This little girl died because her parents beat her for not saying a word correctly. They were followers of Michael Pearl who advocates extreme child rearing practices as you can see from this link. http://www.stoptherod.net/ttuac.html Something must be done. This isn't even reasonable sort of spanking, and one must understand I'm against that too. This guy teaches to spank, no, not spank, HIT at infancy. There's nothing reasonable about this guy's methods. Pearl's church makes millions a year and is tax exempt and teaches this sort of thing. It's not right. It's not a matter of taking away someone's religious freedom because teaching parents to abuse children isn't freedom. Not to mention there's his wife's book Created to Be His Helpmeet which teaches women to endure abuse and cruelty. These folks must be stopped somehow. http://nolongerquivering.com/2010/03/03/no-laughing-matter-michael-pearls-callous-response-to-critics/#more-4517 Plus Michael Pearl has responded to the death of this little girl so callously. Here's some more links. http://www.amazon.com/Train-Up-Child-Michael-Pearl/dp/1892112000/ref=pd_sim_b_3 Amazon sells this book. I don't believe in censorship, but this is an exception. Should they really sell a book that is basically a child abuse manual? http://www.tulipgirl.com/index.php/2010/02/who-is-speaking-out-against-abuse/ http://www.tulipgirl.com/index.php/category/michaelanddebipearl/ Something must be done. These people must be stopped. They cannot be allowed to promote child rearing methods that have already killed two children and are destroying countless others. I propose writing to 60 Minutes, Oprah, Dr. Phil, anyone who will listen and expose and stop these people. It's not acceptable at all.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Not much to add other than "yeah I agree."
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Pearl's church makes millions a year and is tax exempt and teaches this sort of thing. It's not right.
What's not right -- what they teach, or that they have tax exempt status?
quote:It's not a matter of taking away someone's religious freedom because teaching parents to abuse children isn't freedom.
Stripping away the inflamatory words you're using, why isn't it?
quote: I don't believe in censorship, but this is an exception.
You most definitely do believe in censorship.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:Pearl's church makes millions a year and is tax exempt and teaches this sort of thing. It's not right.
What's not right -- what they teach, or that they have tax exempt status?
quote:It's not a matter of taking away someone's religious freedom because teaching parents to abuse children isn't freedom.
Stripping away the inflamatory words you're using, why isn't it?
quote: I don't believe in censorship, but this is an exception.
You most definitely do believe in censorship.
It's that they have tax exempt status to teach people how to abuse. There's nothing right about what they are teaching. Hitting a child for crying? With 1/4 inch plumbing line? There's acceptions. I'm not really saying ban the book (But I won't mind if it was) I'm saying Amazon really shouldn't sell a book that supports abusing children, giving these folks another platform. But then there's the possibility of it going underground and being sold there. There's got to be some sort of exception here. Folks have got to value children enough to protect them from stuff that is pure abuse. Read some of those links and tell me that isn't abusive and unnecessarily cruel and that somehow these people aren't responsible for these children's deaths. I've read this guy's No Greater Joy Website where he talks about hitting an 11 month old child with a flexible instrument for crying to go outside. Or his wife karate chopped a two year old. It's really warped...
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
It would be wrong (or at least slippery) for the government to ban the book, but nothing wrong with amazon choosing not to sell it.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: It would be wrong (or at least slippery) for the government to ban the book, but nothing wrong with amazon choosing not to sell it.
Yeah, government book bannings bother me, but hurting children like this bothers me more. I would like to boycott Amazon to make them reconsider selling this book. Though I adore Amazon.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Has anyone previously made an attempt to get Amazon to stop?
I'm trying to remember how the whole Amazon-gay-fail thing went (when Amazon suddenly reclassified all gay-related stories as "for mature audiences only", even childrens books).
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Folks have wrote to them, but they said as long as it's legal they can sell it. Amazon is kind of bugging me. Maybe I could switch. As that's not right to reclassify gay related stories as mature audiences if it's not about, say... bondage or something. Plus there's ebay and Half.com.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:It's that they have tax exempt status to teach people how to abuse.
That's not why they have tax exempt status.
quote:There's nothing right about what they are teaching.
That's not a reason to deny tax exempt status.
quote: I'm not really saying ban the book (But I won't mind if it was) I'm saying Amazon really shouldn't sell a book that supports abusing children, giving these folks another platform.
So, you don't want to ban the book, but you don't want anybody to be able to buy it?
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
I think Pearl's methods are sickening, and the fact that they seem to work is frightening, not persuasive. Congratulations, you've found a method of suppressing individuality. Good job, Mike! (All the laughing he describes in that first link sounds extremely creepy.)
But he doesn't advocate killing your kids, or putting them in critical condition. So his culpability in this case is questionable.
As far as I can tell, Porter is right about tax exempt status. Pressuring Amazon is a good idea, although I don't know if it would work.
Porter: "...you don't want anybody to be able to buy it?" Is there anything that you would not try to ban entirely, but would pressure Target (for instance) not to stock on their shelves?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Porter: "...you don't want anybody to be able to buy it?" Is there anything that you would not try to ban entirely, but would pressure Target (for instance) not to stock on their shelves?
First of all, there are important differences between Amazon and Target. But that doesn't really matter for the rest of this post.
Second of all, I don't think that censorship is a dirty word. There are times that I think censorship is appropriate. I certainly censor what can be watched or read in my home.
Yes, there are things that I might pressure Target or Amazon to not carry. I wouldn't try to fool myself that it's not censorship, though.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:It's that they have tax exempt status to teach people how to abuse.
That's not why they have tax exempt status.
quote:There's nothing right about what they are teaching.
That's not a reason to deny tax exempt status.
quote: I'm not really saying ban the book (But I won't mind if it was) I'm saying Amazon really shouldn't sell a book that supports abusing children, giving these folks another platform.
So, you don't want to ban the book, but you don't want anybody to be able to buy it?
They are a religious group, but... a rather abusive one. Have you read samples of what these folks advocate? The beating of children is bad enough, but they also say a wife should stay with an abusive husband or a husband who molests his kids. It's kind of warped, but I don't know how to fight it. It rankles me that they make tax free millions teaching people to be that cruel. I think, religious rights is one thing, but these kids. Nope, I care more about those kids and people should not hurt kids and call it their religious right. Which they will probably do. Which they have already done. Folks will sadly still be able to buy the book. These folks have newsletters and are very popular with some homeschoolers. Some. There's just something rankling about selling a book that is this cruel towards children. What do you suggest can be done, mr_porteiro_head? I can care less about folks selling Playboys and the like, especially if they are out of reach of people too young to look at them, but there's just something about this... Doesn't it seem kind of wrong? Especially the way Pearl claims he doesn't support physical punishment, but the whole site, most of this book is pull this newborn baby's hair because she bit your breasts or show this four month old a gun and hit them if they try to touch it.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:Porter: "...you don't want anybody to be able to buy it?" Is there anything that you would not try to ban entirely, but would pressure Target (for instance) not to stock on their shelves?
First of all, there are important differences between Amazon and Target. But that doesn't really matter for the rest of this post.
Second of all, I don't think that censorship is a dirty word. There are times that I think censorship is appropriate. I certainly censor what can be watched or read in my home.
Yes, there are things that I might pressure Target or Amazon to not carry. I wouldn't try to fool myself that it's not censorship, though.
OK. Maybe it is. There's just something that is so DISTURBING about this kind of book. And I did read it. And their website as well. I don't get why so many folks follow this. It seems needlessly harsh when you're talking about a small, tiny child.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:First of all, there are important differences between Amazon and Target.
Yes, I agree. However, neither one has the power to prevent anyone from buying any item. So the differences aren't really relevant to the point.
quote:Second of all, I don't think that censorship is a dirty word. There are times that I think censorship is appropriate. I certainly censor what can be watched or read in my home.
Me too.
quote:Yes, there are things that I might pressure Target or Amazon to not carry. I wouldn't try to fool myself that it's not censorship, though.
Me too again. However, 'censorship' is far more important for us to pay attention to if it's done by a government. Censorship by Amazon I don't care about.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: I think Pearl's methods are sickening, and the fact that they seem to work is frightening, not persuasive.
How do you define "work"?
I am sure it is great to create terrified, obedient children, but as far as creating a functional member of society without any mental issues and crippling emotional frailty, I am not seeing it.
Posted by CT (Member # 8342) on :
Synesthesia, there is a public statement against this at the Gentle Christian Mothers website which you can sign in support. I seem to recall that you are a member there.
---
Edited to add: I'm not familiar with that site myself, having just found it incidentally. But it seems really nice.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: However, 'censorship' is far more important for us to pay attention to if it's done by a government. [/QB]
Agreed. Even then, I don't think it's always wrong.
For example, libraries refusing to carry items based on their content is not always wrong.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Treat a human being like a dog long enough and you can talk to them like a dog, beat them and order them to do whatever they can understand to do. Making children afraid of you is not difficult, and getting them to obey you when they truely believe that your word is God and there is no safety from your "training."
On the large scale Im not worried about zealots like Pearl, hell the guy is basically spouting off about the neo-puritanism that America saw between 1930 and 1950 and all that did was birth the hippie generation. This guy and his compatriots are sick for thinking that children need to be treated as projects and not people, but lets not forget that any parent is responsible for what comes into thier home and some stupid people thought it best to just keep hitting those babies.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
I'm trying to figure out why M_P_H is over analyzing the OP.
As for being charged, I'm kind of wondering why the claims they make in the book aren't evidence of a chargeable offense. Never mind banning the book, offer it as evidence, and put them in jail.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote: For example, libraries refusing to carry items based on their content is not always wrong.
At fourteen I rented that Tom Hanks movie Bachelor Party from my library, in hindsight someone should have known not to let teenagers get movies that include donkey shows. But I also went to a High School that did have not a list of books that you were unallowed to use for class reports and such, instead we a had a list of approved books that didnt even scrape thirty titles. I still cant stand The Hobbit.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I also went to a High School that did have not a list of books that you were unallowed to use for class reports and such, instead we a had a list of approved books that didnt even scrape thirty titles.
That doesn't sound so odd. We didn't have a school-wide list, but I remember several of my English classes in high school having a list of books you could read for book reports. The lists might have been around 30 books long. There were enough that I never repeated any of them.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
We had the school-wide list but then each teacher had thier own opinion's and preferances. I was in HS from 02 to 06 and the state-wide AIMS test was more important than actual education, so "we" would read one book "together" partly in class and at home alone. Can you imagine reading The Hobbit for the third time sitting there listening to seventeen year-olds who have to sound out the words?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
I don't agree that that should not be allowed to say what they like. Personally, I like it when idiots with abusive tendencies make themselves so easy to identify. And I'm uneasy with telling someone they can't say something.
I also fully support telling other people how obnoxious this group is, posting scathing reviews on Amazon, and supporting just about any other group that works to fight this crap.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by Parkour:
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: I think Pearl's methods are sickening, and the fact that they seem to work is frightening, not persuasive.
How do you define "work"?
I am sure it is great to create terrified, obedient children, but as far as creating a functional member of society without any mental issues and crippling emotional frailty, I am not seeing it.
I think we're on the same page, then.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
yeah what a GREAT way to create neurotic, mentally damaged, agoraphobic, parentally and spousally abusive adults. Super great childrearing system there. A+
/edit -
also, these types of folks are in a category of people who are zealotically against the power of the state to investigate households and take children into custody. hmm! i wonder why!
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Yeah, I think these folks need to read some Alice Miller. I've been arguing with some folks on Amazon about this book and it is NOT good for my stomach or jaw.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Reading something won't change their minds. The only thing they need is to be refuted pointedly by people who figured out the radical concept of how to raise a child without resorting to crude abuse modeled around contingent stimulation.
Then, they need to be ignored.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I reckon, but they drive me so CRAZY. It's bad for my health.
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Yeah, I think these folks need to read some Alice Miller. I've been arguing with some folks on Amazon about this book and it is NOT good for my stomach or jaw.
Jaw?
I've got this image of you being so incensed that you're chewing your monitor.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sean Monahan:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Yeah, I think these folks need to read some Alice Miller. I've been arguing with some folks on Amazon about this book and it is NOT good for my stomach or jaw.
Jaw?
I've got this image of you being so incensed that you're chewing your monitor.
She could be grinding her teeth with stress.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by Sean Monahan:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Yeah, I think these folks need to read some Alice Miller. I've been arguing with some folks on Amazon about this book and it is NOT good for my stomach or jaw.
Jaw?
I've got this image of you being so incensed that you're chewing your monitor.
She could be grinding her teeth with stress.
Heh. I am grinding my teeth. All the time. It's causing me severe headaches and jaw pain. I've got to do something about it and a guard will cost me $350!!!!
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Not reading parenting sites you already know you disagree with is free.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I know... which is why I don't read No Greater Joy anymore, but I really wish folks would not use these on kids Or wild animals even.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I've got to do something about it...
You could try to avoid stressing yourself out about the habits of total strangers.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Not reading parenting sites you already know you disagree with is free.
I'd pay twice that!
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I've got to do something about it...
You could try to avoid stressing yourself out about the habits of total strangers.
It's hard to do that when it involves kids though. - teeth grinding smilie They are so vulnerable. Folks doing stuff like that breaks my heart. I'd like them to stop. It can have a bad effect on a child for their whole life.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: ... I've got to do something about it and a guard will cost me $350!!!!
At one point, I would have suggested working out your frustrations on a wiki dedicated to giving advice as a mother. But that doesn't appear to be an option anymore.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Do you think that purposely getting your heart repeatedly broken will help anything?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: ... I've got to do something about it and a guard will cost me $350!!!!
At one point, I would have suggested working out your frustrations on a wiki dedicated to giving advice as a mother. But that doesn't appear to be an option anymore.
Well, hopefully one day I'll be a parent... SOON. As I really want to be. But mainly I'm going to write to some various news outlets and I'm putting my head together with folks at GCM. (Where I am Synesthesia also)
No, it probably doesn't help, in fact folks keep telling me to stop stressing myself out as it just makes my stomach and jaw pain work and I'm trying to stop but this sort of thing makes me so angry, especially after reading That Mean Old Yesterday by Stacey Patton. Which is a brilliant book. She got treated much worse than I did. I mostly keep worrying about passing this sort of stuff down as when i lived with my mother she often employed a belt. Which made me scared of her. No way I'd want any child of mine being that scared of me, or any other child for that matter.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:what a GREAT way to create neurotic, mentally damaged, agoraphobic, parentally and spousally abusive adults.
I can dig the idea that kids raised this way will have a tendency to raise their children the same way; but I'm not sure about neurotic, agoraphobic, or parentally abusive.
Is there evidence that shows that children raised under the Pearl's system of discipline grow up to be agoraphobic et al.?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: ... I've got to do something about it and a guard will cost me $350!!!!
At one point, I would have suggested working out your frustrations on a wiki dedicated to giving advice as a mother. But that doesn't appear to be an option anymore.
hey, it's why I save threads.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:what a GREAT way to create neurotic, mentally damaged, agoraphobic, parentally and spousally abusive adults.
I can dig the idea that kids raised this way will have a tendency to raise their children the same way; but I'm not sure about neurotic, agoraphobic, or parentally abusive.
Is there evidence that shows that children raised under the Pearl's system of discipline grow up to be agoraphobic et al.?
Well... In the past folks have raised children in a harsh manner. Alice Miller talks about how this can affect children. I don't really think it's a healthy way to raise children AT ALL. Or dogs, or horses.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Well, hopefully one day I'll be a parent... SOON.
Syne, to be frank, I hope you aren't a parent any time soon.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I've got to do something about it...
You could try to avoid stressing yourself out about the habits of total strangers.
Maybe we could get the pro-life activists to adopt this philosophy as well? It is difficult to ignore people harming children. I imagine that can be even more true when the children are undeniably children.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Well, hopefully one day I'll be a parent... SOON.
Syne, to be frank, I hope you aren't a parent any time soon.
That is kind of harsh... Why? I know I'm not in the financial position to be a parent now, being that I only have temporary jobs and I need a bit more structure, but still!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
1) You're single and have no support network of your own. 2) You're financially unable to support a child. 3) You are very emotionally immature. 4) You are desperately looking for a child to, in essence, validate your existence. This is, in my opinion, a bad reason to raise a child.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: 1) You're single and have no support network of your own. 2) You're financially unable to support a child. 3) You are very emotionally immature. 4) You are desperately looking for a child to, in essence, validate your existence. This is, in my opinion, a bad reason to raise a child.
OK. I admit 1, and 2 are valid reasons. I think I am immature in some ways, but mature in others, but 4, now how do you know that is the case? Especially if you are only seeing my words online, and not actually residing in my head? I decided I wanted to have and adopt children back when I was about 26. I never thought I'd want to have kids, but now there's that strong biological pull to have them. The thing is, I don't want to raise my future children the way I was raised. So I learned about attachment, about other ways to raise children besides smacking and hitting. It's a start. It's a lot farther than some folks have gone. I'm not going to go out and get pregnant tomorrow. I have a lot of maturing and stabilizing, self searching and the like to do. Also it would help to have a nice partner. Especially a male one who agrees with me when it comes to discipline and will not hit any of my kids for any reason at all, who will want to be an attachment parent like I do, but that could take a while. I'm in no rush. There's still quite a few things I'd like to do, like publish, get a stable sort of job, have more money and one day have the maturity to adopt special needs children and have biological ones, but not, as you said, to validate my existence, but because I'd really like to raise children, teach and guide them. I'm not in the slightest bit perfect, and I never will be, but I will work hard to be a good parent. When I am ready.
Also, I admit I'm torn between liking being single and childless, and looking forward to having my life changed by having a child. I feel like I am ahead of my own parents a bit at least because I really want to have a child or two and to do what it takes to be mature enough and ready to raise that kid. I've done pretty well for myself over the last few years. Living on my own. Working hard when I had a job. yes, I am delayed on some levels, but not so much on others. I'm preparing for the future. It's painful to me to want a child and to know that people who have children hurt them in the name of love. It doesn't make sense. I know what it's like to have someone love and care about you so much, but they still hurt you anyway. It's so confusing. Children are one of the final frontiers when it comes to making the world a better place.
[ March 07, 2010, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: Synesthesia ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Syn, #3 and #4 are blatantly obvious to me as well.
Posted by dabbler (Member # 6443) on :
I found a review looking at corporal punishment. There are plenty of articles about physical abuse/maltreatment but I guess the closest to Pearl's behaviors are corporal punishment as management of children.
quote:Ten of the 11 meta-analyses indicate parental corporal punishment is associate with the following undesirable behaviors and experiences: decreased moral internalization, increased child aggression, increased child delinquent and antisocial behavior, decreased quality of relationship between parent and child, decreased child mental health, increased risk of being a victim of physical abuse, increased adult aggression, increased adult criminal and antisocial behavior, decreased adult mental health, and increased risk of abusing own child or spouse. Corporal punishment was associated with only one desirable behavior, namely, increased immediate compliance (whether immediate compliance constitutes a meaningful desirable behavior is qualified below).
Depression may be higher, shown in a retrospective study. Associated with increased antisocial behavior or "externalizing behaviors" at a young age even after controlling for other variables. This review for the Journal of Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics looks interesting, though I can only see the abstract. Too lazy to go fetch my ID to login to the hospital.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Syn, #3 and #4 are blatantly obvious to me as well.
Still kind of harsh, because how do you guys know 4 is the case? So many folks have kids without even thinking about it and what it entails. I got to admit I'm trying to be ahead of the game a bit by trying to understand what it means to transition into a parent. I could be romanticizing it a bit, but I think about my own childhood and what I do not want for my kids when I have them... And one thing that bothers me, especially when talking to my mother is this attitude that children are "bad" and somehow you must control them from the beginning. I don't even understand where that attitude came from and why it's alive today.
Being too harsh towards children can cause delays. Crying it out can lead to large amounts of cortisol in the brain. I don't know where all of this stuff comes from, but it seems a lot worse than my imperfections. Which i am slowly working on.
I don't really think I'm immature. I have the tendency to get all flappy over things like butterflies and moths, but that doesn't mean immaturity. It means being myself. I've done my own thing mostly. No drugs, no alcohol, no irresponsible sex. I don't know. I'm doing kind of well. I'm not totally where I want to be, but that takes a lot of hard work and time.
[ March 07, 2010, 06:51 PM: Message edited by: Synesthesia ]
Posted by Yozhik (Member # 89) on :
I agree with the basic point -- harsh punishment of children is wrong. I like the words of a past leader of my church, who said that his father never laid a hand on his children except to bless them. I was subject to yelling and corporal punishment too, including the belt and the attitude that "children are bad," and I'm trying to do things very differently with my two kids.
Syn, you've had serious issues with the opinions of our site host, so I'm curious to see what you think of this column, in which he shares some child-rearing philosophy.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Ok, that article I loved. I love it when he talks about kids, because most of the time he's so warm and kind about it, like when he's talking about changing kids diapers and how it's not a very pleasant task, but still... It's so nice. It's why Lost Boys is a favourite book of mine by OSC even though I can't read it again because I'll cry. A lot. I like it when I agree about something with someone I usually disagree with. Which may be a sentence with bad grammar, but that's just such a nicer way to deal with a child than yelling and hitting and breaking the eggs AND their hearts.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I don't really think I'm immature. I have the tendency to get all flappy over things like butterflies and moths, but that doesn't mean immaturity.
I can't speak for Tom, but that has nothing to do with my saying you act immature here. That has to do with the fact that you seem unable to pass up any opportunity to respond -- often to fairly unrelated things -- in a very negative way. Every thread someone makes about child-rearing doesn't need a rant about the Pearls. Every time someone mentions specific OSC books, you need not mention that you dislike them.
I'm sorry, Syn. I like you. I think you could be a happy person, and I wish you would take more of the advice people have given you here over the years. But you seem determined to be negative and unhappy. And mostly, that makes me very sad. But when you talk about having a kid -- and soon! -- it scares the crap out of me.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I could be romanticizing it a bit, but I think about my own childhood and what I do not want for my kids when I have them...
You're romanticizing it a lot. You seem to think that you can have kids and somehow do it right, as in "better than (your) parents did." This is not the case. Speaking as a parent, the best you can ever do -- especially relative to your own parents -- is "less wrong." You don't have to prove yourself to your parents (or yourself) by raising children better than they did.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I could be romanticizing it a bit, but I think about my own childhood and what I do not want for my kids when I have them...
You're romanticizing it a lot. You seem to think that you can have kids and somehow do it right, as in "better than (your) parents did." This is not the case. Speaking as a parent, the best you can ever do -- especially relative to your own parents -- is "less wrong." You don't have to prove yourself to your parents (or yourself) by raising children better than they did.
It's not a matter of proving myself to my parents, but more... about... well at least not hitting them for starters. It's about doing what is best for them and what will help them to grow up with some semblance of... wholeness. It just makes me sad to have more memories of being hit by my mother than hugged. I know she loves me and stuck by me when I had cancer, but she also hit me a bit excessively when I was having chemo. It's not just about the kids themselves, but THEIR kids, and their kid's kids. Having children is influencing generations long after you're gone. That's why that foundation of love and trust is so important and why it's important to undo that stuff as soon as possible.
quote: I'm sorry, Syn. I like you. I think you could be a happy person, and I wish you would take more of the advice people have given you here over the years. But you seem determined to be negative and unhappy. And mostly, that makes me very sad. But when you talk about having a kid -- and soon! -- it scares the crap out of me.
Uh, you're not around me all the time. Most of the time I'm running around chirping with happiness over a song, a good book. All sorts of things, but it's hard to ignore something like kids being hit because it has a huge effect on the whole of society. Plus I am trying to focus more on the Good Stuff. Such as getting more cocoons and chrysalises, but it's hard to ignore the bad stuff, and I can't ignore something like millions of kids being hurt for a no good reason. But I am pretty content, and I did mention that I love Lost Boys, as it's so heartfelt. I should focus on Neil Gaiman a bit more than OSC, but, if I disagree with something, there's nothing wrong with stating it. I tend to disagree with aspects of OSC's point of view because I don't think it has the healthiest effect on society, and he's doing the same thing even as I'm thinking, homosexuality is NOT going to destroy America.
But I definitely can appreciate his sweet warmer articles.
What this does to do with me having kids is beyond me. I'm not even sure this is supposed to be about me, but a strong desire for kids to not be treated harshly anymore. Plus I started this thread to bring this guy to people's attention because he really does need to be stopped so other kids don't have to suffer that way. That dude is the real negative thing to try to stop. I'm usually quite content with my life and myself, though there's ways I could make things a lot better.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:What this does to do with me having kids is beyond me.
That's actually part of what bothers me, Syne. You need more self-awareness if you're going to be a good mother. Otherwise, the first time your kid says "I hate you," it'll destroy you.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:What this does to do with me having kids is beyond me.
That's actually part of what bothers me, Syne. You need more self-awareness if you're going to be a good mother. Otherwise, the first time your kid says "I hate you," it'll destroy you.
Not really. They seldom mean that. Usually they are just angry for the moment. Then there's, "You're not my REAL mommy." Which I may get in the future.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Intellectually understanding what a child may mean does not necessarily prepare you for having it said.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
This is true... I think teens scare me more than toddlers and kids combine.
They are so... tall. So much harder to redirect. So many hormones of rage and stuff. urg... teenagers ><
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:What this does to do with me having kids is beyond me.
That's actually part of what bothers me, Syne. You need more self-awareness if you're going to be a good mother. Otherwise, the first time your kid says "I hate you," it'll destroy you.
Not really. They seldom mean that. Usually they are just angry for the moment.
Not true. Not when they're teenagers. They can really, REALLY mean it then.
And every adorable infant or cute toddler becomes a teenager sooner or later. Mostly sooner.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:What this does to do with me having kids is beyond me.
That's actually part of what bothers me, Syne. You need more self-awareness if you're going to be a good mother. Otherwise, the first time your kid says "I hate you," it'll destroy you.
Not really. They seldom mean that. Usually they are just angry for the moment.
Not true. Not when they're teenagers. They can really, REALLY mean it then.
And every adorable infant or cute toddler becomes a teenager sooner or later. Mostly sooner.
That's what makes teenagers so scary. I wasn't like that when I was a teen, but then I was rather shy... and a bit dull. I just wanted to read and listen to music all day.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I could be romanticizing it a bit, but I think about my own childhood and what I do not want for my kids when I have them...
You're romanticizing it a lot. You seem to think that you can have kids and somehow do it right,as in "better than (your) parents did." This is not the case. Speaking as a parent, the best you can ever do -- especially relative to your own parents -- is "less wrong." You don't have to prove yourself to your parents (or yourself) by raising children better than they did.
Tom I agree with almost everything you've been saying here, but I have to disagree with the bolded section. It is absolutely possible to be a better parent than one's own parents were, and I don't think it's wrong for someone to feel that's a goal to strive for.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
That's actually the least of what makes teenagers scary. I have two of the critters.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Synesthesia, fwiw, I haven't noticed you being any more messed up or less mature or "ready" than many people who turn out to be perfectly fine parents.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I don't think it's wrong for someone to feel that's a goal to strive for.
I think it is, however, a horrible reason to have children.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Oh! Certainly! Agreed then.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Synesthesia, fwiw, I haven't noticed you being any more messed up or less mature or "ready" than many people who turn out to be perfectly fine parents.
And as a non-parent, you would be a much better judge than two parents.
Of course, you'll explain why that's irrelevant.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I don't think it's wrong for someone to feel that's a goal to strive for.
I think it is, however, a horrible reason to have children.
But how do you know that's my only reason to have children? I really would simply like to raise my children better than I was raised. It makes sense to me as parenting is the most important job EVER in the whole world. My own parents were only 20 and 21 when they had me. I'm 31 now. I don't think my father wanted to have a kid, and my mother was abused terribly as a child. That's pretty much the main reason why I want to strive to at least be gentler and less harsh. It's not like I'm thinking, I will be the PERFECT PARENT, because perfection doesn't really exist, but I'll have to work hard not to hit, not to yell, not to be too harsh and to care about those kids' feelings.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Synesthesia, fwiw, I haven't noticed you being any more messed up or less mature or "ready" than many people who turn out to be perfectly fine parents.
And as a non-parent, you would be a much better judge than two parents.
Of course, you'll explain why that's irrelevant.
I'm not sure that response was deserved. Many people aren't visibly prepared, don't show signs of the things that make good parents... and then are OK parents.
Syn is at least right in that studying parenting puts her ahead of the curve compared to many other parents.
More importantly - she also seems to recognize that she's not ready. So as far as I can tell, there's no need to belabor the point.
"Synethesia" is a persona that is noticeably different from the version of herself that shows up on Ornery.org, and this to me is enough to indicate that Syne isn't the real person. Syne emotes. And likes butterflies and chrysalises. And loves music. And is drastically wistful.
I believe the qualities I've listed are deliberately evoked.
There are other things, of course, which are of greater concern. But she's aware of them.
I think what touched off this derail was Synethesia-the-persona evoking wistfulness and childlike eagerness, but this time about parenting.
Person-behind-Synethesia quickly noted that she's not really looking to get pregnant right now or anything. So we can relax.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Yeah, it would be impossible for me to get pregnant right now anyway, it's only PART of my persona, the moth loving musically passionate one, folks sure do have a lot of layers to them. So it's part of the real person, but not the whole as there's other aspects of me that folks do not always see.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Though I don't know if the answer would be persuasive to anyone, would you agree with my guess that you are deliberately projecting a childlike persona on Hatrack, and that the "real" you is not so childlike?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Syne emotes. And likes butterflies and chrysalises. And loves music. And is drastically wistful.
None of which has anything to do with what concerns me (and I would guess, Tom).
And I would not have said a word had she not been trying to ignore and explain away Tom's concerns, just as she has ignored or explained away a lot of Hatrack attempts to help her over the last 7 years.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I have known perfectly lovely people who become dreadful innatentive parents, and lazy self-absorbed recreational drug users who devote thier entire selves to thier babies. A happily married couple with three children whose relationship started when she started following my friend around and including herself in whatever he was doing, she also had a perpensity for punching him which made us all wonder why he put up with her... but five years later and three kids thier bond is sugar sweet and a bit annoying.
Ive typed all this to present two questions, who cares how and why Syn wants to have a baby and how do you truely know anything about her? for heavens sake before this I had never cared to wonder what gender Synesthesia would indicate. Its not harsh to start questioning her future adequacies like this, its down-right rude.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Though I don't know if the answer would be persuasive to anyone, would you agree with my guess that you are deliberately projecting a childlike persona on Hatrack, and that the "real" you is not so childlike?
Well, I am not so sure, I suspect I may have Asperger's but that could have something to do with it. But me being "child-like" doesn't mean I'm some dopy person. I'm agreeing with Achillesheel up there. I started this topic to point out Pearl and the cruel things his followers are doing to children. It really shouldn't be a "let's jump on Synesthesia for being too immature to be a parent" thread, especially since I've acknowledged that I'm not ready to be a parent NOW. I've notice that folks on and off the internet have a tendency to jump on me. It's not as if I'm not listening to people's advice, I am trying to explain myself, but this usually leads to more jumping. Which is starting to frustrate me. I have the tendency to be meek and slow to anger when it comes to things involving me. I politely ask that instead of folks jumping on me for my future personal decisions, which seems deeply unfair to me, that folks focus on the more pressing topic at hand. Especially since short of someone dumping a baby into my lap, I won't be having or adopting kids for at least a year or so. And I sure as hell wouldn't raise them using such inhumane methods. There's a lot of facades to me, by the way. Just because I'm not pretending to be some stiff dignified person, doesn't mean I'm sort of ditz to be jumped on constantly.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:especially since I've acknowledged that I'm not ready to be a parent NOW.
I would like you to acknowledge that you are not ready to be a parent SOON. Like, not within the next three years at least. I'm really not kidding about this, Syne; you know I'm rooting for you in most elements of your personal life, but your deep desire to acquire a baby somehow is a perfect example of putting the cart before the horse.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: you know I'm rooting for you in most elements of your personal life, but your deep desire to acquire a baby somehow is a perfect example of putting the cart before the horse.
Amen.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Well, I am not so sure, I suspect I may have Asperger's but that could have something to do with it.
Two things:
1. Aspberger's is being removed as a diagnosis. 2. Anything like this — an autistic spectrum disorder — should not be self-diagnosed. Leads to too many countereffectual self-management strategies which include but are not limited to using your self-diagnosis as an excuse for not directly tackling life issues, or not managing them properly.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Aspberger's is being removed as a diagnosis.
Which many people, layperson and professional alike, strongly disagree with.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
I really don't understand the need of some of you to tell Syne she is too immature to have a child. This is an internet forum people. If you know her personally outside of the forum I can understand it a little more, but to judge someone based on a forum is folly. Syne acknowledged that she is not ready, but even after this it seems some of you keep twisting that screw deeper and deeper.
I have opinions and beliefs as well, but you have no idea what type of person I am outside of the forum. To all of the women I work with at my job I am their funny little brother, always cracking jokes. You don't see that side of me here on the forums. You don't see how I interact with my two 2 year old nieces, and how I spend hours with them every week teaching them the alphabet and different words. You didn't see how proud I was when one of my little nieces told her dad where rain comes from and said the word evaporate in a sentence. To them I am a teacher. To my 4 younger brothers and my younger sister, I am their big brother that always looks out for them, even though we are all grown up.
My point is that you can't judge someone solely based on an internet forum. Tempers flare, posts are taken out of context, and sometimes we can type completely outrageous posts when we are angry, tired, drunk, or otherwise "out of it." Try to be a little more understanding.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I really don't understand the need of some of you to tell Syne she is too immature to have a child. This is an internet forum people.
Were she only to try to adopt Internet children, I would not care.
quote:I have opinions and beliefs as well, but you have no idea what type of person I am outside of the forum.
This is, quite frankly, not my fault. If you want me to take your other personality traits into consideration, exhibit them. I won't apologize for otherwise not being aware that they exist.
What I know of Syne tells me that she is not ready to be a mother. Period.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
One pretty good indicator of emotional immaturity, I think, is grinding one's teeth over stuff one reads on the Internet to the point they consider purchasing expensive dental equipment to alleviate the problem...instead of either avoiding the stuff proactively, or not being so destructively upset about it.
Seriously, Syn, if you can't handle this, what makes you think you're possibly equipped to handle raising a child? That may sound harsh, but bear in mind 'fit to raise a child' is a pretty high standard, and there isn't any shame in failing to meet that standard before you actually have a child.
quote:It's not a matter of proving myself to my parents, but more... about... well at least not hitting them for starters.
That's why that foundation of love and trust is so important and why it's important to undo that stuff as soon as possible.
These are just a few of what might be called red flags regarding parenting ability and motives for being a parent, Synethesia. Proving yourself to your parents shouldn't be anywhere on a list of reasons to have a kid, but you're speaking as though it's there, just not much. You're talking about creating and raising a human life, at least in small part for the purposes of proving something to your parents? That kid isn't a vehicle to continue an argument with your parents, no matter how right you are. If you were absolutely, undeniably, 110% right and they were all the way totally wrong, it still wouldn't be fair to the child. It would still be quite selfish, frankly.
As to the second, no matter what kind of parenting job you did with a hypothetical kid, it would never, ever, not even a little undo what was done to you as a child. A kid isn't a time-traveling DeLorean, it's another human life. It doesn't exist to heal you. Even if it could, that's not its job.
Now, kmbboots may be quite right. If you had a child today, you may turn out to be a perfectly fine parent...but if you did, that wouldn't change the fact that your motives right now, that you're talking about here, are...well, they're pretty crappy.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Aspberger's is being removed as a diagnosis.
Which many people, layperson and professional alike, strongly disagree with.
Well, about that — aspies have always pretty much been considered to have a high functioning autistic spectrum disorder. Given the ambiguity over testable functions to certify and differentiate an aspie from a person with an otherwise nondifferentiated autistic spectrum disorder, the removal of aspbergers from the DSM makes sense until there's a clear test and easily demonstrated mental difference that would show aspies to be notably different in a consistent way from the general body of ASD not otherwise specified.
I'm not set one way or the other on the issue but I easily anticipated the controversy. I knew it would be controversial especially among people who greatly self-associate with the label.
Aspies are weird, and the infamous self-diagnosed aspies are weirder, and there are a fantastic amount of them who are fiercely defensive because they consider the label to be an integral part of their personality.
I forget who it was around here who talked about other 'humans' disdainfully as if they were very distinct from them and as a not-human found them very quaint, but they were a perfect example of someone who whether they have a professional diagnosis of an autistic spectrum disorder, are manifesting their fixative exclusion-by-labeling in a rather self-obsessed way. And this is a common occurrence (really, you'll see it a lot) with people with Aspbergers/high functioning ASD. Which leads to a problem: people who are certainly not receiving a qualified diagnosis for aspbergers are highly desirous of the inclusive labeling of the 'aspie community' and will jump into that, regardless as to many degrees of incomparability with the block diagnosis.
What the change is doing is taking away the block diagnosis due to lack of clear, acid tests of the applicability of the diagnosis versus ASD, and moving towards a continuum based diagnosis with more variability towards understanding what is a quite variable condition.
Can't say I necessarily disagree with it. but I know that the aspie community is going to be filled with people who are going to be vehemently bitter about this.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: My point is that you can't judge someone solely based on an internet forum.
In many cases, you pretty much can.
Really.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
Hey Hatrack, hey, hey, nobody asked you.
You guys need to find something better to do than make yourselves feel better about how awesomely rational your decisions were to have kids.
There are so many worse criticisms you could level against a person who wanted to have kids than that they would care too much. Hopefully Syne won't turn-out a bunch of elitists snobs like I'm sure the rest of you are doing.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by jebus202: You guys need to find something better to do than make yourselves feel better about how awesomely rational your decisions were to have kids.
Really don't think that's what they're doing at all, dude
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by jebus202: You guys need to find something better to do than make yourselves feel better about how awesomely rational your decisions were to have kids.
Really don't think that's what they're doing at all, dude
/edit
quote:There are so many worse criticisms you could level against a person who wanted to have kids than that they would care too much.
this too is bypassing the conflict entirely. don't parse their position down to 'syn would care too much' when the issue really comes down to statements that indicate that someone is not prepared to have children but wants to have them soon for very disagreeable stated reasons.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
And from what I've read from what Syne has been saying, she's put more effort in trying to understand effective methods of parenting than the majority of people do. Maybe Syne will never meet Hatrack's standards of "the right parent" but that doesn't mean she should never have kids. Frankly, to me it sounds like she couldn't be any worse than the average parent.
Also, if Syne was a Mormon, acting in the exact same way, I believe certain people would support her choices much more.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
You're absolutely right. Tom and I both give Mormons way more slack than non-Mormons.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Maybe Syne will never meet Hatrack's standards of "the right parent" but that doesn't mean she should never have kids.
how many people here are saying she should never have kids?
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Maybe Syne will never meet Hatrack's standards of "the right parent" but that doesn't mean she should never have kids.
how many people here are saying she should never have kids?
They are telling her to not have kids provided she does not meet their standards for maturity. The implication is that if she never meets these standards, she should never have kids.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Before Syne has kids, I would like her to:
1) Have a steady income, ideally one that provides decent healthcare. 2) Have a reliable support network of friends and family, if not a spouse. 3) Have forgiven her parents, and have moved beyond the desire to "fix" their mistakes with children of her own.
The third is deeper than it sounds. Syne wants kids but doesn't want a family; to me, that strongly suggests control issues.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: You're absolutely right. Tom and I both give Mormons way more slack than non-Mormons.
I didn't mean you guys. I was more talking about people who are not speaking up in her defence.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by jebus202:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Maybe Syne will never meet Hatrack's standards of "the right parent" but that doesn't mean she should never have kids.
how many people here are saying she should never have kids?
They are telling her to not have kids provided she does not meet their standards for maturity. The implication is that if she never meets these standards, she should never have kids.
That is a completely different implication than telling someone that they should never have kids. Like, entirely.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Also, if Syne was a Mormon, acting in the exact same way, I believe certain people would support her choices much more.
If she were a Mormon, acting in the same way, she'd be going against the teachings of her church.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by jebus202:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Maybe Syne will never meet Hatrack's standards of "the right parent" but that doesn't mean she should never have kids.
how many people here are saying she should never have kids?
They are telling her to not have kids provided she does not meet their standards for maturity. The implication is that if she never meets these standards, she should never have kids.
That is a completely different implication than telling someone that they should never have kids. Like, entirely.
That's not what my original statement you have quoted there said. Agreed, it was less clear than the second time, but it's still essentially the same, defining the parameters by which some people at Hatrack would feel Syne should never have kids.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
The hangup here (well, ONE of yours, anyway) is that it is an entirely sensible thing to say that people who are not fit to be a parent should not become a parent at that point in time, and the "if you never become a fit parent ever, then you should never be a parent" is derived from that. nobody here is suggesting that Syne will never be in a good position to be a parent, they're noting that her parental ideation appears consistently to be a bad idea and that they don't personally feel comfortable with it.
And this isn't even "hatrack's standards." We are not a monolithic block of judgment. You don't get an official Hatrack Seal of Parenting Approval that anyone is vying for. It is individual people who are making these declarations.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm Mormon. I am not defending her because, and you did ask, she has posted continually about 1) her difficulties in finding and keeping even menial jobs; 2) her lack of a support system of any kind - I get the impression that she has no family and few if any friends; and 3) the function she wants a child to fill could be satisfied by a virtual pet.
I think talking about wanting a child is fine. Actually having one, though, is different, and there are a dozen red flags as to why such a situation would be bad for the kid.
It takes more than a determination not to hit them. Tom made a good list of the minimum, none of which Syn can provide.
The Mormon in me, ON TOP of all that, thinks that kids need two parents and that isn't a joke, and deliberately depriving a child of that is not a kindness.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by jebus202: ... I was more talking about people who are not speaking up in her defence.
Yup. You pegged me. I am deliberately not speaking up in her defence because I have a secret soft-spot for Mormons.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Before Syne has kids, I would like her to:
1) Have a steady income, ideally one that provides decent healthcare. 2) Have a reliable support network of friends and family, if not a spouse. 3) Have forgiven her parents, and have moved beyond the desire to "fix" their mistakes with children of her own.
The third is deeper than it sounds. Syne wants kids but doesn't want a family; to me, that strongly suggests control issues.
Thats lovely, because you can also "like" a mint parfait and a pony. I believe this would be a more rational desire on your part seeing as short of physical actions being taken you have nothing to do with the matter
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Those are reasonable criteria. In fact, anyone who wants to take care of a kid and does NOT meet that criteria should seriously consider whether than have a kid's best interest at heart. A child's need for a stable home and sane and supported parents is very real.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
We hadn't succeeded in #1 yet when we had our first child, but we were well on our way toward it with a plan on how we would get there.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I like it when jebus sweeps in periodically to teach us all a lesson we so richly deserve:)
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Thats lovely, because you can also "like" a mint parfait and a pony.
I'm under no illusion that I have any power over Syne beyond simple disapproval. However, I'm free to voice my disapproval, and let that do what it can.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Uh, people, how do did this thread turn into let's jump on me? I started this thread to talk about PEARL and his abusive techniques. Not to talk about my very far away future decisions.
And how do you know I don't want a family, TomDavidson? I want to meet a nice man, (maybe even a woman, but I really want a man more.) have (if I can, the chemo might have made me infertile, that's a worry) children and adopt special needs children. Maybe become a foster parent. I've already pointed out that I'm not ready to have kids, but folks make it seem like I absolutely cannot hold down jobs or that I will throw myself at a random man to have a child when I'm not even DOING anything to conceive children, especially since I'm old fashioned in the sense that I'd love to have children and adopt children with someone I love. I'm feeling like I'm being painted with a sort of Nadia Suleman brush, which is a bit unfair, as I do not do such things to other people. Why do this to me? I politely set up boundaries and asked people to stop doing this, and yet they insisted on doing it anyway. Cut it out. Your disapproval has been noted, but, isn't it a little bit unfair and harsh? Just a bit? There's no way I'd pass a home study now, and I've only recently started a new job that's temporary, as well as working an oncall job. I really don't see the need for these kind of... rude personal attacks.
Also, why is it a bad thing for me NOT to want to become the sort of parent my parents were? This isn't my sole reason for having children, but these things are a cycle, and it's important to be aware of it and to stop it. Which is what I'm trying to do...
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:isn't it a little bit unfair and harsh?
No. You said you wanted a child soon, ideally within a couple years.
If you have now changed your mind, I have achieved exactly what I intended by commenting on that ambition.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I feel as if you were out of line when this http://spunkyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2010/02/senseless-deception.html is what this topic is about. If you want to go on and on some more about why and how I'm not ready to be a mother when I'm already aware of this, take it elsewhere, please.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Also, why is it a bad thing for me NOT to want to become the sort of parent my parents were? This isn't my sole reason for having children, but these things are a cycle, and it's important to be aware of it and to stop it.
I'm only responding because you've posed a question.
*IF* you have children, you should endeavor to do better. I don't think anyone has contested this. This just shouldn't be the motivation to have a child in the first place, not even a little bit. Wanting to have a child because you can provide a stable, loving environment for them is a healthy motivation. Wanting a child (even partly) because you want to be a better parent than your parents were is not about having a child, it's about resolving issues with your parents.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
1) You do not get to decide what the topic is about just because you started it. 2) Personally, I'd rather not start a thread about this. Where else would you rather take it -- especially since I've already said my piece? 3) Besides, if you are indeed aware that you are not ready to be a mother and will not be ready "soon," you and I don't have anything to disagree about. Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP:
quote:Also, why is it a bad thing for me NOT to want to become the sort of parent my parents were? This isn't my sole reason for having children, but these things are a cycle, and it's important to be aware of it and to stop it.
I'm only responding because you've posed a question.
*IF* you have children, you should endeavor to do better. I don't think anyone has contested this. This just shouldn't be the motivation to have a child in the first place, not even a little bit. Wanting to have a child because you can provide a stable, loving environment for them is a healthy motivation. Wanting a child (even partly) because you can be a better parent than your parents were is not about having a child, it's about resolving issues with your parents.
I did say that's not why I want to be a parent. To be a better parent than my parents were... But that foundation of love and trust is important. I'm glad I didn't have children when I was 20 because I wouldn't have known how important attachment is. It's essential.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I did say that's not why I want to be a parent.
I'm responding to this:
quote:This isn't my sole reason for having children, but...
This suggests that it's a reason, even if not the sole reason. It shouldn't even be a consideration.
If I misunderstood, then I apologize.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
That was a buzzer for me too, Synethesia. Your language pretty clearly indicates (still does, actually) that dealing with a disagreement with your parents is at least part of the motive, however small, behind your desire to have children.
Now, look, I really am sorry if you feel like this is jumping on you-but that's a crappy motive. I would say that to anyone using similar language on a thread I happened to read. I don't think I'd even heard of the Pearls until I read this thread. I thought it was a music story somehow, actually.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP:
quote:I did say that's not why I want to be a parent.
I'm responding to this:
quote:This isn't my sole reason for having children, but...
This suggests that it's a reason, even if not the sole reason. It shouldn't even be a consideration.
If I misunderstood, then I apologize.
You ignored the things I said afterwards. About cycles. My mother loves me, but she was borderline abusive. My father cares about me, but he didn't want a child and he wasn't always present. Had it not been for my grandmother raising me more than I parents did, I probably would have been worse off, as I mostly lived in fear when I was living with my mother who'd hit me with a belt even as I was having chemo. I cannot understand why I'm being jumped on for this. There's larger issues I'm looking at. Issues like not continuing the cycle. My own mother was abused by her father, hit with extension cords, hangers. It's sort of a disturbing tradition, especially in the African American community of whoopin' that ass, teaching that child their place, according to Stacey Patton, it's a relic from slavery. There's a certain attitude about children, especially toddlers, that goes so against the love and trust kids need to really thrive as adults.
I have politely asked people to respect my boundaries, and they haven't. We've already established that I am not ready to be a parent. I'm aware of this. I have issues, everyone does, but I'm working hard to face them head on.
Now let's get to the more important pressing issue at hand, which is how to stop people like Pearl, Tripp, Ezzo, and Dobson, whose attitudes about children cause a lot of pain to both parents and children. I suggest reading That Mean Old Yesterday by Stacey Patton and see why it's important to me not to pass that sort of thing down, even though it's such a part of the culture.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I cannot understand why I'm being jumped on for this
I think you can avoid this outcome next time. If it's something you don't want to be pressed on, say you don't wish to discuss it instead of responding with questions and opening the issue up. Most of the response here was basically a response to your questions.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
So that Pearl seems like a real jerk.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Where did you ask people to respect your boundaries? You may very well have, and if you made it clear you didn't want to discuss this I'm sorry. But your posts can be difficult to read sometimes because you frequently don't break for paragraphs, plus it can be easy to forget someone doesn't want to discuss something if they continue making declarative statements about it to a group of people.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I like it when jebus sweeps in periodically to teach us all a lesson we so richly deserve:)
I've got to ask, is this built on a West Wing quote?
Hobbes Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Where did you ask people to respect your boundaries? You may very well have, and if you made it clear you didn't want to discuss this I'm sorry. But your posts can be difficult to read sometimes because you frequently don't break for paragraphs, plus it can be easy to forget someone doesn't want to discuss something if they continue making declarative statements about it to a group of people.
Up there, several times. I'm trying to explain myself, but I really shouldn't have to. Especially since people shouldn't make assumptions about my motives to have children when they only know me online. It's quite rude.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I'm trying to explain myself, but I really shouldn't have to.
I'm unclear on this. Why shouldn't you explain yourself? Note that no one is saying you have to; you have chosen to do so. Should we prevent you from explaining yourself if you want to?
quote:Especially since people shouldn't make assumptions about my motives to have children when they only know me online.
Unless you've been lying about your motives for child-rearing all these years, I think you've told us enough that we can draw our own conclusions.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote: Have forgiven her parents, and have moved beyond the desire to "fix" their mistakes with children of her own.
QFT
I don't mean this just or even particularly about Synesthesia. A large part of maturing and becoming a healthy well adjusted adult, is learning to forgive your parents. All parents, even the best parents, make mistakes. Some, or course, make far more serious mistakes but perhaps counter intuitively the more serious our parents mistakes are the more important it is for our own mental health that we move past them.
Dwelling on the past is self destructive.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Sure is, Hobbes:)
quote:Especially since people shouldn't make assumptions about my motives to have children when they only know me online.
So when you make clear, consistent statements in a thread about your motives, should we assume you're lying about those motives or at best that those statements were irrelevant because we know you online?
Also, up there where? It really is difficult to read your posts, especially reading only your posts on a page-the lack of paragraph breaks makes it tougher to read. Looking back, when you first started talking about a desire to be a parent, you hadn't said anything about not wanting to talk about it.
Then when Tom spoke against that desire, you specifically asked him why he felt that way! You went on to rebut his argument with a specific list of items.
On looking back, you asked twice...but continued talking about it. Also when you asked you said people were jumping on you and that they weren't respecting your boundaries-boundaries which you didn't set by opening up the topic yourself!
Now, look, if you don't want to talk about it that's fine with me, I won't talk about it anymore. But let's get on board at least with the idea that it's pretty unreasonable, on a discussion board, to say, "I don't want to talk about this," and then make statements about it and when people object respond to them with lists.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia:
I want to meet a nice man, (maybe even a woman, but I really want a man more.) have (if I can, the chemo might have made me infertile, that's a worry) children and adopt special needs children. Maybe become a foster parent. I've already pointed out that I'm not ready to have kids, but folks make it seem like I absolutely cannot hold down jobs or that I will throw myself at a random man to have a child when I'm not even DOING anything to conceive children, especially since I'm old fashioned in the sense that I'd love to have children and adopt children with someone I love. I'm feeling like I'm being painted with a sort of Nadia Suleman brush, which is a bit unfair, as I do not do such things to other people. Why do this to me? I politely set up boundaries and asked people to stop doing this, and yet they insisted on doing it anyway. Cut it out. Your disapproval has been noted, but, isn't it a little bit unfair and harsh?
Syne, I have two co-workers that are foster parents and absolutely love doing it. They find it very rewarding. They have different kinds of foster homes, some short and some long term. One of the co-workers is a single lady that raised two kids of her own, and now spends her time taking care of kids as a foster mom. She received one child when she was a two weeks old, and has had her for nine months now. Another child she has had for three months, and later this week she will oficially be adopted by another co-worker.
If you feel you want to get a feel for how parenting is and want to help some kids at the same time, I suggest you look into the foster program in your state. You receive some state funding to help out with food and other needed items (diapers, food, etc.) and most states usually cover medical expenses and even day care.
I can see how the two foster moms here at my office have had their lives changed by helping these kids out, and it really is a rewarding experience. Whenever they get a new child and need clothes, toys, or other items everyone in the office will help out and bring stuff for them. They sometimes bring the kids in so we can meet them. This is what led to the adoption.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote: Have forgiven her parents, and have moved beyond the desire to "fix" their mistakes with children of her own.
QFT
I don't mean this just or even particularly about Synesthesia. A large part of maturing and becoming a healthy well adjusted adult, is learning to forgive your parents. All parents, even the best parents, make mistakes. Some, or course, make far more serious mistakes but perhaps counter intuitively the more serious our parents mistakes are the more important it is for our own mental health that we move past them.
Dwelling on the past is self destructive.
Agreed... And it's sometimes very difficult, especially when one feels badly wronged, to remember that forgiveness is often at least as much for the well-being of the one forgiving.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sterling:
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote: Have forgiven her parents, and have moved beyond the desire to "fix" their mistakes with children of her own.
QFT
I don't mean this just or even particularly about Synesthesia. A large part of maturing and becoming a healthy well adjusted adult, is learning to forgive your parents. All parents, even the best parents, make mistakes. Some, or course, make far more serious mistakes but perhaps counter intuitively the more serious our parents mistakes are the more important it is for our own mental health that we move past them.
Dwelling on the past is self destructive.
Agreed... And it's sometimes very difficult, especially when one feels badly wronged, to remember that forgiveness is often at least as much for the well-being of the one forgiving.
Forgiveness is well and good, but it's not dwelling on the past but thinking about the future. I will not fall into the trap of passing this sort of thing on. I must admit me and my mother's relationship is a bit better. In college I used to be too scared to talk to her on the phone. But now we talk quite a bit... Me and my father talk sometimes too and he sends me Birthday and Xmas money.
I want to be a foster parent one day. There's such a need for it.Plus foster care reform is another concern of mine.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I will not fall into the trap of passing this sort of thing on.
*whisper* Not having children is one way to avoid that.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I will not fall into the trap of passing this sort of thing on.
*whisper* Not having children is one way to avoid that.
Should I REALLY deprive myself of the joys and pains having and adopting children in the future because of my past? Why do you think I spent too much time dwelling on this issue in the first place? A person has just one child, and it's like having generations worth of children. The way I see it is, I'm not in an ideal position now. My jobs have mostly been temp, or dull long term jobs I left for greener passages. It's true. The job I have now is temporary. But I feel like if there's one thing that makes me mature it's examining these things and questioning them instead of just going down that same path without a single thought. One day I'll be a lot stabler, more structured, the whole nine yards. I'm getting closer to that ideal each day, I think. I've manage to live on my own for the last several years in the same apartment full of stuff I've worked hard to get. I'd say I'm doing OK, not quite like living in a condo in Brookline, but these things take time.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Should I REALLY deprive myself of the joys and pains having and adopting children in the future because of my past?
If you can't get over that past, maybe.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:Should I REALLY deprive myself of the joys and pains having and adopting children in the future because of my past?
If you can't get over that past, maybe.
Like I said, it's not a matter of getting over it. It's a matter of not wanting to pass it down.
Extreme corporeal punishment is really prevalent in the African American community. It's practically woven into the culture.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
If it's just a matter of not wanting to pass it down, again, not having kids solves that problem. You can't pass it down unless you have kids. In fact, choosing to raise children amounts to choosing to take the risk that you'll pass down your parents' mistakes.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
- teeth grinding smilie![[Smile]](smile.gif)