My DS has a sun-protection rashguard shirt--but not for modesty! THere's that much less of him to slather in sun cream. I really think that only 1 in 500 women look even vaguely attractive in a traditional tank or bikini. I've been that 1 in 500, and when I am, I don't mind wearing them. When I'm not, though, I LOVE the fact that there are new shirt-and-short options. :-) So for me, it's not modesty, though my bikinis are definitely those with more fabric, not less. Now that there are great sun-resistant fabrics, though, chances are low that I'll ever go back to more revealing styles.

Argh, yes. One poor girl... Well, I can't retell the whole story here, but she was SO modest and sweet and her DH was SO clueless that it wasn't until she was in a lot of (completely needless) pain that she broke down and asked for advice from other married women at the church. I swear, they should sell Christian s-x marriage manuals to explain some of these things...

Maybe I'm weird, but having a shirt rub against budding nipples was VERY uncomfortable for me. Once I turned 11, I couldn't imagine going without a "bra" even if it was basically shaped like two-pieces for little girls and offered no support because it protected against chafing. And I had no chest that didn't require a microscope to see until I was 13! I never, for a second, thought that wearing a bra was *inherently* "grown up," much less *s--ual.* Just about all middle schoolers wear bras, and they're far from grown up. And just about all adult women wear bras, no mater what their ages or level of s--ual activity. It'd be almost like finding socks inherently s--ual just because knee socks in some situations are meant to be titillating! I find it very strange to think of not wearing a bra as "helping girls stay young." It's a functional garment. When you have no chest but have buds, it's there to prevent chafing. When you have a little bit of a chest, it's there to prevent embarrassment in chilly situations, too. When you have a lot of a chest, it's there to make sure that chest stays permanently above the bellybutton as well as to prevent the culturally immodest appearance of unleashed, flying breasts. *g* Then, once you're married--well, then it has a very different additional function. But just because it has one function for some and not that for others doesn't mean that keeping girls out of bras keeps them from growing up too fast. If you have a need, then you wear a bra. That's all. *shrugs* You should get bigger shoes when you need them, too. I'm not sure why there's fear and denial involved at all, and the possibility of shame just plain disturbs me. I would be VERY concerned about the possibility of teaching my children that they should be ashamed of the changes their bodies go through and giving them the impression that there's something wrong about it. There's a huge difference between a Biblical modesty and shame at being immodest in front of strangers, for instance, and being unable to even talk about BRAS with one's own children or mother.

Wow. Ironing a shower curtain? If someone--even my mom--doesn't like the way I keep my house, my response is, "Okay. You want to clean it?" And if they do--GREAT! Of course it helps that my house is roughly two orders of magnitude cleaner than my MIL's, mainly because I loathe clutter and she hasn't met a knick-knack she doesn't like, and my mom and I get along great. ;-) But I iron shower curtains for NO ONE!

Only the 5-y-o is a fluent reader! *sighs* Thanks, though! It'd be great if they had an audio preview, too.

The very easiest thing to do would be to do Latin now through Rosetta Stone and then Artes Latinae (both computer-based, with no teacher requires) and then have them take Spanish at the community college. Or you can do The Learnables or one of a bazillion other teacher-free Spanish programs and, again, have them take Spanish at the community college high school to make sure their education is up to snuff. If you don't like foreign language, I really wouldn't do Greek. WHATEVER you choose, I'd do only one language for an entire year and would add no more than one language a year.

I work full time from home. Free time? We don't need no stinkin' free time! ;-)

First, fairy tales are probably the most fundamental part of our Western consciousness. So they're important for that reason. They permeate our culture--literature, movies, even music and dance. Second, fairy tales are the single best way to train the inner "story" ear to understand at a deep level the story patterns of the West. Third, there are many gorgeous versions that are valuable for their literary merit or the art that accompanies them. Fairy tales were a major part of my babysitting arsenal. I picked the story for the kid. Kids would love to dress up and act them out as I told them. I am not insensitive to the sexism of fairytales. Male virtues are almost always active (fighting, adventuring, cleverness, etc.), while female virtues, even when a long journey is involved, are generally passive (patience, endurance of suffering, and unselfishness). But I think they can be dealt with through discussion.

I won't assign them. I prefer to have the most authentic experience possible--with as little watering down as possible. So much of the value in a work of literature is in its language; the greater the distortion, the more of the value of the original is lost. This means unabridged always and in the original language when possible. I don't think children are naturally "scared" of classics and must be acclimatized to them through multiple exposures. In fact, I'm cautious of making the real thing seem boring when they get around to it by spoiling the surprise. My exceptions to this rule are A) things that I know I'm never going to assign in the original, B) things that don't have LITERARY value, or C) the Bible. I would never take away a simplified version that the kids wanted to read, though! (There is a difference between a piece that is "great" because of its literary value versus its historical value or scientific content. I'm a lot looser on the latter! I'd never argue for the really, really great value of Herodotus or Euclid in Greek, for example!) There's a finite amount of time for reading in the lower grades and a great number of excellent books that are written for children that have every bit as much literary value as adult books. I prefer to have the children read those than a simplified classic.

I don't know. I'll find out, I guess. It's really unnatural, though. I think it's an artifact of the ignorance of the people making the software. :-/ I do wish they had a short form of the guided exercise. I have a 4-year-old and 5-year-old doing it who really NEED to have the presentation before having to guess at the answer--otherwise they'll freeze up--but the repetition of that setting is mind-numbing to them. It's insane. I'm not sure WHO they though needed that many repetitions, but when kids that young are groaning and going eye-glazed, it's a bad thing. I'm going to have to figure something out to modify it--that or risk turning their poor little brains to jelly.

I definitely would NOT. I'm using them with two Kindergärtners--I'd use them up to maybe 4th or 5th grade, but I wouldn't even stretch it to 6th. Too lite weight for that. (We're also spending a bit less than half a year on each--WITH tons of enrichment, too.)

RS is THE best K program out there, period. :-) It is so elegantly conceptualized and so brilliantly set up to lead from one concept to the next--it's wonderful. I love Singapore primary, but EB just isn't well organized, and they spend soooo many pages on writing the numbers in EB 2 that it's really annoying. It's also a bit cluttered and chaotic--the exact opposite of Singapore primary. DS has lots of fun in Singapore EB, but he LEARNED in RS. Edit: The key to being successful with RS is to think about what you're teaching as the adult. I've heard so many people say that their kids slow WAY down in RS B around lesson 35-45, but I've found that if you really teach the material that comes before so the kids always have the deepest understanding at every step, this doesn't need to be the case.

I have to agree with what most of the others said except not so much on the re-imagined "trivium." I describe myself as a "classical" educator because that's something that people understand, but I'm not in the least offended by people who get...um...very DEFINITE about my not being one. *ahem* Because really, I'm not. I'm a Renaissance-man educator, but people don't really get that without a big explanation, so I just say "classical." We spend way too much time on non-Western history and non-Western languages to be classical, much less our emphasis on fine arts, music, and science, none of which are emphasized in the British public school/American Latin school tradition that's the classical schooling heritage. We also don't care nearly enough about Latin--we'll do it, sure, but it'll be waaaaay down the list of priorities. I think a lot of people use the term "classical" because it's easy, like me. I think others don't know or care about making their education really, well, classical in truth and use it because they kind of follow TWTM, which is probably the least "classical" of all the "classical" education books. *shrugs* I just don't have anything emotionally invested in the term.

As opposed to union toughs? Right. Tell that to my friend whose new car was destroyed because he wouldn't vote to go union. Oh, yeah, and why not HIS friend who was blinded in one eye by a group of union bullies sent down from AFL-CIO? I have dealt with unions myself in a professional capacity (working as a buyer for GE Medical Systems and earlier in a paper mill with Kimberly-Clark). I've also also had run-ins, through my mother, with the NEA. My DH was forced to contribute to a union when he worked in a low-skilled job in high school. From those experiences, my opinion of modern American unions starts at "extortionist" and goes down from there. I refuse to shop in unionized grocery stores on principle. From DH's experiences, he strongly agrees.

I get access to RS for free, so I've used French, Mandarin, and Latin for me. I'm having my K-ers do RS Spanish as a part of Spanish class, and I discovered something disturbing when they moved to lesson 2. RS uses an unnatural form for describing action in the present tense. They use present progressive instead of simple present. This is a weird as doing the reverse in English. If native English speakers were describing what people are doing, they'd naturally say, for example, "The girls are walking." It would be odd to describe things in simple present, as in, "The girls walk." (For example, in response to the questions, "What are the girls doing?") People just don't talk like that. The opposite is true in Spanish. To put it another way, "Las muchachas caminan" would be translated in English more often as "The girls are walking" than "The girls walk" even though the "literal" meaning is the latter. It's just weird to use the form "Las muchachas estan caminando" the way we use the progressive in English. It isn't 100% WRONG, but it's not how native speakers use the language. This is a big problem with Rosetta Stone. To miss something this fundamental to a very widely-spoken language is quite serious. I think this is another mark against buying the software.

I've had three different people tell me, in almost exactly these words, "Your boobs are overachievers, just like the rest of you!" and fall over in hysterical laughter. :tongue_smilie: (Ok. So they're right. I am an anal overachiever. ;-) )

Biggerbras.com carries up to cup size L. I kid you not. Be prepared to spend, though! Victoria's Secret carries up to DD. They have typically no more than 2 hooks, so if you're bigger, it can haul on your shoulders. Lane Bryant carries a band size as small as 36 and cup size (for band size 36--other go bigger) up to DDD, but good luck finding that in the store. Their band sizes are a bit smaller than VS, too, so 34s at VS can typically get away with a 36 on the tightest setting. Their bras mostly have four hooks, which is easier on the shoulders. Felina USED to be my fave for pretty bras in large cup sizes for, um, grown up women. *g* The band sizes run a bit smaller than Victoria's Secret, and the cup sizes are a little bit bigger (with a smaller wire diameter corresponding with the smaller band size). But now it seems that they carry nothing larger than a D! Grrr. VS runs a bit smaller in the cup than most department store brands, but I don't think bra cup sizes have really changed in a long time. DDs and DDDs still look incredibly huge to me--until I put them on. Unfortunately, I start out big and when I get pregnant, my body decides it's best to prepare for breast-fed quintuplets, just in case, so I'm going to get to enjoy quite a range of huge bras this pregnancy. Last time, I hit 34I--yes, I--before I stopped measuring in horror. But this one-woman freak show loves biggerbras.com.

NEM is generally considered to be the best, if that makes a difference! Math Counts in particular is way watered down.

Email me privately, and I'll let you know! I use several pen names, though.

*sighs* Pejorative, I think you mean. You don't seem to get why it is significant that there is "women's fiction" and not "men's fiction" *even though* there are any number of subgroups of fiction produced by and for men. Wow. I really can't understand how you go from my post to such statements as "All woman novelists certainly do not write what you term as 'women's fiction.'" Um. Hello? Hon, I don't call it women's fiction. It's a genre term. I'm not protesting the existence of the books--I'm protesting the existence of such a label. I have no idea how you managed to misunderstand that, either. The fact that you feel it is an INFERIOR GENRE is the most telling statement of all. Amazing--and hilarious, considering what you're defending. Please note that I ALSO used the preterit tense, noting a historical fact, while you changed it to the present. I'm not sure if you are trying to misunderstand me on purpose or really don't understand. I'm not sure how you COULD misunderstand that badly and that consistently. I find it absolutely hilarious that you would go and denounce me for stating a historical fact (that women novelists had a bad name) and THEN go and make such broad-brushed, ignorant statements yourself about an entire group of books you have probably read little to none of. Now, the worst book that I have ever read in my life was a Harlequin Historical. However, Harlequin has also published some very good books. But books like that awful Harlequin Historical and more than two centuries of literary sexism combine to make people who have little to no experience with the books look down on them. Hmmm. Notice a parallel with UTC? To put it even more clearly: There are good Harlequin romances and bad Harlequin romances. Harriet Beecher Stowe was writing in a genre that was the 19th-century equivalent of Harlequin romances--sentimental fireside women's novels. Her work contributed to the genre's bad name and, by extension, to the bad name of all women novelists, giving weight to a sexist stereotyping that women would have had to fight against in any case. Your blind acceptance of these kinds of stereotypes as expressed above--not a recognition of what happened in the past but a present, active promulgation of them--is a great example of the legacy of Harriet Beecher Stowe and her ilk. I think you've JUST proven my point roughly a thousand times better than anything else could have. You'll probably manage to "misunderstand" this, too, but I don't care. I'm done with this conversation.

Oh, please. Women novelists had a horrible name in the 19th century. Anyone who knows the slightest bit about the history of the novel knows this. It is books like UTC that caused this--sloppy, soppy, contrived twaddle. I never said that women novelists are bad--exactly WHAT do you think I do for a living? I said they had a bad name. And they did. They still do--why do you think there's a genre of "women's fiction" but not one for "men's fiction"? Gotta segregate the "pretend" novels from the real ones, you know. (In case you don't realize, that's sarcasm.)

Two things: 5th-6th grade statistics and probability and geometry. These are covered beginning with NEM 1. Remember that Singapore doesn't repeat things from year to year, so there's not the "preview" that other programs have. Thermometer work is properly science, anyway. Caledar I do in social studies.

I'm studying it. DH is a native speaker, though he remembers more Cantonese now, and HE'S going to be responsible for teaching the boys, not me! (HA!)

I have to agree. Like The Jungle, it is heavy-handed and abominably written, but it's significant for its influence rather than its quality. It's horrible as literature, and it's worse as a representation of slavery. But it's important in the context of mythologizing the North's moral stance to justify their participation in the war. It, more than anything else, made the war "about slavery" when it was really about states' rights to regulate things *like* slavery--including the right to secede! Really, though, books like Uncle Tom's Cabin are what gave women novelists bad names.

The ones from Target are cheaper, though IKEA makes similar ones. :-) I really like the Target ones because they stack. I have two 3x3 ones for toys--they make 2x4 and 3x3. The 2x4 can also be set on its end. I love the boxes. You can get them at Home Depot or Lowes, too--I forgot which.