A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Good Newsweek article



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 16th 05, 08:33 PM
Melania
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

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

What a pessimistic view of motherhood!!

I have no sympathy for women who sign their 9 kids up for 4 different
after school activities each, and then complain that they spend all
their time in the car. Duh. No one is holding a gun to her head
forcing her to have each kid in an art class, a music class, a

physical
activity, and a club. It's not necessary to do that every week to be

a
good or well rounded person.

When I was a kid I took piano lessons for several years, then

switched
to cello. I had after school activities, and I rode the late bus or

my
bike home. If I wanted to join something, I was responsible for

making
it work - not my mom. One year I wanted to take PE during summer
school (you got to wear your own swim suit instead of the nasty ones
that the school provided during the year). I rode my bike to school,
ran and swam for the entire morning, then rode home. I was in the

best
shape of my life that summer.

My husband and I have already decided that our kids will be allowed

to
choose one activity per semester - one lesson, one club, one class
outside of school. If they are able to do so in a way that doesn't
inconvenience the rest of the family, they can choose to pick up

Scouts
or something too. We are not going to be one of those families who
never has dinner together because the kids are always at practice or
lessons or whatnot. It's a choice, not a requirement.

Another thing that annoys me about that article is the idea that
"society" makes us all behave like Martha Stewart. That's crap. As

if
the kids give a damn if their paper plates are color coordinated with
the napkins and cups. Kids are far more practical than that. Sure,
it's nice for everything to look lovely, and if that's what you're
into, fine. But if you're already frazzled, driving all over town to
find streamers in that *perfect* shade of pink is self-imposed

torture.
Society doesn't give a crap about your streamers.

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

If women want relief from the stress of parenting, they need to let

go
of this ridiculous competitiveness we have with each other. They

need
to let go of the idea that there's no such thing as good enough - and
it doesn't start with tax breaks, the government, or "society" - it
starts with the self.

It's all a matter of choices and priorities, and I don't feel that

the
government needs to change anything to make me a better (future)
parent. In fact, the less the government is involved with my home

and
my family, the better.

Amy


The Anna Quindlen article "The Good Enough Mother" is a good one, too.
(linked on the same page)

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

  #22  
Old February 16th 05, 08:34 PM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Laura Faussone says...



Still, I agree with your basic assessment: much of these women's complaints
seem to be purely self-imposed and is largely done by women who want to
impress other women with their ability to be Martha Stewart and do it all.
When did motherhood become a competition? If you're trying to do so much
that you're that stressed out, you need to take a long look at whose
interests you're *really* serving. Chances are pretty good that it's *not*
your kids'!


Martha Stewart's also divorced and, from what I've heard, doesn't have the best
relationship with her daughter.

Laura


I also heard this little rumor about her going to jail....

  #23  
Old February 16th 05, 08:38 PM
shinypenny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Karen wrote:

Talk to me in about 8 years ;-) While I agree with you in theory,

you'll be
surprised how easy it is to get very, very busy with just a couple of
activities per child. Also, as you watch your child develop various

talents
and interests, it is hard to turn your back on those interests

(especially
if they promote things you want for your kids - exercise, quality

social
opportunities, building on inherent talents). My kids enjoy music

lessons,
scouting, and sports. Music lessons are once a week, scouting

involves two
meetings a month, one of them a Friday night, plus special weekend
activities. Sports often run in long (Little League) or short

segments
(parks and recreation soccer or t-ball, for example, that run in six

week
periods). Because my oldest takes piano, am I to deny him the Scout
experience that all his friends enjoy that only takes up a few

evenings per
month? Or do I say he can't do Little League, a physical activity he

loves?
I guess I just can't see the "one activity per semester" rule being
practical, even if in theory it seems to rightly put family before
activities. Quite frankly, I'd be afraid my son would throw in the

towel on
piano if it took away all other fun opportunites. But I'd hate him

to not
do piano at all just because he has scouts or has several week

periods where
he plays a sport. Almost every night, we have dinner together, but
occasionally we have those nights where it's just crazy .....it's

amazing
how all our practices and meetings always turn out to be on

Wednesdays! I
think it's possible to be rational about doling out activites without
insisting on boilerplate rules.....and I think our kids appreciate

our
flexibility and fairness. Sometimes we can do it and sometimes we

can't.
YMMV.


I hear you!!!

I think it's great to have general guidelines and to also be flexible.
I do have guidelines but otherwise let the children lead. DD12 *loves*
piano and she is getting quite good at it. I admire her dedication and
passion. We accomodate it happily.

DD10 took it for awhile, but never seemed to like to practice all that
much. So we next tried clarinet. Same story there - theoretically, she
likes the idea of taking music, but in practice, she's just not all
that into it like DD12 is, so we mutually decided to drop it.

DD10 really wanted to sign up for softball with her friends. So we
endured a season of that. At the end of the season, she was exhausted
and often on her very last thread. It was just too much - too many
practices during the week, and very long weekend games. The part she
did love was being on a team and with her friends; she wasn't
passionate about softball itself. At the end of the season, she made me
*promise* no matter how much she begged this year, I'd be the adult
(her words) and put my foot down and say no!!! This kid really knows
herself well, and knows she needs guidance and someone to set some
boundaries for her, because she doesn't do it well herself. She lets
her enthusiasm get the better of her, and then she finds herself stuck
in a commitment that makes her miserable.

And so I did put my foot down this year. Looks like we'll sign up for
tennis instead. The commitment is much more manageable (an hour and a
half per week), they keep you hopping, and her friends will also be
doing it. If she doesn't like it, she can quit after 4 weeks, no big
deal. I do keep trying her to try different things. Eventually, she'll
find one that really sticks.

jen

  #24  
Old February 16th 05, 08:38 PM
emilymr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I read the article really quickly and liked the policy recommendations, but
I think that one of the other articles spoke to me mo
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6960127/site/newsweek/

I know that I could easily fall into the trap of wanting to be the
supermommy if I don't end up getting a job -- that somehow being the
domestic goddess will make up for/replace not 'using' my PhD and following
the expected tenure track academic trajectory. I think it's very easy
especially for highly educated women to feel guilt coming from both
directions: we're not fulfilling our feminist obligations by going into
the workplace and taking advantage of the opportunities we've had, or
we're not being good moms by staying at home with our children. And it
might seem really crazy, but I can definitely see how such a woman would
be tempted to substitute high-powered parenting for a high-powered
career.

Luckily for me, I'm too lazy (and, I'd like to think, too practical) to go
in for color-coordinated plates and streamers -- but I do have a lot of
sympathy for women who are desperately trying to do the best job they can
for their kids and their husbands/partners, and, often, their careers. I
know several women in that position; it's HARD to navigate through all the
expectations constantly bombarding them! And if I get my job (still
waiting to hear, argh), I'll be joining their ranks soon enough.

Wow, that was an incoherent post. :P

Em
mama to Micah, 11/14/04

PS None of this is to say that I fundamentally disagree with Amy -- I want
to be very careful not to overschedule, be an interfering and pressuring
mom, do my kids' homework projects for them, etc. But I definitely see
where the impulse to be supermom comes from, esp. in the cohort of women
described in the article.

  #25  
Old February 16th 05, 08:43 PM
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:

Ericka Kammerer wrote:


While I agree with you in principle, it isn't always
that easy to follow through on this. For it to work, you assume
that your kids will either jump about from activity to activity
(doing something different each semester) or will focus on just
one activity exclusively (doing the same activity over and over).


That's a good point. I figure that our kids will probably take music
lessons, and we'll go to the gym (or the park) as a family and get
physical activity there. I don't think that physical activity needs to
be a "sport" to have value, and while sports are an important part of
development for a lot of kids, it's possible to raise happy, healthy
kids who never play an organized sport.


Oh, absolutely. The rub comes in when you've got a kid
who *wants* to play sports...and play an instrument...and go to
scouts with his best friend...and whatever. It's easy to say
no when the kid isn't interested, but when the kid is begging
for something that is a Good Thing to do, it gets hard to turn
them down--especially if they're ready, willing, and able to
put in the effort for whatever it is.

If they don't have an affinity for music, we'll try dance or art or
something else. The thing is that I would rather that we eat as a
family every night than have overscheduled, overburdened kids. If
they're in school for 7 hours a day, then they're in activities all
afternoon, and then they have to do their homework, they miss out on
other things (like dinner and family time) that are, IMHO, more
important.


Sure. We virtually always have family dinner despite
being a relatively busy family. In my opinion, if it's a priority,
you'll make time for it one way or another. The exception for us
is Friday nights, when the boys have back-to-back dance classes
which would mean a very early dinner minus DH or a very late
dinner (with cranky kids). Instead, on Friday nights, one parent
takes DS2 and DD out to dinner after the first class and the other
parent takes DS1 out to dinner after his class. That gives each
boy some one-on-one time with a parent (and we switch off who takes
which kid). When possible, we leave DD with my parents so that
DS2 gets one-on-one time instead of having his little sister
always tagging along.
I agree that it's a lot with school and homework and
activities and such. On the other hand, many schools have
dramatically reduced the amount of time they spend on music,
the arts, and physical education. I'm willing to put myself
out to provide exposure in those areas when and if my kids
are interested in pursing something. I just keep an eye on
how the kids are managing. If they're too stressed or if
schoolwork is suffering or if there's no family time or
downtime, then it's time to cut back. If we're all managing,
then I don't arbitrarily limit activities. It does keep us
rather busy, though, and it's harder on me than on the kids,
for the most part. I could certainly make my life easier
by limiting activities more, and I believe it would be reasonable
if I chose to do so. I just love seeing them do things they
enjoy doing and I believe they get a lot out of those activities,
so I suck it up as long as I think there's a net benefit.

My mom spent thousands of dollars on music lessons for me, and I can't
play more than a few notes anymore.


Whereas the same was true of me, but I still play regularly.

Was it good for me? Sure. But
the things I really remember about childhood were that I hated to
practice, and I really loved it when we all sat down and had dinner
together. I never played soccer, but the neighborhood kids would all
get together and play Kick the Can or Tag in the empty lot down the
street. I had a great childhood, and I was limited to one activity a
semester (I think we were allowed to pick up more during the summer).


I had more activities, but also had dinner with my family
virtually every night, and also had a great childhood. I do feel
that my activities (mostly music related, though there were some
other things as well) were a major factor in getting admitted to
college (and getting scholarships) and in enhancing my life then
and now.

Sometimes you can enrich your kids to the point of poisoning them -
even objectively healthy things, like water, are toxic in large
amounts.


Sure, one has to be reasonable--and what is reasonable
will vary from child to child. Some can handle quite a few
activities and others can handle only few.

But if you want your kids to be in two activities a semester, you won't
get any complaints from me. Maybe I can work it out so that we
have piano for both kids on Monday, and then they're both in the same
martial arts class on Friday or something... With creative scheduling,
you can make something like that work without making yourself crazy.


;-) Right now, DS1 is doing dance (2x/week), piano (lessons
1x/week, practice 6x/week), chess club (1x/week) and has decided not
to do soccer this spring (thank goodness), though he's considering
whether he wants to do golf this summer. DS2 is doing dance (2x/week--
one the same class as DS1 and the other a different class) and chess
club (1x/week, same as DS1). He wants to take up golf ASAP, though
he thinks that tennis might also be fun. He also decided he didn't
want to do soccer this spring (apparently, he doesn't like wearing
cleats ;-) DD, thank goodness, is too little for much in the way
of activities, though she is pounding at the doors to get into dance
classes. DS1 wants to pick up band next year (percussion, he thinks).
DS2 will start piano next year. Right now, we have activities after
school four days a week, but as I said, we have family dinner every
night except Fridays.
It does help that the boys' activities overlap, though when
they were both playing soccer it didn't help at all because the
league was organized by age. But even having the two just in
soccer was a royal PITA. Generally, DS1 would have a practice
at a fixed time on Saturday, a practice at a fixed day/time on
a weekday after school, and a game at a floating time on Sunday
afternoon. DS2 would have a practice at a fixed time on Saturday
and a game at a floating time on Sunday afternoon. And all that
was just for standard house league play--not even travel soccer
(which is much worse). The schedule was really unpleasant. Both
boys were doing wonderfully at it, and it was fabulous exercise
for them, but I confess to heaving a sigh of relief that neither
wanted to do it this spring (we've been doing fall and spring
soccer for the last...um...four years, though in the beginning
it was only one child in it and it was only a single practice/game
on Sundays at 6 years old). Looks like DD is a budding soccer
player, though, so we may be back on the bandwagon in another
three years if she's still as enamored of it as she is now.

Best wishes,
Ericka

  #26  
Old February 16th 05, 08:43 PM
shinypenny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Melania wrote:

I'm pretty sure the same goes
for parenting - nobody is going to like you better for being

"perfect."


I'm not so sure it's about being perfect, as it is doing a better job
than your own parents did. It's pretty common stage for adults to grow
up and blame their folks for raising them wrong, one way or another. So
with each generation, we've got parents trying to do a better job than
the last generation, and this raises the bar with each successive
generation.

jen

  #27  
Old February 16th 05, 08:47 PM
Melania
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Ericka Kammerer wrote:
Melania wrote:


I think it's different when it's activities the kids really love,
either from an affinity for the activity itself or because of the
social experience. Some kids are herded into music, dance, sports,

art,
language, and who knows what all else, and don't seem to even be
enjoying it.


Well, it's very different for the kids--but mom (or whomever)
is just as busy regardless of the impetus for the activities ;-)


Oh, for sure - but hopefully the mom is also happier than if she is
constantly fighting her kids into things "for their own good." There
were times with all three of us in music lessons that my parents were
very busy. But I think it made them happy to see us enjoying music, and
to see our abilities developing with the musical education.

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

My rule is the kids have to *really* want it (and prove it by
giving 100 percent to the activity) and it has to be nearby
(which is easy, because there are loads of opportunities very
nearby) for me to agree.

Best wishes,
Ericka


  #28  
Old February 16th 05, 08:51 PM
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Melania wrote:


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


Well, it's very different for the kids--but mom (or whomever)
is just as busy regardless of the impetus for the activities ;-)
My rule is the kids have to *really* want it (and prove it by
giving 100 percent to the activity) and it has to be nearby
(which is easy, because there are loads of opportunities very
nearby) for me to agree.

Best wishes,
Ericka

  #29  
Old February 16th 05, 08:53 PM
Melania
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


shinypenny wrote:
Melania wrote:

I'm pretty sure the same goes
for parenting - nobody is going to like you better for being

"perfect."


I'm not so sure it's about being perfect, as it is doing a better job
than your own parents did. It's pretty common stage for adults to

grow
up and blame their folks for raising them wrong, one way or another.

So
with each generation, we've got parents trying to do a better job

than
the last generation, and this raises the bar with each successive
generation.

jen


Just contemplating that possibility makes me sad. I'm not sure I agree,
though - I think for a lot of women it *does* boil down to having
something to prove to themselves: I'm not "just" a mom, I'm not merely
"good enough", being a mother now isn't wasting the education I got
earlier (or all those years of career building I put in), being a
working mom *shouldn't* mean someone else is raising my kids . . . and
so on. I don't think it's parents, usually, but just mothers. I have a
friend who wants to have kids, someday, but doesn't want to budge at
all in her career. She's already terrified about how she's going to
handle it. It isn't that she doesn't think her parents did a good job,
just that she has a really different life than her parents do/did.

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

  #30  
Old February 16th 05, 09:01 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Karen wrote:

Talk to me in about 8 years ;-)


Hahaha! I know...

While I agree with you in theory, you'll be
surprised how easy it is to get very, very busy with just a couple of
activities per child. Also, as you watch your child develop various

talents
and interests, it is hard to turn your back on those interests

(especially
if they promote things you want for your kids - exercise, quality

social
opportunities, building on inherent talents).


I know this one family who has stuff every single night, and not just
one thing, but three or four things. They hardly have time to eat (and
they end up eating crap instead of food) because they're running from
church thing to school thing to scouts thing to sports thing all the
time... It's just not healthy. But maybe one will prove unrealistic.
I'll be happy if we can keep it to one creative (music, art) and one
physical (martial arts or sports) per semester. See, I'm very
flexible.

I
think it's possible to be rational about doling out activites without
insisting on boilerplate rules.....and I think our kids appreciate

our
flexibility and fairness. Sometimes we can do it and sometimes we

can't.
YMMV.


It's such a seductive trap to fall into, though... And it goes along
with the basic drive of every parent - the wish that we could give our
kids everything... But walking the dog every night before dinner is
every bit as healthy as baseball practice (I remain unconvinced that
baseball is a sport, looks like a lot of standing around and scratching
to me!!), and if it strengthens the family, I think that's healthy.

I must say, though, that my cousin is a basketball superstar (he's at
an Ivy League school playing now), and going to watch his games with
the whole family is a lot of fun. I did drama and stuff, community
theater, when I was a kid. I was Brigitta in the Sound of Music, and
it was fun to have the whole family come see me... You can build the
family through activities, I guess, but it's just so slippery a slope,
between "enough" and "too much"...

I think each family has to find out what works for them. Since I'm
lazy, it'll be one or two a week, until they get their own drivers'
licenses or learn the public transportation system!

Amy

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good Newsweek article Sue General 353 March 22nd 05 04:19 PM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 December 29th 04 06:26 AM
misc.kids FAQ on breastpumps, Part 1/2 Beth Weiss Info and FAQ's 1 March 3rd 04 11:06 AM
misc.kids FAQ on breastpumps, Part 1/2 Beth Weiss Info and FAQ's 1 February 16th 04 10:59 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 February 16th 04 10:59 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.