Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother cruel ideas
J. Stauffer
<<<< Does saying the phrases automatically mean someone isn't mindful?
ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to tell someone that
you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted, because you had some
status they didn't have. Please, if I'm wrong show me. If I'm right, say
uncle and stop defending it." or (paraphrase) "some phrases don't even exist
outside of put-downs of children."
I even posted that perhaps if we find ourselves using cliches we should
examine what is going on.
The entire point was that a poster, I believe, Joylyn used the phrase and
the phrase was jumped on as being mean, not pointed out as something she
might want to take a look at.
Julie S.
>And you know, that is all I have been saying. As opposed to "I have never,
> No.>>>>
ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to tell someone that
you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted, because you had some
status they didn't have. Please, if I'm wrong show me. If I'm right, say
uncle and stop defending it." or (paraphrase) "some phrases don't even exist
outside of put-downs of children."
I even posted that perhaps if we find ourselves using cliches we should
examine what is going on.
The entire point was that a poster, I believe, Joylyn used the phrase and
the phrase was jumped on as being mean, not pointed out as something she
might want to take a look at.
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fetteroll" <fetteroll@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
> on 5/16/04 2:48 PM, J. Stauffer at jnjstau@... wrote:
>
> > I am sorry people have been so injured by the words of others that they
> > begin to see the words themselves as bad rather than the intent of the
> > person who spoke them.
>
> The whole point is to gain awareness of what we are communicating to our
> children and become mindful.
>
> You seem to be responding to the list of phrases as though it's being
> presented as the ultimate test to determine if you're mean or not.
>
> I don't see the list that way. I see it as something that might help some
> (one? a dozen?) people be more aware of what they're doing when they hear
> those phrases automatically coming out of their mouths.
>
> Is someone mindful if they don't say those phrases or if they stop saying
> them?
>
> No.
>
> Does saying the phrases automatically mean someone isn't mindful?
>
> No.
>
> It's just something that might help someone be more self-aware. We don't
get
> enough feed back -- from kids themselves or from other people -- on how we
> sound to kids, especially if we sound like conventional parents. We need
to
> be able to hear ourselves.
>
> I don't think objecting to the list of phrases will help anyone be more
> aware. But if you want to expand on the topic and have other ideas on how
> people can become more aware of how they come across to their children,
that
> would be helpful.
>
> Joyce
>
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/16/04 1:39:03 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
<< The entire point was that a poster, I believe, Joylyn used the phrase and
the phrase was jumped on as being mean, not pointed out as something she
might want to take a look at. >>
My point was exactly that if people are using phrases without realizing they
did, they might want to take a look at that and try not to.
Sandra
<< The entire point was that a poster, I believe, Joylyn used the phrase and
the phrase was jumped on as being mean, not pointed out as something she
might want to take a look at. >>
My point was exactly that if people are using phrases without realizing they
did, they might want to take a look at that and try not to.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/16/04 1:39:03 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
<< The entire point was >>
And that's not the entire point anyway.
You've asserted that you have heard it used (that phrase) in other contexts,
but you aren't giving examples or taking it back.
We're building archives of discussions that people go back into and read. I
would really like them to contain statements people can defend. There is a
list policy about that topic, too.
-=-4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to public
examination, don't post it to the list. -=-
That applies to anyone who chooses to report having used such a phrase, and I
think DEFINITELY should apply to statements of alleged fact or experience.
Sandra
<< The entire point was >>
And that's not the entire point anyway.
You've asserted that you have heard it used (that phrase) in other contexts,
but you aren't giving examples or taking it back.
We're building archives of discussions that people go back into and read. I
would really like them to contain statements people can defend. There is a
list policy about that topic, too.
-=-4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to public
examination, don't post it to the list. -=-
That applies to anyone who chooses to report having used such a phrase, and I
think DEFINITELY should apply to statements of alleged fact or experience.
Sandra
J. Stauffer
<<< And that's not the entire point anyway.
the post you are replying to....for whatever reason, it hasn't shown up yet.
So I will repost it in its entirety in this post.
<<<< I have never, ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to
tell
tastes and didn't like things that are commonly put together to be together,
etc.. She would often do as he asked but sometimes she didn't. She would
laughingly say "I love you but I'm not the short-order cook. There is the
fridge, help yourself." And kiss the top of his head.
Does that count? Or does she have some status he doesn't have? Sheesh.
I'm not even asking for an uncle.
Julie S.
> You've asserted that you have heard it used (that phrase) in othercontexts,
> but you aren't giving examples or taking it back.>>>>Actually, I posted an example already...In fact, I posted it just prior to
the post you are replying to....for whatever reason, it hasn't shown up yet.
So I will repost it in its entirety in this post.
<<<< I have never, ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to
tell
> someone that you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted,because
> you had some status they didn't have.>>>>My mom has said it on several occassions to my dad. He had very particular
tastes and didn't like things that are commonly put together to be together,
etc.. She would often do as he asked but sometimes she didn't. She would
laughingly say "I love you but I'm not the short-order cook. There is the
fridge, help yourself." And kiss the top of his head.
Does that count? Or does she have some status he doesn't have? Sheesh.
I'm not even asking for an uncle.
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine" andother
cruel ideas
>
> In a message dated 5/16/04 12:56:08 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
>
> << Perhaps this is the problem. I HAVE heard this phrase is conversations
>
> which had absolutely nothing to do with chirldren. It wasn't used in a
>
> hurtful way but in a rather playful, laughing way to get a point across
>
> between adults.
>
> >>
>
> Can you give me an example of when "I'm not short-order cook" came up in
a
> conversation (and more than once, you said 'conversations') when it wasn't
to
> or about children? What point were the adults trying to get across to one
> another?
>
> I have never, ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to
tell
> someone that you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted,
because
> you had some status they didn't have. Please, if I'm wrong show me. If
I'm
> right, say uncle and stop defending it.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
>
> In a message dated 5/16/04 1:39:03 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
>
> << The entire point was >>
>
> And that's not the entire point anyway.
> You've asserted that you have heard it used (that phrase) in other
contexts,
> but you aren't giving examples or taking it back.
>
> We're building archives of discussions that people go back into and read.
I
> would really like them to contain statements people can defend. There is
a
> list policy about that topic, too.
>
> -=-4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to
public
> examination, don't post it to the list. -=-
>
> That applies to anyone who chooses to report having used such a phrase,
and I
> think DEFINITELY should apply to statements of alleged fact or experience.
>
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
J. Stauffer
We're building archives of discussions that people go back into and read. I
exist out of certain contexts. I am very willing to believe that you have
not experienced them outside of certain contexts. I am unsure how you can
"defend" the statement that they do not exist for anyone outside of those
contexts.
Julie S.
> would really like them to contain statements people can defend. There isa
> list policy about that topic, too.public
>
> -=-4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to
> examination, don't post it to the list. -=-So.....you have posted repeatedly how there are phrases that simply don't
exist out of certain contexts. I am very willing to believe that you have
not experienced them outside of certain contexts. I am unsure how you can
"defend" the statement that they do not exist for anyone outside of those
contexts.
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
>
> In a message dated 5/16/04 1:39:03 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
>
> << The entire point was >>
>
> And that's not the entire point anyway.
> You've asserted that you have heard it used (that phrase) in other
contexts,
> but you aren't giving examples or taking it back.
>
> We're building archives of discussions that people go back into and read.
I
> would really like them to contain statements people can defend. There is
a
> list policy about that topic, too.
>
> -=-4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to
public
> examination, don't post it to the list. -=-
>
> That applies to anyone who chooses to report having used such a phrase,
and I
> think DEFINITELY should apply to statements of alleged fact or experience.
>
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Robyn Coburn
<<My mom has said it on several occassions to my dad. He had very
particular
tastes and didn't like things that are commonly put together to be together,
etc.. She would often do as he asked but sometimes she didn't. She would
laughingly say "I love you but I'm not the short-order cook. There is the
fridge, help yourself." And kiss the top of his head.
Does that count? Or does she have some status he doesn't have?>>
She probably had status in the kitchen of being the person who did most of
the cooking or of being the best cook.
As an adult your father already had sense of the real meaning of that short
order cook phrase. Unless you are talking to someone who actually works in a
restaurant, it is a euphemism with a number of levels of meaning: "you are
perfectly capable of doing it yourself" and "I am too
busy/overwhelmed/tired/unwilling right now" and "you have crossed the line
into too demanding".
But those are just the top layers of meaning. There is a lot more in that
phrase - in some cases, especially when said to children "Independence and
self sufficiency is to be valued and encouraged (or forced on them if they
aren't doing it themselves)" and "my time and energy is for more important
things than you" and "you are less important than I am" and "revenge is
sweet" and "no-one does stuff for me and I'm neglected".
I read the above story and wonder what your father actually felt at those
moments, and if they were at all predictable. Maybe he felt loved. Maybe he
felt confused, "What's different about this request compared to yesterday
when she was perfectly happy to get me a sandwich?". Maybe he felt sheepish,
"well it was worth a try." What if your father felt sad? "Gee, I'd hoped she
would show love by doing something totally unnecessary for me" or "Why is
she laughing at me asking for something".
I mention these possibilities not to criticize, but to try to come back to
*children* in this discussion. How might using such a phrase make your child
feel?
Children do not have a sense of that cultural history of the phrase. It is
tough for little children to know where the "uncrossable line into too
demanding" is on any given day. To them it comes out of nowhere, and it
wouldn't surprise me if they felt all the force of "you are less important
than I am" as the primary meaning of it, no matter how cheerily it is said.
There have been times when I have felt irritated by numerous requests from
either James (dh) or Jayn. It is when I am feeling negative emotions that I
try even harder to use simple factual language - this list has taught me
that over the last couple of years. Loaded emotional terms or cultural
shorthand are less useful than saying, "I'm a little tired right now. Will
you get it instead?" or "can I do that later?" or "I need some help. Will
you do such-and-such?" (especially necessary with James who just assumes I
don't need help/am not overwhelmed unless I say so).
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
particular
tastes and didn't like things that are commonly put together to be together,
etc.. She would often do as he asked but sometimes she didn't. She would
laughingly say "I love you but I'm not the short-order cook. There is the
fridge, help yourself." And kiss the top of his head.
Does that count? Or does she have some status he doesn't have?>>
She probably had status in the kitchen of being the person who did most of
the cooking or of being the best cook.
As an adult your father already had sense of the real meaning of that short
order cook phrase. Unless you are talking to someone who actually works in a
restaurant, it is a euphemism with a number of levels of meaning: "you are
perfectly capable of doing it yourself" and "I am too
busy/overwhelmed/tired/unwilling right now" and "you have crossed the line
into too demanding".
But those are just the top layers of meaning. There is a lot more in that
phrase - in some cases, especially when said to children "Independence and
self sufficiency is to be valued and encouraged (or forced on them if they
aren't doing it themselves)" and "my time and energy is for more important
things than you" and "you are less important than I am" and "revenge is
sweet" and "no-one does stuff for me and I'm neglected".
I read the above story and wonder what your father actually felt at those
moments, and if they were at all predictable. Maybe he felt loved. Maybe he
felt confused, "What's different about this request compared to yesterday
when she was perfectly happy to get me a sandwich?". Maybe he felt sheepish,
"well it was worth a try." What if your father felt sad? "Gee, I'd hoped she
would show love by doing something totally unnecessary for me" or "Why is
she laughing at me asking for something".
I mention these possibilities not to criticize, but to try to come back to
*children* in this discussion. How might using such a phrase make your child
feel?
Children do not have a sense of that cultural history of the phrase. It is
tough for little children to know where the "uncrossable line into too
demanding" is on any given day. To them it comes out of nowhere, and it
wouldn't surprise me if they felt all the force of "you are less important
than I am" as the primary meaning of it, no matter how cheerily it is said.
There have been times when I have felt irritated by numerous requests from
either James (dh) or Jayn. It is when I am feeling negative emotions that I
try even harder to use simple factual language - this list has taught me
that over the last couple of years. Loaded emotional terms or cultural
shorthand are less useful than saying, "I'm a little tired right now. Will
you get it instead?" or "can I do that later?" or "I need some help. Will
you do such-and-such?" (especially necessary with James who just assumes I
don't need help/am not overwhelmed unless I say so).
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
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/16/04 3:23:56 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
<< I am unsure how you can
"defend" the statement that they do not exist for anyone outside of those
contexts.
dozens to hundreds of times (depending on the phrase), used to kids' faces or in
snarky mom-conversations behind kids' backs. And in all those years I have
never heard any of those phrases used other times (unless maybe by a drunk trying
to start a fight, in the cases of things like "Who do you think you are?" and
"You are so full of yourself," but they're usually reserved for the putting
down of children.
So I defend my statement by giving my reasons for making the statement in
public where I knew I could be called on to defend it.
And if anyone wants to refute it, they need to have more than just "I doubt
it" or "but if they did," I think.
Julie, I know you can come up with good, clear arguments, so I'm confused as
to why you're clinging to your defense of the possibility (or more) of the
casual use of such exact word, exact tone of voice phrases in ways that have
nothing to do with their broad and longterm use in kid put-down.
Did you grow up without ever hearing those phrases used to or of you?
If so, I think you're in a small minority.
I think your mom had at least one of them used on her, and she's used it
again, at least on your dad. I doubt that if she heard it as a kid she got a
smile and a kiss on the head after. And if she's been married to your dad long,
wouldn't she know what food he likes or will eat? And isn't the purpose of
food prep and presentation more than just "I did it, eat it or not?"
Those questions move it on to another topic, I suppose, or maybe straight
back to the original.
Feeding families is more than cooking one meal because it's 5:00. That's a
rule kind of thing, a checklist. "I'm the mom, it's dinner time, I cooked,
I'm done."
But the principle is that people need to eat and if they go to bed hungry
they might not sleep well, and both food and sleep are important. So if it's
important, the mom needs to plan life so that somehow, by whatever necessary
combination of factors, everyone has enough food he or she will eat that the
principle is fulfilled.
I don't sweep well, and I don't like sweeping. If I have a list that says
"sweep" and I sweep, I can cross that off. If the list says or means "get the
floor clean" it's going to be more work before I can cross it off, but the real
purpose is "get the floor clean" not "move broom all over floor and call it
good."
I think school and chores are a combination that make lots of adults
(millions and millions of adults) think that if they moved their eyes across something
they read it; if they cast their eyes toward a person or a kid-project, they
looked at it; if music played and their ears perceived it they listened to it.
But the person asking them to read, or look, or listen wasn't asking them to
indicate whether their nervous system registered stimuli. They really
wanted attentive, thoughtful interaction.
When someone wants to eat, they often want attentive, thoughtful interaction
(and food). It doesn't happen every time. One of our biggest fallbacks is an
extra freezer with kid-favorite microwave stuff. And I got really grumpy
earlier because Keith ate my cheeseburger and left me with the no cheese, green
chile that he had ordered. Life's not perfect. But it's a step in the right
direction for people to honestly think and honestly look and carefully speak
instead of reciting phrases from another set of principles.
Sandra
<< I am unsure how you can
"defend" the statement that they do not exist for anyone outside of those
contexts.
>>I defend it by saying that in all my 50 years I have heard those phrases
dozens to hundreds of times (depending on the phrase), used to kids' faces or in
snarky mom-conversations behind kids' backs. And in all those years I have
never heard any of those phrases used other times (unless maybe by a drunk trying
to start a fight, in the cases of things like "Who do you think you are?" and
"You are so full of yourself," but they're usually reserved for the putting
down of children.
So I defend my statement by giving my reasons for making the statement in
public where I knew I could be called on to defend it.
And if anyone wants to refute it, they need to have more than just "I doubt
it" or "but if they did," I think.
Julie, I know you can come up with good, clear arguments, so I'm confused as
to why you're clinging to your defense of the possibility (or more) of the
casual use of such exact word, exact tone of voice phrases in ways that have
nothing to do with their broad and longterm use in kid put-down.
Did you grow up without ever hearing those phrases used to or of you?
If so, I think you're in a small minority.
I think your mom had at least one of them used on her, and she's used it
again, at least on your dad. I doubt that if she heard it as a kid she got a
smile and a kiss on the head after. And if she's been married to your dad long,
wouldn't she know what food he likes or will eat? And isn't the purpose of
food prep and presentation more than just "I did it, eat it or not?"
Those questions move it on to another topic, I suppose, or maybe straight
back to the original.
Feeding families is more than cooking one meal because it's 5:00. That's a
rule kind of thing, a checklist. "I'm the mom, it's dinner time, I cooked,
I'm done."
But the principle is that people need to eat and if they go to bed hungry
they might not sleep well, and both food and sleep are important. So if it's
important, the mom needs to plan life so that somehow, by whatever necessary
combination of factors, everyone has enough food he or she will eat that the
principle is fulfilled.
I don't sweep well, and I don't like sweeping. If I have a list that says
"sweep" and I sweep, I can cross that off. If the list says or means "get the
floor clean" it's going to be more work before I can cross it off, but the real
purpose is "get the floor clean" not "move broom all over floor and call it
good."
I think school and chores are a combination that make lots of adults
(millions and millions of adults) think that if they moved their eyes across something
they read it; if they cast their eyes toward a person or a kid-project, they
looked at it; if music played and their ears perceived it they listened to it.
But the person asking them to read, or look, or listen wasn't asking them to
indicate whether their nervous system registered stimuli. They really
wanted attentive, thoughtful interaction.
When someone wants to eat, they often want attentive, thoughtful interaction
(and food). It doesn't happen every time. One of our biggest fallbacks is an
extra freezer with kid-favorite microwave stuff. And I got really grumpy
earlier because Keith ate my cheeseburger and left me with the no cheese, green
chile that he had ordered. Life's not perfect. But it's a step in the right
direction for people to honestly think and honestly look and carefully speak
instead of reciting phrases from another set of principles.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/16/04 4:29:17 PM, dezigna@... writes:
<< Children do not have a sense of that cultural history of the phrase. >>
I heard it for years before I found out what it literally meant. Just
because I didn't know what it meant in the adult world, at a restaurant, didn't mean
I didn't know that it meant "You're not getting what you want" and "You made
a mistake even asking."
Another thing my mom used to say that meant a little bit of nothing and a
WHOLE lot of something bad was some variant of "Who do you think you are, Miss
Aster?" or to someone else with me standing there, "Little Miss Aster thinks..."
and then a story would be told of how I wanted something too good, too
expensive. I had no earthly idea who "Miss Aster" was, and I wouldn't swear my mom
did. I asked her when I was nine or so and she said she was a millionaire
with lots of servants, and she had inherited her money and not earned it, so she
was spoiled and got anything she wanted.
Maybe my mom was the meanest mom in the whole world and none of you had
put-down moms, and if I could believe that or make it any more true for wishing it,
I would LOVE that. But I knew moms then and now who were even worse than my
mom, and moms reinforced one another (often right in front of kids) and
"supported" each other to be mean, insulting, and punitive.
I don't want ANY of that for my kids. I don't even want the box it came in.
I would be glad for them to find it hard to believe that any mother would
ever say those things to a child. I hope they will be indignant if they hear
it, and never ttolerate or support others who are that way, when they're adults.
I hope it dies out completely.
Unfortunately, some people are keeping it flamed and ready. Unfortunately, a
lot of them are structured homeschoolers.
Sandra
<< Children do not have a sense of that cultural history of the phrase. >>
I heard it for years before I found out what it literally meant. Just
because I didn't know what it meant in the adult world, at a restaurant, didn't mean
I didn't know that it meant "You're not getting what you want" and "You made
a mistake even asking."
Another thing my mom used to say that meant a little bit of nothing and a
WHOLE lot of something bad was some variant of "Who do you think you are, Miss
Aster?" or to someone else with me standing there, "Little Miss Aster thinks..."
and then a story would be told of how I wanted something too good, too
expensive. I had no earthly idea who "Miss Aster" was, and I wouldn't swear my mom
did. I asked her when I was nine or so and she said she was a millionaire
with lots of servants, and she had inherited her money and not earned it, so she
was spoiled and got anything she wanted.
Maybe my mom was the meanest mom in the whole world and none of you had
put-down moms, and if I could believe that or make it any more true for wishing it,
I would LOVE that. But I knew moms then and now who were even worse than my
mom, and moms reinforced one another (often right in front of kids) and
"supported" each other to be mean, insulting, and punitive.
I don't want ANY of that for my kids. I don't even want the box it came in.
I would be glad for them to find it hard to believe that any mother would
ever say those things to a child. I hope they will be indignant if they hear
it, and never ttolerate or support others who are that way, when they're adults.
I hope it dies out completely.
Unfortunately, some people are keeping it flamed and ready. Unfortunately, a
lot of them are structured homeschoolers.
Sandra
Danielle Conger
Sandra wrote: > Another thing my mom used to say that meant a little bit of
nothing and a
Oh, no! You're not the only one! My mother had a whole littany of names for
me, none of which were very nice, made me feel loved or remotely good about
myself.
Calamity Jane, Mrs. Magoo (Mr. Magoo, for those who recall, was blind,
bumbling and often ran into things), Linda Lightfoot, etc. The last one has
always been a major point of contention between the two of us. My mother
went to a two year college for her associate's degree in home-ec, though it
was basically finishing school. She always corrected my grammar (to this
day, I growl back that I'm using the vernacular), insisted upon Emily Post
manners and used to flick my elbows off the table, and used to walk so
quietly that she could sneak up on my pretty much any time of the day and
just start talking right behind me. Being a person who startles very easily,
this has *always* majorly bugged me, and she has never done anything to give
me advance warning of her approach but instead implies that I'm heavy-footed
and oafish.
The really interesting thing about these nicknames in retrospect is that I'm
actually a quite athletic and coordinated person, so they do little to
reflect any reality about me. They certainly wouldn't be any better if they
*did* reflect reality, but it seems telling that she needed to put me down
for the sake of putting me down. She's an extremely negative and selfish
person, and she's probably been the single greatest influence in my own
mothering--it's just too bad that it couldn't have been in a good way. I
accepted a long time ago that I couldn't change her, but my children will
*never* have a mother like she was--that much I do have contol over. I work
every day to ensure that my kids have the best mom they can have, and I'm
grateful to have support for that here on this list and irl with LLL, AP and
unschooling friends.
--Danielle
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html
nothing and a
> WHOLE lot of something bad was some variant of "Who do you think you are,Miss
> Aster?" or to someone else with me standing there, "Little Miss Asterthinks..."
> and then a story would be told of how I wanted something too good, tooswear my mom
> expensive. I had no earthly idea who "Miss Aster" was, and I wouldn't
> did. I asked her when I was nine or so and she said she was a millionaireso she
> with lots of servants, and she had inherited her money and not earned it,
> was spoiled and got anything she wanted.wishing it,
>
> Maybe my mom was the meanest mom in the whole world and none of you had
> put-down moms, and if I could believe that or make it any more true for
> I would LOVE that. But I knew moms then and now who were even worse thanmy
> mom, and moms reinforced one another (often right in front of kids) and============
> "supported" each other to be mean, insulting, and punitive.
Oh, no! You're not the only one! My mother had a whole littany of names for
me, none of which were very nice, made me feel loved or remotely good about
myself.
Calamity Jane, Mrs. Magoo (Mr. Magoo, for those who recall, was blind,
bumbling and often ran into things), Linda Lightfoot, etc. The last one has
always been a major point of contention between the two of us. My mother
went to a two year college for her associate's degree in home-ec, though it
was basically finishing school. She always corrected my grammar (to this
day, I growl back that I'm using the vernacular), insisted upon Emily Post
manners and used to flick my elbows off the table, and used to walk so
quietly that she could sneak up on my pretty much any time of the day and
just start talking right behind me. Being a person who startles very easily,
this has *always* majorly bugged me, and she has never done anything to give
me advance warning of her approach but instead implies that I'm heavy-footed
and oafish.
The really interesting thing about these nicknames in retrospect is that I'm
actually a quite athletic and coordinated person, so they do little to
reflect any reality about me. They certainly wouldn't be any better if they
*did* reflect reality, but it seems telling that she needed to put me down
for the sake of putting me down. She's an extremely negative and selfish
person, and she's probably been the single greatest influence in my own
mothering--it's just too bad that it couldn't have been in a good way. I
accepted a long time ago that I couldn't change her, but my children will
*never* have a mother like she was--that much I do have contol over. I work
every day to ensure that my kids have the best mom they can have, and I'm
grateful to have support for that here on this list and irl with LLL, AP and
unschooling friends.
--Danielle
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html
pam sorooshian
On May 16, 2004, at 12:38 PM, J. Stauffer wrote:
now," or "Can I offer you something else that isn't quite so much work
to make?" or even "Oh - gosh - I really don't feel like getting the
waffle iron out now and then having to clean it and all that..." --
those are "real" answers and they take responsibility for not being
willing or able to do what the child wants right then.
But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the person
asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to take
advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.
Julie, even your example of your mother saying it to your father - that
sounds like a sweet and mild rebuke, to me. Her way of telling him,
sweetly, that he's asking too much of her. Again, it makes him wrong,
even if she's making it clear that she's not upset with him for it. And
that's fine between adults - maybe he should have known not to ask so
much of her and he just needed a little gentle reminder.
But when we're the parent and our child is asking for special food,
that's PERFECTLY okay for the child to ask, isn't it? Do we want to
make them feel like they are being rebuked for asking? Like they should
have known better? Like they're treating us badly by not recognizing
themselves that we're "not a short-order cook?"
Like I said before, I said this once. I said it nicely and sweetly and
I smiled - like in Julie's example of her mother. But the minute the
words were out of my mouth I felt I had rebuked my child just for
asking if I'd make her waffles instead of pancakes. Why should she NOT
be asking. I can say no without making it seem like she made a mistake
to even ask.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> "I have never,Saying, "I'm tired," or "I have some other stuff I have to do right
> ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to tell someone
> that
> you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted, because you
> had some
> status they didn't have.
now," or "Can I offer you something else that isn't quite so much work
to make?" or even "Oh - gosh - I really don't feel like getting the
waffle iron out now and then having to clean it and all that..." --
those are "real" answers and they take responsibility for not being
willing or able to do what the child wants right then.
But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the person
asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to take
advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.
Julie, even your example of your mother saying it to your father - that
sounds like a sweet and mild rebuke, to me. Her way of telling him,
sweetly, that he's asking too much of her. Again, it makes him wrong,
even if she's making it clear that she's not upset with him for it. And
that's fine between adults - maybe he should have known not to ask so
much of her and he just needed a little gentle reminder.
But when we're the parent and our child is asking for special food,
that's PERFECTLY okay for the child to ask, isn't it? Do we want to
make them feel like they are being rebuked for asking? Like they should
have known better? Like they're treating us badly by not recognizing
themselves that we're "not a short-order cook?"
Like I said before, I said this once. I said it nicely and sweetly and
I smiled - like in Julie's example of her mother. But the minute the
words were out of my mouth I felt I had rebuked my child just for
asking if I'd make her waffles instead of pancakes. Why should she NOT
be asking. I can say no without making it seem like she made a mistake
to even ask.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
J. Stauffer
<<<<Did you grow up without ever hearing those phrases used to or of you?
least not in a manner that made me remember them. I truly don't remember my
parents (who have been married since 1959) ever making comments to put me or
my siblings down. Doesn't mean they were always sweet love and pink clouds
with us but that we had a realistic view of their world and never questioned
their devotion to us.
My dad was a peace officer and always worked at least 2 jobs, sometimes 3.
My mom always worked as well. It was obvious to all of us that if or when
they were unable to do something for us they just didn't have the time or
energy or both. I just can't imagine myself or my siblings or any of my
kids getting bummed at someone who spent the time and effort to make me a
dinner simply because I wanted them to make me something else and they were
too tired to want to do it. To be honest, it seems tremendously selfish.
And in my 40 years, this is my experience of most of the families I know.
Sure, I also know some really crappy parents and I know some really crappy
kids but for the most part, the people I know have very loving dynamics in
thier families and understand that use of a cliche doesn't indicate a lack
of love.
I talked with my dh about this because I thought perhaps I just had a wierd
family. He laughed and said that he had used the phrase on his mom at the
last family reunion (we grew up on opposite ends of the country) in a joking
manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping and
her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up.
So I know it doesn't have to do with where you grew up, or in which
particular family you grew up. I now know of at least 2 situations in which
that phrase was used in a manner that wasn't intended to put anyone down but
rather in a joking manner. I think it has a lot to do with how people grow
up, whether they feel overall that they were loved or not, which was my
original post on this topic.
I think perhaps it is just a difference in temperament or something. If you
want to offend me, you are going to have to try a lot harder than to say
"I'm not a short-order cook." <grin>
Julie S.
>To my knowledge, I have never had those types of phrases used to me. Or at
> If so, I think you're in a small minority.>>>>
least not in a manner that made me remember them. I truly don't remember my
parents (who have been married since 1959) ever making comments to put me or
my siblings down. Doesn't mean they were always sweet love and pink clouds
with us but that we had a realistic view of their world and never questioned
their devotion to us.
My dad was a peace officer and always worked at least 2 jobs, sometimes 3.
My mom always worked as well. It was obvious to all of us that if or when
they were unable to do something for us they just didn't have the time or
energy or both. I just can't imagine myself or my siblings or any of my
kids getting bummed at someone who spent the time and effort to make me a
dinner simply because I wanted them to make me something else and they were
too tired to want to do it. To be honest, it seems tremendously selfish.
And in my 40 years, this is my experience of most of the families I know.
Sure, I also know some really crappy parents and I know some really crappy
kids but for the most part, the people I know have very loving dynamics in
thier families and understand that use of a cliche doesn't indicate a lack
of love.
I talked with my dh about this because I thought perhaps I just had a wierd
family. He laughed and said that he had used the phrase on his mom at the
last family reunion (we grew up on opposite ends of the country) in a joking
manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping and
her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up.
So I know it doesn't have to do with where you grew up, or in which
particular family you grew up. I now know of at least 2 situations in which
that phrase was used in a manner that wasn't intended to put anyone down but
rather in a joking manner. I think it has a lot to do with how people grow
up, whether they feel overall that they were loved or not, which was my
original post on this topic.
I think perhaps it is just a difference in temperament or something. If you
want to offend me, you are going to have to try a lot harder than to say
"I'm not a short-order cook." <grin>
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
>
> In a message dated 5/16/04 3:23:56 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
>
> << I am unsure how you can
>
> "defend" the statement that they do not exist for anyone outside of those
>
> contexts.
>
> >>
>
> I defend it by saying that in all my 50 years I have heard those phrases
> dozens to hundreds of times (depending on the phrase), used to kids' faces
or in
> snarky mom-conversations behind kids' backs. And in all those years I
have
> never heard any of those phrases used other times (unless maybe by a drunk
trying
> to start a fight, in the cases of things like "Who do you think you are?"
and
> "You are so full of yourself," but they're usually reserved for the
putting
> down of children.
>
> So I defend my statement by giving my reasons for making the statement in
> public where I knew I could be called on to defend it.
>
> And if anyone wants to refute it, they need to have more than just "I
doubt
> it" or "but if they did," I think.
>
> Julie, I know you can come up with good, clear arguments, so I'm confused
as
> to why you're clinging to your defense of the possibility (or more) of the
> casual use of such exact word, exact tone of voice phrases in ways that
have
> nothing to do with their broad and longterm use in kid put-down.
>
> Did you grow up without ever hearing those phrases used to or of you?
>
> If so, I think you're in a small minority.
>
> I think your mom had at least one of them used on her, and she's used it
> again, at least on your dad. I doubt that if she heard it as a kid she
got a
> smile and a kiss on the head after. And if she's been married to your
dad long,
> wouldn't she know what food he likes or will eat? And isn't the purpose
of
> food prep and presentation more than just "I did it, eat it or not?"
>
> Those questions move it on to another topic, I suppose, or maybe straight
> back to the original.
>
> Feeding families is more than cooking one meal because it's 5:00. That's
a
> rule kind of thing, a checklist. "I'm the mom, it's dinner time, I
cooked,
> I'm done."
>
> But the principle is that people need to eat and if they go to bed hungry
> they might not sleep well, and both food and sleep are important. So if
it's
> important, the mom needs to plan life so that somehow, by whatever
necessary
> combination of factors, everyone has enough food he or she will eat that
the
> principle is fulfilled.
>
> I don't sweep well, and I don't like sweeping. If I have a list that says
> "sweep" and I sweep, I can cross that off. If the list says or means "get
the
> floor clean" it's going to be more work before I can cross it off, but the
real
> purpose is "get the floor clean" not "move broom all over floor and call
it
> good."
>
> I think school and chores are a combination that make lots of adults
> (millions and millions of adults) think that if they moved their eyes
across something
> they read it; if they cast their eyes toward a person or a kid-project,
they
> looked at it; if music played and their ears perceived it they listened to
it.
> But the person asking them to read, or look, or listen wasn't asking them
to
> indicate whether their nervous system registered stimuli. They really
> wanted attentive, thoughtful interaction.
>
> When someone wants to eat, they often want attentive, thoughtful
interaction
> (and food). It doesn't happen every time. One of our biggest fallbacks
is an
> extra freezer with kid-favorite microwave stuff. And I got really grumpy
> earlier because Keith ate my cheeseburger and left me with the no cheese,
green
> chile that he had ordered. Life's not perfect. But it's a step in the
right
> direction for people to honestly think and honestly look and carefully
speak
> instead of reciting phrases from another set of principles.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
J. Stauffer
<<<< But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the person
Julie S.
> asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to takeGuess I just have much thicker skin. Differences of opinion.
> advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.>>>>
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "pam sorooshian" <pamsoroosh@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
>
> On May 16, 2004, at 12:38 PM, J. Stauffer wrote:
>
> > "I have never,
> > ever heard or read that phrase when it wasn't intended to tell someone
> > that
> > you were not going to do what they unreasonably wanted, because you
> > had some
> > status they didn't have.
>
> Saying, "I'm tired," or "I have some other stuff I have to do right
> now," or "Can I offer you something else that isn't quite so much work
> to make?" or even "Oh - gosh - I really don't feel like getting the
> waffle iron out now and then having to clean it and all that..." --
> those are "real" answers and they take responsibility for not being
> willing or able to do what the child wants right then.
>
> But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the person
> asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to take
> advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.
>
> Julie, even your example of your mother saying it to your father - that
> sounds like a sweet and mild rebuke, to me. Her way of telling him,
> sweetly, that he's asking too much of her. Again, it makes him wrong,
> even if she's making it clear that she's not upset with him for it. And
> that's fine between adults - maybe he should have known not to ask so
> much of her and he just needed a little gentle reminder.
>
> But when we're the parent and our child is asking for special food,
> that's PERFECTLY okay for the child to ask, isn't it? Do we want to
> make them feel like they are being rebuked for asking? Like they should
> have known better? Like they're treating us badly by not recognizing
> themselves that we're "not a short-order cook?"
>
> Like I said before, I said this once. I said it nicely and sweetly and
> I smiled - like in Julie's example of her mother. But the minute the
> words were out of my mouth I felt I had rebuked my child just for
> asking if I'd make her waffles instead of pancakes. Why should she NOT
> be asking. I can say no without making it seem like she made a mistake
> to even ask.
>
> -pam
> National Home Education Network
> <www.NHEN.org>
> Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
> through information, networking and public relations.
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Fetteroll
on 5/17/04 12:38 AM, J. Stauffer at jnjstau@... wrote:
"short-order cook" being negative help others unschool or become more aware
parents?
It's like pointing out during a discussion meant to help people get past the
barriers that using the word teach can throw in front of their path to
unschooling, "Well, I don't have a problem with the word teach."
Not everyone will have the same problems so some techniques won't apply. No
one technique will work for everyone who has a particular problem. But it's
good for the ideas to be out there swirling around because they might help
someone.
much," even if he then felt it was okay to do as much as was being asked.
How was his mother to know all the energy he'd been spending while she was
asleep? It's a way of saying "You should just be able to know what a drained
state I'm in and not even bother to ask."
His mother probably got what he meant since she's an adult and has
undoubtedly ended up in similar situations. But a child doesn't have that
understanding and can't have it until she's grown and has spent all morning
cooking or doing things for others. The child is just suddenly in a
situation where she's expressed what she needs as she usually does and for
some mysterious reason the person she's asking gives her a reply that
implies she shouldn't have asked and she should have realized she shouldn't
have asked.
For a child to not hear that as a rebuke or to understand that "not a short
order cook" is just code for "I'm exhausted," they need an atmosphere of
hearing people express their real feelings and offering alternatives. They
need to hear things like "I'm really tired. Could I get you something
simpler?"
How to create that atmosphere would be more useful than "That doesn't bother
me." Because if it doesn't bother you, it probably came out of an atmosphere
of people being honest with their feelings. And it would be useful for
people to see how that atmosphere gets created.
Joyce
>> But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the personBut how does your inability to hear it as negative or inexperience with
>> asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to take
>> advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.>>>>
>
> Guess I just have much thicker skin. Differences of opinion.
"short-order cook" being negative help others unschool or become more aware
parents?
It's like pointing out during a discussion meant to help people get past the
barriers that using the word teach can throw in front of their path to
unschooling, "Well, I don't have a problem with the word teach."
Not everyone will have the same problems so some techniques won't apply. No
one technique will work for everyone who has a particular problem. But it's
good for the ideas to be out there swirling around because they might help
someone.
> in a jokingEven if he was joking, it was coming from a place of "You're asking too
> manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping and
> her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up.
much," even if he then felt it was okay to do as much as was being asked.
How was his mother to know all the energy he'd been spending while she was
asleep? It's a way of saying "You should just be able to know what a drained
state I'm in and not even bother to ask."
His mother probably got what he meant since she's an adult and has
undoubtedly ended up in similar situations. But a child doesn't have that
understanding and can't have it until she's grown and has spent all morning
cooking or doing things for others. The child is just suddenly in a
situation where she's expressed what she needs as she usually does and for
some mysterious reason the person she's asking gives her a reply that
implies she shouldn't have asked and she should have realized she shouldn't
have asked.
For a child to not hear that as a rebuke or to understand that "not a short
order cook" is just code for "I'm exhausted," they need an atmosphere of
hearing people express their real feelings and offering alternatives. They
need to hear things like "I'm really tired. Could I get you something
simpler?"
How to create that atmosphere would be more useful than "That doesn't bother
me." Because if it doesn't bother you, it probably came out of an atmosphere
of people being honest with their feelings. And it would be useful for
people to see how that atmosphere gets created.
Joyce
[email protected]
pamsoroosh@... writes:
take advantage? Really unreasonable, I mean, to the point of being "wrong" to
pile that request/demand on Mom?
Not saying this is a good response even then. But I do think there's
some difference between saying it that way, and saying it in a steady flow of
imprinted bitterness and resentment of the people you live with. Now wondering
if this is the sticking point Julie has been getting at-- that this phrase is
also used in exasperated response to a truly unreasonable expectation or
demand, as a sort of warning sign or signal? I think I've heard it in both
contexts, as a child and as an adult.
I'm thinking that words and tone used generally reflect the feelings
that cause them. So if Mom doesn't feel taken advantage of in the first place,
she won't feel like spouting these snappy little cliches we've been
discussing, right?
If this is right, then the ideal unschooler response wouldn't be just
to tell Mom she's wrong to say it even when she honestly feels it, but also to
help her see (with clear eyes) and feel good about the often-unreasonable --
but really lovable! -- people with whom she lives.
Which is what the list is trying to do? :) JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Saying, "I'm tired," or "I have some other stuff I have to do rightWhat if the person asking is in fact being unreasonable and trying to
> now," or "Can I offer you something else that isn't quite so much work
> to make?" or even "Oh - gosh - I really don't feel like getting the
> waffle iron out now and then having to clean it and all that..." --
> those are "real" answers and they take responsibility for not being
> willing or able to do what the child wants right then.
>
> But to say, "I am NOT a short-order cook," implies that the person
> asking is being unreasonable. It implies that they are trying to take
> advantage of you. It makes the child "wrong" in asking.
>
take advantage? Really unreasonable, I mean, to the point of being "wrong" to
pile that request/demand on Mom?
Not saying this is a good response even then. But I do think there's
some difference between saying it that way, and saying it in a steady flow of
imprinted bitterness and resentment of the people you live with. Now wondering
if this is the sticking point Julie has been getting at-- that this phrase is
also used in exasperated response to a truly unreasonable expectation or
demand, as a sort of warning sign or signal? I think I've heard it in both
contexts, as a child and as an adult.
I'm thinking that words and tone used generally reflect the feelings
that cause them. So if Mom doesn't feel taken advantage of in the first place,
she won't feel like spouting these snappy little cliches we've been
discussing, right?
If this is right, then the ideal unschooler response wouldn't be just
to tell Mom she's wrong to say it even when she honestly feels it, but also to
help her see (with clear eyes) and feel good about the often-unreasonable --
but really lovable! -- people with whom she lives.
Which is what the list is trying to do? :) JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 05/17/2004 6:54:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
the whole thread, finally. Thanks Joyce. JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
fetteroll@... writes:
> How to create that atmosphere would be more useful than "That doesn'tExactly! This really hit the nail on the head for me -- made sense of
> bother
> me." Because if it doesn't bother you, it probably came out of an atmosphere
> of people being honest with their feelings. And it would be useful for
> people to see how that atmosphere gets created.
>
>
the whole thread, finally. Thanks Joyce. JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
J. Stauffer
<<<< it probably came out of an atmosphere
adults have to re-learn it. That it is truly ok to be who you are.
What is it the UU's say? "We will speak the truth as we know it to each
other knowing in loving trust that we do not have to think alike to be able
to worship together and learn from one another."
Julie S.
> > of people being honest with their feelings. And it would be useful forNow there is the big question. I think children are born with this and most
> > people to see how that atmosphere gets created.>>>>
adults have to re-learn it. That it is truly ok to be who you are.
What is it the UU's say? "We will speak the truth as we know it to each
other knowing in loving trust that we do not have to think alike to be able
to worship together and learn from one another."
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: <jrossedd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
> In a message dated 05/17/2004 6:54:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> fetteroll@... writes:
>
>
> > How to create that atmosphere would be more useful than "That doesn't
> > bother
> > me." Because if it doesn't bother you, it probably came out of an
atmosphere
> > of people being honest with their feelings. And it would be useful for
> > people to see how that atmosphere gets created.
> >
> >
>
> Exactly! This really hit the nail on the head for me -- made sense
of
> the whole thread, finally. Thanks Joyce. JJ
>
>
> [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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/16/04 10:51:57 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
<< I talked with my dh about this because I thought perhaps I just had a wierd
family. He laughed and said that he had used the phrase on his mom at the
last family reunion (we grew up on opposite ends of the country) in a joking
manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping and
her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up. >>
Maybe if he had never heard the phrase, he would never have used it on his
mother.
Maybe if he had memories of his mother making him special food even when she
was tired, he would have made his mother some food even though he was "through
with his task."
Maybe if the task were redefined to provide food until everyone had eaten, it
would be better than the "I cooked, you weren't here, tough" stance you
described above.
-=-So I know it doesn't have to do with where you grew up, or in which
particular family you grew up. I now know of at least 2 situations in which
that phrase was used in a manner that wasn't intended to put anyone down but
rather in a joking manner. -=-
Okay, then you did prove your point.
But I think mine stands.
You know two instances where you include that it was used sweetly or
jokingly, but it was used as a justification for choosing NOT to feed a family member.
I'm not happy to do better than my mom. I want to do better than I did
yesterday, and to save a few of those phrases to use later with a husband or
parent is not part of my longterm plan.
I honestly do think it's important enough to merit consideration.
Sandra
<< I talked with my dh about this because I thought perhaps I just had a wierd
family. He laughed and said that he had used the phrase on his mom at the
last family reunion (we grew up on opposite ends of the country) in a joking
manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping and
her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up. >>
Maybe if he had never heard the phrase, he would never have used it on his
mother.
Maybe if he had memories of his mother making him special food even when she
was tired, he would have made his mother some food even though he was "through
with his task."
Maybe if the task were redefined to provide food until everyone had eaten, it
would be better than the "I cooked, you weren't here, tough" stance you
described above.
-=-So I know it doesn't have to do with where you grew up, or in which
particular family you grew up. I now know of at least 2 situations in which
that phrase was used in a manner that wasn't intended to put anyone down but
rather in a joking manner. -=-
Okay, then you did prove your point.
But I think mine stands.
You know two instances where you include that it was used sweetly or
jokingly, but it was used as a justification for choosing NOT to feed a family member.
I'm not happy to do better than my mom. I want to do better than I did
yesterday, and to save a few of those phrases to use later with a husband or
parent is not part of my longterm plan.
I honestly do think it's important enough to merit consideration.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/17/04 7:58:24 AM, jrossedd@... writes:
<< What if the person asking is in fact being unreasonable and trying to
take advantage? Really unreasonable, I mean, to the point of being "wrong" to
pile that request/demand on Mom? >>
My kids aren't unreasonable and they don't take advantage of me.
I think it's directly because I have been really generous with them.
Because I have given freely, "take advantage of" hardly even applies.
I think it's back to principles and priorities.
If the principle is people get fed, then people get fed (or there is easy
food they can get to). If my priority is peace and positive feelings with the
kids at night, then someone about to go to bed hungry is NOT in keeping with
the priorities.
But in exchange for that, the kids are really understanding.
It's when the parent draws a line and says "This is me and mine, and over
there is you and yours" that "taking advantage" and balking rebellion happen.
And that's not to say that we don't "have boundaries" here. Not at all. It's
just the boundaries are based on principles too. If someone is sick or tired or
distraught or hungry, he has more territory than the others. But the
territory is offered and maintained by the rest of the family, not claimed by the
needy one.
-=- I'm thinking that words and tone used generally reflect the feelings
that cause them. So if Mom doesn't feel taken advantage of in the first
place,
she won't feel like spouting these snappy little cliches we've been
discussing, right? -=-
I think that's true. But I think the suspect phrases both reflect and create
unnecessary negativity. Even positive phrases like "I love you" aren't as
cool as honest, heartfelt personalized messages along the same lines. "I'm
really happy we're getting along so well even though everything's breaking and
going weird" or "I was watching you across the room at the party and thinking
nobody had as good a husband, and it just made me want to come right home"
might be better than "I love you" without any clue or detail. <g>
"You were really helpful today, thanks" beats "You're a good kid."
-= If this is right, then the ideal unschooler response wouldn't be
just
to tell Mom she's wrong to say it even when she honestly feels it, but also
to
help her see (with clear eyes) and feel good about the often-unreasonable --
but really lovable! -- people with whom she lives.
-=-Which is what the list is trying to do? :) -=-
Yes, exactly!
And which unschooling.com has been doing even better about housework for a
couple of years.
Some of the good parts are here:
http://sandradodd.com/chores
Sandra
<< What if the person asking is in fact being unreasonable and trying to
take advantage? Really unreasonable, I mean, to the point of being "wrong" to
pile that request/demand on Mom? >>
My kids aren't unreasonable and they don't take advantage of me.
I think it's directly because I have been really generous with them.
Because I have given freely, "take advantage of" hardly even applies.
I think it's back to principles and priorities.
If the principle is people get fed, then people get fed (or there is easy
food they can get to). If my priority is peace and positive feelings with the
kids at night, then someone about to go to bed hungry is NOT in keeping with
the priorities.
But in exchange for that, the kids are really understanding.
It's when the parent draws a line and says "This is me and mine, and over
there is you and yours" that "taking advantage" and balking rebellion happen.
And that's not to say that we don't "have boundaries" here. Not at all. It's
just the boundaries are based on principles too. If someone is sick or tired or
distraught or hungry, he has more territory than the others. But the
territory is offered and maintained by the rest of the family, not claimed by the
needy one.
-=- I'm thinking that words and tone used generally reflect the feelings
that cause them. So if Mom doesn't feel taken advantage of in the first
place,
she won't feel like spouting these snappy little cliches we've been
discussing, right? -=-
I think that's true. But I think the suspect phrases both reflect and create
unnecessary negativity. Even positive phrases like "I love you" aren't as
cool as honest, heartfelt personalized messages along the same lines. "I'm
really happy we're getting along so well even though everything's breaking and
going weird" or "I was watching you across the room at the party and thinking
nobody had as good a husband, and it just made me want to come right home"
might be better than "I love you" without any clue or detail. <g>
"You were really helpful today, thanks" beats "You're a good kid."
-= If this is right, then the ideal unschooler response wouldn't be
just
to tell Mom she's wrong to say it even when she honestly feels it, but also
to
help her see (with clear eyes) and feel good about the often-unreasonable --
but really lovable! -- people with whom she lives.
-=-Which is what the list is trying to do? :) -=-
Yes, exactly!
And which unschooling.com has been doing even better about housework for a
couple of years.
Some of the good parts are here:
http://sandradodd.com/chores
Sandra
J. Stauffer
<<<<Maybe if the task were redefined to provide food until everyone had
eaten, it
I am not posting. We were at a family reunion. We have the small kids so
we were up first. There were over 20 people there and Jerry had been up
making pancakes, getting cereal for kids, whatever for well over an hour and
was starting to clean up. He wanted to go enjoy himself and said JOKINGLY
something to the effect of "I'm done playing short-order cook".
That is a far stance from "tough".
<<<<I honestly do think it's important enough to merit consideration.>>>>
I completely agree.
Julie S.
eaten, it
> would be better than the "I cooked, you weren't here, tough" stance youThat is not the stance I described at all. You are hearing inflections that
> described above.>>>>
I am not posting. We were at a family reunion. We have the small kids so
we were up first. There were over 20 people there and Jerry had been up
making pancakes, getting cereal for kids, whatever for well over an hour and
was starting to clean up. He wanted to go enjoy himself and said JOKINGLY
something to the effect of "I'm done playing short-order cook".
That is a far stance from "tough".
<<<<I honestly do think it's important enough to merit consideration.>>>>
I completely agree.
Julie S.
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] "a taste of his own medicine"andother
cruel ideas
>
> In a message dated 5/16/04 10:51:57 PM, jnjstau@... writes:
>
> << I talked with my dh about this because I thought perhaps I just had a
wierd
>
> family. He laughed and said that he had used the phrase on his mom at the
>
> last family reunion (we grew up on opposite ends of the country) in a
joking
>
> manner after spending time cooking breakfast while his mom was sleeping
and
>
> her wanting something just as he was starting to clean up. >>
>
> Maybe if he had never heard the phrase, he would never have used it on his
> mother.
> Maybe if he had memories of his mother making him special food even when
she
> was tired, he would have made his mother some food even though he was
"through
> with his task."
>
> Maybe if the task were redefined to provide food until everyone had eaten,
it
> would be better than the "I cooked, you weren't here, tough" stance you
> described above.
>
> -=-So I know it doesn't have to do with where you grew up, or in which
>
> particular family you grew up. I now know of at least 2 situations in
which
>
> that phrase was used in a manner that wasn't intended to put anyone down
but
>
> rather in a joking manner. -=-
>
> Okay, then you did prove your point.
> But I think mine stands.
>
> You know two instances where you include that it was used sweetly or
> jokingly, but it was used as a justification for choosing NOT to feed a
family member.
>
> I'm not happy to do better than my mom. I want to do better than I did
> yesterday, and to save a few of those phrases to use later with a husband
or
> parent is not part of my longterm plan.
>
> I honestly do think it's important enough to merit consideration.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> "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 Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/17/04 11:12:28 AM, jnjstau@... writes:
<< He wanted to go enjoy himself and said JOKINGLY
something to the effect of "I'm done playing short-order cook".
That is a far stance from "tough". >>
He didn't make her breakfast.
He didn't (according to your account) say "I'm really sorry, mom, I'm tired."
I didn't mean "tough" like rough and tough, I meant "tough" as in "you don't
get what you wanted."
Maybe "That's tough" should go on my list of things that can be harsh.
Maybe it's not a phrase you knew because your parents didn't use stock
phrases.
My grandmother (granny/maternal) had another one. A rhyming phrase meaning
"serves you right":
"That'll learn ya, durn ya."
It also rhymes in third person. "That'll learn him, durn 'im."
Sometimes it was said in a friendly, almost affectionate way, but just
because it was one of the nicest put-down phrases I remember her using, that didn't
keep it from being a put-down phrase. It meant "You got what you deserve," or
"he had it comin' to him."
I don't think it's "legalistic" or picky at all to recommend people avoid
those things if they can. I think it's to the principle of being compassionate,
of treating kids like people we like. ["Legalistic" is such a
former-fundamentalist Christian term to use of such things. I don't remember who used it,
and that's fine.]
Sandra
<< He wanted to go enjoy himself and said JOKINGLY
something to the effect of "I'm done playing short-order cook".
That is a far stance from "tough". >>
He didn't make her breakfast.
He didn't (according to your account) say "I'm really sorry, mom, I'm tired."
I didn't mean "tough" like rough and tough, I meant "tough" as in "you don't
get what you wanted."
Maybe "That's tough" should go on my list of things that can be harsh.
Maybe it's not a phrase you knew because your parents didn't use stock
phrases.
My grandmother (granny/maternal) had another one. A rhyming phrase meaning
"serves you right":
"That'll learn ya, durn ya."
It also rhymes in third person. "That'll learn him, durn 'im."
Sometimes it was said in a friendly, almost affectionate way, but just
because it was one of the nicest put-down phrases I remember her using, that didn't
keep it from being a put-down phrase. It meant "You got what you deserve," or
"he had it comin' to him."
I don't think it's "legalistic" or picky at all to recommend people avoid
those things if they can. I think it's to the principle of being compassionate,
of treating kids like people we like. ["Legalistic" is such a
former-fundamentalist Christian term to use of such things. I don't remember who used it,
and that's fine.]
Sandra