I'm only a bit younger, and I don't mind it at all. We can have pretty crude humor around here, though. Growing up, my dad was a bit proper and my mom got a kick out of using potty humor to make him blush. Now, my DH is a bit proper and the boys and I get a kick out of making HIM blush, too. :D He'll eventually break down and join in, usually topping all of us to much laughter. We're much more polite in public! My youngest coined the term "Pootsniggle." When he was little he would come up to you, looking so sweet and loving. He crawl up in your lap and wrap his arms around your neck and kiss your cheek, just the sweetest little boy. Then he would whisper softly in your ear, "Mommy, I just pootsniggled you," followed by letting one rip right on your lap. Then he would jump down and run off laughing hysterically. I believe a pootsniggle was his combination of poot and snuggle. :lol: My grandma always called them tree frogs. DH's dad calls them barking spiders, which I had never heard before.

I have no phobias for anything real. Spiders, snakes, heights, water, bridges, enclosed places are all fine. Zombies, or as DH and the kids refer to them around me, the Z-word are another thing altogether. One of my kids pretending to be one all goofy-like will freak me out. This whole zombie fad right now is driving me crazy. I'm glad I rarely watch tv, but when I do it's usually Sy-Fy and they always seem to be advertising some Z-flick. It's so bad, I leave the room for every commercial break just in case. We went to a scout haunted hike one year and Z's came busting out of the woods at us. I grabbed my friend's 17 year old son and threw him toward the Z's while I took off running. He and his mom still like to laugh at me for that one! :blushing:

Depends on the variables. If his team needs him, then he gets to go. If they can survive without him and he isn't that keen on it, then he can hang with grandpa. It sounds like your game is a parent-child scrimmage thing? If so, that's valuable bonding time with a preteen, and that can really pay dividends as you enter the rocky teen years so it's not a fully selfish choice. Personally, I would talk it over with him then come to a decision. In my family, children do not come first, we are all equals and we all come first. We decide together what will work best for the family. Both children and adults make sacrifices for each other, and that strengthens our family bond. We would discuss it, both rank how important we each felt our respective games were, and discuss options. Perhaps he'd be thrilled to have some one-on-one practice time with just you at the park later in the week, or maybe another special activity. On the other hand, maybe he ranks his game a 10 on the want-to-do scale, so this time you must sacrifice your want. Families are give and take, even though it may not always feel fair.

Here, Boys and Girls clubs are more of a miniature YMCA/rec center aimed at low income youth (although all young people are welcome), and have all the same requirements. They have day care programs, but they are more to provide a safe place for kids to hang out and have fun. They might be different in different areas, but I hope not so you can enjoy safe, low cost swimming! :001_smile:

Are you sure you would be alone? I would think insurance requires there to be employees there at all times. I know any public pool here (Such as the YMCA or city pools) cannot operate without a life guard on duty. Not because of city code, but for insurance purposes.

There's also people that scam. They flag you, hope you don't notice the post is gone, then they make a lowball offer a week or two later. They hope you are bummed at no offers and willing to accept their ridiculous offer. There are also people that are selling something similar, so they go through and flag everyone selling something similar. :glare:

It just depends on so many variables: 1) What is a homestead to you? Is it big and fully self-sufficient, or small and only partly so? 2)How labor and time intensive is your work? What about your other responsibilities? 3)Would you be going it alone or do you have help? Children, relatives a supportive spouse? 4)What is your personal energy level? Are you highly motivated and driven, or do you like to kick back and relax often? 5)How organized are you? 6)How creative are you? Cost really depends on creativity. My two cents for the above: 1) For us, in this season of our life, our homestead is our city lot. We grow all our own produce except for some fruit in a large garden, we raise ducks for our own eggs. We have a root cellar for preservation and we can the summer bounty. We will be adding more fruit trees next year. We do have to buy meat, dairy and baking staples, but we DIY what we can (making our own yogurt, bread, etc). If our city every legalizes goats, we will likely wean off meat and only need to purchase baking staples, like flour. 2)DH and I both work full time, but we are self-employed and work from home, so we can juggle our schedules as needed. We also homeschool and have active kids, so this eats up time as well. We still manage to fit in all the chores each week. Our jobs aren't labor intensive, so we aren't ever to physically tired for the homestead chores. 3)I have help. DH and both our children help out with chores. I couldn't do it alone, work and homeschool. 4)I am a high energy person, DH is not. My version of relaxation is to be engaged in a project, his is zoning out on TV. In other words, I prefer active relaxation and he prefers passive relaxation. If were both passive relaxers, I don't think we could do it. 5)Once again, I am a highly organized person. I make lists and actually complete them. I am good at time management. 6)Both DH and I are creative, and our homesteading costs us very little. We scavenge, scrounge and build things ourselves. We are easily self-taught people so can teach ourselves the skills we need from books, friends and the internet. We are also lucky with good soil (thanks, Mt. St. Helens!), which can be the biggest start up cost for many. We are currently collecting old discarded windows for a greenhouse. So in short, yes, I think it's possible for some people, especially on a small scale. Most importantly, start small. Start where you are. It's a marathon, not a race, and you can build your homesteading stamina as you go. :)

I didn't use the term blind respect in error. I really mean that the message I think we sometimes inadvertently send is that respect and blind obedience mean the exact same thing. I can't count the amount of times I heard "you must respect your teacher, coach, grandmother, etc," when the adult telling me this meant "You must obey your teacher, etc." Now, my older son, who is 12, was reading over my shoulder and quipped, "Eh, you're making this too difficult. Put respect on a 10 point scale. Some people deserve a 10 while others deserve a 1, with most deserving a 5, so I try to default to a 5 for everyone and adjust it as I get to know them better. But every once in awhile you run into a math genius that understands negative numbers and achieves a -10 instead." :lol:

This is exactly it, I think! I'm not sure if I missed the lesson as a child, didn't understand it, or if it was never intended, but I spent my childhood believing that you don't question authority, but give respect to everyone with authority and all adults. I wanted to be a good kid, but I always felt like a bad kid because I couldn't help but question. Not with my parents because they encouraged questioning, but the other adults in my life (including grandparents, teachers and other friend's parents) would accuse me of being disrespectful, even when I took great pains to phrase questions in ways that wouldn't offend. Eventually, as a teenager, I quit caring if I offended and became quite the brat that questioned authority even when I agreed with them. For me at least, it was confusing message that I missed early on and had to learn as an adult! I agree with Tammy, we must model what we mean. But I know I am guilty of not always modeling it, or even better, explaining it in plain terms to my kids, because for me it seems like common sense and I assume they already understand what I mean! I think it's easy to forget that our kids are just learning these things and often take what we say literally and at face value, missing the deeper nuances we as adults take for granted as common knowledge.

I used the word "blind" because blind respect is what I was wondering about. Not courtesy, politeness, etc. But the true, first dictionary meaning of the word respect. The way people bandy about the term respect it sounds like it means blind respect. Extreme examples: Joe is the boss so Joe gets respect, even though he is a jerk. Tammy is 75 years old, so she needs respect even if she kills kittens and spits on babies. I know that none of us actually believe that Joe and Tammy deserve respect because of this, but we tell our kids they do every time we tell them to respect their elders. We also confuse them when we then turn around and say respect is earned. We know what we mean. We know we mean respectful behavior and not the deeper meaning of real respect. But our kids may not realize this nuance. We may not be proponents of blind respect, but the message we may be inadvertently sending our kids is one of blind respect. And how can a kid question what we really mean, if they have been lead to believe, even erroneously, that questioning equals disrespect?

Hmm, lots of food for thought, but I am going to guess that most people see respect as basic courtesy, while I do think it is a deeper thing. Saying a 7 year old is a child doesn't deserve respect because of his age becomes tricky when the 7 year old is in the position of authority. For example, he was the teacher and the adults were the students, and the students were disrespecting him because of his age, not because of his knowledge or teaching ability. If he had been 27, or even 17, he probably would have been treated better, if not with respect at least with courtesy. Not all children behave as immature children, and not all adults behave as mature adults. Deference and respect are different things, although my dictionary lists them as synonyms they have distinct definitions. The definition of deference is "humble submission or courteous yielding to the opinion, wishes, or judgment of another." The definition of respect specifically states it is granted because of "abilities, qualities or achievements." To me, there is no age requirement for this. I can respect a two year old for their artistic ability or creativity, and I can respect a renowned 80 year old painter for the same thing. The 80 year old doesn't deserve more because he is 80, although he may deserve more respect because he has had the time and experience to develop his skill further than the two year old.

Once upon a time I could probably have agreed with the respecting elders because they have lived a long time thing, but not anymore. Living a long life is no longer an achievement granted only to the smarter/healthier/luckier. With modern medicine, any fool can have a long life! :D A long life no longer necessarily means more experience, considering many younger people have more experience in the world and with other people than some in the older generation. Yes, be courteous to your elders, but I expect the elders to show the same courtesy to me or my kids, and I have met many that don't because they see respect as a one way street that's only earned by age. :glare:

Not to quibble, but I don't agree with this. I think it comes down the courtesy/respect confusion. I've know people that didn't respect me whom I have respected. For example, my father has a specialist that is rude, talks down to you, and isn't very pleasant. But she is very, very good at her job and has saved his life three times. I respect her as a surgeon but I am sure she doesn't respect me. Now if you are courteous, I do think it is easier to earn people's respect. If there were two surgeons of equal skill, I would be more likely to respect the polite one than the rude one.

I mean this along the lines "Respect your elders!" type comments. I'm sorry if I ramble on a bit, I think I am trying to just get my own thoughts in order because I see many more of these conversations with DS in my future! My dad shared an exchange he had with DS7 this weekend that tickled him. First, my son and dad are cut from the exact same cloth and often have pretty deep conversations. As dad tells it, they were rough housing and my dad said to son playfully, "you have to earn my respect!" DS instantly stopped and asked, "Why? I have to respect you because you're old but I have to earn it because I'm a kid?" This ended with them having a deep conversation about respect, and even looking up the real definition in the dictionary (definition: A feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements). They came to the conclusion that everyone has to earn respect, old and young alike, and instead it would be better to say "be courteous to your elders" instead of "respect your elders." I remember having trouble with the blind respect aspect shoved down my throat by teachers as a kid, and even serving detention once for telling a teacher they had to earn my respect. After discussing this with my dad, we both agreed that these two 'respect' phrases are overused and misused. Dad told me point blank that he hopes I don't raise overly respectful kids -- kind, courteous, polite ones yes -- but not the type of kids that respects elders or authority figures blindly. He admitted he had never though about it before DS's questions. Now, DS7 is advanced for his age and had issues with people not giving him respect this summer, so I think this topic is very fresh in his mind. He teaches kids and adults in an outreach program about the night sky, giving them tours with his telescope. He is the only child teaching at these events. He is used to the other adults teaching to treat him like a knowledgeable person and an equal, and he gets upset when the adult students don't do the same thing and they argue with him over facts or talk down to him like he's a kid (which he is, true). He is also friends with a real scientist who also treats him with respect and as an intellectual equal, and not just as a silly kid. He doesn't get why he is supposed to be respectful to someone because of their age, when half the time they can't even treat him with courtesy because of his age. He knows not everyone follows these rules, because he has adults in his life (his fellow teachers, the scientist, hopefully us!) that treat him with respect. He also feels that in these circles at least, he has earned respect. DS told my dad that he thinks people should respect him an astronomer, but they probably shouldn't respect him as a football player because he's bad at it so he doesn't even try. Yet, I'm guilty of the whole blind respect thing. I've told him many times to respect his elders in one or another. I think as adults we don't put the weight on the word that it actually has, and we really do mean be courteous and polite instead. But my literal kid and literal dad don't see it that way. Respect is a heavy word, reserved for those that achieve great things, do hard jobs, or stand above the rest in their behavior or knowledge. So what do you think? Do you teach blind respect for elders or authority figures? Do you teach what real respect is then reinforce that everyone, regardless of respect, deserves courtesy, and that being courteous is one way to begin earning other's respect. Or maybe, dad and I are just reading way too much into a single word and we should get a hobby? :D

We also have a weekend-only rule, unless they are watching something school-related or it's a special movie or similar. They no longer ask for screen time. DS12's computer time isn't really regulated, but that's because he only uses it to research projects he's making, read up on film making techniques, or to edit his movies. All online games fall under the weekend-only rule. These rules are in effect year-round. We occasionally give extra time during the week for great behavior or if we've been cooped up inside due to weather for several days. It's easy enough to implement. The kids don't have screens in their room and we only have one television. DH or I would be aware if they were trying to sneak games or TV. All the computers are password locked, except DS12's, which is in my husband's office. The first month is the hardest. We refused to entertain them during the transition period. Let them be bored! After a few days of moping around the house they began to think more creatively and they are now rarely bored. Honestly, DS12 was the only one with addictive behavior towards TV and games, and it was hardest on him when we began limiting it a couple of years ago. DS7 could probably handle unlimited access. He can only handle about 30 minutes of TV or games before he becomes bored with it, even when he is in a situation with free access, such as at grandma's. he just isn't one for passive entertainment.

I've never heard anyone describe me as "nice" and I probably wouldn't use that description either. Blunt, honest, fun, sarcastic is more the norm. I answered other, though, because I wouldn't consider myself nasty. To me, nasty is being mean or hurtful just for the sake of being mean or hurtful. If someone asks my opinion, they will get it. I will word it kindly but I won't sugar coat it. Oddly enough, my friends and family ask my opinion often because they know they'll get the truth and I'm not trying to be mean. I'll help a stranger but I may laugh to my husband later about what an idiot they were to get themselves in the situation in the first place (I'd expect the same of them if the roles were reversed). I generally think the best of others, and they generally pull through on those expectations. But, conversely, I don't have seriously high expectations in general so they're easy to meet. I will not suffer fools and I'll state as much to the fool if they can't take a subtle hint. I sometimes think pretty horrible things about others or things. I'm a Buddhist and don't believe in any divine beings, although I still have morals, but have no issues not acting upon those thoughts. (Well, except for the time we egged this snobby, cruel chick's car in high school. I still don't regret it!)

That sets off all sorts of red flags with me. i have no experience with AHG, although I have plenty of experience with the other scouting movements. Generally, open door policies are encouraged and parents are never excluded because of child safety issues. With older kids, we usually encourage parents to wait in another room, but our meeting room remains open and parents are encouraged to walk in and observe, but not interfere, whenever they like. I would find out the exact rules of the parent organization. It could be the leaders misunderstood the leadership requirements. Most scouting organizations have rules that all volunteers must have background checks, but parents attending only with their child and not acting in a volunteer capacity don't have to submit to checks or volunteer requirements. It could also be they are short on volunteers and this is their way of trying to strong arm people into volunteering.

I had to bulldoze out my son's room. We struck a deal -- he loaded up a laundry basket with the must keep items, then I had at it without him. I boxed things up and put them away. We followed a simple rule. We introduced a new box back into his room for every two weeks he kept the room clean. Once he had trouble keeping it up again, we stopped reintroducing his stuff back in. He can trade out a box of items for a new box in the basement whenever he likes. We also have cleanup time every evening and boys' rooms must pass inspection. We rarely inspect my older son's room in practice, because he is neat, but we must inspect my younger one's. In my experience, weekly cleaning just doesn't work and it needs to be nightly. It's a bit messy again but I'm not worrying about it too much because we are doing a surprise room makeover for him this weekend, which will result in more storage for him. We do a yearly clean out every year before the holidays, so I'm just doing it a few weeks early this year!

DH and I are self-employed in a field that doesn't limit our clients by geographical area (writing and graphic design), so we were able to keep ahead of the recession by simply broadening our client base. Most of those I know who are thriving right now are self-employed, or in a science, tech or engineering field and not afraid to move to follow the jobs. Thinks are picking up here in Eastern Washington, according to the news. There aren't enough homes on the market for people looking to buy, so construction is picking up again. Medical is big as well, although I think the lower level medical fields (such as Xray techs and others that required shorter schooling) are over flowing with applicants because that's what everyone went back to school for two years ago after they went on unemployment. We desperately need more nurses, I've heard. As for anecdotal evidence, all the empty slots in the strip malls are filling up with mom and pops. I told DH when the recession first got rolling to watch those storefronts. That there were plenty of people living without debt that would bide their time until leases hit rock bottom then they would pounce on the opportunity to start or expand their business. Judging by the amount of small businesses popping up, I was right. I'm also pleasantly surprised to see they aren't all restaurants!

There really is no way of knowing until they come out. I only had two out and it was a pain worse than child birth, especially considering it lasted several weeks. Dentist said I had corkscrew roots, that were working their way into the bone. I couldn't eat solid food for over two weeks and literally thought I was going to die (and I have a very high pain tolerance). It's the only dental work I have ever needed and for that I am forever grateful. DH had all four out at once, two were impacted. He was fine and eating a hamburger the next day. :confused:

Here's a no-milk biscuit recipe: http://www.cooks.com/rec/view/0,1816,158165-229196,00.html It's for roll-out biscuits so you will need to increase the water to one cup for drop biscuits. As long as your recipe uses baking powder and not baking soda you should be able to leave out the milk. It may affect the richness, but it shouldn't affect rising. If the recipe uses baking powder, you will need milk in it (usually butter milk or sour milk) for the proper chemical reaction, if I remember correctly.

Sewingmama: STEM means science, technology, engineering and math. :001_smile: I don't know what the school's are doing, but I fear it won't be too much and will result in a lot of wheel spinning. At the musuem, we are trying to reach kids in early elementary. Not with hard science, math, etc, but with fun stuff that makes them ask questions and wonder why. Then we have lots and lots of volunteers and docents around to help them explore the why. I don't know a lot about their outreach to the local schools, but I assume it's similar. How it's implemented in the schools? All I see is teachers leading kids around the hands-on exhibits while the kids scribble notes down. :glare: Not exactly in the spirit of what we're trying to do. The theory with those in STEM outreach seems to be to start the spark early, before textbooks and drills turn kids off the subjects entirely. From my own viewpoint the focus in recent years on literacy has sucked the actual science from science lessons in the schools. Kids don't learn about science, they learn to read about science using boring, dry materials. All early elementary subjects are tied back into literacy, which I agree is important (I'm a writer by trade after all!) but sometimes science just needs to be science. By the time they get to a place in the educational system where science becomes more interesting, they are already completely turned off. It's also a goal to remove many of the negative nerd stereotypes that prevent many teens from pursuing STEM interests later. Many of the liberal arts fields are overflowing with brilliant minds but not enough jobs. The hope is some of those brilliant minds may discover a love for a STEM field younger and choose a career there instead.

Thank you for the link to Rachel West's essay. Although i don't agree with everything West says, either, it was not the rabid anti-homeschooling entreaty the NR article led me to believe. It further cements that the NR article is utter tripe. The quotes were most definitely cherry-picked to make a partisan point. I wonder why this quote from West's essay wasn't used in the NR article? "Second, although I will be criticizing the right to completely deregulated homeschooling, I do not mean to deny for a moment that homeschooling itself is often--maybe usually--successful, when done responsibly. Passionately involved and loving parents, whether religious or not, can often better educate their children in small tutorials at home, than can cash-strapped, under-motivated, inadequately supported, and overwhelmed public school teachers with too many students in their classrooms. Results bear this out, as homeschool advocates repeatedly point out (and as critics virtually never deny): the homeschooled children who are tested, or who take college boards, whether or not religious, perhaps surprisingly, perhaps not, do very well on standardized tests, and on the average, they do better than their public school counterparts (though it must be noted that the parents and children who voluntarily subject themselves to testing are the self-selected educational elite of the homeschooling movement). My target is not the practice of homeschooling, whether religious or secular. My target, rather, is unregulated homeschooling--the total abdication of responsibility by the states for regulating the practice. The right to unregulated homeschooling visits quite concrete harms on the homeschooled children themselves, the mothers who are teaching them, and the often rural and isolated communities in which they are raised and taught." (bolding mine)

The problem isn't new, the focus isn't new, it's the acronym that's new. The truth is that US ranks very far behind other first world nations in STEM related education, and we are turning out far less. I don't have the numbers handy (the book by Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Space Chronicles, lays out the case very well), but we are way at the bottom of the pile. Yet, we have jobs for graduates in these subjects, but not enough applicants. So, we bring in scientists, engineers, and mathematicians from outside of the country to fill those jobs. Yes, we have to do that even during a recession because we aren't growing our own scientists anymore. Unfortunately, I agree that the new STEM focus is just lip service to a problem, in both institutions and homeschools. I volunteer at a science center on their homeschool advisory board, and many homeschoolers I meet also fall into the trap of teaching to the test, it's just the test is to know enough about the STEM subjects to get into college "because college will teach them all that math and science stuff." Unfortunately in many cases, the spark for math and science has to be sparked fairly young in someone for them to become the type of thinker that can really excel in a STEM field and college is often too late. Plus, many (not all) liberal arts schools are easier to get into and more affordable than STEM universities. So we end up with a million out-of-work English and history majors when we need two million scientists, engineers and mathematicians. Almost every single professional field needs graduates with STEM knowledge anymore. You can't be a successful publisher without some tech knowledge (digital publishing). You can't study history without a solid basis in science and tech (think forensic history). NASA receives a half cent of every tax dollar, which is very little, yet most people think they are over-funded. :confused: Sorry to ramble! This is just one of my pet passions and I run into so many scientifically and mathematically illiterate adults and young adults on a daily basis that it worries me. :eek: A bit of googling and I found an excerpt of the Tyson book, which at least gives the amount of US science graduates compared to Chinese: http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/perspectives/012148/by-the-numbers

With my oldest, by two we knew he was a righty. With my 7 year old? I'm 98 percent sure he is a righty when writing, although he sometimes switches to his left when drawing (but not when writing letters/numbers). He also plays sports with his left hand, and holds silverware with either hand. He went back and forth with which hand dominated until he was about five, now he is pretty ingrained with which hand he uses for which task. He's either selectively ambidextrous or a non-dominant righty (which I've never heard of :D ).