upset at nanny -- vent

"She's A Goddess" wrote in message
news:vExWb.284527$na.446900@attbi_s04...

"Nina" wrote in message
...

My personal belief is that children are raised by their primary
caregivers
so if my kid is at daycare 10 hours/day and with me maybe 3 waking
hours/day
I would feel as if someone else were raising my child, based on MY
definition of
"raise".

Um...ack. Our nanny was an integral part of our child's life, but
we were
raising her. By our philosophies and our rules. Raising isn't just
taking
care of. Its forming the child's knowledge and beliefs and hiring
the right
people to help you do that when you have to be away from them.

Well, I do agree that we all have our own personal definitions of what
it
means to raise kids, si I am not judging.

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
k...
"Nina" skrev i en meddelelse
...

"Michelle Spina" wrote in message
m...
"iphigenia" wrote in message
...


So if you want to raise your children yourself, are you looked
down on?

Heck, SAHM's with that opinion are looked down on here by many,
as
well. ;-)

Sorry, pet-peeve of mine. Both DH and I are raising our
children.
Our
employment status has no bearing on this fact. I don't *think*
you
meant it in the tone that I read it, but I still couldn't just
let
it
go...

My personal belief is that children are raised by their primary
caregivers
so if my kid is at daycare 10 hours/day and with me maybe 3 waking
hours/day
I would feel as if someone else were raising my child, based on MY
definition of
"raise".

I just made a calculation: My DS is awake 14 hours a day = 98 hours
a week.
On weekdays he's with either mom or dad or both for 5 hours a day =
25 hours
a week.
On weekends he's with either mom or dad or both for 14 hours a day =
28
hours a week.

That gives me an advantage of 53 hours over 45 (school and day
care). I
won!!! I'm the child raiser. :-)

lol
there ya go!!!

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
k...

"Nina" skrev i en meddelelse
...
When I was a kid it was afro-American, now its African-American.
Really, who can keep up?

I give up - I'll try to keep up with my own language and be funny
and
old-fasioned in English.

Tine, Denmark
Its not just you, we cant keep up here either

H Schinske wrote:
Barbara ) wrote:

Er, 35 years ago, I was 4 years old. I'm reasonably sure that
Negro was in disfavor by then. I believe "colored" was actually
the favored term by that time.

I thought it had gone the other way, from colored to Negro, and
then a bit later, to black.

Yes, I agree that's probably right. I'd gotten it backward in my mind. In my
childhood, though, Negro was a very rarely used term, at least in Southern
California. By the time my memory kicks in, black was pretty clearly
preferred.
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [23 mos.] mom)

This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
Financing for "5" years -- car dealership sign

Mommy: I call you "baby" because I love you.
Julian (age 4): Oh! All right, Mommy baby.

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman

Marie wrote:

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:53:08 GMT, Dawn Lawson
wrote:




Ok, sure. But the first group I was describing do ALL these things,
cook three meals every day and all the rest. I don't see why they can
do more and to the majority of posters here it seems impossible or
somehow self-indulgent to do. I'm honestly wondering what the
fundamental difference is.


Then I will say I do not organize my time enough to do much of
anything other than cleaning, cooking and dealing with the kids. And I
sure am not calm through any of it!

*g*....it's pretty confusing to be wondering through the whole thing too.


Perhaps I will call and talk to a few of the
people I'm closest to in the first group of families and pose these
questions to them, too. For the "other" side of the coin, and how they
manage to do all that they do and still remain calm and organised and
attentive to their children, etc.


I have known a couple of families like you mention, and I would just
feel overwhelmed if I did all that they do. I think I have been
unclear in what I've been trying to say.

Ditto that. ;-)
But thanks for answering, i'm trying to see if I can "pinpoint" the
difference since I greatly admire these families I know and find teh
enormous differences between their POV and what I read here to be
fascinating...

Dawn, who maybe SHOULD have been a social anthropologist ;-)

Tine Andersen wrote:

"PattyMomVA" skrev i en meddelelse
...

This is the same reason I cringe when I hear someone refer to "the blond."
(And, I can't get DH to stop doing it.)


But 'blonde' is a noun, isn't it?

Yes, or an adjective.
The blonde woman/the blond man (adj)
or she was blonde (noun)

Nina wrote:
"Circe" wrote in message
news:YHwWb.39211$QJ3.2799@fed1read04...
Nina wrote:
I was thinking, however, that colored was considered a less
offensive term than Negro first, since blacks themselves used the
term (as in the NAACP). I'll admit, my regionalism may be
showing!

Black people (using a modifier as a noun is offensive, since
"black" is not a noun in English) use the term negro.

It's fairly rare nowadays, though, wouldn't you agree? I have
never met a black person who called him or herself a "Negro".

Its a term that would be used only amongst black people.
So no, you wouldn't hear it.

Well, if it's only used *within* the group, then it's pretty clearly a word
they don't like applied to them from outside the group. You see the same
sort of things among the Latino population, who use a variety of terms with
one another that they would find offensive if applied to them by an
outsider.

Maybe I'm sheltered,
though I had several black roommates in college and work with a
number of black people, so I don't *think* that's it.

Its an insiders word/term/joke. You wont hear it used, that doesnt
mean it isnt being used.

But you admit, if I referred to the black people I worked with as "Negroes",
they would probably find it offensive. In which case, it is *not* a term in
common usage to describe people of African ancestry.

BTW, I hung out with these black roommates a lot in the company of their
black friends. They used another term with each other in my presence that I
guarantee you would be considered a slur if *I* had used it. IOW, they
didn't appear to be censoring their language because I, a white girl, was in
the room. And, moreover, since they used a term in my presence that's
considerably more insulting, I'm pretty sure I'd have heard the term "Negro"
if they'd been wont to use it.

Negro is a noun, black isnt. So a person can be a black person or
a negro, but not a negro person or a black.

I don't agree. I rarely hear white people called Caucasian,
either, though I suspect that's the term you'd think of as being
analagous to Negro.

I *do*
hear white people called "whites" and black people called
"blacks", and I've never heard any offensive connotation imputed
to either term.

Many black people take offense to the term "blacks" as well as
"coloreds".

Shrug I don't know many whites who do, so I guess I can't see any logical
reason for it. (Of course, "white" is a ridiculous term to apply to people
of European ancestry, anyway, since we are quite clearly not white, but
varying shades of pinkish-tan.)
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [23 mos.] mom)

This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
Financing for "5" years -- car dealership sign

Mommy: I call you "baby" because I love you.
Julian (age 4): Oh! All right, Mommy baby.

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman

"Circe" skrev i en meddelelse
news:BgyWb.39216$QJ3.8247@fed1read04...
But you admit, if I referred to the black people I worked with as
"Negroes",
they would probably find it offensive. In which case, it is *not* a term
in
common usage to describe people of African ancestry.

Now I'm probably offending all of you, but I'll try anyhow.

Is it true, that the black population of USA - at least the decendants of
the slaves - consist of more 'white' blood than 'black' blood due to the
adventures of the local white men? Or is this only something we read about
in horrible books about the horrible slavery over in the far-away America?

If not, why is their color so faded compared to African people? If it's
true, how much 'white' should you have in order not to be 'black'? 1/4,
1/16, 1/64? When you can't see it?

I'm not being judgemental - we have our issues here as well with Greenland.

Tine, Denmark

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
news

"Circe" skrev i en meddelelse
news:BgyWb.39216$QJ3.8247@fed1read04...
But you admit, if I referred to the black people I worked with as
"Negroes",
they would probably find it offensive. In which case, it is *not* a term
in
common usage to describe people of African ancestry.

Now I'm probably offending all of you, but I'll try anyhow.

Is it true, that the black population of USA - at least the decendants of
the slaves - consist of more 'white' blood than 'black' blood due to the
adventures of the local white men? Or is this only something we read about
in horrible books about the horrible slavery over in the far-away America?

If not, why is their color so faded compared to African people? If it's
true, how much 'white' should you have in order not to be 'black'? 1/4,
1/16, 1/64? When you can't see it?

I'm not being judgemental - we have our issues here as well with
Greenland.

Tine, Denmark



There's probably some truth to it, but I don't think it'd be a majority. As
far as skin color, IIRC we learned that Africans were darker than blacks on
other continents because of evolution and the sun. As far as not being
black, at least with the people I'm friends with, if you have any black,
you're black. 1/4, 1/16th, it doesn't matter.

Denise

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
k...

"Denise Anderson" skrev i en meddelelse
...
There's probably some truth to it, but I don't think it'd be a majority.
As
far as skin color, IIRC we learned that Africans were darker than blacks
on
other continents because of evolution and the sun. As far as not being
black, at least with the people I'm friends with, if you have any black,
you're black. 1/4, 1/16th, it doesn't matter.

Denise

The Germans under Holocaust has some rules - as Germans tend to have. If
you
were 1/32 jew (or more) you would be a jew. I'm not sure about the number.

Funny enough it's said that Hitler himself has some jewish blood. It could
be an urban legend.

Tine, Denmark



I remember watching something on the history channel about how if we were
all descendants of one couple, we'd all have Jewish blood. I tried googling
the Hitler thing and all I've found are a bunch of websites calling it an
urban legend.

Denise