Kolleen

>I guess I've always heard it as a put-down too. That's why I was surprised
>to see someone identifying their style as unparenting. I'll stick with
>mindful parenting.
>
>Life is good.
>~Mary


I suppose since I don't see the word 'unschooling' equated to
'unlearning', I find no issue with the word 'unparenting'.

And since many manipulative people see themselves as 'mindful', I'd
personally rather stay away from that term.

In the end, it is just words...


regards,
kolleen

"People take different roads seeking
fulfillment and happiness. Just
because they're not on your road
doesn't mean they've gotten lost."
-H. Jackson Brown, Jr.

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/19/02 12:36:20 PM, Kolleen@... writes:

<< I suppose since I don't see the word 'unschooling' equated to
'unlearning', I find no issue with the word 'unparenting'.
>>

I'm not schooling at all.
I am parenting, though, fulltime.

Sandra

Fetteroll

on 3/19/02 2:18 PM, Kolleen at Kolleen@... wrote:

> In the end, it is just words...

Only to people who don't enjoy a good heated discussion ;-) If a word
conjures up one image for one person and another image to another and they
each assume they both have the same image and don't care about clarifying
then language loses a lot of it's usefulness. Unschooling doesn't even
conjure up the same image for each of us so unparenting is even iffier.

Just as a test of current usage, I typed "unparenting" into Google. There
are 78 pages that turned up. Pretty amazing when most searches turn up at
least thousands and typically millions.

Apparently it's a technical term foremost and uses up most of the 78 pages:

> Have you tried just unparenting the belly from the hips (the old origin) and
> then parenting the hips to the belly, making the belly bone effectively your
> new root? I just did a quick test with a skinned object and seemed to work
> ok. I could then independantly animate the front and rear quad, and control
> the overall orientation of the setup from the new 'belly' root.
>
> You may need to disable any IK handles though that may be along the spine
> though and make sure your model is at the bind pose when you do it.

I *think* they're talking about computer animation though I'm not entirely
sure they're speaking English ;-)

(If anyone wants to check out the other fascinatingly baffling posts they're
at:
http://www.highend3d.com/maya/gamearchive/spe.3d?mail_id=921)

And used in programming:

> gtk/gtklist.c (gtk_list_clear_items): Clear
> list->undo/list_focus_child after unparenting
> child, since unparenting the child can result
> in list->last_focus_child being set.

They both seem to suggest severing a dependent relationship.

The first use of unparenting in a family context is from a page on a
homeschooling conference that's gone but tantalizingly said:

> ... children time and space to explore their interests. Why unschooling does
not
> mean unparenting. This workshop is primarily for people new to unschooling ...

The next one is an essay from Unschooling.com :-) written by Nancy Wooton on
2/24/99. (Are you here Nancy?) She's a bit of a ringer (who came up
legitimately! :-) since she's an ex-AOLer who would have been used to seeing
unparenting used to mean not parenting.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/essays/essay09.shtml

> Unschooling scares people, because there are no guarantees. What they fail to
> realize is, public school, private school, or school-at-home offer no
> guarantees, either. What unschooling is about is *freedom.* How it appears in
> different homes is as individual as the child himself. It does not mean
> "unparenting," though a wide range of parenting philosophies are practiced
> (most unschoolers are pretty relaxed, though, since you aren't trying to force
> the kids to do things all day long). The basic tenet is not new age; it's
> "what is best for this individual person, my child?" In some cases,
> unschooling parents will find their child desires a structured curriculum, and
> they provide it. The difference is in WHO is asking for the curriculum, and
> who is responsible for doing it.

Then, after many animation references, a frustratingly unlinked (or perhaps
unparented?) link to an essay entitled "Unschooling or Unparenting?"

And another missing page that starts: "... My response to that is to remind
them that unschooling doesn't mean "unparenting". My kids have plenty of
responsibilities and structure in their lives. It's ..."

Finally an independent, relevent use which ironically ties into the feminism
discussion :-)

http://gotcannedgoods.com/a_didactic_dialectic/add18-15Feb2001.cfm
(waaaaay down at the bottom)

> In the end, the values of feminism and individualism are good.  The problem is
> that our time-place has not yet developed the cultural responses to compensate
> for the familial losses feminism has helped create.  We have yet to solve such
> problems as homemakerless houses, unparenting parents, independencism, and
> isolationism (oh yea, lots of us feel alone and depressed ­ where have our
> grandparents gone?!).  I think it is the undervaluing of the family, and the
> overvaluing of the individual, that produced this mess.  (We value the group
> as a whole very much, btw).  We forget our place in life: our duty.  We are
> not frogs; we are mammals:  we must raise our young with precious time and
> energy if we want to make them happy and successful.

And then, frustratingly, a reference that could arguably go either way from
a Pagan homeschooling page:

http://members.tripod.com/acorns3/acorns9.html

> My view of this is that people sort themselves out by associating with others
> based on commonalities and what meets their needs as time goes by.
> Homeschooling families may find that they actually have little in common with
> each other, except for an intense interest in the well-being of their children
> and a desire to be left alone by the school district. Families who come to
> this primarily from a religious motivation may share a great deal more with
> each other; many such groups dictate a unified way of life. However, the more
> secular homeschoolers are indeed a diverse lot, particularly the adults. They
> include rich and poor, mainstream and alternative lifestyles, families with
> professional degrees and those with high school diplomas, urban, suburban and
> rural, liberal and conservative, young and middle-aged, new and old
> homeschoolers, etc. Even with regard to child-rearing, homeschoolers include
> all philosophies from what I call unparenting to rigid behavior management. Is
> there any reason to think all these folks are likely to be friends? About the
> only way to bring them all together would be in defense of homeschooling
> itself, if the legislature were proposing some drastic reduction of our
> rights. Even then, each part of the homeschooling "community" would have its
> own critique and analysis of the proposal.

And another vote for unparenting being a pejorative term:

http://www.geocities.com/wrightway2/011500.htm
> I read a post on the internet later that evening that really hit home as to
> what was missing in our unschooling efforts, other than compliance :)  The
> lady that posted said she felt that unschoolers actually have more structure
> than other homeschoolers - only internal not external.  We expect our kids to
> learn to care for themselves.  She said "that being responsible for your
> actions and taking care of what God gives you is completely biblical.  She
> also said that unschooling doesn't mean unparenting".

Joyce


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

Kara Bauer

Then, after many animation references, a frustratingly unlinked (or perhaps
unparented?) link to an essay entitled "Unschooling or Unparenting?"

And another missing page that starts: "... My response to that is to remind
them that unschooling doesn't mean "unparenting". My kids have plenty of
responsibilities and structure in their lives. It's ...">>

This one struck me, although the computer animation was pretty funny. It seems *to me* that when being confronted about things - school, parenting, housework, etc sometimes we (as adults mostly) tend to say things such as the above because we don't want to be seen as 'failing'.

When faced with "well you are unparenting, so therefore you sit on your butt and eat bon bons, or you are so lucky to be a stay at home mom and do "nothing" all day, or any of the various other annoying things someone may say, people may (I have) get defensive and say these things..

Anyway it was just a thought that passed through my head,
KaraGet more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


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

Kolleen

>Joyce wrote:
>And then, frustratingly, a reference that could arguably go either way from
>a Pagan homeschooling page:
>
>http://members.tripod.com/acorns3/acorns9.html
>
>> My view of this is that people sort themselves out by associating with
others
>> based on commonalities and what meets their needs as time goes by.
>> Homeschooling families may find that they actually have little in common
with
>> each other, except for an intense interest in the well-being of their
>children
>> and a desire to be left alone by the school district. Families who come to
>> this primarily from a religious motivation may share a great deal more with
>> each other; many such groups dictate a unified way of life. However, the
more
>> secular homeschoolers are indeed a diverse lot, particularly the adults.
They
>> include rich and poor, mainstream and alternative lifestyles, families with
>> professional degrees and those with high school diplomas, urban, suburban
and
>> rural, liberal and conservative, young and middle-aged, new and old
>> homeschoolers, etc. Even with regard to child-rearing, homeschoolers include
>> all philosophies from what I call unparenting to rigid behavior management.
>Is
>> there any reason to think all these folks are likely to be friends? About
the
>> only way to bring them all together would be in defense of homeschooling
>> itself, if the legislature were proposing some drastic reduction of our
>> rights. Even then, each part of the homeschooling "community" would have its
>> own critique and analysis of the proposal.


Curiously, why is this a 'frustrating' reference?

kolleen
the unschooling unparent.

Kolleen

>Kara wrote:
>When faced with "well you are unparenting, so therefore you sit on your
>butt and eat bon bons, or you are so lucky to be a stay at home mom and do
>"nothing" all day, or any of the various other annoying things someone may
>say, people may (I have) get defensive and say these things..

You're right Kara, about assumptions. Especially on words that are not
clearly defined in our unabridged Oxfords or *insert dictionary of choice
here*.

The assumptions that stay-at-home moms have it so much *easier* is going
to be a hard prejudicial mountain to climb. Or the assumption that
unparents sit on their ass all day.

kolleen

Fetteroll

on 3/20/02 11:07 AM, Kolleen at Kolleen@... wrote:

> Curiously, why is this a 'frustrating' reference?

Because either use of unparenting could have applied to it. *She* knows what
style she'd label unparenting but we can only guess.

>> homeschoolers include all philosophies from what I call unparenting to rigid
>> behavior management.

Joyce


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

Cindy

Fetteroll wrote:
>
> Apparently it's a technical term foremost and uses up most of the 78 pages:
>
> > Have you tried just unparenting the belly from the hips (the old origin) and
> > then parenting the hips to the belly, making the belly bone effectively your
> > new root? I just did a quick test with a skinned object and seemed to work
> > ok. I could then independantly animate the front and rear quad, and control
> > the overall orientation of the setup from the new 'belly' root.
> >
> > You may need to disable any IK handles though that may be along the spine
> > though and make sure your model is at the bind pose when you do it.
>
> I *think* they're talking about computer animation though I'm not entirely
> sure they're speaking English ;-)
>
> (If anyone wants to check out the other fascinatingly baffling posts they're
> at:
> http://www.highend3d.com/maya/gamearchive/spe.3d?mail_id=921)
>
Yes, this is computer animation terminology. Maya is a high-end graphics
program that Alias/Wavefront makes.

> And used in programming:
>
> > gtk/gtklist.c (gtk_list_clear_items): Clear
> > list->undo/list_focus_child after unparenting
> > child, since unparenting the child can result
> > in list->last_focus_child being set.
>
> They both seem to suggest severing a dependent relationship.
>
They are changing relationships in a directed acyclic graph most
likely - I know the animation people use those lots.

From a person formerly employeed in the computer animation field,

Cindy