Good Newsweek article

Denise Anderson wrote:
wrote in message

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.

How many children do you plan on having?

2 or 3. My husband wants 2, I want 3. We'll see if we can manage 2.5,
but I'm betting I'll win and get my 3.

We have 4 right now. Only 2 are
old enough to be in any sort of activities. My oldest, does
gymnastics and
a sport. This summer my 2nd oldest will be doing a sport for
disabled
children. It's the same sport the oldest is doing, but are they on
the same
night? No, that would be too easy. So Monday-Wednesday baseball for
kid 1
Tuesday-Thursday baseball for kid 2
Friday- gymnastics
Saturday - baseball games (I've yet to figure out how I'll be at two
games
at one time.. this is where I start relying on my neighbors)

Which kid should I have give up their activities because they
interfere with
our family life?

The pretty one.

Neither - by my count, that's still two for each kid, which I amended
to later, when I decided that one was mean.

Amy

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

I just want to mention (please don't flame me) that someone women (my SIL,
for example) have a lovely time doing this. She just threw a fabulous
'Princess' party for her 3 yr. old with dresses for everyone, a castle cake,
matching streamers, invitations, plates, etc. and, I'm sure, fabulous party
favors. However, she loves doing this and is very good at it. I feel sorry
for the women with whom she is 'friends', though, who feel that now she's
raised the bar. I certainly don't feel that way as she and I both know that
I'm good at other things so won't be throwing and fancy theme party for E.
However, I'm sure there are enough women who aren't as sure of themselves
who feel obligated to keep up with other mums when they do something like
this.

I know mums like the ones talked about in the article and I thought they
were exclusive to my (reasonably well-off) part of Southern California
(which is kooky to begin with). I find it very sad that it's a nationwide
phenomena and that I've just lucked into a group of friends who aren't like
this. Heck, most of spend two hours at the park each morning playing in the
sand and on the climbers and swings. We're not obesessing over pre-schools
(who wants to spend $15k a year for a toddler anyway) and several of the
mums have decided to delay pre-school until their children turn 3 or even
3.5.

I feel really sad for the mums in the article because they're not having any
fun. As much as I NEVER thought I'd love being a SAHM, I do. I miss working,
but E and I have a great time almost every day and I love being with her. If
I hated it, I hope that I would try to find some way to make it better, just
as I would switch jobs to improve my happiness. OTOH, DH does get home from
work at 4 p.m. most days and he does most of the cooking and a good portion
of the parenting, so I'm one of the extremely lucky ones.

In the end, I found the article not bad, but didn't agree with some of her
conclusions. For many of the mums who have to work, I highly doubt that
they're doing as much of the competitive mummying as those who are SAHM (or
work part-time) because there just isn't time. Although I think affordable
daycare (and pre-school) would answer many of our nation's problems, I don't
think it's the solution to the over-competitive mum. (BTW, despite the 'mum'
thing, I do live the US. I just grew up in Canada and can't quite get my
mouth around the word 'mom'.)
--
Melissa (in Los Angeles)
Mum to Elizabeth 4/13/03
and one due early 3/05

"Melania" wrote and I snipped:

I'm not so sure it's about being perfect, as it is doing a better job
than your own parents did.

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.

Now I think you're saying a bit of what the article says.

lenny fackler wrote:
Melania wrote:
snip

The problem here, though I do not disagree with you, is all this
stuff comes
at a cost, and I am not just atlking abotu the dollars and cents.
Where
there is universal healthcare, often the standards of care are
lower,
or
really more basic in nature, and the wait times for procedures
is
very,
very long. USA has a history of individualist accomplishment. Our
capitalist
economy is the core of our system.

I would argue that in Canada our standards of care are excellent,
and
that wait times are usually only long when procedures are not
urgently
needed (I'm sure others will disagree vehemently, I'm speaking only
from experience).

The US ranks pretty far down the list of countries on basic
healthcare
indicators. Canada ranks higher on most of them.

Yep. I get annoyed when I hear American politicians defending
privatized healthcare by making the Canadian system out to be
substandard. It's not that our system doesn't have problems - it
certainly does - but it's still pretty darn good IMO.

Unnecessary procedures and interventions might be
less common. I get twitchy whenever capitalist economy and
healthcare
are mentioned in the same breath. The last thing I want is a doctor
seeing a tally of billable services every time s/he looks at me.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Denise Anderson wrote:
wrote in message

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.

How many children do you plan on having?

2 or 3. My husband wants 2, I want 3. We'll see if we can manage 2.5,
but I'm betting I'll win and get my 3.

We have 4 right now. Only 2 are
old enough to be in any sort of activities. My oldest, does
gymnastics and
a sport. This summer my 2nd oldest will be doing a sport for
disabled
children. It's the same sport the oldest is doing, but are they on
the same
night? No, that would be too easy. So Monday-Wednesday baseball for
kid 1
Tuesday-Thursday baseball for kid 2
Friday- gymnastics
Saturday - baseball games (I've yet to figure out how I'll be at two
games
at one time.. this is where I start relying on my neighbors)

Which kid should I have give up their activities because they
interfere with
our family life?

The pretty one.

Neither - by my count, that's still two for each kid, which I amended
to later, when I decided that one was mean.

Amy


It's only 1 activity for kid 2 and 2 activities for the oldest. It just
happens to be 2 days a week. I can't very well take gymnastics away from
DD1 because she's very good at it and she loves it.. Eventually DDs 3 and 4
will want to do one activity each too, then I'll really be in a pickle.

Denise


I

Circe wrote:

"Irrational Number" wrote in message
...

" wrote:

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

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


This is a problem with *older* kids, though, not with the preschool/early
elementary school set. I doubt my kids' college admissions board is going to
give a rip whether they started piano or ballet at age five or played travel
soccer in the third grade.

They won't. It matters if you think your kid is going to
be competitive at certain things, but the admissions board isn't
going to care if your kid is the next dance/music/sports star either
(unless your kid is applying for the dance/music/sports programs).
However, there are many activities where waiting until high
school or jr. high to start puts the kid so far behind the eight
ball that they're unlikely *to* choose to start. They don't want
to be floundering among kids half their age. It's frustrating.
Now, that said, I don't think it makes sense to jam your
kid into music/dance/sports at the earliest opportunity just so
that your kid can be a star or so that they're not left without
activities later in life. On the other hand, if your five year
old is begging to dance or your seven year old is begging to
study music and you've already been doing the sorts of things
you can do at home, just maybe those activities are something
that will turn into your child's passions, in which case it
may matter to the *child*.
The other thing that has always been my personal bugaboo
is kids who don't want to do *anything*. I'd much rather have
kids who had passionate interests in things than kids who just
want to spend all their time "hanging around." (Mind you, I
have nothing against lower energy kids, or kids whose passions
are more solitary pursuits. I just think people should *want*
to do *something* other than hang out at the mall ;-) Of the
kids I've known who wouldn't do anything, most were kids who'd
never *done* anything, for assorted reasons. I'd rather have
the problem of teaching my children to prioritize than the
problem of trying to get them off their butts ;-) I think life
is full of wonderful and amazing things to learn and do. Anyone
who doesn't perceive way more fun things to do than there is
time to do them isn't paying attention in my book. I want
my children to have a passion for doing things that are
meaningful to them. Those needn't be structured activities,
but the rub is that you have to try structured activities to
know if they're of interest. If your passion is reading, you
don't need a class and you can do it anytime ;-) I'm kinda
hoping that golf will be easier to accommodate if the boys
take a shine to it.

Best wishes,
Ericka

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

I just want to mention (please don't flame me) that someone women (my
SIL,
for example) have a lovely time doing this. She just threw a fabulous

'Princess' party for her 3 yr. old with dresses for everyone, a
castle cake,
matching streamers, invitations, plates, etc. and, I'm sure, fabulous
party
favors. However, she loves doing this and is very good at it. I feel
sorry
for the women with whom she is 'friends', though, who feel that now
she's
raised the bar. I certainly don't feel that way as she and I both
know that
I'm good at other things so won't be throwing and fancy theme party
for E.
However, I'm sure there are enough women who aren't as sure of
themselves
who feel obligated to keep up with other mums when they do something
like
this.

Too true!

I know mums like the ones talked about in the article and I thought
they
were exclusive to my (reasonably well-off) part of Southern
California
(which is kooky to begin with). I find it very sad that it's a
nationwide
phenomena and that I've just lucked into a group of friends who
aren't like
this. Heck, most of spend two hours at the park each morning playing
in the
sand and on the climbers and swings. We're not obesessing over
pre-schools
(who wants to spend $15k a year for a toddler anyway) and several of
the
mums have decided to delay pre-school until their children turn 3 or
even
3.5.

Heh - that just goes to show you the competitive mindset! I didn't
even consider pre-school until 3!

Irene

"Sue" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
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.

But then, what if you have three children like me. One activity for each
child and that is three activities, three times a week.

Hmmm. My 7 year old has piano lessons (once a week), soccer (once a week),
and cub scouts (once every other week). My 5 year old has ballet (once a
week) and Daisies (once every other week). I don't think they've ever done
an activity that required more than two trips in a week. Personally, I don't
think I'll allow my kids to be involved in an activity that requires more
than two practices/games/sessions per week until they're old enough to get
to and from that activity on their own, unless it's something that follows
immediately after school and just requires a later pick-up.

I don't find the amount of activities my kids are doing now to be
particularly burdensome, and I hasten to add that I am the Daisy leader and
my husband is the cub scout leader, so we are more involved and have more to
do with respect to those activities than any of the other parents have to.

I do sort of wonder where the youngest's activities will fit in when the
time comes. But I'm sure we'll figure it out. By then, we'll probably be
trading off car-pooling to various activities for the older kids, thus
giving us more time for the youngest's activities.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (almost
3)

I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan)

Thank god you posted first! Now I don't have to post that
it is a piece of crap and makes me sick at my stomach.
When an expert handles a thread on this newsgroup I can
leave it alone. I have marked the thread read and will
not come back to it.

Thanks,
Larry

In misc.kids.pregnancy 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

I snipped the rest of your post, but the basic gist of it was that
there's a lot of pressure to do what these moms are doing, and what I
criticized. I am sure that that's true. There probably IS a great
deal of pressure - but much of it is self-imposed.

Yes, I agree. That kind of was my point. Lots of women have put the pressure
on themselves to be the perfect mom, to have their kids in every activity
and for them to be gifted. I'm not saying that I have given into the
pressure, but that the pressure is there whether or not you succumb to it.

Honestly, Sue, don't you think it's not very grown up to capitulate to
that pressure, at the expense of your kids and your sanity? Don't you
think it might be more mature, in this case, to say, "F@#k 'em,"? What
are you teaching your kids? That if other people have unrealistic
expectations of you, you'd better just get in line because that's the
only way to survive? I choose my friends based on whether or not we
have similar values. Sure, I plan to catch good natured **** for
breastfeeding and whatnot, but at the end of the day, if it makes my
husband and I happy, the rest of the world can kiss my ass.

I don't happen to be raising my kids with all the activities and needing
them to be gifted like in the article. I don't buy matching plates and so
on, but I do try to make them happy as much as I can. One friend of my DD
(who is 12) had a sleepover/skating party and rented a limosine for the
night. Another friend rented a pony for a half birthday. My kids see this
stuff and then ask if they can have the same thing. I can't compete with
that and I don't want to, but there is a little part of me that is a little
bit jealous and feeling incompetent. Not that I would do it just because
someone else is, but it's still there and it bothers me that our society has
come to that. But, I do know that there is an underlying pressure for my
kids to be the best at everything. It comes from hearing other moms at
school brag about their kids. They ask me what soccer team my kids play on
and when I say they don't they become quiet and move on to someone else who
is in their clique. I have pretty much said F*** them. These newsgroups are
not good for a parent who is going against the tide because just about every
post is about reading to your babies in utero to make them smart, buying
only educational toys, not letting watch TV and having them read at an early
age, etc.... It's just unnerving that's all.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)