Good Newsweek article

My husband and I have already decided that our kids will be allowed to
choose one activity per semester - one lesson, one club, one class
outside of school. If they are able to do so in a way that doesn't
inconvenience the rest of the family, they can choose to pick up Scouts
or something too. We are not going to be one of those families who
never has dinner together because the kids are always at practice or
lessons or whatnot. It's a choice, not a requirement.

Talk to me in about 8 years ;-) While I agree with you in theory, you'll be
surprised how easy it is to get very, very busy with just a couple of
activities per child. Also, as you watch your child develop various talents
and interests, it is hard to turn your back on those interests (especially
if they promote things you want for your kids - exercise, quality social
opportunities, building on inherent talents). My kids enjoy music lessons,
scouting, and sports. Music lessons are once a week, scouting involves two
meetings a month, one of them a Friday night, plus special weekend
activities. Sports often run in long (Little League) or short segments
(parks and recreation soccer or t-ball, for example, that run in six week
periods). Because my oldest takes piano, am I to deny him the Scout
experience that all his friends enjoy that only takes up a few evenings per
month? Or do I say he can't do Little League, a physical activity he loves?
I guess I just can't see the "one activity per semester" rule being
practical, even if in theory it seems to rightly put family before
activities. Quite frankly, I'd be afraid my son would throw in the towel on
piano if it took away all other fun opportunites. But I'd hate him to not
do piano at all just because he has scouts or has several week periods where
he plays a sport. Almost every night, we have dinner together, but
occasionally we have those nights where it's just crazy .....it's amazing
how all our practices and meetings always turn out to be on Wednesdays! I
think it's possible to be rational about doling out activites without
insisting on boilerplate rules.....and I think our kids appreciate our
flexibility and fairness. Sometimes we can do it and sometimes we can't.
YMMV.

Karen
Mom to three

Irrational Number wrote:
" wrote:

While I agree with this, there is something
to the fact that college applications look at
things like well-roundedness. For some people,
for whom it's important to go to a "good college",
this kind of stuff is "necessary".

I got a hell of an education from the state university (Purdue), and
I'm pretty sure that they didn't look at whether or not I took soccer
in kindergarten. I also got all four+ years for less than the cost
of a year at Notre Dame or Yale...

Of course, if you have Ivy League aspirations for your kid, that's
another thing. But wouldn't it be better if they're under, oh, 12 or
so to just let them be kids? I was an honors student, and I didn't
start thinking about college until my junior year. Turned out fine...

Whatever
other parents want to have done and were calling her
to do..., THEY can do themselves!

"Why, Mrs. Jones, how nice of you to volunteer to make a homemade
pinata! I simply haven't had the time, myself, but I know the kids
will love it! Thank you!!" Ta da! Who's going to say, "I'm not
volunteering, I think YOU should do it,"?

I also hated that the article mentions that the husbands
are basically incompetent. Who are these women
anyway? Are the the ones who get mad because
the husbands got the wrong brand of milk? Or didn't
get colour-coordinated paper plates???

Aw, man, don't get me started on all the man bashing that goes on in
the media... We'll be here all night. I'm so sick of shows, like
Everybody Loves Raymond, where men are portrayed as incompetent
buffons. Women's lib doesn't mean that we need to subjugate men.
That's not equality. ARGH!!

Amy

wrote in message
ups.com...

Sue wrote:
I thought this one and the other links on mothering were good.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6959880/...week/?GT1=6190

What a pessimistic view of motherhood!!

I have no sympathy for women who sign their 9 kids up for 4 different
after school activities each, and then complain that they spend all
their time in the car. Duh. No one is holding a gun to her head
forcing her to have each kid in an art class, a music class, a physical
activity, and a club. It's not necessary to do that every week to be a
good or well rounded person.

When I was a kid I took piano lessons for several years, then switched
to cello. I had after school activities, and I rode the late bus or my
bike home. If I wanted to join something, I was responsible for making
it work - not my mom. One year I wanted to take PE during summer
school (you got to wear your own swim suit instead of the nasty ones
that the school provided during the year). I rode my bike to school,
ran and swam for the entire morning, then rode home. I was in the best
shape of my life that summer.

My husband and I have already decided that our kids will be allowed to
choose one activity per semester - one lesson, one club, one class
outside of school. If they are able to do so in a way that doesn't
inconvenience the rest of the family, they can choose to pick up Scouts
or something too. We are not going to be one of those families who
never has dinner together because the kids are always at practice or
lessons or whatnot. It's a choice, not a requirement.

Another thing that annoys me about that article is the idea that
"society" makes us all behave like Martha Stewart. That's crap. As if
the kids give a damn if their paper plates are color coordinated with
the napkins and cups. Kids are far more practical than that. Sure,
it's nice for everything to look lovely, and if that's what you're
into, fine. But if you're already frazzled, driving all over town to
find streamers in that *perfect* shade of pink is self-imposed torture.
Society doesn't give a crap about your streamers.

It's like fashion - men don't give a rip about fashion - we say we're
dressing up for our S.O.s but we're really doing it to try to impress
or outdo other women. Kids don't give a crap about being in the BEST
pre-school, they just want to finger paint. We do it to increase our
status with other women.

If women want relief from the stress of parenting, they need to let go
of this ridiculous competitiveness we have with each other. They need
to let go of the idea that there's no such thing as good enough - and
it doesn't start with tax breaks, the government, or "society" - it
starts with the self.

It's all a matter of choices and priorities, and I don't feel that the
government needs to change anything to make me a better (future)
parent. In fact, the less the government is involved with my home and
my family, the better.

Amy


Yeah. I was struck right off the bat:

"Back in the days when I was a Good Mommy, I tried to do everything right. I
breast-fed and co-slept, and responded to each and every cry with anxious
alacrity. "

You are a good mom because you are anxious?? She and I have different
opinions of what a good mom is.

wrote:
Another thing that annoys me about that article is the idea that
"society" makes us all behave like Martha Stewart. That's crap. As
if
the kids give a damn if their paper plates are color coordinated with
the napkins and cups. Kids are far more practical than that. Sure,
it's nice for everything to look lovely, and if that's what you're
into, fine. But if you're already frazzled, driving all over town to
find streamers in that *perfect* shade of pink is self-imposed
torture.
Society doesn't give a crap about your streamers.

I think the article would agree with you:

"Instead of blaming society, moms today tend to blame themselves. They
say they've chosen poorly. And so they take on the Herculean task of
being absolutely everything to their children, simply because no one
else is doing anything at all to help them. Because if they don't
perform magical acts of perfect Mommy ministrations, their kids might
fall through the cracks and end up as losers in our hard-driving
winner-take-all society."

jen

Ericka Kammerer wrote:
And, of course, heaven forbid your child should become
very devoted to any activity in particular, as that typically
turns into a monster all its own. Travel soccer (or most any
other sport) can eat a family alive.

We "just said no" to travel soccer. Eek, regular soccer practice was
bad enough!

So far, my DD12 takes piano and both girls have swimming lessons (fall)
or skiing (winter) or tennis (spring). That's it. We've said no to
everything else. I felt guilty about it, but then I remembered that I
had no activities as a kid, beyond a few years with violin. My mom was
a SAHM so technically she could've carted us around. I could've signed
up for extracurricular stuff at school, but I didn't. And I got into a
good college and I'm no worse for wear.

I am more like the Slacker Mom in that article, if you followed that
link.

jen

Irrational Number wrote:
" wrote:

Sue wrote:
I thought this one and the other links on mothering were good.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6959880/...week/?GT1=6190

What a pessimistic view of motherhood!!

I have no sympathy for women who sign their 9 kids up for 4
different
after school activities each, and then complain that they spend all
their time in the car.

While I agree with this, there is something
to the fact that college applications look at
things like well-roundedness. For some people,
for whom it's important to go to a "good college",
this kind of stuff is "necessary".

Yes and no. I went to the top undergraduate university in Canada, and
on scholarship. Incidentally, the quality of education I received there
far surpassed that of my graduate school. I went all the way through
school in a rural community, with basic (but good) education available.
I did piano lessons and sang in choir, but that was the full extent of
my "roundedness" as indicated by organized extra curricular activities.
I had other experiences, such being involved in human rights work in
high school, but this was my own incentive and was not associated with
the school. I also took two years off after high school, one to go as
an exchange student to Brazil, and one to work as a waitress in a truck
stop diner to make money to pay for university (didn't know about the
scholarship). I finished my BA with the highest overall average in the
faculty of Arts, beating out a great number of kids who not only had
all the enrichment money could buy, but many of whom also had an entire
year more of high school (Ontario's Grade 13, or whatever they call it
these days).

My point is that enrichment and well-roundedness come from all kinds of
sources, and my parents certainly provided loads of it, as well as an
understanding of the value of self improvement, without it becoming the
nightmare of scheduled activities described by the article's author.
Plus, I think with all the rushing and pressure and diversification,
kids are ending up "jack of all trades, master of none" in many cases.
It's lip service rather than actual enrichment.

snip

Another thing that annoys me about that article is the idea that
"society" makes us all behave like Martha Stewart. That's crap.
As if
the kids give a damn if their paper plates are color coordinated
with
the napkins and cups.

Thank you for saying this. When reading the
article, I was thinking, WHAT??? Colour-coordinated
paper plates??? Heck, get whatever plates and cups
are on sale, get some streamers, DONE. Whatever
other parents want to have done and were calling her
to do..., THEY can do themselves!

Moms doing this are setting themselves up for a martyr complex, IMO. It
becomes all about who's going to appreciate what they've done, will it
be adequately appreciated, etc, etc, and we know the kids don't really
care! I read this funky book, written in the '60s, called "The I Hate
to Housekeep Book." At one point the author remarked that keeping an
immaculately clean house had nothing to do with popularity or respect
from others. She said, nobody in history has every said, "I just love
Marjorie! She keeps such a neat house!" I'm pretty sure the same goes
for parenting - nobody is going to like you better for being "perfect."


I also hated that the article mentions that the husbands
are basically incompetent. Who are these women
anyway? Are the the ones who get mad because
the husbands got the wrong brand of milk? Or didn't
get colour-coordinated paper plates???

-- Anita --

Amen. It's easy for me, though to say that, because I'm at home, and
happy to have the opportunity to *be* at home, so my job includes
housework, shopping, cooking, childcare, and I get loads of support and
respect for that. Dh helps out as much as he can, and he also works
full time. He's great with ds, and although sometimes he won't know why
I get brand x versus brand y, or will pick up the wrong z at the
grocery store, I don't consider that incompetence. He's doing his best
to help and support me in my job, even though he also works long hours
at his.

But, it's a different story for women who, like their husbands, are
working full time and are still doing all the cooking, cleaning, etc.
That would be frustrating.

Melania
Mom to Joffre (Jan 11, 2003)
and #2 (edd May 21, 2005)

Karen wrote:
My husband and I have already decided that our kids will be allowed
to
choose one activity per semester - one lesson, one club, one class
outside of school. If they are able to do so in a way that doesn't
inconvenience the rest of the family, they can choose to pick up
Scouts
or something too. We are not going to be one of those families who
never has dinner together because the kids are always at practice
or
lessons or whatnot. It's a choice, not a requirement.

Talk to me in about 8 years ;-) While I agree with you in theory,
you'll be
surprised how easy it is to get very, very busy with just a couple of
activities per child. Also, as you watch your child develop various
talents
and interests, it is hard to turn your back on those interests
(especially
if they promote things you want for your kids - exercise, quality
social
opportunities, building on inherent talents). My kids enjoy music
lessons,
scouting, and sports. Music lessons are once a week, scouting
involves two
meetings a month, one of them a Friday night, plus special weekend
activities. Sports often run in long (Little League) or short
segments
(parks and recreation soccer or t-ball, for example, that run in six
week
periods). Because my oldest takes piano, am I to deny him the Scout
experience that all his friends enjoy that only takes up a few
evenings per
month? Or do I say he can't do Little League, a physical activity he
loves?
I guess I just can't see the "one activity per semester" rule being
practical, even if in theory it seems to rightly put family before
activities. Quite frankly, I'd be afraid my son would throw in the
towel on
piano if it took away all other fun opportunites. But I'd hate him
to not
do piano at all just because he has scouts or has several week
periods where
he plays a sport. Almost every night, we have dinner together, but
occasionally we have those nights where it's just crazy .....it's
amazing
how all our practices and meetings always turn out to be on
Wednesdays! I
think it's possible to be rational about doling out activites without
insisting on boilerplate rules.....and I think our kids appreciate
our
flexibility and fairness. Sometimes we can do it and sometimes we
can't.
YMMV.

Karen
Mom to three

I think it's different when it's activities the kids really love,
either from an affinity for the activity itself or because of the
social experience. Some kids are herded into music, dance, sports, art,
language, and who knows what all else, and don't seem to even be
enjoying it.

And, it's easy for me to be in favour of limited extracurricular
activities because I lived in a small town where the options just
weren't there.

That said, I would rather raise my kids in a rural community than a
city, if there's any way we can swing it.

Melania
Mom to Joffre (Jan 11, 2003)
and #2 (edd May 21, 2005)

wrote:
Maybe I can work it out so that we
have piano for both kids on Monday, and then they're both in the same
martial arts class on Friday or something... With creative
scheduling,
you can make something like that work without making yourself crazy.

We've found what works best is only scheduling activities on the
weekends. I don't want to be running around on weekday evenings.

We have piano Friday night, and it is a great way to wind down and
relax at the end of the week. DD12 has her lesson for an hour, while
DD10 and I sit in the quiet parlor reading together, listening to her
play. It's a very nice way to start out the weekend! We get pizza
afterwards so there's no dinner rush when we finally get home.

Then they may have a sport-related activity on the weekend, but I put
my foot down and insist that one day be completely activity free. So if
one DD wants to take tennis, and the other wants to do soccer, that's
fine, but I prefer to have them both on the same day. Then we can sleep
in late on the other day, and have one day when we're free to go at a
slower, more relaxed pace.

We also make a practice of taking the kids out for one early night
during the week to such things as an art exhibit, lecture, play, etc,
to help expose them to culture, as this is very important to me.

But to me these nights are more an interactive, shared family event vs
dropping kids off at an activity and having us sit on the sidelines and
watch. The kids look forward to these nights and do their homework
ahead of time so we can go straight out from school, and I look forward
to them because it's a way I can teach them something and open their
minds beyond what they learn in school.

jen

Yeah, what she said!
wrote in message
ups.com...

Sue wrote:
I thought this one and the other links on mothering were good.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6959880/...week/?GT1=6190

What a pessimistic view of motherhood!!

I have no sympathy for women who sign their 9 kids up for 4 different
after school activities each, and then complain that they spend all
their time in the car. Duh. No one is holding a gun to her head
forcing her to have each kid in an art class, a music class, a physical
activity, and a club. It's not necessary to do that every week to be a
good or well rounded person.

When I was a kid I took piano lessons for several years, then switched
to cello. I had after school activities, and I rode the late bus or my
bike home. If I wanted to join something, I was responsible for making
it work - not my mom. One year I wanted to take PE during summer
school (you got to wear your own swim suit instead of the nasty ones
that the school provided during the year). I rode my bike to school,
ran and swam for the entire morning, then rode home. I was in the best
shape of my life that summer.

My husband and I have already decided that our kids will be allowed to
choose one activity per semester - one lesson, one club, one class
outside of school. If they are able to do so in a way that doesn't
inconvenience the rest of the family, they can choose to pick up Scouts
or something too. We are not going to be one of those families who
never has dinner together because the kids are always at practice or
lessons or whatnot. It's a choice, not a requirement.

Another thing that annoys me about that article is the idea that
"society" makes us all behave like Martha Stewart. That's crap. As if
the kids give a damn if their paper plates are color coordinated with
the napkins and cups. Kids are far more practical than that. Sure,
it's nice for everything to look lovely, and if that's what you're
into, fine. But if you're already frazzled, driving all over town to
find streamers in that *perfect* shade of pink is self-imposed torture.
Society doesn't give a crap about your streamers.

It's like fashion - men don't give a rip about fashion - we say we're
dressing up for our S.O.s but we're really doing it to try to impress
or outdo other women. Kids don't give a crap about being in the BEST
pre-school, they just want to finger paint. We do it to increase our
status with other women.

If women want relief from the stress of parenting, they need to let go
of this ridiculous competitiveness we have with each other. They need
to let go of the idea that there's no such thing as good enough - and
it doesn't start with tax breaks, the government, or "society" - it
starts with the self.

It's all a matter of choices and priorities, and I don't feel that the
government needs to change anything to make me a better (future)
parent. In fact, the less the government is involved with my home and
my family, the better.

Amy




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

In article .com,
says...


Circe wrote:
wrote in message

Oh, Amy, you rock! I couldn't have said it better myself.

Yay! After I posted that I was worried that I was about to get
lambasted...

One other thing that struck me after I posted - you don't hear men
complaining about their lack of choices. By and large, men are
expected to get jobs and support their families. Most of them never
get the option to stay home, even though many of them would probably
like to, and yet there aren't articles about how the poor, poor men
need help from the government to do what they're supposed to do - they
just suck it up and do it.

Women could take a page out of their play book, don't you think?

Well, I dunno. At least it could go both ways.

Men DO have the *choice* to stay home, and live on their wife's income. Which,
while it may be small at first, will increase as her her salary and salary
potential increases with job experience and training, just has been true all
along for male breadwinners.

But, very often they don't, because they've bought into society's idea that
they're not 'really men' if they do so, and have to put up with guff from the
men, and some of the women, they know.

Well, they can take a page out of OUR book! The one where getting a physics
degree in the early '70s meant I'm not 'really a woman', and how I put up with a
lot of guff from both men and women. So - let's let THEM be the pioneers for
once!

At least the men who stay home to take care of their kids won't be fondled by
coworkers, or laid off because someone else is supposed to 'need the work more'.

So how about it? No more excuses from men as to why they don't exercise their
choice to stay home.

Banty (we broke into the boardrooms of America - they can break into the
kitchens and playrooms of America)