emphasis, and
emotion. Most posts lend themselves to a very WIDE range of
interpretation. It's an interesting drama exercise.

(I like to do it with bedtime stories.)

Betsy

PS (When in doubt, try reading posts as if they were spoken by Robin
Williams in his Mrs. Doubtfire little old lady drag with that sweetie-pie,
fake English accent.)

Elizabeth Hill

>
>
> <<Here's an analogy of sorts, "I like cookies and cream ice cream. It's
> really good and they just should stop making all those other flavors
> because this is the one I like best and that means everyone should like
> it best too." >>
>
> Here's an analogy that actually works:
>
> "My kids cry every time I give them ice cream; it's not working for us; I
> have to make them eat ice cream; I finally found this website and would like
> ideas for how to make my kids eat vanilla ice cream."
>
> And the answers will NOT be ways to make them eat vanilla ice cream.
> That would be HELPING the mom, not affirming her dead-end-rut problem.
>
> She might not know there are other flavors.
> She might not know kids don't HAVE to eat ice cream at all.
>
>

I think there's a bit of confusion here between a general case (people crying
about schooling not working) and a specific case (Bridget posting about
how she
homeschools). Nobody in Bridget's family was crying or bent out of
shape, as
far as we could tell. (Although some of them might not have been
getting as
many hours of television as they wanted. ;-) )

Based on what Bridget originally posted, the analogy would be that she
asks her
children to eat a certain amount of leafy greens every week, but that
she lets
them decide whether to eat ice cream for breakfast and greens for
dessert, or
vice-versa.

And then, some of us told Bridget we don't think ice cream should be
leafy and
green. (Unschooling doesn't normally have writing requirements.)

Maybe a leap was made in assuming that Bridget's children must dislike
the way
their learning is (lightly) organized?

Maybe there was a blurring of the particular into the general? I gather that
Sandra's intention is to address the general case, in order to provide
information that is generally helpful to the list as a whole.

However, when one post replies to another, quotes it, AND addresses some
details of that original posters family life, THEN all the paragraphs
that come
next SEEM to be personal.

We may need some kind of "road sign" or flag or punctuation mark that shows
when the comment changes from advice for one person to philosophy for the
general audience.

Betsy

>
>
> "Everything counts."
> http://expage.com/SandraDoddArticles
> http://expage.com/SandraDodd
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/