Learning toys
Kristi Hayes
Assomeone pointed out, I put the "learning" in "learning toys" in
quotes. My daughter taught her how to subtract while eating a bowl of
cereal. I certainly don't feel anything more than a welcoming
environment is necessary for learning. I was just wondering the
thoughts of others on the importance of "learning" toys such as pattern
blocks, tinkertoys, the gear toy, etc. Aside from super-frugal we also
have small space. Right now it's pretty full. I'm wondering if I
should get rid of some of the stuff, such as the VTech, and get
something else, such as tinkertoys, to get more bang per square foot.
Or if, on the other hand, it really matters all that much. Because part
of my question involves how strongly I should try to influence the gifts
they get from mom and MIL, who, in spite of my protests, keep buying
Orion stuffed Elmos and Morgaine more and more Barbie stuff. They like
these, but it takes up space. If I decide (and I've been pondering a
while) to put my foot down on variety, I'll have to be stronger. For
example, at Christmas I told them in no uncertain terms if they bought
her more Barbie dolls then I'd get rid of some of the worn ones she
already has. This was a space issue. She already has 15 or more
barbies and at least as many Kelly's. They were pretty ticked off but
the threat of my getting rid of the other ones deterred them. I hate to
impose such limits on them, and it makes them really angry. But I am
wondering if I should fill my kids stuff with different sorts of toys?
That really was the reasoning behind my questions. Strewing is great,
but you need space in which to do it. Is it worth getting rid of stuff
they have and play with occasionally for stuff they haven't asked for
and may or may not play with? I don't have much storage space for
rotating large groups of toys; we live in a trailer.
Anyway, now that I've clarified the question does anyone have any more
thoughts on this? Thanks .
'
Kristi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
quotes. My daughter taught her how to subtract while eating a bowl of
cereal. I certainly don't feel anything more than a welcoming
environment is necessary for learning. I was just wondering the
thoughts of others on the importance of "learning" toys such as pattern
blocks, tinkertoys, the gear toy, etc. Aside from super-frugal we also
have small space. Right now it's pretty full. I'm wondering if I
should get rid of some of the stuff, such as the VTech, and get
something else, such as tinkertoys, to get more bang per square foot.
Or if, on the other hand, it really matters all that much. Because part
of my question involves how strongly I should try to influence the gifts
they get from mom and MIL, who, in spite of my protests, keep buying
Orion stuffed Elmos and Morgaine more and more Barbie stuff. They like
these, but it takes up space. If I decide (and I've been pondering a
while) to put my foot down on variety, I'll have to be stronger. For
example, at Christmas I told them in no uncertain terms if they bought
her more Barbie dolls then I'd get rid of some of the worn ones she
already has. This was a space issue. She already has 15 or more
barbies and at least as many Kelly's. They were pretty ticked off but
the threat of my getting rid of the other ones deterred them. I hate to
impose such limits on them, and it makes them really angry. But I am
wondering if I should fill my kids stuff with different sorts of toys?
That really was the reasoning behind my questions. Strewing is great,
but you need space in which to do it. Is it worth getting rid of stuff
they have and play with occasionally for stuff they haven't asked for
and may or may not play with? I don't have much storage space for
rotating large groups of toys; we live in a trailer.
Anyway, now that I've clarified the question does anyone have any more
thoughts on this? Thanks .
'
Kristi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lisa H
Hi Kristi,
Since your question is about a space issue and you are considering removing some toys that are not used - i would reply to this by asking you what your kids think and want. In a similar situation, I've talked to my girls about my concerns and considerations and together we've come up with solutions that work for all. (Actually - they almost always come up with great solutions - better than i left to my own devices)
Lisa H.
Since your question is about a space issue and you are considering removing some toys that are not used - i would reply to this by asking you what your kids think and want. In a similar situation, I've talked to my girls about my concerns and considerations and together we've come up with solutions that work for all. (Actually - they almost always come up with great solutions - better than i left to my own devices)
Lisa H.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kristi Hayes
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 2:17 PM
Subject: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Learning toys
Assomeone pointed out, I put the "learning" in "learning toys" in
quotes. My daughter taught her how to subtract while eating a bowl of
cereal. I certainly don't feel anything more than a welcoming
environment is necessary for learning. I was just wondering the
thoughts of others on the importance of "learning" toys such as pattern
blocks, tinkertoys, the gear toy, etc. Aside from super-frugal we also
have small space. Right now it's pretty full. I'm wondering if I
should get rid of some of the stuff, such as the VTech, and get
something else, such as tinkertoys, to get more bang per square foot.
Or if, on the other hand, it really matters all that much. Because part
of my question involves how strongly I should try to influence the gifts
they get from mom and MIL, who, in spite of my protests, keep buying
Orion stuffed Elmos and Morgaine more and more Barbie stuff. They like
these, but it takes up space. If I decide (and I've been pondering a
while) to put my foot down on variety, I'll have to be stronger. For
example, at Christmas I told them in no uncertain terms if they bought
her more Barbie dolls then I'd get rid of some of the worn ones she
already has. This was a space issue. She already has 15 or more
barbies and at least as many Kelly's. They were pretty ticked off but
the threat of my getting rid of the other ones deterred them. I hate to
impose such limits on them, and it makes them really angry. But I am
wondering if I should fill my kids stuff with different sorts of toys?
That really was the reasoning behind my questions. Strewing is great,
but you need space in which to do it. Is it worth getting rid of stuff
they have and play with occasionally for stuff they haven't asked for
and may or may not play with? I don't have much storage space for
rotating large groups of toys; we live in a trailer.
Anyway, now that I've clarified the question does anyone have any more
thoughts on this? Thanks .
'
Kristi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.
Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UnschoolingDiscussion/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Leonor Gomes
Hi Kristy,
I'm enjoying your opinions and that you understood
what I've meant. Thank you. :)
I think there might be a problem in pressuring
children to get rid of their things. My mum did that a
lot, and now I'm sorry many of my books and toys are
gone. They would have been wonderful to play with my
child now. I also feel a bit ressented she didn't get
rid of one piece of her huge china collection, you
know what I mean?
But if you really have too much stuff lying around
that is a real problem. Maybe you can ask your
children what are the toys they want to play with more
now, and box the others? Then ask a relative with more
space to keep them for you. You can always get them
back later.
Get rid of some of your things, as an example, it
might inspire selection of toys in your children. My
child always joins in my activities.
I also wouldn't be shy to say to my family to stop
offering so many toys. It's not an uncommon
charicature the poor bored child with thousands of
toys. Presents can be suffocating too.
Then there's libraries that have toys. You can go
there, your children can play with them, and they stay
there.
When my child really wants something, I usually buy
from Ebay - always informing my child it's usedfor
respect - but this way of buying it goes more with my
ecological ideas.
We can treat ourselves to the toys we like to play
with our children. I do that. I buy a nice wooden dice
game and we play it together. It's good to share our
ideas. That's what the pro-toy-gun parents are doing,
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;)
Just my random thoughts, hope it helps.
Leo
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
I'm enjoying your opinions and that you understood
what I've meant. Thank you. :)
I think there might be a problem in pressuring
children to get rid of their things. My mum did that a
lot, and now I'm sorry many of my books and toys are
gone. They would have been wonderful to play with my
child now. I also feel a bit ressented she didn't get
rid of one piece of her huge china collection, you
know what I mean?
But if you really have too much stuff lying around
that is a real problem. Maybe you can ask your
children what are the toys they want to play with more
now, and box the others? Then ask a relative with more
space to keep them for you. You can always get them
back later.
Get rid of some of your things, as an example, it
might inspire selection of toys in your children. My
child always joins in my activities.
I also wouldn't be shy to say to my family to stop
offering so many toys. It's not an uncommon
charicature the poor bored child with thousands of
toys. Presents can be suffocating too.
Then there's libraries that have toys. You can go
there, your children can play with them, and they stay
there.
When my child really wants something, I usually buy
from Ebay - always informing my child it's usedfor
respect - but this way of buying it goes more with my
ecological ideas.
We can treat ourselves to the toys we like to play
with our children. I do that. I buy a nice wooden dice
game and we play it together. It's good to share our
ideas. That's what the pro-toy-gun parents are doing,
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;)
Just my random thoughts, hope it helps.
Leo
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
Ren Allen
"That's what the pro-toy-gun parents are doing,
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;)"
First of all, I'm not pro-gun, I'm pro-child.
Secondly, I get it quite well that my ideas are not yours...thank
God.
And thirdly, quit insulting the long time list members, it's getting
old.
Ren
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;)"
First of all, I'm not pro-gun, I'm pro-child.
Secondly, I get it quite well that my ideas are not yours...thank
God.
And thirdly, quit insulting the long time list members, it's getting
old.
Ren
[email protected]
In a message dated 4/16/04 6:51:02 PM, mais1mae@... writes:
<< That's what the pro-toy-gun parents are doing,
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;) >>
It's not "pro-toy-gun."
It's pro-respect-for-children.
Sandra
<< That's what the pro-toy-gun parents are doing,
they just don't get it that their ideas are not our
own. ;) >>
It's not "pro-toy-gun."
It's pro-respect-for-children.
Sandra
Kristi Hayes
I don't have a problem with others who choose to let their children own
toy weapons. Those are not my children to raise, nor my choices to
make. I make choices for myself and my family, and I feel strongly that
I do not want toys in *my* home whose sole purpose is to enact wounding
and killing. I try hard not to judge the decisions of others, though I
am only human and not always successful. I hope this, too, this
unwillingness to be judgemental of other people, is a value I'll pass to
them.
Sometimes we pass on our values in surprising ways. It did sadden me,
for example, when Morgaine one evening commented, "Wow daddy, your steak
looks really good." And I said, "You know honey, if you want to try it
it's okay with me. I think you're old enough to choose whether to eat
animals or not," and she decided to be a meat eater. But what was
interesting was the discussion that came later - one value I've tried to
share is the idea that all life is equal; we live in an intricate web
and no one life is more important than another. When we discussed it
later, the choice of eating meat, I told her that if she wanted to try
other kinds of animals she'd have to talk with her daddy or her
grandparents, because, I reminded her, I choose not to buy or cook them.
She looked out her windows and started a line of thought - "I'd like to
eat squirrels, and fish, and seagulls. But I couldn't eat a cat,
because cats are people's pets. But tigers aren't people's pets, and I
could eat tigers. And what about mice, mommy, do people eat mice?" Of
course nobody will agree to kill and cook a squirrel or seagull for her,
so I've told her that when she's 10 (hunter safety age in Maine and New
Hampshire) she can ask her grandfather to teach her to hunt, and she can
kill the animals and take the skin off and cook them if she wants to.
Some days she's a vegetarian again, but when she decides to be an
omnivore she looks forward to this. So I went from being sad to being
glad - she didn't share my value of not eating animals, but she shared
the larger, more important value of the equality of life.
Incidentally (was it Sandra?) had mentioned we have to kill to eat. Not
true. There are people who only eat food that does not require the
killing of a plant - for example, eating animal products that do not
require killing of animals, eating vegetables and fruits that do not
require death of a mother plant (eat a strawberry but not a potato;
broccoli but not a head of lettuce, etc.). Not the lifestyle I lead,
but one that is possible.
Kristi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
toy weapons. Those are not my children to raise, nor my choices to
make. I make choices for myself and my family, and I feel strongly that
I do not want toys in *my* home whose sole purpose is to enact wounding
and killing. I try hard not to judge the decisions of others, though I
am only human and not always successful. I hope this, too, this
unwillingness to be judgemental of other people, is a value I'll pass to
them.
Sometimes we pass on our values in surprising ways. It did sadden me,
for example, when Morgaine one evening commented, "Wow daddy, your steak
looks really good." And I said, "You know honey, if you want to try it
it's okay with me. I think you're old enough to choose whether to eat
animals or not," and she decided to be a meat eater. But what was
interesting was the discussion that came later - one value I've tried to
share is the idea that all life is equal; we live in an intricate web
and no one life is more important than another. When we discussed it
later, the choice of eating meat, I told her that if she wanted to try
other kinds of animals she'd have to talk with her daddy or her
grandparents, because, I reminded her, I choose not to buy or cook them.
She looked out her windows and started a line of thought - "I'd like to
eat squirrels, and fish, and seagulls. But I couldn't eat a cat,
because cats are people's pets. But tigers aren't people's pets, and I
could eat tigers. And what about mice, mommy, do people eat mice?" Of
course nobody will agree to kill and cook a squirrel or seagull for her,
so I've told her that when she's 10 (hunter safety age in Maine and New
Hampshire) she can ask her grandfather to teach her to hunt, and she can
kill the animals and take the skin off and cook them if she wants to.
Some days she's a vegetarian again, but when she decides to be an
omnivore she looks forward to this. So I went from being sad to being
glad - she didn't share my value of not eating animals, but she shared
the larger, more important value of the equality of life.
Incidentally (was it Sandra?) had mentioned we have to kill to eat. Not
true. There are people who only eat food that does not require the
killing of a plant - for example, eating animal products that do not
require killing of animals, eating vegetables and fruits that do not
require death of a mother plant (eat a strawberry but not a potato;
broccoli but not a head of lettuce, etc.). Not the lifestyle I lead,
but one that is possible.
Kristi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Robyn Coburn
<<Aside from super-frugal we also
have small space. Right now it's pretty full. I'm wondering if I
should get rid of some of the stuff, such as the VTech, and get
something else, such as tinkertoys, to get more bang per square foot.
Or if, on the other hand, it really matters all that much. Because part
of my question involves how strongly I should try to influence the gifts
they get from mom and MIL, who, in spite of my protests, keep buying
Orion stuffed Elmos and Morgaine more and more Barbie stuff. They like
these, but it takes up space.>>
We live in a small space too, although admittedly perhaps not as small as
you - one bedroom apartment. Nor do we have room for visitors - one more
reason why we are hoping to move soon. Boy I remember when she had only 15
Barbie's.
I can only go back to what we do with Jayn - we only get her toys she asks
for. Last Christmas Jayn wanted a particular baby doll. I asked my parents
to get it for her, and Jayn knew they were bringing it (rather than us). Her
anticipation and excitement was only matched by her delight when she finally
got it. She told everyone what she would be getting and who was giving it to
her. On a similar note, for her birthday she wanted a particular doll only
available at Disneyland. Our tradition is to go there for family events like
birthdays. She was very excited at the thought of getting this doll on her
birthday trip. She actually refused to let me buy it for her when we went to
Disneyland the month before her birthday!
Jayn doesn't like surprises much. She also has been reluctant to allow me to
get rid of any of her baby toys - she sometimes gets them out and uses them
for something or other. Rarely, she offers me something for the Goodwill
bag. I make room in the home by continually renouncing my own unused stuff
or done with clothes. I find it very freeing, but I guess neither Jayn nor
DH feel encumbered by their stuff in the same way I do. We turned the living
room coat closet into her play/storeroom, and I am assiduous in my sorting,
tidying and organizing - with her permission when she is done with a game. I
am going increasingly vertical with storage. I guess we have just adjusted
to living with our space taken up with kid stuff, instead of our stuff.
What about asking your folks for gift certificates to the stores that you
may not be able to frequent as often? Then your kids could have the
opportunity to make their own choices. You can certainly use your lack of
space as a good reason that they might find understandable.
Personally we never toss/remove technologically based toys unless they have
become totally broken and even then we sometimes take them apart or to the
infrequently organized take-apart days at our local HS group. Jayn goes back
to old computer games in the same way that she goes back to old dvd's - on
no particular schedule and in response to who-knows-what external stimuli.
Actually she rotates through all her toys like that, including the vast
seeming supply of stuffed animals she has. I'm excited that she responds to
techno toys as well as "creative" toys like construction stuff and art
stuff.
At one point you wrote "Strewing is great, but you need space in which to do
it." It is also a state of mind as well as a physical action. (Trying to
think of an example and failing!)
Robyn L. Coburn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
have small space. Right now it's pretty full. I'm wondering if I
should get rid of some of the stuff, such as the VTech, and get
something else, such as tinkertoys, to get more bang per square foot.
Or if, on the other hand, it really matters all that much. Because part
of my question involves how strongly I should try to influence the gifts
they get from mom and MIL, who, in spite of my protests, keep buying
Orion stuffed Elmos and Morgaine more and more Barbie stuff. They like
these, but it takes up space.>>
We live in a small space too, although admittedly perhaps not as small as
you - one bedroom apartment. Nor do we have room for visitors - one more
reason why we are hoping to move soon. Boy I remember when she had only 15
Barbie's.
I can only go back to what we do with Jayn - we only get her toys she asks
for. Last Christmas Jayn wanted a particular baby doll. I asked my parents
to get it for her, and Jayn knew they were bringing it (rather than us). Her
anticipation and excitement was only matched by her delight when she finally
got it. She told everyone what she would be getting and who was giving it to
her. On a similar note, for her birthday she wanted a particular doll only
available at Disneyland. Our tradition is to go there for family events like
birthdays. She was very excited at the thought of getting this doll on her
birthday trip. She actually refused to let me buy it for her when we went to
Disneyland the month before her birthday!
Jayn doesn't like surprises much. She also has been reluctant to allow me to
get rid of any of her baby toys - she sometimes gets them out and uses them
for something or other. Rarely, she offers me something for the Goodwill
bag. I make room in the home by continually renouncing my own unused stuff
or done with clothes. I find it very freeing, but I guess neither Jayn nor
DH feel encumbered by their stuff in the same way I do. We turned the living
room coat closet into her play/storeroom, and I am assiduous in my sorting,
tidying and organizing - with her permission when she is done with a game. I
am going increasingly vertical with storage. I guess we have just adjusted
to living with our space taken up with kid stuff, instead of our stuff.
What about asking your folks for gift certificates to the stores that you
may not be able to frequent as often? Then your kids could have the
opportunity to make their own choices. You can certainly use your lack of
space as a good reason that they might find understandable.
Personally we never toss/remove technologically based toys unless they have
become totally broken and even then we sometimes take them apart or to the
infrequently organized take-apart days at our local HS group. Jayn goes back
to old computer games in the same way that she goes back to old dvd's - on
no particular schedule and in response to who-knows-what external stimuli.
Actually she rotates through all her toys like that, including the vast
seeming supply of stuffed animals she has. I'm excited that she responds to
techno toys as well as "creative" toys like construction stuff and art
stuff.
At one point you wrote "Strewing is great, but you need space in which to do
it." It is also a state of mind as well as a physical action. (Trying to
think of an example and failing!)
Robyn L. Coburn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
Fetteroll
on 4/16/04 9:31 PM, Kristi Hayes at hayes@... wrote:
find a good quote that summed up what she was saying as succinctly.)
Choosing for ourselves is good.
And we can't *not* choose for our families. We're all going to choose to
provide for our children things we think are important.
But it's useful to examine our reasons when making choices for others. It's
useful to examine whether our decisions are based on reality or fallacy or
"better safe than sorry."
"Better safe than sorry" is not a bad policy for decisions that affect only
ourselves. Sometimes we can't get access to better data to make a more
informed choice. We might choose to give up something to avoid something
that might or might not be true.
But it's not so good -- and should be examined thoroughly -- when used to
make decisions for other people.
If my husband decided it was better to be safe than sorry to not eat refined
sugar, he's welcome to give up a lot of foods to get something that may be
better. But if he decided the whole family needed to give up refined sugar
because *he* had come to the conclusion it was better to be safe than sorry,
then that's more problematical.
It makes sense that playing acting violence, playing violent video games,
role-playing violence will reinforce violent tendencies. It makes sense that
by not allowing children to use toy weapons and by discussing play that
looks violent and how real violence is bad, that they will be peaceful.
There is data that *seems* to support that theory: Not uncommonly people who
have committed horribly violent acts have enjoyed watching violence or
enjoyed playing violent games.
It seems reasonable to assume that violent play leads to violence in real
life.
But is it true?
Better to be safe than sorry? That's not a good enough place to stop on a
discussion list!
What people take *away* from the list and *do* is up to them. People are
free to read all the arguments about not controlling our children's values,
participate in the debate, and yet still decide to control at home.
Here on this list we discuss and examine what *really* happens in real
unschooling families. *Real* data that's applicable to unschooling families
for people to ponder and turn over to make decisions for their families.
What happens in my home isn't necessarily what will happen in someone else's
home. But the outcome of what I do in my home is more likely to apply to
someone whose values are similar, than the outcome of some criminal from
who-knows-what home life.
You and Leo are theorizing that preventing violent play will yeild peaceful
children. You have two experiments going (your families) and so far your
results support that theory. But you both have young children so the results
are, scientifically speaking, not conclusive.
What you don't have are a large pool of families who are preventing violent
play to see the range of outcomes. What you don't have are families where
children are loved and treated with respect *and* have violent play (toy
guns, boffers, video games, etc.)
One of the pieces of data being offered is that control is widely used. It's
one of the more common parenting techniques so there are lots of examples of
outcomes. Sometimes control works and children adopt their parents values.
Sometimes control doesn't work and children choose differently. Sometimes
control fails miserably and children choose what's been forbidden *because*
it's been forbidden. Since control doesn't universally work, there is some
other factor that caused the children to adopt their family's values.
(There are families here who use to control and now don't and they can tell
you what the differences are that they've seen if you ask.)
Control doesn't work. People *think* it works because it appears to work for
some families (sometimes it really does and sometimes the kids are very
different people when out of their parents' sight) and it makes sense that
it should work. But control often doesn't work. Unfortunately when it fails
people don't usually conclude that control doesn't work. They conclude that
they just didn't control enough.
The other piece of data being offered is many real unschooling familes who
have allowed their children to explore the pretend violence to the extent
that intrigues them, and their children are peaceful.
What *isn't* happening, and what you theorize will happen, is that children
would extend that violent play into real life.
What will happen in your home is unknowable. There are so many factors. But
Trust and Respect are seeming to be very big factors in allowing children to
become the decent loving children we hope for them.
Joyce
> I make choices for myself and my family, and I feel strongly that(This is really more directed towards what Leo's been saying, but I couldn't
> I do not want toys in *my* home whose sole purpose is to enact wounding
> and killing.
find a good quote that summed up what she was saying as succinctly.)
Choosing for ourselves is good.
And we can't *not* choose for our families. We're all going to choose to
provide for our children things we think are important.
But it's useful to examine our reasons when making choices for others. It's
useful to examine whether our decisions are based on reality or fallacy or
"better safe than sorry."
"Better safe than sorry" is not a bad policy for decisions that affect only
ourselves. Sometimes we can't get access to better data to make a more
informed choice. We might choose to give up something to avoid something
that might or might not be true.
But it's not so good -- and should be examined thoroughly -- when used to
make decisions for other people.
If my husband decided it was better to be safe than sorry to not eat refined
sugar, he's welcome to give up a lot of foods to get something that may be
better. But if he decided the whole family needed to give up refined sugar
because *he* had come to the conclusion it was better to be safe than sorry,
then that's more problematical.
It makes sense that playing acting violence, playing violent video games,
role-playing violence will reinforce violent tendencies. It makes sense that
by not allowing children to use toy weapons and by discussing play that
looks violent and how real violence is bad, that they will be peaceful.
There is data that *seems* to support that theory: Not uncommonly people who
have committed horribly violent acts have enjoyed watching violence or
enjoyed playing violent games.
It seems reasonable to assume that violent play leads to violence in real
life.
But is it true?
Better to be safe than sorry? That's not a good enough place to stop on a
discussion list!
What people take *away* from the list and *do* is up to them. People are
free to read all the arguments about not controlling our children's values,
participate in the debate, and yet still decide to control at home.
Here on this list we discuss and examine what *really* happens in real
unschooling families. *Real* data that's applicable to unschooling families
for people to ponder and turn over to make decisions for their families.
What happens in my home isn't necessarily what will happen in someone else's
home. But the outcome of what I do in my home is more likely to apply to
someone whose values are similar, than the outcome of some criminal from
who-knows-what home life.
You and Leo are theorizing that preventing violent play will yeild peaceful
children. You have two experiments going (your families) and so far your
results support that theory. But you both have young children so the results
are, scientifically speaking, not conclusive.
What you don't have are a large pool of families who are preventing violent
play to see the range of outcomes. What you don't have are families where
children are loved and treated with respect *and* have violent play (toy
guns, boffers, video games, etc.)
One of the pieces of data being offered is that control is widely used. It's
one of the more common parenting techniques so there are lots of examples of
outcomes. Sometimes control works and children adopt their parents values.
Sometimes control doesn't work and children choose differently. Sometimes
control fails miserably and children choose what's been forbidden *because*
it's been forbidden. Since control doesn't universally work, there is some
other factor that caused the children to adopt their family's values.
(There are families here who use to control and now don't and they can tell
you what the differences are that they've seen if you ask.)
Control doesn't work. People *think* it works because it appears to work for
some families (sometimes it really does and sometimes the kids are very
different people when out of their parents' sight) and it makes sense that
it should work. But control often doesn't work. Unfortunately when it fails
people don't usually conclude that control doesn't work. They conclude that
they just didn't control enough.
The other piece of data being offered is many real unschooling familes who
have allowed their children to explore the pretend violence to the extent
that intrigues them, and their children are peaceful.
What *isn't* happening, and what you theorize will happen, is that children
would extend that violent play into real life.
What will happen in your home is unknowable. There are so many factors. But
Trust and Respect are seeming to be very big factors in allowing children to
become the decent loving children we hope for them.
Joyce
Juli Kearns
At 02:17 PM 4/16/2004, you wrote:
area, perhaps you could suggest instead a gift of family passes.
Juli
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>They were pretty ticked off butDon't know how this would go over but if you have a zoo, museums in the
>the threat of my getting rid of the other ones deterred them. I hate to
>impose such limits on them, and it makes them really angry. <snip>
>Anyway, now that I've clarified the question does anyone have any more
>thoughts on this? Thanks .
>'
>Kristi
area, perhaps you could suggest instead a gift of family passes.
Juli
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]