They wanted equality and they have had it for years now.
However, I am seeing a trend which is more than alarming.
Women are having babies and abandoning them to daycare. Why?
Because they have to get back to work.
(To live in California, a two-earner income is required.)
Recently, I have been working at public school sites where childcare is provided for preschool through sixth grade. Parents have the option of bringing their kids at six in the morning and picking them up at six at night. The children which are brought the earliest and left the longest are the ones who are the most restless, troublesome and tiresome to the adults in charge.
My question is this:
If a woman cannot raise her OWN child, who needs HER so much, (especially the first three years,) why have one?
I hate to say it, but we have come a long way …
- to what end?
You claim a two income family is required, yet you make a statement like this? Abandoning them. That's harsh and uncalled for. It's hard enough for women to juggle everything without someone attempting to paint them in such a negative light.
I suppose if we let attitudes such as this one be the judge and jury....and we let these types of attitudes ride rough shod over our lives the human race will slowly peter out.
Oh. That won't happen. We'll simply use these types of moments to teach our kids not to be so judgmental and negative toward others.
I guess the child needs both mother and father and it is the job of two of them to raise the child and not the woman's job alone. The end was not to abandon the child but to raise him or her together rather than abandoning the child. This definitely cannot be blamed upon the women Kathryn.
Oh really? You are blaming it on the men as well?
Because ... oh I forgot, thanks to government welfare and planned parenthood women don't have to hold themselves accountable … at all.
If you are not from this country, why are women where you live not accountable/responsible to themselves? Is it because it is difficult for them to get jobs? Pressure to marry? Uncaring/abandoning fathers?
We do not have those particular injustices. Well, except for the last one.
My point is this: Women in the USA have come a long way. We have many freedoms and we do not have the problems I see listed in one your hubs, Karishma.
We truly have come a long way ... for ourselves. But strangely enough, women are naturally caretakers. They still happily cook and clean. They come home tired from working eight hours, (and picking up the kids from after-school day care,) and they put dinner on the table, throw in the laundry and pick up after everyone. Not much as changed within the psyche of a woman. Except that now she has to work outside the home and sometimes in, lets face it, a man's world … (and STILL for less pay than what men make.) And heaven forbid if a woman stops working to raise her child for a couple years. Why, she'll loose her place in the competitive work world!
NO, there is no rest or space for a woman who wants to raise a child. Women today have huge pressure to contribute financially and THAT is what it has come to. No longer do we have the luxury of raising our OWN children.
In the end, a society where women work and are not home to raise their children, will produce wild children who cannot sit still, who are angry and uncontrollable.
MOMS: You think the day care staff is loving your child and giving him what he needs to become robust and capable? To become calm and disciplined? To become intelligent and civilized? THINK AGAIN!!!!
And you might want to double, triple check!
Women have the choice to do what they want. Some of them do stuff you disapprove of because, you know what, it's their life. As a woman who is not naturally a caretaker I am very grateful for the choices we now have. Back in the day I would probably have been forced to stay at home and have kids I didn't even want.
And as for the idea that daycare harms kids, I doubt there is any actual evidence to back that up. Having children looked after by a range of people is actually very traditional. In the absence of a village of related tribes-people, a good daycare approximates traditional child-rearing better than being alone with only the female parent most of the time.
So you don't want any woman to have an abortion but then you turn around and say they shouldn't be working to support themselves and their child, either? While prefacing this opinion with "women want equality and have had it for years..."? Your own expectations of women don't give them equality at all.
I most definitely don't happily cook and clean. My husband and I split those jobs because I am not "naturally" drawn to doing "woman stuff" because I was born with a vagina. I AM naturally drawn to taking care of my child, as are most mothers, and for some mothers that means going to work so they can give their child the life they deserve.
My mom was a single mother and instead of having an abortion she chose to have me and then take on two jobs to support me. She got nothing from my biological father, she had no choice. I split most of my days between daycare and my grandma's house, and you know what? I grew up with a secure attachment to my mother and we have always been incredibly close. I also got to form a wonderfully close relationship with my grandma in the extra time that I spent with her that I wouldn't change for the world.
I'm a stay at home mom because my husband can support all of us on his salary. I am lucky but a lot of people aren't. I have friends who wouldn't be able to afford to pay for rent, food, and clothing on one salary so they work (and some of them can still barely afford to pay for all of that with two incomes).
It's a pretty privileged and naive view to think that all woman are realistically capable of staying home with their children, I think.
And you know what else? Even if a mother could stay at home with her child and live comfortably off of her husband's salary, it doesn't mean she should have to. Some women enjoy their jobs and have worked hard to get where they are in their careers. Not everyone wants to be a stay at home mom and that's okay, too. Treating women as equals includes letting them make their own choices about how they live their lives and not expecting them to stay home and cook, clean, and do kid stuff all day if that's not what they feel is right for them. Working mothers are still mothers to their children, going to work during the week doesn't change that.
Edit: Just reading your post about "angry and uncontrollable" daycare children... what? I'd like to see which study you read that had this finding.
My own experience as a substitute teacher for both (Public) school and after school programs in the last two weeks confirms this. I am thinking of taking videos of a typical (proper/true) Montessori classroom and a typical daycare classroom and exposing the truth of the matter quite blatantly.
Montessori knew the day would come when women would be required and have the freedom to work way back in the early 1900's. She found a way to institutionalize the home. A Montessori classroom gives freedom as do typical daycares today. But the difference is this:
In a true Montessori classroom, the boundaries of proper behavior, teaching, and expectations are set as part of the environment by a directress who stays behind the scenes. She knows how and when to establish boundaries, realizing this discipline is absolutely required for freedom. In a Montessori classroom, which in the past I have worked in, children are learning at their own pace, concentrating quietly with self-teaching materials which they are shown very carefully how to use.
In contrast, what I have been witnessing is this: Children arguing, fighting and hitting. Why?
They are not happy. In the morning they have been awakened out of bed too early. After school, they are tired from being in school all day. They have no cots to sleep on when tired. They are sent outside to the black top to run wildly on. No coaches guide them in games. There are bikes at some schools for the younger ones but no one takes the time to put on their helmets. I have seen head injuries, scraped knees, arms and elbows. At other schools there are structures but children are allowed to jump off heights twice the size of themselves.
Inside the class room children are allowed to run and leave toys all over the place where they trip and become confused with so many. They are not taught how to care for them or expected to put them back after use. And they play with the same ones day after day after day. Snack consists of processed sugary foods. The last classroom I worked in gave out overly preserved cookies and chocolate milk. This is fine once in a while, but they are given sugary processed foods like this day after day. At one school, at lunch time, they were given a decent lunch but with that good lunch they were give a very large cookie. Needless to say it was the cookie they ate first and the rest was therefore thrown away. No one said a word about saving the cookie for dessert. Not a word. Why was the cookie even given to them at all?
Montessori was very concerned with the physical health of the child. She advocated nourishing whole foods and specially prepared meats. I notice that there is kind of a day care cough children have. They are not sick yet they cough.
I have spoken to those in charge of the program in my school district about implementing Montessori, but they tell me it is "just public school," and there is no way they would consider such a thing.
Well, I, for one, wish they would. Why not?
it would be such a win win.
Thanks for listening to my rant.
Really? Most public schools can't even afford books these days. What do you expect? My niece is in 8th grade,and she JUST got her first textbook ever.
Really? We have plenty of text books. Well, they are getting pretty beat up.
But, I am basically talking about early child care. Our school system overall is quite good.
I sub in a good area (of high Mortgage homes) consisting of many "Blue Ribbon" schools.
It's all very fine to advocate wholesome, nourishing foods, but if children won't eat them (and they won't), they won't be nourished any better than sugary or fat filled foods can do.
We can help develop their palates.
2 (sense of) taste, appetite, stomach.
3 flavor, savor, taste.
When they are given good foods they develop a sense of what is good for them and acquire a permanent preference for the taste of it.
For instance I never gave my kids candy. They will not eat it to this day. I fed them pretty much macrobiotically. They still are still very careful and eat according to the principals they grew up with.
No, you cannot help but in the smallest amount in developing their palates. That will happen at home where they eat the vast majority of their food. They will not appreciate that good food is good for them if they don't eat it, and that is exactly what happens in the school - any cafeteria can confirm this. It's why they serve hamburgers, hot dogs and pizza.
That you accomplished it at home by never feeding junk food does NOT mean the school can do the same.
Some children spend twelve hours a day at school !
Better, then, to send 500 kids home hungry in order to try and teach a handful how to eat properly but differently than they do at home?
(And I've never seen a school that operates for more than a few hours. After that it becomes a day care, not a school.)
1. They will learn to eat what they are served and enjoy it when they realize good food is as good as it gets.
2. They are on school (the school they went to) grounds the entire day. They are in classrooms at desks reading, writing, doing homework, playing on the school playgrounds for exercise: School.
At the school I worked at today, the children must sit and read quietly for the last 45 minutes. A 9 yr. old girl commented as the clock approached six o clock: "Here we are putting up with it."
I asked, "Putting up with what?"
She laughed, "We want to go home!" And the other kids, waiting oh-so-anxiously for the sight of a parent, agreed.
"Can we put our books down now and just talk?" they asked the aide and I.
He said, No.
I overrode him with the authority I have as the "guest" teacher:
"Yes, you may."
Don't be ridiculous. A 6 year old doesn't care one iota what is "good" for them.
"Day". As in 8-5? Sunup to sundown? No, kids aren't studying for 9 hours, not in any school I've ever heard of.
wilderness, I am not kidding. Some kids come in at 6 in the morning and leave at 6 in the evening. Some are preschoolers. I have seen it. These are the ones who have the most behavioral issues. They are mean to other children, have short tempers, and have learned to grab and hit to get their ways. They are the restless ones who refuse, (or for some reason are unable,) to sit still or settle down for a nap.
I am alerting people about public school daycare. At several schools in my district, it is merely a holding spot until the parents can pick them up. I have cringed through very harsh lectures listening to daycare teachers threaten the kids under their "care" to be quiet or else they will have to read or write their names ten times (five year olds! … the very things in a Montessori school this age LOVEs to do,) or such things depending on age. I do not think writing or reading should be used as a punishment ever. Many of the teachers do not talk to the kids very kindly. The kids in their classes respond/cooperate to anger only. Often, (as a kind and good-natured sub,) when I try to stop bad behavior or give directives, kids as young as six will talk back to me, tell me I am wrong or argue with ME! Something is going wrong there.
Hopefully you are right and these particular daycares in my school district are isolated cases. Am I wrong and overly sensitive to expect better for kids?
As in: a Mom AT HOME before and after school?
How would you have liked to be dragged to school every morning at a quarter to six? or be in a very restrictive environment at school after school when you were a kid? I couldn't wait to run home for freedom, relaxation and comfort!!!
I really feel sorry for them.
I don't know about you, but as a kid I used to spend 8-10 hours at school and in college, on many occasions I spend about 14-15 hours. If schools provide food, then they should provide good food, not junk food and if they do provide junk food they should not lay the blame at parent's or children's doorstep. Irrespective of what students eat at home the schools should provide healthy food.
Today, at the public school where I worked, the kids were given chemical/sugar laden breakfast bars and cereal with tons of preservatives and sugar. On the wall is a bulletin explaining the importance of good nutrition in this particular district.
Ha ha ha!
They provide individual, easy to serve, prepackaged cereal/ breakfast bars with the longest shelf life possible. Yum. I guess if they are infused with vitamins, they are considered nutritious.
So, two weeks as a substitute teacher has led you to start this thread. I don't think you have enough experience to warrant an opinion of this nature.
<"So you don't want any woman to have an abortion but then you turn around and say they shouldn't be working to support themselves and their child, either?">
I don't want women conceiving if they cannot give the child what it NEEDS (and once conceived, it needs life.) I want women to take charge of their lives and bodies and in so doing contribute to world peace by avoiding getting pregnant in the very first place, if they know it would not be conducive. Thankfully the abortion rate is going down. But the need for daycare is going up. There is a long waiting list for a drastically growing and already impacted daycare program in my district.
Yes, but stuff happens. I was conceived while my mother was on birth control. She took the measures to prevent pregnancy but it happened anyway. Was her working two jobs ideal for either of us? No, but it all worked out in the end. It would be lovely if birth control worked flawlessly and people were always responsible when having sex but it's not reality. I would think you'd be praising the women who work their butts off to raise their unplanned child instead of the alternative. But it seems that you think stereotypical housewives with well-off husbands are the only women that should be having sex.
Women need to stop having children they can't afford, guide, educate and take good care of.
Sad to say. Equality is one thing, Self-induced misery is another. I heard on the radio this morning that some teens today get this:
No sex before marrige.
No sex before marriage is a good choice. With good reasons which are apparent to me.
I have been subbing for years in the schools. I worked with public school "day camp" K-6 all summer and preschool day care 3 through 5 and school aged day care K-6 since the beginning of the school year. I just recently started working with public school preschool. I was pretty surprised at what is going on there, especially having worked at Montessori schools, and then to hear there is a waiting list for all these day care programs!
Maybe the economy is forcing women to work and abandon their kids in daycare because their husbands are loosing work and full time jobs.
Staaahhhp with the overdramatic "abandonment" stuff. They drop their kids off with professional caretakers. They come back to pick them up. That is not abandonment.
Daycare teachers in the school district I work for are only required to have 24 early education childcare units from a Jr. college. They do not have bachelor degrees. They should, if you ask me.
" A professional is a member of a profession or any person who earns their living from a specified activity. The term also describes the standards of education and training that prepare members of the profession with the particular knowledge and skills necessary to perform the role of that profession. In addition, most professionals are subject to strict codes of conduct enshrining rigorous ethical and moral obligations. Professional standards of practice and ethics for a particular field are typically agreed upon and maintained through widely recognized professional associations. Some definitions of "professional" limit this term to those professions that serve some important aspect of public interest and the general good of society."
Basically you are telling a large proportion of people here that they are screwed up and maladjusted by having someone other than their genetic mother watch over them at times when they were young.
And these same people are telling you that you are wrong.
In my opinion locking kids up with one parent from a nuclear family in a house in a suburb somewhere is a more dubious choice. That requires the mother make a lot of effort to ensure their child socializes properly with diverse people in order to become prosocial and not inclined towards emotional prejudices.
Four people are telling me I am wrong. I really wonder how many people are reading what I write here. Maybe only you four! I am thankful for your responses. They probably represent the majority. I should just be happy I have a job and shut up. You four win.
If we know anything at all about the American family ,We know that any family can be healthy ! Working Mom , working Dad , both parents working , Or not . The problem today is the disconnection of parent and child , when we require day care at schools , when we require teachers that are councilors , its probably gone too far .
What needs to happen is a reconnecting of the family components , there are too many single parents out there , absent parents , mom or dad ! When we lose the child we lose the future , and guess what folks , we're on our way to just that !
I agree, ahorseback. The latest shooter is an example of what can happen to a child. What is a lost child? A child who has lost touch with himself. There is a science to helping our children stay in touch with themselves.
A lost child is a child who is abandoned on some level. A child who is restless, sad, distraught, confused, unfocused an unable to concentrate due to a diminished sense of reality and a basic mistrust of life. A lost child is child who is adrift in a sea of confusion and uncertainty with no rudder, sails or wind.
What gives a child his inner sense of direction and strength?
Parents and their continual attention, love and guidance.
But every one tells you everything is fine, ahorseback.
Everything is fine. I guess we already have world peace!
IMHO young men have struggled to adjust throughout history, and expressed it different ways.
I would point the finger more at commentators who immediately seize on their murderous "fame" to make some point of their own as part of the problem.
And none of us have any idea whether he was put in daycare as an infant or not or not so the direct relevance to this thread is nil.
I can't help it if this incident pretty much proves my point.
I am talking about the science of facilitating a child's connection to himself. This boy lost his connection to Himself.
Look at what his mother did as far as the choices she made. Her choices contributed to the final result which manifested in her son's actions.
Karma refers to the law of cause and effect.
Is it wrong to assume this male lost connection to his own soul/Self at some point in his twenty odd years??
Is it wrong to assume his mother had something to do with it?
To me it is common sense.
Or Is my opinion and way of thinking somehow inappropriate?
I don't think there is much to support this opinion. It appears to me that you may simply be grasping at straws in order to lay a finger of blame. Why you would lash out at the mother exclusively is a bit of a mystery to me. No one sets out to raise someone who would do such as that. No sane person anyway.
Nor a compassionate one. We all have our ideas as to what is driving this trend.
I find this quote you posted interesting. "'He yelled at us, me and my husband,' Harte told the paper. 'He was not a friendly type of guy. He did not want anything to do with anyone."
By this, he appeared to be somewhat judgmental and possibly self righteous. This sounds to me as if he was a personality type who thought he obviously had the right to pass judgment on others and it was usually negative; although he did not have the benefit of interacting with this couple enough to know who they were.
It appears that our society pushes this type of behavior. Everyone thinks they know better than others and that if everyone would do things the way they do that the world would be a better place. Fortunately (or unfortunately) each of us has the right to live our lives in the manner we see fit. What causes a person to move from yelling, complaining, judging negatively without cause to a weapon wielding psychopath is a mystery. But, believing one has the right to pass judgment on another human being is certainly one of the steps in the process of getting there.
"Harte said Mercer would often 'sit by himself in the dark in the balcony with this little light.' She added that a woman she believed to be Mercer's mother also lived upstairs and was 'crying her eyes out' Thursday.
Harte also told the New York Times Mercer would frequently yell at her for smoking on her apartment's balcony.
'He yelled at us, me and my husband,' Harte told the paper. 'He was not a friendly type of guy. He did not want anything to do with anyone."
The news just said that he had asked what religion the students were, if they said Christian he shot them.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/02/ne … p=obinsite
Well it's not the whole issue but it's certainly part of the issue, don't you think?
We have socially inept and mentally ill people up here, too, and yet......
'What is a lost child? A child who has lost touch with himself.
There is a science to helping our children stay in touch with themselves.
A lost child is a child who is abandoned on some level. A child who is restless, sad, distraught, confused, unfocused and unable to concentrate due to a diminished sense of reality and a basic mistrust of life. A lost child is child who is adrift in a sea of confusion and uncertainty with no rudder, sails or wind.
What gives a child his inner sense of direction and strength?
Parents and their continual attention, love and guidance.'
Not to mention respect, comfort and peace.
According To My Understanding
Let's face it folks , humanity is made up of the same characteristics as the natural world , break it all down and we realize that TWO parents are required for a healthy family equation . We know that but somehow we fail to evolve that in our culture or rather we have turned away from that , ONLY part of our present day problems are illustrated by single mom's raising kids . We can glorify the enlightened gender or we can blame both for our failures . Feminism IS reaping it's rewards . And MAN is the biggest failure in our time , Karma ? An interesting word or place . Both men and women are reaping their rewards !
Yes, its a simple matter of cause and effect. I am pointing out the cause of kids going berserk. For some reason people do not want to listen to objective solutions, and instead, they take them subjectively.
We need to become more scientific and let nature be our guide.
Kathryn , You are absolutely right , I believe though that it is women who are doing most of the harder work in child raising , pointing out that in almost every instant of home or school and children's interactions are centered around the mom ! Men , I believe have dropped the ball -big time ! When a marriage ends , a lot of people forget that it doesn't ever end for the child and hence , the Mom .
Maybe its all as simple as this , when the father figure leaves the day to day world of the family , with him goes the lateral thought and reason of the man , the authority , the firmer motivational exercise of child raising based upon the traditional authourative figure . Can it be as simple as when once there was the last say in a matter , Dad was always there ? And without that , we are all bound to familial anarchy ? I certainly don't know where we've gone wrong but that is part of it !
Women have something to do with the men leaving don't you think? Without love, a man becomes a drone. Who wants to be a drone? They give up. They forget the child. Without the love of the woman, they drift away.
You guys are getting over the top now. The lateral thought and reason of the man? Anarchy without the man? I'm glad women aren't as incompetent as you two would like to believe.
Live to Learn: Women are not men. Are you saying we are all balanced beings?
You would probably say there is nothing wrong with this scenario:
Two little five year old twins were given up by their mother when they were one year old. These boys went from foster home to foster home until recently two gay men adopted them. They are the wildest children in the classroom where I have been working with them. It is a struggle for the teachers to get them to settle down, take naps, stop running, hitting, sticking out their tongues and being disruptive in many ways ...
I think they they need a mother big time, and sooner the better. You would disagree?
I think attempting to determine what these two children need simply by that blurb of information is impossible. Jumping to conclusions is probably the worst thing you can do.
Women are not men. I can agree with that. But, that doesn't mean that a mature woman can't raise a balanced child without a man in the house. To say otherwise is to ignore the fact that there are a lot of well adjusted adults who were raised by one parent.
Mostly they lost a parent to death. Those people who lose a parent to divorce are more affected and less able to adapt. I have heard.
Oh. You have heard.
What does that have to do with the example you gave? Death and divorce weren't part of your story.
I think you are wrong , a HEALTHY well balanced child cannot be raise without a lot of difficulty by one parent . At least not without the probability of long term negative psychological affects , of at least some kind . Single mothers seem to raise children replacing the more Authourative side of man , BY BE-friending the child , I have observed this for a couple of decades now . There is almost zero authority and replacing that by a friend-like tolerance of each other , is not the same .
The disintegration of the family unit is one of the major reasons for our cultural problem's today ! Woman's Lib ? Men's Lib , call the fault that you wish , it's not the same !
I know a woman who raised her boys by herself because her husband died. Her boys became very successful. (She is the one who explained to me that children of divorced parents have a harder time adjusting to the loss of a parent.) I know another woman who divorced and raised her children. This woman's adult children have issues to this day, as I have witnessed.
If we need statistics, I am out because I work with common sense and philosophy, not statistics.
Unless, of course, you can come up with some.
Common sense and philosophy do not appear to be part of your repertoire. From where I'm standing anyway.
Children of divorced parents may have more problems. That may have to do with either parent using the child as a weapon against the other. I just thought of two kids who were the worst behaved children I ever met. They had two parents. Not divorced. But, they turned out all right in the end. They are actually pretty productive and happily married.
You may simply be like me. Not well suited to deal with school children. Any time I stopped into the school I thought the kids were a bunch of heathens. I didn't assume it was an abandonment issue with the parents. Common sense led me in other directions.
Facts don't matter to some people. If you really take the time to understand the dynamics of how divorce affects the positive outcomes of children, you will see that income of the family is more predictive than the structure of the family. Children of single parents who make plenty of money have similar outcomes as children of two-family homes with similar incomes. The same applies to same-sex parents vs. heterosexual parents.
Of course, none of this evidence will matter to those who are determined to see the world through their own judgmental lenses.
Glad you finally switched pronouns from they to we. And thank goodness Karma is finally
catching up to women since they have had it so easy since time immemorial.
I was a stay at home Mom for 13 years and thought that was the only way to raise children. My daughter became a single Mom not through her choice when her children were 3 and 1, and I learned that there is more than one way to raise children and do a good job of it.
I hope your prejudice is not coming through to those precious children who are in your care. Ever consider maybe the teachers are tired and out of the patience little ones require by 6 p.m.?
Kathleen, If you don't believe me, go volunteer at a public school day care.
It used to be women would work when their kids were in school.
They would be there for them when they came home.
Women in America have always been strong and willing to pitch in and help make money.
The men traditionally worked full time and the women part time. That is good. Nothing wrong with that. Moms were home for their kids.
Everything has changed. Men don't have the full time work they used to have due to the economy, and women have had to become the full timers. Perhaps some women see divorce as a way to get back some of the freedom they used to have before they were married. (?) I don't know why, but today the divorce rate is 51 percent.
The family structure for many, (not all of course,) is falling apart.
The kids who must go to daycare and or "rap", (up to 200 kids out of the total number in some schools,) are tired and cranky.
On Friday, I had to work a full day at school and then work day care. I got to the first assignment by 8 and the second assignment by 2. This long day was finally over when the last child went home at ten after 6.
I was exhausted. These kids do this every single day! Its too much, from what I have observed!
As a sub teacher, I advocate for their free time. Thats what they need. Not mandatory ungraded assignments, busy work and forced reading just to keep them quiet.
The ideal solution would be to introduce Montessori materials into these daycare classrooms and then everything would be
F I N E !
Is it so hard for women to be subordinate and sweet?
Is it so hard for them to do what they intuitively and naturally do best: Love?
Love their family, support their man. Make their home a sanctuary of health, creativity, joy and wedded bliss?
Is it so wrong to just agree to the way nature has set it up?
Woman as a helper to her man? augh! ohh no! NOT that!
Subordinate and sweet? Is that while they are barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen?
I'm not subordinate. I'm not sweet. Men who need such, in my opinion, have issues they need to work through. I give support and expect support. Happily married, too. And so is my husband. Or, maybe he's just saying that and would rather have some simple minded piece of a person. But, I doubt that.
Why does anyone have to be subordinate? In fact, I think you'll find that marriages where partners consider each other to be equal are far more successful than marriages where there's a "subordinate". So which is it, do you want women to be subordinates or do you want solid marriages to raise children under? Because you usually can't have both.
I do love my family and I do support my husband, just as he loves his family and supports me. I'm not a homemaker by any means, I've been a student for 8 years, and I do stay at home with our daughter but I also work from home and study and have stuff to do other than fluff pillows and dust ceilings and act as my husband's "helper". I'm not always sweet because working, studying, and taking care of a toddler is stressful business and my husband is intelligent enough to realize that me being a good wife and good woman runs deeper than greeting him at the door with a smile and a freshly baked pie at the door everyday.
Are you afraid of free-thinking, independent women? Is that why you're so opposed to the shift? Because I'd rather see mothers teaching their kids that women are equals when it comes to opportunity and value. I don't want my daughter, or anyone else's daughter, growing up thinking that she has to fit into a box that keeps her at home acting as her husband's assistant. I want ALL young kids growing up respecting each other equally and not limiting opportunities based on gender. I want the girls to grow into women who are able to work 60 hours a week as a CEO if that's what makes them happy. I want boys to grow up staying at home with their children and baking cookies while the kids nap if that's what makes them happy. And I definitely don't want ANYONE to feel like they should be a subordinate in a marriage. We've moved past that (well, most of us have) and for a good reason. It's not the way "nature" had it set up, it's the way a patriarchal society had it set up.
… and when you think about it, what woman attracted her man by acting like a queen bee looking for a worker / drone bee?
- so if you don't want to be subordinate to a man, don't marry one. After all, we have come a long way. We don't need a man.
And leave the souls sleeping peacefully in the arms of the angels until you have a conducive situation to raise them in. Children need and deserve a mom and a dad.
Huh? What? I am lost! I read your response to my comments and the last comment in the thread which says if you don't want to be subordinate to a man, don't marry one! You keep saying we have come a long way and yet, you think like that! I understand that you are more worried about upbringing of children than about equality (I refrain from saying equality for women because it is not equality then, right?)
You said it, children need a MOM and a DAD and why shouldn't I blame it on the men as well? Mom and Dad should figure out together how they can give their best to the child and earn money at the same time, find a solution rather than one of them suffer. It isn't psychologically good for the health of anyone to sit at home throughout the day.
And what was that with "Oh! I am from the USA and you are this 3rd world person!" tone. You sounded like a mother in law in those Indian TV soaps who give their daughter in laws a tough life. And no matter what logic you bring up, they won't relent. They force themselves upon you. Though, they are fictional; how about you? fictional?
Opting out of this silly conversation don't see it going anywhere. Hope you don't have a daughter or daughter in law or a grand daughter to take care of, you are going to make life difficult for them!
Good luck! c ya!
Well, I am still up and the tone of the last three comments are very surprising to me.
Right now many children are being put in daycare because moms have to work. I don't think public school daycare, (as it is now) every single day is the best place for children. I think children should be with trusted neighbors, family members or grandparents. Someplace comfortable with people who love and understand them.
Is that message too much to handle?
I wish mom's didn't have to work so many hours as they seem to have to do these days for whatever reasons. Divorce is one reason. Husbands losing jobs and hours is another. In the past, moms worked when their kids were in school and picked them up after school. Mothers had part time jobs which fit in with family obligations. Now a days, work has become more important than family. And women are afraid to give up their jobs for fear of never being able to reenter the work world.
Do you think this situation is right no matter what country you are in? I revere India, but I know you do not have our same issues. Then again, how do I know? Maybe I do not know at all! Feel free to set me straight. Or not. Your choice.
Alright. Sorry about my tone. I see your point about children being ignored. My point is why are you only talking about women? Men also leave their children and go to work. Both man and woman have had the child and not just the woman; so, why should the woman alone sacrifice? Can't the two of them work into a consensus? Well, we are slowly starting to have the same issues...I am a teacher and often left aghast at the attitude of children but I don't blame their mothers alone. The father also has a role, right? In fact, a toddler in my home is very excited that his mum is studying law and his mum is out most of the day, he is decent and well behaved and enjoys and respects the time he gets with his mum, makes the most of it. But he equally reveres his dad and his happiness knows no bounds when both of them are off. Similarly, another child whose mum works from home is an indecent and spoilt brat because his mum pampers him, covers and apologises for his mistakes and this other child is 13; not a toddler. So, while I agree children need to be taken care of by trustworthy people, I absolutely hate it when only women are pinpointed and the men aren't. Equality didn't mean we ignored children, it meant men and women walk hand in hand in the home as well as outside it. Hope you see my point there?
HI. Yes. ahorseback agrees with you. However, I see that men focus on work and thats how they show their love. Their dedication to their family is not often apparent. However, men today really seem to be rising to the occasion. Who is picking up the kids from daycare. The men!
I have a wonderful father and wonderful brothers. I have only witnessed hard working men who do 200 percent! My brother took his daughter with him to work as a pool man from the time she was five months old. His wife was a full time lawyer for the city. She had the baby even though she knew she would have to work. She retired early and now is full time mother to a ten year old which my brother absolutely raised while she worked. So, I do not blame men. I guess I blame the economy. I am baffled. I want to blame some one ... why not the women? did they really have to be so hard working and ambitious?
Couldn't they have just enjoyed staying home raising their kids? Looking after their hard working husbands? Children grow up so fast. Then women can go back to school/work etc! You know, when the kids are in their late teens ... or in college.
But, I guess I shouldn't be so critical of women. We are and always have done the best we could and now we are equal to the men. We are both, men and women, doing 200 percent!
But, some kids are putting up with being on school grounds for a really long time every day.
Could be worse, latch key kids, for instance.
I will be thankful, instead of critical.
Sorry if I offended anyone. Sometimes my objectivity is not appropriate
Kathryn , No offense here ! Unless given , lol , You're right, most good parents give 200 Percent , It's frustrating I know for all of us to witness this addiction to the dollar ! The great spoiler of all things family . I WAS a latch key kid too . Even in the sixties . I adore it when I see a woman - or a man - decide to stay at home and focus on the most important reality of this world - the family !
Single mom's and dad's are probably the most contributing members of our society , its pretty sad to see the same situational results of broken marriages first , and broken families , children too ! I too have experienced - and been responsible for this situation , at the final cost to my child . I for one , am lucky to still hold my daughters love and adoration in my hands .
We DO all need to focus on the family in America , that is the center - the middle and the end importance of our very societies existence !........:-}
"I want to blame some one ... why not the women? did they really have to be so hard working and ambitious?
Couldn't they have just enjoyed staying home raising their kids? Looking after their hard working husbands?"
Sometimes I have a hard time believing that you are a real person who actually exists.
I shoot for the ideal. Wouldn't that be the ideal? I had to work and contribute financially. To this day I wish I could just look after the house and garden and cook really great meals every night. Can I at 61? Noooo!
ahh… the good 'ol days of the fifties, as I imagine: those women with their white picket fences didn't know they had it so good!!
In the sixties my mom worked ... well, at the YMCA where I followed her around and did gymnastics and swimming on the swim team. Later she went back to school and got her California teaching credentials and became a substitute teacher and then a community college PE teacher. She had dinner on the table for the whole family (which included my dad and three brothers) every single night.
I worked at YMCAs teaching swimming and lifeguarding. When my two kids were teenagers I went back to school to become a substitute teacher. I lifeguarded, taught swimming and substitute taught all through my child raising days. I took hours that were conducive to being with my family. My mother and I only knew equality and freedom. It was always a given. Always.
I really don't understand your comment. Maybe you could explain why you made it:
<"Sometimes I have a hard time believing that you are a real person who actually exists.">
I wish you could have had your ideal also. But, I don't think it is fair to imply that others should be forced to live your ideal, or be somehow lacking. Your idea of a wonderful life would be stifling to me. I don't envy the white picket fence Leave it to Beaver moms. I used to pity them. Now, I've gotten older and understand that what works for some doesn't work for others. I still have my prejudices toward non contributing adults; but I don't make a habit of bashing them for their choices (as I perceive this particular thread to be engaged in).
In those days, it all worked out perfectly. I was not stifled! I followed my skills, interests and motivations. I had a blast as did my two children. I had meaningful work outside of my home and I was always there for them before and after school.
I lament now because I cannot afford to become a Montessori teacher.
I wish I could. I am stuck doing what I am doing: public school and public school daycare (and I will never be able to retire!)
Here is what I realized today and this is a real news flash if any one is paying attention.
Preschoolers and kindergartners are not reaching their learning potentials in public schools or in the before and after school daycares. For school age children, I have no complaints. Teachers are doing the best they can within the Common Core stipulations. But in daycare, they not given enough freedom or help with homework, (in the schools I work for.)
However, in a Montessori classroom kids are able to reach their potentials as they teach themselves reading, writing and arithmetic. They would rather do these things then play with toys and I saw it first hand when I worked as an aide in a Montessori school in the 80's. Anyway. I know what kids are capable of.
In these daycares they just play. They are merely taken care of, yet here they are in a school setting. Many are sad, restless and overly hyped by four and five o'clock. But, if they had intellectually stimulating activities they would be happy. They would be learning and concentrating in a focused and calm way in liberty and the boundaries which guarantees it.
There are pros and cons to any system of learning. Being hooked on Montessori, I can see why you would be frustrated not working within that environment. There's a private school around here that raves about the fact that they teach per the abeca book (or something). All I know is that their students are less likely to be accepted at colleges and score much lower on SAT's and such; so thinking something is better and proving it is better in a 12 year program are two different things.
You may not have been displeased with a stay at home position. I know my mother's life ended with her lamenting the fact that she had not had the chance to do more outside of the position of supporting her husband. She may have regretted it long before the end of her life because she raised all of her daughters to believe that their future was more than bearing children and standing behind a man. Funny because she had a full page article in a major paper about her contributions when she died. So, I think she saw herself as trapped and did the best she could where she was. Feeling trapped made it so she couldn't see to celebrate her accomplishments.
Now, as a child from a home whose mother stayed home leave it to beaverish style I can tell you I would have much preferred she be happy and fulfilled in her own life because a happy and fulfilled person has a much better chance of giving their child the emotional support needed during childhood.
In the first place I was not a stay at home mom and I am not advocating that.
I am advocating being there for your kids in the morning and picking up your kids after school. I am also advocating keeping yourself in good shape so that by the time your kids are teenagers you are healthy and fit enough to continue where you left off when you accidentally got pregnant with the first attentive guy you came across and then regrettably married.
Meanwhile, If you have to have your own separate bedroom, thats fine. If you have to sleep in another corner of the house thats fine. The Bible agrees.
Keep the family together and get along with the man. Let him work if he is willing so you can take care of your kids. This care means being there for them; setting boundaries, guiding them and encouraging them toward successful futures. Part time work you enjoy or do to help with finanes, is fine. But, its not about you and YOUR work-world career. Furthermore, let the man have his career! Let him get paid more! why not? Your career for about two decades is your house-hold.
You two made the kids and you two need to see it through til they are old enough to be on their own, however long that takes. They need this kind of love and attention from you both as they grow.
Many do not agree with this. But to me, it is a simple matter of doing the right thing.
Montessori is good in ways that I could never convince you of,
so we will drop the Montessori aspect.
T W I S I
Take it or leave it.
"Keep the family together and get along with the man."
I wholeheartedly agree with you here. Do it for the kids.
How hard can it be unless you really made a huge mistake? in which case what were YOU thinking?
Unfortunately such families that stay together "for the kids" usually deteriorate into a setting that no child should have to live through. That they are better off being taken care of by the state, as horrible as that usually is.
Pretty much this.
If a couple can really manage to stay perfectly civil and essentially live as friends together in the marriage for the duration of the childhood(s) then sure, that's preferable to divorce. But how often does that happen? How many people can really remain happy in a loveless marriage?
Divorce can be devastating for children but more often than not they will adjust. It's much less destructive to their well-being than staying in a toxic environment where both parents are unhappy and not in love.
Happy parents separately > unhappy parents together.
All of that said, I would explore every avenue to save my relationship with my husband now that we have a child together. Where some things before I might've just said "nope, I'm not going to stand for this", I would now try harder to overcome, because I really do want my daughter to have her parents together and around all of the time. But... if it doesn't work out even after putting in all the effort, I'm not staying in a relationship that I feel forced to stay in. That will eventually show in my demeanour and the way I handle my relationships, and it won't be a good thing for my daughter. I grew up in a very untraditional family and I turned out pretty okay (though I guess some around here might not agree ).
yes, positivity and peace is our inner nature. Healing can always take place. Humans are very adaptive.
It is indeed better to split up if things are bad for the kids. I once heard a minister on the radio say, "You can love any one!" (in discouraging divorce.) I really balked at that statement.
Sometimes you just can't and that is the reason it is better to dissolve the relationship: for the benefit of the kids!
Thank you all.
All I can say is thank god you aren't in charge of my life. It would be a miserable one.
I just didn't think I would ever hear a woman say the things that you've said in this thread, especially while claiming that women have equality. It's just a bit perplexing.
What man wouldn't want you standing there with a peach pie when he came home!??!
It would put a smile on his tired face. He would say, "My Love, or some other pet name, lets have some of that pie before the kids even know I am home."
You two would sneak into the warm kitchen where you have been for at least two hours making this pie. Maybe you would have flour on your chin and he would kiss it off. He would demand some vanilla ice cream and plop some on your slice too. You know it will make you gain five pounds but to see him eat this pie, to eat this pie with him.. to see the twinkle in his eye and hear him chat about whatever is on his mind… who cares about gaining weight in a moment like this ...?
and then the kids come in and catch you having dessert before dinner.
Well, you two will have some explaining to do …
good gosh that sounds sappy.
- but it makes the point.
A basic question: Why do men love women; and vice versa?
[let me know if you're avoiding my posts these days]
Why do men love women?
Why do women do love men?
maybe a better question: what is love to opposite sexes? or even same sexes?
what is love to God/ or to our pets?
what in the world, when it gets down to it, is love?
For instance love seems to come and go. It does not seem to be a constant. Oh, we will stand there at the alter and promise to love til death parts us …
then why is there so much divorce?
what happened to that love which brings us to the altar?
what is this love that can fool us, trick us, and then fizzle to nothing?
Spirituality is a tricky subject. In fact human life is a tricky subject. We pretend that we know things, but we don't. But, I do believe there exists a 'state' - like the one above a bed of dark rainy clouds.
We already know our questions. And we already know all our answers. But there's nothing wrong in pretending that we don't know them.
Life is a bit like a test, and a serious one in certain respects. There are quicksands that lay like landmines all waiting for us that we put our one unaware leg on them, and then it goes off to blast. And so on. But the landmines have their own problems. They must sit and sit and sit under the darkness. Their peace and happiness are relative to someone else's destruction. They cover only a few acres of land, but they think they cover the entire universe.
Much of what I've learn't during my search is that we ignore a lot of important things because they belong to our everyday life and are of very common nature. We take them for granted. But simplicity is something costly. We understand its value only once we lose it.
The best things are very near to us. In fact, they're inside us. We need not run to find them inside a television, or inside a computer screen.
<"Life is a bit like a test, and a serious one in certain respects. There are quicksands that lay like landmines all waiting for us that we put our one unaware leg on them, and then it goes off to blast. And so on. But the landmines have their own problems. They must sit and sit and sit under the darkness. Their peace and happiness are relative to someone else's destruction. They cover only a few acres of land, but they think they cover the entire universe.">
~ feel free to give a for-instance. Maybe it starts with w.
If children are given what they need in their early days, which is love, acceptance and understanding, you will have less landmines.
Are you hoping to win the Nobel Peace Prize 2017?
Ha Ha ha! !!! try 5017!!!
This thread is about all I can do in THIS lifetime.
And You Were There!
really I am about finished. I'll just be making nonsense comments from now on.
or maybe not.
The Bible talks about the importance of all things in their own season. The value of not rushing.
So you are right. There is no time. it is better to ride the earth like a bicycle: with balance.
I can use that one for one of my flash fortune cookie sayings . Thanks.
we should all know.
I notice Dr. Montessori's name is not on the list.
The Nobel organization is a bit eccentric sometimes.
Malala Yousafzai The Nobel Peace Prize 2014
"for their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education"
Works for Children's Right to Education
Much of the world's population, especially in poor countries, is made up of children and young people. To achieve a peaceful world, it is crucial that the rights of children and young people be respected. Injustices perpetrated against children contribute to the spread of conflicts to future generations. Already at eleven years of age Malala Yousafzai fought for girls' right to education. After having suffered an attack on her life by Taliban gunmen in 2012, she has continued her struggle and become a leading advocate of girls' rights.
This is a start. Malala was born in 1997.
Oh maybe you're following Lord Krishna's advice that one must work without ever thinking about their fruits?
how about this one! spectacular isn't it?
The Nobel Prize in Literature 2007
"that epicist of the female experience, who with scepticism, fire and visionary power has subjected a divided civilisation to scrutiny"
They had mothers. and wives
But yeah, whats up with that?
Native American (Native Canadian, too) mothers are interesting.
oh! I heard that in some tribes a mother would give her baby/child six years of her attention before having another baby.
I agree with this… others will not.
However, Montessori discovered that the first six years is the time of the development of the mind/psyche The body is complete, ( just grows bigger,) but the mind is not. takes six years!
Yes! Thank You! (Couldn't get the you tube play list)
I also figured out that Montessori or ( similar methods) will never be implemented into the public school system because her precepts are not allowed to be taught in colleges / universities.
But, I am somewhat more hopeful now!
I will get his book. :-)
Click on the text itself ('YouTube playlist'), the text is hyperlinked. Including the text 'Ken Robinson'.
edit- I see that the link isn't working. I'll fix it. Here it is: YouTube channel
Upon further consideration, I feel I can not dismiss Krishna's advice, either. It seems to carry some weight with it.
Moral of the story: Casual sex is a gamble / risk not worth taking.
I saw a Millennial guy wearing a Tshirt with these words:
THE BIGEST CRIME IS FAKING IT " in very large letters!
And that message is a good contribution toward world transformation and world peace.
If you ask me.
which no one ...
Frankly speaking, there is no "one size fits all solution" to this problem. Every house comes with different issues. All houses have different plus points and minus points. I personally won't encourage my wife to work. I'd rather she be a housewife and tend to our daughter. Although there has been discussion of her wanting to work, I immediately discourage it and make sure I earn enough for the three of us.
It is a man's duty to provide, no matter how tough it gets. I may sound old fashion but I can tell you this, life is harder for us now than it was for our parents. They did not have to go through this economy crisis like we are going through. I don't think they went through a mountain of debt the moment they graduated like we are.
But this is just my point of view. I guess it is a matter of choice and a matter of priority. No point in trying to raise a great child if you don't have the money to feed him/her, but if you have money and your child is a nightmare incarnate then that would really suck as well. So it is a matter of what is your priority now. And yes I do realize that it is easier said than done. Which is why you need to sit with your spouse and have a discussion and set your priorities straight. Good luck to all the moms and dads reading this.
Kathryn, I have to ask...
You seem pretty progressive as far as how children should learn/be treated, but you're also very old-fashioned in how you view the "ideal" family environment for a child to be raised in.
I'm just wondering what your views are on physical discipline as I feel that's sort of consistent with "the good old days" where the strict, somewhat distant father works and the simple, unanbitious mother stays home baking pies, and little Jimmy gets a swat on the butt for disobeying his hardworking father. But then you go on to praise Montessori which I'm sure would frown heavily on physical punishment.
What's your position?
Dear Aime F
Setting boundaries is practically a science with Montessori. I have noticed through working in these public school daycares that the teachers of 1-6 don't have a clue as to how to set boundaries or why. However, they really should because 1-6 yrs. is a very crucial period as far as this second embryonic stage of development, when the growth of the psyche occurs.
The mind and all its capabilities is developing during this period, just as the body developed in the womb. During this period, practice is required: trial and error, mastering, comprehending and understanding until all the skills become automatic. Eventually its: "Now I can walk without falling!" "Now I can jump on the bed / off the bed!" "Now I can pour this food into this other bowl." "Now I can understand the word, "No." "Now I can ride my scooter!" "Now I can listen quietly to a chirping bird and find it on a branch in the tree." But, as we know, not at first.
The child learns to master his body, mind, brain and senses via an inner joy of life. We set the boundaries while respecting this joy of life since its through this inner joy of life, which Montessori calls "horme," that the child adapts to his environment and gradually masters it.
A father needs to have common sense and love in order to discipline his child. He needs to teach him the stove is hot, the distance is far, the street is NOT safe. However, he should not try to make him into the next major league baseball pitcher, or child genius.
Discipline is really a common sense thing. What do moms do to discipline their child? The same as dad. Both do the job of setting boundaries so that the child learns how to live and be safe in his world. What we must not do is bombard the child. He is absorbing the world in his own way. This way, according to Montessori, must be respected. It requires rather keen observation.
Also, we must not shut his joy of life down with unrealistic expectations. He is developing his ability to guide his own will. He cannot do it yet. He cannot do so many things on command until he learns how to do so. Many parents today do not understand this. I see them trying to force their kids to do what they are not ready to do. Developing abilities and learning to cooperate with the expectations and guidelines of society is a slow careful process for the child. And it is being undertaken in definite and predictable stages of development.
Children love their parents. They will do anything for them. Sadly, parents, (and daycare teachers) who don't understand when the child is not tired and can't force himself to take a nap, might yell and punish him. Very young children cannot comply with all our commands.
For instance, I observed a 21 month old running back and forth on a couch in a restaurant because he found it a truly fascinating experience. The father was overly strict in expecting the child to obey verbal commands. He sat across the way and yelled at him to sit down and stop running. Eventually, though, the father wisely implemented what he wanted his child to do. He picked him up and gave him the boundary of not getting on the couch again. Now the child instinctively complied.
If a child has a stick and he is poking the dog with the stick, we take the stick away. If another child is hitting Johnny, we break up the pair and simply set the boundary of no hitting. We do not scold or punish. We just implement the course of action we want the child to take. They will learn better without criticism and scolding because they are guided by nature and love TO follow the parent or adult in charge.
Hope this helps.
There is no idle time. This process goes on all day long.
There are stages of growth during this period and the child changes accordingly …. almost as a caterpillar changes into a butterfly or a tadpole into a frog. If we are not aware of these stages we can misunderstand the needs of the child. The Secret of Childhood and The Absorbent Mind by Maria Montessori are books I highly recommend. I am reading The Montessori Method these days.
I think Kathy you have prompted me to write a whole new hub and people who are bashing her....umm...let her voice her opinions? She isn't forcing us to follow us? Kathy - To work hard or not to should be a woman's choice no? There are stay at home dads (no one calls them house husbands) but yea, it should be a mutual decision wherein parents work out a way through which they can earn money and also raise a child. I do see your point and in fact, these are the reasons I long ago decided not to marry or have children (looked down upon in my community) and I even despised those married people who left their jobs, threw away their lives just for the sake of their husbands and children....I mean people do have individual wishes and desires..where is the time for that...and no financial independence will lead to frustration which is no good for the child....my mum left her job for me and I had grown so used to independence, her presence started to feel heavy on me. Now, of course, I understand why she did it..... So it all depends from person to person...situation to situation and yup I do see your point, I agree the children shouldn't suffer like that but please don't blame the women no? blame the man and the woman...otherwise the women are going to hurt
my friends and relatives call me Kathy.
I am only looking out for the child. Women might LIKE the OPTION to stay home and focus on their home. Who would not like to have a vegetable garden, fruit trees to tend and a lawn to mow?
Who would not like food on the table every night, home cooked and delicious, nutritious.
Who would not like a PEACEFUL organized home for their children?
Really! don't shoot your self in the foot! If you have to work and you want your career, I would suggest you not have a child. They need their parents! At least one of them.
Otherwise, they become angry.
What is bonding? What is psychological health?
Look it up and don't come any where near a sperm until you know!
You are right. I am not forcing. I am only putting forth an option for the benefit of both mom and kids.
If you wanted a career, and you got pregnant by accident., Oh well, you have a new career. You can work part-time when the child is in school.
You can wait until the child is an adult to resume your career. The years fly by. ENJOY THEM! I am suggesting women be in a position to enjoy them. These years really are a blast, and happy for ever after, if you do.
What's money in comparison to love? Be happy with what you have and make it work. They need you more than material crap.
I would love to read your hub when you write it.
Err so should I or should I not call you Kathy? I just finished my hub, you can go read it And well, money is important, I see it like this... what if my husband dies and I have no means to live? But yes, love is more important. And as a teacher, I hate to see children suffer and parents even though aware of the neglect don't do anything about it. Their doing nothing bothers me yes...though the mothers at least come and talk to me, the fathers, except for one, I don't know the fathers of all of them, and mothers, I know them personally. And all of them are working mothers. Yup, it is a tiring situation out there.
If you call me Kathy, that's fine: I perceive you understand where I am coming from.
Going soon to read hub.
Yes I do. I just felt very pissed at first because you kept blaming the women but as long as you don't, I agree with your point about children being unconsciously mistreated. Truce then!
(I like your name better.)
Yes. Its just that I know how much the children would love to go home after school.
Saturn however, in their charts, is in Cancer. So it may just be the karma of this generation and maybe they can handle it just fine. As you said you like your independence. Maybe they do/will too.
Glad! I like my name better. It also amuses me how this thread has gone silent after all of us have reached a consensus. Isn't it annoying how everyone jumps in to argue their corner and impose it rather than try and see the other's pov? What are your thoughts on it Kathy? Also...after my mum left her job...I hated coming home to a controlled environment...it still fills me with dread and its funny this is the first time am noticing this...don't know if anyone else goes through this too...
what exactly fills you with dread? what is the controlled environment? (This should be entertaining!)
Regarding your question: "Isn't it annoying how everyone jumps in to argue their corner and impose it rather than try and see the other's pov? What are your thoughts on it Kathy?"
A. Those who agree do not post. Usually those who do not agree, will post. It is a matter of emotional intensity.
Disagreers are motivated to action. Agreers not at all. It is human laziness, I assume.
If you want a dead in the water thread, post something all would agree on, such as:
No one Should Drive in the Nude
Religion is Losing its Relevance
Women Deserve Equal Pay
Pets are Comforting, Especially for Childless Couples
The Graphic Use of the Rainbow has been Ruined by U NO What
The Color Pink Has Become Unappealing Due to its Over-use by the Breast Cancer Awareness campaign
I could go on and on.
continuing on with topics no one can argue ...
Everybody Knows This is Nowhere.
Without Boundaries There is no Freedom and Without Freedom There is No Love
Public School Teachers are Becoming More and More Frustrated For Many Reasons
Today, Public School Cafeterias Feature mostly Processed and Prepackaged Foods
Today, Many Mothers Today are Working Full Time Instead of Raising Their Children
Children are Over-Indulged and Not Understood, (As Far As Their True Needs,) But No One Wants to Admit It
Everybody Knows Children Should Not Be Given Screen Technology Devices as Distractions/Toys/Games, But They Do Anyway
Children Need the Concrete World of Nature, Books and Educational Manipulative to Explore and Experience Freely
You know, I actually agree with many of your assessments about how children are treated and raised in our modern culture, particularly the diet they are fed and the horrible public school system that insists they all fit in identical little boxes.
That said, I wish you would present your ideas with less judgment toward those who live their lives differently than what you believe is ideal. You are not furthering any cause by sitting on a pedestal looking down on others and judging their choices.
How about working with your local school district to convince them to grow a garden and hire real cooks (like they did in the old days) instead of contracting out with these services that truck in processed food?
its all about money. There is no changing anything in the public schools.
I am just saying we need to reassess the good 'ol days. We can now choose to be HOMEmakers. We can now choose to not have sex before marriage. Today, nothing is forced, however, we forget we can CHOOSE positively the things that used to be imposed. Back then, we were reacting to the forced nature of being a stay at home mom. Truthfully, many today ARE willingly adopting this way of life.
I am not on a judgmental high-horse. Just fighting for children's rights to have a good home where mom is there for them.
That is not much to ask.
I am not being haughty.
Learned (and Learning It) The Hard Way.
This is what I find maddening about so many conservatives. You say, "there is no changing anything in public schools." Really? Never? Not a thing? Of course not, if you have that attitude.
Look, people are doing the very thing you say cannot happen. The 10 most impressive farm-to-school programs. Imagine that! Click on it and learn.
I'm sorry to be sarcastic, but it is SO common for you and others to moan, groan, gripe, criticize, judge, and complain, then state nothing can be done, AND berate and obstruct those who DO try to make progress. I'm so thankful not everyone is like that.
I challenge you to do something.
"grow a garden and hire real cooks (like they did in the old days)"
Who are you trying to kid?!? The school district I live in has over 35,000 students in 50 schools. Have you any idea at all of how many acres it will take to provide that much carrots, beans, wheat, corn, cows (meat and milk), pigs, chickens (meat and eggs), beets, etc.? And the manpower needed to hand tend the crops (a giant harvest combine is useful only in giant fields of a specific crop)? And it is all to be used "fresh", leaving the kids hungry for 11 out of 12 months, without pasteurizing milk or grinding wheat into flour.
PP, that's a nice dream, but that's all it can ever be - a dream. Our population levels and densities prohibit any such plan.
One school at a time, wilderness. You have to start somewhere. Not starting at all results in nothing.
Rooftop gardening, edible parks, hydroponics, vertical gardening. This stuff exists. People are doing it.
Well, I guess we could turn the playgrounds and football fields into gardens. That would supply enough to feed the kids for a month or two in a decent sized school. Yeah, it all exists, and greenhouses actually provide something beyond luxuries and snacks.
But the basic problem remains; our population levels and density require efficient farming in terms of both manpower and space. And making a few gardens in the city does not provide that.
I grew up on garden produce and wild meat. A garden around an acre, that took more man hours than Dad spent at work to feed 5 people; translate that to a small school of 500 kids and you need 100 acres and 100 people to work it. Take away the fertilizer and insecticides and it doubles. Then add the time to process it for winter storage and it goes up again, along with the equipment to do that and 24 hour security to protect it from animals and people. And that includes no protein or dairy!
No, PP, we can never go back to the backyard gardens, even if we add in the rooftops and hydroponics and have the climate and water necessary for a wide variety of crops.
If you take an all or nothing attitude like you seem to like to do, then no, nothing can be done. I prefer the incremental approach. Children are gardening at school all across the country. No, the gardens don't provide 100% of the food they eat at school. Yes, they still have food brought in from outside. Who cares? Something positive is happening, and teaching children to grow and eat their own food has no downside.
Edited to add: This is just a side note. People can get plenty of protein and calcium from plant foods. The meat and dairy industries have convinced us we must eat their products at every meal. It simply is not true. In fact, completely eliminating both is associated with improved health and longer life spans, even reversal of lifestyle diseases such as diabetes and atherosclerosis. The word is slowly getting out. Doctors are realizing that a whole foods, plant-based diet will eliminate most of the horrible diseases of our modern, affluent lifestyles. Okay, off my dietary soap box now. ;-)
I am on that soap dietary box too!
In my district we do have above ground gardens and plant/flowers growing at many schools. It does take caring and motivated individuals, (teachers and parents,) to make positive changes.
But there is a limit. Laziness, basic lack of vision and the need to keep positions reigns at the top where school administrators must staunchly maintain their power and illusionary validity.
Yes, of course, it is always an uphill fight. Change does not come easy. Do we not do something just because we find it difficult? I think that is a defeatist way of living. Individuals can facilitate great change through perseverance and vision. I've seen it happen.
Volunteer for something that matters to you. If you are so concerned about children's diets, do something to educate people. Even if you influence just 10 people, those 10 people might also influence 10 more, and on it goes. This is how change happens.
Or, we can say it can never be done and sit at home arguing on the Hubpages forums. ;-)
Oh I do. I talk to every single daycare teacher I work with about Montessori principles and how much the kids in their care would benefit from didactic self-teaching educational materials rather than the same toys/games they play with day after day. And I bring my own teacher-made didactic materials.
The younger ones want to learn their letters and numbers and would rather read and write than play. I see it in every preschool and kindergarten class I sub in.
Three to six years is a very valuable time when the absorbent mind in every child is strong and everything they learn becomes indelible.
Actually, what I do here, (reading, writing and expressing insights in the HP forums,) is very valuable in enabling me to speak to others.
I am thankful for input because it helps me reach into my mind to find responding words/thoughts which I need for communicating with others.
After all, adults are lifetime learners.
Actually, I have been thinking that there should be schools / programs tailor-made for women who want to go back to school after their child-rearing days are over. A school just for post-family women so they can continue their education and transition back into the work world!
And if they eat carefully, avoid white flour processed sugar, (meat and milk to some extent) and make sure to exercise, they will have years of youthfulness after their kids are old enough. Their reentry into the work world would also be a good example for their kids. Of course, women can take advantage of already existing scholarships and grants that are available today.
PS Thanks for the encouragement, Pretty Panther
PSS, The dietary issue is beyond my concern. Money speaks louder than any words I could use.
Parents need to see what is going on. If they don't care, should I? All they have to do is pack nutritious lunches.
Oh, don't get me wrong here - I think it's great to have a small garden plot for school children to grow and learn on. It just isn't good for anything (nutrition wise) more than a nifty snack they grew themselves. I take my grandson out every time he comes now and we pick tomatoes; it's an adventure for him as he has no idea where food comes from. And we eat them, too; maybe 5 or 10% of a meal.
Yes, I know that some people think it's great to ignore what evolution has made us and only eat plants. I also know that it's possible (although quite difficult) to get proper nutrition that way. That doesn't mean it's a good idea, though - it's no coincidence that we began to grow bigger brains at the same time we began to eat meat.
by janesix2 years ago
Should moms stay home with their kids? I think they should . It's better for the family in my opinion. At least until they are in school full time. The American family is falling apart, and mothers working and dumping...
by steve-bc-ca7 years ago
I was involved in a forum discussing whether teachers should be held accountable for a students success. I started thinking about the possibilities of home schooling, but I don't have any information on the subject and...
by Astralrose5 years ago
Are there still reasons for women to marry these days?
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 weeks ago
NEVER to have children? Not every woman was meant to be a mother. There are some women who do not a maternal instinct. Yes, there are women who are quite happy without children. They have...
by washington Benard4 years ago
What makes a happy family ?
by StricktlyDating2 years ago
If society expects equality, why do women still want men to pursue them?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.