Awful Halloween costumes

[Nevermind]

Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.

So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
with something creative this week before Halloween.

Thanks.

[Kevin Karplus]

In article >, Nevermind wrote:
> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
> with something creative this week before Halloween.

I'm sure some people do have kids who like gory Halloween costumes,
judging by the number who come to our door each year. Our elementary
school has a costume parade on Halloween at school each year, and
explicitly prohibits graphic depiction of violence. The letter to the
parents is carefully worded to make it clear that such costumes may be
appropriate for other Halloween activities, but are NOT acceptable at
school.

Our 7-year-old son has never shown much interest in gore. He prefers
more imaginative costumes. This year, he wants to be a green lizard.
My wife found some reptile-print fabric and is making him some
reptile-print pajamas. We'll add a mask or hat and tail to complete
the costume, and he will have new pajamas to wear after Halloween.
(We did a similar thing using commercial green fleece pajamas when he
needed to be a "Wall of Thorns" for a play---the pajamas became his
favorites.)

The most challenging costume to design was the year he decided to be a
house. (We put shoulder straps into a carboard box which my wife
painted to look like a house---he looked out the window of the house.)


--
Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
Affiliations for identification only.

[Robyn Kozierok]

In article >,
Nevermind > wrote:
>Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
>mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
>any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
>I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
>imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
>immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.
>
>So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
>for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
>stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
>with something creative this week before Halloween.

I haven't faced this particular issue, but I think I'd let my kid
do this if he wanted to. After all, they're supposed to be
something "scary" (at least, that's how many kids view Halloween)
and not something they aspire to be IRL. My 7yo is going as "the
devil" -- not any nicer a guy than Freddie... I haven't seen what
a "Freddie mask" looks like (nor have I seen any of the movies),
but maybe you need to clarify for yourself what you think is wrong
with him being Freddie as opposed to a devil, or a monster, or a
skeleton, or a vampire, etc.... (assuming you wouldn't have the
same reaction to those more "traditional" costume ideas).

--Robyn

[Banty]

In article >, Nevermind says...
>
>Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
>mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
>any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
>I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
>imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
>immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.
>
>So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
>for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
>stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
>with something creative this week before Halloween.

Let him be Freddie - it's a weird scary mask that's fun for Halloween.

Banty (whose son is 'Kenny' this Halloween)

[Marijke]

I have two boys and a girl - trick or treating is past for them now but I
remember the boys went from cutesy to outright gore in one year and it was
usually around their 8th birthday.

I never bought masks for the kids so it wasn't an issue but we got creative.
One of the boys wanted to be "death" so we ripped up a shirt, got lots of
artificial blood and messed up his face and the shirt really well. My
oldest son was a headless man once - that was interesting to make. I made a
head out of paper mache and his face was in the middle of a shirt. Last
year, my youngest went out as the grim reaper (now come to think of it, my
daughter did that once too).

So, I'm in the "let them be what they want to be" camp. It's only one night
and it's for make believe.

Marijke
mom to three (Matthew, april 87; Anne, feb 89 and Kevin, sept 91)


"Nevermind" > wrote in message
om...
> Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
> mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
> any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
> I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
> imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
> immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.
>
> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
> with something creative this week before Halloween.
>
> Thanks.
>

[Louise]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:25:12 EST, "Marijke" >
wrote:

>I have two boys and a girl - trick or treating is past for them now but I
>remember the boys went from cutesy to outright gore in one year and it was
>usually around their 8th birthday.
>
>I never bought masks for the kids so it wasn't an issue but we got creative.
>One of the boys wanted to be "death" so we ripped up a shirt, got lots of
>artificial blood and messed up his face and the shirt really well. My
>oldest son was a headless man once - that was interesting to make. I made a
>head out of paper mache and his face was in the middle of a shirt.

Our "headless man" wore a men's dress shirt, with a place to look out
between the buttons, and carried a motorcycle helmet.

Louise
Louise

"If zero can be a number, why can't vanilla be a kink?"
-- umar

[Marijke]

I have two boys and a girl - trick or treating is past for them now but I
remember the boys went from cutesy to outright gore in one year and it was
usually around their 8th birthday.

I never bought masks for the kids so it wasn't an issue but we got creative.
One of the boys wanted to be "death" so we ripped up a shirt, got lots of
artificial blood and messed up his face and the shirt really well. My
oldest son was a headless man once - that was interesting to make. I made a
head out of paper mache and his face was in the middle of a shirt. Last
year, my youngest went out as the grim reaper (now come to think of it, my
daughter did that once too).

So, I'm in the "let them be what they want to be" camp. It's only one night
and it's for make believe.

Marijke
mom to three (Matthew, april 87; Anne, feb 89 and Kevin, sept 91)


"Nevermind" > wrote in message
om...
> Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
> mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
> any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
> I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
> imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
> immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.
>
> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
> with something creative this week before Halloween.
>
> Thanks.
>

[Rosalie B.]

x-no-archive:yes
Louise > wrote:

>On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:25:12 EST, "Marijke" >
>wrote:
>
<snip> My
>>oldest son was a headless man once - that was interesting to make. I made a
>>head out of paper mache and his face was in the middle of a shirt.
>
>Our "headless man" wore a men's dress shirt, with a place to look out
>between the buttons, and carried a motorcycle helmet.

We did it with a cape (looking out between the buttons), and carried a
carved pumpkin head with a flashlight in it. A dark cape, and a black
shirt and hood inside the cape would be best, but I didn't have one,
so I used what I had which was maroon and grey. They also rode their
ponies so they were the headless horseman, but that's probably not an
option for most people. Other than the horse, or the more realistic
head, it's really a pretty easy costume to do.

We also had a guy at school who did it with a flight suit (zippers go
both directions so he could zip is partway up and partway down.

grandma Rosalie

[Elizabeth Gardner]

In article >,
(Kevin Karplus) wrote:

> In article >, Nevermind wrote:
> > So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
> > for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
> > stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
> > with something creative this week before Halloween.
>
> I'm sure some people do have kids who like gory Halloween costumes,
> judging by the number who come to our door each year. Our elementary
> school has a costume parade on Halloween at school each year, and
> explicitly prohibits graphic depiction of violence. The letter to the
> parents is carefully worded to make it clear that such costumes may be
> appropriate for other Halloween activities, but are NOT acceptable at
> school.

Our school has a policy against fake blood or any sort of weaponry.
Being a monster is OK, though.

Since she was old enough to care about having a costume, our daughter
has been a black cat, a witch, a ghost, a vampire, a princess and a
leopard. (The last was because her grammy sent her a leopard costume,
and it was her last chance to use it before she outgrew it.) This year
she wants to be the "Spider Queen," which is going to entail some
ingenuity but no gore. She does seem to go for spooky, in general.

I say let him be Freddie as long as there's no blood to get him sent
home from school.

[Nevermind]

(Robyn Kozierok) wrote
>
> I haven't faced this particular issue, but I think I'd let my kid
> do this if he wanted to. After all, they're supposed to be
> something "scary" (at least, that's how many kids view Halloween)
> and not something they aspire to be IRL. My 7yo is going as "the
> devil" -- not any nicer a guy than Freddie... I haven't seen what
> a "Freddie mask" looks like (nor have I seen any of the movies),
> but maybe you need to clarify for yourself what you think is wrong
> with him being Freddie as opposed to a devil, or a monster, or a
> skeleton, or a vampire, etc.... (assuming you wouldn't have the
> same reaction to those more "traditional" costume ideas).

Well, I'm sure that at one time in history, vampires and "the devil"
and the like represented real evil to people, but I don't think they
do for most of us these days. However, the movie serial killers, like
Jason and Freddie, do, AND they're used for entertainment purposes, a
combination I really feel uncomfortable with.

Still, I don't think I would have ended up *forbidding* him from being
Freddie, because I can't find any reason to believe that harm of any
kind would be done, or even bad lessons learned. I can't afford to
forbid things due soley to "principle." But he made the point moot by
suddenly, after weeks of saying he would be Freddie or Jason, deciding
to wear a scary beast mask we already have and putting together a
costume for "rock ‘n roll animal" – which he really is, and I don't
mind him representing.

[ConTactMe]

You're the mom. Don't like what your child is into? Don't be politically
correct. There's lot's of reason for keeping your kids from something that
turns you off. Want a good example of the way kids think? Read Hangman's
Curse, by Frank Peretti. It'll keep you up late at night, so grab some
coffee.


"Nevermind" > wrote in message
om...
> Yet another chapter in the saga of the "typical" 8 YO boy and his PC
> mom. He wants to be Freddie. No, he has of course never seen that or
> any other similar movie, but he thinks Freddie is "cool". In general,
> I have learned to avoid fussing over his interest in violent and scary
> imagery, as he has no issues with violence or general (serious)
> immorality in his real life, but . . . ugh.
>
> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
> with something creative this week before Halloween.
>
> Thanks.
>
>

[David desJardins]

"Nevermind" writes:
> Still, I don't think I would have ended up *forbidding* him from being
> Freddie, because I can't find any reason to believe that harm of any
> kind would be done, or even bad lessons learned. I can't afford to
> forbid things due soley to "principle."

I don't have much insight into 8 year olds, since my children are only
3, but there are a lot of things that I wouldn't "forbid" my child to
do, but I wouldn't help him to do, either. This seems like one of
those. If he wants to create his own costume, he can do that. If he
wants me to help him make a costume, it's got to be something that's not
offensive or distasteful to me.

David desJardins

[Banty]

In article >, David desJardins says...
>
>"Nevermind" writes:
>> Still, I don't think I would have ended up *forbidding* him from being
>> Freddie, because I can't find any reason to believe that harm of any
>> kind would be done, or even bad lessons learned. I can't afford to
>> forbid things due soley to "principle."
>
>I don't have much insight into 8 year olds, since my children are only
>3, but there are a lot of things that I wouldn't "forbid" my child to
>do, but I wouldn't help him to do, either. This seems like one of
>those. If he wants to create his own costume, he can do that. If he
>wants me to help him make a costume, it's got to be something that's not
>offensive or distasteful to me.
>
> David desJardins
>

The gory scary masks are usually bought ones. Would you buy one?

Just curious..

Banty

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
> The gory scary masks are usually bought ones. Would you buy one?
> Just curious..

Personally? I think I'd be willing to buy one with cartoonish or
non-realistic gore (a "monster"). But not one based on a serial killer
(like Freddy). Pretty much the same distinction that "Nevermind" posted.

David desJardins

[Banty]

In article >, Kevin Karplus says...
>
>In article >, Nevermind wrote:
>> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
>> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
>> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
>> with something creative this week before Halloween.
>
>I'm sure some people do have kids who like gory Halloween costumes,
>judging by the number who come to our door each year. Our elementary
>school has a costume parade on Halloween at school each year, and
>explicitly prohibits graphic depiction of violence. The letter to the
>parents is carefully worded to make it clear that such costumes may be
>appropriate for other Halloween activities, but are NOT acceptable at
>school.

Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a whole range
of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just wish the kids Happy
Halloween on October 31 and send them home to the festivities.

Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course all the
kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them *really* want
to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes and more preparation, or the
kid compromising, and it gets the heck in the way of Halloween.

There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party,
especially if the school is queasy about it.


>
>Our 7-year-old son has never shown much interest in gore. He prefers
>more imaginative costumes. This year, he wants to be a green lizard.
>My wife found some reptile-print fabric and is making him some
>reptile-print pajamas. We'll add a mask or hat and tail to complete
>the costume, and he will have new pajamas to wear after Halloween.
>(We did a similar thing using commercial green fleece pajamas when he
>needed to be a "Wall of Thorns" for a play---the pajamas became his
>favorites.)
>

He's all of seven. That my soon change (or not).

>The most challenging costume to design was the year he decided to be a
>house. (We put shoulder straps into a carboard box which my wife
>painted to look like a house---he looked out the window of the house.)
>

My son was a car twice. He strapped a cardboard car I made, and wore the
hardtop on his head. I still have it in my attic :-)

Banty

[Louise]

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 11:09:10 EST, Elizabeth Gardner
> wrote:

>This year
>she wants to be the "Spider Queen," which is going to entail some
>ingenuity but no gore. She does seem to go for spooky, in general.

Whenever I have to come up with a costume for myself in a hurry, I go
as a spider. I wear a black turtleneck and leggings. I take two
pairs of black kneesocks for the other four spider legs, stuff them
with newspaper, and pin the open ends to my sides.

Then, the fun part is to make the other legs mobile. I use black
thread to connect the "legs" to the arms of my shirt ( if I'm doing it
properly, I attach the threads to rounds of black elastic to wear on
my arms, so I can let them hang down if I have to drive or wear a coat
or something).

I can then move my arms and the other legs move along with them. It
works most effectively if there are two sets of threads, one at my
elbows and the others at my wrists. Then I can gesture dramatically
with 6 legs, hug people, etc.

Additional spooky decoration I've used includes
- spiderweb drawn on my face with facepaint
- black lace veil for a black widow spider
- spiderweb drawn on my back with chalk (hey, I said this was an 'in a
hurry' costume)
- black nailpolish

Have fun!

Louise

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
>> Our elementary school has a costume parade on Halloween at school
>> each year, and explicitly prohibits graphic depiction of violence.
>
> Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole
> Halloween ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they
> have a whole range of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd
> just wish the kids Happy Halloween on October 31 and send them home to
> the festivities.

There's plenty of room for the "whole Halloween ghosty-ghouly-gory
thing", without depictions of simulated violence (graphic or otherwise).

You could fall off a ladder, hit your head, and bleed a lot. That would
be gory. But it wouldn't be violent, unless someone pushed you.

David desJardins

[Kevin Karplus]

In article >, Banty wrote:
> Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
> ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a
> whole range of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just
> wish the kids Happy Halloween on October 31 and send them home to
> the festivities.
>
> Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course all the
> kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them
> *really* want to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes
> and more preparation, or the kid compromising, and it gets the heck in
> the way of Halloween.
>
> There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party, especially if the
> school is queasy about it.

The school costume parade is very popular with the kids, so the school
does it as a treat for them. I think many of the parents appreciate
that the school doesn't allow very gory costumes, since they can then
tell their kids "OK, but if you really want that costume then you
can't wear it in the school parade." I doubt that many of the kids
get 2 costumes (over 40% of the school is in the free or reduced price
lunch program).

Students don't have to participate in the Halloween costume parade, so
if a kid really wants a gory costume, he can choose not to take it to
school and just wear it in the evening. For such a student, this is
almost the same as Banty's proposal, and the vast majority of students
can have a school parade to show off their non-gory costumes.

--
Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
Affiliations for identification only.

[Scott Lindstrom]

Kevin Karplus wrote:
> In article >, Banty wrote:
>
>>Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
>>ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a
>>whole range of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just
>>wish the kids Happy Halloween on October 31 and send them home to
>>the festivities.
>>
>>Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course all the
>>kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them
>>*really* want to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes
>>and more preparation, or the kid compromising, and it gets the heck in
>>the way of Halloween.
>>
>>There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party, especially if the
>>school is queasy about it.
>
>
> The school costume parade is very popular with the kids, so the school
> does it as a treat for them. I think many of the parents appreciate
> that the school doesn't allow very gory costumes, since they can then
> tell their kids "OK, but if you really want that costume then you
> can't wear it in the school parade." I doubt that many of the kids
> get 2 costumes (over 40% of the school is in the free or reduced price
> lunch program).


I think if you don't want your kid to do something, you
should prohibit it and not hide behind a school rule.
Yes it's easier to tell your child that Of Course I would
let you wear the Slasher Victim costume, but the mean
old school board won't allow it. But I think it skews
the relationship between child, parent, and school
unhealthily.

I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?

Oh, sorry, was I ranting? ;)

Scott DD 10 (Queen Elizabeth I) and DS 7.5 (A Bionicle)

[Rosalie B.]

Banty > wrote:

>In article >, Kevin Karplus says...
>>
>>In article >, Nevermind wrote:
>>> So, do any of you have kids like this? Do you disallow such choices
>>> for Halloween? I tell you what: It would be a LOT easier to buy the
>>> stupid Freddie mask than fight against it and then help him come up
>>> with something creative this week before Halloween.
>>
>>I'm sure some people do have kids who like gory Halloween costumes,
>>judging by the number who come to our door each year. Our elementary
>>school has a costume parade on Halloween at school each year, and
>>explicitly prohibits graphic depiction of violence. The letter to the
>>parents is carefully worded to make it clear that such costumes may be
>>appropriate for other Halloween activities, but are NOT acceptable at
>>school.
>
>Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
>ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a whole range
>of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just wish the kids Happy
>Halloween on October 31 and send them home to the festivities.
>
>Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course all the
>kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them *really* want
>to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes and more preparation, or the
>kid compromising, and it gets the heck in the way of Halloween.
>
>There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party,
>especially if the school is queasy about it.
>
<snip>

I hear what you are saying, but I only remember the school having a
parade once and that was a Lutheran school when DD#1 was in 1st grade.
They were supposed to come as story book characters. DD went as the
Scarecrow of Oz and won a prize.

When I taught middle school, some of the teachers dressed up, but I
don't think there was a school wide parade type thing.

I normally did not buy the full face masks or costumes as I thought
they were cheap and common. (Not meaning that as a compliment) None
of the kids ever asked for one IIRC. I got the black eye mask or else
they used face makeup. I really don't remember any big controversy
about halloween costumes.

When I was a kid my mom made costumes - I don't recall that we had any
'say' in what we went as. One year we were clowns. One year I was
Miss Muffet and my sister was the spider.

>>The most challenging costume to design was the year he decided to be a
>>house. (We put shoulder straps into a carboard box which my wife
>>painted to look like a house---he looked out the window of the house.)
>>
>
>My son was a car twice. He strapped a cardboard car I made, and wore the
>hardtop on his head. I still have it in my attic :-)
>
>Banty

grandma Rosalie

[Banty]

In article >, Kevin Karplus says...
>
>In article >, Banty wrote:
>> Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
>> ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a
>> whole range of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just
>> wish the kids Happy Halloween on October 31 and send them home to
>> the festivities.
>>
>> Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course all the
>> kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them
>> *really* want to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes
>> and more preparation, or the kid compromising, and it gets the heck in
>> the way of Halloween.
>>
>> There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party, especially if the
>> school is queasy about it.
>
>The school costume parade is very popular with the kids, so the school
>does it as a treat for them. I think many of the parents appreciate
>that the school doesn't allow very gory costumes, since they can then
>tell their kids "OK, but if you really want that costume then you
>can't wear it in the school parade." I doubt that many of the kids
>get 2 costumes (over 40% of the school is in the free or reduced price
>lunch program).
>
>Students don't have to participate in the Halloween costume parade, so
>if a kid really wants a gory costume, he can choose not to take it to
>school and just wear it in the evening. For such a student, this is
>almost the same as Banty's proposal, and the vast majority of students
>can have a school parade to show off their non-gory costumes.


?? My proposal?? That *was* my post :-)
My proposal is that schools stay out of a celebration, if they feel compelled to
place scruples on it.

For parents who believe that there should be no 'violence' or 'blood', having a
school hoo-haa with costumes and all that, but with certain standards applie,
this is all hunky -dory. They can prepare one costume, and use the school
standards to reinforce their own to boot. No suprise that you and David don't
see a problem with it.

For the kid that wants to be Freddy and his parents don't object, he'll either
have to give that up, or have his parents buy or prepare two costumes for all
the events. Or not participate in the school event, and lose out and stand out.
Which puts the whole thing into a bind.

Is that the effect desired - to foster non-violent non-bloody scruples regarding
Halloween celebrations in *other* families than your own?

Banty

[Donna Metler]

"Kevin Karplus" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Banty wrote:
> > Uuurgh. I wish the schools, if they can't go in for the whole Halloween
> > ghosty-ghouly-gory thing (OK, fine, maybe they can't, they have a
> > whole range of parents and philosophies to consider), they'd just
> > wish the kids Happy Halloween on October 31 and send them home to
> > the festivities.
> >
> > Because this idea of having a school Halloween party, which of course
all the
> > kids will have to dress up for, but it can't be what a lot of them
> > *really* want to dress up like, necessitates having two costumes
> > and more preparation, or the kid compromising, and it gets the heck in
> > the way of Halloween.
> >
> > There doesn't have to be a school Halloween party, especially if the
> > school is queasy about it.
>
> The school costume parade is very popular with the kids, so the school
> does it as a treat for them. I think many of the parents appreciate
> that the school doesn't allow very gory costumes, since they can then
> tell their kids "OK, but if you really want that costume then you
> can't wear it in the school parade." I doubt that many of the kids
> get 2 costumes (over 40% of the school is in the free or reduced price
> lunch program).
>
> Students don't have to participate in the Halloween costume parade, so
> if a kid really wants a gory costume, he can choose not to take it to
> school and just wear it in the evening. For such a student, this is
> almost the same as Banty's proposal, and the vast majority of students
> can have a school parade to show off their non-gory costumes.

In general, our rule is "Nothing which will give the little ones (we have 4
yr old Title I preschool, as well as all-day kinder) nightmares". This rules
out the really gory, scary stuff-and the older kids seem to understand the
limit. Relatively few of my kids have the really expensive, scary masks
anyway-maybe because we're a low income school.




>
> --
> Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
> life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
> Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
> Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
> Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
> Affiliations for identification only.
>

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
> Is that the effect desired - to foster non-violent non-bloody scruples
> regarding Halloween celebrations in *other* families than your own?

I think the effect desired is to avoid using the coercive power of the
state (i.e., children are required to attend school) to expose them to
stuff that many parents dislike.

But personally, it would be ok with me if you kept your child home that
day, rather than subject him to the insufficiently violent Halloween
celebration.

David desJardins

[H Schinske]

wrote:

>In general, our rule is "Nothing which will give the little ones (we have 4
>yr old Title I preschool, as well as all-day kinder) nightmares". This rules
>out the really gory, scary stuff-and the older kids seem to understand the
>limit.

That seems perfectly reasonable to me, particularly as my son was just recently
scared out of his wits by a treat-distributing green-faced witch in Value
Village. (I was really ticked that they didn't get the hint and go away before
I said "Could you PLEASE move on, my SON IS REALLY SCARED NOW!" Apparently
moaning and hanging on to mom's leg isn't enough to get the message across ...)

I am actually surprised that some ordinary places like grocery stores have such
scary displays. I was in a QFC that had skull balloons today that I thought
were pretty creepy-looking.

--Helen

[Banty]

In article >, David desJardins says...
>
>Banty writes:
>> Is that the effect desired - to foster non-violent non-bloody scruples
>> regarding Halloween celebrations in *other* families than your own?
>
>I think the effect desired is to avoid using the coercive power of the
>state (i.e., children are required to attend school) to expose them to
>stuff that many parents dislike.

And how about Banty's Proposal: have a nice school day, send the kids home with
Happy Halloween wishes. And partake of no PC Halloween parties.

You can dress your kid up as the Pillsbury Doughboy, I can let my boy be Rambo
with a flame thrower if he wants. They might cross paths during
trick-or-treating, though ;-)

Banty (mmmmm - biscuits)

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
> And how about Banty's Proposal: have a nice school day, send the kids
> home with Happy Halloween wishes. And partake of no PC Halloween
> parties.

That would be fine with me too. I don't really like Halloween parties
at all, not having them at school would be just great as far as I'm
concerned.

But I don't see your desire to have either an ultra-violent Halloween
party or none at all, as having any more or less weight than some other
parent's desire to have a nice "PC" Halloween party that their kids will
enjoy. If there were more people like you, who dislike the parties,
than people who like the parties, then it would certainly make sense to
skip them. But I doubt that's the case.

David desJardins

[Banty]

In article >, David desJardins says...
>
>Banty writes:
>> And how about Banty's Proposal: have a nice school day, send the kids
>> home with Happy Halloween wishes. And partake of no PC Halloween
>> parties.
>
>That would be fine with me too. I don't really like Halloween parties
>at all, not having them at school would be just great as far as I'm
>concerned.

There we have agreement.

>
>But I don't see your desire to have either an ultra-violent Halloween
>party or none at all, as having any more or less weight than some other
>parent's desire to have a nice "PC" Halloween party that their kids will
>enjoy. If there were more people like you, who dislike the parties,
>than people who like the parties, then it would certainly make sense to
>skip them. But I doubt that's the case.

It's not that I have a 'desire to have an ultra-violent Halloween' - it's that,
since costume preparation is a time-consuming and sometimes costly thing, to
pretty much require that kids have one for the school venue, with stated
thematic limitations, impacts what the home celebration would be, which may or
may not beholden to those limitations. I'm rather for unencumbered choices,
rather than any specific one.

So, if the school has to accomodate parents like you and limit the kinds of
getups the kids can wear, I'd much rather the school just stay out of it and not
get in the way of whatever folks want to do outside school.

If they want to do something such that I won't possibly end up having to
multiply efforts at home, like a Halloween essay - fine. They can require it to
be a very non-violent diversity-embracing socially-aware environmentally
sensitive essay if they want. ;-)

Another option would be a non-costume party. In my day ::putting on my
bifocals:: costumes were out because of the school dress codes anyway.

Cheers,
Banty

[Splanche]

>I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
>so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
>to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
>that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?

In my experience, it's not a matter of inappropriateness, it's a matter of
decision making.... my DD is 9yrs old, and I still lay out clothes for her.
Otherwise she takes forever getting dressed in the morning because she feels
the need to try on twelve different things. She also doesn't check the weather
like I do, and she has a habit of pulling out short-sleeved shirts on days
where the high temp is 45F.

[Splanche]

>I think many of the parents appreciate
>that the school doesn't allow very gory costumes, since they can then
>tell their kids "OK, but if you really want that costume then you
>can't wear it in the school parade."

We have the extra added benefit of "If you get that icky one, you won't be able
to wear it for Purim!"
Isn't it amazing how much Guinevere looks like Queen Esther? ;-)

[Penny Gaines]

Scott Lindstrom wrote in >:
[snip]
> hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
> so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
> to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
> that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?

I don't think the two situations are quite equivalent.

If the school allows the kids to wear a custume, then you probably
have just two or three occasions to wear them: once at school, and
once (or maybe twice) out of school. So if you get two custumes,
the average number of times you wear each of them is 1.5 wears.

With clothes, you have plenty of chances to wear non-school clothes:
if your kid has a crop top they are not allowed to wear at school, they
can wear it every afternoon after school until they grow out of it,
getting an average number of wears to be about 365.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three

[Banty]

In article >, Splanche says...
>
>>I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
>>so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
>>to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
>>that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?
>
>In my experience, it's not a matter of inappropriateness, it's a matter of
>decision making.... my DD is 9yrs old, and I still lay out clothes for her.
>Otherwise she takes forever getting dressed in the morning because she feels
>the need to try on twelve different things. She also doesn't check the weather
>like I do, and she has a habit of pulling out short-sleeved shirts on days
>where the high temp is 45F.
>

I think that's unusual for a nine year old. Maybe you can start teaching her
some outfit basics and give her a weather report the night before, and have her
lay out clothes and you check for appropriateness before she goes to to bed.
Solves all that.

But this theme of parents wanting to have the school environment nicely line up
with their particular codes and needs such that they don't have to apply
fortitude at home reminds me of another issue that came up in my district.

This didn't fly this year because the efforts started much too late (which to me
tips off just how clueful the proponents of this idea are..), but there is a
movement of some parents that the school and town (for intramurals, team sport
stuff, etc.) all observe a Tuesday Family Evening. The schools are to arrange
no homework, no team sports would be scheduled, scouts and other common youth
activities would re-schedule Tuesday meetings to another day. So that families
can have one day of the week without homework and other activities to spend time
together as a family.

My take on it is that, from a practical standpoint, it would only clutter up
Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays all the more with many of these activities
because already they are not scheduled over weekends (team sports seem to have a
carte blanche concerning timing and days to meet.) Homework is seldom given
over weekends already due to parental pressures, scouts also stays away from
weekends except for specific activities. The other problem is - what of shift
workers and others who cannot schedule a free Tuesday evening for the parents to
start with? Not only would it not work out for a Family Evening for them, but
it would become all the harder to do family stuff on the evenings they *are*
home.

I could manage with this if it happened, although it would impact our other
weekday evenings in a bad way. But the main rub I have with it is that, with
fortitude, a family if they so desire can arrange a Tuesday Family Evening now!
By not doing clubs that meet Tuesdays or finidng alternatives, shifting whatever
homework they can off Tuesday and getting the rest done by dinner, and letting
certain consuming commitments like youth baseball coaches, know that Tuesdays
are off days for their children. Or finding another team. Or just not doing
it. Or perhaps Wednesday works better one year - make it a Wednesday Family
Evening.
And making it a family priority, standing up to the kids, the coaches, whoever
else and applying a little courage and committment toarranging their particular
Family Evening. And not bending everyone else's life around.

But noooooo. It's soo much easier if everybody just did the same thing, because
it may suit a certain perponderance of families.

Banty

[Scott Lindstrom]

Banty wrote:
> In article >, Splanche says...
>
>>>I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
>>>so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
>>>to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
>>>that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?
>>
>>In my experience, it's not a matter of inappropriateness, it's a matter of
>>decision making.... my DD is 9yrs old, and I still lay out clothes for her.
>>Otherwise she takes forever getting dressed in the morning because she feels
>>the need to try on twelve different things. She also doesn't check the weather
>>like I do, and she has a habit of pulling out short-sleeved shirts on days
>>where the high temp is 45F.
>>
>
>
> I think that's unusual for a nine year old. Maybe you can start teaching her
> some outfit basics and give her a weather report the night before, and have her
> lay out clothes and you check for appropriateness before she goes to to bed.
> Solves all that.

I don't think it's unusual for a girl to try on many different
outfits in the morning. I think it's unusual for a parent to
be directly supervising in the process still at age 9. It was
very nice for me to tell DD to go get dressed for school, and
she did without any input from me or the BH. Occasionally, she'll
choose something that's not quite right for school, and she'll
change. Grudgingly. [I expect it to become progressively more
grudgingly in the next couple years ;) ]
If your child chooses to wear something
that doesn't match the weather, I say let them and let them
learn about the consequences of the choice. Maybe it won't
bother them. (My DD has boiling water in her veins, it seems)
The exception being dangerous wind chills, in which case DD and
DS have to cover up as much skin as possible, but they treat
that as a game.
Anyway, if DD was taking a long time to choose, I'd
just send her to get changed earlier and earlier. I'm always
up before they are anyway.

Scott, DD 10 and DS 7.5

[Banty]

In article >, Scott Lindstrom says...
>

>I don't think it's unusual for a girl to try on many different
>outfits in the morning. I think it's unusual for a parent to
>be directly supervising in the process still at age 9. It was
>very nice for me to tell DD to go get dressed for school, and
>she did without any input from me or the BH. Occasionally, she'll
>choose something that's not quite right for school, and she'll
>change. Grudgingly. [I expect it to become progressively more
>grudgingly in the next couple years ;) ]
>If your child chooses to wear something
>that doesn't match the weather, I say let them and let them
>learn about the consequences of the choice. Maybe it won't
>bother them. (My DD has boiling water in her veins, it seems)

My son, too. Sometime's he's clueless about what he'll face, like when I forced
him to bring a polartrec hoodie to a Scout weeklong canoe trip in the
Adirondacks, and he admitted that once the sun went down, he practically lived
in it.

But for him a 45 degrees high for an ordinary school day would maybe have him
thinking about long pants, let alone wanting a warm shirt. He really *is* too
hot otherwise.

Banty

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
> It's not that I have a 'desire to have an ultra-violent Halloween' -
> it's that, since costume preparation is a time-consuming and sometimes
> costly thing, to pretty much require that kids have one for the school
> venue, with stated thematic limitations, impacts what the home
> celebration would be, which may or may not beholden to those
> limitations. I'm rather for unencumbered choices, rather than any
> specific one.
>
> So, if the school has to accomodate parents like you and limit the
> kinds of getups the kids can wear, I'd much rather the school just
> stay out of it and not get in the way of whatever folks want to do
> outside school.

Sure. You've explained that that's what you want. But there are many
more parents and children who want the costume party, so their
preferences outweigh yours.

David desJardins

[Donna Metler]

"Banty" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Splanche
says...
> >
> >>I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
> >>so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
> >>to wear to school. Well, who is buying their kids clothes
> >>that are inappropriate to wear to school in the 1st place?
> >
> >In my experience, it's not a matter of inappropriateness, it's a matter
of
> >decision making.... my DD is 9yrs old, and I still lay out clothes for
her.
> >Otherwise she takes forever getting dressed in the morning because she
feels
> >the need to try on twelve different things. She also doesn't check the
weather
> >like I do, and she has a habit of pulling out short-sleeved shirts on
days
> >where the high temp is 45F.
> >
>
> I think that's unusual for a nine year old. Maybe you can start teaching
her
> some outfit basics and give her a weather report the night before, and
have her
> lay out clothes and you check for appropriateness before she goes to to
bed.
> Solves all that.
>
> But this theme of parents wanting to have the school environment nicely
line up
> with their particular codes and needs such that they don't have to apply
> fortitude at home reminds me of another issue that came up in my district.
>
> This didn't fly this year because the efforts started much too late (which
to me
> tips off just how clueful the proponents of this idea are..), but there is
a
> movement of some parents that the school and town (for intramurals, team
sport
> stuff, etc.) all observe a Tuesday Family Evening. The schools are to
arrange
> no homework, no team sports would be scheduled, scouts and other common
youth
> activities would re-schedule Tuesday meetings to another day. So that
families
> can have one day of the week without homework and other activities to
spend time
> together as a family.
>
> My take on it is that, from a practical standpoint, it would only clutter
up
> Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays all the more with many of these
activities
> because already they are not scheduled over weekends (team sports seem to
have a
> carte blanche concerning timing and days to meet.) Homework is seldom
given
> over weekends already due to parental pressures, scouts also stays away
from
> weekends except for specific activities. The other problem is - what of
shift
> workers and others who cannot schedule a free Tuesday evening for the
parents to
> start with? Not only would it not work out for a Family Evening for them,
but
> it would become all the harder to do family stuff on the evenings they
*are*
> home.
>
> I could manage with this if it happened, although it would impact our
other
> weekday evenings in a bad way. But the main rub I have with it is that,
with
> fortitude, a family if they so desire can arrange a Tuesday Family Evening
now!
> By not doing clubs that meet Tuesdays or finidng alternatives, shifting
whatever
> homework they can off Tuesday and getting the rest done by dinner, and
letting
> certain consuming commitments like youth baseball coaches, know that
Tuesdays
> are off days for their children. Or finding another team. Or just not
doing
> it. Or perhaps Wednesday works better one year - make it a Wednesday
Family
> Evening.
> And making it a family priority, standing up to the kids, the coaches,
whoever
> else and applying a little courage and committment toarranging their
particular
> Family Evening. And not bending everyone else's life around.
>
> But noooooo. It's soo much easier if everybody just did the same thing,
because
> it may suit a certain perponderance of families.

We're already told to minimize homework on Wednesday because of church
activities, so I guess there already is a family night here. I don't know
how it works at the high school level, but at the elementary level, homework
is either weekly anyway (like having a set spelling list every week), or it
is completing work not finished in class, and tends to be minimal
regardless.

What I do in ensemble music courses is to require a set minimum amount of
practice (120 minutes a week for first year, or 20 minutes a night, 6 nights
a week), but to tell the children they can break it up any way they wish-so
if they have church on Wednesday nights, they might practice 10 minutes
extra on Tuesday and Thursday. Usually it takes only one week where they try
to cram a whole week's practice into one night to get the message across. (I
encourage parents to make practicing the child's job-and I don't require
parents to sign practice cards-it's pretty obvious who has and hasn't
practiced, and in general they do a pretty good job of keeping the logs up
to date).

>
> Banty
>

[Banty]

In article >, David desJardins says...
>
>Banty writes:
>> It's not that I have a 'desire to have an ultra-violent Halloween' -
>> it's that, since costume preparation is a time-consuming and sometimes
>> costly thing, to pretty much require that kids have one for the school
>> venue, with stated thematic limitations, impacts what the home
>> celebration would be, which may or may not beholden to those
>> limitations. I'm rather for unencumbered choices, rather than any
>> specific one.
>>
>> So, if the school has to accomodate parents like you and limit the
>> kinds of getups the kids can wear, I'd much rather the school just
>> stay out of it and not get in the way of whatever folks want to do
>> outside school.
>
>Sure. You've explained that that's what you want. But there are many
>more parents and children who want the costume party, so their
>preferences outweigh yours.

Are you sure? There are many holiday parties and events which occur only
because the perception is that it's expected. (That goes for a lot of things,
we combed through the Cub Scout calendar when my son was involved to find that
some of the events were done only because they've been done for skeighty-eight
years, nobody would miss them, and the calendar was freer than we at first
thought to do *other* good stuff.) A poll of the parents may surprise you as to
how many are relieved not to have it, or are at least neutral, in which case why
make the expenditures in time and resources?

There also is always the option that, since after all it *is* a Halloween party,
those with reservations concerning some aspects of that holiday keep their kids
at home or arrange other activities. Rather than imposing on the celebration.

But IMO there's no reason to impose on instructional time to begin with.

Banty

[Rosalie B.]

x-no-archive:yes
Scott Lindstrom > wrote:

>Banty wrote:
>> In article >, Splanche says...
>>
>>>>I hear similar reasons for parents liking dress codes --
>>>>so they don't have to argue with their kids over what
>>>>to wear to school. <snip>
>>>
>>>In my experience, it's not a matter of inappropriateness, it's a matter of
>>>decision making.... my DD is 9yrs old, and I still lay out clothes for her.
>>>Otherwise she takes forever getting dressed in the morning because she feels
>>>the need to try on twelve different things. She also doesn't check the weather
>>>like I do, and she has a habit of pulling out short-sleeved shirts on days
>>>where the high temp is 45F.
>>>
>> I think that's unusual for a nine year old. Maybe you can start teaching her
>> some outfit basics and give her a weather report the night before, and have her
>> lay out clothes and you check for appropriateness before she goes to to bed.
>> Solves all that.
>
>I don't think it's unusual for a girl to try on many different
>outfits in the morning. I think it's unusual for a parent to
>be directly supervising in the process still at age 9. It was

My sister would do this when she was in the 7th grade even (about 11
years old) - try on 4 or 5 outfits and discard them and come
downstairs completely mismatched and have to be sent up to change.
The problem was she never put her clothes back after she tried them on
- our mom had to go up and rehang them up for her.

She's still like that (i.e. indecisive about what to wear and also
what to buy). She had to get a personal shopper to advise her for her
son's wedding, and when her oldest daughter (my niece) got married the
older girl sent her younger sister to vet out what my sister was
wearing for MOB.

Some people are just like that.

>very nice for me to tell DD to go get dressed for school, and
>she did without any input from me or the BH. Occasionally, she'll
>choose something that's not quite right for school, and she'll
>change. Grudgingly. [I expect it to become progressively more
>grudgingly in the next couple years ;) ]

>If your child chooses to wear something
>that doesn't match the weather, I say let them and let them
>learn about the consequences of the choice. Maybe it won't
>bother them. (My DD has boiling water in her veins, it seems)
>The exception being dangerous wind chills, in which case DD and
>DS have to cover up as much skin as possible, but they treat
>that as a game.

I would agree with that - as long as they have a jacket or something
to wear if it gets cold, I'd say short sleeves ds long sleeves isn't a
big deal.

>Anyway, if DD was taking a long time to choose, I'd
>just send her to get changed earlier and earlier. I'm always
>up before they are anyway.

Have you never heard the axiom that work expands to fill the time
available?

grandma Rosalie

[Penny Gaines]

Banty wrote in >:

[snip]
> This didn't fly this year because the efforts started much too late (which
> to me tips off just how clueful the proponents of this idea are..), but
> there is a movement of some parents that the school and town (for
> intramurals, team sport
> stuff, etc.) all observe a Tuesday Family Evening. The schools are to
> arrange no homework, no team sports would be scheduled, scouts and other
> common youth
> activities would re-schedule Tuesday meetings to another day. So that
> families can have one day of the week without homework and other
> activities to spend time together as a family.

Let me guess: they chose Tuesday after polling all the families who would
be affected, compared all the conflicting needs, and concluded that
Tuesday evening would have the least detrimental effect on all the families.
When I say "all", I of course mean the five families who came up with this
idea, not the other 550 families in your town, or any of the leaders of the
youth groups.

Let me predict: in a year or two, the school or social club would
start organising "family fun evenings" on Tuesdays. They might be discos
or games evenings, so that everyone can socialise together, without worrying
that the activities clash with homework or sports activities. Oh, and
whatever is arranged will assume that the child has two parents and one
sibling.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three

[Tamex]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:44:12 EST, Banty >
wrote:

>But this theme of parents wanting to have the school environment nicely line up
>with their particular codes and needs such that they don't have to apply
>fortitude at home reminds me of another issue that came up in my district.
>
>This didn't fly this year because the efforts started much too late (which to me
>tips off just how clueful the proponents of this idea are..), but there is a
>movement of some parents that the school and town (for intramurals, team sport
>stuff, etc.) all observe a Tuesday Family Evening. The schools are to arrange
>no homework, no team sports would be scheduled, scouts and other common youth
>activities would re-schedule Tuesday meetings to another day. So that families
>can have one day of the week without homework and other activities to spend time
>together as a family.
>
>My take on it is that, from a practical standpoint, it would only clutter up
>Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays all the more with many of these activities
>because already they are not scheduled over weekends (team sports seem to have a
>carte blanche concerning timing and days to meet.) Homework is seldom given
>over weekends already due to parental pressures, scouts also stays away from
>weekends except for specific activities. The other problem is - what of shift
>workers and others who cannot schedule a free Tuesday evening for the parents to
>start with? Not only would it not work out for a Family Evening for them, but
>it would become all the harder to do family stuff on the evenings they *are*
>home.
>
>I could manage with this if it happened, although it would impact our other
>weekday evenings in a bad way. But the main rub I have with it is that, with
>fortitude, a family if they so desire can arrange a Tuesday Family Evening now!
>By not doing clubs that meet Tuesdays or finidng alternatives, shifting whatever
>homework they can off Tuesday and getting the rest done by dinner, and letting
>certain consuming commitments like youth baseball coaches, know that Tuesdays
>are off days for their children. Or finding another team. Or just not doing
>it. Or perhaps Wednesday works better one year - make it a Wednesday Family
>Evening.
>And making it a family priority, standing up to the kids, the coaches, whoever
>else and applying a little courage and committment toarranging their particular
>Family Evening. And not bending everyone else's life around.
>
>But noooooo. It's soo much easier if everybody just did the same thing, because
>it may suit a certain perponderance of families.

When I was in high school, our school was supposed to keep Wednesday
nights free for the same purpose. What really happened, though, is
that local churches used that night for confirmation classes, so it
wasn't really a "family" night, it was a "church" night. Also, I
think most teachers blew it off...I don't remember receiving any less
homework on Wednesday nights than I did any other night of the week.
However, when it came to scheduling meetings for school clubs,
Wednesday nights were verboten. I was on the school paper, and the
only time we could find to meet was before school at 6 am...we had
decided upon Wednesday evening (we must not have been a big
churchgoing bunch) until our adviser remided us of the rule. So, it
was the wee hours of the morning for us due to the local church lobby.
--
Tamex

No matter how much Jell-o you put in the pool, you still can't walk on water.

**remove Tricky Dick to reply by e-mail**

[David desJardins]

Banty writes:
>> But there are many more parents and children who want the costume
>> party, so their preferences outweigh yours.
>
> Are you sure? There are many holiday parties and events which occur
> only because the perception is that it's expected.
> ....
> But IMO there's no reason to impose on instructional time to begin with.

No, I'm not sure. I think the large majority of parents like this sort
of school activity, but I could be wrong. (Are there a lot of parents
reading this thread who would rather not have Halloween parties in school?)

I certainly don't think children need even more "instructional time".
My feeling is that the school year is way too long, has too many hours
in it, and constrains families too much (since we can't really pick and
choose which days to send our kids to school). But I'd be pretty
pleased if the schools would focus more on instruction, have shorter
hours and fewer days as a result (with the same amount of instruction),
and leave more time for families to do things other than school. (Which
would often be at least as "educational" as school, at least in my
family, although perhaps not in most families.)

So I'd certainly be glad to get things like Halloween parties out of
schools, although perhaps not for the same reasons as you. But I still
think we are both in the minority, and a pretty slim minority at that.

David desJardins

[Rosalie B.]

x-no-archive:yes David desJardins > wrote:

>Banty writes:
>>> But there are many more parents and children who want the costume
>>> party, so their preferences outweigh yours.
>>
>> Are you sure? There are many holiday parties and events which occur
>> only because the perception is that it's expected.
>> ....
>> But IMO there's no reason to impose on instructional time to begin with.
>
>No, I'm not sure. I think the large majority of parents like this sort
>of school activity, but I could be wrong. (Are there a lot of parents
>reading this thread who would rather not have Halloween parties in school?)
>
I didn't particularly care for Halloween parties, especially after the
first couple of kids. It was a drag. Even moreso as a teacher.

>I certainly don't think children need even more "instructional time".
>My feeling is that the school year is way too long, has too many hours
>in it, and constrains families too much (since we can't really pick and

Well the length of the year and the length of the day is pretty much
set as to what the government wants. It would be fine to cut the
school year if all the students were there all the time, and if the
instructional time was not cut into for band trips, or school plays or
children's (or teachers) illness, trips, snow days, vacation, field
trips, etc. etc. The supposed amount of time for instruction isn't as
great as might be assumed from the simple computation of the time.

Every holiday, the day or days before are more of less wasted and
ditto the day after. It's just hard to settle the kids down to work.
How easy is it for you to come back to work and start right in after
vacation?

If it starts snowing during school time, it's hard to keep the kid's
attention on lessons when they might be going home early. If you have
multiple kids out for various activities or because they are sick or
playing hookey you have to repeat stuff that the kids that were there
have already had, so it's a waste of those kids' time.

And if you have a lot of mandated material to cover in addition to the
traditional stuff (teaching nutrition, frugal budgeting, map
recognition skills), then it might be hard to achieve student mastery
in the time available.

>choose which days to send our kids to school). But I'd be pretty
>pleased if the schools would focus more on instruction, have shorter
>hours and fewer days as a result (with the same amount of instruction),
>and leave more time for families to do things other than school. (Which
>would often be at least as "educational" as school, at least in my
>family, although perhaps not in most families.)
>
>So I'd certainly be glad to get things like Halloween parties out of
>schools, although perhaps not for the same reasons as you. But I still
>think we are both in the minority, and a pretty slim minority at that.
>
> David desJardins

grandma Rosalie

[Banty]

In article >, Penny Gaines says...
>
>Banty wrote in >:
>
>[snip]
>> This didn't fly this year because the efforts started much too late (which
>> to me tips off just how clueful the proponents of this idea are..), but
>> there is a movement of some parents that the school and town (for
>> intramurals, team sport
>> stuff, etc.) all observe a Tuesday Family Evening. The schools are to
>> arrange no homework, no team sports would be scheduled, scouts and other
>> common youth
>> activities would re-schedule Tuesday meetings to another day. So that
>> families can have one day of the week without homework and other
>> activities to spend time together as a family.
>
>Let me guess: they chose Tuesday after polling all the families who would
>be affected, compared all the conflicting needs, and concluded that
>Tuesday evening would have the least detrimental effect on all the families.
>When I say "all", I of course mean the five families who came up with this
>idea, not the other 550 families in your town, or any of the leaders of the
>youth groups.

Not sure actually - it showed up in the local newspaper at one point but without
many specifics - it was a word of mouth thing mostly that first hit me
concerning what night to move the scout meeting to. Then I started hearing
about it in other venues from other people. I may see a more formal effort for
next year starting in a few months. In which case I may spend some effort
opposing it. Or it may fizzle out as the obvious problems are brought up as the
thing starts to flesh out.

>
>Let me predict: in a year or two, the school or social club would
>start organising "family fun evenings" on Tuesdays. They might be discos
>or games evenings, so that everyone can socialise together, without worrying
>that the activities clash with homework or sports activities. Oh, and
>whatever is arranged will assume that the child has two parents and one
>sibling.

I think it was modelled more on the Family Home Evening that some religious
groups have encouraged. The discussion has been more in terms of what a family
can do at home (believe me - a 'family fun evening' would just end up being a
place where parents drop off the kids!) Where I've encountered it before this
instance, it was put for as something every individual family should do for
family cohesion, arranged within each family. Which actually I think is a great
idea. It's the "everyone does it so it's easy for us to do it" aspect which is
so onerous IMO.

Banty

[Kevin Karplus]

In article >, Rosalie B. wrote:
> Well the length of the year and the length of the day is pretty much
> set as to what the government wants. It would be fine to cut the
> school year if all the students were there all the time, and if the
> instructional time was not cut into for band trips, or school plays or
> children's (or teachers) illness, trips, snow days, vacation, field
> trips, etc. etc. The supposed amount of time for instruction isn't as
> great as might be assumed from the simple computation of the time.

The biggest imposition on instruction time at our school seems to be
the 3-times-a-year individual assessment of each student. It seems to
take about 1-2 hours a student, so the teacher is tied up for 60-120
hours a year on the assessment.

Our school does not have band trips, school plays, or snow days.
Field trips happen, but not very often.

--
Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
Affiliations for identification only.

[Robyn Kozierok]

In article >,
David desJardins > wrote:
>Banty writes:
>>> But there are many more parents and children who want the costume
>>> party, so their preferences outweigh yours.
>>
>> Are you sure? There are many holiday parties and events which occur
>> only because the perception is that it's expected.
>> ....
>> But IMO there's no reason to impose on instructional time to begin with.
>
>No, I'm not sure. I think the large majority of parents like this sort
>of school activity, but I could be wrong. (Are there a lot of parents
>reading this thread who would rather not have Halloween parties in school?)
>

I don't mind having a party at school, *if* I don't have to help
prepare/finance a separate costume. I'm with Banty on the multiple
costumes though. What a pain. My issue this year is that both of my
big boys' costumes rely on face paint that they can't apply very well
themselves. We avoid masks because they are dangerous and
uncomfortable for trick or treating. They are supposed to bring their
costumes to school this year and put them on "quickly" for their
party. That's not going to work out so well for them. I'd be just
a s happy if they didn't bother. We seem to have lots of outside of
school halloween events to satisfy them. (fwiw, the preschool our
little one goes to does not do halloween or other holiday celebrations
at all -- it really simplifies a lot of things and the kids don't seem
horribly deprived for it)


--Robyn (mommy to Ryan 9/93 and Matthew 6/96 and Evan 3/01)

[Nevermind]

> David desJardins > wrote:
> >No, I'm not sure. I think the large majority of parents like this sort
> >of school activity, but I could be wrong. (Are there a lot of parents
> >reading this thread who would rather not have Halloween parties in school?)

I'd rather not have it. It may just be that I'm really lazy, but to
me, the school costume thing (in our school, that's a parade) is more
trouble than it's worth. On Halloween, I have to go to the school
*twice*: once in the a.m. to attend my kindergardener's party (no
costume) and then once in the afternoon to watch the parade (both kids
will be in costume). Though, fortunately, both kids are allowed to be
what they will actually be for Halloween they are not supposed to wear
the costumes to school, so we have to pack 'em up and hope they bring
all the pieces home. The whole thing is a huge PITA, IMO, on the very
day when they're already going to have enormous fun going out
trick-or-treating and getting loads of candy.

Am I the only one who thinks the Halloween celebration has gotten a
bit out of hand? I do love it -- the kids getting dressed up, the
spooky decorations, the old horror movies they put on TV. But it's
almost as big as Christmas now!

[Robyn Kozierok]

In article >,
Nevermind > wrote:
(Robyn Kozierok) wrote
>>
>> I haven't faced this particular issue, but I think I'd let my kid
>> do this if he wanted to. After all, they're supposed to be
>> something "scary" (at least, that's how many kids view Halloween)
>> and not something they aspire to be IRL. My 7yo is going as "the
>> devil" -- not any nicer a guy than Freddie... I haven't seen what
>> a "Freddie mask" looks like (nor have I seen any of the movies),
>> but maybe you need to clarify for yourself what you think is wrong
>> with him being Freddie as opposed to a devil, or a monster, or a
>> skeleton, or a vampire, etc.... (assuming you wouldn't have the
>> same reaction to those more "traditional" costume ideas).
>
>Well, I'm sure that at one time in history, vampires and "the devil"
>and the like represented real evil to people, but I don't think they
>do for most of us these days. However, the movie serial killers, like
>Jason and Freddie, do,

Well, no, not to me they don't. They're fictional characters, like
all the rest.

I think maybe your issue is that devils and vampires etc. seem to fall
squarely into the realm of fantasy, whereas a human serial killer
"could" be real, even though these particular examples aren't.

Anyhow, I'm glad the issue resolved itself to your satisfaction...

--Robyn (mommy to Ryan 9/93 and Matthew 6/96 and Evan 3/01)

[Banty]

In article >, Robyn Kozierok says...
>
>
>>Well, I'm sure that at one time in history, vampires and "the devil"
>>and the like represented real evil to people, but I don't think they
>>do for most of us these days. However, the movie serial killers, like
>>Jason and Freddie, do,
>
>Well, no, not to me they don't. They're fictional characters, like
>all the rest.
>
>I think maybe your issue is that devils and vampires etc. seem to fall
>squarely into the realm of fantasy, whereas a human serial killer
>"could" be real, even though these particular examples aren't.


That makes sense, thanks.

That was a head-scratcher for me, too - devils and vampires no-big-deal but
Jason and Freddy bad-bad-bad - - huh?

The "what's OK for school Halloween" thing really comes down to perception and
to some extent taste. Even the gentler requirement that costumes not scare the
bejeezers out of the poor Kindergarteners is pretty fuzzy. For example - it's
common for little kids to be terrified of clowns. But I doubt many parents
would stop their kids from being a clown for school Halloween.

OK Freddy's violent. It G.I. Joe violent? If so, how about a cop uniform?
Deer hunter's camo gear? How about as a parent I came in my Amazon getup -
better leave the spear at home? Or not? Is the school a 'zero-tolerance'
school? Would I then be suspended from all the Open House evenings? Say now,
that's an idea..... ;-)

Banty

[Robyn Kozierok]

In article >,
Banty > wrote:
>
>The gory scary masks are usually bought ones. Would you buy one?
>
>Just curious..

We avoid masks for trick-or-treating. I also avoid spending much
money on Halloween costumes, other than generic reusable items.
(That is, I will buy a sweatsuit in an appropriate color, but not
a prefab costume.) I help my boys make costumes inexpensively,
and will buy cheap face paints and accessories.

If one of my boys wanted to buy a (presumably fairly expensive)
gory scary halloween mask, for use at our indoor functions, he'd
have to pay for it himself, but I wouldn't disallow it (unless
it was something I considered truly inappropriate, of which I
can't think of an example right now but I'm sure there are some...).
I would still be willing to help him make the rest of a coordinating
costume. (I made Matthew split the cost of his bought devil's
pitchfork with me this year, as I felt we could have easily made
one.)

--Robyn

[Kevin Karplus]

In article >, Banty wrote:
> The "what's OK for school Halloween" thing really comes down to perception and
> to some extent taste. Even the gentler requirement that costumes not scare the
> bejeezers out of the poor Kindergarteners is pretty fuzzy. For example - it's
> common for little kids to be terrified of clowns. But I doubt many parents
> would stop their kids from being a clown for school Halloween.
>
> OK Freddy's violent. It G.I. Joe violent? If so, how about a cop uniform?
> Deer hunter's camo gear? How about as a parent I came in my Amazon getup -
> better leave the spear at home? Or not? Is the school a 'zero-tolerance'
> school? Would I then be suspended from all the Open House evenings? Say now,
> that's an idea..... ;-)


The rule at our school is fairly simple: no blood, no graphic
depiction of violence.

There was not a ban on weapons, so a (non-functional) sword or spear
would be acceptable, unless it was decorated with blood. Similarly
hunter's garb, police uniform, military uniform, ... would be
acceptable, but not a bloody deer, a murder victim, or "collateral
damage".




--
Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
Affiliations for identification only.

[Banty]

In article >, Robyn Kozierok says...
>
>In article >,
>Banty > wrote:
>>
>>The gory scary masks are usually bought ones. Would you buy one?
>>
>>Just curious..
>
>We avoid masks for trick-or-treating. I also avoid spending much
>money on Halloween costumes, other than generic reusable items.
>(That is, I will buy a sweatsuit in an appropriate color, but not
>a prefab costume.) I help my boys make costumes inexpensively,
>and will buy cheap face paints and accessories.
>

For me, time is the biggest factor - I'll purchase rather than make, even though
I could sew just about anything.
Although I've gotten away with only buying one mask - a screeeum one (my son
isn't always for originality). Oh yeah, a football-head.

But masks do have problems. Visibility, comfort. Expense.

>If one of my boys wanted to buy a (presumably fairly expensive)
>gory scary halloween mask, for use at our indoor functions, he'd
>have to pay for it himself, but I wouldn't disallow it (unless
>it was something I considered truly inappropriate, of which I
>can't think of an example right now but I'm sure there are some...).
>I would still be willing to help him make the rest of a coordinating
>costume. (I made Matthew split the cost of his bought devil's
>pitchfork with me this year, as I felt we could have easily made
>one.)

This year's idea of being South Park Kenny meant getting a pretty good orange
sweatshirt, which my son started wearing for cold days. And a bright orange
thingy for Halloween isn't a bad idea anyway :-)

Banty

[H Schinske]

wrote:

>I think maybe your issue is that devils and vampires etc. seem to fall
>squarely into the realm of fantasy, whereas a human serial killer
>"could" be real, even though these particular examples aren't.

That's what sets off the squick factor for me. I remember there was a case many
years ago where I live that a child was missing (her body was found years
later) and there were posters everywhere that said "Where's [little girl's
name]?" That Halloween, people were selling T-shirts with "I know where [little
girl's name] is" on them. THAT was nothing but SICK, and references to serial
killer costumes tend to bring that back for me.

--Helen

[Robyn Kozierok]

In article >,
H Schinske > wrote:
wrote:
>
>>I think maybe your issue is that devils and vampires etc. seem to fall
>>squarely into the realm of fantasy, whereas a human serial killer
>>"could" be real, even though these particular examples aren't.
>
>That's what sets off the squick factor for me. I remember there was a case many
>years ago where I live that a child was missing (her body was found years
>later) and there were posters everywhere that said "Where's [little girl's
>name]?" That Halloween, people were selling T-shirts with "I know where [little
>girl's name] is" on them. THAT was nothing but SICK

Agreed. Earlier, I said I couldn't think of an example of a costume I'd
forbid as truly inappropriate, but figured there must be some. This
would definitely fit that category! Sick, indeed, and very cruel to her
family!

--Robyn

[Nevermind]

I thought I'd responded to this; not seeing it posted, so here's
another try.

(Robyn Kozierok) wrote
> >
> >Well, I'm sure that at one time in history, vampires and "the devil"
> >and the like represented real evil to people, but I don't think they
> >do for most of us these days. However, the movie serial killers, like
> >Jason and Freddie, do,
>
> Well, no, not to me they don't. They're fictional characters, like
> all the rest.
>
> I think maybe your issue is that devils and vampires etc. seem to fall
> squarely into the realm of fantasy, whereas a human serial killer
> "could" be real, even though these particular examples aren't.

Thanks for the suggestion, but this isn't quite it for me. Consider
this scenario: Suppose the Mona Lisa model was widely known to have
been the sexiest courtesan of her day. At this point, when we see her
face, all we think is "famous painting," "high art," "weird smile," .
.. . So, my daughter could go out for Halloween as the Mona Lisa.
However, at 5, she cannot go out as Tracy Lords or even as Pamela Lee.
They represent sex and sexual desirability (regardless of individual
tastes), which I don't think are appropriate for a 5 YO to portray.

When I think of vampires and devils, I primarily think of, well,
Halloween costumes and, secondarily, of cool old horror movies (even
though I do know a bit about the history of the images and associated
characters -- but for me that is "ancient history" and not "alive"
anymore); when I think of Freddie I think of people getting slashed up
*and* I think about how our (youth) culture revels in the (yes,
fictionalized) portrayals of that kind of violence. I don't like it,
and I don't think it's appropriate for a little boy to depict that on
Halloween. *He* is not trying to portray that; he has never seen the
movies and he doesn't think in terms of society and all that, and so
*he* sees Freddie the same way he sees a vampire or the devil, "only
more so."

You may not see any of this the way I do, but this is where *my*
discomfort is coming from, generally. There is also, I admit, a bit of
a taste thing going on -- the Freddie and Jason movies are crap. If
one wants to be scared at the movies or see violence depicted, one
could do a lot better. I admit to being freer in letting my kids
indulge in "naughty" or inappropriate things that are of high quality
than the crappy examples.

[beeswing]

Robyn wrote:

>I haven't faced this particular issue, but I think I'd let my kid
>do this if he wanted to. After all, they're supposed to be
>something "scary" (at least, that's how many kids view Halloween)
>and not something they aspire to be IRL. My 7yo is going as "the
>devil" -- not any nicer a guy than Freddie... I haven't seen what
>a "Freddie mask" looks like (nor have I seen any of the movies),
>but maybe you need to clarify for yourself what you think is wrong
>with him being Freddie as opposed to a devil, or a monster, or a
>skeleton, or a vampire, etc.... (assuming you wouldn't have the
>same reaction to those more "traditional" costume ideas).

I'm catching up on my newsgroup reading, so sorry for the delay in responding.
After reading this, the obvious occurred to me: If a parent is against Freddy
costumes in general, and Freddy costumes are inspired by Freddy movies -- why
is the child familiar with the Freddy movies? I can't imagine showing one to a
7-year-old, for example, and I can't imagine dressing my kid in the costume of
a movie character when I would never allow the kid to see the movie in the
first place. Why would the issue of a Freddy costume even come up in a family
that is anti-Freddy and such?

beeswing

[Donna Metler]

"beeswing" > wrote in message
...

> I'm catching up on my newsgroup reading, so sorry for the delay in
responding.
> After reading this, the obvious occurred to me: If a parent is against
Freddy
> costumes in general, and Freddy costumes are inspired by Freddy movies --
why
> is the child familiar with the Freddy movies? I can't imagine showing one
to a
> 7-year-old, for example, and I can't imagine dressing my kid in the
costume of
> a movie character when I would never allow the kid to see the movie in the
> first place. Why would the issue of a Freddy costume even come up in a
family
> that is anti-Freddy and such?
>
Because if the child attends school or socializes with kids who do watch
such things, and they become "cool" in the peer group, they'll still get
some of the same viewpoint. And in some cases, these are the kids who are
most interested in such characters, almost to prove that "see, I'm NOT out
of it". This is more common about age 11 or 12 than 7, though. The 7 yr olds
I'm around seemed to be more in the traditional and "character"
costumes-more Bob the builder, Simba from Lion King, Dora The Explorer, and
things like that than anything gruesome or scary.

I have never forgotten the year that I asked students to write a sound
composition about a dilemma (after a unit on program music)-and a whole
bunch chose to do something based on a "Halloween" movie which had just come
out. And was R rated. I can't imagine any parent letting their child see it,
and a few of the most involved kids were ones who I KNOW had parents who
felt likewise. The next time I did that, I gave them a choice of topics, but
only from a pre-selected list. This was a group of 10 and 11 yr olds.


> beeswing
>

[David desJardins]

beeswing writes:
> After reading this, the obvious occurred to me: If a parent is against
> Freddy costumes in general, and Freddy costumes are inspired by Freddy
> movies -- why is the child familiar with the Freddy movies?

I'm wondering how your children could *not* pick up this sort of popular
culture. The schools are swimming in it, I think. Are you
homeschooling?

David desJardins

[beeswing]

David desJardins wrote:

>beeswing writes:
>> After reading this, the obvious occurred to me: If a parent is against
>> Freddy costumes in general, and Freddy costumes are inspired by Freddy
>> movies -- why is the child familiar with the Freddy movies?
>
>I'm wondering how your children could *not* pick up this sort of popular
>culture. The schools are swimming in it, I think. Are you
>homeschooling?

My kid is 8, almost 9. Out of curiousity just now, I asked her if she knew who
Jason and Freddy were. She said no. I said that they characters from movies for
adults, and there wasn't much reason why she should know. Then I asked her if
the kids at school talked about movies at school. She said not much; a little
at recess, maybe. So there's one test case. YMMV.

beeswing

[Nevermind]

(beeswing) wrote in message >...
> David desJardins wrote:
>
> >beeswing writes:
> >> After reading this, the obvious occurred to me: If a parent is against
> >> Freddy costumes in general, and Freddy costumes are inspired by Freddy
> >> movies -- why is the child familiar with the Freddy movies?
> >
> >I'm wondering how your children could *not* pick up this sort of popular
> >culture. The schools are swimming in it, I think. Are you
> >homeschooling?
>
> My kid is 8, almost 9. Out of curiousity just now, I asked her if she knew who
> Jason and Freddy were. She said no. I said that they characters from movies for
> adults, and there wasn't much reason why she should know. Then I asked her if
> the kids at school talked about movies at school. She said not much; a little
> at recess, maybe. So there's one test case. YMMV.

Actually, the child who started this thread *was* homeschooled until
this year, but he was no bubble boy, nor did I try to make him one. I
suspect that Beeswing's daughter has been in the presence of pictures
of Freddie or references to Freddie or ads about Freddie but they were
below her radar and that of her peer group. Not so for my kid.
Actually, almost nothing is below his radar, but he pricks up his ears
especially at the mention of anything forbidden or scary or grotesque.

Beeswing: If I had had the above conversation with my son, his first
reaction after telling me he didn't know who they were would be to
pepper me with questions about them and the movies they're in. Then,
he would have at least attempted to look them up on the 'Net, ask my
SIL about them (he knows she is a horror movie fan and therefore a
go-to person for this info), and otherwise research them to death.
That's just the way he is. He shares my *values*, but not my tastes or
interests (for now?).

[beeswing]

Nevermind wrote:

>Beeswing: If I had had the above conversation with my son, his first
>reaction after telling me he didn't know who they were would be to
>pepper me with questions about them and the movies they're in. Then,
>he would have at least attempted to look them up on the 'Net, ask my
>SIL about them (he knows she is a horror movie fan and therefore a
>go-to person for this info), and otherwise research them to death.
>That's just the way he is. He shares my *values*, but not my tastes or
>interests (for now?).

You can't put a kid in a bell jar, but on the other hand, you can limit his
internet access, ask your SIL not to discuss inappropriate movies with him, and
so on...if it's part of your value structure to limit that sort of input.

beeswing

[Mary Ann]

"beeswing" > wrote in message
...
> Nevermind wrote:
>
> >Beeswing: If I had had the above conversation with my son, his first
> >reaction after telling me he didn't know who they were would be to
> >pepper me with questions about them and the movies they're in. Then,
> >he would have at least attempted to look them up on the 'Net, ask my
> >SIL about them (he knows she is a horror movie fan and therefore a
> >go-to person for this info), and otherwise research them to death.
> >That's just the way he is. He shares my *values*, but not my tastes or
> >interests (for now?).
>
> You can't put a kid in a bell jar, but on the other hand, you can limit
his
> internet access, ask your SIL not to discuss inappropriate movies with
him, and
> so on...if it's part of your value structure to limit that sort of input.
>
> beeswing

I can see not letting your child watch scary movies...I have never seen them
because I a scared of being scared but what is wrong in discussing them,both
what you like and what you don't like about them?

[beeswing]

Mary Ann wrote:

>I can see not letting your child watch scary movies...I have never seen them
>because I a scared of being scared but what is wrong in discussing them,both
>what you like and what you don't like about them?

It's not that these movies might be "scary" -- my main objection to the slasher
horror films the violence in them. And my daughter and I have had many talks on
violence and why I don't want her to watch violent movies. What I I won't do is
discuss the individual movies with my daughter in any detail, and when she asks
me about a movie I have objections to, I'll give her my perspective on *why* I
don't want her to see it at her age. There's a difference between discussing
*why* you don't like these kinds of movies versus detailing the characters, the
story, and so on.

beeswing