So i went to visit one of my best friends, Jacqueline, today. She tells me that her parents don't want her to spend time with me anymore, that they don't like me for some reason. We were both quite pissed.
This is the second great friend I've lost because of this. About 6 months ago, my friend Caro was not allowed to see me anymore because her dad doesn't like me.
I just don't get it. I've always been really nice to everyone in their family, and I've always been very respectful and gotten jacqueline home on time, etc.
GRRRRRRRR!!!!
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Er...is it possible she is lying?
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
I understand the frustration and sympathize, but I think it's important to remember that the majority of parents make choices, even choices that their children will not be happy with, out of love and concern for their child. They may be wrong, but their intentions are nothing more than looking out for their daughter.
Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
Storm Saxon--not a chance in hell. She still plans to sneak out to see me whenever she can.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Can you calmly and rationally ask why, discuss the issues with them, and perhaps come to some sort of compromise arrangement? Such as spending time with her and them together for awhile, until they have a chance to get to know you better and build some trust in you and her? While they need to realize that part of their daughter growing up is trusting her to make good decisions, the two of you also can make it easier for them to do that by showing you're willing to earn that trust.
My goodness, I sound like such an adult. When did that happen?
Edit - Since you posted before mine came up... See, that's the kind of thing that will just confirm for them that they made the right decision. I know that's her choice to sneak out, but they're still going to blame it on you.
[ March 28, 2004, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Did you find out why her dad didn't like you?
I'm probably one of 'those' dads; I mistrust the five year old boys that my daughter goes to school with. Little hellions.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Scott, after reading Banna's story, you probably have good reason.
CM, I'm really sorry. On the other hand, you have to admit, it's pretty cool to be the guy that all the parents hate and the girls love. Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Scroll down a little. It's really quite amusing. Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
Well, there's clearly something wrong with the parents.
Heh. Love the title.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Junebug's already proposed to two boys. . .
Posted by Dreamwalker (Member # 4189) on :
please so her first reaction is to decide to sneak out to meet you. doesn't sound to me like it's about you at all. There are heaps of resons her parents might not want you around e.g a spending too much time with you instead of studying but my pick, from the info you've given, is that her behaviour has changed in way that is not acceptable. Perhaps after meeting you she's really grumpy or defensive (you dont know,you're not there)and you being the 'contributing factor' have to go. In fact I'll go further as her reaction is to sneak out to meet you I'd say she's been lying to them (perhaps about where you are going)and been caught.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Still, you have to give CM props for getting the girls to want to sneak out and see him. I would have totally killed for that ability when I was a teenager.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Yeah, and I'd totally kill the teenager that tempted my daughter to disobey me.
:cracks knuckles:
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
K. I can't tell if that made sense or not, so I'm deleting it.
[ March 28, 2004, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Man, that's a bad idea to keep seeing her behind her parent's back. That is, if you really care for her. If you're just out to enjoy *yourself*, then I guess it makes sense.
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
I feel ya, Noah. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I always had some very weird -- and often adversarial -- relationships with the parents of my girlfriends. I absolutely REFUSED to lie to them, and did my best to make it clear to my girlfriends that I didn't tolerate it, myself, and loathed "sneaking around," so there would frequently be situations in which I'd knock on the door, calmly inform someone's father that, despite her lies to the contrary, I was in fact still dating her and intended to continue doing so, permission granted or not. It was rarely pleasant, but I often felt that it was the only honorable way to conduct myself without having to operate on the assumption that parents were always entitled to their own foolishness -- a view that, even as an incipient parent myself, I've never been able to stand.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Oh, suck it up, CM.
[ March 28, 2004, 06:36 PM: Message edited by: Primal Curve ]
Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
Noah, you didn't sing THAT SONG for them, did you?
No, but seriously! How could they? That is so sad! What's happened? What made them decide that?
[ March 28, 2004, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: aka ]
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Noah, I have to say that instead of sneaking arounf behind their back and proving you are exactly what they feared, you should ask them exactly what our beloved AK asked: "Why". Is it actually you they dissaprove of or is that their daughter is just generally out too much? And if it is you, try to defend yourself, we all know you're a great guy, so you just have to let her parents on on the loop.
Hobbes Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I was thinking about it, and I was afraid that my earlier response came across as snarky. Let me explain my position. I'll start from the assumption that you care for her and want what is best for her.
Her relationship with her parents is a permanent part of her life. In ten years, damage that was caused to her relationship to them because she went behind their back to date you will still be there. Well the damage won't be irreparable, but still. What difference will it make 10 years down the road? Will it matter that she got to spend time with you? Probably not, unless you become a permanent part of her life.
If you are considering this (marriage?), then by all means go for it. Otherwise, you are encouraging her to sacrifice something permanent for some fleeting fun.
Just some thoughts. Don't take them as commands, but as suggestions.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
CM, do you have any tatoos or earrings? I know parents that make hasty decisions because of outward appearances. They just dont give people a chance.
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
Go Tom.
I'm totally behind Tom on this one. Sneaking around suggests a) that you're doing something dishonorable by dating each other and b) that the parents' wishes are too reasonable to be faced down honestly.
Her parents can think what they want to. It's up to you and her to do as you will -- if she lacks the spine or will to be honest about her intentions with you, or simply prefers to obey her parents over spending time with you, hell, you're probably better off without her.
Though, really, I can't imagine why the parents wouldn't want their daughter spending time around such an intelligent young man as yourself, CM.
[edited to clarify a pronoun]
[ March 28, 2004, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: Daedalus ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Another thought -- there may be some other factors that she is failing to tell you about. If she is so casual about lying to her parents, she may have similar attitudes about lying to you. But I don't know.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I agree with Mr. P H. Is she Jewish Orthodox, or another religion that does not allow young girls to date, or only under certain conditions? If so, that is a battle she must fight with herself. Don't get roped into that one.
If that is not the case, ask if they would allow you to date her for a while under their supervision, or with some acceptable(to them and you two) chaperone.
[ March 28, 2004, 08:02 PM: Message edited by: Elizabeth ]
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I'm fairly certain they're not dating, just friends.
Posted by Jaiden (Member # 2099) on :
Does best friends mean dating?
If so I must have given off the wrong idea to many people... I have had more then one best friend who is male and not someone I'd date (not because they weren't great guys but because we were completely wrong for each other- and both of us -knew- it. We had to "babysit" an egg for a course and almost killed each other in the process!) Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I think I'd like some basic information here, like the ages involved, and just what the nature of their relationship was before I comment.
Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
As many people are jumping on the parents' side, I feel it's my duty to jump in on the girl's side.
We don't know the situation. We could come up with countless situations, for some of which I'd certainly side with the girl.
CM, it's up to you and her whether or not you both want to risk her parent's wrath. Parents can be wrong, monumentally wrong. What if I said that my parents refused to let me have a black friend, but my best friend was black? Would it still be right to obey my parents and stop talking to that friend? I think that's going too far. That blind obedience is stupid. She'll make her choice on how to choose her friends, as she'll have to in the future, for the rest of her life. Being forbidden to associate with certain people is being told you're not worthy of independent thought. If she thinks she's worthy, she'll make her own path.
And it's not her fault if her parents are unhappy with that.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Interesting that Orthodox Judaism is the one brought up... Orthodox Jews allow dating, just on different leves. Either way, they dont really allow dating non-jews...hmmm, that could be a problem. If that were the case i'd think Calvin woulda figured it out...
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
I just think it was interesting that Judaism was brought up, simply because Noah is Jewish. Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
We're not dating. We're best friends.
I'm 18, she's 16.
Yes, I have a "punk" look, including tattoos, and earring, etc.
All we do is go swing dancing, to the movies, ice skating, whatever. We always let her parents know where we're going. I always was nice to everyone. I always got her home on time. We even went to prom together as friends last year.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: All we do is go swing dancing, to the movies, ice skating, whatever. We always let her parents know where we're going. I always was nice to everyone. I always got her home on time. We even went to prom together as friends last year.
That sure sounds like dating to me.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I do agree that talking to the parents is the best possible course of action. Dress up like its a job interview, knock politely, and ask if you can discuss it.
If that doesn't work, screw the parents and help her sneak out if you can. A girl at 16 is nearly an ADULT. In another year she could be in college! She needs to develop independance right quick. Parental guidelines at that age should be as lax as possible. You need to help your children develop freedom.
Do NOT, I repeat, Do NOT take this lying down. Fight for her friendship, she's willing to fight for yours.
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
*gags Xavier*
DO NOT listen to him!! Do not sneak that girl out, you will end up never seeing her again. She is NOT almost an adult! Sixteen is soooo naive. Obey her parent's wishes and take your time. She needs to trust her parents, they will learn to trust her choice in friends. Wait until her parents are comfortable, it will be worth it.
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
Don't be ridiculous. She's free to do as she likes -- do what you want, so long as you can provide a reasonable argument against obeying her parents, but don't sneak around about it.
If she wants to go with you -- fine. She should do it. But if she sneaks around, she admits there something to be ashamed about. Be honest and be open, and you'll have nothing to fear.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
If you go behind their back, then you are provin that her parent's decision was justified.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
But when they refuse him after a rational talk with them, then they are proving Noah that they aren't rational people and it really doesn't matter what they think.
Whats the alternative, waiting until she is 18?
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
The alternative is damning the consequences and doing whatever they want to do in full view of gods and men.
Well, not everything -- some things require locked doors and curtained windows. But they should at least be open about what they do, why they do it, and why they shouldn't stop. Sneaking around is indicative of a lack of spine and character and moral righteousness, already throwing whatever relationship the two have in a bad light.
Walk out the front door with her, don't squeeze out her bedroom window. Have pride and confidence and damn whoever tries to stop you from doing as you will without good reason, and you'll be prepared for life.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
Yes Lalo (or do I have to start calling you Daed again?), that solution is even better.
I just can imagine some scary drama there .
Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
Be open, and have character? Sounds nice on paper until you're getting hit for your troubles. Or getting kicked out of the house.
She probably knows her parents pretty well. If she thinks talking will work, maybe they can try talking. But if she decides that her happiness and survival are best served by a bit of sneaking here and there, then so be it.
I think this out-the-window stuff is probably an exaggeration. She'll likely do the usual, "I'll be at Betty's house" excuse.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
This thread title reminds me of "I have a crush on every boy".
[ March 29, 2004, 03:48 AM: Message edited by: Xavier ]
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Noah, hon. You have to know I like ya, and all, but I can see why the parents of a 16 year old girl would get the vapors over her spending time with you. Not that I agree with their decision. I think 'forbidding' a person from doing something is one of the sure-fire ways of getting them interested in doing it. Frex, my mom never had a set age when I'd be allowed to date. Most of my friends did, and the parents were pissed at my mother because of that. I went on a double date with my 16 year old sister and her fella when I was ten or 11, I think.
I don't agree with their decision, as I have said, but I spent some time with you and you do sort of come off as a nice young man who has not had an overabundance of moral guidance.
I still think forbidding her to see you is a pretty stupid choice on their part, though.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
quote:Not that I agree with their decision. I think 'forbidding' a person from doing something is one of the sure-fire ways of getting them interested in doing it.
I disagree with this statement completely. So long as the parents say why (even if it is only a simple explanation of how the thing will be harmful spiritually or emotionally without more information), than telling them NOT to do something is a responsibility of a parent. Until the children leave the house to live on their own, they are under the control of the parents who are the gaurdians, leaders, and dictators. Any parent that does not take on that responsibility to tell their children what they can and cannot do is, in my opinion, a bad parent.
It may be the number one reason to get them to want to do something, but I will not allow the WANTS of children overtake their NEEDS in order to be better people. You hate parents? I've disliked children since I was a child. It is sad that they aren't controlled anymore, and let run free as birds. At least birds are born to fly. Children are born to fail if let alone.
[ March 29, 2004, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: Occasional ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: Walk out the front door with her, don't squeeze out her bedroom window. Have pride and confidence and damn whoever tries to stop you from doing as you will without good reason, and you'll be prepared for life.
Yeah, that might be good for *his* self-confidence and sense of honour, but that will do horrible things to her relationship to her parents. It would be a selfish thing to do.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*hug*
Noah, my best friend's parents did approve of me as a friend either. It was the cause of much tension how much she enjoyed hanging out with me. With me. ME! I was the bad influence.
*hug*
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I feel like I should say something on this thread, but I'm not sure what.
First of all I have been in a very similar position to what Suneun describes, and agree with her analysis for the most part.
How I as a 16 year old girl ended up being friends with a bunch of 21 year old guys is really my parents fault since it has everything to do with academics. And when you are the only girl in a 4th semester college calculus class and you need study buddies what do you do? (and all of us as a group were in the same physics and chemistry classes too...)
My parents freaked out, but what was I to do. They weren't interested in me romantically. The term is "jailbait" and they had no intention of even allowing themselves to think anything given the paranoia of my parents. I keep in touch with a couple of those guy today, even got invited to their weddings. I would still consider them my friends.
That having said, because CM is 18 and the girl is 16 you do then have a problem with an "adult" hanging out with a minor even if the ages are close. If her parents really wanted to nail you, they probably could even if you are completely and totally innocent.
----
Mr_poterio_head, what you said about "dating" strikes a nerve with me. I had numerous fights with my parents over this exact topic.
Why do older people believe that no innocent friendships can exist between opposite sex persons? It really really ticks me off, because in the situation described above the friendships were completely innocent.
My parents would argue "but you don't know how guys think" and I would retort back that I had a lot better idea of how todays guys thought then they did. I was the friend, the kid sister, they didn't regard me as a "girl" I know how those guys talked about and treated their girlfriends, and while there was an occasional unsightly adjective thrown in, for the most part they were extremely respectful of every woman they dated.
How are you going to learn "how guys think" if you don't have trusted male friends? I think not having male friends puts a woman in a much more vulnerable situation when it comes to serious relationhips, because she has no one to watch her back if it ever becomes necessary or to warn about anything unhealthy that might be developing.
Also it ISN'T a date if there is no romantic intent. It is simply "hanging out" together (or whatever the latest vernacular is) and doing stuff for fun together which is *NOT DATING*.
For crying out loud, I got accused of "dating" when I went on a biking day trip with a guy and my little brothers! If you have your little brothers along it most certainly isn't a date. The guy in question liked hanging out with my brothers as much if not more than me, because they were all pretty much cut in the same mold as far as their interests went. Yeah he met them as a result of me but that was about it.
Anyway I apologize for ranting at you m_p_h but this is a very passionate subject for me.
AJ
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I'm not sure how much it relates to the rest of the thread but I'm going to have to back AJ up here. It's perfectly possible to have friends of the opposite gender, I mean if not I had a harem or something going during high school. Almost all my friends were girls (for whatever reason). The only problem I encountered was that of course when they had sleep overs (or whatever they called it) I wasn't exactly welcome . My parents had no problems with it, and I don't think their's did either (I tend to get along pretty well with most parents).
Hobbes Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
No problem, Banna.
I didn't say that he *was* dating, I said that it *sounded* like dating to me. Which it will to her parents.
Which in a way it is. Does there have to be something romantic in the relationship for it to be a date? No. It seems to me that if a guy and a girl go off and recreate together, it could be called a date. They might not want to call it that themselves "We were just hanging out", but that doesn't matter. The patents are going to treat the two the same, and understandable so.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I don't know if there's much sense arguing over what parents should or should not think about the relationships of their teenage children. Parents are darned protective, and sometimes there's no rational reason to give. You can rant all you want about how parents should think, but you're not going to get any reasonable argument past the big wall that is protective instinct.
For example, have you ever come across a bear cub in the woods? I was running with a few of my cross-country buddies once, and we came up a hill, and voila, there was a cute little black bear cub. The way we skidded to a stop, wheeled around, and tore out of there was almost cartoonlike. Yeah, we didn't mean the cub any harm, but try explaining that to the mother when she gets a whiff of you.
CM, all I can say is that you're battling against all of nature if you have a punk look. Most parents don't trust their daughters to that look. It's a look that means disrespect and danger--I mean, it's calculated to have that effect, so it's no surprise that it does. You can be the nicest guy inside, but if you look menacing...well, the first thing the parents ask themselves is why you are cultivating that image if you're such a nice guy.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
addendum:
I get the distinct impression from my own upbringing that a generation or so ago, cross gender friendships did not exist. Even though my parents have been close friends with several other couples their age for years, to this day, my mother would not consider the male of the couple her friend, only the female, which I think is patently rediculous.
I don't know how you get paranoid parents to admit that do exist and that they are probably quite healthy, when it is their own lack of these friendships leading to their warped perspective.
it is a frustrating conundrum
AJ
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I went to Christian school with a bunch of girls who were 'forbidden' to date until they were 16. I was not. My mother's rule was that she had to meet the boy and his family first, she had to know where we were and when we'd be back.
I'm sure we'd have had a talk if she didn't approve of the boy, but that never came up. The 11 year old 'date' was to a movie with my sister and her boyfriend. I didn't like it (boys still had cooties, I only went to test my boundaries, I think), and didn't date again until I was nearly 18.
My friends, who were forbidden to date, always snuck out, made plans with their 'boyfirends' to meet at the movies, and sometimes used ME as a cover ("Mom, Dad, [Olivet]'s going" was usually enough, because I was the good kid that everyone wanted their kids to be like). For the record, that only happened once and I didn't realize until later that I was only being asked to go with them as a cover. They invited a boy for me, as if that made it okay. I told them I didn't want to be a part of them decieving their parents.
Truth is, my mother and I were very close. She had explained to me, in no uncertain terms, what had happened in her youth and that she was determined not to make the mistakes her parents had made with her. We talked a lot about how important relationships were, and that they should not be entered into lightly. The purpose of dating was to find someone to marry, and physical intimacies were a sacred thing between married people. We talked about real, important things.
She alweays knew what was going on my life, and we never lied to each other. I went to her when I had problems and I trusted her advice. In turn, she trusted my judgment. It was her faith and love that kept me on the straight and narrow, not blind adherence to 'rules'. Some kids may need dictatorship, but I did not, and my mother knew that. The result was that I was always the kid that other parents said, "why can't you be more like..." about.
She sacrificed a lot for me, she loved me and she took great pains to be involved in my life. Anyone who thinks that is a bad parent is an idiot.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Olivet I wish I had had a mother like yours. The problem is many are not.
While mine was not a bad mother, I could never be close to her because from the beginning I realized that she would never accept any ideas that I had that weren't exactly in line with her own. She *thought* we were close, because I would verbally agree with her, since it wasn't worth whatever argument would happen if I disagreed.
I read a book where the meaning of
"Die Gedanken Sind Frei"
was discussed, in a family that actually left Germany before WWII blew up.
This became my motto to survive. Knowing that "My Thoughts Are Free" is what kept me sane from about 8 years of age on. She couldn't control my thoughts and ideas, no matter how hard she tried.
quote:English translation (as sung by Pete Seeger) follows:
Die Gedanken Sind Frei. My thoughts freely flower. Die Gedanken Sind Frei. My thoughts give me power. No scholar can map them, no hunter can trap them. No man can deny Die Gedanken Sind Frei. No man can deny Die Gedanken Sind Frei.
I think as I please, and this gives me pleasure. My conscience decrees: This light I must treasure. My thoughts will not cater to Duke or dictator. No man can deny Die Gedanken Sind Frei. No man can deny Die Gedanken Sind Frei.
Well, should tyrants take me and throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free like blossoms in season. Foundations will crumble and structures will tumble And free men will cry Die Gedanken Sind Frei. And free men will cry Die Gedanken Sind Frei.
[ March 29, 2004, 11:36 AM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*nods* Olivet, my mom did the same thing. We talked very much about dating and emotional states and human relations. I am so grateful for that. I did have the no dates till I was 16 rule, but there was no one I wanted to date around that was planning on asking me so it wasn't a problem.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I agree with what AFR said in his last paragraph. You can talk all you want about how people should not judge by appearances, but the fact is that you have *chosen* to appear threatening. That's judging based on an action.
CalvinMaker -- I hope that I haven't offended you with these posts. It's hard for me to gague when I am and when I am not. Based on lack of feedback, I'll have to assume that you are OK with recieving advice that you solicited.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Does anyone actually feel threatened by the punk look nowadays? Most of the punks I know are also among the nicer and more cuddly people.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Yes. And with parents: Double Yes.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Tom I think as new parents you need to start sporting a mohawk and an earring or two to go along with Christy's purple hair...
AJ
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
CM doesn't really look threatening to ME, though.
Of course, I have sons, not daughters.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I would have had a crush on Noah instantly in high school. He looks slightly threatening and is in reality a complete sweetheart.
In which case, yes, my mother would have been horrified.
[ March 29, 2004, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I guess the real question is,
How open-minded should parents be to their children's thoughts and ideas?
Especially when the children aren't children any more but young adults? If you don't give freedom with responsibility how are your children ever going to learn self control or correct actions and decision making. Mommy and Daddy aren't always going to be there as much as they think they'd like to be. Tying your children to your aprons strings isn't healthy for the children or parents and often brings out the worst of co-dependency.
I'm sure there is a middle course of action that is resonable, but coming from the extreme overprotection end myself, it sounds to me like m_p_h is advocating that same extreme.
AJ
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
Until a minor is financially independent, a parent has EVERY right to interfere with a child’s dating life. It is the parent’s responsibility to look after the child. If you don't like it-tough.
Being involved is a much more significant sign of love then being detached. Parents, as a rule, will love their children more then any teenager.
If they don't like you, be open. If they insist you not see their daughter, then you should respect their decision. Of course, once the child is financially independent, the rules change.
If you hate parents, then you justify their position (not that they need your justification). If there is a pattern of parents being concerned about you, be open to input.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I have not yet had the pleasure of watching a teenage daughter go out on a date (my oldest just turned 3) but I have seen all my sisters have bad and sometimes dangerous experiences with boys that my parents did not screen. My parents were not protective enough, IMO. Letting them find things out for themselves is all well and good, but protecting them against some dangers (even if only perceived) is a parent's solemn responsibility. While I do not intend to be overprotective of my daughter when she starts dating, I do intend to err on the side of caution. Having been a teenage boy myself, I know in general how they think. Yes, her dates will come inside and meet me first---not so I can ask them if they plan to become doctors or lawyers some day, but just to get a good look at their eyes while making pleasant chit-chat, and to get a detailed itinerary of where he plans to take her. I want my daughter to have a good time, get to know lots of people, and make friends, but I will do my best to keep her from some situations with boys that are much more easily prevented than resolved. And this is expressly so she can remain free to follow her dreams and make the choices that will help her grow and blossom as she enters adulthood.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I go and do things with my guy friends, just the two of us. I also have a steady boyfriend who couldn't care less and does the same things with his girlfriend. We're not going on dates with our friends, which just hanging out and having fun, same as we would do with members of the same sex.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
My dad also pretends he hates my boyfriend, because he thinks I'll break p with him if I know he likes him. He's not a very good actor though. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Alexa,
I'm sorry. I have a history here that I know is getting in the way. I WAS financially able to take care of myself.
The total amount my parents contributed to my five years of college education was less than 5K, or about $1000 per year. I could have earned that much with a job at McDonald's.
At 16 I was holding down an adult job tutoring. Fellow students actually lived off the same tutoring job, but my hours were restricted because my parents refused to allow me more. I was capable of being fully self-sufficient including car insurance if necessary. I did the math, numerous times.
I never dated ANYONE until age 20. The most I ever went behind my parents back was to tell them that Sarah brought me home from a study session rather than Matt. Matt lived closer and it was far more convienient for him to do so than Sarah for whom it would have been a 40 minute out of the way drive.
Yet I was constantly assaulted with all sorts of baseless accusations, about who or what I was doing or dating. They refused to believe me if I said a guy friend and I weren't dating. They would say, yes you are, you just don't know you are. Preoposterous! Basically questioning my integrity thought I tried to deal with them with the utmost integrity until about 3 years into college when I finally gave up because I reallized I was dealing with irrational and unreasonable people. Even then I can count the actual number of lies I told and it stops at three. I don't like lying. But the power of denial is hard to overcome and eventually I just gave up and let them believe what they wanted to.
AJ
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
grrr, and I just got an e-mail from my best friend whose maid of honor I was going to be.
Her parents are saying they don't want to come to the wedding because she's marrying an atheist. The woman is 27 years old, finishing a PhD and they think they can still manipulate and control who she marries!
AJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That's absolutely unconscionable.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I think she should just come out and tell them the truth: that he's not really an atheist; he's really a Satanist, and she was just looking to spare their feelings.
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
BannaOJ,
I am sorry. That post was directed to the originator of this post, CalvinMaker.
He said it was the second parent who broke up his friendship and that he hated "All Parents."
I found his brief history potentially telling when coupled with his emotional response to "all parents" and his willingness see the girl behind the backs of the parents.
I should of been more clear who my response was intended for. I agree that there was no gross foul play in YOUR attitude or behavior.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
sorry alexa like I said, this is a sore point.
Calvin Maker despite his appearance (which I haven't actually seen myself, though I could probably find him on foobonic) appears to actually be a generally mature and responsible guy, judging from his responses to extremely difficult situations.
I don't know the particulars of the girls situation. But I feel that the parents should have made an effort to get to know Calvin before dismissing him wholesale. They owe their daughter that much. If they make judgement calls that are completely wrong about Calvin, how is she supposed to trust them about making judgement calls about the rest of her life, just because they are her parents. Judgement calls aren't issues when rasing a toddler, but they are extremely important with raising a mature teenager able to make healthy interactions with other people.
AJ
Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
quote:He said it was the second parent who broke up his friendship and that he hated "All Parents."
I found his brief history potentially telling when coupled with his emotional response to "all parents" and his willingness see the girl behind the backs of the parents.
I obviously don't hate "all parents". I'm just very upset at the unfair loss of one of my best friends, and considering this is the second time it's happened, I'm just growing frustrated with some parents' control over their children.
Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
Oh, and also, considering I'll be going away to college in August anyway, I kind of feel like her parents could have at least given us until I went away to college.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Noah, was any reason ever given, from either of the girls' parents, as to why the parents don't want you seeing the girls anymore? Are they basing it solely on your appearance? I am just curious about this. As Tom points out, the punk look is not all that uncommon among kids your age.
Personally, I found you personable and respectful, and not at all threatening.
And unlike Olivet, I do have a daughter. Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
I disagree that parents have complete rule over their children while their children are financially attached. Children aren't pets or slaves, no matter what culture you might have grown up in.
If only one person in a couple works, does that mean that the other is dependent on the first for all rules? Can a wife only associate with certain people because her husband happens to bring home the money? Or a man if his wife does?
Financial obligation does not make the argument. Worry about respect, knowledge, wisdom all you want, but bringing money in is a tawdry element.
My parents told me when I was a kid that I was not allowed to date until Medical School. And I'm not allowed to be friends with black people. Or gay people.
Guess what. I refuse to obey their narrow-minded plans. And no other child should have to compromise their open-hearted beliefs like that.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Some of the descriptions of parents rules here (Banna's and Suneun's) do sound pretty unreasonable. But I think there is some wisdom in encouraging your child to wait until they are older to date.
[ March 29, 2004, 05:45 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Mom always screened boys before we could go out with them-- you know, talked to them and met their parents-- until we were out of the house.
Dad just made sure he was sharpening his knife collection right around the time the boys came to pick us up. Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
beverly: I don't believe there's any inherent value in having someone date at 16 versus 18, or 18 versus 21. Each person must be evaluated on their own, and ultimately, each person must decide _for themselves_.
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
The problem is, I think that parents, with the extra experience they have, should guide their children.
I am very committed to having my children become as independent as they can as soon as is healthy for them. But there are simply some things they aren't ready to decide for themselves at certain ages and I think parents can be the better judge of that than their children, provided they aren't control freaks.
My girls won't be allowed to date until they are sixteen. This puts them past the worst part of puberty so that they will be making more mature decisions with a better understanding of their body (having gone through puberty rather than just hearing about it from me, school, and friends) and more experience in general. I lived under these same rules and I don't feel like my freedoms were strangled in any way. Once I could date, curfews were based on what the activity was and when we said we would be home. I once had a curfew of 2 am because my BF of the time had prom in his town which was an hour away and a planned activity afterwards. We went to my prom as well, but that curfew was 1 am. So, my parents trusted me and I felt that, but I had rules. Even though I got angry at my parents sometimes, I knew they loved me and only wanted what was best for me. Intellectually I knew that they had more experience than I did, but I couldn't possibly think what it was until I grew up and had those experiences too.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
If your sole reason for making them wait until 16 you should consider that boys are just starting to through their super hormonal period. You're probably better to push it up to "no dating until you leave the house or are 21, whichever comes first." That way you know that the guys are just as influenced by hormones as she may have been when she was 14, or whatever.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
From what Noah is saying, this doesn't sound like a question of dating, anyway, but just a girl that he is friends with. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
You are correct, Ela, this is just a textbook example of a derailed thread. Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
quote:Noah, was any reason ever given, from either of the girls' parents, as to why the parents don't want you seeing the girls anymore?
That's just the thing. Jacqueline said she asked her parents if it was because of my punk look and they said no.
Apparently it's because i'm now enemies with a friend of jacqueline's who used to be a good friend of mine. I barely even see this girl anymore, but for some reason Jax's parents think that I "disrespected Kate", and therefore will do the same to Jacqueline. When in fact, all that happened was Kate and I got in a big argument and blew up at each other, saying we weren't going to talk to each other anymore.
The only problem is, Jacqueline says kate's been talking smack about me, some of it around her parents.
I hate it when people can't just leave other people's lives alone. When I stop talking to someone, I try and stay out of their lives. It's as if Kate's a little girl and can't keep her hands to herself.
And what's REALLY annoying, is that jacqueline isn't even nearly as good friends with kate as she is with me. She often vents to me about how annoying kate is and how her and I get along much better than her and kate.
Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
That does sound really unfair, Noah. I wonder if she discussed with them your side of the story of the falling out with Kate, would they listen? It seems pretty unfair that they judged after only hearing Kate's side and not yours.
Did you call Kate profane names in her hearing, by any chance? If you did and she mentioned it to Jaqueline's parents, that could be what they are upset about. That is a case where the particular idiom one chooses can have a real life effect, and be more than a matter of taste.
[ March 29, 2004, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: aka ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That sounds more like an excuse than a reason.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Actually, depending on what CM actually said about Kate, I would consider that a legitimate reason.
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
Suneun,
You state
quote:Children aren't pets or slaves, no matter what culture you might have grown up in.
However, I did not say they are pets or slaves. I did say
quote: Until a minor is financially independent, a parent has EVERY right to interfere with a child’s dating life.
and
quote: Being involved is a much more significant sign of love then being detached.
However, perhaps I erred on talking about financially independence. I should of stated that until a child is emancipated, parents have every right be involved. *Note* I never said "complete rule."
If a child vandalizes property, the parents are responsible to pay, because in the eyes of the law, minors have no property. Even if a 17 year old works hard and buys a car, unless emancipated, the parents can sell the car and keep the money.
Why do I say this? Because parents are legally responsible for kids until they are 18 and are considered old enough to financially be independent. Of course if a child proves they can be independent before 18, they can get emancipated.
There are competent and incompetent parents. There are effective and ineffective parents. I am not debating those issues. I am saying, if the parent is involved (which is a surer sign of love then setting children loose), the parents are right and JUSTIFIED to influence who a child sees. If CM is seeing the girl behind the parents back, well, he is proving his character.
Obviously if the parents are abusive in any manner, rules change and we seek to help the children, but if they are good parents, we should respect them.
Having that respect in our countenance will open more doors then going behind the backs of people.
Last thought, no parent has absolute control, children are independent thinkers, and part of maturity is testing boundaries, disobeying, and finding our individual identities. Most parents know this, act in love, and have a right to still guide, direct, give feedback, and even refuse threats they think exist for their children.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Well, as a parent of teenagers -- my daughter is a sophomore in high school -- obviously we have had this "talk" in our house: "what is the appropriate age to date."
After much intellectual discussion, all my kids agree that "dating" (and by this I mean one-on-one time together, not group dates or simple outings with friends) is designed for when you are ready to find a spouse -- someone you want to spend the rest of your life with.
My daughter plans to be a veterinarian -- she has extremely strong feelings about this, has had since she was young, and has never wavered from her goal. So that means after high school, she has at least six years (if not more) of college to go through.
So she agrees that there is no sense in her dating at this time. She goes out with groups (like youth groups from our church, etc.) where there might be several guys & girls, and usually some adults along as well. She has many many friendships. But I'm trying to steer her away from the "going steady" thing I see with so many teens, getting younger and younger now.
I know of kids who "went steady" in fifth and sixth grades. And lost their virginity then, too. I'm not saying one always follows the other, but when you emotionally commit yourself to just one person daily, it is a lot easier for temptation to be there.
If my daughter had said all she ever wants to be in life is a wife and mother, then I wouldn't have any problem with her dating at 17-18 or whatever. But her own goals show that she should concentrate on them first, then look for someone to share that life with.
And not to be sexist, but it is the same with my sons. As long as they are living at home, depending on me for any portion (financially) of their existance, then they are not yet ready to "date" exclusively and be put in a situation that leads to marriage. Because they aren't ready for that responsiblity yet.
Farmgirl
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
This is one place where my parents dropped the ball. We had a rule "no dating util 16", which I mostly followed. But years beforehand, I "went steady" or "went out" exclusively with girls. I was way to young to be doing that, and it caused me emotional problems that persisted well into adulthood. Since the rule was "no dating", I figured that was a bigger deal than going steady. But now I disagree.
[ March 30, 2004, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Dating? 16? yeah right! not in my family. Like I said, I didn't date til I was 20 and even then defining it as "dating" is stretching it. I don't believe my brother at nearly 21 has ever been on a date. Though my 19 year old brother may have. But if he has, he's not telling my parents or anyone else, since I know he has a healthy sense of self preservation.
The aformentioned good friend who is getting married who has similarly difficult parents who is getting married didn't date til 24 or 25.
The thing is for a long time we both believed our parents when they said that no one was suitable for us. Then we realized that NO ONE would ever be good enough so what was the point of trying to keep them happy. (Admittedly it took my friend a little longer to reach the realization than it took me, but I think both paths were equally valid.)
AJ
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote:The aformentioned good friend who is getting married who has similarly difficult parents who is getting married didn't date til 24 or 25.
So, AJ -- are you saying I'm a difficult parent simply because I want my kids to wait until they are emotionally mature enough for everything that comes with dating?
Farmgirl
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Farmgirl I would disagree with you slightly (but only slightly) I agree that people need to be financially independent before they marry.
However, when in college one is still often financially somewhat dependent on one's parents. (though I wasn't) College is a good place to meet people with similar aims and interests.
To lock yourself off totally from the possibility of a relationship in college seems a bit extreme. Theoretically upon graduation you should be able to attain employment and be independent. Sometimes it is more difficult than others though. Also, if the person loves you they would be willing to help you achieve your goals as well. If it meant moving to a different state so one person could pursue a PhD while the other held down a job, why not? That is what celia has done.
Especially with postgraduate degrees because they take so long. If you cut yourself off from posible relationships until the end of medical school I would consider it unhealthy.
AJ
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
If my wife and I already had 2 children by the time I was finished with school. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think it's important to date as a teenager, date a lot, date a lot of different kinds of people, and to fully and completely be there for you kids when they are dating so they don't look for affection and stability then from someone that they wouldn't pick if they weren't emotionally starved.
My middle brother was mixed up with a true, true nutcase as a teenager because he was so starved for affection after my mom died, and she needed him and showered him with all kinds of affection for being there for her. It was not a good thing.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I agree with FarmGirl 100%. I do not consider dating a necessary part of growing up and something that every child should experience.
Dating is a way to spend time with someone and determine whether or not this person is the one you want to spend the rest of your life with.
Why would I tell my daughter I don't want her to fall into sexual sin, lecture her on what is right and proper, explain to her why in our household we hold the religious beliefs we do, and then turn around and put her in a situation where she will face temptation? It's like saying "Don't go off the cliff!" And then shoving her right up to the precipice!
I see zero reason for dating while one is in high school. All of the fun and social aspects are available in group activities. Why should I let my daughter get into a situation that can be difficult for her?
We intend to allow our kids to do group activities with kids of parents we know. We have no trouble allowing them to go to movies with friends, or to Six Flags with a youth group. But one on one dating is not something we support for young teens.
That doesn't mean I don't trust my daughter. It doesn't mean I intend for her to be sheltered. It just means that I don't want to put her in situations I don't think she is emotionally mature enough for until she's ready. She's had us discuss this with her since she was old enough to even understand what dating is and she's well aware of the rules and the reasons for them and so far it doesn't bother her. She just knows that's the way things are in our household.
Some of her friends already go on dates! They go to movies with boys, one on one. At 11! I don't agree with that stance, and I don't let my daughter do it.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Actually the "difficult" part was in response to m_p_h not you at all Farmgirl.
I'm all for emotional maturity. The problem being that we were over protected to the point where emotions never had the chance to become mature.
We experienced a "delayed adolescence" that was much much harder because there was no one around you going through the same thing. Though fortunately my friend was more delayed than I was so that she had me to talk to.
At age 24 she was suddenly coming down with her first crush and dealing with the fact that she might actually be attracted to men and that they aren't all "icky". She was experienceing all of the emotions normally experienced in adolescence that she had never felt before.
We were taught to look down upon those emotions that they were basically worthless. So coping with them when you suddenly realize you are having them is quite a shock. You can't deal with them nearly as rationally and logically as we were taught to think. You suddenly learn logic doesn't apply to emotions well at all.
Yes you don't lose self control. But you lose yourself, because you suddenly realize that the entire logical framework that was taught you by your parents doesn't apply the way you thought it should because they never ever allowed you to have any emotions in that framwork. It is devestating to say the least and leaves you far far more emotionally vulnerable at an age when you shouldn't be. Normal adolescents all running around with their emotions and hormones hanging out all over the place all at the same time got it over with much more quickly and efficiently, than we were allowed to.
AJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You date to get to know people. You date to find out the difference between the way good guys treat you and the crappy ones. You date for fun, for social development, and friends, and for life.
The above only works, though, if you have a very firm line on what you'll do physically. It's no problem to date five guys in a week, but you're kissing five guys in a week, there IS a problem.
This sort of ties in with the other thread, but I really think the physical makes some people crazy.
There's so much more fun and freedom in dating without the pressure to consumate the event. If you make it really clear that the date entails just getting to know one another, dating is a fabulous experience.
It's a scary thing, but life is scary. You can't keep your kids in a bubble - they will come out. Better to take the first few steps out when Mom is at home with ice cream at the end, willing to listen and not freak out.
For myself, I basically limited everything I was doing to things I could tell my mom about later. My mom was a socialite and flirt as a teenager, and she didn't freak out. Even the guys she dissaproved of didn't get a complete freak-out once I explained my reasoning.
[ March 30, 2004, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I have also noticed a distinct differences in generational definitions of "dating". My parents in their 50s have different definitions than people I know in their 40s. And 30s etc. And you can't convince the older generations that their definitions don't apply necessarily to the younger generations even though you can clearly see the difference in definitions even in between generations not your own.
I find that the older the person generationally from me the more rigidly they view dating as "finding a mate", while younger people view dating in a much more fluid social manner as more hanging out with friends and having a good time.
AJ
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
The thought that people date to find a spouse blows my mind. If I were to approach you and say, "hey, do you want to go out for coffee?" and I find out your first thought is, "Hmm... how would this man be as a father for my children?" I'd head for the hills.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
BtL in some fundamentalist Christian circles "courtship" and "arranged marriages" are being ressurected.
I listened to seminars on the topic. And it seemed to put a lot more pressure on a budding relationship than necessary.
I mean you have to decide before you ever "date" that you are willing to speak to her father and say that you are considering his daugher as a prospective mate.
AJ
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
I once heard a wise person say that you are not ready to have a mature relationship until you have broken someone's heart and had your heart broken.
Now, obviously there are plenty of people who have not experienced these things. There are plenty of people who marry the first person they ever have a romantic experience with. But I do think that going through those things helps prepare you to have a stronger, more mature relationship. How many people divorce their first spouse, but then have a really wonderful second marriage? (Note: I am NOT advocating divorce).
I agree with kat. Dating and interacting with the opposite sex is very important in helping you figure out how to have a strong relationship. The key is in having "rules" that you follow while dating to avoid the temptations naturally faced. Learning how to be strong and resist temptation are important skills. Just my opinion.
Edit: Our opinions usually come from our experience. In my experience, the relationships that both Porter and I had before meeting each other really helped prepare us for the relationship we share together today.
[ March 30, 2004, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
You can find out who are good guys and bad guys in group settings, too.
I distinctly said I don't keep my kids in a bubble, kat. They are allowed to do a lot of things socially with people their age. What they are not allowed to do is get into a car and leave with someone of the opposite sex and spend the evening alone and unsupervised with them. And I don't think that hurts their development at all.
I have spoken with parents and their kids who had these same rules. One of the kids I talked to is now 23 and dating for the first time. She is extraordinarily grateful to her parents for teaching her that waiting to date was the wisest course. Her siblings now range in age from 9 to 18, none of them are dating yet, and I asked the 16 year old boy and 18 year old girl how they felt about it and they said it was great. They had lots of friends, they did lots of fun things, and they thought they were much happier than their friends who had already been dating, gone through all kinds of problems, and certainly they were better off than the ones who were teenage mothers or fathers.
They didn't resent their parents, they didn't feel like they were missing anything, and they were confident that when the time came they would be ready for dating.
That's one family, out of about five I know well, that all follow the same rules and all the kids are fine with it. You don't feel deprived if you grow up knowing that's the way things are and your family just plain does things this way.
The 23 year old, Alisa, and I talked a lot about it one weekend, and these are the kinds of things she said "I knew my parents loved me and cared about me. A lot of friends of mine had parents that didn't even know where they were, or who they were with. I knew my parents cared enough to try and keep me safe, and what did I miss? Being pressured to have sex? Declaring my undying love for someone and getting my heart broken two weeks later? At 16 you're not ready for that kind of emotional commitment. While some girls were crying over who dumped them this week or worrying about who was going to ask them out that Friday night I was making plans as to what I was going to do, without any worries and nothing on my mind but having fun."
Wes and I spent a lot of time discussing this with our friends, with people with older kids who've been through the teenage years we have yet to experience, with the kids themselves, both ones like Alisa who are grown and the ones that are in high school now, and hours talking with our oldest daughter. All of us think this philosophy is the best course.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Belle, AJ and her friend had a similar growing up situation as the 23-year-old you described, and they didn't think it helped them at all. *shrug*
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Dating does not equal sex. Or even physical entanglements.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I am completely against arranged marriages, unless it's a marriage arranged between my Emily and Olivet's Robert. I mean, Olivet and I know what's best for them.
Truthfully, I don't agree with taking it that far. Once they're grown, they need to be able to make their own decisions. My job is to raise them to that point, safely. And to prepare them as best as I can for that point in life when they walk out the door and know they are on their own.
I just don't agree that part of that preparation should include one-on-one dating. I think it's something best tackled when one is already emotionally and physically mature, and not caught up in the turmoil that comes with being a teenager. There's so much else to focus on when you're in high school than who you're dating! So many other ways to have fun, and so many other ways to get to know people of the opposite sex.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Belle you are talking with your kids about this. That is healthy. A lot of not-talking went on in my family. I think that makes a large difference in emotional readiness too.
Please Belle and Farmgirl, don't take my experiences as reflections on your parenting. They aren't whatsoever. We hear the cons about lack of parental involvement all the time.
I have just experienced the cons in the other direction, with parents micromanging and living vicariously through their children's lives. As such I have a much different perspective. In airing it I find that there are other people like Suneun and Jenny Gardner who have had similar experiences. I guess I would hope that it would be a cautionary tale saying that the middle course on either side of the two extremes is probably the best way to achieve emotionally healthy children.
AJ
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"It's no problem to date five guys in a week, but you're kissing five guys in a week, there IS a problem."
I agree with kat, but would use a different verb in place of "kissing," one that actually implies committment.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I don't think we are talking about the same thing in terms of one-on-one dating. I mean spending time alone with him and in groups, but I'm not talking about being pinned for your whole junior year.
Emotional maturity doesn't just happen with age. And I really think the first crush craziness happens no matter how old you are when you have your first crush. Isn't it better to do it when you have a loving, emotionally-secure place to return to after?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
kat, I think we are talking about vastly different approaches. AJ says she got the impression that "no one is good enough for you" that's a completely different approach than ours. We're not focusing on "all boys are sex-starved and only want one thing and you are too precious to get involved with them."
And, dating doesnt' have to mean sex or physicality, but it often DOES. And the consequences are so very high. Why put them in that situation, when so many of the positive aspects that can come from dating can also come from platonic friendship activites in groups?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The fact that dating, even as teenagers, often DOES imply sex in many places completely drives me crazy. Because dating without that pressure is fun, fabulous, and very, very good in terms of experience. There's so much more freedom in it.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
In my own life I have actually "dated" exceedingly rarely. I think I had gone on a "date" a grand total of twice before Steve and one of those was negotiable.
Steve and I decided we were a couple before we ever went on an offical "date" for that matter. We knew each other quite well before. I'd spent many afternoons with him and a mutal friend Patrick, helping them clean up the student run Engineer's lounge, which routinely got trashed. Upon discovering our mutual attraction, the inital added dimension to the relationship, was merely catching a few moments cuddling on his couch together while surounded by stacks of our engineering homework that we would be working through. In fact I can't give you a time or place for a "first date" that we ever had. It is possible he can, but I sure don't remember it.
AJ
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
In my high school, it was not socially acceptable to date around. If a girl dated around without commitment and without intimacy, she was considered to be a slut. But if she "went out" serially with boy after boy, having sex with each one, that was just normal.
It wasn't until I left for college that I was able to date casually. I loved it!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"You don't feel deprived if you grow up knowing that's the way things are and your family just plain does things this way."
My mother raised my brother and me on carob, a chocolate substitute. We didn't know that it WASN'T chocolate until we were about eight years old, and someone tried OUR chocolate bars at lunch and spat them out.
We then got to try THEIR chocolate bars, and realized what we'd been missing the whole time -- and had never even had a clue, up to that point.
IMO, shielding your children from experience only works if you can somehow ensure that they'll never get those experiences anyway -- but if they DO, you've actually made the situation worse.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
So you were worse off for not eating chocolate until you were eight?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'd say so. Of course, it's hard to tell, because we certainly ate enough of it AFTER we were eight to defeat any possible benefit from the exercise.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm sticking to my assertion that crushes and bad dates can happen at any age, and it's much, much better to have them happen when you can go home and tell Mom about it than to have them when you are older and the stakes are so much higher.
You think sex is expected at 16, can you imagine what it is in the world at 24?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Tom, your analogy doesn't work. I'm not pretending there is no chocolate in the world.
Kat, you're making a big assumption that one can't go to their parents after getting their heart broken at 24. I know in your case it isn't possible, and I'm very sorry you lost your Mom so young.
I still go talk to my mother when I'm upset and need comforting, advice, or just a listening ear. If anything, I'm more likely to go talk to her now as an adult than I was at 16.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
.... I forgot to check back on this thread after posting on a couple of others. So sorry for my delay in replying, AJ
I do agree that once they are in college, dating is not off-limits. After all, usually by then they are 18 (although my daughter will be in college at age 16), and after that age there should be more cutting of the apron-strings.
However, I hope I have taught them enough now, at younger ages, that when they do begin to date, it will be with the understanding that dating does not have to mean one-on-one exclusivity, or making out in dark places. They will have more maturity and self-assurance about what they want.
I have known many many girls who gave up college after finding a serious relationship while in college. Although you would always HOPE one would find someone who would support you in your own goals, that doesn't always happen. Sometimes you have to make tough choices.
I do prefer the "courtship" idea of dating.
BtL -- I was not talking about "going out for coffee" as being a date -- and you can tell that by my original post. I was talking about exclusively pairing -- "going steady" like so many teens do now.
Shoot -- I "go out" for lunch and coffee all the time now with fellows -- co-workers, who are even married -- I don't consider that a date if it is just friendship and sharing of a meal.
I don't do this because I was raised super-strict either. I do this BECAUSE I made all the wrong, bad choices as a teen, because no one had these talks with me. I tell my children how my choices affected my life -- in order to hopefully help them learn from my mistakes.
I do NOT have any problem with my kids "hanging out" with their friends, or having an active social life. There are lots of ways they can spend time with lots of different people without narrowing it to one-on-one with one person.
Farmgirl
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
TomD -- I'm not even going to bother debating this topic with you until that unborn baby of yours is a teenager.
Come back and visit the thread again in 16 years, please.
Farmgirl
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
My stance has NOTHING to do with my mother dying. Please don't assign motives to me I do not claim.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I wasn't assigning it as a motive. My point was to say that people can go talk to their parents about heart breaks even when they're 24.
But, I didn't want to just post that without acknowledging that it isn't possible for you. I did that out of respect for you, kat. I didn't want to cause you any pain.
Quit assigning negative motives to me. I was trying to be respectful and considerate.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Belle I couldn't go to my still living mother and tell her I got my heart broken. It would be pointless. She couldn't offer anything constructive to do about it, because she has no practical relevant experiences in the matter. I know her romantic history in fairly decent detail and there is nothing in it that would have any relavance. I've heard her platitudes already. Her sympathy while genuine would only be of an "I told you so" variety.
I talk to my mother because she is my mother and I do love her and I try to ease her worry as much as possible. So I attempt to call her at semi random kind of weekly intervals. Do I enjoy talking to her? Not particularly. We struggle to find things in common to talk about (she is now realizing how little we ever had in common) and she finds it necessary to insert snarky comments frequently, that I have to bite my tounge and use every ounce of self control to keep from retorting to in a way I would regret.
AJ
It is odd I'm actually taking the advice all mothers give and applying it to my conversations with my own mother. The "if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all" principle. I wish she would do the same. I honestly don't know if she realizes how hurtful the things she says are at times. Maybe saying all the things I actually think would clear the air, but I have a feeling it would cause more harm than good, and destroy the little bit of fragile relationship we have.
[ March 30, 2004, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I know. I just don't like assumptions being made about me. My opinion that waiting until you are in your twenties before dating at all raises the stakes comes from my experience that dating in your twenties is a heck of a lot more fraught with expectations than in the teenage, but does not come from my mom.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I know that, AJ.
I feel like I'm not communicating here.
One of kat's objections to my philosophy was that it is easier to go to your mother with a broken heart when you are 16. I contended that's not a reason to condone dating at 16 - you can go to your mother when you're 24 as well.
If you don't have a good relationship with your Mom and can't go to her at any age, then it doesn't matter. I'm trying to counter the point kat brought up because I don't think her point is valid. I'm not trying to suggest you go talk to your mother.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I can't go to my living mother, either.
Since I don't know where she lives. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
My point is that if you are going to go through a little drama around the first date no matter what, why wait until you are 24, when the expectations are so much higher and the stakes are raised? If you have your standards and emotional support as a teenager, why not do it then, when you can go bowling together without playing for keeps?
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
But I have lots of hatrack older sisters to fill in. Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
If nothing else this thread is making value the phenomenal relationship I had all through high school. Yes, we had fights, no marriage never once crossed my mind and yes, I am beyond the shadow of a doubt a significantly better person for it. You learn things from your peers that you cannot learn from your family (often these things are about your family ) But, really, there is simply no way my mother could have made me see the things Sarah did, I wouldn't have listened.
And you know what, I'm really glad that Mom was there for that relationship. She saw *a lot* of Sarah and I and understood it better than any other relationship I'll ever had. I will say that it actually brought Mom and closer and that Mom was able to offer a lot of insight that she wouldn't have been able to offer otherwise.
I'm not advocating it for everyone. Your house, your rules. But I suddenly feel much luckier than I did before.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I know it depends how deep the emotional damage is, but generally speaking doesn't emotional damage heal faster at 16 than at 24? I mean yes you don't want your children making major life mistakes. But dealing with angst on a small scale then can make a difference in the maturity level of how you deal with angst later too. Shouldn't it?
Theoretically you should be less vulnerable at 24 but if you haven't played for low stakes, what havoc is playing for high stakes going to wreak on you emotionally?
I've heard the "unstained" emotions for your spouse argument and I don't particularly buy it myself but if is that the argument you want to use I will respect it.
AJ *jinx* to kat... I was still typing when you posted!
[ March 30, 2004, 04:54 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm trying to imagine going to my parents -- both of whom were working on ruining their second marriages by the time I started dating -- with relationship questions, and the mental images that creates are so horrible that I actually need to scrub my brain, now.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Who says you must date someone exclusively to get emotional wounds and to be vulnerable?
I suppose the time my daughter came home devastated by the betrayal of a friend at school meant nothing? There is something called life that teens go through, and you don't have to date to experience it. My daughter knows all about hurt and abandonment and betrayal and loss and grief, thanks to my stepfather/her grandfather.
Does she need to date someone, get involved with them, and then have her heart ripped out in order to learn something more significant than what she already knows?
I don't think so. I hear what you are saying, AJ. But the circumstances are different - I am not your mother and my reasons are not hers. My choices for my kids stem from what I think is best for them and I've determined that from talking to other parents, other kids, discussing it with them and with my husband, and looking to God for guidance. I just see zero benefit in exclusive dating for anyone under the age of 18.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Okay, then we are still using different vocabulary. You can most certainly date without dating exclusively.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Does she need to date someone, get involved with them, and then have her heart ripped out in order to learn something more significant than what she already knows?"
I would argue, having had my heart ripped out in a variety of different ways, that having your heart ripped out by a lover is in fact very different from having it ripped out by a family member, and a completely different experience.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
*and now we know why Tom has no heart....*
*snicker*
FG
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
...you know, it's possible we found something I, Banna, and Tom all agree on.
Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
and me, Kat. Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
And I'm on the other side.
What a shocker.
I probably shoulnd't have used exclusively, I don't just mean that you can't date only one person. I think telling someone "You can date, but you can't date just one guy, go play the field" is just as harmful.
But so there's no confusion, here's a list for you.
Our rules:
Our children CANNOT:
Go out with one person of the opposite sex in a car, just the two of them.
Go to a function at the home of another person unless we know the parents, and the parents will be home, and there are other kids present (i.e., they can't go to the home of someone of the opposite sex to study, unless there is study group meeting that involves at least a few other people)
Spend the night in the home of a friend, if that friend has siblings of the opposite sex (a general rule, each case is evaluated separately) or we don't know the parents.
Spend any time alone in their bedroom with a member of the opposite sex.
What our children CAN do:
Spend time with their friends in group activites, i.e., a group getting together to go to a football game.
participate in church youth activities if they're properly supervised and chaperoned
Invite a friend of the opposite sex over for dinner, to watch a movie, hang out in the basement and play pool, etc.
Go on special occasions to functions that are chaperoned, an example of this would be to a school prom where teachers chaperoned, but they would not be allowed to stay out all night or God forbid, get a hotel room (I was floored when I heard mothers talking about letting their kids get hotel rooms on prom nights )
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
and beverly.
Oh my word.
What's wrong with going on dates with all different people if you're not macking on them? Playing the field is only slutty if you're promising exclusivity and your body to each of them.
Demanding that people date only one at a time - first date means commitment, can't date anyone else until you're either married or it's all over - seems very confining. The point of dating is to find who you're compatible with. Unless you specialize in short relationships (which brings its own problems), sticking to dating only one at time when you're still figuring who you are and what you want is, among other things, terribly inefficient.
[ March 30, 2004, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Huh? Wha'd I say?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I agree with kat. Dating and interacting with the opposite sex is very important in helping you figure out how to have a strong relationship. The key is in having "rules" that you follow while dating to avoid the temptations naturally faced. Learning how to be strong and resist temptation are important skills. Just my opinion.
Sorry. I was thinking of this. I don't see "I agree with kat" very often, so I was tickled and remembered. Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
I think it's possible that your children might miss out on something beautiful during their teenage years.
Dan, my first boyfriend, and I dated for nine months my sophomore year of high school. He taught me to really love myself, and not be ashamed of myself. He taught me how much I can care for another individual for the merits of that individual, and not just because of blood ties.
Mike, my boyfriend all through senior year of high school, was even more wonderful. We spent countless hours together reading, playing games, laughing and talking. His parents cared a lot for me, and his mother was a wonderful maternal figure during my senior year. His relationship with me, and his parents' relationship with me really helped me grow.
My friendships pale in comparison to the depth of growth, joy, and loss my relationships could invoke in me. I love my friends. But they did not teach me as much. The only other person who I didn't date that touched me that way was Gabe, and mainly through his death.
It will never be wrong that I chose to date in high school. I will never regret such an important part of my life.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
*high fives Sun*
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
*whew* I thought I had said something terribly offensive or outrageous. I was pretty confused!
Is it really uncommon for people to agree with you? I haven't been around long enough to know. Though, I have seen you lock horns with others on several different occasions. I admire your courage in holding your ground amidst the onslaught regardless of whether or not I agree with you. Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Belle, are rides home with members of the opposite sex ok?
I don't want to get into this, because while I'm in a fairly successful high school relationship myself, I'm becoming more and more anti hgh school relationships the more of my friends I see in them.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I have three stubborn brothers and a dad with a very strong personality. It's sheer self-defense.
*explains* I do only do it on Hatrack. I'm much nicer in person.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
A comment for each side of the issue: For Belle's side, I think it is cool for a teen to grow up feeling that they don't *have* to date to feel good about themselves. There are many teens who want to date and don't and feel like failures.
On the other hand, having these young "practice relationships" (I will call them, because I know that as a teenager I was incapable of having a mature relationship, YMMV) can do a lot for a teen learning that they can be loved romantically. It had a HUGE positive effect in my life.
Posted by skrika03 (Member # 5930) on :
I wonder if CM's problem is not that they think he is interested in the girl. Maybe there is an issue of him not being interested enough. My mom got real tired of the guys I had unrequited crushes on who were my friends. I know I'm a little late to show up and actually try to talk about what the thread was originally about...
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
blacwolve, depends on who it is offering the ride. If I know him, then sure. I mean, if my daughter is stuck at school and needs a ride home, and I for some reason can't go get her and she calls me at 3:00 and says "I'm stranded and Mike offered me a ride home" then that's cool, but I expect her and Mike to at my doorstep at 3:10, considering the school is 10 minutes away.
But, that's not just a male/female thing - I wouldn't want my children accepting rides from anyone they don't know.
We have a procedure in place in case the kids ever get stranded anywhere, they have all the numbers they need. I've also covered what to do if they come home and get off the bus and I'm not here. That happened once, when I was on my way home and got stuck behind some highway construction. Natalie followed the rules perfectly, came in, locked the door behind her (she has a key) called me on my cell phone, I told her to sit tight, I"d be there in five minutes. She was fine. If she had not been able to get me on the phone she was to go up the street to Ms. Joy's house. Ms. Joy's kids have the same instruction to come to my house if they get home and no-one's there.
There's no such thing as a totally inflexible rule, everything has to e evaluated based on the circumstances and people involved. I would rather my daugther accepta ride home from someone she knows that be stranded alone someplace. However, her first attempt should always be to contact me or her father, ideally we would go get her.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
The other thing that does happen, with astonishing regularity, is that high schoolers who were for all appearances model responsible human beings due to their upbringing or whatever, get to college, realize they have freedom and suddenly go nuts.
If you really want to protect your daughters, Belle and Farmgirl, never let her stay in a college dorm room (even if it is entirely same sex) for a single night (doesn't matter if it is a Christian college, I've had friends who've been to them and they are just as bad, sometimes worse.) On the other hand having had the experience I think that living in a college dorm for at least a semester is one of those glimpses of humanity, that everyone should experience at least once in their lives. It definitely teaches you how to get along with people drastically different from yourself.
AJ
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
wow. the difference between parenting strategies is amazing.
My parents routinely stranded me at school...I got lots of rides home from other kids' parents.
I was a latchkey kid from the age of seven. Those two to three hours without mom or dad home were wonderful.
My parents expected me to get rides from other people/parents if I wanted to spend a night at a friend's house, attend an athletic practice or game, an awards night, a drama rehearsal or play.
If my mother picked me up, she was always pissy about it.
If my father remembered to pick me up, we took the long route home (we stopped at one of the bars, he went in for drinking and food, and a couple hours later, THEN we'd make it home).
And if my father had to watch me if my mother was working at night and he decided he wanted to party...I got left out in the car for all hours.
So, I suppose understanding reasonable practices for kids being alone is tough.
And don't get me started on dating. I'm 24 and WAY behind the learning curve. And at 24, from peers, prospective dates, and even healthcare professionals, the expectation is that you have or are having sex in your relationships.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
This is slightly off topic, but this thread is already derailed so bad I don't think it will matter.
Talking about giving rides reminded me of something that's been puzzling me for a while. When I was a sophomore in high school I was sixteen and terrified of driving, my mom informed me I could drive myself, get rides, or not do anything. I got rides from friends everywhere I went my sophomore year.
My brother is a sophomore this year, he didn't turn sixteen until December, when he started driving right away. However, until he started driving himself he was absolutely NOT allowed to get rides places, my mo took him, even though quite a few of the guys on his soccer team live in our neighborhood.
I'm still enormously confused by this, can any of the mothers here shed some light on why the rules went that way and not the other (me not being allowed to drive with people)?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I suggest you ask her. Really.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I have, I've gotten different answers each time, none of them particularly convincing. Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
What were they? Now I'm curious.
Hobbes Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
"you could have driven yourself if you'd wanted to" and "I don't want the other kids to have to go out of the way for him"
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:The other thing that does happen, with astonishing regularity, is that high schoolers who were for all appearances model responsible human beings due to their upbringing or whatever, get to college, realize they have freedom and suddenly go nuts.
Everyone is assuming my kids see our rule as a lack of freedom. They don't. Oh, we had some problems with Natalie at first with the whole "spend the night" rules.
But, once I explained that these were our rules and what the limitations were she only had one question "Oh, so that means I can spend the night with Jordan, though - right?" Jordan is a friend who has an older sister and their parents are fellow church members, and I said yes, absolutely. She's never questioned it since.
For what it's worth, and I'm not trying to make anyone else feel bad for their decisions, but when I discussed this with my therapist she applauded our stance. She only had to give me a few numbers about how many young women she'd counselled that had been sexually abused at spend the night parties to make me feel even better about my decision.
Another thing is that my kids don't feel like they are abnormal at all. I mean, compared to some of the kids at school we are incredibly strict, but compared to other friends we are really relaxed on things. For example, Natalie has a lot of friends who've never seen the Lord of the Ring movies and think she has the coolest Mom ever because I not only took her to every movie but even made her an elven dress. Natalie told me once she considers us "right in the middle" Not too strict, not too loose. I can't think of anywhere I'd rather be, personally.
Edit: One more thing - there was one friend who asked Natalie to spend the night and we said no, we didn't know the parents well. It was about three weeks later the little girl came over and was dropped off by her Dad, who apparently graduated from the same school of parenting mack's parents attended. They made no provision for getting the girl home, and when I asked her when she was supposed to be home, she just shrugged and said "I dunno."
I drove her home about eight, and her parents weren't there. She asked me if I would wait until her Mom and Dad got home and I said of course (I had no intention of leaving a 10 year old alone) I asked her if her sister was there, because I knew she had an older sister and she said no, but Mike (not real name) was. Then she said 'That's why you have to stay, I'm not allowed to stay with Mike alone."
Some discreet questioning of the mother got me the following information: Mike is a friend of the dad's, and he has no other place to stay. The Mom then said "Mike has some problems, we just don't want the girls home alone with him. Not that he'd ever do anything to them or anything."
That one incident convinced me my policy was in the best interest of my kids. Imagine if I hadn't cared and had just let my daughter go over there and spend the night?
[ March 30, 2004, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: Belle ]
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
I agree with you Belle, and I'll one up you. My kids are not allowed to go on sleep overs. They can have 'late night play dates' but not sleep overs.
I guess we have a different middle. When they are 16, I'll allow them to date. I'll advise them that group dating might be better for a while than one on one. But at that point, if I haven't taught them what they need to know yet, then I've already lost. In fact, I think if I haven't taught them the right things by about 12, I've neglected my responsibility.
I will always be there to guide and advise, but they are already making so many decisions on their own that they are learning much more from experience than I can teach them.
I'll trust them to make the right decisions.
I think that as a society we unfortunately expect less from our children. They'll only live up to those standards that we give them. Kids can handle a lot more than we give them credit for.
I got married when I was 20. I had my first child when I was 21. That is considered too young in this culture, but I disagree. I believe we've extended childhood too long. I believe we have too many expectations of what should happen before someone gets married and starts a family. A formal education, a career, a house, a good car... You don't need that to start a good marriage. I think my marriage is stronger because we had to struggle through tight finances and getting Vladimir into a good job. Things are good now, and we did it together. This is our life that we built, not the life I made and the life he made that we combined.
Teach your children with respect and then trust them to make the right decisions.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
once again Belle my comments about freshhman college students going wild were not directed particularly at you. If your kids think you are in the middle that is awesome!
AJ
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
I think a lot of parents are way too paranoid. Risk is an important part of life and if you too afraid of letting your kids take risks, they'll suffer. Forbidding friendships for all but the far most extreme cases falls under this, I believe.
The funny thing is, most kids realize this when they are kids, but then forget it when they become parents. I suspect it's because parents fear losing their kids more than they fear losing their own lives, and have to justify this fear to themselves.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote: Our children CANNOT: ...
See, Belle, as a teenager (and this is a biased opinion because of that), I am kind of insulted by some of your cannots. I understand that you want to protect your kids, but to me in many cases, you seem to assume that your children have ulterior motives (or that the member of the opposite sex has ulterior motives).
Of course, you know your children best, but I choose my friends so that I know I am safe with them and their families.
I'm not attacking your parenting techniques, I'm just giving you my as a teenager feedback. Posted by CalvinMaker (Member # 2032) on :
quote:I wonder if CM's problem is not that they think he is interested in the girl. Maybe there is an issue of him not being interested enough. My mom got real tired of the guys I had unrequited crushes on who were my friends. I know I'm a little late to show up and actually try to talk about what the thread was originally about...
Nah. We saw each other fairly reguarly. Not like, a TON, but on average once every other weekend or so. To go swing dancing or whatnot.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
It's not about ulterior motives. It's about not putting my children in positions that are fraught with risk and temptation.
It's like not letting them ride on the back of a motorcycle without a helmet. Do I trust them not to fling themselves off the motorcycle? Yes. Do I trust them to be safe if the motorcycle crashes? No. That's beyond their control.
Many things that can happen to them would be beyond their control, and it's not about not trusting them. If I had let her go on that sleepover and that man abused her - would it have happened because my daughter wasn't trustworthy?
Posted by skrika03 (Member # 5930) on :
I don't think having friends requires going on sleepovers. My husband came from a family that didn't have sleepovers, but it was something I had grown up with (though I didn't have many friends, I tended to have a few close friends instead). So he was going to be open minded about it. But then he came across this case of some folks he knew personally where the children were abused at a sleepover it absolutely turned the lives of every member of the family inside out. I can't say it destroyed them, but it radically altered most major aspects of their lives.
Now we don't even let our daughter go to pajama parties at school. It's a major irritation that they keep having them. We actually relented on this last one and let her go, but wearing sweats.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
*grin* Christy wasn't allowed to date in high school, couldn't have boys alone in any room in her house, and actually had car privileges taken away from her for years because she drove it once -- thinking she had permission -- to pick up some groceries, and they thought she'd stolen off somewhere.
Then she went to an all-girls' dorm, got involved in Bible study, and went (as Anna has indicated) "nuts," if by nuts you mean relatively normal. What's interesting, really, is that she was actually a lot less sheltered than a number of her other friends, so she wound up being the person they'd call when, for example, they'd just touched a guy through his underwear by "accident" and were afraid that they might get pregnant. (I was often curled up on the floor convulsed in silent laughter during these phone conversations, I'm slightly ashamed to admit.)
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
And when I turned 16, I was set loose. No curfew, they didn't have to meet the guys, I had a job that kept me out late, and I when I went to college, I lived in a co-ed dorm. It wasn't neglect - my mom trusted me.
She actually said it. It was something along the lines that I was stubborn as all get out and had a very clear idea of standards.
My best friend's family was incredibly strict with her (hence their horror of me), and it used to irritate me to no end because they had no idea how much crap I talked her out of on a regular basis.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Belle.
quote:I think a lot of parents are way too paranoid.
A recent statistic I heard noted that 7 of 10 girls reported being sexually assaulted in one manner or another before the age of 20.
7 of 10. Parents have a good reason to be paranoid.
quote:Risk is an important part of life and if you too afraid of letting your kids take risks, they'll suffer.
What are you calling 'risks?'
[ March 31, 2004, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: Scott R ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I thought some more about this last night. And I got to thinking back over my own experiences.
Did what I learn about heart ache and losing someone I thought I loved really help and prepare me for my marriage? I don't think it really did, but let's go ahead and assume that yes, it was helpful for me to meet Wes with having one serious and a couple of minor heart breaks behind me. (although I didn't get any of those before the age of 18)
Then I contrasted it with what I've been through because of sexual abuse (and I was never abused - I've only had to deal with survivor's guilt)
There is no comparison. I would much rather my daughter be a little inexperienced in heart ache than have her in a therapist office trying to pick up the pieces after being a victim of sexual abuse.
If you think I'm being paranoid - then you haven't talked to the people I've talked to. You must not know a gynecologist who works in pediatric gynecology and spends his time trying to heal the physical damages done to little girls. You must not know the therapists who try to heal the emotional damages.
If my daughters can grow up and enter into adult relationships without carrying around with them scars of past abuse then I will have done my job.
No one has yet been able to convince me that keeping them from sleepovers and dating is a bad thing, especially when looked at against the alternatives.
Thanks Scott. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
My parents were fairly strict with me, and I was continually kicking against the pricks. But I had a friend who had almost no limitations -- zero curfue, etc.. His parents trusted him. My parents trusted him. If I was with him, then they felt a lot better about things.
And with good reason. If I had been given no curfue, it would have been a disaster. I am so grateful that my parents loved me enough to have me hate them at times for my own good. I know that I would have gotten into real trouble if my parents had given me enough rope to hang myself.
But it worked fine with my friend. He didn't need the tight leash that I did.
Thinking of this makes me scared. Each person has such different needs. I pray again and again that I will be able to provide my children with what they need. It's one of the biggest fears in my life right now.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Belle, I am totally with you on the sleepovers thing. I don't think my kids will ever be allowed to do sleepovers--too dangerous. But I don't understand what dating has to do with sexual abuse. If you are talking about unhealthy relationships, those can happen at any age.
[ March 31, 2004, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
They can happen at any age but I think they are more likely to happen when you are young and insecure.
I don't want my kids caught in the trap of needing a boyfriend to fit in with the popular crowd at school. I don't think the attitude that "I have to be going steady or I'm not good enough" is unhealthy and I don't want to promote it.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Okay, to clarify.
I don't believe in "going steady" in high school, or in exclusive relationships until you're an adult. Or in sex as a teenager. Or any of that.
But you can date without pairing off. You can date without physical involvement, and you can date without marrying the guy.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:But you can date without pairing off. You can date without physical involvement, and you can date without marrying the guy.
I agree, but why is dating at all necessary until you are ready to pair off? What do you get from dating that you cannot get from social interaction in a group setting? If it's not physical involvement what is it? The experience of having your heart broken? That's what I've heard so far and I'm not convinced that you learn something more from that at age 16, that would make it a vital part of growing up. Surely heart break can wait a few years?
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Belle and katharina, it sounds like you somewhat agree because the sort of "dating" that katharina is talking about sounds very much like some of the acceptable activities on Belles list. Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Belle, I still hold to the feeling that having expressed romantic intentions and having them expressed towards me in return was very, very good for me as a teen. Both of us involved held to certain limits and it was ok. But when I was in college, I had a really messed relationship that nearly ruined my life. I guess I am one of those who "went nuts", not because I felt repressed by my parents, but because I encountered things I had never had to deal with before and didn't know how to.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
There is a difference in getting to know someone in a group setting and getting to know someone one-on-one.
Ultimately, you do pair off to one-on-one. Some people are different when there aren't other people around for distraction. Some relationships only work with an audience watching.
[ March 31, 2004, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
I think there is no substituting for experience. I think that once we go out into the dating world, we are going to find things that we've never encountered before and will have to adjust to it. Yes, we don't want it to happen too young, but I don't think 16 is too young.
Our children will go into situations that are difficult for them. The way to help them is not to avoid this by putting strict restrictions on them, but to arm them with knowledge and self respect.
My curfews were more for giving my parents a time at which they should become worried that something had happened. If I called because I couldn't make it in on the stated time, they let me stay out longer.
[ March 31, 2004, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Amka ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"If you think I'm being paranoid - then you haven't talked to the people I've talked to. You must not know a gynecologist who works in pediatric gynecology and spends his time trying to heal the physical damages done to little girls. You must not know the therapists who try to heal the emotional damages."
Actually, almost every female I consider a friend has been raped. Of those, only two were raped by someone who wasn't a member of their families.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
I am impressed again and again by how much our opinions are shaped by our experience. That is why you can discuss all day and not sway someone. You can't exchange experiences. All you can do is learn to understand and appreciate why someone feels the way they do.
Posted by Mike (Member # 55) on :
I'm getting a little uncomfortable with all the "Mike this and Mike that" in this thread. Can't we use a different name? Like Isaiah? Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That is so right. I think that I would have been happier and healthier with more structure from my parents in regards to dating/relationships. So I will give my children, probably to their much chagrin, more structure than I was given.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:What are you calling 'risks?'
Things ranging from sleepovers to dating to having a friend with blue hair.
My grandmother won't ride on planes. Or boats. Or trains. She is afraid there will be some accident and she will end up in a gruesome death. And to refute any claims that such modes of travel are safe, she will point to all the statistics of people who got killed horribly because of a choice to ride a boat, or a train, or a plane. Thus, she holds firm in her fear, and as a result can't really travel anywhere far.
Parents tend to be a lot like this. Sure, it's easy to point to statistics about kids getting abused - but it's also easy to forget that for every one instance of abuse there's probably a million instances of healthy interpersonal interaction.
If you are really concerned about keeping your kid safe at all costs, just keep them in a padded room for their whole life. They'll be safe there. DEFINITELY, don't let them go to school - I can tell you with great confidence that many many kids are screwed up by the things they end up enduring at school. And college should be out of the qustion: Just look at the rape statistics! Don't let them get their liscense either - there are news stories every week about some kid dying at the wheel. In fact, don't let them get in a car at all - accidents are far too common. And let's add sports (life-altering injury possibility), babysitters (rape risk again), and the internet (online predators!) to the list while we're at it. All of these are more dangerous than, say, sleepovers or dating.
[Edit: I forgot church! The Catholic priest scandals have shown how dangerous it is to let your children associate with church officials, etc.]
Life is about risk-taking. Sometimes really bad stuff happens, are you have to deal with it, but to allow your life to revolve around avoiding that danger is to ruin your life, I believe. I think most people understand this, as evidenced by the fact that most adults take plenty of risks all the time. I mean, we are on a forum filled with people giving out random information about themselves on the internet to other people they barely even know - and occassionally even driving out to meet those people. What if there are 'crazy' people lurking? There have been plenty of stories about this happening after all. Obviously, we are willing to take that risk. I think this, along with all the other risky things I'm sure we all do, suggests we must believe such a level or risk is healthy for us.
But for the kids we have a different standard. The healthy level of risk is one thing, and what we actually allow kids is something altogether different. Why? Here's what I suspect: We fear screwing up our kids more than we fear screwing up ourselves. And whereas we feel the benefits of our own risk-taking ourselves, it is our children that get the direct benefits of their risk-taking. All parents get are the fear on the one hand, and the indirect benefit of making them happy on the other. Thus, I think parents who worry about their kids are predisposed to giving them less than the healthy level of risk. Even if the kids stand to lose on the deal, the parents stand to gain, because their (greater) fear is alleviated.
[ March 31, 2004, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Xaposert ]
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
I find this amusing because I never particularly wanted to date in high school. There were not that many girls I was interested in and either I was too shy or they were too taken. This worried my parents a little bit, and I recall several times being encouraged to date. Now if I had found the right person things might have been different, but I did not. The sum total of my high school dating experience was a bit of flirting and one meaningless makeout session freshman year. For the first two years I was sometimes a bit concerned because I could not find anyone, but by my junior and senior years I had seen enough of the crap that went on not to be so worried. Most high school relationships are stupid anyway, although lots of times the stupid things people do in them result in experience.
My definition of dating is romantic involvement. You may not have any definite plans to get married, and you may be saving yourself for marriage, but you are more than just friends. A movie with a female friend is not a date. The same movie with a girlfriend is. This is a little different than what kat did although I see nothing wrong with that either.
The thing is... Do the parents here remember high school? I have forgotten quite a bit and I have only been out for two years. If your kid wants to date, then either you will have to be so incredibly restrictive as to screw them up beyond what normal teenage dating can do, or they will ignore your lesser restrictions. Asking whether teenage dating is a good idea is asking the wrong question. Anyone with a brain can figure out the good and bad aspects of it. The question should be, "How can I teach my child to make wise choices in this area?" I have never once personally seen a rule against dating stop anyone who really wanted to break it. At 14, it might if it they were not serious, but at 16 or 17 they will do pretty much what they want to do. Even chaperoned trips cannot watch everyone all the time. I never seen that type of rule create anything but strife, and frankly I consider it unfair to the other half of the would be couple. Either they obey the wishes of the parents and get the child upset, or they sneak around and cause trouble between the parents and their child.
Certainly I would have little respect for barriers a parent put up between their daughter and myself. I doubt I would actually lie to them, but I would indeed help their daughter sneak out. If they asked me, I would be more likely to just tell her parents straight up that they were being unreasonable and I could care less about that particular rule of theirs. I have always had an antagonistic streak in me. This depends somewhat upon the situation - if they asked us to wait for a short term goal (two years ago high school graduation or 18th birthday would have been good examples) and had good reasons for it I would be much more open to doing that than if they said, "My daughter will never be allowed to date you because you are [white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male, destroying your life with the Devil's weed, etc.]" The only way I would possibly consider not going out with a girl who had restrictions like that would be if her parents could and would seriously ruin her future prospects because of it. If I was a little more selfish and decided to stay with her, her parents would be the ones to ruin her life. Not me. I realize parents worry, but sometimes they worry too much and they have nothing to worry about from me in that area. As far as I am concerned everyone has a right to peacefully assemble, even if they are not legal adults.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:I find this amusing because I never particularly wanted to date in high school. There were not that many girls I was interested in and either I was too shy or they were too taken. This worried my parents a little bit, and I recall several times being encouraged to date.
Hmmm... sounds like shy old me. Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
Parenting is tough. I didn't realize sleepovers could be so dangerous. My daughter is going on her first sleepover to a friend's house next week. Should I be freaking out? She's 5, the friend is 5, and the family lives in our neighborhood. I don't know them well, but the little girls are best friends. The other little girl is going to sleepover at our house soon. I have a good feeling about this family, and I'm not worried at all. Abby is looking forward to a good time with a friend.
When it comes to dating, I've already talked with Abby a lot about my expectations for her - that she will make wise decisions, and come to me if she needs to talk about anything. I figure some bridges we will cross when we come to them.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Danzig,
Yes, I remember high school very well. Too well.
The difference is that at this point my teenage kids agree with me on this point. However, granted, they haven't fallen head-over-heels in crush with anyone yet, they are shy, and they just aren't the rebellious type. (like I was).
But it would be pretty darn hard for them to "sneak" and have a relationship without me knowing. 1) living on a farm means we are miles from the nearest town -- they can't just say "I'm walking over to so-and-so's house to work on a school project together. 2) none of them can drive my 5-speed truck very well, and have never asked for it. 3)I pretty much know where they are and who they are with at all times simply because we do most everything together.
So far, they aren't complaining, so I just count myself lucky that I didn't get kids with the personality that I am.
Farmgirl
Posted by ladyday (Member # 1069) on :
Just wanted to say that this thread has helped to sort out my thoughts . I still really haven't reached a conclusion one way or another though...
I understand the practical reasons for only casually dating and not going steady, or even having no dating allowed at all, but there's something I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around. I guess it's because for me, love and romance are so far from practical...we don't develop feelings or fall in love when it makes sense to, or at least I didn't. And it just seems to be such an inevitability, that if you casually date someone you'll eventually find someone you want more with. And then you're on the dangerous "more" road, which leads to the "everything" lane...I don't know, it just all seems so inevitable.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Tres, I have had to come to the realization that raising a kid today is diffrent than it used to be. I went on many sleepovers. I also rode a bicycle without a helmet and trick-or-treated far and wide in the dark of night without parental supervision.
My kids may never experience the classic sleepover. I happen to think the risk is too high in that particular area. They may never experience many of the "freedoms" I did. I don't think I will be able to completely keep them from danger, but there are some things that I will do. Those things are up to individual parents.
On a side note, it does seem that parents are a lot more conscious today of danger to their kids than a generation ago. Such messages are much more widely taught. There were no child car seats when we were little. My husband was put in a "box" on the floor of the car as a baby. If you look at any baby magazine, it is full of safety information. Heaven forbid any mother puts a baby to sleep on its stomach!
Some of the hype I think is silly. Some of it is wisdom. The decisions are up to the parent (thank goodness). I happen to feel strongly about sleepovers. Belle happens to feel strongly about dating. Another parent doesn't. That is fine with me.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Tres:
What's important, and what you are forgetting, is that good parents know their children, and know better than anyone how to assess risk for them.
For example: I am comfortable allowing my daughter to go to the bathroom at church alone. I've been comfortable with that since she was 3. I do not allow my son to go by himself-- because I know his temperment, and I know that he'd dawdle, or play in the hall, etc.
It's nice to talk about acceptable risk for children, but the application of those ideologies is something else entirely. What Tresopax non-parents define as acceptable risk, parents know to be idealistic nonsense.
And while I would appreciate a young man like Tom being completely honest about going out with my daughter, that honesty does not remove the fact that I think (theoretically) he's a bad influence on my child.
I think we all agree that children need to be taught about life. No one is proposing that we keep the facts hidden from them. No one is proposing living in a convent, or secluding our children from the world. No one is saying that Christy's friends' parents in Tom's example have the correct attitude.
What we are saying (Belle said it first) is that while a child may know a thing, acting on that knowlege may be out of his or her capacity. That's where a good parent comes in-- to discern what is good and what is bad for a particular child, because frankly, they lack the wisdom to do so.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:we don't develop feelings or fall in love when it makes sense to, or at least I didn't
I am a big beleiver that it is utterly impossible to fall in love against your will.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
However, it CAN happen when you're not looking. If you're fighting it, then probably not, but if you're just not paying attention, it can hit you between the eyes.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
mph ...
I have always been a big believer in that as well...
...but I'm fighting it BIG time at present. You can make a conscious thought in your head to say "don't fall in love with this person!" but sometimes that just seems to make them all the more irresitable.
Farmgirl
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Yeah, I'll give you that one, katha.
[ March 31, 2004, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
IMO, kat-- that isn't love.
That's attraction.
Posted by ladyday (Member # 1069) on :
So we should teach our kids to fight love?
Honest question, really. I can't really speak to this as, frankly, I started dating because I wanted to get laid, so obviously there were some issues there to begin with. I'm honestly trying to sort it all out :\.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*searches for the "what is love" thread*
If it's at all possible to fall in love with someone who was before merely a friend, then you can have love before attraction.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Ladyday: We should teach our children to understand and control their emotions. We expect them to control their anger,their greed, their excitement, their honesty, and their altruism-- we should also teach them to control their instinct toward romantic love.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I sure wish CM would change the title of this thread. I mean, I know he posted out of frustration and emotions of the moment, but every time I visit the main page and see "I HATE ALL PARENTS" in caps like that, it just pierces me....
FG
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
quote: If it's at all possible to fall in love with someone who was before merely a friend, then you can have love before attraction.
I don't know Kat. With Steve and I it went
Friendship (which while possibly love is a different and much more unconscious than romantic-relationship type love)---> Attraction--->romantic-relationship love
I love the greek words for love, they are so much more precise.
phileo--->eros--->agape/eros
AJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I have to admit I currently have no definite theories about love whatsoever. That doesn't mean I'll believe any/everyone's - it just means that this stance I will not defend. Heck if I know.
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
quote: I don't believe in "going steady" in high school, or in exclusive relationships until you're an adult.
I don't mean to nitpick, and i'm sure most kids would understand the difference...but isn't encouraging dating multiple persons at one time just like encouraging promiscuity? Certainly sex doesn't have to be involved, but i would be totally afraid of seeing a guy who declared that he was seeing 5, 6 other girls besides me.
And, just to bring up an interesting point, I don't think forbidding dating will necessarily protect your children from relationship-related heart-break. Ever heard of infatuation? Cause I sure as heck did and crushed on the same guy (too old to date me) for over a year when i was twelve. Ended up breaking my heart, and we never "dated exclusively" nor, according to him, dated at all. How are you going to keep your children from wanting to be romantic with someone? They're going to have those feelings, even if they understand that they're not to act on them...they're still going to exist!
Knowing that I wasn't going to be able to have a relationship with a 15 year old didn't stop me from really, really liking him.
~*~*~*~
Dating in high school helped me suss out what I did and did not want in a relationship. I realized that personality was 3,000 times more important than looks, for starters.
i'd type more but i have to teach! Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think kat was talking about "social dating". Someone else here said they did not think of such activities as dating at all. More like one guy and one girl doing something together. Or "group dating" where there is an equal number of girls and guys. Pretty casual. Not about romance.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'd be fascinated to know, of all lifetime dating, what the general percentage is for second and third dates after a first date.
Someone dating 6 people who all think they are exclusive is promiscuous. Someone with four first dates in one weekend, in which you simply talk, do whatever, and don't mack on each other, is having a great weekend in high school.
Maybe it's about expectations? If your expectations are that every date leads to a relationship, then just asking someone out is, in a way, something of a committment. If your expectation is to have a fun social experience, maybe make a friend, have a good day, or simply flirt, isn't that the point of dating as a teenager?
Edit: removed half the simplies.
[ March 31, 2004, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
quote: Risk is an important part of life and if you too afraid of letting your kids take risks, they'll suffer.
I agree totally and completely with this. I'm not saying kids need to take risks like... say... bungee jumping off of bridges or having unprotected sex with many anonymous partners, but they should be able to go out on a limb and have their heart broken sometimes. For me, I haven't taken many risks at all and I think I'm worse off for it. Read on...
quote: I agree, but why is dating at all necessary until you are ready to pair off? What do you get from dating that you cannot get from social interaction in a group setting?
All I know is what I DIDN'T get from not having been in a romantic relationship. It's difficult for a person who interacts socially the way I do to get people to tell them they're attractive. I refuse to say that not dating gives people low self-esteem, but I can say that the fact that I was available and no one came after me did nothing to help my self-esteem.
I'd call myself a late bloomer. I didn't start having serious crushes on guys until probably... Oh no wait. OK, so I'm not a late bloomer, necessarily. I had a fairly serious crush on a guy in Freshman year, but boy was that a pathetic crush. He was very cute, nice, and he had vision problems so I thought he could overlook my hideousness... Gag. So much low self-esteem. But anyway, I digress.
I think I'm worse off for never having had a relationship, because I don't know for the life of me how to get involved with someone. I wouldn't know how to start or what to do... And that's something people expect you to know in college. So I'm looking at hard times if ever I do get into a relationship.
quote: We should teach our children to understand and control their emotions. We expect them to control their anger,their greed, their excitement, their honesty, and their altruism-- we should also teach them to control their instinct toward romantic love.
I'm going to hide now, because this is me. (hides)
[ March 31, 2004, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Ryuko ]
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:It's nice to talk about acceptable risk for children, but the application of those ideologies is something else entirely. What Tresopax non-parents define as acceptable risk, parents know to be idealistic nonsense.
Know? I think you mean believe. (And only some parents at that.) And I think many parents are going to be a bit biased on the issue, since the natural instinct is to avoid risk when you have something very important at stake.
[ March 31, 2004, 05:24 PM: Message edited by: Tresopax ]
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Kat, I think it depends very much on the personalities involved. My sister and I, raised in the same house by the same parents, with the same rules, had completely opposite views on dating. I never would have gone on a date with more than one person in a weekend. Or in a week. (Lately, not more than one person in a decade.) Because I’ve always looked at dating as being about finding someone to be with long-term. LJ enjoys “recreational” dating and probably would have been very happy to go on lots of first dates. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that she has at some point dated more people in a single week than I have in my entire life. (That may be hyperbole, but I’m not sure.)
I’m happy in a committed relationship. I dated two guys in high school – went on two dates with the first one, and dated the second for three years. Would have married him too, except I realized, once we got to college, that I was only dating him because I was comfortable in a long term relationship, not because I was in love with him.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
When you say sleepovers, all you people who are worried about sleepovers, do you mean co-ed, two people only, big group sleepovers of a single gender, or all sleepovers?
Is your kid allowed to have a sleepover?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*nods* That makes sense.
I didn't date a ton in high school, but from 16 to 21, I went on an average one first date a month/month-and-a-half. I didn't date anyone for longer than three weeks until I was twenty, and didn't date anyone for longer two months until I was back from my mission. There were some quirky stories in there - I had one guy ask me out every six months for almost five years. If you see each other once every six months, it's a first date every frequin' time. *grins*
Why I didn't date any for longer... well, by college, most were either pre-mission, so they left fairly soon, or else they were back from their missions and wife-hunting in a serious way. If anything, I wish I had dated more in high school than I did, because when you start as an adult, you're still just as...awkward, but the stakes are high. They are playing for keeps.
I quite enjoyed being able to have fun and flirt when the stakes weren't quite as high.
"Date" as a verb in all of the above being a very loose term.
[ March 31, 2004, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Xap -- you assume that people's opinions change when they become parents because they have forgotten what they knew when they are kids.
I say it is the opposite. It is because we have learned things that we didn't know when we were kids. I have not forgotten how frustrated I was with my parents. I hated the rules I had to follow. But as I have said in other posts, I now realize how much more of a disaster my life would have been it if hadn't been for the rules my parents managed to enforce.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
From the ages of 15 to 22 or so, I dated continuously; every week, almost without exception, I went out with SOMEONE. Obviously, I was in committed relationships for some of this time; at other times, I was "dating" as many as three or four people at once, just because I enjoyed their company and liked discussing movies with them between kisses or something. There are times when this approach didn't work out, but my experience was that the really BAD relationships, the ones I slightly regret, were all some of the long-term and monogamous ones; the "hung out with Julie four or five times" relationships never left either of us the worse for wear, as far as I can tell. I traveled a lot when I was younger, too, and made a point of finding an attractive local to hang out with wherever I went -- again, mainly for the company and entertainment. There was obviously nothing long-term expected, but it was nice anyway.
So I sometimes have trouble understanding the whole "dating is for finding a mate, and nothing else" mentality, since it's clearly not one that I or the girls I dated shared. That's not to say that some of these dates didn't eventually turn into longer relationships -- but why saddle a budding friendship with that kind of leaden pressure so early?
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
)![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
please ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
Belle.![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
This depends somewhat upon the situation - if they asked us to wait for a short term goal (two years ago high school graduation or 18th birthday would have been good examples) and had good reasons for it I would be much more open to doing that than if they said, "My daughter will never be allowed to date you because you are [white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male, destroying your life with the Devil's weed, etc.]" The only way I would possibly consider not going out with a girl who had restrictions like that would be if her parents could and would seriously ruin her future prospects because of it. If I was a little more selfish and decided to stay with her, her parents would be the ones to ruin her life. Not me. I realize parents worry, but sometimes they worry too much and they have nothing to worry about from me in that area. As far as I am concerned everyone has a right to peacefully assemble, even if they are not legal adults.