Questions?
[email protected]
Thanks April,
Looking forward to hearing more.
that sounds alot like what we already do and are planning to do this year.
Let the kids and studies lead us where they will.
Thanks again,
Darci
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Looking forward to hearing more.
that sounds alot like what we already do and are planning to do this year.
Let the kids and studies lead us where they will.
Thanks again,
Darci
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brian and Kathy Stamp
I'm not trying to start controversy I'm truly learning here. Some thoughts I've had lately.
Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their level that might cause them harm.
So how do you all decide the difference between letting your children do what they wish and keeping them safe? How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old really understands the dangers of certain situations? Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological damage is happening?
How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.? I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their brains are still growing. If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them? No we can't protect them forever but how do we know that a 3 year old is ready to handle it. If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day after day aren't we desensitizing them from these types of things. Making them think it's normal or acceptable. I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. She thinks all those bad things might happen to her. Then she has nightmares. But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart was found. We turned on the coverage of her being found and it was a happy time, but my 9 year old was obsessed with the fact that she had been taken and was very scared for a while after.
I'm really struggling on just letting them do whatever interests them and realizing that they are still not able to completely comprehend the consequences of some choices and by the time they do it might be too late as the damage might be done already either physically or mentally.
I really struggle with these thoughts every day which keeps me from enjoying this journey with my kids.
Kathy
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their level that might cause them harm.
So how do you all decide the difference between letting your children do what they wish and keeping them safe? How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old really understands the dangers of certain situations? Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological damage is happening?
How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.? I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their brains are still growing. If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them? No we can't protect them forever but how do we know that a 3 year old is ready to handle it. If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day after day aren't we desensitizing them from these types of things. Making them think it's normal or acceptable. I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. She thinks all those bad things might happen to her. Then she has nightmares. But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart was found. We turned on the coverage of her being found and it was a happy time, but my 9 year old was obsessed with the fact that she had been taken and was very scared for a while after.
I'm really struggling on just letting them do whatever interests them and realizing that they are still not able to completely comprehend the consequences of some choices and by the time they do it might be too late as the damage might be done already either physically or mentally.
I really struggle with these thoughts every day which keeps me from enjoying this journey with my kids.
Kathy
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/3/03 8:56:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bstamp@... writes:
to sit in front of the TV all day watching violence or sex. This assumption
just doesn't hold true in the families that I know where children do have the
choice.
Just one thought.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
bstamp@... writes:
> . if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years inYou may be assuming that because they have the choice that they will choose
> front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.? I mean afterall we
> don't come into the world knowing everything. Their brains are still growing.
> If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence or
> to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them? No we
> can't protect them forever but how do we know that a 3 year old is ready to
> handle it.
to sit in front of the TV all day watching violence or sex. This assumption
just doesn't hold true in the families that I know where children do have the
choice.
Just one thought.
Pam G
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
24hrmom
<<Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.? I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their brains are still growing. If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
Well, from my experience, given the freedom of choice, my kids just didn't choose to sit and watch violent shows when they were younger ... they just weren't interested. In fact, they still aren't interested and they are 6, 9, and 11. But, even if they were, you don't just leave them alone for hours in front of the TV; you watch with them. Probably not all the time, but regularly. And you engage them in conversation. Maybe you say "Yuck, I think that's gross!", or "I wonder how they got that to look so realistic?" (whatever you're really thinking) and by enjoying the moment with them, as a byproduct you will learn what it is that is interesting to them and why. It's a win-win situation! By talking about what is interesting to them, you get to share your knowledge about the subject and they get to share their knowledge and excitement with you. And you've enjoyed each others company. :-)
As for doing nothing, it may look like that to you, but there is definitely something going on, even if it's not physical ... unless they are sleeping ;-)
<<I'm really struggling on just letting them do whatever interests them and realizing that they are still not able to completely comprehend the consequences of some choices and by the time they do it might be too late as the damage might be done already either physically or mentally.>>
I wouldn't suggest you just screw up your courage and drop all imposed limits. But you can definitely ease into it. For example:
Next time they want to do something they find interesting, but you think has no redeeming value, say sure and join in. I bet you'll be interested to see why they are interested, and you may be surprised to find that they are learning.
Next time they want to stay up past bedtime because they are in the middle of something, just say okay. And marvel that they are so engaged in something that makes them happy.
Next time they want a snack close to dinner, realize that they are hungry now and that you want them to listen to their bodies, not watch the clock. And if they're not hungry when dinner is ready, save them a plate for later.
Next time they want to build a big fort (or get out all the craft stuff etc.) in the family room, don't start to get all twitchy and grim and remind them they better clean it up after they're done. Smile, help them carry the blankets over, and maybe surprise them with a snack or hot chocolate for you all to enjoy inside. The joy you will see in their eyes is infectious and worth way more than a tidy family room.
The great thing is that you'll learn to trust them - their goal is not to make you miserable - and they'll learn to make good decisions, not just how to follow someone's rules (Joyce had a great post about this yesterday).
Pam L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Well, from my experience, given the freedom of choice, my kids just didn't choose to sit and watch violent shows when they were younger ... they just weren't interested. In fact, they still aren't interested and they are 6, 9, and 11. But, even if they were, you don't just leave them alone for hours in front of the TV; you watch with them. Probably not all the time, but regularly. And you engage them in conversation. Maybe you say "Yuck, I think that's gross!", or "I wonder how they got that to look so realistic?" (whatever you're really thinking) and by enjoying the moment with them, as a byproduct you will learn what it is that is interesting to them and why. It's a win-win situation! By talking about what is interesting to them, you get to share your knowledge about the subject and they get to share their knowledge and excitement with you. And you've enjoyed each others company. :-)
As for doing nothing, it may look like that to you, but there is definitely something going on, even if it's not physical ... unless they are sleeping ;-)
<<I'm really struggling on just letting them do whatever interests them and realizing that they are still not able to completely comprehend the consequences of some choices and by the time they do it might be too late as the damage might be done already either physically or mentally.>>
I wouldn't suggest you just screw up your courage and drop all imposed limits. But you can definitely ease into it. For example:
Next time they want to do something they find interesting, but you think has no redeeming value, say sure and join in. I bet you'll be interested to see why they are interested, and you may be surprised to find that they are learning.
Next time they want to stay up past bedtime because they are in the middle of something, just say okay. And marvel that they are so engaged in something that makes them happy.
Next time they want a snack close to dinner, realize that they are hungry now and that you want them to listen to their bodies, not watch the clock. And if they're not hungry when dinner is ready, save them a plate for later.
Next time they want to build a big fort (or get out all the craft stuff etc.) in the family room, don't start to get all twitchy and grim and remind them they better clean it up after they're done. Smile, help them carry the blankets over, and maybe surprise them with a snack or hot chocolate for you all to enjoy inside. The joy you will see in their eyes is infectious and worth way more than a tidy family room.
The great thing is that you'll learn to trust them - their goal is not to make you miserable - and they'll learn to make good decisions, not just how to follow someone's rules (Joyce had a great post about this yesterday).
Pam L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brian and Kathy Stamp
Thanks Pam! I really have been letting go little by little. Letting them eat if they are hungry if they dont' think they can hold out the extra 30 minutes till dinner for eg. I've always let them build and construct things in our home. But I guess I don't understand the logic of them not having to clean up such creations they make if it's in the center of our home. I don't understand the allowing of them to play violent video games. I'm against violence of all type and to me personally, violent movies and video games glorifies it in their minds. My oldest has friends that play these games every free moment they get and I do think that it can cause damage to one's mental thinking. I might be wrong but this is one place I'd rather take a chance on being wrong then just hoping that it's doing no harm.
It's hard sometimes to express what one is really getting at. I just read a lot on this list about no limits, but yet we do set limits for safety reasons for infants and I'm wondering why/when that necessarily jsut changes.
Kathy
I
It's hard sometimes to express what one is really getting at. I just read a lot on this list about no limits, but yet we do set limits for safety reasons for infants and I'm wondering why/when that necessarily jsut changes.
Kathy
I
----- Original Message -----
From: 24hrmom
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Questions?
<<Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.? I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their brains are still growing. If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
Well, from my experience, given the freedom of choice, my kids just didn't choose to sit and watch violent shows when they were younger ... they just weren't interested. In fact, they still aren't interested and they are 6, 9, and 11. But, even if they were, you don't just leave them alone for hours in front of the TV; you watch with them. Probably not all the time, but regularly. And you engage them in conversation. Maybe you say "Yuck, I think that's gross!", or "I wonder how they got that to look so realistic?" (whatever you're really thinking) and by enjoying the moment with them, as a byproduct you will learn what it is that is interesting to them and why. It's a win-win situation! By talking about what is interesting to them, you get to share your knowledge about the subject and they get to share their knowledge and excitement with you. And you've enjoyed each others company. :-)
As for doing nothing, it may look like that to you, but there is definitely something going on, even if it's not physical ... unless they are sleeping ;-)
<<I'm really struggling on just letting them do whatever interests them and realizing that they are still not able to completely comprehend the consequences of some choices and by the time they do it might be too late as the damage might be done already either physically or mentally.>>
I wouldn't suggest you just screw up your courage and drop all imposed limits. But you can definitely ease into it. For example:
Next time they want to do something they find interesting, but you think has no redeeming value, say sure and join in. I bet you'll be interested to see why they are interested, and you may be surprised to find that they are learning.
Next time they want to stay up past bedtime because they are in the middle of something, just say okay. And marvel that they are so engaged in something that makes them happy.
Next time they want a snack close to dinner, realize that they are hungry now and that you want them to listen to their bodies, not watch the clock. And if they're not hungry when dinner is ready, save them a plate for later.
Next time they want to build a big fort (or get out all the craft stuff etc.) in the family room, don't start to get all twitchy and grim and remind them they better clean it up after they're done. Smile, help them carry the blankets over, and maybe surprise them with a snack or hot chocolate for you all to enjoy inside. The joy you will see in their eyes is infectious and worth way more than a tidy family room.
The great thing is that you'll learn to trust them - their goal is not to make you miserable - and they'll learn to make good decisions, not just how to follow someone's rules (Joyce had a great post about this yesterday).
Pam L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/3/03 6:56:46 AM, bstamp@... writes:
<< Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house
unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them
by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up
and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of
that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance
that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their
level that might cause them harm. >>
I'm the same way with my adult friends, though. If they're about to
accidently do something dangerous (sit on scissors, walk on a wet floor, change a
lightbulb without standing on something I know for sure to be safe) I'll quickly
intervene and help make the situation safer.
<<How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old
really understands the dangers of certain situations?>>
I'm not sure that my 14 and 17 year olds really understand the dangers of all
situations, but I know they have a lot of experience with making respnsible
decisions and with being analytical, because for 14 and 17 years I've give them
safe opportunities to practice.
<<Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological
damage is happening?>>
I'm with my kids a lot, and not just in the same house, but right beside
them, watching what they're watching, answering their questions about what we all
saw elsewhere, or about why another family is not like ours, or why the cat's
walking funny or why the air smells like smoke. We have, since they were
little, helped them analyze the world around them, and one result is that we are
near enough to feel their moods and responses in a more visceral way. We
don't wait for them to come and tell us they're uncomfortable about something.
We can tell by how close they sit, how long they stand around where other
people are, by how they eat and sleep afterwards.
A moment of time out: many people ignore entirely any instinct they have
toward the interpersonal or intrapersonal skills they have. Partly they've been
around too many rules and truisms about what should be and so they've shoved
aside their perceptions of what is. And none of that "counts in school." When
a kid is good at interpersonals, they're criticized for talking too much and
for not leaving the other kids alone to take care of their own problems
themselves.
<<How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't
be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months
or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex
etc.?>>
I've had three eighteen month olds, and three five year olds. Not once did
they say "OOOH! Violence and sex." And they rarely if ever "sat in front of
a T.V." in the way I'm guessing you mean. If there was a TV on, they were
never required to "SIT." Holly surprised me when she was five by sitting down
to watch part of Twelfth Night (Helena Bonham Carter version) with a little
girl from across the street. I expected them to watch a bit and wander off.
They watched all the rest of it. I neither made them nor forbid them from
watching it. There were movies they liked parts of, but they weren't usually
sitting through a whole movie.
I still haven't really concentratedly watched all of The Lion King or Beauty
and the Beast--I wander in and out so some parts I've seen ten times, and some
not yet. Very same with my kids and some movies. And what they'd tend to
walk out on is sex and violence. They come back for kid and animal scenes, or
songs, which is what made Rocky Horror Picture Show an exception. There was
cartoonish sex and violence, but some good songs. When the music was boring or
gone, they'd go back to legos or swings or Ninja Turtle figures or the dog or
whatever.
<<I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their
brains are still growing.>>
There are people who say we come into the world knowing nothing. That belief
is called "tabula rasa," meaning "blank slate." If you want to read more
about it, just put in in at google and there will be all kinds of claims one way
and another. But the only way people believe it is to discount ALL of
instinct. And they do! I was taught in school in the 60's and 70's that humans have
no instincts, that all we learn has to come from books. I mentioned this
derisively in the 1980's and a friend who was in college then said he's just
been taught that at school himself.
So that's one of the kernals of the book-worshipping culture which bites
unschoolers in the butt. IF humans are blank slates, and if books are our
artificial replacement for instincts we don't have, then books are like parts of us,
parts of our culture without which we would be like birds that didn't know how
to build nests, or monkeys who had no idea of their social positions and so
would be chucked violently out of the nearest tree and killed. TERRIBLE things
would happen if we didn't study hard and listen to our teachers, because we
had no instinct.
Add to that Christianity's fear of evil, and the idea that Satan lurks to
tempt the weak, and let people steep in that for a few hundred years, and what
you get is parents who are afraid to step out of the lines.
<<If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence
or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
This question can only come from someone who's never seen a kid free to
choose in a rich environment. A serious question to bstamp@carolina...: Have you
ever seen a kid "just do nothing day after day"? Please respond to the list,
because I'll have questions.
<<If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day>>
Why would a three year old sit watching violence?
What are his other choices? DOES he have freedom of movement and choice?
And if so, why do you think he wouldn't choose other things day after day?
<<I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. >>
Why is she watching the news?
Are you watching it and modelling that it's important to do so?
Are you encouraging it? Is it on in the kitchen or where she needs to be and
it's hard to get away from it?
Because I've had three nine year olds, and they never chose to watch the news.
<<But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it
happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following
making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart
was found. >>
I read about it online and in magazines. I didn't bring that story into my
house. The older kids were vaguely aware from overhearing things.
We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either. Not that the kids
couldn't have gone there if they'd had an interest from things outside the
house, but neither my husband nor I cared, so most of what we heard was on comedy
routines. EASILY the details are available later if someone wants to catch up
on a story like that.
Sandra
<< Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house
unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them
by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up
and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of
that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance
that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their
level that might cause them harm. >>
I'm the same way with my adult friends, though. If they're about to
accidently do something dangerous (sit on scissors, walk on a wet floor, change a
lightbulb without standing on something I know for sure to be safe) I'll quickly
intervene and help make the situation safer.
<<How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old
really understands the dangers of certain situations?>>
I'm not sure that my 14 and 17 year olds really understand the dangers of all
situations, but I know they have a lot of experience with making respnsible
decisions and with being analytical, because for 14 and 17 years I've give them
safe opportunities to practice.
<<Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological
damage is happening?>>
I'm with my kids a lot, and not just in the same house, but right beside
them, watching what they're watching, answering their questions about what we all
saw elsewhere, or about why another family is not like ours, or why the cat's
walking funny or why the air smells like smoke. We have, since they were
little, helped them analyze the world around them, and one result is that we are
near enough to feel their moods and responses in a more visceral way. We
don't wait for them to come and tell us they're uncomfortable about something.
We can tell by how close they sit, how long they stand around where other
people are, by how they eat and sleep afterwards.
A moment of time out: many people ignore entirely any instinct they have
toward the interpersonal or intrapersonal skills they have. Partly they've been
around too many rules and truisms about what should be and so they've shoved
aside their perceptions of what is. And none of that "counts in school." When
a kid is good at interpersonals, they're criticized for talking too much and
for not leaving the other kids alone to take care of their own problems
themselves.
<<How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't
be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months
or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex
etc.?>>
I've had three eighteen month olds, and three five year olds. Not once did
they say "OOOH! Violence and sex." And they rarely if ever "sat in front of
a T.V." in the way I'm guessing you mean. If there was a TV on, they were
never required to "SIT." Holly surprised me when she was five by sitting down
to watch part of Twelfth Night (Helena Bonham Carter version) with a little
girl from across the street. I expected them to watch a bit and wander off.
They watched all the rest of it. I neither made them nor forbid them from
watching it. There were movies they liked parts of, but they weren't usually
sitting through a whole movie.
I still haven't really concentratedly watched all of The Lion King or Beauty
and the Beast--I wander in and out so some parts I've seen ten times, and some
not yet. Very same with my kids and some movies. And what they'd tend to
walk out on is sex and violence. They come back for kid and animal scenes, or
songs, which is what made Rocky Horror Picture Show an exception. There was
cartoonish sex and violence, but some good songs. When the music was boring or
gone, they'd go back to legos or swings or Ninja Turtle figures or the dog or
whatever.
<<I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their
brains are still growing.>>
There are people who say we come into the world knowing nothing. That belief
is called "tabula rasa," meaning "blank slate." If you want to read more
about it, just put in in at google and there will be all kinds of claims one way
and another. But the only way people believe it is to discount ALL of
instinct. And they do! I was taught in school in the 60's and 70's that humans have
no instincts, that all we learn has to come from books. I mentioned this
derisively in the 1980's and a friend who was in college then said he's just
been taught that at school himself.
So that's one of the kernals of the book-worshipping culture which bites
unschoolers in the butt. IF humans are blank slates, and if books are our
artificial replacement for instincts we don't have, then books are like parts of us,
parts of our culture without which we would be like birds that didn't know how
to build nests, or monkeys who had no idea of their social positions and so
would be chucked violently out of the nearest tree and killed. TERRIBLE things
would happen if we didn't study hard and listen to our teachers, because we
had no instinct.
Add to that Christianity's fear of evil, and the idea that Satan lurks to
tempt the weak, and let people steep in that for a few hundred years, and what
you get is parents who are afraid to step out of the lines.
<<If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence
or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
This question can only come from someone who's never seen a kid free to
choose in a rich environment. A serious question to bstamp@carolina...: Have you
ever seen a kid "just do nothing day after day"? Please respond to the list,
because I'll have questions.
<<If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day>>
Why would a three year old sit watching violence?
What are his other choices? DOES he have freedom of movement and choice?
And if so, why do you think he wouldn't choose other things day after day?
<<I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. >>
Why is she watching the news?
Are you watching it and modelling that it's important to do so?
Are you encouraging it? Is it on in the kitchen or where she needs to be and
it's hard to get away from it?
Because I've had three nine year olds, and they never chose to watch the news.
<<But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it
happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following
making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart
was found. >>
I read about it online and in magazines. I didn't bring that story into my
house. The older kids were vaguely aware from overhearing things.
We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either. Not that the kids
couldn't have gone there if they'd had an interest from things outside the
house, but neither my husband nor I cared, so most of what we heard was on comedy
routines. EASILY the details are available later if someone wants to catch up
on a story like that.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/3/03 8:21:57 AM, 24hrmom@... writes:
<< Next time they want to build a big fort (or get out all the craft stuff
etc.) in the family room, don't start to get all twitchy and grim and remind
them they better clean it up after they're done. Smile, help them carry the
blankets over, and maybe surprise them with a snack or hot chocolate for you all
to enjoy inside. The joy you will see in their eyes is infectious and worth
way more than a tidy family room. >>
Saturday the youngest kid at Holly's party wandered off by himself, and was
bored, and I pulled out some toys for him. A bag of Power Rangers and vehicles
(some fast food toys from long ago), a suitcase with Fisher Price viewers and
animation cartridges (I don't know what those are called) and a plastic
shoebox with Mr. Potatohead stuff.
He played with it all and it was scattered around the den and I thought that
was fine with me, and I'd pick it up later, and organize it better when I did,
and put that cloth bag in the laundry because I think a cat peed on it long
ago...
When the party was closing down, I saw that all that stuff had been packed
and stacked up. Wow. I was almost disappointed!! <bwg> It was cool. Marisa
Martinez had helped him (he's a once-removed relative of hers). That was
unexpected (Dave and Nancy, if you're reading, that was great!)
And a few weeks ago Holly and two friends made a big maze/ playhouse of
folding futons set up on their sides and chairs and sheets and blankets draped over
all that, and it was a whole room FULL of stuff. I admired what they showed
me and went away figuring later I'd help Holly clean it up. Nope, they put it
all back.
If I were holding the idea that **they better not leave that mess for ME,
grumble, darn it, I'll just tell them they can't get the stuff out at all** I
couldn't have been happily surprised by ANYthing. I would resent it if it were
not clean, and feel just smug if it were.
But by deciding that I would be willing to pick it up happily, I could be
happily NOT required to pick it up.
Sandra
<< Next time they want to build a big fort (or get out all the craft stuff
etc.) in the family room, don't start to get all twitchy and grim and remind
them they better clean it up after they're done. Smile, help them carry the
blankets over, and maybe surprise them with a snack or hot chocolate for you all
to enjoy inside. The joy you will see in their eyes is infectious and worth
way more than a tidy family room. >>
Saturday the youngest kid at Holly's party wandered off by himself, and was
bored, and I pulled out some toys for him. A bag of Power Rangers and vehicles
(some fast food toys from long ago), a suitcase with Fisher Price viewers and
animation cartridges (I don't know what those are called) and a plastic
shoebox with Mr. Potatohead stuff.
He played with it all and it was scattered around the den and I thought that
was fine with me, and I'd pick it up later, and organize it better when I did,
and put that cloth bag in the laundry because I think a cat peed on it long
ago...
When the party was closing down, I saw that all that stuff had been packed
and stacked up. Wow. I was almost disappointed!! <bwg> It was cool. Marisa
Martinez had helped him (he's a once-removed relative of hers). That was
unexpected (Dave and Nancy, if you're reading, that was great!)
And a few weeks ago Holly and two friends made a big maze/ playhouse of
folding futons set up on their sides and chairs and sheets and blankets draped over
all that, and it was a whole room FULL of stuff. I admired what they showed
me and went away figuring later I'd help Holly clean it up. Nope, they put it
all back.
If I were holding the idea that **they better not leave that mess for ME,
grumble, darn it, I'll just tell them they can't get the stuff out at all** I
couldn't have been happily surprised by ANYthing. I would resent it if it were
not clean, and feel just smug if it were.
But by deciding that I would be willing to pick it up happily, I could be
happily NOT required to pick it up.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/3/03 8:43:47 AM, bstamp@... writes:
<< I really have been letting go little by little. Letting them eat if they
are hungry if they dont' think they can hold out the extra 30 minutes till
dinner >>
Why not give them a bite or two of something so they never have to "hold
out," not even thirty minutes? It will make a difference in the peace and
happiness of all involved (except those who enjoy control, and they NEED to lose some
of the peace and happiness they're deriving from others' discomfort).
<<But I guess I don't understand the logic of them not having to clean up
such creations they make if it's in the center of our home.>>
It's hard to understand, but it's worth trying.
(And they way you've phrased it isn't a match for the eventual thinking.
"Not having to clean up" isn't the same as you will word it when/if you come to
understand the difference.)
<<I don't understand the allowing of them to play violent video games. I'm
against violence of all type and to me personally, violent movies and video
games glorifies it in their minds.>>
Playing a video game isn't violence. It's playing a game.
Preventing someone else's non-harmful behavior comes closer to violence than
sitting with a game controller on a couch in one's own living room comes.
You start "to me personally..." and then go on to say what is happening in
someone else's mind. Your idea about what happens in their minds isn't the
same as what DOES happen.
Don't believe everything you think.
<<My oldest has friends that play these games every free moment they get and
I do think that it can cause damage to one's mental thinking. >>
Why do you think that?
(and "mental thinking" is the only kind there is)
<<I might be wrong but this is one place I'd rather take a chance on being
wrong then just hoping that it's doing no harm. >>
What might be the harmful thing is the limitations and the explanations which
turn out not to be true. You are taking a chance.
People who spank don't want to take the chance that by not spanking their
kids grow up to ... (whatever: get pregnant, steal cars) So they don't want to
"take a chance," and they hit their kids as prevention against something
someone else told them might possibly be a result.
How many levels removed from your actual children, in this actual moment, are
you willing to risk being so that you can comfortably accept vague advice
from people who've never tried respecting kids?
<<
It's hard sometimes to express what one is really getting at. I just read a
lot on this list about no limits, but yet we do set limits for safety reasons
for infants and I'm wondering why/when that necessarily jsut changes.>>
It never "just changes."
Sandra
<< I really have been letting go little by little. Letting them eat if they
are hungry if they dont' think they can hold out the extra 30 minutes till
dinner >>
Why not give them a bite or two of something so they never have to "hold
out," not even thirty minutes? It will make a difference in the peace and
happiness of all involved (except those who enjoy control, and they NEED to lose some
of the peace and happiness they're deriving from others' discomfort).
<<But I guess I don't understand the logic of them not having to clean up
such creations they make if it's in the center of our home.>>
It's hard to understand, but it's worth trying.
(And they way you've phrased it isn't a match for the eventual thinking.
"Not having to clean up" isn't the same as you will word it when/if you come to
understand the difference.)
<<I don't understand the allowing of them to play violent video games. I'm
against violence of all type and to me personally, violent movies and video
games glorifies it in their minds.>>
Playing a video game isn't violence. It's playing a game.
Preventing someone else's non-harmful behavior comes closer to violence than
sitting with a game controller on a couch in one's own living room comes.
You start "to me personally..." and then go on to say what is happening in
someone else's mind. Your idea about what happens in their minds isn't the
same as what DOES happen.
Don't believe everything you think.
<<My oldest has friends that play these games every free moment they get and
I do think that it can cause damage to one's mental thinking. >>
Why do you think that?
(and "mental thinking" is the only kind there is)
<<I might be wrong but this is one place I'd rather take a chance on being
wrong then just hoping that it's doing no harm. >>
What might be the harmful thing is the limitations and the explanations which
turn out not to be true. You are taking a chance.
People who spank don't want to take the chance that by not spanking their
kids grow up to ... (whatever: get pregnant, steal cars) So they don't want to
"take a chance," and they hit their kids as prevention against something
someone else told them might possibly be a result.
How many levels removed from your actual children, in this actual moment, are
you willing to risk being so that you can comfortably accept vague advice
from people who've never tried respecting kids?
<<
It's hard sometimes to express what one is really getting at. I just read a
lot on this list about no limits, but yet we do set limits for safety reasons
for infants and I'm wondering why/when that necessarily jsut changes.>>
It never "just changes."
Sandra
24hrmom
<<If I were holding the idea that **they better not leave that mess for ME,
grumble, darn it, I'll just tell them they can't get the stuff out at all** I
couldn't have been happily surprised by ANYthing. I would resent it if it were
not clean, and feel just smug if it were.
But by deciding that I would be willing to pick it up happily, I could be
happily NOT required to pick it up. Sandra>>
I had the same kind of experience last night. Over the past couple of weeks (again!) my daughter has been spending most of the time in her room listening to her Harry Potter audiobooks. What she loves is that she can do other things while she's listening. So her room had become home to: our entire bead collection (she's been making wire jewelry - just figuring it out on her own, designing clasps etc.); all our playdoh stuff (we made a new batch and she took it upstairs); all the HP books & lots of paper (she has been looking up stuff and writing down her fave parts); some sort of potion she's making (cutting up bits of paper and putting them in a glass of water); tons of material, thread, stuffing, and needles (we visited a fabric store nearby and rummaged through the end of roll bin and she's been sewing up a storm - pillows, clothes for her stuffed animals, HP scarf etc.); lots of candy wrappers from Halloween; a collection of the pop cans she's worked her way though the past few days ... you get the picture! :-)
Anyway, she's been having a great time but as you can imagine, her room is pretty full of stuff by now! Yesterday she had two spilling accidents from the crowded TV table beside her bed .. which we just wiped up and then went about our business. And she noticed how hard it was for her to see her clock on her night table.
So I was trying to get to sleep just after 10pm last night when I heard some repeated banging from her room and I got up to ask her to keep it down a bit. Well the banging was from the broom she was wielding around her floor - while listening to an audiobook, of course! And this morning I peeked in (she's still sleeping) and her room is all tidied up. Without me mentioning it, or hounding her to do it, she just decided it was too messy for her, so she cleaned it up. And she knows she can ask me to help, or to do it all for that matter if it's overwhelming for her, but she did it on her own.
There is now a pile by the stairs of stuff that she doesn't want to keep in her room, and I'll happily carry that stuff down. And it will be interesting to see what new stuff she decides to do when she gets up today!
On a related side note, something I've been thinking about lately. One of the things I personally enjoy about unschooling is the freedom the kids have to be creative; not being told that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to do things. My daughter loves to figure out ways to make/accomplish things (as you can see from above!). A few weeks ago my kids were together with their cousins and my daughter suggested they make things with the fabric bits my Mom had laying around. My niece (10) said she'd like to make a ladybug, to go with the theme in her bedroom, and asked my daughter how to make one. She replied, "I don't know, just figure it out. That's most of the fun!" Well, my niece was quite taken aback. She's so used to being given directions on how to do things, that's there's a "right way" (i.e. the teacher's way), that open-ended, creative stuff is confusing and difficult - definitely not very fun. Eventually my daughter gave her some ideas and she set about making her ladybug. It really hit me that the kids at school are not learning how to analyze a situation and figure out a solution, just being taught what to think / do.
Oh, just made a connection! To the posts yesterday and today about kids just learning to follow the rules, not how to analyze a situation and make good decisions. Extend it to kids just learning to follow instructions, not how to figure out a path for themselves. I would bet that many school and school-at-home kids get easily frustrated in open-ended situations because they feel they have to figure out the path that their teacher / parent wants them to follow, not just a path that will work for them (I remember I hated that at school). Put them in a situation where they have no rules or set of instructions to follow, and they will often be lost as to how to successfully get themselves out of it.
Pam L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
grumble, darn it, I'll just tell them they can't get the stuff out at all** I
couldn't have been happily surprised by ANYthing. I would resent it if it were
not clean, and feel just smug if it were.
But by deciding that I would be willing to pick it up happily, I could be
happily NOT required to pick it up. Sandra>>
I had the same kind of experience last night. Over the past couple of weeks (again!) my daughter has been spending most of the time in her room listening to her Harry Potter audiobooks. What she loves is that she can do other things while she's listening. So her room had become home to: our entire bead collection (she's been making wire jewelry - just figuring it out on her own, designing clasps etc.); all our playdoh stuff (we made a new batch and she took it upstairs); all the HP books & lots of paper (she has been looking up stuff and writing down her fave parts); some sort of potion she's making (cutting up bits of paper and putting them in a glass of water); tons of material, thread, stuffing, and needles (we visited a fabric store nearby and rummaged through the end of roll bin and she's been sewing up a storm - pillows, clothes for her stuffed animals, HP scarf etc.); lots of candy wrappers from Halloween; a collection of the pop cans she's worked her way though the past few days ... you get the picture! :-)
Anyway, she's been having a great time but as you can imagine, her room is pretty full of stuff by now! Yesterday she had two spilling accidents from the crowded TV table beside her bed .. which we just wiped up and then went about our business. And she noticed how hard it was for her to see her clock on her night table.
So I was trying to get to sleep just after 10pm last night when I heard some repeated banging from her room and I got up to ask her to keep it down a bit. Well the banging was from the broom she was wielding around her floor - while listening to an audiobook, of course! And this morning I peeked in (she's still sleeping) and her room is all tidied up. Without me mentioning it, or hounding her to do it, she just decided it was too messy for her, so she cleaned it up. And she knows she can ask me to help, or to do it all for that matter if it's overwhelming for her, but she did it on her own.
There is now a pile by the stairs of stuff that she doesn't want to keep in her room, and I'll happily carry that stuff down. And it will be interesting to see what new stuff she decides to do when she gets up today!
On a related side note, something I've been thinking about lately. One of the things I personally enjoy about unschooling is the freedom the kids have to be creative; not being told that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to do things. My daughter loves to figure out ways to make/accomplish things (as you can see from above!). A few weeks ago my kids were together with their cousins and my daughter suggested they make things with the fabric bits my Mom had laying around. My niece (10) said she'd like to make a ladybug, to go with the theme in her bedroom, and asked my daughter how to make one. She replied, "I don't know, just figure it out. That's most of the fun!" Well, my niece was quite taken aback. She's so used to being given directions on how to do things, that's there's a "right way" (i.e. the teacher's way), that open-ended, creative stuff is confusing and difficult - definitely not very fun. Eventually my daughter gave her some ideas and she set about making her ladybug. It really hit me that the kids at school are not learning how to analyze a situation and figure out a solution, just being taught what to think / do.
Oh, just made a connection! To the posts yesterday and today about kids just learning to follow the rules, not how to analyze a situation and make good decisions. Extend it to kids just learning to follow instructions, not how to figure out a path for themselves. I would bet that many school and school-at-home kids get easily frustrated in open-ended situations because they feel they have to figure out the path that their teacher / parent wants them to follow, not just a path that will work for them (I remember I hated that at school). Put them in a situation where they have no rules or set of instructions to follow, and they will often be lost as to how to successfully get themselves out of it.
Pam L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
nellebelle
-----Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex etc.?>>>>>
I am allowed to watch whatever I want, and I choose not to watch that sort of programming. Why would a 3 or 5 year old choose to? My 8 year old says yuck and covers her eyes when she sees someone kissing.
Mary Ellen
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I am allowed to watch whatever I want, and I choose not to watch that sort of programming. Why would a 3 or 5 year old choose to? My 8 year old says yuck and covers her eyes when she sees someone kissing.
>>>>>>I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. She thinks all those bad things might happen to her>>>>>I stopped watching most TV news when my first child was a toddler, because I didn't want her to be exposed to it. Although she now (age 10) has free reign of the remote control, she doesn't choose to watch the news.
Mary Ellen
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pam sorooshian
On Nov 3, 2003, at 5:55 AM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of
violence or sex etc."
Sounds like you've mistakenly assumed that those of us who have no
limits have kids who do watch anything and everything. Even the wording
you've used, "sit in front of.." is indicative of an attitude - do you
also use that wording when kids are reading? Would you ask us if we
condone kids sitting in front of a book all day long? My kids are not
just sitting there in front of the tv having something done to them.
They no more disengage their brains when they watch tv and movies then
they do when they read a book or watch a play or the opera or ballet or
anything else. Its a lie that watching tv is more passive than those
other things.
My kids at 9 years old seldom, if ever, watched the "news" - not the
network or local news broadcasts. They don't have the ability to
discern that there are lots of awful things that happen every day and,
yet, are extremely unlikely to happen to them. Why is your 9 yo
daughter wanting to watch the news?
My guess is that it was not her choice - that it was just "on" - some
adult in the family watching it - and so she watched. THAT is not a
responsible adult behavior - to watch that while young children are
around.
No limits on children's tv watching doesn't mean that adults should
stop behaving responsibly.
Far from my kids watching anything and everything, they are
discriminating about what they choose to watch. Knowing that it is
their decision, they think about it. There is no sense of demanding to
be allowed to watch - because being "allowed" isn't an issue. My 18 yo
(19 in less than three weeks - sob, sob, sob they grow up TOO FAST) has
always been very careful about things that are too scary - still is.
Sees NO reason to frighten herself and will STILL go find something
else to do if people she's with are wanting to watch something that
might be scary. I can easily see how this self-awareness of her own low
tolerance level for scary stuff developed when she was little - she
made a few mistakes, but we were very respectful of her fears - always
described things carefully - told her honestly if we thought something
might have some scary bits - watched ahead of time and warned her -
fast forwarded through them - sometimes offered up substitute shows or
movies. I remember her saying, "Mommy, I want to watch "Jaws" because
people refer to it and I haven't seen it, but will you sit close to
me?" She was maybe 12 or so then.
My 16 yo seems to like scary stuff. She isn't scared by it. She
analyzes it and is very very into the drama and theatrical aspects. I
think it is her analytical nature - doesn't let her get fully sucked in
and she never loses track of the fact that these are actors. She's
extremely interested in "how" things are done and "why" the director
chose what he/she did and what effects actors' choices had on how the
show goes. She's a natural critic - and that attitude keeps her just a
bit disengaged.
My youngest is careful, too, about what she watches. She is especially
careful about things that are TOO sad. So am I, by the way, for myself.
She sometimes chooses to wait to see movies when we can watch them on
TV instead of in a theater where they might be overwhelming or where
she can't easily escape if things get too intense.
We also don't have the tv "just on" very often - and the tv is out in
the middle of the main room in the house and so we do all have to be be
considerate of each other. The hardest thing was probably for my dh who
wanted to watch things in the evenings that he didn't really want the
kids to watch - nothing awful, but just more adult shows like Hill
Street Blues (popular when we had little kids) which was somewhat
violent. The kids weren't asking to watch it <G> - they were into Mr.
Rogers and Sesame Street. There were MANY times that I took kids in the
other room to play a game or read or something else - so that my dh
could watch a show. There were also many times he just videotaped a
show and we watched later. Mostly we went along with what the kids
wanted to watch - lots of Raffi - and we all had a good time with that.
As the kids got older, we didn't worry as much about what they watched
in terms of "pretend" tv - but still didn't typically have the "news"
on. We read the newspaper - we don't get our news from tv and, to be
honest, I don't need the visuals of all the nasty stuff that happens in
the world to be the wallpaper background in my brain either.
If kids are WANTING to watch something that I find offensive or that I
have major reservations about them watching, I tend to watch with them
and engage in conversations that help me figure out what it is they are
after. Sometimes I can't figure it out - but I'm still not forbidding
it - because I think the forbidding would have more negative impact on
our relationship than whatever it is they are watching.
If kids are spending hours and hours in front of the tv in a
brain-not-engaged kind of way - I'd take that as a giant hint that I'm
not being responsible as a homeschooling parent for providing what they
need in their lives to engage their brains OR I'd take it as a sign
that something is wrong in their life in some other way and I'd work
hard on figuring that out.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choicesNo limits doesn't mean condoning that they "sit from the age of 18
> couldn't be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the
> age of 18 months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows
> full of violence or sex etc.?
months or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of
violence or sex etc."
Sounds like you've mistakenly assumed that those of us who have no
limits have kids who do watch anything and everything. Even the wording
you've used, "sit in front of.." is indicative of an attitude - do you
also use that wording when kids are reading? Would you ask us if we
condone kids sitting in front of a book all day long? My kids are not
just sitting there in front of the tv having something done to them.
They no more disengage their brains when they watch tv and movies then
they do when they read a book or watch a play or the opera or ballet or
anything else. Its a lie that watching tv is more passive than those
other things.
My kids at 9 years old seldom, if ever, watched the "news" - not the
network or local news broadcasts. They don't have the ability to
discern that there are lots of awful things that happen every day and,
yet, are extremely unlikely to happen to them. Why is your 9 yo
daughter wanting to watch the news?
My guess is that it was not her choice - that it was just "on" - some
adult in the family watching it - and so she watched. THAT is not a
responsible adult behavior - to watch that while young children are
around.
No limits on children's tv watching doesn't mean that adults should
stop behaving responsibly.
Far from my kids watching anything and everything, they are
discriminating about what they choose to watch. Knowing that it is
their decision, they think about it. There is no sense of demanding to
be allowed to watch - because being "allowed" isn't an issue. My 18 yo
(19 in less than three weeks - sob, sob, sob they grow up TOO FAST) has
always been very careful about things that are too scary - still is.
Sees NO reason to frighten herself and will STILL go find something
else to do if people she's with are wanting to watch something that
might be scary. I can easily see how this self-awareness of her own low
tolerance level for scary stuff developed when she was little - she
made a few mistakes, but we were very respectful of her fears - always
described things carefully - told her honestly if we thought something
might have some scary bits - watched ahead of time and warned her -
fast forwarded through them - sometimes offered up substitute shows or
movies. I remember her saying, "Mommy, I want to watch "Jaws" because
people refer to it and I haven't seen it, but will you sit close to
me?" She was maybe 12 or so then.
My 16 yo seems to like scary stuff. She isn't scared by it. She
analyzes it and is very very into the drama and theatrical aspects. I
think it is her analytical nature - doesn't let her get fully sucked in
and she never loses track of the fact that these are actors. She's
extremely interested in "how" things are done and "why" the director
chose what he/she did and what effects actors' choices had on how the
show goes. She's a natural critic - and that attitude keeps her just a
bit disengaged.
My youngest is careful, too, about what she watches. She is especially
careful about things that are TOO sad. So am I, by the way, for myself.
She sometimes chooses to wait to see movies when we can watch them on
TV instead of in a theater where they might be overwhelming or where
she can't easily escape if things get too intense.
We also don't have the tv "just on" very often - and the tv is out in
the middle of the main room in the house and so we do all have to be be
considerate of each other. The hardest thing was probably for my dh who
wanted to watch things in the evenings that he didn't really want the
kids to watch - nothing awful, but just more adult shows like Hill
Street Blues (popular when we had little kids) which was somewhat
violent. The kids weren't asking to watch it <G> - they were into Mr.
Rogers and Sesame Street. There were MANY times that I took kids in the
other room to play a game or read or something else - so that my dh
could watch a show. There were also many times he just videotaped a
show and we watched later. Mostly we went along with what the kids
wanted to watch - lots of Raffi - and we all had a good time with that.
As the kids got older, we didn't worry as much about what they watched
in terms of "pretend" tv - but still didn't typically have the "news"
on. We read the newspaper - we don't get our news from tv and, to be
honest, I don't need the visuals of all the nasty stuff that happens in
the world to be the wallpaper background in my brain either.
If kids are WANTING to watch something that I find offensive or that I
have major reservations about them watching, I tend to watch with them
and engage in conversations that help me figure out what it is they are
after. Sometimes I can't figure it out - but I'm still not forbidding
it - because I think the forbidding would have more negative impact on
our relationship than whatever it is they are watching.
If kids are spending hours and hours in front of the tv in a
brain-not-engaged kind of way - I'd take that as a giant hint that I'm
not being responsible as a homeschooling parent for providing what they
need in their lives to engage their brains OR I'd take it as a sign
that something is wrong in their life in some other way and I'd work
hard on figuring that out.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
zenmomma2kids
>>I really have been letting go little by little. Letting them eat ifthey are hungry if they dont' think they can hold out the extra 30
minutes till dinner>>
I always think it's a good idea to let someone eat if they are
hungry. :o)
I was going to write more, but Casey is calling me to tie her up.
Don't ask.
Life is good.
~Mary
Robyn Coburn
<<My oldest has friends that play these games every free moment they get
and I do think that it can cause damage to one's mental thinking. >>
That's because their "free moments" are being limited. When all the
moments are "free" then there will be more variety in how they are
spent. My husband plays violent video games a lot. It is an opportunity
for catharsis. He is loud while playing, then calm and normal. Damage to
thinking occurs when a child is repeatedly made to feel afraid and
unsure - because of punishments or what they perceive as conditional
love. They are damaged by being made to feel that their choices are
wrong and stupid. They may have nowhere else to take their frustrations
than these games.
Robyn Coburn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
and I do think that it can cause damage to one's mental thinking. >>
That's because their "free moments" are being limited. When all the
moments are "free" then there will be more variety in how they are
spent. My husband plays violent video games a lot. It is an opportunity
for catharsis. He is loud while playing, then calm and normal. Damage to
thinking occurs when a child is repeatedly made to feel afraid and
unsure - because of punishments or what they perceive as conditional
love. They are damaged by being made to feel that their choices are
wrong and stupid. They may have nowhere else to take their frustrations
than these games.
Robyn Coburn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Robyn Coburn
The fires have been in the news and were covered ubiquitously here in
Los Angeles. The TV was on quite a lot, mostly I think because my
husband is fairly fascinated with how fires work, and a lot of the air
support technology. Jayn looked at some of it, but mostly would go do
something else when it was on. She also heard us discussing various
topics and joined in the conversations on: how to protect your home from
fire, what we would take if we were ever evacuated from this apartment
(really unlikely), fireproof safes, the bark beetle infestation, the
cool helicopters, the ash landing in our pool, the time we stayed in a
hotel with a wood burning stove, candles and fire, remembering times we
were burnt (while cooking or something), how we will have fire drills
when we move into our own home one day. She invented a new game for her
and I to play that I guess I would call "Fire Rescue" where I am a
firefighter who has to rescue her doll from a "fire" and then we both
use an imaginary hose (with sound fx) to put the fire out. I actually
think the game came more from watching a scene in Spiderman, than the
news, but I could be wrong. So far she has asked no questions, or
changed any of her behavior in such a way that would make me think she
might be worried or scared.
Robyn Coburn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Los Angeles. The TV was on quite a lot, mostly I think because my
husband is fairly fascinated with how fires work, and a lot of the air
support technology. Jayn looked at some of it, but mostly would go do
something else when it was on. She also heard us discussing various
topics and joined in the conversations on: how to protect your home from
fire, what we would take if we were ever evacuated from this apartment
(really unlikely), fireproof safes, the bark beetle infestation, the
cool helicopters, the ash landing in our pool, the time we stayed in a
hotel with a wood burning stove, candles and fire, remembering times we
were burnt (while cooking or something), how we will have fire drills
when we move into our own home one day. She invented a new game for her
and I to play that I guess I would call "Fire Rescue" where I am a
firefighter who has to rescue her doll from a "fire" and then we both
use an imaginary hose (with sound fx) to put the fire out. I actually
think the game came more from watching a scene in Spiderman, than the
news, but I could be wrong. So far she has asked no questions, or
changed any of her behavior in such a way that would make me think she
might be worried or scared.
Robyn Coburn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tia Leschke
>My son never chose to watch TV news until recently. He's 16.
>
>I stopped watching most TV news when my first child was a toddler, because
>I didn't want her to be exposed to it. Although she now (age 10) has free
>reign of the remote control, she doesn't choose to watch the news.
Tia
Tia Leschke
>I don't understand the allowing of them to play violent video games. I'mI used to think that way. But I thought about it and realized that just
>against violence of all type and to me personally, violent movies and
>video games glorifies it in their minds. My oldest has friends that play
>these games every free moment they get and I do think that it can cause
>damage to one's mental thinking. I might be wrong but this is one place
>I'd rather take a chance on being wrong then just hoping that it's doing
>no harm.
about all the men I was demonstrating against the Vietnam war with, way
back when, had grown up playing with toy guns. As adults, they were
pacifists. One of my sons had a friend who wasn't allowed to play with toy
guns. What do you think he always wanted to play with when he came to our
house?
Far better to work on figuring out what it is they're getting from the
games we think might be harmful. I know that the guys I've talked to about
playing with toy guns when they were little always spoke about things that
actually had nothing to do with the violence. When they played cops and
robbers, what they enjoyed was the sneaking around, trying to get the other
guy without getting caught. In other words, it really was just a *game*.
Tia
[email protected]
bstamp@... writes:
I'm getting annoyed, are you done playing with this, or will it fit somewhere
else?
Leaving it there is logical because there's enough room for the
creation there and they might want to play with it later. It's not logical to add
on the expectation that they should know it's annoying and they should know
that they should move it to avoid bothering you, for example.
That's they kind of stuff I was trained to "know" when I was a kid, and
it's anxiety inducing and inconsistent and crazy making. Trust me, you don't
really want your kids to have *that* kind of logic!! lol
<<but yet we do set limits for safety reasons for infants and I'm wondering
why/when that necessarily jsut changes. >.
It doesn't magically change one day, it's gradual, and the parents see it
happening, and the child's world opens up a little more, and the parent is there
for the child if he/she needs it (safety).
Does a child who understands the concept for hot need to have a rule (limit)
for not touching the stove, or does it make more sense to show the child that
when the little knobs are turned that means the hot is "on". The latter is
informative and interactive, and the former is limiting and condescending to the
child.
I think many people are under the impression that no limits means no parental
interaction, but that's just not true or fair. It's about more parental
interaction, not less.
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> . But I guess I don't understand the logic of them not having to clean upWell, I simply say, Hey, this is really getting to be in my way, and
> such creations they make if it's in the center of our home.
I'm getting annoyed, are you done playing with this, or will it fit somewhere
else?
Leaving it there is logical because there's enough room for the
creation there and they might want to play with it later. It's not logical to add
on the expectation that they should know it's annoying and they should know
that they should move it to avoid bothering you, for example.
That's they kind of stuff I was trained to "know" when I was a kid, and
it's anxiety inducing and inconsistent and crazy making. Trust me, you don't
really want your kids to have *that* kind of logic!! lol
<<but yet we do set limits for safety reasons for infants and I'm wondering
why/when that necessarily jsut changes. >.
It doesn't magically change one day, it's gradual, and the parents see it
happening, and the child's world opens up a little more, and the parent is there
for the child if he/she needs it (safety).
Does a child who understands the concept for hot need to have a rule (limit)
for not touching the stove, or does it make more sense to show the child that
when the little knobs are turned that means the hot is "on". The latter is
informative and interactive, and the former is limiting and condescending to the
child.
I think many people are under the impression that no limits means no parental
interaction, but that's just not true or fair. It's about more parental
interaction, not less.
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brian and Kathy Stamp
"We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either."
Sandra what I get then is you do choose to shelter your kids. I never got that impression from you before. See I do shelter my kids from things like that which is why I asked all the questions in the first place. Most of what I asked was hypothetical but my dd watched the story about Elizabeth Smart because a neighbor called with the news she had been found and of course I was excited and turned it on. Yes I was right there in the room with her and we talked about it quite a bit with her to help her feel safe but that didn't seem to really help. The seeds of worry had been planted.
No I don't know any 3 year olds that sit and watch horror movies personally, but I do know some 4 year olds (not mine) that will sit and watch as their older siblings play the shooting video games for very long periods of time.
Yes I do watch the news. It is important to me to know what's going on in the world. If she comes into the room I will turn it off but often she may have caught some of it before this happens.
I guess I don't always understand what you ladies are saying. Must come from all those days in public school. From your response today I see things a little differently then I have from some of your other responses.
It's always interesting here and I continue to learn. I will state though that our home is a very rich environment where children are free to pick and choose what they do. Hasn't stopped them from saying they are bored and that there's nothing to do but I will admit they have never sat for days and days doing nothing. But certainly they can get unmotivated at times. I guess we all do.
Kathy
From: SandraDodd@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Questions?
In a message dated 11/3/03 6:56:46 AM, bstamp@... writes:
<< Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house
unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them
by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up
and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of
that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance
that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their
level that might cause them harm. >>
I'm the same way with my adult friends, though. If they're about to
accidently do something dangerous (sit on scissors, walk on a wet floor, change a
lightbulb without standing on something I know for sure to be safe) I'll quickly
intervene and help make the situation safer.
<<How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old
really understands the dangers of certain situations?>>
I'm not sure that my 14 and 17 year olds really understand the dangers of all
situations, but I know they have a lot of experience with making respnsible
decisions and with being analytical, because for 14 and 17 years I've give them
safe opportunities to practice.
<<Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological
damage is happening?>>
I'm with my kids a lot, and not just in the same house, but right beside
them, watching what they're watching, answering their questions about what we all
saw elsewhere, or about why another family is not like ours, or why the cat's
walking funny or why the air smells like smoke. We have, since they were
little, helped them analyze the world around them, and one result is that we are
near enough to feel their moods and responses in a more visceral way. We
don't wait for them to come and tell us they're uncomfortable about something.
We can tell by how close they sit, how long they stand around where other
people are, by how they eat and sleep afterwards.
A moment of time out: many people ignore entirely any instinct they have
toward the interpersonal or intrapersonal skills they have. Partly they've been
around too many rules and truisms about what should be and so they've shoved
aside their perceptions of what is. And none of that "counts in school." When
a kid is good at interpersonals, they're criticized for talking too much and
for not leaving the other kids alone to take care of their own problems
themselves.
<<How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't
be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months
or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex
etc.?>>
I've had three eighteen month olds, and three five year olds. Not once did
they say "OOOH! Violence and sex." And they rarely if ever "sat in front of
a T.V." in the way I'm guessing you mean. If there was a TV on, they were
never required to "SIT." Holly surprised me when she was five by sitting down
to watch part of Twelfth Night (Helena Bonham Carter version) with a little
girl from across the street. I expected them to watch a bit and wander off.
They watched all the rest of it. I neither made them nor forbid them from
watching it. There were movies they liked parts of, but they weren't usually
sitting through a whole movie.
I still haven't really concentratedly watched all of The Lion King or Beauty
and the Beast--I wander in and out so some parts I've seen ten times, and some
not yet. Very same with my kids and some movies. And what they'd tend to
walk out on is sex and violence. They come back for kid and animal scenes, or
songs, which is what made Rocky Horror Picture Show an exception. There was
cartoonish sex and violence, but some good songs. When the music was boring or
gone, they'd go back to legos or swings or Ninja Turtle figures or the dog or
whatever.
<<I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their
brains are still growing.>>
There are people who say we come into the world knowing nothing. That belief
is called "tabula rasa," meaning "blank slate." If you want to read more
about it, just put in in at google and there will be all kinds of claims one way
and another. But the only way people believe it is to discount ALL of
instinct. And they do! I was taught in school in the 60's and 70's that humans have
no instincts, that all we learn has to come from books. I mentioned this
derisively in the 1980's and a friend who was in college then said he's just
been taught that at school himself.
So that's one of the kernals of the book-worshipping culture which bites
unschoolers in the butt. IF humans are blank slates, and if books are our
artificial replacement for instincts we don't have, then books are like parts of us,
parts of our culture without which we would be like birds that didn't know how
to build nests, or monkeys who had no idea of their social positions and so
would be chucked violently out of the nearest tree and killed. TERRIBLE things
would happen if we didn't study hard and listen to our teachers, because we
had no instinct.
Add to that Christianity's fear of evil, and the idea that Satan lurks to
tempt the weak, and let people steep in that for a few hundred years, and what
you get is parents who are afraid to step out of the lines.
<<If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence
or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
This question can only come from someone who's never seen a kid free to
choose in a rich environment. A serious question to bstamp@carolina...: Have you
ever seen a kid "just do nothing day after day"? Please respond to the list,
because I'll have questions.
<<If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day>>
Why would a three year old sit watching violence?
What are his other choices? DOES he have freedom of movement and choice?
And if so, why do you think he wouldn't choose other things day after day?
<<I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. >>
Why is she watching the news?
Are you watching it and modelling that it's important to do so?
Are you encouraging it? Is it on in the kitchen or where she needs to be and
it's hard to get away from it?
Because I've had three nine year olds, and they never chose to watch the news.
<<But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it
happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following
making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart
was found. >>
I read about it online and in magazines. I didn't bring that story into my
house. The older kids were vaguely aware from overhearing things.
We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either. Not that the kids
couldn't have gone there if they'd had an interest from things outside the
house, but neither my husband nor I cared, so most of what we heard was on comedy
routines. EASILY the details are available later if someone wants to catch up
on a story like that.
Sandra
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra what I get then is you do choose to shelter your kids. I never got that impression from you before. See I do shelter my kids from things like that which is why I asked all the questions in the first place. Most of what I asked was hypothetical but my dd watched the story about Elizabeth Smart because a neighbor called with the news she had been found and of course I was excited and turned it on. Yes I was right there in the room with her and we talked about it quite a bit with her to help her feel safe but that didn't seem to really help. The seeds of worry had been planted.
No I don't know any 3 year olds that sit and watch horror movies personally, but I do know some 4 year olds (not mine) that will sit and watch as their older siblings play the shooting video games for very long periods of time.
Yes I do watch the news. It is important to me to know what's going on in the world. If she comes into the room I will turn it off but often she may have caught some of it before this happens.
I guess I don't always understand what you ladies are saying. Must come from all those days in public school. From your response today I see things a little differently then I have from some of your other responses.
It's always interesting here and I continue to learn. I will state though that our home is a very rich environment where children are free to pick and choose what they do. Hasn't stopped them from saying they are bored and that there's nothing to do but I will admit they have never sat for days and days doing nothing. But certainly they can get unmotivated at times. I guess we all do.
Kathy
From: SandraDodd@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Questions?
In a message dated 11/3/03 6:56:46 AM, bstamp@... writes:
<< Most of us don't let our small babies play in danger zones of the house
unsupervised. For eg. letting them stick a toy into an outlet. We protect them
by either removing them or covering the outlet. We wouldn't let them crawl up
and pull a pan of boiling water onto themselves because the consequences of
that would be horrific. We often gate the stairs if we think there is a chance
that an active 6 month old might fall down them. We remove things from their
level that might cause them harm. >>
I'm the same way with my adult friends, though. If they're about to
accidently do something dangerous (sit on scissors, walk on a wet floor, change a
lightbulb without standing on something I know for sure to be safe) I'll quickly
intervene and help make the situation safer.
<<How do you know for sure that your 3 year old or 4 year old or 10 year old
really understands the dangers of certain situations?>>
I'm not sure that my 14 and 17 year olds really understand the dangers of all
situations, but I know they have a lot of experience with making respnsible
decisions and with being analytical, because for 14 and 17 years I've give them
safe opportunities to practice.
<<Sure it's easy to see physical damage but how do we know what phsycological
damage is happening?>>
I'm with my kids a lot, and not just in the same house, but right beside
them, watching what they're watching, answering their questions about what we all
saw elsewhere, or about why another family is not like ours, or why the cat's
walking funny or why the air smells like smoke. We have, since they were
little, helped them analyze the world around them, and one result is that we are
near enough to feel their moods and responses in a more visceral way. We
don't wait for them to come and tell us they're uncomfortable about something.
We can tell by how close they sit, how long they stand around where other
people are, by how they eat and sleep afterwards.
A moment of time out: many people ignore entirely any instinct they have
toward the interpersonal or intrapersonal skills they have. Partly they've been
around too many rules and truisms about what should be and so they've shoved
aside their perceptions of what is. And none of that "counts in school." When
a kid is good at interpersonals, they're criticized for talking too much and
for not leaving the other kids alone to take care of their own problems
themselves.
<<How do you know that the psychological damage of certain choices couldn't
be just as bad to them. Eg. if we just let them sit from the age of 18 months
or even 5 years in front of a t.v. watching shows full of violence or sex
etc.?>>
I've had three eighteen month olds, and three five year olds. Not once did
they say "OOOH! Violence and sex." And they rarely if ever "sat in front of
a T.V." in the way I'm guessing you mean. If there was a TV on, they were
never required to "SIT." Holly surprised me when she was five by sitting down
to watch part of Twelfth Night (Helena Bonham Carter version) with a little
girl from across the street. I expected them to watch a bit and wander off.
They watched all the rest of it. I neither made them nor forbid them from
watching it. There were movies they liked parts of, but they weren't usually
sitting through a whole movie.
I still haven't really concentratedly watched all of The Lion King or Beauty
and the Beast--I wander in and out so some parts I've seen ten times, and some
not yet. Very same with my kids and some movies. And what they'd tend to
walk out on is sex and violence. They come back for kid and animal scenes, or
songs, which is what made Rocky Horror Picture Show an exception. There was
cartoonish sex and violence, but some good songs. When the music was boring or
gone, they'd go back to legos or swings or Ninja Turtle figures or the dog or
whatever.
<<I mean afterall we don't come into the world knowing everything. Their
brains are still growing.>>
There are people who say we come into the world knowing nothing. That belief
is called "tabula rasa," meaning "blank slate." If you want to read more
about it, just put in in at google and there will be all kinds of claims one way
and another. But the only way people believe it is to discount ALL of
instinct. And they do! I was taught in school in the 60's and 70's that humans have
no instincts, that all we learn has to come from books. I mentioned this
derisively in the 1980's and a friend who was in college then said he's just
been taught that at school himself.
So that's one of the kernals of the book-worshipping culture which bites
unschoolers in the butt. IF humans are blank slates, and if books are our
artificial replacement for instincts we don't have, then books are like parts of us,
parts of our culture without which we would be like birds that didn't know how
to build nests, or monkeys who had no idea of their social positions and so
would be chucked violently out of the nearest tree and killed. TERRIBLE things
would happen if we didn't study hard and listen to our teachers, because we
had no instinct.
Add to that Christianity's fear of evil, and the idea that Satan lurks to
tempt the weak, and let people steep in that for a few hundred years, and what
you get is parents who are afraid to step out of the lines.
<<If they are allowed from an early age to choose to sit and watch violence
or to just do nothing day after day, what says we aren't damaging them?>>
This question can only come from someone who's never seen a kid free to
choose in a rich environment. A serious question to bstamp@carolina...: Have you
ever seen a kid "just do nothing day after day"? Please respond to the list,
because I'll have questions.
<<If they sit watching people killed in movies or video games day after day>>
Why would a three year old sit watching violence?
What are his other choices? DOES he have freedom of movement and choice?
And if so, why do you think he wouldn't choose other things day after day?
<<I see the fear sometimes on my 9 year old after she watches the news. >>
Why is she watching the news?
Are you watching it and modelling that it's important to do so?
Are you encouraging it? Is it on in the kitchen or where she needs to be and
it's hard to get away from it?
Because I've had three nine year olds, and they never chose to watch the news.
<<But she will still watch and then become worried all the time about it
happening to her. Then this effects the way she acts in the time period following
making her afraid of the world. I noticed this actually when Elizabeth Smart
was found. >>
I read about it online and in magazines. I didn't bring that story into my
house. The older kids were vaguely aware from overhearing things.
We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either. Not that the kids
couldn't have gone there if they'd had an interest from things outside the
house, but neither my husband nor I cared, so most of what we heard was on comedy
routines. EASILY the details are available later if someone wants to catch up
on a story like that.
Sandra
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
zenmomma2kids
>>Because I've had three nine year olds, and they never chose towatch the news.>>
Same here. Conor (14) watches CNN and MTV News sometimes lately.
He'll give me updates on the fires in CA or the situation with the
feeding tube in FL. I think he usually checks out the TV news if he's
heard or seen a story about something that he wants more detail
about. We've had some really interesting discussions about ethics,
forest management and Eminem. <g>
>>I read about it online and in magazines. I didn't bring that storyinto my house. The older kids were vaguely aware from overhearing
things.>>
We lived in Utah during the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping. My kids found
out about it because there were flyers and billboards everywhere.
Because of that, they needed discussion and reassurance. Like Sandra
though, I don't invite news like that into my home. Just because the
TV is there, doesn't mean I have to watch every channel or every
show. I've found that my kids didn't want to see the dark and
frightening stuff.
>> We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either. >>I didn't even watch the news on 9/11!! I flipped it on when I found
out and then would check in private at short intervals during the
day. The kids knew I was terribly shaken and we talked about what was
going on. I saw no reason to have those visuals coming in too. I
didn't forbid them, I just didn't turn it on and they didn't ask. My
kids make good choices about their well being for the most part.
Life is good.
~Mary
pam sorooshian
On Nov 3, 2003, at 7:42 AM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
most conducive to exploring and thinking and pondering and
experimenting and, thereby, real learning. I don't neglect my kids'
safety - I protect it in the least restrictive way I can figure out.
AND - I keep a long-term focus so, whenever possible, I opt for less
protection now if I think protecting them now might interfere with them
developing their own internal self-protection mechanisms.
Its an attitude that permeated our relationship from the time they were
babies. In each situation I tried not to confine them, for example, any
more than was truly absolutely necessary. I tried not to get into too
many situations where it would be necessary.
Another way to look at it is that I try to do everything IN my power to
set things up so that I don't exert that power over the kids. I know
that this is the opposite of what a lot of child-rearing experts say,
today. They talk about not being afraid to be the parent and not
letting kids get away with anything and so on. This is all a response
to the supposedly overly-lenient irresponsible parenting that led to my
generation (I'm 50-something) being such self-centered lazy
good-for-nothings <G>.
But - I'm not "lenient" - I'm very demanding, in fact. I have very high
expectations of my kids in terms of behavior - generosity, kindness,
honesty, individual search for truth, openmindedness, appreciation of
diversity, etc. Everything we do is gist for an examination of how it
demonstrates our "character." And books and tv and movies and plays are
the primary source material for that kind of constant evaluation. Far
from my kids thinking that what they watch on tv is somehow "normal"
and expected and far from them emulating whatever they happen to be
watching, they are examining life decisions and coming to their own
decisions. I have NO fear, for example, that my 12 yo watching Cheers
reruns is in danger of thinking that hanging out in bars is the best
way to develop an interesting social group. Why not? Well - because we
talk about alcohol and what it really does to people and why they drink
and why it feels good and what it does to people's brains (physically)
and when it is a problem and what AA is all about and what its like to
be the child of an alcoholic or the friend of someone who drinks on a
daily basis and so on and on. We talk about these things when they come
up in natural everyday conversations.
I really really loved Ben Lovejoy's topic at the Live and Learn
conference - principles versus rules. That really described how I've
tried to raise my children based on general principles - "We try to be
considerate of each other" as opposed to rules "No watching tv after 10
pm." Principles always make sense - rules can be nonsensical if
situations change. Principles invite people to be creative in getting
what they want while still living up to them while rules invite people
to bend or break them to get what they want.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> It's hard sometimes to express what one is really getting at. I justI aim for the "least restrictive environment" because I think it is the
> read a lot on this list about no limits, but yet we do set limits for
> safety reasons for infants and I'm wondering why/when that necessarily
> jsut changes.
most conducive to exploring and thinking and pondering and
experimenting and, thereby, real learning. I don't neglect my kids'
safety - I protect it in the least restrictive way I can figure out.
AND - I keep a long-term focus so, whenever possible, I opt for less
protection now if I think protecting them now might interfere with them
developing their own internal self-protection mechanisms.
Its an attitude that permeated our relationship from the time they were
babies. In each situation I tried not to confine them, for example, any
more than was truly absolutely necessary. I tried not to get into too
many situations where it would be necessary.
Another way to look at it is that I try to do everything IN my power to
set things up so that I don't exert that power over the kids. I know
that this is the opposite of what a lot of child-rearing experts say,
today. They talk about not being afraid to be the parent and not
letting kids get away with anything and so on. This is all a response
to the supposedly overly-lenient irresponsible parenting that led to my
generation (I'm 50-something) being such self-centered lazy
good-for-nothings <G>.
But - I'm not "lenient" - I'm very demanding, in fact. I have very high
expectations of my kids in terms of behavior - generosity, kindness,
honesty, individual search for truth, openmindedness, appreciation of
diversity, etc. Everything we do is gist for an examination of how it
demonstrates our "character." And books and tv and movies and plays are
the primary source material for that kind of constant evaluation. Far
from my kids thinking that what they watch on tv is somehow "normal"
and expected and far from them emulating whatever they happen to be
watching, they are examining life decisions and coming to their own
decisions. I have NO fear, for example, that my 12 yo watching Cheers
reruns is in danger of thinking that hanging out in bars is the best
way to develop an interesting social group. Why not? Well - because we
talk about alcohol and what it really does to people and why they drink
and why it feels good and what it does to people's brains (physically)
and when it is a problem and what AA is all about and what its like to
be the child of an alcoholic or the friend of someone who drinks on a
daily basis and so on and on. We talk about these things when they come
up in natural everyday conversations.
I really really loved Ben Lovejoy's topic at the Live and Learn
conference - principles versus rules. That really described how I've
tried to raise my children based on general principles - "We try to be
considerate of each other" as opposed to rules "No watching tv after 10
pm." Principles always make sense - rules can be nonsensical if
situations change. Principles invite people to be creative in getting
what they want while still living up to them while rules invite people
to bend or break them to get what they want.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
Tia Leschke
>I never did watch any of the 9/11 videos. I looked at pictures on the
>I didn't even watch the news on 9/11!! I flipped it on when I found
>out and then would check in private at short intervals during the
>day. The kids knew I was terribly shaken and we talked about what was
>going on. I saw no reason to have those visuals coming in too. I
>didn't forbid them, I just didn't turn it on and they didn't ask. My
>kids make good choices about their well being for the most part.
internet, but I knew that I wouldn't be able to handle the moving visuals.
It's one of the reasons I don't watch TV news.
Tia
Tia Leschke
>"We didn't let the OJ Simpson trial into the house either."I got the impression that she was sheltering herself more than the kids by
>
>Sandra what I get then is you do choose to shelter your kids. I never got
>that impression from you before.
not watching TV news. <g>
>See I do shelter my kids from things like that which is why I asked allOnce she'd seen a bit of it, probably the best thing you could have done
>the questions in the first place. Most of what I asked was hypothetical
>but my dd watched the story about Elizabeth Smart because a neighbor
>called with the news she had been found and of course I was excited and
>turned it on. Yes I was right there in the room with her and we talked
>about it quite a bit with her to help her feel safe but that didn't seem
>to really help. The seeds of worry had been planted.
was let her watch more, or get her more info about the relative infrequency
of stranger abductions (which it turns out the Elizabeth Smart case
wasn't). Maybe you could explore the statistics with her, so she doesn't
think that the TV spin is reality.
>No I don't know any 3 year olds that sit and watch horror moviesDo those 4 year olds have a lot of other interesting things to do? Do they
>personally, but I do know some 4 year olds (not mine) that will sit and
>watch as their older siblings play the shooting video games for very long
>periods of time.
have parents who interact with them a lot? Are *they* not allowed to play
and so can only watch?
>Yes I do watch the news. It is important to me to know what's going on inThe main reason I don't watch the news is because it makes people afraid. I
>the world. If she comes into the room I will turn it off but often she
>may have caught some of it before this happens.
don't know if I've told this here or not. If I have, most of you can stop
reading. When my mother was still alive, my son and I would go down and
visit her once a year for a week. She always watched the news for about an
hour and a half every day. Her apartment wasn't big enough to get away from
it, so I listened. What I gradually noticed was that the news stations
seemed to have a quota for violence and tragedy. If there was enough in the
local area, those were the featured stories. But if there wasn't enough
there, the stations would feed in stories from elsewhere. It's very subtle.
Probably the only reason I noticed it was the fact that I was only
subjected to it for one week every year. No wonder so many people are
fearful and convinced that violent crime is increasing when in fact it's
decreasing.
I do want to know what's going on in the world, so I read the paper and
check the internet news sources, both mainstream and alternative. The thing
I prefer about reading the news rather than watching it is that *I* get to
decide what I'll take in. I can just skim the headlines of the horrific
stuff. I don't have to take in all the details.
Tia
pam sorooshian
On Nov 3, 2003, at 12:57 PM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
you, in effect, coerced a child into watching something inappropriate.
I'm not saying this to criticize, but because you seem to sense there
is a difference between that and what we're talking about and so I'm
trying to make it clear for you.
I KNOW, you didn't tie her down and make her watch. But your neighbor
called and made a big deal about it and you acted like it was so
exciting that you had to watch it right that minute and you didn't wait
to find a time when your little girl was busy with something else.
What we're talking about is the exact opposite of that - it is being
far more in tune with your own children. In fact, even if my little
girl had come running in saying, "They found that girl and I want to
watch it on TV" then we'd watch and I'd talk to her and so on, but we'd
probably watch just a bit - and I'd flip around and try to find the
parts where they showed her happy parents and avoid the parts where
they speculated about what had been done to her, etc.
No limits means we don't have rules that say, for example, "You may
watch 1 hour of tv, only between the hours of 5 and 8 pm, and only if
you've done your schoolwork and chores and only these specific shows."
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> Most of what I asked was hypothetical but my dd watched the storySo - in fact, you did the OPPOSITE of what people here try to promote -
> about Elizabeth Smart because a neighbor called with the news she had
> been found and of course I was excited and turned it on. Yes I was
> right there in the room with her and we talked about it quite a bit
> with her to help her feel safe but that didn't seem to really help.
> The seeds of worry had been planted.
you, in effect, coerced a child into watching something inappropriate.
I'm not saying this to criticize, but because you seem to sense there
is a difference between that and what we're talking about and so I'm
trying to make it clear for you.
I KNOW, you didn't tie her down and make her watch. But your neighbor
called and made a big deal about it and you acted like it was so
exciting that you had to watch it right that minute and you didn't wait
to find a time when your little girl was busy with something else.
What we're talking about is the exact opposite of that - it is being
far more in tune with your own children. In fact, even if my little
girl had come running in saying, "They found that girl and I want to
watch it on TV" then we'd watch and I'd talk to her and so on, but we'd
probably watch just a bit - and I'd flip around and try to find the
parts where they showed her happy parents and avoid the parts where
they speculated about what had been done to her, etc.
No limits means we don't have rules that say, for example, "You may
watch 1 hour of tv, only between the hours of 5 and 8 pm, and only if
you've done your schoolwork and chores and only these specific shows."
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
pam sorooshian
On Nov 3, 2003, at 12:57 PM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
- what would happen if you suddenly stopped enforcing the rules or
limits. That's different than what we're talking about. Maybe if you
spend time thinking in that direction it'll be useful to you -- instead
of thinking about what we do NOT do (don't have rules or limits) - put
your focus on what people here are saying they DO instead.
That is harder because we're all so different - our children are
different and our family situations are different and so on -- but
maybe if you do focus on what we say we DO instead of what we do not
do, you can come up with some general principles that you can then try
out in your OWN way in your own home with your own unique children.
If you think about what you can DO instead of having rules and limits,
you might just suddenly discover yourself saying, "Hmmm, we don't find
that we have any need for rules or limits on tv watching." And, you
might find that it is hard to explain exactly why - but it'll be the
truth and you'll know that it is a good thing.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> I guess I don't always understand what you ladies are saying. MustYou have probably been thinking in terms of "removing" rules or limits
> come from all those days in public school. From your response today I
> see things a little differently then I have from some of your other
> responses.
- what would happen if you suddenly stopped enforcing the rules or
limits. That's different than what we're talking about. Maybe if you
spend time thinking in that direction it'll be useful to you -- instead
of thinking about what we do NOT do (don't have rules or limits) - put
your focus on what people here are saying they DO instead.
That is harder because we're all so different - our children are
different and our family situations are different and so on -- but
maybe if you do focus on what we say we DO instead of what we do not
do, you can come up with some general principles that you can then try
out in your OWN way in your own home with your own unique children.
If you think about what you can DO instead of having rules and limits,
you might just suddenly discover yourself saying, "Hmmm, we don't find
that we have any need for rules or limits on tv watching." And, you
might find that it is hard to explain exactly why - but it'll be the
truth and you'll know that it is a good thing.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
Brian and Kathy Stamp
"I KNOW, you didn't tie her down and make her watch. But your neighbor
called and made a big deal about it and you acted like it was so
exciting that you had to watch it right that minute and you didn't wait
to find a time when your little girl was busy with something else."
No I didn't. I made a mistake in doing so and I felt badly for it. I'm assuming we've all made a few of those at least those of us who are still learning about being a parent(even after 15 years).
Actually I'm glad I posted this even if I am being made to feel like the "stupid" kid in school because I've learned that you all do impose limits when you think they are necessary and up until this topic I never got that impression.
Kathy
called and made a big deal about it and you acted like it was so
exciting that you had to watch it right that minute and you didn't wait
to find a time when your little girl was busy with something else."
No I didn't. I made a mistake in doing so and I felt badly for it. I'm assuming we've all made a few of those at least those of us who are still learning about being a parent(even after 15 years).
Actually I'm glad I posted this even if I am being made to feel like the "stupid" kid in school because I've learned that you all do impose limits when you think they are necessary and up until this topic I never got that impression.
Kathy
----- Original Message -----
From: pam sorooshian
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Questions?
On Nov 3, 2003, at 12:57 PM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
> Most of what I asked was hypothetical but my dd watched the story
> about Elizabeth Smart because a neighbor called with the news she had
> been found and of course I was excited and turned it on. Yes I was
> right there in the room with her and we talked about it quite a bit
> with her to help her feel safe but that didn't seem to really help.
> The seeds of worry had been planted.
So - in fact, you did the OPPOSITE of what people here try to promote -
you, in effect, coerced a child into watching something inappropriate.
I'm not saying this to criticize, but because you seem to sense there
is a difference between that and what we're talking about and so I'm
trying to make it clear for you.
I KNOW, you didn't tie her down and make her watch. But your neighbor
called and made a big deal about it and you acted like it was so
exciting that you had to watch it right that minute and you didn't wait
to find a time when your little girl was busy with something else.
What we're talking about is the exact opposite of that - it is being
far more in tune with your own children. In fact, even if my little
girl had come running in saying, "They found that girl and I want to
watch it on TV" then we'd watch and I'd talk to her and so on, but we'd
probably watch just a bit - and I'd flip around and try to find the
parts where they showed her happy parents and avoid the parts where
they speculated about what had been done to her, etc.
No limits means we don't have rules that say, for example, "You may
watch 1 hour of tv, only between the hours of 5 and 8 pm, and only if
you've done your schoolwork and chores and only these specific shows."
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pam sorooshian
We've all made mistakes - and I used it as an example because clearly
you felt it was a mistake. And as I said I didn't point it out to
embarrass or criticize you but ONLY because you seem sincere in trying
to figure out what people really mean when they say "no limits." To go
along with the "no limits" you'd have to ALSO add in what the parents
do -- and one thing would be limiting our OWN watching tv news when
little kids are around, if they are made nervous by it. I figured
you'd realized that - so am using it as an example of something we'd DO
as opposed to just not having rules.
Mistakes are okay - they're good if they mean we're trying out needed
changes in our lives. I mean - assuming we don't keep repeating
mistakes for too long - that we eventually learn from them. Kids are
remarkably able to withstand ineptness in their parents - and even to
learn from OUR mistakes. And they totally understand that we're
learning too - they are great about not expecting us to be perfect.
Thank goodness. Your daughter probably learned to be more careful,
herself, about what she watches on tv and you could apologize to her
for not realizing that it would be something that would later bother
her and having it on while she was there. She'd learn some good stuff
from that too.
And so on -- I mean - none of these are "rules" - try principled
conscious hopeful loving living in place of rules. Things become
ambiguous and more complicated and harder to figure out - but worth it.
you felt it was a mistake. And as I said I didn't point it out to
embarrass or criticize you but ONLY because you seem sincere in trying
to figure out what people really mean when they say "no limits." To go
along with the "no limits" you'd have to ALSO add in what the parents
do -- and one thing would be limiting our OWN watching tv news when
little kids are around, if they are made nervous by it. I figured
you'd realized that - so am using it as an example of something we'd DO
as opposed to just not having rules.
Mistakes are okay - they're good if they mean we're trying out needed
changes in our lives. I mean - assuming we don't keep repeating
mistakes for too long - that we eventually learn from them. Kids are
remarkably able to withstand ineptness in their parents - and even to
learn from OUR mistakes. And they totally understand that we're
learning too - they are great about not expecting us to be perfect.
Thank goodness. Your daughter probably learned to be more careful,
herself, about what she watches on tv and you could apologize to her
for not realizing that it would be something that would later bother
her and having it on while she was there. She'd learn some good stuff
from that too.
And so on -- I mean - none of these are "rules" - try principled
conscious hopeful loving living in place of rules. Things become
ambiguous and more complicated and harder to figure out - but worth it.
On Nov 3, 2003, at 2:30 PM, Brian and Kathy Stamp wrote:
> No I didn't. I made a mistake in doing so and I felt badly for it.
> I'm assuming we've all made a few of those at least those of us who
> are still learning about being a parent(even after 15 years).
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
Mary
We don't have rules and regulations about tv and video watching. We have
cable and the children are free to watch whatever it is they want to watch.
That includes the news.
I have never found any of them watching anything that may have made me feel
a bit uncomfortable about what they were seeing. My younger three find the
news very boring and not worth even a second of their time. My oldest finds
it depressing and doesn't watch either. And we do watch news here and I have
never not allowed a certain news broadcast to come into the house. If my
kids watched and became upset about it, I'm sure that would change. Or at
least how we approached it would.
The times that the younger 3 have watched something from beginning to end is
very rare. Even movies we all get to watch together, Joseph and Alyssa will
leave at times to do other things. Sierra is a watcher and enjoys certain
movies and TV programs. Joseph is the least interested in tv. Joseph also
doesn't like scary things, so if he comes into a room while we are watching
something like that, we will warn him. He always choses not to watch. He
just doesn't like them.
There are only two times I can remember changing the channel when watching
something and one of the kids came into the room. One was the show Real Sex
and the other was Nip/Tuck. Didn't make a big deal out of it, just changed
the channel to answer a question and then put it back on.
Once, I told Joseph about a show that was on here. I thought it might
interest him. It was supposed to be about dinosaurs and people living among
them. So he put on the channel and when I came back in the room, it was
changed. He told me it was real stupid with women running around naked and
guys chasing them instead of worrying about the dinosaurs!!! He had no
interest at all in that. I'm sure the day will come when he will, but so
what. We'll all watch and talk about it just like we do about anything new
and interesting for them. And if he wants to watch it alone, I have no doubt
he'll ask us about that stuff too.
Maybe my kids aren't the kind of kids that get all caught up in tv and
zoming out on it. Maybe my kids just have a lot of really neat things to do
so tv isn't the best of their choices most of the time. I wouldn't really
know as these are the only kids I have and I'm not about to make a boring
household to see what would happen!!
Mary B.
http://www.homeschoolingtshirts.com
cable and the children are free to watch whatever it is they want to watch.
That includes the news.
I have never found any of them watching anything that may have made me feel
a bit uncomfortable about what they were seeing. My younger three find the
news very boring and not worth even a second of their time. My oldest finds
it depressing and doesn't watch either. And we do watch news here and I have
never not allowed a certain news broadcast to come into the house. If my
kids watched and became upset about it, I'm sure that would change. Or at
least how we approached it would.
The times that the younger 3 have watched something from beginning to end is
very rare. Even movies we all get to watch together, Joseph and Alyssa will
leave at times to do other things. Sierra is a watcher and enjoys certain
movies and TV programs. Joseph is the least interested in tv. Joseph also
doesn't like scary things, so if he comes into a room while we are watching
something like that, we will warn him. He always choses not to watch. He
just doesn't like them.
There are only two times I can remember changing the channel when watching
something and one of the kids came into the room. One was the show Real Sex
and the other was Nip/Tuck. Didn't make a big deal out of it, just changed
the channel to answer a question and then put it back on.
Once, I told Joseph about a show that was on here. I thought it might
interest him. It was supposed to be about dinosaurs and people living among
them. So he put on the channel and when I came back in the room, it was
changed. He told me it was real stupid with women running around naked and
guys chasing them instead of worrying about the dinosaurs!!! He had no
interest at all in that. I'm sure the day will come when he will, but so
what. We'll all watch and talk about it just like we do about anything new
and interesting for them. And if he wants to watch it alone, I have no doubt
he'll ask us about that stuff too.
Maybe my kids aren't the kind of kids that get all caught up in tv and
zoming out on it. Maybe my kids just have a lot of really neat things to do
so tv isn't the best of their choices most of the time. I wouldn't really
know as these are the only kids I have and I'm not about to make a boring
household to see what would happen!!
Mary B.
http://www.homeschoolingtshirts.com
zenmomma2kids
>>Its an attitude that permeated our relationship from the time theywere babies. In each situation I tried not to confine them, for
example, any more than was truly absolutely necessary. I tried not to
get into too many situations where it would be necessary.>>
THANK YOU for writing was I was thinking Pam. <g>
When my kids were toddlers, I baby-proofed my home completely so that
they were free to explore their world without me having to hover or
constantly tell them no. As they got older, they got access to more
things. If they'd see or ask for something that they might break or
might be dangerous to them, I'd show it to them with me right there
guiding the process as they learned what this new object was.
What we're doing now is just a continuation of that baby-proofing. I
don't put dangerous or spirit-breaking stuff deliberately in their
path. BUT, if they're aware of something that's out there and they
want to explore more, I'll be right in there talking and guiding and
parenting as they do.
>>Another way to look at it is that I try to do everything IN mypower to set things up so that I don't exert that power over the
kids. >>
I like this.
Life is good.
~Mary
zenmomma2kids
>> Actually I'm glad I posted this even if I am being made to feellike the "stupid" kid in school>>
Nope. No one here is making you feel anything. You're imposing that
latent school crap on yourself. People here are willingly answering
your questions because we want to help you understand what we have
found so helpful in our own lives. What is it that someone here
called mistakes? Learning-takes? And you didn't even make a mistake
really. You misunderstood, we're explaining. It's all good.
>>because I've learned that you all do impose limits when you thinkthey are necessary and up until this topic I never got that
impression.>>
For me it's still not about imposing limits. It's about creating a
good, and yes safe, learning and living atmosphere. I don't forbid
but I also don't strew their paths with broken glass.
Life is good.
~Mary
Brian and Kathy Stamp
Well I disagree just a little bit. When someone makes a written expression mistake as I did....ie. I said "mental thinking" instead of just "thinking" and I'm corrected on my error it tends to lead to the "stupid student" feeling that I received in school. Yes probably left over pent up feelings from school no doubt.
Kathy
Kathy
----- Original Message -----
From: zenmomma2kids
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 7:02 PM
Subject: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Re: Questions?
>> Actually I'm glad I posted this even if I am being made to feel
like the "stupid" kid in school>>
Nope. No one here is making you feel anything. You're imposing that
latent school crap on yourself. People here are willingly answering
your questions because we want to help you understand what we have
found so helpful in our own lives. What is it that someone here
called mistakes? Learning-takes? And you didn't even make a mistake
really. You misunderstood, we're explaining. It's all good.
>>because I've learned that you all do impose limits when you think
they are necessary and up until this topic I never got that
impression.>>
For me it's still not about imposing limits. It's about creating a
good, and yes safe, learning and living atmosphere. I don't forbid
but I also don't strew their paths with broken glass.
Life is good.
~Mary
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]