zenmomma *

>>The information back that she was getting was fantatic, I could not
>>understand your reasoning for your response, genitic was ok, but the
>>modeling just didn't fit.>>

Perhaps next time you could just make that comment, with that tone and then
the conversation could progress rather than get quite so sidetracked. :o) I
personally thought the idea of modeling behaviors and attitudes and
reactions was a good topic to explore further. As I have said before, I am
always looking for ways to be more mindful of just what I *am* modeling for
my children.

>>And if it was modeling behavior for instance after me or my husband, I
>>don't think I would have even wanted to share it with the
group.>>

Then you could have stayed out of the discussion and let others tear the
*idea* apart further. That's really what we do here. Someone will throw out
their own particular situation. We try to offer specific comments or advice.
But then we also continue to flesh out the underlying ideology behind it
all.

It works pretty well when we all remember to think of each poster as if they
were a friend chatting with us over tea. :o)

Life is good.
~Mary


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/16/2003 11:14:39 AM Central Standard Time,
zenmomma@... writes:

> >>And if it was modeling behavior for instance after me or my husband, I
> >>don't think I would have even wanted to share it with the
> group.>>
>
> Then you could have stayed out of the discussion and let others tear the
> *idea* apart further.
>
> I find your use of words here rather difficult to grasp. Its one thing to
> tear apart a subject, and another to tear apart ones skills as a parent.
> If you are the Mary, that Teresa has written about. Than I will shall let
> this die out right here and now.
> And as a member of this group, I will respond when I so chose.
>
> Linda



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