upset at nanny -- vent

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". 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. Perhaps, once again, it's
regionalism coming into play.

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. In the
singular, I grant you it sounds a bit odd, but both Caucasian and Negro
sound just as clunky to my ear. I prefer the use of the words black or white
as modifiers, frankly, because it puts the emphasis on the *person*, not on
the color. The words Caucasian and Negro and similar terms have, IMO, the
affect of emphasizing the ways in which we differ more than the (vastly
greater) ways in which we're all alike.

Certainly, in slave-holding times, the term for blacks was Negro
(or a much ruder variation thereof). IMO, that means it was, by
definition, not a value-neutral word.

It was neutral and over time it fell out of favor as did "coloreds".
You imply that by definition, any term used to refer to black people
in those days
would not be neutral. That's absurd. Negro was a perfectly legit and
preferable term as opposed to darky, coon, ****** , nigra.

It was a legal term that applied, typically, to people who had a lesser
legal status than those who were white. Now, I'm not trying to say that I
think there's some racist *intent* behind the word Negro, but I understand
why it bothers most of the black Americans I know. It's carrying a lot of
baggage and its similarity to words that are clearly insulting and degrading
doesn't improve its currency, IMO.
--
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

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
k...

"Nina" skrev i en meddelelse
...

e, Tine, we've got cultural differences even *within* the US!

Yup - but I'm learning as I'm reading.

I spent some years in NYC ('60 to '64) as a very small child - I was
late to
talk so I learnt English in day care and Danish at home. I'm sure an
appropriate word was negro where I lived. I remember being
threatened by a
young Afro-American/colored/black/brown/negro/KWIM? boy: I'm gonna
sue you!
I believe I had stolen his shovel in the sandbox. He was five and I
was
four.

Tine, since age of six Denmark


When I was a kid it was afro-American, now its African-American.
Really, who can keep up?

"Michelle Spina" wrote in message
om...
Marie wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:56:09 +0100, "Tine Andersen"
wrote:
I just cook, housekeep and clean BESIDES having a full time job.
If I only
had to do that my house would be spotless, or I would spin, knit,
sew and
weave which I don't consider work but play.

Trust me, no one's house is spotless just because they stay at
home.
During the hours you are working "full time", what do you think
stay
at home mothers are doing? Like the joke about the husband who
comes
home and looks around and asks "So what did you do all day?" Our
days
are full of taking care of our children, with children at home
they
make messes. We don't just leave our nice clean house in the
mornings
and come home to the same nice clean homes at night as working
mothers
do...our homes are constantly lived in. Our children are being
interacted with, taught, doing arts/crafts, eating... The way I
see it
working out of the house is the easy thing to do as far as how
much
work is concerned. And I've been there so I know.
As for knitting/sewing, LMAO No stay-at-home moms *I* know have
the
time for that.
Marie

This is *clearly* very person dependent, then. I was thinking as I
was
reading this "you have no idea what it's like to be a working
mother!"
When exactly do you think the house *gets* cleaned? I'd love to have
the picture you painted - clean house in the morning, come home to
same clean house. Hmmm - when would I manage that? Mornings are busy
getting parents ready for work, and kids ready for their day. The
day
is filled with work. Come home, play with kids, make dinner, play
more
with kids, put kids to bed. Now it's 8:30 - 9:00pm. Some cleaning
can
be done, but nothing too noisy, because, well, the kids are
sleeping.
And, we've been going since 6:30am - cleaning is NOT at the top of
my
list at that point. So, dirty house remains dirty. Repeat 5x.
Weekends
are a blur of errands and cleaning that should have been done during
the week. Hardly the nirvana painted above.


Yeah. When I was in school it was like that. Hectic indeed.

"Dawn Lawson" wrote in message
news:qBvWb.475937$ts4.323883@pd7tw3no...


Nina wrote:

"Dawn Lawson" wrote in message
news:FQrWb.462164$JQ1.333434@pd7tw1no...


Nina wrote:


"Tine Andersen" wrote Being quite
frank: I would probably look down at someone who chose to let


her DH support her and stay at home. I would consider it lazy, I

think.


You're supposed to provide for yourself. I myself would hate to

stay

at


home - I need the satisfaction my job gives me. I'm an
acceptable

mother,


but I'm not born to be a MOTHER, if you KWIM.


You dont consider the tasks of maintaining a home and family o be
work? I find it
ironic when people approve of working as a daycare worker outside

the

home for pay
but consider it laziness when the same job is performed in ones

home.

Being a:
daycare worker
cook
housekeeper
are work when paid professsions, but laziness when same functions

are

provided at home.

and imo, this is why NAmerican daycare is poorer than what Tine is

used

to. We have to be as sensitive to the differences in culture as

Tine

has been, if we are to continue asking her to spell out those
differences. She was ASKED what NAmericans do that she finds

unusual

and shocking.

Dawn


My goodness, you tend to be testy.
Where was i insensitive? I was disucssing in depth with her her
perceptions
and asking her further questions to get a better idea of her
perspective.
I cant see how thats insensitive.
Dialogue.

Sure, but the general reaction to Tine's posts about the differences

between the Danish culture and what she reads here was "WHOT!! How
can
you feel that way?" the moment she said that there are few SAHM in
Denmark and they are viewed in a certain way.

I didnt get that impression. I personally just asked how she would
consider
being a SAHM lazy and if she considered doing the same work in home
that maids, daycare workers etc do legit work. She answered by
telling about her mother
and how society there has been the past few decades. I dont think my
reaction was one of shock
and my questions were genuine, not veiled attempts to ridicule her
views or statement.

In the context of "our"
culture, SAHM are viewed differently, and it's difficult to accept
(it
seems) that another culture may feel otherwise, and be set up
socially
in a completely different way.

It isnt difficult at all for me to believe, but I like to learn,
my mothers degree is sociology and I spent my teen years
reading her papers for her post-masters work. I still read
cultural anthropology books, case studies etc for fun.
So having the chance to bat ideas around and explore
other peoples views, I cant resist asking more questions and probing.
When other people ask me, I dont generally get defensive, but simply
explain
what factors lead me to believe as I do.


The anecdote of the Danish mother who
was jailed in the USA points that out to an extreme.

:-)

Dawn

"Tine Andersen" wrote

My goodness, you tend to be testy.
Where was i insensitive? I was disucssing in depth with her her
perceptions
and asking her further questions to get a better idea of her
perspective.
I cant see how thats insensitive.
Dialogue.

It's OK with me - I love these exchanges of ideas and ways of
living. And I
accept that not everyone recognize my descriptions as mere
descriptions and
not statements of a better way of living.

Me too.

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

"Tine Andersen" wrote in message
k...

"Nina" skrev i en meddelelse
...
Here, a lot of us find that having 2 incomes doesnt help much.
The
2nd
income is eaten
away by daycare, transportationa nd other costs. So its
beneficial
for
one person to stay home.
If one person provides money and one provides services, it may
not
be
equal or identical
but it is an equitable distribution of labor. Honestly,
regarding
laziness, my husband could never afford
to pay someone for the services I render. If I were to work,
my
salary
wouldnt cover
child care
housework
laundry
etc.
Since we do have a small baby, i prefer to stay home and do
these
things rather than work and pay someone for it.
With the number of kids we have, all the Drs appointments,
school
meetings, housework etc, there really needs to be someone
home full time.


Things are very different. Daycare is 250-300$ per month. I make
3000$ after
taxes. I can take some hours off - with full pay - to go to the
dentist,
doctor, what have you with the kids. When they are ill I can
take
one day
off - fully payed - and so can DH. When I'm on sick leave I'm
payed
my full
salary. We have maternaty leave for nearly a year - so I was a
SAHM
for 6
mos (it has become longer since my kids were born). As everyone
works,
school metings are during the evenings - always. Distances are
short - most
people can bike to work. This country has more bikes that
people. We
are
four people - we have (counting) six bikes. They come in all
kinds:
carrier
cycles, with two chairs for kids, with trailers for groceries
and
kids.

There is absolutely a difference between having one and two
incomes
here.

There is here too. But with 3 kids,if the daycare is
300/child,thats a
big chunk of money.
Plus the lack of time because there are generally only 3 hours
between
coming home from work
and kids going to bed. With more than 1,it gets very rushed.


2nd kid half price, 3rd even cheaper. I would make it four hours,
but yes,
it's not much.

Wow, thats great. I know few places that discount for additional kids
in a fmaily
but not an entire 50%. I have a friend who would pay nearly
$1500/month for child care
its just not worth it foir her.

Mine are 6 and 11, so if we pick the small one up at 4:30 and he
goes to bed
8:30-9:00 we do have some time. The big one comes home by herself
(or she is
home) and she goes to bed at 10, så we have lost of time for home
work and
beating dad in chess.


Ah, so you have a short work day? Here, by the time you get off of
work at 5, get all the kids,
it is 6 pm. Then you have to get (in my case) 3 kids fed, bathed,
homeworked, loved and ready for bed
by 8.

"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".

"Dawn Lawson" wrote in message
news:tPvWb.474356$X%5.391618@pd7tw2no...


Marie wrote:

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:24:38 GMT, Dawn Lawson
wrote:

Marie wrote:
I know LOTS of people who have spotless houses, hot meals, and
enjoyable
children because they stay at home.


Hot meals, I have. Enjoyable children, *I* think so! I guess I do
too
much with the kids to spend too much time doing other things. (I
homeschool and the kids are the main part of my life)

You made quite a sweeping statement that no one with similar
commitments
has a spotless house. I've been pondering this, as I know literally
dozens of families that do, AND they do things like make most of
their
own clothing, food (bread, canning, butchering, etc) AND are very
involved in community and such. I'm finding it very interesting to
try
to pinpoint the difference between these families (where i'm
guessing
the average number of kids is 4 or 5) and families I am reading
about
here where there's *one* child and a SAH parent, and the household
so
frazzled it seems ok to walk past animal waste because it's too
difficult to manage to clean it up. (Ok that's not said commonly,
but
at least two people have posted just that)

I'm curious because I find the first group to be a calm, warm,
loving
group, with welcoming homes, and a commitment to quality
workmanship. I
find the second group to be frazzled and harried and generally
struggling to keep one disaster or another at bay. There's clearly
some
fundamental difference between the SAHM and the communities in both
groups.




Again, these same moms I know sew, knit, do woodwork, maintain
enormous
gardens to feed the families etc.


I want a garden, I just need to figure out where to have one where
the
cows(not mine) won't eat it through the fences, but there will
still
be room for the kids to play.

Double fence the garden area, with about a six foot gap if you can,
the
kids can play around in the gap, the cows can't get near the garden.
And garden in raised beds, and the kids can play in the garden too.
(plus you get more yeild for the area gardened)



I suspect from what I have been told by people coming here or
hearing
what my plans are for the day that I am further to the camp of
spotless
house and such than not.
I dont' see why you can't do all these things if you wanted, when
you're
a SAHM.


I guess if I wanted to do it I could, I just feel there are more
important things to spend my time on. Hmm, I do play piano, do my
online stuff and read as hobbies, and I go out every other weekend
with a friend so I guess there are my "me" times. Except my
hobbies
are usually done with a baby on me!

I'm not even talking about "me" time. I'm talking about doing all
the
things people say you have to stop doing when there are kids,
because
there isn't time in the day.

So. Now I'm curious. Again. ;-)

WHAT are the more important things that you spend your time on?

I wonder if I *don't* do them, or if I do them *as well* as all the
other things I do, ditto for the first group I mentioned...

Dawn

I have a large house, 3 kids, my husband is away in the army, i have
no family near
few friends and one child is disabled. So its hectic here.

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:53:08 GMT, Dawn Lawson
wrote:
Is sewing a hobby if you are clothing your family? I suppose.
Woodworking if you are using the income from it to buy groceries? I
suppose.some people view gardens as a hobby. For me they are a source of
quality food, and NOT a hobby.
Maybe that's why these things aren't valued as contributing to family
life, because they are seen as taking away time with the family? Which
seems strange to me, because they are practical, useful, (geez, Tine?
What AM I trying to say? ;-) skills and don't detract from any of the
families I know that do them all. In fact they strengthen the families
and I don't hear the same 'issues" coming from them as I do from the
average person in my "second group of families"

The sewing and woodworking I was not thinking of being part of family
life, I was thinking of them as hobbies. I did not realize you
mentioned them as examples of being part of the "household" type
activities, instead of just hobbies.(my mother did some woodworking
and painting, but just as a hobby)
I think I started out misunderstanding you! This whole thing has been
confusing for me.

Everything but the basics, it sounds like. Anytime other things are
mentioned like having a clean house, or a garden or baking or such, they
are sort of brushed off as "not as important as what I chose to do
instead".

Hm. The basics are a clean house, and baking and gardening, right?
(not a spotless house, which was one of my original points) I have a
clean house. (woohoo I can say that!) I feel proud when I look
around(because i had a huge problem with housework for years but I'm
organized enough to keep it clean now). But It's by no means spotless.
There is always something to be done; whereas if it were spotless
there would be *nothing* that needed to be done.
Baking, gardening, sewing your clothes or to help out financially...I
would consider those things necessary. But things that would not
benefit my family at all I just wouldn't spend anymore time on than I
already do (such as the 'net, piano and reading)

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!

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.
Marie

"Circe" wrote in message
news:YHwWb.39211$QJ3.2799@fed1read04... AND I snipped!
I prefer the use of the words black or white
as modifiers, frankly, because it puts the emphasis on the *person*, not
on
the color.

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.)

-Patty, mom to Corinne (5.75y) and Nathan (3.5y)
and stepmom to Victoria (13.5y)