re plug in drug conversation
Tim and Maureen
I have been lurking and following the tv debate for a while. I have four people at home unschooling ages 14,12,10 and 7. I have been at this unschooling process for 5 years and have had my doubts off and on about tv, whether i am providing the 'right' learning,etc.. My heart has the answers for me and i have finally tapped into listening to myself and my children.
I have tried many times to do the unrestricted tv thing with my anxiety finally ending it and creating unpleasant scenes. After reading some of the emails and entertaining some new ways to view tv and my issues I have successfully dropped the tv thing.
Now here is the interesting thing. When I was tense and uncertain around the unrestricted tv watching my kids would spend hours and hours on the tv rarely choosing other things to do even when I left it for a month. When I freely and openly let it go it is amazing to see the changes in how they view the tv as well. They do not only choose the tv anymore and that happened right away. Wow! and I feel great to finally be completely trusting them to make their own choices
Tim and Maureen Thomas
http://www.stillwaters.ca
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have tried many times to do the unrestricted tv thing with my anxiety finally ending it and creating unpleasant scenes. After reading some of the emails and entertaining some new ways to view tv and my issues I have successfully dropped the tv thing.
Now here is the interesting thing. When I was tense and uncertain around the unrestricted tv watching my kids would spend hours and hours on the tv rarely choosing other things to do even when I left it for a month. When I freely and openly let it go it is amazing to see the changes in how they view the tv as well. They do not only choose the tv anymore and that happened right away. Wow! and I feel great to finally be completely trusting them to make their own choices
Tim and Maureen Thomas
http://www.stillwaters.ca
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mary
From: Tim and Maureen
<<I have been lurking and following the tv debate for a while. I have four people at home unschooling ages 14,12,10 and 7. I have been at this unschooling process for 5 years and have had my doubts off and on about tv, whether i am providing the 'right' learning,etc.. My heart has the answers for me and i have finally tapped into listening to myself and my children.
I have tried many times to do the unrestricted tv thing with my anxiety finally ending it and creating unpleasant scenes. After reading some of the emails and entertaining some new ways to view tv and my issues I have successfully dropped the tv thing.
Now here is the interesting thing. When I was tense and uncertain around the unrestricted tv watching my kids would spend hours and hours on the tv rarely choosing other things to do even when I left it for a month. When I freely and openly let it go it is amazing to see the changes in how they view the tv as well. They do not only choose the tv anymore and that happened right away. Wow! and I feel great to finally be completely trusting them to make their own choices>>
There go again. Another one!!!
Thanks for the story.
Mary B
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<<I have been lurking and following the tv debate for a while. I have four people at home unschooling ages 14,12,10 and 7. I have been at this unschooling process for 5 years and have had my doubts off and on about tv, whether i am providing the 'right' learning,etc.. My heart has the answers for me and i have finally tapped into listening to myself and my children.
I have tried many times to do the unrestricted tv thing with my anxiety finally ending it and creating unpleasant scenes. After reading some of the emails and entertaining some new ways to view tv and my issues I have successfully dropped the tv thing.
Now here is the interesting thing. When I was tense and uncertain around the unrestricted tv watching my kids would spend hours and hours on the tv rarely choosing other things to do even when I left it for a month. When I freely and openly let it go it is amazing to see the changes in how they view the tv as well. They do not only choose the tv anymore and that happened right away. Wow! and I feel great to finally be completely trusting them to make their own choices>>
There go again. Another one!!!
Thanks for the story.
Mary B
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Heidi and Brent Ricks
So, I guess I raised some hackles with my last post. Oh well. I have thought about a lot of the responses and all of them have something to offer and I will continue to mull them over. I would like to talk a little more about my reasoning in limiting TV. I'm sure I'll be blasted again with anything I say as it seems that the dissenters on this thread have dropped off but that's OK. There's got to be a rabble rouser in every crowd and today it seems to be me. (yeah,
there's more to this story but not for publication here as we're not discussing war stuff...thank goodness)
Our house is a very open plan. Therefore there is no place upstairs where the TV will not be seen and heard by everyone in the house if it is on. I know that I am very auditory sensitive. This means that with overload I get crabby. No one needs that any more than necessary! When I said that if anyone wants to watch TV then they have to be willing to be away from the rest of the family, that was sometimes true but what usually happens is that this means we all watch TV
together. This would not happen if the tv was elsewhere. If it was in the livingroom, we would keep on doing other activities and not tune in to what is on the tube. I see this happen at my mil's all the time. She turns it on and walks away and they end up watching some really inappropriate (in my opinion) things. We like to watch with the kids so we can talk about what they are seeing.
I was raised without a tv for my entire childhood and I thank my parents for making that decision. I know I would have spent many hours on my butt watching idiotic shows and commercials. Instead I spent hours outside and working on my own projects. I am definitely not a tv addict now because I didn't have a tv earlier in my life so that arguement doesn't wash with me. My husband was raised with the tv always on. He would chose to veg out in front of it much more than I
do. With the tv out of the living space he can do that without the rest of us having to hear Jay Lenno or whoever is on late night now, without the rest of us having that junk interfere with our dreams. This literally happened when the tv was in our bedroom. I know the emotions that the tv bring into a house are powerful. I was most sensitive to this when I was pregnant but I remember how I felt then, and know that they are just as powerful now although I am not as
perceptive now. Kids are though.
I want my kids outside rather than in front of some mindless show. They have plenty of opportunities to watch stuff (including mindless shows) but they choose other things most of the time becuse the tv isn't the first thing they see when they get up in the morning.
It seems as though a part of this discussion is really about how we, as parents feel about limit-setting in general. The tv is one of the most obvious (that and food) chances we have to look at where we stand on this basic facet of parenting. I happen to be of the opinion that children do need some limits. (whoa, probably not to ppopular to say here). I relate this to how I felt as a new EMT riding on our local volunteer rescue sqad. I wanted to know that there was
someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge than I had. It was felt safer knowing that there was someone there watching and making sure I was doing things right and thinking things through. As my experience grew and I felt more confident, then it was OK to be the one in charge but that transition isn't always smooth. Kids need to know there are boundries and that those bounderies will move as they are ready. I know kids who have never had boundries
with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long run as they feel so alone in their decision making. There is no one to fall back on, to get advice from. So, yes, I think it is OK to set limits on some things. Those limits are not set in stone. They can and will move.
Sorry to open another whole can of worms but here goes.....
Heidi R
there's more to this story but not for publication here as we're not discussing war stuff...thank goodness)
Our house is a very open plan. Therefore there is no place upstairs where the TV will not be seen and heard by everyone in the house if it is on. I know that I am very auditory sensitive. This means that with overload I get crabby. No one needs that any more than necessary! When I said that if anyone wants to watch TV then they have to be willing to be away from the rest of the family, that was sometimes true but what usually happens is that this means we all watch TV
together. This would not happen if the tv was elsewhere. If it was in the livingroom, we would keep on doing other activities and not tune in to what is on the tube. I see this happen at my mil's all the time. She turns it on and walks away and they end up watching some really inappropriate (in my opinion) things. We like to watch with the kids so we can talk about what they are seeing.
I was raised without a tv for my entire childhood and I thank my parents for making that decision. I know I would have spent many hours on my butt watching idiotic shows and commercials. Instead I spent hours outside and working on my own projects. I am definitely not a tv addict now because I didn't have a tv earlier in my life so that arguement doesn't wash with me. My husband was raised with the tv always on. He would chose to veg out in front of it much more than I
do. With the tv out of the living space he can do that without the rest of us having to hear Jay Lenno or whoever is on late night now, without the rest of us having that junk interfere with our dreams. This literally happened when the tv was in our bedroom. I know the emotions that the tv bring into a house are powerful. I was most sensitive to this when I was pregnant but I remember how I felt then, and know that they are just as powerful now although I am not as
perceptive now. Kids are though.
I want my kids outside rather than in front of some mindless show. They have plenty of opportunities to watch stuff (including mindless shows) but they choose other things most of the time becuse the tv isn't the first thing they see when they get up in the morning.
It seems as though a part of this discussion is really about how we, as parents feel about limit-setting in general. The tv is one of the most obvious (that and food) chances we have to look at where we stand on this basic facet of parenting. I happen to be of the opinion that children do need some limits. (whoa, probably not to ppopular to say here). I relate this to how I felt as a new EMT riding on our local volunteer rescue sqad. I wanted to know that there was
someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge than I had. It was felt safer knowing that there was someone there watching and making sure I was doing things right and thinking things through. As my experience grew and I felt more confident, then it was OK to be the one in charge but that transition isn't always smooth. Kids need to know there are boundries and that those bounderies will move as they are ready. I know kids who have never had boundries
with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long run as they feel so alone in their decision making. There is no one to fall back on, to get advice from. So, yes, I think it is OK to set limits on some things. Those limits are not set in stone. They can and will move.
Sorry to open another whole can of worms but here goes.....
Heidi R
MARK and JULIE SOLICH
<< I know kids who have never had boundries
with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child
in the long run as they feel so alone in their decision making. >>
Don't you think though that the real problem for kids like this is that
their parents don't want them around and use every opportunity to tell them
to go and watch TV just to get them out of their hair? That has been my
observation. I don't think it is so much a lack of limits as a lack of time
and love.
Julie
Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child
in the long run as they feel so alone in their decision making. >>
Don't you think though that the real problem for kids like this is that
their parents don't want them around and use every opportunity to tell them
to go and watch TV just to get them out of their hair? That has been my
observation. I don't think it is so much a lack of limits as a lack of time
and love.
Julie
>the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner,
> ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
>
> If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
>email to:
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
[email protected]
-=-It seems as though a part of this discussion is really about how we, as
parents
feel about limit-setting in general.-=-
That's the surface of it. But underneath it's about clarity and mindfulness.
Not having TV hasn't made you a peaceful, thoughtful person if your post is
typical. Your descriptions included words like "idiotic," "mindless" and
"that arguement doesn't wash with me." Edgy and emotional kind of writing.
-=- children do need some limits.
(whoa, probably not to ppopular to say here). I relate this to how I felt as a
new EMT riding on our local volunteer rescue sqad. I wanted to know that there
was
someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge than I had.-=-
Nobody here has ever left their kids in a cave alone, nor sent them out in an
ambulance all alone. We're right where the kids are, we're right here.
-=Kids need to know there are boundries and that
those bounderies will move as they are ready.-=-
That doesn't mean all boundaries are equally valid. And by "valid" I mean
well-considered and fairly applied.
-=I know kids who have never had
boundries with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast
adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long
run as they feel so alone in their decision making.-=-
If you know children who are alone in their decision making, that's a
situation far different from anything being recommended to you here. You
seem to be recommending that children not have any part in "their" decision
making, but the parents decide.
My children are never alone in their decision making. Kirby (16) talks to me
about his girlfriend. Marty (14) talks to me about his plans with friends.
I have children who "are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast."
I have children who have never chosen to have coke and cookies for breakfast.
You have children who have never had coke and cookies for breakfast.
You think it is because you haven't allowed them that choice.
The other day Kirby left the house really sleepy and I asked him to drink a
Dr Pepper on the way to driver's ed, because he was going to walk half a mile
on a really busy street and he had worked late. He stopped drinking caffeine
at New Year's by his own choice, but he understood my concern. My car was in
the shop and I couldn't drive him. I was afraid for him to be groggy and in
that situation. He took a Dr Pepper.
I have children who could watch R rated movies at age 6. 5. 4.
Today I had two children at 11 and 14 watching Shrek. Sitting in a room full
of all KINDS of videos and DVDs and they chose Shrek. That's different from
watching Shrek because it's not R rated and so it's on the allowable list.
The TV's off right now. Nobody's watching TV anywhere in the house. Just
because everyone has chosen to do various other things, not because anyone
was shamed or teased or told to turn it off.
For me, that's a very valuable thing.
Sandra
parents
feel about limit-setting in general.-=-
That's the surface of it. But underneath it's about clarity and mindfulness.
Not having TV hasn't made you a peaceful, thoughtful person if your post is
typical. Your descriptions included words like "idiotic," "mindless" and
"that arguement doesn't wash with me." Edgy and emotional kind of writing.
-=- children do need some limits.
(whoa, probably not to ppopular to say here). I relate this to how I felt as a
new EMT riding on our local volunteer rescue sqad. I wanted to know that there
was
someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge than I had.-=-
Nobody here has ever left their kids in a cave alone, nor sent them out in an
ambulance all alone. We're right where the kids are, we're right here.
-=Kids need to know there are boundries and that
those bounderies will move as they are ready.-=-
That doesn't mean all boundaries are equally valid. And by "valid" I mean
well-considered and fairly applied.
-=I know kids who have never had
boundries with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast
adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long
run as they feel so alone in their decision making.-=-
If you know children who are alone in their decision making, that's a
situation far different from anything being recommended to you here. You
seem to be recommending that children not have any part in "their" decision
making, but the parents decide.
My children are never alone in their decision making. Kirby (16) talks to me
about his girlfriend. Marty (14) talks to me about his plans with friends.
I have children who "are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast."
I have children who have never chosen to have coke and cookies for breakfast.
You have children who have never had coke and cookies for breakfast.
You think it is because you haven't allowed them that choice.
The other day Kirby left the house really sleepy and I asked him to drink a
Dr Pepper on the way to driver's ed, because he was going to walk half a mile
on a really busy street and he had worked late. He stopped drinking caffeine
at New Year's by his own choice, but he understood my concern. My car was in
the shop and I couldn't drive him. I was afraid for him to be groggy and in
that situation. He took a Dr Pepper.
I have children who could watch R rated movies at age 6. 5. 4.
Today I had two children at 11 and 14 watching Shrek. Sitting in a room full
of all KINDS of videos and DVDs and they chose Shrek. That's different from
watching Shrek because it's not R rated and so it's on the allowable list.
The TV's off right now. Nobody's watching TV anywhere in the house. Just
because everyone has chosen to do various other things, not because anyone
was shamed or teased or told to turn it off.
For me, that's a very valuable thing.
Sandra
averyschmidt
>I'm sure I'll be blasted again with anything I say as it seems thatPerhaps the dissenters are busy thinking and changing their minds.
>the dissenters on this thread have dropped off but that's OK.
I personally wish they'd speak up if they have something to say. I
know I'm open to changing *my* mind if someone else's point of view
makes more sense to me than mine does.
> Our house is a very open plan. Therefore there is no placeI've never tried them myself, but I've heard that a good solution to
>upstairs where the TV will not be seen and heard by everyone in the
>house if it is on. I know that I am very auditory sensitive. This
>means that with overload I get crabby.
this problem is headphones.
> I was raised without a tv for my entire childhood and I thank myMy children have unlimited tv and spend many more hours outside
>parents for making that decision. I know I would have spent many
>hours on my butt watching idiotic shows and commercials.
>Instead I spent hours outside and working on my own projects.
and "working on projects" than they do watching it. Perhaps you
missed my post where I told how I've at times pleaded with them to
come in (because I need to be outside with the youngest and
sometimes I want to start dinner or I'm cold or something) and they
clamor to remain outside playing.
> I want my kids outside rather than in front of some mindlessshow.the morning.
>They have plenty of opportunities to watch stuff (including
>mindless shows) but they choose other things most of the time
>becuse the tv isn't the first thing they see when they get up in
It still wouldn't be the first thing they see when they get up in
the morning if you made the basement comfortable and cozy for them.
BTW, my kids usually choose to do something else right away in the
morning even though the tv is right in our bedroom. And they are
making a genuine choice because they actually *have* a choice, and
they know that even if they *do* choose to watch tv nobody's going
to make them feel guilty about it.
> It seems as though a part of this discussion is really about howWe all have some limits, not just children. Society is full of
>we, as parents feel about limit-setting in general. The tv is one
>of the most obvious (that and food) chances we have to look at
>where we stand on this basic facet of parenting. I happen to be of
>the opinion that children do need some limits.
limits that we are all subject to. They don't need arbitrary limits
set up for them so they can "learn limits."
>They are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast adn watch rThis is a serious misunderstanding. I don't think there's anyone
>rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long
>run as they feel so alone in their decision making. There is no
>one to fall back on, to get advice from.
here who's saying you should leave kids alone in their decision
making and refrain from giving them advice.
Patti
Stephanie Elms
> IBut my kids *do* know that I am at their side. That I am there
> relate this to how I felt as a new EMT riding on our local
> volunteer rescue sqad. I wanted to know that there was
> someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge
> than I had. It was felt safer knowing that there was someone
> there watching and making sure I was doing things right and
> thinking things through. As my experience grew and I felt
> more confident, then it was OK to be the one in charge but
> that transition isn't always smooth.
watching and will help whenever they need it (even if they make
different choices then I think they should). And I am finding that
they accept my advice easier when I am not forcing them to accept it.
I have also found that Jason (6 yo) especially is starting to get
more self aware lately...I think that this is because he has the
chance to make his own mistakes and to learn from these mistakes without
getting additional guilt from me. He is feeling safer about making those
mistakes because he knows that I am there to help him without recrimination
for doing something "wrong".
> Kids need to know thereI have been doing a lot of thinking about this...I think that (as has
> are boundries and that those bounderies will move as they are
> ready. I know kids who have never had boundries
> with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and
> cookies for breakfast adn watch r rated movies at age 6.
> This doesn't serve the child in the long run as they feel so
> alone in their decision making. There is no one to fall back
> on, to get advice from. So, yes, I think it is OK to set
> limits on some things. Those limits are not set in stone.
> They can and will move.
been brought up here recently) that it is more important to have
principles rather then boundaries. And principles will *not* change.
They will remain the same because they apply to everyone, not just
those who have "earned" the right to have special privileges based
on age. My kids now have the right to have cookies and coke for
breakfast and they do it from time to time. But I have also seen that
they will also ask for 3 grilled cheese sandwiches and apples more
frequently then before. Their diet is balancing out (my 3 yo is actually
better about this then my 6 yo having not been controlled to the same extent).
If it is ok to eat cookies in the afternoon, why not the morning? Not to
mention the power struggles we now no longer have....
Stephanie E.
mummyone24
--- In [email protected], "Stephanie Elms"
<stephanie.elms@d...> wrote:
<<My kids now have the right to have cookies and coke for
breakfast and they do it from time to time. But I have also seen that
they will also ask for 3 grilled cheese sandwiches and apples more
frequently then before. Their diet is balancing out (my 3 yo is
actually better about this then my 6 yo having not been controlled to
the same extent).>>
Just want to comment on this food thing. I've found that my kids go
in spurts as to what and how they eat. With Tara, I worried. Then
with Joseph 9 years later, I forgot and worried again. I no longer
worry. We don't restrict or limit food. I did use to really want them
to eat what I made for dinner. That was before I joined this list.
Now dinners are more relaxed and a kind of free for all. My kids are
happier, Joe and I are happier and the kids actually eat better
making their own choices.
I mentioned that Alyssa had pepermint patties for breakfast. One
morning she had pasta, chicken and meatball. Why worry about the
candy? Tonight she specifically asked me for pasta and chicken. She's
one very Italian child!! Sierra was wondering what to eat and I
mentioned that I had some soft tortilla shells and could make her a
soft taco but different than Taco Bell. She asked what I had to put
in it and decided to have sour cream, chicken and assorted cheeses.
The tortillas were bigger than taco size. I put one together and
popped it in the micro and she loved it. Asked for another one and
ate the whole thing. Then she asked for a bowl of Cocoa Puffs,
finished that and had a second bowl. This is a kid who will have 2
pieces of cinnamon raisin toast for breakfast, then a poptart and
finish that off with a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios. The only thing I
worry about is her exploding!!!!!
Wonder why she didn't want any dessert tonight???
Mary B
<stephanie.elms@d...> wrote:
<<My kids now have the right to have cookies and coke for
breakfast and they do it from time to time. But I have also seen that
they will also ask for 3 grilled cheese sandwiches and apples more
frequently then before. Their diet is balancing out (my 3 yo is
actually better about this then my 6 yo having not been controlled to
the same extent).>>
Just want to comment on this food thing. I've found that my kids go
in spurts as to what and how they eat. With Tara, I worried. Then
with Joseph 9 years later, I forgot and worried again. I no longer
worry. We don't restrict or limit food. I did use to really want them
to eat what I made for dinner. That was before I joined this list.
Now dinners are more relaxed and a kind of free for all. My kids are
happier, Joe and I are happier and the kids actually eat better
making their own choices.
I mentioned that Alyssa had pepermint patties for breakfast. One
morning she had pasta, chicken and meatball. Why worry about the
candy? Tonight she specifically asked me for pasta and chicken. She's
one very Italian child!! Sierra was wondering what to eat and I
mentioned that I had some soft tortilla shells and could make her a
soft taco but different than Taco Bell. She asked what I had to put
in it and decided to have sour cream, chicken and assorted cheeses.
The tortillas were bigger than taco size. I put one together and
popped it in the micro and she loved it. Asked for another one and
ate the whole thing. Then she asked for a bowl of Cocoa Puffs,
finished that and had a second bowl. This is a kid who will have 2
pieces of cinnamon raisin toast for breakfast, then a poptart and
finish that off with a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios. The only thing I
worry about is her exploding!!!!!
Wonder why she didn't want any dessert tonight???
Mary B
Fetteroll
on 3/29/03 7:32 PM, Heidi and Brent Ricks at rickshei@... wrote:
where your thinking could be clearer. Muddled thinking means muddled
conclusions.
thought to logical conclusion -- but a set of obstacles.
People will go to extraordinary lengths to remove obstacles in front of
something they truly want. People will grasp at obstacles between them and
something they don't want and say they're insurmountable. The truth isn't
that they *can't* surmount them. The truth is they *choose not* to surmount
them.
adversity but that doesn't justify the adversity they went through.
You *can't* know how you would have turned out if you had been given free
access to TV. People imagine that unless kids are made to learn they won't
learn anything. It makes sense from the data they have available. But
they're wrong.
lot of TV when I was a kid, I was still selective. I never watched anything
that I didn't like. There are shows I watched as a kid that I wouldn't watch
now, but that's because I'm not that kid any more and don't have the needs
of that kid. I'm a different person.
that supports it. Your theory doesn't explain why I don't watch a lot of TV
even though I had unlimited access as a child.
because his parents left it on all the time? What other options did he have?
Did his parents interact with him and be with him? Why was he watching TV?
Was he watching TV as an escape from a distant home life or pressures at
school?
Our TV when I was a kid was on when someone was watching and off when we
were doing other things. I used it to relax after the forced socialization
of school. I used it as a way of visiting other times and places. My needs
are different now though I do still make time for things I really want to
watch.
than if you see it as a resource.
But stepping back objectively, if two people have needs that clash then it's
respectful to treat everyone's needs as important and work out a way for
everyone to get their needs met. Everyone's needs aren't equally important
but if you denigrate what someone else is doing ("junk") then it's going to
feel justifiable to just tell them they need to stop so you can do what you
want.
across the board needs of some mythical general population, the easier it is
to meet the needs of those unique inviduals we live with.
They may choose something you don't find worthwhile, but if they find it
interesting then it isn't mindless to them.
drawing. And when she wants to watch TV, she turns on the TV. And when she's
done with it, she turns it off.
seem to make no sense to you?
are troubled and frightened when faced with the decision of whether to play
with a toy or draw or watch TV?
We *are* there to support our kids. They aren't left to make decisions in a
vacuum and clean up the consequences. We're there by their side for them as
a sounding board and to help them pick up and start over when the outcome
isn't what they expected.
I'm here to support her, not to cage her and protect her. She knows I will
protect her from real dangers, just as I would protect my husband from doing
something he didn't have enough information to realize would have a bad
outcome. (Like reformatting the hard drive!)
movies. Though she has undoubtedly had cookies for breakfast the
overwhelming majority of time she chooses fairly standard meal type food.
(Though not necessarily breakfast food! She's had Chinese spare ribs and
pizza for breakfast.) She can watch R rated movies but has no interest.
There isn't anything in an R movie that has any appeal to her whatsoever.
Probably why those kids are making those choices is because they're parents
are disconnected from them, are basically letting the kids raise themselves.
That isn't what we're talking about at all. If the parents are there with
great choices that the kids like for breakfast it's unlikely the kids will
choose cookies all the time. If the parents are there watching TV with the
kids, or at least are aware of the types of programs and other interests
they have, are interacting with them, there isn't a reason to choose
programs that don't meet their needs. Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie?
a child the freedom to make their own choices and letting them loose without
support.
decision making process and choosing for them.
Joyce
> So, I guess I raised some hackles with my last post.No one's angry or fearful or guarding anything. People are pointing out
where your thinking could be clearer. Muddled thinking means muddled
conclusions.
> I would like to talk a little more about my reasoning in limiting TV.What you've written isn't reasoning -- as in a smooth flow of reasoned
thought to logical conclusion -- but a set of obstacles.
People will go to extraordinary lengths to remove obstacles in front of
something they truly want. People will grasp at obstacles between them and
something they don't want and say they're insurmountable. The truth isn't
that they *can't* surmount them. The truth is they *choose not* to surmount
them.
> I was raised without a tv for my entire childhood and I thank my parents forThe ends don't justify the means. Lots of people have come out stronger from
> making that decision.
adversity but that doesn't justify the adversity they went through.
You *can't* know how you would have turned out if you had been given free
access to TV. People imagine that unless kids are made to learn they won't
learn anything. It makes sense from the data they have available. But
they're wrong.
> I know I would have spent many hours on my buttWhy would you have chosen to watch idiotic shows? Even though I watched a
> watching idiotic shows and commercials.
lot of TV when I was a kid, I was still selective. I never watched anything
that I didn't like. There are shows I watched as a kid that I wouldn't watch
now, but that's because I'm not that kid any more and don't have the needs
of that kid. I'm a different person.
> I am definitely not a tv addict now because I didn't have a tv earlier in myFor a theory to be valid it has to explain all the data, not just the data
> life so that arguement doesn't wash with me.
that supports it. Your theory doesn't explain why I don't watch a lot of TV
even though I had unlimited access as a child.
> My husband was raised with the tv always on. He would chose to veg out inWas it always on because he chose to turn it on and leave it on? Why? Or
> front of it much more than I
> do.
because his parents left it on all the time? What other options did he have?
Did his parents interact with him and be with him? Why was he watching TV?
Was he watching TV as an escape from a distant home life or pressures at
school?
Our TV when I was a kid was on when someone was watching and off when we
were doing other things. I used it to relax after the forced socialization
of school. I used it as a way of visiting other times and places. My needs
are different now though I do still make time for things I really want to
watch.
> without the rest of us having that junk interfere with our dreams.If you see it as junk then its presence is going to bother you a lot more
than if you see it as a resource.
But stepping back objectively, if two people have needs that clash then it's
respectful to treat everyone's needs as important and work out a way for
everyone to get their needs met. Everyone's needs aren't equally important
but if you denigrate what someone else is doing ("junk") then it's going to
feel justifiable to just tell them they need to stop so you can do what you
want.
> I know the emotions that the tv bring into a house are powerful. I was mostNot all kids. Some kids. Some people for that matter. The less we think in
> sensitive to this when I was pregnant but I remember how I felt then, and know
> that they are just as powerful now although I am not as
> perceptive now. Kids are though.
across the board needs of some mythical general population, the easier it is
to meet the needs of those unique inviduals we live with.
> I want my kids outsideWhat do *they* want?
> rather than in front of some mindless show.Why would they choose to watch a mindless show?
They may choose something you don't find worthwhile, but if they find it
interesting then it isn't mindless to them.
> they choose other things most of the time becuse the tv isn't the first thingMy daughter chooses the best options she has available. Usually it's
> they see when they get up in the morning.
drawing. And when she wants to watch TV, she turns on the TV. And when she's
done with it, she turns it off.
> I happen to be of the opinion that children do need some limits.How do your children feel? How do you feel when people impose limits that
seem to make no sense to you?
> I relate this to how I felt as a new EMT riding on our local volunteer rescueThat isn't limitations. That's support.
> sqad. I wanted to know that there was
> someone else at my side who had more experience adn knowledge than I had.
> It was felt safer knowing that there was someone there watching and makingPresumably you were making life and death decisions. Do you think your kids
> sure I was doing things right and thinking things through.
are troubled and frightened when faced with the decision of whether to play
with a toy or draw or watch TV?
We *are* there to support our kids. They aren't left to make decisions in a
vacuum and clean up the consequences. We're there by their side for them as
a sounding board and to help them pick up and start over when the outcome
isn't what they expected.
> Kids need to know there are boundries and that those bounderies will move asMy daughter knows there are real life limitations to life.
> they are ready.
I'm here to support her, not to cage her and protect her. She knows I will
protect her from real dangers, just as I would protect my husband from doing
something he didn't have enough information to realize would have a bad
outcome. (Like reformatting the hard drive!)
> They are allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast adn watch r ratedMy daughter can have coke and cookies for breakfast and watch R rated
> movies at age 6.
movies. Though she has undoubtedly had cookies for breakfast the
overwhelming majority of time she chooses fairly standard meal type food.
(Though not necessarily breakfast food! She's had Chinese spare ribs and
pizza for breakfast.) She can watch R rated movies but has no interest.
There isn't anything in an R movie that has any appeal to her whatsoever.
Probably why those kids are making those choices is because they're parents
are disconnected from them, are basically letting the kids raise themselves.
That isn't what we're talking about at all. If the parents are there with
great choices that the kids like for breakfast it's unlikely the kids will
choose cookies all the time. If the parents are there watching TV with the
kids, or at least are aware of the types of programs and other interests
they have, are interacting with them, there isn't a reason to choose
programs that don't meet their needs. Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie?
> This doesn't serve the child in the long run as they feel so alone in theirNo one is suggesting that. There's a huge world of difference between giving
> decision making. There is no one to fall back on, to get advice from.
a child the freedom to make their own choices and letting them loose without
support.
> So, yes, I think it is OK to set limits on some things.And there's a huge world of difference between supporting a child in their
decision making process and choosing for them.
Joyce
Sorcha
I'm going to make an analogy, since I'm usually able to think more
clearly about something when I look at it from a different angle.
Instead of television, let's say internet. Presumably we all have
internet access in our homes (at least all of us who are posting). If
you're posting but don't have access at home, then you're spending a lot
of time somewhere that has internet access, so it's important enough for
you to do so.
I think the internet was the single best invention humans ever made.
Honestly. There is so much information on the internet that you could
travel to every library in your state and spend hours per day looking
and still not find as much as you can find in a one hour search online.
With the internet, people can form communities with like-minded people,
even if some of them are in Arkansas and others in Australia. On the
internet, you aren't being judged by your hairstyle or clothes or weight
or age.
My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. She hates it.
She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few years ago,
she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking up porn.
There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but also violent
things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the library naked
and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. He
stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
Porn and instructions on explosives are not the only things the internet
has against it. People cheat on their spouses with people they met in
chat rooms. People stalk other people, and perverts prey on children.
Not to mention just the simple stupidity of some sites. My husband had
to work late one night and I was bored so I passed the time reading an
entire site about farts.
But we're all here, on the internet, despite all the bad things it can
be used for. We're all learning more about unschooling and probably
learning many more things with the internet. I doubt any of us are
learning how to make bombs or preying on children.
My mom says the thing she hates most about the internet is how people
are on it all day. I have a cable connection that allows my computer to
be online all day. I love it. I don't sit here staring at my computer
all day, but anytime I want to use it for any reason, I can. It's right
there in my living room, next to the TV and a bookshelf, and I can check
my email during the two minutes my hot pocket is microwaving and go
about my day. I'm on it less than the people my mom talks about coming
into the library when they open and sitting there until closing, just
using the internet. I could be on it 24 hours a day. I'm probably on
it 45 minutes per day.
Since you're online reading this, please explain to me how the bad
things about TV are worse than the bad things about the internet.
Sorcha
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
clearly about something when I look at it from a different angle.
Instead of television, let's say internet. Presumably we all have
internet access in our homes (at least all of us who are posting). If
you're posting but don't have access at home, then you're spending a lot
of time somewhere that has internet access, so it's important enough for
you to do so.
I think the internet was the single best invention humans ever made.
Honestly. There is so much information on the internet that you could
travel to every library in your state and spend hours per day looking
and still not find as much as you can find in a one hour search online.
With the internet, people can form communities with like-minded people,
even if some of them are in Arkansas and others in Australia. On the
internet, you aren't being judged by your hairstyle or clothes or weight
or age.
My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. She hates it.
She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few years ago,
she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking up porn.
There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but also violent
things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the library naked
and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. He
stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
Porn and instructions on explosives are not the only things the internet
has against it. People cheat on their spouses with people they met in
chat rooms. People stalk other people, and perverts prey on children.
Not to mention just the simple stupidity of some sites. My husband had
to work late one night and I was bored so I passed the time reading an
entire site about farts.
But we're all here, on the internet, despite all the bad things it can
be used for. We're all learning more about unschooling and probably
learning many more things with the internet. I doubt any of us are
learning how to make bombs or preying on children.
My mom says the thing she hates most about the internet is how people
are on it all day. I have a cable connection that allows my computer to
be online all day. I love it. I don't sit here staring at my computer
all day, but anytime I want to use it for any reason, I can. It's right
there in my living room, next to the TV and a bookshelf, and I can check
my email during the two minutes my hot pocket is microwaving and go
about my day. I'm on it less than the people my mom talks about coming
into the library when they open and sitting there until closing, just
using the internet. I could be on it 24 hours a day. I'm probably on
it 45 minutes per day.
Since you're online reading this, please explain to me how the bad
things about TV are worse than the bad things about the internet.
Sorcha
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
-=I know kids who have never had
boundries with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast
adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long
run as they feel so alone in their decision making.-=-
I missed the original post this was taken from Sandra's post, she quoted it,
so not sure who said it or if it was said in jest. If it was I apologize in
advance.
I guess I don't set boundaries randomly for my children. There are some
boundaries that I have like hitting is unacceptable behavior. My boys and I
have talked about this. I do understand that sometimes they get frustrated
and can't express themselves and lash out. We talk about it and try to do
better. But my boys are always a part of the process.
And they have had coke and cookies for breakfast before. That was their
decision and it doesn't always happen but if we have cake around sometimes
they want it for breakfast, sometimes I do to. And sometimes they skip
breakfast or have cereal or an apple. It isn't like if the cookies are
around they will always grab them to eat. I think that is one of the gifts I
have given them. The ability to see all food as equal. They aren't always
asking for cake because cake has never been forbidden. They see it as
another option and are just as likely to have an apple.
Also both have seen R rated movies. (6 and 8 yo) I watch with them but if it
is something they want to see. If the movie is too intense in one way or
another then they tend to get up and walk away or ask to not watch and we
turn it off. I don't think the G, PG, R, etc., rating are in any way a good
way to rate weather a movie is good or not. Or acceptable for my boys or not.
Anyway just some thoughts this morning.
Pam G.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
boundries with their parents. They are allowed to have coke and cookies for
breakfast
adn watch r rated movies at age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long
run as they feel so alone in their decision making.-=-
I missed the original post this was taken from Sandra's post, she quoted it,
so not sure who said it or if it was said in jest. If it was I apologize in
advance.
I guess I don't set boundaries randomly for my children. There are some
boundaries that I have like hitting is unacceptable behavior. My boys and I
have talked about this. I do understand that sometimes they get frustrated
and can't express themselves and lash out. We talk about it and try to do
better. But my boys are always a part of the process.
And they have had coke and cookies for breakfast before. That was their
decision and it doesn't always happen but if we have cake around sometimes
they want it for breakfast, sometimes I do to. And sometimes they skip
breakfast or have cereal or an apple. It isn't like if the cookies are
around they will always grab them to eat. I think that is one of the gifts I
have given them. The ability to see all food as equal. They aren't always
asking for cake because cake has never been forbidden. They see it as
another option and are just as likely to have an apple.
Also both have seen R rated movies. (6 and 8 yo) I watch with them but if it
is something they want to see. If the movie is too intense in one way or
another then they tend to get up and walk away or ask to not watch and we
turn it off. I don't think the G, PG, R, etc., rating are in any way a good
way to rate weather a movie is good or not. Or acceptable for my boys or not.
Anyway just some thoughts this morning.
Pam G.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 3/30/03 5:59:36 AM, fetteroll@... writes:
<< Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie? >>
Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.
Kirby didn't watch many R rated movies, but Marty and Holly have watched more
of them than Kirby did.
They've never (ever) picked out a movie because of its rating, one way or the
other. They choose them for historical period, or having an actor they like,
or for humor (way more humorous purpose here than any other), or for action.
My kids saw Rocky Horror at young ages, or rather they were in the house when
I had it on for the music and humor. My husband loves action adventure stuff
like Die Hard. If it has spies and bombs and helicopters, he's there. So
the kids have walked in and out on stuff like that, sometimes gotten
interested, sometimes not. Same with me and some of their movies. I still
haven't seen all of Shrek, but am familiar with most parts from passing
through.
One aspect we habitually dodge here because it turns into religion and
politics is whether the parents are willing for their children to hear "the f
word." I don't mind. If I minded, lots of movies would be right out for our
family. Eddie Izzard's stand-up routine "Dress to Kill" is the main
attraction this week. He uses the word casually. He used it in French
(there's a long routine he did in France on the DVD too). For "the whole
damned world" (paraphrase) he used 'tout le f***ing monde' which I thought
was pretty funny.
I bought Marty an autographed copy of Jay and Silent Bob Strike back for
Christmas, and a t-shirt to go with it. Yet Marty is a considerate boy who
watches cartoons with his little sister and plays Harry Potter with her
friends.
Anothe factor we haven't discussed much is that unschooled kids are not on
the school's timetable, nor following their patterns. In school there comes
a time when a child might stop playing with dolls or action figures, because
he wants to be accepted as "too big" for that. And so many kids under
school's influence will reject a phase or interest to go to the next. What
they loved last year, they decide they "hate" this year. Or things will be
declared "that's for babies," or "that's for elementary school kids."
Without that skin-shedding social behavior, a kid can watch an R rated movie
and then go outside and play house under sheets pinned to trees and then
check their e-mail and play Barbies.
Maybe some of the television fear is that it would cause a child to lose
innocence and skip phases of play and thought.
I haven't found that to be true. On the contrary, my kids are willing to
choose their activities for personal and honest reasons, not because they
want others to think them cool.
Sandra
Sandra
<< Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie? >>
Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.
Kirby didn't watch many R rated movies, but Marty and Holly have watched more
of them than Kirby did.
They've never (ever) picked out a movie because of its rating, one way or the
other. They choose them for historical period, or having an actor they like,
or for humor (way more humorous purpose here than any other), or for action.
My kids saw Rocky Horror at young ages, or rather they were in the house when
I had it on for the music and humor. My husband loves action adventure stuff
like Die Hard. If it has spies and bombs and helicopters, he's there. So
the kids have walked in and out on stuff like that, sometimes gotten
interested, sometimes not. Same with me and some of their movies. I still
haven't seen all of Shrek, but am familiar with most parts from passing
through.
One aspect we habitually dodge here because it turns into religion and
politics is whether the parents are willing for their children to hear "the f
word." I don't mind. If I minded, lots of movies would be right out for our
family. Eddie Izzard's stand-up routine "Dress to Kill" is the main
attraction this week. He uses the word casually. He used it in French
(there's a long routine he did in France on the DVD too). For "the whole
damned world" (paraphrase) he used 'tout le f***ing monde' which I thought
was pretty funny.
I bought Marty an autographed copy of Jay and Silent Bob Strike back for
Christmas, and a t-shirt to go with it. Yet Marty is a considerate boy who
watches cartoons with his little sister and plays Harry Potter with her
friends.
Anothe factor we haven't discussed much is that unschooled kids are not on
the school's timetable, nor following their patterns. In school there comes
a time when a child might stop playing with dolls or action figures, because
he wants to be accepted as "too big" for that. And so many kids under
school's influence will reject a phase or interest to go to the next. What
they loved last year, they decide they "hate" this year. Or things will be
declared "that's for babies," or "that's for elementary school kids."
Without that skin-shedding social behavior, a kid can watch an R rated movie
and then go outside and play house under sheets pinned to trees and then
check their e-mail and play Barbies.
Maybe some of the television fear is that it would cause a child to lose
innocence and skip phases of play and thought.
I haven't found that to be true. On the contrary, my kids are willing to
choose their activities for personal and honest reasons, not because they
want others to think them cool.
Sandra
Sandra
Mary
From: <SandraDodd@...>
In a message dated 3/30/03 5:59:36 AM, fetteroll@... writes:
<< Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie? >>
I'm not quite sure what this means. The part about being an only child?
Tara was an only child for 9 years. She watched R rated movies when she was
young. Before she had any kind of school stuff going on. She watched movies
that interested her. At that time, I watched them first. The violence and
language didn't bother me but I did moniter then the sex scenes. She always
picked movies that had like robots or giant bugs and things in them. She
loved Jaws. Never any kind of Jason movies where people were running around
killing and getting killed. My kids now pick the same kind of movies. They
loved Lake Placid with the giant crocodile. And just recently, Joseph
watched Die Hard with Joe. Actually only parts of it. He would come and go
while it was on, find something interesting and then leave and come back
later.
When Tara started school, her friends were always talking about movies they
couldn't see. Tara didn't understand what the fascination was with them. She
saw them and they were no big deal to her. When she got older and started to
meet friends at the movies, she also couldn't understand why some of them
went off to sneak into another movie. They were R rated. Tara was going to
see the PG ones and the other kids were sneaking off. If she wanted to see
those R rated ones, she would have asked me and I would have taken her. Now
that's with school influence even.
I don't worry about the choices the kids are making now in this house.
As a side note, last Sunday we all celebrated Tara's 17th birthday. It was
the only day she wasn't already booked! Anyway, we all went to see Piglet's
Big Movie. Tara too. We all loved it. I mentioned that I wanted to take
Alyssa to her first movie. Sierra wanted to come, then Joseph said he wanted
to see it too. When Tara heard, she said she wanted to go with us. Even Joe
liked it. It's all about choices that are free to be made.
Mary B
In a message dated 3/30/03 5:59:36 AM, fetteroll@... writes:
<< Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated
movie? >>
><< Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.>>
I'm not quite sure what this means. The part about being an only child?
Tara was an only child for 9 years. She watched R rated movies when she was
young. Before she had any kind of school stuff going on. She watched movies
that interested her. At that time, I watched them first. The violence and
language didn't bother me but I did moniter then the sex scenes. She always
picked movies that had like robots or giant bugs and things in them. She
loved Jaws. Never any kind of Jason movies where people were running around
killing and getting killed. My kids now pick the same kind of movies. They
loved Lake Placid with the giant crocodile. And just recently, Joseph
watched Die Hard with Joe. Actually only parts of it. He would come and go
while it was on, find something interesting and then leave and come back
later.
When Tara started school, her friends were always talking about movies they
couldn't see. Tara didn't understand what the fascination was with them. She
saw them and they were no big deal to her. When she got older and started to
meet friends at the movies, she also couldn't understand why some of them
went off to sneak into another movie. They were R rated. Tara was going to
see the PG ones and the other kids were sneaking off. If she wanted to see
those R rated ones, she would have asked me and I would have taken her. Now
that's with school influence even.
I don't worry about the choices the kids are making now in this house.
As a side note, last Sunday we all celebrated Tara's 17th birthday. It was
the only day she wasn't already booked! Anyway, we all went to see Piglet's
Big Movie. Tara too. We all loved it. I mentioned that I wanted to take
Alyssa to her first movie. Sierra wanted to come, then Joseph said he wanted
to see it too. When Tara heard, she said she wanted to go with us. Even Joe
liked it. It's all about choices that are free to be made.
Mary B
kayb85
> My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. Shehates it.
> She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few yearsago,
> she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking upporn.
> There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but alsoviolent
> things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the librarynaked
> and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. HeI know this wasn't your point in the whole analogy (and it was a good
> stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
analogy), but I just had to comment that at the two libraries that we
go to most often, the librarians really don't like the computers.
At the first one, when they were rearranging to make room for a
computer center, I commented to the lady checking out my books how
neat it was that they were going to be getting all of these
computers. She started going on about how she's not a computer
teacher, no one had better ask her how to use them, etc. At the same
library, I heard that the board turned down a grant that would have
allowed them to computerize their system. They prefer the "old
fashioned card catalog". They don't allow people to email anyone or
access chat rooms or message boards using their computers. I asked
what their reasoning was behind that rule and they told me, "Because
someone might email a bomb threat to the white house and then it
would come back that it happened from our computer".
At the second library we sometimes go to, they are just kind of rude
about everything. They seem annoyed and bothered when you ask about
using the computers, but then again they seem annoyed and bothered
about everything! lol
Sheila
[email protected]
In a message dated 3/30/03 11:01:03 AM, mummy124@... writes:
<< << Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.>>
I'm not quite sure what this means. The part about being an only child? >>
I think it's way easier to shelter/isolate/"nest" an oldest or only than it
is a child with older siblings.
That's all I meant.
Kirby was more solidly into stuff designed for little kids than the other two
were, because when Kirby moved on to other stuff, Marty did (two and a half
years sooner) and Holly did (five and a half years sooner), just by being
there.
But they're all just as willing to still watch "kid stuff," and they were all
sad when Mr. Rogers died.
Was it this list where a mom confessed liking Teletubbies? Holly liked it
and I've watched it with her several times. I love the little videos, and
the color stuff. "Purple!" Very still and slow and attractive.
Sandra
<< << Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.>>
I'm not quite sure what this means. The part about being an only child? >>
I think it's way easier to shelter/isolate/"nest" an oldest or only than it
is a child with older siblings.
That's all I meant.
Kirby was more solidly into stuff designed for little kids than the other two
were, because when Kirby moved on to other stuff, Marty did (two and a half
years sooner) and Holly did (five and a half years sooner), just by being
there.
But they're all just as willing to still watch "kid stuff," and they were all
sad when Mr. Rogers died.
Was it this list where a mom confessed liking Teletubbies? Holly liked it
and I've watched it with her several times. I love the little videos, and
the color stuff. "Purple!" Very still and slow and attractive.
Sandra
Fetteroll
on 3/30/03 12:12 PM, Mary at mummy124@... wrote:
rated stuff.
I thought about it after I posted that there are horror and violent movies
(like Gladiator) that are rated R that some younger kids might want to
watch.
Joyce
> From: <SandraDodd@...>Meaning my daughter doesn't have older kids around who would be watching R
>
> In a message dated 3/30/03 5:59:36 AM, fetteroll@... writes:
>
> << Why *would* a 6 yo watch an R rated movie? >>
>
> << Joyce wrote that and she has an only child.>>
>
> I'm not quite sure what this means. The part about being an only child?
rated stuff.
I thought about it after I posted that there are horror and violent movies
(like Gladiator) that are rated R that some younger kids might want to
watch.
Joyce
sablehs
SandraDodd@... wrote:
My husband loves action adventure stuff
like Die Hard. If it has spies and bombs and helicopters, he's there. So
the kids have walked in and out on stuff like that, sometimes gotten
interested, sometimes not.
<<<I bought Marty an autographed copy of Jay and Silent Bob Strike back for
Christmas, and a t-shirt to go with it. Yet Marty is a considerate boy who
watches cartoons with his little sister and plays Harry Potter with her
friends.>>
Husband and I saw that at the movies {one of the very few dates we have been on since we have been married} and then rented it so the kids could see it when it came out on video. I got my husband 2 sets of action figures {the first set was opened, by my then 2 year old, when my back was turned}. {one of the things my husband has collected is cool action figures and keeps them packaged up}
We own Mall Rats, Dogma, and Chasing Amy but haven't gotten around to own Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back yet because we have a DVD now and want to start getting that format. {and a little low of funds right now}
They watch all kinds of scary movies but I thought it was interresting to note you can never know what will be scary. Kessa {my middle daughter} has watched "Freddy" with her sister with no problems, but when watching Dogma, she was scared to go to the bathroom alone for a while because of the "sh*t demon" {we called him the doodie monster} but after we were there with her all the time she needed us she ended up fine.
We also own some Cheech and Chong movies <gasp> and they think it's funny but with most of the things, like you said they come and go depending on their moods.
Tracy
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
My husband loves action adventure stuff
like Die Hard. If it has spies and bombs and helicopters, he's there. So
the kids have walked in and out on stuff like that, sometimes gotten
interested, sometimes not.
<<<I bought Marty an autographed copy of Jay and Silent Bob Strike back for
Christmas, and a t-shirt to go with it. Yet Marty is a considerate boy who
watches cartoons with his little sister and plays Harry Potter with her
friends.>>
Husband and I saw that at the movies {one of the very few dates we have been on since we have been married} and then rented it so the kids could see it when it came out on video. I got my husband 2 sets of action figures {the first set was opened, by my then 2 year old, when my back was turned}. {one of the things my husband has collected is cool action figures and keeps them packaged up}
We own Mall Rats, Dogma, and Chasing Amy but haven't gotten around to own Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back yet because we have a DVD now and want to start getting that format. {and a little low of funds right now}
They watch all kinds of scary movies but I thought it was interresting to note you can never know what will be scary. Kessa {my middle daughter} has watched "Freddy" with her sister with no problems, but when watching Dogma, she was scared to go to the bathroom alone for a while because of the "sh*t demon" {we called him the doodie monster} but after we were there with her all the time she needed us she ended up fine.
We also own some Cheech and Chong movies <gasp> and they think it's funny but with most of the things, like you said they come and go depending on their moods.
Tracy
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
MARK and JULIE SOLICH
We must have the world's greatest librarians. The one responsible for
buying new stock is always getting CD Roms too and she plays on them for
awhile so that she can help anyone who has problems with them. I remember
when a Carmen Sandiego CDRom came in and she knew we were waiting for it,
she hunted me out in the library to give it to me because she was excited
about sharing it!
Julie
buying new stock is always getting CD Roms too and she plays on them for
awhile so that she can help anyone who has problems with them. I remember
when a Carmen Sandiego CDRom came in and she knew we were waiting for it,
she hunted me out in the library to give it to me because she was excited
about sharing it!
Julie
----- Original Message -----
From: "kayb85" <sheran@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 1:54 AM
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: re plug in drug conversation
>
> > My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. She
> hates it.
> > She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few years
> ago,
> > she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking up
> porn.
> > There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but also
> violent
> > things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the library
> naked
> > and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. He
> > stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
>
> I know this wasn't your point in the whole analogy (and it was a good
> analogy), but I just had to comment that at the two libraries that we
> go to most often, the librarians really don't like the computers.
>
> At the first one, when they were rearranging to make room for a
> computer center, I commented to the lady checking out my books how
> neat it was that they were going to be getting all of these
> computers. She started going on about how she's not a computer
> teacher, no one had better ask her how to use them, etc. At the same
> library, I heard that the board turned down a grant that would have
> allowed them to computerize their system. They prefer the "old
> fashioned card catalog". They don't allow people to email anyone or
> access chat rooms or message boards using their computers. I asked
> what their reasoning was behind that rule and they told me, "Because
> someone might email a bomb threat to the white house and then it
> would come back that it happened from our computer".
>
> At the second library we sometimes go to, they are just kind of rude
> about everything. They seem annoyed and bothered when you ask about
> using the computers, but then again they seem annoyed and bothered
> about everything! lol
>
> Sheila
>
>
>
> ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
>
> If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner,
Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an
email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
the_clevengers
> At the first one, when they were rearranging to make room for asame
> computer center, I commented to the lady checking out my books how
> neat it was that they were going to be getting all of these
> computers. She started going on about how she's not a computer
> teacher, no one had better ask her how to use them, etc. At the
> library, I heard that the board turned down a grant that would haveWeird. I wonder if they have the same restrictions on their pay
> allowed them to computerize their system. They prefer the "old
> fashioned card catalog". They don't allow people to email anyone or
> access chat rooms or message boards using their computers. I asked
> what their reasoning was behind that rule and they told me, "Because
> someone might email a bomb threat to the white house and then it
> would come back that it happened from our computer".
phones. After all, you could phone a bomb threat to the White House
from there as well.
AFA card catalogs go, our library has a new computerized system that
somehow manages to be infinitely slower than the old one. Hey, I'm a
big fan of technology, worked in high tech for a decade, but I'm not
sure what the point is if it makes everything harder to use and
slower. And call me weird, but I miss having a little card in each
book that tells me when that particular book is due (as opposed to a
gigantic printout slip that I somehow always misplace and have to
scroll down visually to find my books, or an online library system
that is so dog slow from my modem that I give up before I can check
what's due).
Blue Skies,
-Robin-
zenmomma *
>>So, I guess I raised some hackles with my last post.>>I don't think you raised hackles, just prompted responses and discussion.
>>I'm sure I'll be blasted again with anything I say as it seems that theI don't think anyone here is out to blast anyone personally. We're all just
>>dissenters on this thread have dropped off but that's OK. >>
talking ideas. This particular topic is the idea that you can allow children
more choices than you might have previously considered. It's worth
discussing here! These kinds of ideas don't get discussed in the mainstream.
Contolling children and making their "big" decisions for them is the norm.
>>We like to watch with the kids so we can talk about what they areThat's great. I like to know what the kids are watching too. That's why I
>>seeing.>>
like the TV in the family room. I can hear it even if I don't watch every
moment. I float in and out of their show or movie as I do other things
around the house.
>>I know I would have spent many hours on my butt watching idiotic shows andYou *can't* know that. Maybe it would have become so commonplace that it
>>commercials.>>
would have lost its mojo over you. Maybe you would have been attracted to
only one or two cool shows and turned it off for the rest. And you should
give yourself more credit. Why would you spend the majority of your time
with idiocy? You seem pretty intelligent to me. :o)
>>With the tv out of the living space he can do that without the rest of usI've never had Jay Leno interfere with my dreams thank goodness. Maybe I
>>having to hear Jay Lenno or whoever is on late night now, without the rest
>>of us having that junk interfere with our dreams.>>
should watch a good Brad Pitt movie before bed and wish real hard. <g>
Just kidding. But I do notice a lot of really loaded words in your post like
junk, idiotic, mindless, etc. And now you're giving the tv potential
control of your dreams. That's a lot of negative energy right there, flowing
from your words.
>>I know kids who have never had boundries with their parents. They areNeglect is not unschooling is not mindful parenting.
>>allowed to have coke and cookies for breakfast adn watch r rated movies at
>>age 6. This doesn't serve the child in the long run as they feel so alone
>>in their decision making.>>
I wouldn't want my children to feel alone in their decision making and
that's why I try to talk through decisions with them. Helping them
understand the potential consequences of their decisons is way different
from setting up rules and set-in-stone age limits and such.
Sweets in the morning won't kill a kid. Casey has had a cookie first thing
several times this week because Girl Scout cookies are here. They're only
around once a year and are very special. :o) She then goes on to have
regular breakfast. R rated movies are decided on a case by case basis.
Shakespeare in Love got an R rating and I just love watching that with my
kids. I'm not going to turn down a movie based on ratings alone.
>>>Sorry to open another whole can of worms but here goes.....>>It's not a can of worms, it's a good discussion. :o) I think it's cool you
brought it up knowing you were going to be disagreed with here. To me it
means you're open-minded and thinking.
Life is good.
~Mary
"The miracle is not to walk on water. The miracle is to walk on the green
earth, dwelling deeply in the present moment and feeling truly alive."
~ Thich Nhat Hanh
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Stephanie Elms
> AFA card catalogs go, our library has a new computerized system thatHmmm. That is interesting...we have a great computerized library system and
> somehow manages to be infinitely slower than the old one. Hey, I'm a
> big fan of technology, worked in high tech for a decade, but I'm not
> sure what the point is if it makes everything harder to use and
> slower. And call me weird, but I miss having a little card in each
> book that tells me when that particular book is due (as opposed to a
> gigantic printout slip that I somehow always misplace and have to
> scroll down visually to find my books, or an online library system
> that is so dog slow from my modem that I give up before I can check
> what's due).
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link
still have the little card in the back. :o) I love our computerized system.
I can access it at home, put holds on books and they call me when they come in
(especially handy when the book is at another library).
Or I can look up the call number for my books at home so that I can find them
easier (we always look up the boys books together at the library but they start
getting antsy when I look up books for me. Oh, I can also renew online and check
and see what fines I have due. :o) Or identify any books that we have not returned.
Right now I have a hold on the new Harry Potter book...I wonder how many people
are before me! I hate buying hard covers but I don't want to wait for the book
to come out in soft cover!
Stephanie E.
Amie
I have not had alot of time to respond to this thread, but I am reading the posts off and on.
I recently said that I limited t.v. again in our house. I have to say that I do wish I was comfortable giving my kids free rein on the t.v. But, I don't. Not because I don't trust them or want them to decide, but because I do not want them exposed to the garbage that is on. Nor do I want to sit and watch t.v.
I have read studies about how our minds become wired one way for t.v. viewing, and new paths are not made while viewing other shows. It is the same path when we are 5 that we have when we are 25. It is a passive task to sit there. This is my opionion, of course. I also just read another study that followed people from childhood until into the adult years, and the ones that watched violence, (shows like Baretta when they were younger), were more violent as adults. They were more likely to strike a spouse, be in trouble with the law, etc. I am not saying this is the case for all, of course, I just thought it was interesting.
I mentioned a book once before that I find very interesting, called Magical Parent, Magical Child by Joseph Chilton Pearce. It includes alot of research, etc. Again, just one more tool.
I want my kids to be able to make decisions for themselves, but why would I let my 5 1/2 year old go see the movie Cody Banks? He really wants to see it, but I just can't do it. It has violence, it shows women in a demeaning way, etc. How can I justify that? And, I feel if I agree to see it, I am saying that our values include giving money to people making those kinds of movies. It makes me sick to see some of the garbage that is offered. He loves movies so I want to be able to say yes to all of them he wants to see, but I don't want to polute his head with that junk! I totally trust him, I do not trust some of the people making t.v. and movies.
I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can't stand the stuff on t.v. They have access to watching movies and dvd's, but I do say no to some of the movies they want. And we talk about why. The world is flooded with so much junk, I want to try and limit the amount they see or at least delay it. It is inevitable in our world.
Just my opinion...
Amie
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I recently said that I limited t.v. again in our house. I have to say that I do wish I was comfortable giving my kids free rein on the t.v. But, I don't. Not because I don't trust them or want them to decide, but because I do not want them exposed to the garbage that is on. Nor do I want to sit and watch t.v.
I have read studies about how our minds become wired one way for t.v. viewing, and new paths are not made while viewing other shows. It is the same path when we are 5 that we have when we are 25. It is a passive task to sit there. This is my opionion, of course. I also just read another study that followed people from childhood until into the adult years, and the ones that watched violence, (shows like Baretta when they were younger), were more violent as adults. They were more likely to strike a spouse, be in trouble with the law, etc. I am not saying this is the case for all, of course, I just thought it was interesting.
I mentioned a book once before that I find very interesting, called Magical Parent, Magical Child by Joseph Chilton Pearce. It includes alot of research, etc. Again, just one more tool.
I want my kids to be able to make decisions for themselves, but why would I let my 5 1/2 year old go see the movie Cody Banks? He really wants to see it, but I just can't do it. It has violence, it shows women in a demeaning way, etc. How can I justify that? And, I feel if I agree to see it, I am saying that our values include giving money to people making those kinds of movies. It makes me sick to see some of the garbage that is offered. He loves movies so I want to be able to say yes to all of them he wants to see, but I don't want to polute his head with that junk! I totally trust him, I do not trust some of the people making t.v. and movies.
I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can't stand the stuff on t.v. They have access to watching movies and dvd's, but I do say no to some of the movies they want. And we talk about why. The world is flooded with so much junk, I want to try and limit the amount they see or at least delay it. It is inevitable in our world.
Just my opinion...
Amie
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Amie
I also wanted to ask a question about the food subject. My kids pretty much eat what they want. However, I think they both have some food intolerances, so what do you do about this? They are both 5 1/2. We have talked about food and how it can affect our bodies, but they keep eating the stuff that makes them feel bad. I do think sometimes we crave what our bodies are allergic to.
So, how would you handle this?
Thanks,
Amie
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
So, how would you handle this?
Thanks,
Amie
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 3/31/03 4:06 AM, Amie at amiersa2@... wrote:
worth the consequences they'll suffer later. Perhaps the effect is so far
removed in time that it doesn't seem connected. A couple of hours to a 5 yo
may seem like a day later. Perhaps they aren't aware enough of the change
(if it's behavioral). From the outside hyper is a pretty dramatic change.
From the inside it doesn't feel that different. They may need help in
identifying the subtle (to them) feelings.
Joyce
> We have talked about food and how it can affect our bodies, but they keepHow does it affect them? Perhaps what enjoyment they get from the food is
> eating the stuff that makes them feel bad.
worth the consequences they'll suffer later. Perhaps the effect is so far
removed in time that it doesn't seem connected. A couple of hours to a 5 yo
may seem like a day later. Perhaps they aren't aware enough of the change
(if it's behavioral). From the outside hyper is a pretty dramatic change.
From the inside it doesn't feel that different. They may need help in
identifying the subtle (to them) feelings.
Joyce
Fetteroll
on 3/31/03 4:02 AM, Amie at amiersa2@... wrote:
universally accepted definition. Your idea of garbage isn't the same as your
children's idea or my idea or my husband's idea. So what's your definition?
And why do you think your children will watch garbage? Because they don't
know how to change the channel? Because the pull of TV is so powerful that
they won't be able to change the channel even though what they're seeing
makes them uncomfortable? Because TV will convince them that garbage is
good?
that real people with real stories of what and how they do things are far
more meaningful. It's especially true with unschooling families. *All*
studies -- unless they're specifically about homeschooling -- are done on
schooled kids because essentially all kids are schooled kids so that's the
norm. Researches have *no clue* how huge of an impact school has on
children's behavior. By their nature schools are designed to separate kids
from their parents and create basically a new family for them, a family of
teachers and age-mates.
That seems harsh but when you look at it objectively, the major portion of a
child's day is spent in school or preparing for school. Much of the
interactions between child and parent have to do with school. But even more
importantly, those hours spent under the influence of school are when the
child is presented with challenges to test their values on. They are alone
in one sense since they don't have their parents to support them and help
them. And they are dependent on peers and teachers in another sense to see
what values are useful and how they play out in action.
And it's not just that peers and teachers may have values that we'd rather
our children not pick up. They have values that are unique to school. For
instance we value helping each other but in school that's a big taboo. And
when kids get home that bond between parent and child isn't as strong as it
should be and kids won't share the things they're working through. They're
getting used to -- in fact their parents are *forcing* them to -- watching
and figuring out solutions on their own. TV is going to be another resource
to them of values and how those values play out for them.
It takes some powerful communication skills for families to maintain the
close ties they have with their kids before beginning school. Schooled kids
are far more influenced in their values by sources outside their families.
In a loving home where children are respected and where the parents are
involved with their kids lives (not glued to them but are with them and
aware of what's going on with them and what interests them) TV loses much of
the power that is found in homes where children are leading separate lives
from their families.
*what* and not why. Did the violent shows *create* violent adults? The
studies imply that. Or are children who are filled with frustrated emotions
who don't know what to do with them, who are in danger of becoming violent,
drawn to violent shows?
Since many peaceful people enjoy watching violence that's a huge piece of
data that contradict the studies. *Why* someone is drawn to something is far
more important than *what* they are drawn to.
Even though why is a far more important influence it's very difficult to
design studies to study it. So researchers stick to studying what.
making the same choices you would for them.
I don't think you realize this but your opinions are saying that you feel
that violence and disrespect is more attractive than feeling loved so your
kids will turn their backs on what makes them feel good in order to hurt
people.
Why do you think they'd do that?
could. Why would he value the values expressed in movie more than the values
you practice at home and the values that make him feel loved and cherished?
Joyce
> But, I don't. Not because I don't trust them or want them to decide, butWe assume when we use judgemental words like garbage that there's some
> because I do not want them exposed to the garbage that is on.
universally accepted definition. Your idea of garbage isn't the same as your
children's idea or my idea or my husband's idea. So what's your definition?
And why do you think your children will watch garbage? Because they don't
know how to change the channel? Because the pull of TV is so powerful that
they won't be able to change the channel even though what they're seeing
makes them uncomfortable? Because TV will convince them that garbage is
good?
> I have read studies about how our minds become wired one way for t.v. viewing,Being of a scientific bent, I'm drawn to studies. But what I've found is
> and new paths are not made while viewing other shows. It is the same path when
> we are 5 that we have when we are 25. It is a passive task to sit there. This
> is my opionion, of course.
that real people with real stories of what and how they do things are far
more meaningful. It's especially true with unschooling families. *All*
studies -- unless they're specifically about homeschooling -- are done on
schooled kids because essentially all kids are schooled kids so that's the
norm. Researches have *no clue* how huge of an impact school has on
children's behavior. By their nature schools are designed to separate kids
from their parents and create basically a new family for them, a family of
teachers and age-mates.
That seems harsh but when you look at it objectively, the major portion of a
child's day is spent in school or preparing for school. Much of the
interactions between child and parent have to do with school. But even more
importantly, those hours spent under the influence of school are when the
child is presented with challenges to test their values on. They are alone
in one sense since they don't have their parents to support them and help
them. And they are dependent on peers and teachers in another sense to see
what values are useful and how they play out in action.
And it's not just that peers and teachers may have values that we'd rather
our children not pick up. They have values that are unique to school. For
instance we value helping each other but in school that's a big taboo. And
when kids get home that bond between parent and child isn't as strong as it
should be and kids won't share the things they're working through. They're
getting used to -- in fact their parents are *forcing* them to -- watching
and figuring out solutions on their own. TV is going to be another resource
to them of values and how those values play out for them.
It takes some powerful communication skills for families to maintain the
close ties they have with their kids before beginning school. Schooled kids
are far more influenced in their values by sources outside their families.
In a loving home where children are respected and where the parents are
involved with their kids lives (not glued to them but are with them and
aware of what's going on with them and what interests them) TV loses much of
the power that is found in homes where children are leading separate lives
from their families.
> I also just read another study that followed people from childhood until intoAnd you can find studies that say the opposite. The studies only study
> the adult years, and the ones that watched violence, (shows like Baretta when
> they were younger), were more violent as adults. They were more likely to
> strike a spouse, be in trouble with the law, etc.
*what* and not why. Did the violent shows *create* violent adults? The
studies imply that. Or are children who are filled with frustrated emotions
who don't know what to do with them, who are in danger of becoming violent,
drawn to violent shows?
Since many peaceful people enjoy watching violence that's a huge piece of
data that contradict the studies. *Why* someone is drawn to something is far
more important than *what* they are drawn to.
Even though why is a far more important influence it's very difficult to
design studies to study it. So researchers stick to studying what.
> I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can't stand theThen you don't agree 100%. You only agree to the point where your kids are
> stuff on t.v.
making the same choices you would for them.
I don't think you realize this but your opinions are saying that you feel
that violence and disrespect is more attractive than feeling loved so your
kids will turn their backs on what makes them feel good in order to hurt
people.
Why do you think they'd do that?
> I want my kids to be able to make decisions for themselves, but why would IBy trusting that your loving home offers his soul far more than a movie
> let my 5 1/2 year old go see the movie Cody Banks? He really wants to see it,
> but I just can't do it. It has violence, it shows women in a demeaning way,
> etc. How can I justify that?
could. Why would he value the values expressed in movie more than the values
you practice at home and the values that make him feel loved and cherished?
Joyce
Dawn Ackroyd
Good analogy!!
-----Original Message-----
From: Sorcha [mailto:sorcha-aisling@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 6:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Unschooling-dotcom] re plug in drug conversation
I'm going to make an analogy, since I'm usually able to think more
clearly about something when I look at it from a different angle.
Instead of television, let's say internet. Presumably we all have
internet access in our homes (at least all of us who are posting). If
you're posting but don't have access at home, then you're spending a lot
of time somewhere that has internet access, so it's important enough for
you to do so.
I think the internet was the single best invention humans ever made.
Honestly. There is so much information on the internet that you could
travel to every library in your state and spend hours per day looking
and still not find as much as you can find in a one hour search online.
With the internet, people can form communities with like-minded people,
even if some of them are in Arkansas and others in Australia. On the
internet, you aren't being judged by your hairstyle or clothes or weight
or age.
My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. She hates it.
She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few years ago,
she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking up porn.
There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but also violent
things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the library naked
and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. He
stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
Porn and instructions on explosives are not the only things the internet
has against it. People cheat on their spouses with people they met in
chat rooms. People stalk other people, and perverts prey on children.
Not to mention just the simple stupidity of some sites. My husband had
to work late one night and I was bored so I passed the time reading an
entire site about farts.
But we're all here, on the internet, despite all the bad things it can
be used for. We're all learning more about unschooling and probably
learning many more things with the internet. I doubt any of us are
learning how to make bombs or preying on children.
My mom says the thing she hates most about the internet is how people
are on it all day. I have a cable connection that allows my computer to
be online all day. I love it. I don't sit here staring at my computer
all day, but anytime I want to use it for any reason, I can. It's right
there in my living room, next to the TV and a bookshelf, and I can check
my email during the two minutes my hot pocket is microwaving and go
about my day. I'm on it less than the people my mom talks about coming
into the library when they open and sitting there until closing, just
using the internet. I could be on it 24 hours a day. I'm probably on
it 45 minutes per day.
Since you're online reading this, please explain to me how the bad
things about TV are worse than the bad things about the internet.
Sorcha
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=246920.2960106.4328965.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=1705
081972:HM/A=1513703/R=0/*http://www.gotomypc.com/u/tr/yh/cpm/grp/300_06F
/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=246920.2960106.4328965.1728375/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1513703/rand=728919967>
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list
owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sorcha [mailto:sorcha-aisling@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 6:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Unschooling-dotcom] re plug in drug conversation
I'm going to make an analogy, since I'm usually able to think more
clearly about something when I look at it from a different angle.
Instead of television, let's say internet. Presumably we all have
internet access in our homes (at least all of us who are posting). If
you're posting but don't have access at home, then you're spending a lot
of time somewhere that has internet access, so it's important enough for
you to do so.
I think the internet was the single best invention humans ever made.
Honestly. There is so much information on the internet that you could
travel to every library in your state and spend hours per day looking
and still not find as much as you can find in a one hour search online.
With the internet, people can form communities with like-minded people,
even if some of them are in Arkansas and others in Australia. On the
internet, you aren't being judged by your hairstyle or clothes or weight
or age.
My mother wishes there was no such thing as the internet. She hates it.
She's a librarian, and ever since they got the internet a few years ago,
she has unemployed men coming in and spending all day looking up porn.
There was one man who kept looking up not only porn, but also violent
things like how to make bombs. One day he came into the library naked
and screaming at the top of his lungs, wielding a huge knife. He
stabbed the counter over and over before the police got there.
Porn and instructions on explosives are not the only things the internet
has against it. People cheat on their spouses with people they met in
chat rooms. People stalk other people, and perverts prey on children.
Not to mention just the simple stupidity of some sites. My husband had
to work late one night and I was bored so I passed the time reading an
entire site about farts.
But we're all here, on the internet, despite all the bad things it can
be used for. We're all learning more about unschooling and probably
learning many more things with the internet. I doubt any of us are
learning how to make bombs or preying on children.
My mom says the thing she hates most about the internet is how people
are on it all day. I have a cable connection that allows my computer to
be online all day. I love it. I don't sit here staring at my computer
all day, but anytime I want to use it for any reason, I can. It's right
there in my living room, next to the TV and a bookshelf, and I can check
my email during the two minutes my hot pocket is microwaving and go
about my day. I'm on it less than the people my mom talks about coming
into the library when they open and sitting there until closing, just
using the internet. I could be on it 24 hours a day. I'm probably on
it 45 minutes per day.
Since you're online reading this, please explain to me how the bad
things about TV are worse than the bad things about the internet.
Sorcha
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=246920.2960106.4328965.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=1705
081972:HM/A=1513703/R=0/*http://www.gotomypc.com/u/tr/yh/cpm/grp/300_06F
/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=246920.2960106.4328965.1728375/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1513703/rand=728919967>
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list
owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mary
From: "Amie" <amiersa2@...>
<<I recently said that I limited t.v. again in our house. I have to say that
I do wish I was comfortable giving my kids free rein on the t.v. But, I
don't. Not because I don't trust them or want them to decide, but because I
do not want them exposed to the garbage that is on. Nor do I want to sit and
watch t.v. >>
Seems like you are not trusting what your kids will do with what they see
and hear. That's not trusting them. It's also a matter of you doing
something for you children that you just don't want to do, watch tv.
<<I mentioned a book once before that I find very interesting, called
Magical Parent, Magical Child by Joseph Chilton Pearce. It includes alot of
research, etc. Again, just one more tool.>>
I really don't take studies and eperts to heart. I would rather listen to
people and what they have done and what has worked and what hasn't. Seeing
is believing and putting it all to practical use makes much more sense to me
than what someone studied. Especially when all the studies are done on
children I don't know, don't know how their parents are with them and who go
to school. I know homeschooled children that make homeschooling look really
bad. You should see how they are parented. Their behavior has nothing to do
with homeschooling. If someone did a study on those few, it would be
pitiful.
<<I want my kids to be able to make decisions for themselves, but why would
I let my 5 1/2 year old go see the movie Cody Banks? He really wants to see
it, but I just can't do it. It has violence, it shows women in a demeaning
way, etc. How can I justify that? And, I feel if I agree to see it, I am
saying that our values include giving money to people making those kinds of
movies. It makes me sick to see some of the garbage that is offered. He
loves movies so I want to be able to say yes to all of them he wants to see,
but I don't want to polute his head with that junk! I totally trust him, I
do not trust some of the people making t.v. and movies.>>
I still don't see how you can say you trust your child when you are not
trusting them to make good sound decisions, learn from mistakes and reason
out for themselves what is best.
<<I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can't stand
the stuff on t.v. They have access to watching movies and dvd's, but I do
say no to some of the movies they want. And we talk about why. The world is
flooded with so much junk, I want to try and limit the amount they see or
at least delay it. It is inevitable in our world.>>
You can't possibly agree 100% with allowing them to self regulate when you
only allow them to regulate certain things. It's either you do or you don't.
Like unschooling except for math. Makes no sense.
I'm just wondering if limiting them from all the junk and garbage you say tv
and movies hold, if you wondered what will happen when they finally see it.
And they will. Probably at an age of more curiousity, like in their teens.
Again I have to go by what I've seen and heard, not studies. Those kids all
of sudden exposed go nuts. They want to see it all, no matter what it is.
It's new and exciting at a time where exciting is more entailed than when
they were little.
I had a friend who sheltered her son from violence and what she thought was
attitudes demeaning to women. Her son gradually grew older and wanted to see
a Lethal Weapon movie. Not sure which one but there was a scene where you
saw a women and some cleavage or maybe the side or top ofher boobs. She
wasn't even big up top and the son, in the movie theater yelled out totally
excited that he wanted to see more. Now I'm not saying all kids do that, but
that reaction is very similar with children not use to it and not being able
to ask in a very innocent way what's going on. His hormones were talking and
he never saw boob before. Children I know of raised like that usually get
very excited and want to see everything they can and will sneak to do it, or
become very embarassed by it all and never ask a thing. Either way, not
healthy.
Mary B
<<I recently said that I limited t.v. again in our house. I have to say that
I do wish I was comfortable giving my kids free rein on the t.v. But, I
don't. Not because I don't trust them or want them to decide, but because I
do not want them exposed to the garbage that is on. Nor do I want to sit and
watch t.v. >>
Seems like you are not trusting what your kids will do with what they see
and hear. That's not trusting them. It's also a matter of you doing
something for you children that you just don't want to do, watch tv.
<<I mentioned a book once before that I find very interesting, called
Magical Parent, Magical Child by Joseph Chilton Pearce. It includes alot of
research, etc. Again, just one more tool.>>
I really don't take studies and eperts to heart. I would rather listen to
people and what they have done and what has worked and what hasn't. Seeing
is believing and putting it all to practical use makes much more sense to me
than what someone studied. Especially when all the studies are done on
children I don't know, don't know how their parents are with them and who go
to school. I know homeschooled children that make homeschooling look really
bad. You should see how they are parented. Their behavior has nothing to do
with homeschooling. If someone did a study on those few, it would be
pitiful.
<<I want my kids to be able to make decisions for themselves, but why would
I let my 5 1/2 year old go see the movie Cody Banks? He really wants to see
it, but I just can't do it. It has violence, it shows women in a demeaning
way, etc. How can I justify that? And, I feel if I agree to see it, I am
saying that our values include giving money to people making those kinds of
movies. It makes me sick to see some of the garbage that is offered. He
loves movies so I want to be able to say yes to all of them he wants to see,
but I don't want to polute his head with that junk! I totally trust him, I
do not trust some of the people making t.v. and movies.>>
I still don't see how you can say you trust your child when you are not
trusting them to make good sound decisions, learn from mistakes and reason
out for themselves what is best.
<<I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can't stand
the stuff on t.v. They have access to watching movies and dvd's, but I do
say no to some of the movies they want. And we talk about why. The world is
flooded with so much junk, I want to try and limit the amount they see or
at least delay it. It is inevitable in our world.>>
You can't possibly agree 100% with allowing them to self regulate when you
only allow them to regulate certain things. It's either you do or you don't.
Like unschooling except for math. Makes no sense.
I'm just wondering if limiting them from all the junk and garbage you say tv
and movies hold, if you wondered what will happen when they finally see it.
And they will. Probably at an age of more curiousity, like in their teens.
Again I have to go by what I've seen and heard, not studies. Those kids all
of sudden exposed go nuts. They want to see it all, no matter what it is.
It's new and exciting at a time where exciting is more entailed than when
they were little.
I had a friend who sheltered her son from violence and what she thought was
attitudes demeaning to women. Her son gradually grew older and wanted to see
a Lethal Weapon movie. Not sure which one but there was a scene where you
saw a women and some cleavage or maybe the side or top ofher boobs. She
wasn't even big up top and the son, in the movie theater yelled out totally
excited that he wanted to see more. Now I'm not saying all kids do that, but
that reaction is very similar with children not use to it and not being able
to ask in a very innocent way what's going on. His hormones were talking and
he never saw boob before. Children I know of raised like that usually get
very excited and want to see everything they can and will sneak to do it, or
become very embarassed by it all and never ask a thing. Either way, not
healthy.
Mary B
sablehs
Not to menton that no matter what there is no way to get a completely accurate result in any study. There are so many varibles in the lives of the people of both sides.
Just as my husband and I were talking about second hand smoke but it applies to any study. Yes, they can do as much as they can to get an accurate result. but how about the guy who it seems to have had the same experiances, yet at the very least he may have lived in an area that had smog or worked near a factory that put off pollutants into the air {yes we all have this but some areas are better then others and it varies depending on the year} Or maybe his genetics carried some recessive gene that didn't show up in his family for generations. Etc...
Anyway just an example for my take on studies. I think they are interresting but there are so many varibles that could go overlooked or missed somehow, I tend to rely personal experiances myself. :-)
Tracy {sorry, spell check on yahoo messed up again}
Fetteroll <fetteroll@...> wrote: on 3/31/03 4:02 AM, Amie at amiersa2@... wrote:
that real people with real stories of what and how they do things are far
more meaningful. It's especially true with unschooling families. *All*
studies -- unless they're specifically about homeschooling -- are done on
schooled kids because essentially all kids are schooled kids so that's the
norm. Researches have *no clue* how huge of an impact school has on
children's behavior. By their nature schools are designed to separate kids
from their parents and create basically a new family for them, a family of
teachers and age-mates.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Just as my husband and I were talking about second hand smoke but it applies to any study. Yes, they can do as much as they can to get an accurate result. but how about the guy who it seems to have had the same experiances, yet at the very least he may have lived in an area that had smog or worked near a factory that put off pollutants into the air {yes we all have this but some areas are better then others and it varies depending on the year} Or maybe his genetics carried some recessive gene that didn't show up in his family for generations. Etc...
Anyway just an example for my take on studies. I think they are interresting but there are so many varibles that could go overlooked or missed somehow, I tend to rely personal experiances myself. :-)
Tracy {sorry, spell check on yahoo messed up again}
Fetteroll <fetteroll@...> wrote: on 3/31/03 4:02 AM, Amie at amiersa2@... wrote:
> I have read studies about how our minds become wired one way for t.v. viewing,Being of a scientific bent, I'm drawn to studies. But what I've found is
> and new paths are not made while viewing other shows. It is the same path when
> we are 5 that we have when we are 25. It is a passive task to sit there. This
> is my opionion, of course.
that real people with real stories of what and how they do things are far
more meaningful. It's especially true with unschooling families. *All*
studies -- unless they're specifically about homeschooling -- are done on
schooled kids because essentially all kids are schooled kids so that's the
norm. Researches have *no clue* how huge of an impact school has on
children's behavior. By their nature schools are designed to separate kids
from their parents and create basically a new family for them, a family of
teachers and age-mates.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pamela Sorooshian
On Monday, March 31, 2003, at 01:02 AM, Amie wrote:
nothing but scary or offensive or just plain stupid reality shows,
trashy daytime soaps, smartmouthed kids on sitcoms, and scummy talk
shows ala Jerry Springer, all mixed in with incessant brainwashing in
materialism in the form of commercials. But, that makes me wonder, if
you think that, what on earth do you think WE are doing actually
watching it and letting our kids watch it? Do we, those of us who say
we watch TV and don't have restrictions placed on our kids' viewing,
really sound like people who are of the kind of mentality that we're
interested watching that stuff? Do you really think that our kids have
become product-worshiping I-gotta-have-that consumers and that we'd be
defending that?
People who have 'rules' about TV might want to consider why they need
them? They might wonder about how we handle materialism - in the face
of commercials. They might wonder how we handle the possibility that
the kids will see scary stuff or stuff that is too sophisticated or
sexually explicit or cruel or demeaning to specific races or to women,
etc.
If the TV (watch it or don't) debate could just move up a step to a
slightly higher plane of discussion, I think those who do restrict tv
time would discover some interesting things about those of us who do
not. Framed as "restrict tv" versus "no restrictions" misleads those
who don't really know what the alternatives to "no restrictions really
are, and picture our kids sitting zombie-like eyes glued to the tube,
watching whatever pops up in front of them for hours on end. It just is
not like that in any of the no-restrictions households that I know
well. I wish we could talk more about the way kids in our
no-restrictions families DO interact with tv - it is really different
than in other families, in my experience, and really well worth taking
time to examine in depth. But we always get distracted by general
comments like, "I just cannot stand the junk on TV," and we don't get
beyond it very often.
For example, I think it is really interesting that my kids have
conversations about shows they want to watch together - they take time
to consider each other's interests and age level and so on. They LIKE
to have their sisters or me watch shows with them because they want to
talk about them later.
Another little interesting thing is how they'll tape something and
watch it over and over and over and over. I know this isn't uncommon
and I'd like to talk about what is going on when a kid does that - to
an extreme.It looks like some kind of brain exercise - the mental
equivalent of bouncing a ball against the garage door, over and over.
There are lots of things about kids who don't have specific
tv-limits/rules that are interesting and I wish we could talk about
those without feeling like we have to even address the "no tv/yes tv"
issue at all.
-pam
> I agree 100 % with allowing kids to self regulate, but I just can'tPeople who do not watch tv seem to have the impression that there is
> stand the stuff on t.v.
nothing but scary or offensive or just plain stupid reality shows,
trashy daytime soaps, smartmouthed kids on sitcoms, and scummy talk
shows ala Jerry Springer, all mixed in with incessant brainwashing in
materialism in the form of commercials. But, that makes me wonder, if
you think that, what on earth do you think WE are doing actually
watching it and letting our kids watch it? Do we, those of us who say
we watch TV and don't have restrictions placed on our kids' viewing,
really sound like people who are of the kind of mentality that we're
interested watching that stuff? Do you really think that our kids have
become product-worshiping I-gotta-have-that consumers and that we'd be
defending that?
People who have 'rules' about TV might want to consider why they need
them? They might wonder about how we handle materialism - in the face
of commercials. They might wonder how we handle the possibility that
the kids will see scary stuff or stuff that is too sophisticated or
sexually explicit or cruel or demeaning to specific races or to women,
etc.
If the TV (watch it or don't) debate could just move up a step to a
slightly higher plane of discussion, I think those who do restrict tv
time would discover some interesting things about those of us who do
not. Framed as "restrict tv" versus "no restrictions" misleads those
who don't really know what the alternatives to "no restrictions really
are, and picture our kids sitting zombie-like eyes glued to the tube,
watching whatever pops up in front of them for hours on end. It just is
not like that in any of the no-restrictions households that I know
well. I wish we could talk more about the way kids in our
no-restrictions families DO interact with tv - it is really different
than in other families, in my experience, and really well worth taking
time to examine in depth. But we always get distracted by general
comments like, "I just cannot stand the junk on TV," and we don't get
beyond it very often.
For example, I think it is really interesting that my kids have
conversations about shows they want to watch together - they take time
to consider each other's interests and age level and so on. They LIKE
to have their sisters or me watch shows with them because they want to
talk about them later.
Another little interesting thing is how they'll tape something and
watch it over and over and over and over. I know this isn't uncommon
and I'd like to talk about what is going on when a kid does that - to
an extreme.It looks like some kind of brain exercise - the mental
equivalent of bouncing a ball against the garage door, over and over.
There are lots of things about kids who don't have specific
tv-limits/rules that are interesting and I wish we could talk about
those without feeling like we have to even address the "no tv/yes tv"
issue at all.
-pam
Kelly Lenhart
>For example, I think it is really interesting that my kids haveI have a 7 and a 2 year old. Boys. The big one has outgrown Blues Clues
>conversations about shows they want to watch together - they take time
>to consider each other's interests and age level and so on. They LIKE
>to have their sisters or me watch shows with them because they want to
>talk about them later.
and Dora, but they make good wake up material. THe little one, of course,
adores them. IT's great to watch them watching together. "Did you see that
Ben? There's the clue!" "Say map, Ben, say MAP!" IT's wonderful. James
gets to enjoy it in a whole new way.
And I get to do dishes with a BIG SMILE on my face.
Kelly