Date   

Re: Money & Power

Julie <jlist@...>
 

Thanks for your input, Cat and Dawn.

Julie

----- Original Message -----
From: catherine aceto
To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Money & Power


My 5 yo gets $5/week -- enough so that she can buy a small toy if she wants to, or save for a bigger toy (like a barbie or playdough set) in an amount of time that is conceivable to a five year old. She likes to window shop the toy stores, thinking about what she'd like to save her allowance for. The first couple of months, it seemed to burn a whole in her pocket -- as soon as she got it she wanted to spend it -- now she is more concerned with finding something that she wants to own, rather than just spending money because she has some. I think she has about $20 saved right now.

The money isn't tied to her behavior in any way. It is the line item in the family budget for Lydia discretionary spending, similar to the line item that my husband and I each have. The baby does not have a line item yet. : - )

-Cat
----- Original Message -----
From: Dawn Bennink
To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Money & Power


Julie wrote:

> Another thing--do your kids get allowances? I'd really like to know
> an effective approach toward handling money in an inclusive way and
> with respect for all (and, of course, without burdening little ones
> too much with financial concerns).







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
AlwaysLearning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: television

Julie <jlist@...>
 

from Sandra:
<<Some people are teens or adults when they first realize that commercials
appeal to fantasy and self-image. My kids have known it since they were young, and so not only did they discuss it and get over it, but they've freed up their minds to think of loftier things.

We got a copy of GQ (Gentleman's Quarterly) last week, for articles on three guys Marty really likes (The Rock, Conan O'Brien and Jack Black). That magazine is mostly ads. Holly and I looked at a few and talked about how some appeal to European fantasy, some to teens (not by SHOWING teens), etc. We had an English version (not of the same issue)brought by a travelling friend, and the ads were really different.

That's art, psychology, photography, commerce...
Holly is 11. She understands things now that I didn't understand until I was in college.>>

I didn't even begin to realize the way I had fallen prey to advertising until I was in my mid-20s. Now I see that the main reason for this was probably the extreme peer dependence and need for security that was nurtured by confinement schooling--not the TV and advertising itself. I wouldn't have responded to it if I didn't have the need for acceptance and the desire for conformity in the first place.

Thanks for helping me see this!

Julie

----- Original Message -----
From: SandraDodd@aol.com
To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] television


In a message dated 10/17/2003 5:46:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
fishierich@aol.com writes:
-=-Having the television on
all day is not something I want and I live here too. -=-


We don't have the television on all day.

You live there too, but if your priority is your children's learning, then
limiting input is going to make that more difficult.

-=-Do you think at 4
years my daughter should be the one deciding what shows to watch?-=-

I think (from years of experience at these kinds of exchangs) that what
you're envisioning and what I would be talking about would be two extremely
different things.

My short answer is "yes."

I don't think she will even BEGIN to choose the shows you're afraid of.

-=-What about the influence of commercial TV? -=-

"The influence" so far is that they know that the broadcast is free because
the sponsors paid for it. They were TINY little when we explained that
companies pay for advertising on TV, radio, magazines, billboards, and newspapers.
When the boys were little they were glad to know what toys were being offered
at which fast-food places, and they watched for those ads. Some toys they
weren't interested in; some they were. They were discerning even about fast food
toys.

Some people are teens or adults when they first realize that commercials
appeal to fantasy and self-image. My kids have known it since they were young,
and so not only did they discuss it and get over it, but they've freed up their
minds to think of loftier things.

We got a copy of GQ (Gentleman's Quarterly) last week, for articles on three
guys Marty really likes (The Rock, Conan O'Brien and Jack Black). That
magazine is mostly ads. Holly and I looked at a few and talked about how some
appeal to European fantasy, some to teens (not by SHOWING teens), etc. We had an
English version (not of the same issue)brought by a travelling friend, and the
ads were really different.

That's art, psychology, photography, commerce...
Holly is 11. She understands things now that I didn't understand until I was
in college.

-=-Do you not think that has an
affect on the gimmes and yes I did read about 'Magical Thinking and Spoiled
Children' and agree completely. -=-

My kids have never "had the gimmes."

I've tried to even change the words in which I will think about my children
and their environment. There are LOTS of phrases used as put-down and
belittlement.
"gimmes"
spoiled rotten
boob tube
junk food
brat
mindless tv
zombie
daydreaming (better connotation for some people than others)

It's possible to have long conversations with other parents which don't
require much thought, which don't say anything original, and which are very
disrespectful of children as a class and as individuals. Part of what got me where I
am today was a conscious choice NOT to go there.

My husband was at a "no children" barbecue with people from work, and they
got to badmouthing teens. What they were saying did NOT apply to our teens, and
it might not even have applied to theirs. They were just having a canned
conversation about how irresponsible and stupid teens are, and how hard it is to
be the parent of a lazy teen who never thinks. When Keith did say something
flattering about Kirby, our oldest, one of the parents made a dismissive
comment and they went back to their martyrly insults of people who had been
disallowed from the party.

Parents do it without thinking. They do it about school starting, they do it
when they use terms like
rug rats
drape apes
just a kid
young'uns (some manage to use that without insult; others intend to create
us/them)

-=-So does that mean I should not worry about commercial TV? -=-

It means I don't and lots of other people don't. You can worry about what
you want to worry about, but wouldn't it be cool if your 'worry' list could be
shorter?

-=-What about the news or just the news flashes? Regular prime-time news
coverage is not really something a 4 year old needs to hear about let alone a
29
year old. -=-

My kids don't watch the news. They could if they wanted to. They rarely
choose to.

-=-Is there a place for me in the chat group with my views on TV or should I
reconsider my involvement in this chat group?-=-

What are you really asking?
Would you feel better if people weren't honest?
Are you looking for a group that says whatever anyone does is great and all
parenting decisions are equally close to unschooling success?

You're welcome to stay in this group, but if you express your views they
probably WILL be questioned and dissected. It's part of learning about
unschooling for people to pick apart other parents' theories and ideas and practices.

Sandra
Sandra













Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
AlwaysLearning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: And yet another new one

Julie <jlist@...>
 

Dawn wrote:
<<Thanks for your support for F.R.E.E. in NY! I'm in Jamestown, in Western NY. My husband used to live in Endicott when he was very small. His Dad was an IBMer. We pass through your area at least twice a year when going to visit my SIL in the Kingston area.

http://www.nyhen.org/ <http://www.nyhen.org/>is a great place to learn about regulations for NY homeschoolers, find a support group local to you and more. They have a few email lists to which you can subscribe for support as well. Check 'em out. I'm on their legislative committee as well. I'm also list mom for NYSHomeschool@yahoo.com. We are
presently a moderated group due to the onslaught of porn on
homeschooling lists lately. You are welcome to join.>>

It's a small world, Dawn. My hometown is Jamestown! We visit my parents there several times a year. Did you grow up in Jamestown? My husband was born and raised in Endicott, and his dad was an IBMer, too. We live minutes from the Endicott exit on rte 17, so feel free to stop by if you need a break on your way to Kingston. :)

I'll definitely check out www.nyhen.org and join the list. Thanks!

Julie

----- Original Message -----
From: Dawn Bennink
To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] And yet another new one


Julie,

Thanks for your support for F.R.E.E. in NY! I'm in Jamestown, in
Western NY. My husband used to live in Endicott when he was very small.
His Dad was an IBMer. We pass through your area at least twice a year
when going to visit my SIL in the Kingston area.

http://www.nyhen.org/ <http://www.nyhen.org/>is a great place to learn
about regulations for NY homeschoolers, find a support group local to
you and more. They have a few email lists to which you can subscribe
for support as well. Check 'em out. I'm on their legislative committee
as well. I'm also list mom for NYSHomeschool@yahoo.com. We are
presently a moderated group due to the onslaught of porn on
homeschooling lists lately. You are welcome to join.

NY has a horrible reputation for their treatment of homeschoolers, but
in most cases districts are not too difficult. There are a few
exceptions, but there is plenty of support out there to help you learn
the finer points of the regulations, probably better than the district
people know them, to combat any difficulties. My paperwork takes me
just a few minutes every quarter. Of course, it would be even nicer if
I didn't have to deal with it at all. Thus F.R.E.E. in NY. We are very
proud to have the support of people like Linda Dobson, John Taylor
Gatto, Paul Matte & Doris Hohensee.

Thanks again for your support, and don't hesitate to let me know if I
can be of help with regards to NY homeschooling.

Dawn


Re: tv watching

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 9:32:11 AM, rettafontana@yahoo.com writes:

<< Tv is a series of 600 black dots that light up in sequence over and over.
This is damaging to the brain development to children under age 7. >>

Says who?

And what about the computer screen? Same CRT technology, right? Without the
benefit of music an d good acting.

<<Tv lowers the brain waves to the pre-sleep state, so things that are going
in hypnoticcally and it's really hard to make a conscious choice to turn it
off. >>

I've read this in two books, and heard it parotted by "educators," but I
haven't seen it seem true with kids who weren't limited.

I've seen kids dance and talk and run to the other room to get me to show me
something, and if it's hard to make a choice to turn it off, it's for the same
reason it's hard to put a good book down. The mind is engaged, not asleep.

The tests I've read about that some of that "research" was based on was
putting daycare or school kids in a room pointed at a program chosen by the re
searcher, and they were wired up and told "watch this."

It wasn't real kids in the real world making a choice to watch something or
not.

Please don't believe all the research you see which is designed to support
schools' agendas.

For example, Sesame Street: Educational research created Sesame Street for
sound reasons. Also Schoolhouse Rock came out of the same research, and they
were popular AND effective.

Then a few years later, educational reasearch turned on Sesame Street, to try
to blame it for "short attention span," which was bullshit. Sesame Street
was created to make learning easier for kids, theoretically so school would be
easier for them (and thereby success in life, yada yada).

But school had been kinda counting on kids being ignorant. Kids who don't
already KNOW their numbers and letters might possibly sit still for a boring
long lesson. Kids with no other option for learning letters will carve them
out on a wax slate that has to be re-melted on a wood stove that night, but
those days are LONG, long gone, and to rein kids in from cutting edge opportunity
(these days, computer games) is selfish cruelty on the part of adults who
don't want to lose their audience for their lame old-timey presentations.

There never was a uniformly ignorant kindergarten class anyway, but if the
teachers can blame a few parents that's limited. (Parents are told "don't teach
these things at home, because he'll be ahead of the other kids and that's
hard on kids.") But if they can find one big scapegoat like Children's
Television Workshop and heap blame on THEM, a few people get master's degrees or PhDs
for their "research," which gets them out of the classroom and into the
administration, and schools are "better served."

As unschoolers we don't have to buy into their stuff, and that anti-TV
propaganda is part and parcel of their "science."

Sandra


Re: Money & Power

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 7:49:48 AM, jlist@redjellyfish.net writes:

<< I keep forgetting that unschooled kids won't necessarily react the same
way as I did in situations involving money.
>>

Nor about just about anything else, I've found with mine.

I reported here a while back that the first week Kirby had his license and I
was letting him go out and he had the go to be gone overnight or all day, he
kept coming back!!

If I had permission to be out until midnight when I was a teenager, I would
NOT have risked stopping by the house for anything, lest my mom take it back.
And if I had permission to be out overnight, I would have stayed out overnight
even if I had to sleep in the car, because such freedoms were rare.

So there was Kirby, in his own bed, the first night he had permission to keep
the car out overnight.

He said he was too long for his friend's couch now, and it just wasn't going
to be comfortable. When he had gotten tired, he wanted to sleep in his own
bed.

!!

Sandra


Re: registered of not in NC

Leslie530@...
 

Thanks, Pam. I will pass this info on to my friend.

Leslie


<<<<They send out this post card after you have been homeschooling a couple
of
years. You send it in also to state how many children are currently enrolled
in
your homeschool. Not by name but by age and gender. And yes that is what it
says. But it does not say your chances of a visit increase it says you are
willing to have a home visit. >>>>


Re: television

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 3:10:48 AM, fetteroll@earthlink.net writes:

<< If we spent our childhoods doing what our parents wanted us to do and we
enter adulthood (and then parenthood) trying to fulfill the need to do what
we want, then we pass that legacy of neediness and unhappiness onto our
children. >>

AMEN.

I lived with "when you grow up you can..."
and my parents had lived with it too.


And another "legacy" of this culture is "I hope your kids treat you as badly
as you treat me" (and other parental curses). "When you have kids you'll
understand." "I suffered through this when I was a kid and you will too, and then
your kids will too, but you'll understand."

Yes. What I understand is that just like fraternity hazing, to tell someone
"endure this and your reward is that you will get to do it to others later" is
one of the unerpinnings of continuing violence.

How many wife beaters were themselves intimidated by children or saw their
mothers hit and were powerless to do anything about it, and rather than
resolving to do better, they swallowed it all and identified with the strong male in
the picture because they were afraid and disgusted by the mother's powerless,
and their own.

That's extreme, but it's the other end of the same continuum. Can we splash
in the shallow end of that water without seeing the violence in the deeper
parts?

<<My daughter has always been able to choose what she wanted to watch. She
didn't much care about flipping through channels at 4 but by 6 she would
search for the stations that had cartoons. She'd pass by anything live
action.>>

Just two days ago Holly mentioned about some movie (she's asleep and I dont'
remember which) "Yes, but it doesn't have any kids in it." So she still
pretty much prefers movies about kids, or at least with kid/teen characters as
witnesses to the action. I reminded her that The Green Mile didn't, really,
either. But I was wrong. Children were murdered, and men's lives were hugely
affected. The first time she watched parts of The Green Mile, because she was
interested in some of the actors, I sent her off on an errand (she knew it was
so she'd miss some of the movie, and she didn't mind) for the kid-parts because
they're scary. Not graphic nor detailed at all, but still...

After she knew and liked the story, she was willing (but certainly not
required) to see those parts, but just a glimpse at first. Now she can watch the
whole movie, asked me to buy a copy (we've rented it twice) and asked me to
read the book so I could tell her what parts were different from the book.

She's also quite interested in the fact that Hasbro just started
manufacturing My Little Pony horses and accessories and stickers lately.

Because we don't have age milestones and requirements and threshholds for
things, she didn't have to put aside playing with Barbie and Ponies to watch R
rated movies. So she will do both on the same day.

Her level of thought and conversation is really remarkable, and I say
"remarkable" because two adult friends have commented in the past month on her
maturity and poise, totally at their own initiation.

That maturity has come from her being treated as a person, as Holly, rather
than as a four year old or six year old or eleven year old. She's never been
treated as "a first grader" or "a sixth grader." She is where she is, she's
learning what is new and interesting, and we try to keep the options for input
and activity swirling around her so she DOES have choices. She's not waiting
until she's twelve for this privilege or fifteen for that other one. She has
not motivation to act "more mature" because she has no school "peers" to
pressure her.

Sandra


Re: do unschoolers get good jobs?

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 2:55:27 AM, Dnowens@aol.com writes:

<< How about Peter Kowalke? And
Mae Shell too. And they got married! So I guess that would make her Mae
Kowalke,
unless she is a Shell-Kowake like I am an Edds-Owens. <bg> >>

Her webpages are linked from
http://sandradodd.com/unschooling

Sandra


Re: television

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 2:11:14 AM, kara@stjonn.com writes:

<< Yes, my daughter acts out

what she sees in a movie, but she does that with books too, should I

limit her reading time and book choices? She acts out things she

sees in her everyday life. >>

I love to see the kids adding to their make-believe the things that have
happened in their real lives, like deaths, divorces, accidents, broken bones or
out-of-control backyard fires or whatever.

Literature pretty much exists for us to exercise our biochemistry and
imagination on "what ifs." Like an amusement park for brains, scary stories
stimulate the parts of us that usually don't get a workout unless there's a real
fright, and love stories stimulate parts that are usually quiet and still unless
we're currently really involved with some crush/romance, and so forth. That
works with storytelling, reading, movies, song lyrics, paintings, sculpture,
music...

So I was surprised and disappointed to find that the wife of one of my best
friends is on him about not letting their sons watch movies. She doesn't mind
the child sitting behind a chair or couch, playing with toys and listening to
a movie, but she says if he watches movies he's not exercising his
imagination, and that it's healthier for him (the older one, I'm talking about) to
picture the action and characters himself.

He was asking me what I thought about that.

I tried to be kind, because he does love his wife.

She has one of those totally quicky master's degrees in early childhood
education. The NEA's flooding the unemployment market with unemployeed master's
degreed EXPERTS in early childhood ed in preparation for their push to get
government-funded preschools back to two year olds. It will take them awhile, but
they are working on it.

So I asked him to consider why people with that anti-video prejudice are not
complaining about illustrated books. He hooted with joy and said THANK YOU,
that's going to help.

But what's more and I didn't say it was that movies are not intended to be
for the blind or the behind-the-chair. You can't follow all the action from
just hearing the dialog and music. They're carefully built of music, dialog,
scenery/sets and subtle facial acting.

To look at a piece of art like a movie or a cartoon and say "just listen" is
one of the dumbest things I've heard in my now-long life.

Sandra


Re: Emulating Arthur (was: television)

SandraDodd@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 12:15:50 AM, ikonstitcher@cox.net writes:

<< (and I told them if they started talking
like SouthPark, they couldn't watch it anymore -- then they started
imitating Cartman so perfectly, I couldn't stop laughing long enough to nuke
'em!) >>

I've told this story before, but there are new people.

My husband loves musicals, and before I hung out with him I knew very little
about them, outside of Jesus Christ Superstar.

My husband who loves musicals was working in Minneapolis when I and two other
adult friends took Kirby and Marty to see the South Park Movie. This was the
greatest preparation and security we'd ever had outside of marking kids with
names and phone numbers and emergency plans when they went to the State Fair
with another family.

We sat adult-child-adult-child-adult. I hadn't seen the movie and had been
warned it was REALLY horribly offensively adult. But before I had known, I had
promised the boys they could see it. So my counsellor/bodyguards, one male
and one female to be able to answer any questions the kids might have during or
after accompanied these two children to the movie and the children had the
following onus put up on them:

Do not quote them movie at any homeschooling functions.
Do not quote the movie outside of our house.

And, it was added, after we saw it was a musical: "Do not learn and sing
these songs."

I had two motivations in all this, and one was not to so totally irritate the
other homeschooling families that my kids were isolated as toxic-child-waste,
and the other was not to get in trouble for being some kind of neglectful mom.

So two funny things happened. A few weeks passed and my husband went to see
the movie in Minneapolis. He had visited home in the meantime, and he had
gone back to MN and seen the movie. He called and said "I didn't know it was a
musical!"

That proves how quiet my kids REALLY were, in honoring their contract.

And the other funny thing was that when it came out on CD I bought the CD and
we all sang along. Because, it turns out, the subject matter of the movie is
exactly the thing I had been doing: Parents overreacting insanely to the
idea that children will hear bad words in movies.

HUGE learning experience for all involved.

Sandra


TV - question, please don't flame me

Irsue@...
 

OK, for fear of being flamed, I have hesitated in sending this message, but
my curiosity is getting the best of me. I am fairly new to unschooling, I have
been homeschooling for 4 years, and this is my first year of unschooling.
Around our house, TV isn't something we watch a lot of. Yes, we watch a ton of
videos, we have quite a collection of videos, and the kids usually pick videos
of interest to them from the library. My question is for the people that do
not put limits on what their kids watch, and again, please don't flame me, I
am not trying to ask a dumb question and I really hate groups that start
flaming. If your child chooses to watch something along the lines of borderline
pornography, or full blown pornography, do you put an end to that, or are you
letting them watch it or has that not become an issue in anyone's home? I guess
that is something I wouldn't want to walk in and see my kids watching and I
would hope that other parents would feel the same. Again, I am just asking a
question, not trying to start an all out war. Susan


Re: registered of not in NC

genant2@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/03 9:11:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Tuckervill@aol.com writes:

But I wouldn't allow them to visit, on principle. Invasive and
unnecessary.
Accomplishes NOTHING.

But in NC when you fill out your notice of intent it says, and the law
supports it, that they can make homevisits when they like but do have to give notice
before coming. In order to file for your NOI you have to agree to this. I
am not saying that you "have" to let them in just if you do not, after you
agreed to, they might assume, correctly or incorrectly, that you have something to
hide and will probably take further actions.

It isn't a home inspection, as there are no regulation like for day care or
private schools, it s just to "review your records".

Now I know some out there choose to not comply based on principal but I am
not one of them. I do the minimum to comply so that I do not in any way put my
boys in jeopardy of any state intervention.
Pam G


Re: television

Leslie530@...
 

In a message dated 10/17/2003 6:51:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ambdkf@earthlink.net writes:
Do you feel like they were always like that? When the tv thing happened
with us they were 2 and 4 now 3 and 5. I wonder if the difference is that
at such a young age they take in info differently or if it is just them/me
(i.e. personality).
Using AOL 9.0 so don't know if this will work...

I did limit my son's TV content a bit when he was this young. He was very
sensitive to what he saw. He would act like the characters and have nightmares
if he watched something intense. When he was this young, that just meant not
having the TV on a channel where this might show up and not bringing those
videos into the house. I feel like it was more management than anything.

Now (he's seven), if he's not so affected and he leaves the room for scary
parts. He still picks up an occassional behavior he's seen, but it doesn't
usually last long. I see it as sort of an acting thing, trying it on for size.
If it's inappropriate, I tell him so.

The only movie I've "censored" lately is Lilo and Stitch, I didn't take him
to see it at the movies. He would have acted like Stitch, all crazy. But he
didn't ask, hasn't asked to rent it or anything, so have I really censored it?
I just didn't suggest it. He's gained enough maturity since the movie came
out that if he saw it now, I would only have an hour or two of Stitch-ness
instead of days.

Leslie


Re: television

Fetteroll <fetteroll@...>
 

on 10/17/03 6:17 PM, fishierich@aol.com at fishierich@aol.com wrote:

Having the television on
all day is not something I want and I live here too.
Did they turn it on themselves and watch it all day? For how many months?
What other things did they have in their lives that they enjoyed doing that
were available to them? Did you take them out to places and were they
unhappy and wanting to get back to the TV? How much did you watch with them?
How much were they left to themselves?

Having the television on
all day is not something I want and I live here too.
And if they did want it on all day and you didn't then there are two sets of
incompatible desires. And the solution to that dilemma you're modeling for
your kids is that bigger, stronger people get to have what they want and
smaller, weaker people get the shaft.

If we spent our childhoods doing what our parents wanted us to do and we
enter adulthood (and then parenthood) trying to fulfill the need to do what
we want, then we pass that legacy of neediness and unhappiness onto our
children. And our relationship with our kids isn't as joyful as it could be
because using our power to get our way creates an adversarial relationship
with them.

It's helpful in terms of building a relationship to recognize that children
have no power over the world. All the power they wield is what they get
through us.

If our goal is to have our own way, then having kids isn't a good way to
achieve that. If our goal is to help our kids (give them the power to) get
what they want in life -- which is the goal of unschooling -- then we need
to recognize when we're being our own roadblock to our goal.

Blocking our children's access to something they like (TV) is being a
roadblock to our goal. If you set your sights on helping them get what they
want out of life, then the things you want your way won't seem as important
as they did in the past.

That doesn't mean we should set our needs aside entirely. If we don't
respect ourselves, our kids won't respect us either. But it doesn't help our
relationship if we take away our kids power (that they're getting through
us) in order to respect ourselves.

My opinion may change as
they grow older. They will have to make their own choices.
The more help and practice they have when they're younger trying to get what
they want (on things that aren't dangerous), the easier it will be when they
have the power and freedom to do whatever they want with choices that are
dangerous.

Learning how to make choices between TV shows is much safer than learning
how to make choices when cars and alcohol are available.

Do you think at 4
years my daughter should be the one deciding what shows to watch?
Yes.

At 4 does she go to the adult section of the library and pull out The Joy of
Sex and full color photos of war? Those things just don't interest kids.

My daughter has always been able to choose what she wanted to watch. She
didn't much care about flipping through channels at 4 but by 6 she would
search for the stations that had cartoons. She'd pass by anything live
action.

There isn't any reason for little kids to be watching shows that we fear
they'll watch. They won't want to see the news or sex or violence. It just
doesn't interest them. (And if it does, then it's likely there's something
else going on in their lives that they need help with.)

(There are, though, kids who develop deep compassion early who can be upset
by images of people being mean to each other. Rather than avoiding TV, we
can help them have power over TV by helping them figure out ways to get to
what they want on TV while avoiding seeing the things they don't want to
see.)

What about the influence of commercial TV? Do you not think that has an
affect on the gimmes and yes I did read about 'Magical Thinking and Spoiled
Children' and agree completely. So does that mean I should not worry about
commercial TV?
You can talk about advertisements with them to give them power over them.

I think it's more helpful to use commercials for things the kids don't want
-- adult stuff like laundry detergent and toys that don't interest them --
for discussion rather than using the commercials for things they want. If we
use commercials for things they want the kids will recognize the agenda
isn't commercial awarenes but is really about convincing them they're being
decieved and manipulated into wanting that product.

What about the news or just the news flashes? Regular prime-time news
coverage is not really something a 4 year old needs to hear about let alone a
29 year old.
My daughter has told me that news flashes don't seem real to her. And we've
talked about that being advertising for the news. The stations want us to
watch the news so they make it sound like the sky is falling so we'll feel
like we have to watch it.

Is there a place for me in the chat group with my views on TV or should I
reconsider my involvement in this chat group?
As in a place where people can comfortably share the walls they've built up
around their fears rather than examining whether those fears have
foundations and discussing ways to deal with the fears?

Building and maintaining walls against what we fear is always much easier
than examining and dealing with fears. But walls give power to the things we
fear beyond what they have. Knowledge helps us understand what the true
power is of the things we fear and gives us power over them.

Joyce


Re: registered of not in NC

Tuckervill@...
 

In a message dated 10/18/2003 8:06:53 AM Central Daylight Time,
genant2@aol.com writes:
I guess I figure if I am complying with the
law then it really doesn't matter if they visit or not.

~~~

But I wouldn't allow them to visit, on principle. Invasive and unnecessary.
Accomplishes NOTHING.

Tuck


Re: registered of not in NC

genant2@...
 

In a message dated 10/17/03 12:18:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Dnowens@aol.com writes:

I don't understand the point. If there is no grade level requirement, then
you could just have your kids take the lowest grade level offered. If there
is
no minimum scoring then it doesn't matter what test level kids take. And if
you
don't have to report the scores then isn't that just a waste of a tree? (Not

that it isn't already) Where is the logic?
You would have to ask the state. I just comply with the law because I feel
it is very easy to do and don't want any more requirements. The law is just
very vague.
Pam G


Re: registered of not in NC

genant2@...
 

In a message dated 10/17/03 9:53:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Leslie530@aol.com writes:

Does anyone know about this? I'm all for doing the least the law requires,

but don't want a home visit. My friend is very concerned and considering
sending in the paperwork.

They send out this post card after you have been homeschooling a couple of
years. You send it in also to state how many children are currently enrolled in
your homeschool. Not by name but by age and gender. And yes that is what it
says. But it does not say your chances of a visit increase it says you are
willing to have a home visit. The Notice of intent says that as well. (that
you agree to a home visit). I know people who have sent it in both ways saying
they will send the info in and not send it in and still don't know anyone that
has had a home visit. This is a voluntary thing to send the info to the
state. It says this on the paper. I guess I figure if I am complying with the
law then it really doesn't matter if they visit or not.

They have three people who work in the NC DNPE and that covers private
schools as well. Sometime at the end of the year you will see a notice going around
from the department asking for volunteers to help file int he office. I do
believe that is to help file all that paperwork from the thousands of people
who chose to voluntary send int he information. They ask for attendance
records, and test results.

Pam G


Re: television

kstjonn <kara@...>
 

Too long to get into but we don't have access to satellite TV. But
we have an extensive movie collection. My nearly five yr old can get
out her own DVDs and put them in whenever she wants. And some may
say that it's not a real choice, since we chose the movies. But there
again, Soph makes the choices when we shop. Of course, we also buy
things when she is not with us, so there are always lots of choices
she may have not even known about or seen in a store or online. My
husband travels a lot and always comes home with a suitcase full of
movies (and books and toys and .... LOL). Yes, my daughter acts out
what she sees in a movie, but she does that with books too, should I
limit her reading time and book choices? She acts out things she
sees in her everyday life. This is how she processes and learns. She
adds her own flavor to these scenarios and changes things around to
get a diff. outcome.


Re: television

fishierich@...
 

In a message dated 10/17/03 8:30:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@aol.com writes:
You're welcome to stay in this group, but if you express your views they
probably WILL be questioned and dissected.
Well, isn't this why I'm hear to broaden my views and opinions. Which will
hopefully make me a more open minded parent/person. I like the idea of people
giving honest opinions on subjects. No one said I had to agree; but I'm willing
to think about it.
Margaret


Re: Emulating Arthur (was: television)

Nancy Wooton <ikonstitcher@...>
 

on 10/17/03 4:22 PM, M. Dalrymple-Lepore at si1verkitten@mac.com wrote:

Yeah, I've had times when my little guy emulated the less-wonderful
parts of Arthur. But to be honest, I was grateful for the opportunity
to talk to him about it. I mean, I don't believe in sitting a 5 yr old
down and lecturing him on sexism because I had a whim one day-- but if
he emulates sexist behavior, suddenly it's relevant and not
preachy/schoolish for me to explain why that might hurt someone's
feelings (say, MINE) briefly, and go on with our lives.

So that's what has worked in our house. Your mileage may vary.
If you're leaving your kids alone to be babysat by the TV while you spend
your day on the internet ;-))) that's one thing; I think watching with them
can be a valuable introduction to issues they might not encounter as
homeschoolers.

For example, my dd started watching ER with me when she was about 12. Dad
would play board games with ds, then about 9, while Laura and I had "ER
Night." One episode featured a 14 y.o. who was pregnant. This opened a
discussion following Laura's wide-eyed "She's *14*?" which included topics
like compassion for young out-of-wedlock mothers (my maternal grandmother
conceived my mom at 14), abortion, birth control, STD's, waiting until
you're truly ready, etc. All during the commercial break <ggg>

Nancy
(but I hated that Arthur show ;-) (and I told them if they started talking
like SouthPark, they couldn't watch it anymore -- then they started
imitating Cartman so perfectly, I couldn't stop laughing long enough to nuke
'em!)