8circles
-
Posts
6,384 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by 8circles
-
-
Yes! Bragging rights. Putting those bumper stickers on the car, "I'm a honor roll parent." or whatever they say. We don't have those in Canada, but I've seen them in the US.
Honestly, most everyone has one around here. If they're seemingly handed out like candy, it's not really bragging, is it? ;)
(we don't have any such stickers. I expect we'll get some soon - my kids just started PS this year - but I'd have to find a big enough spot without any rust in order to get them to stick lol.)
-
I know a few IRL and some sound like they are online.
I think that there are definite outward positives that you can see from Tiger parenting. Sometimes there can be internal positives in building resilience.
But I wonder if these positives are worth the price that was paid and I'm sure that for some people it is and others it isn't. It isn't worth it to me to risk the negatives. I have heard more people regret parenting or being parented in the Tiger way than I've heard people regret not. I was Tiger parented and it did me no favors.
People also have different ideas of what it means to Tiger parent. Not Tiger parenting does not mean not pushing/challenging your kids or slacking.
-
Since sweet tea has been brought up...
Can anyone explain to me why it's so gross? :tongue_smilie: ;)
Up here, Lipton has apparently been selling sweet tea in their iced tea line. I accidentally purchased a case, thinking it was the usual iced tea for my secret splurge stash. I opened one up, expecting to satisfy my sweet tooth and got a big shock!
I'm having a hard time figuring out how one tea with sugar (well, in Lipton's case, HFCS, but there are plenty of brands with actual sugar) tastes so different from another tea with sugar.
I can't tell what you're even comparing lol.
You've got Lipton Iced Tea, which is what you usually buy and it's sweet. So it's sweetened iced tea, yes?
Then you've got Lipton Sweet Tea, which you accidentally bought and it's... way sweeter than just sweetened iced tea?
I just always thought Sweet Tea was uber sweet - like way more than just sweetened iced tea. But I've never had it & don't care for iced tea of any kind.
-
I think I am broken.
I am WI born and raised. I did live elsewhere for a handful of years, but not many. And I don't think I've ever heard the term hotdish. However, we are Catholic, so maybe that explains it.
It's definitely soda. And the game is "duck duck goose."
I've lived in WI for 10.5 years. Never heard hotdish except from transplants from MN.
-
-
I guess. Not common - heard a lot. But common - not strange, people don't think it's weird.
-
1
-
-
It looks normal to me, too, PeterPan.
I have definitely seen at least one of my kids doing exactly that during sleep and there has never been any suspicion of seizures or any ongoing medical problem.
-
2
-
-
I think actually I was talking to gardnmom, who was responding to me saying that I didn't think this was a particularly true statement by saying it was. So yeah, if you want to argue that something is indeed the case when someone disagrees, you do usually have to give some kind of reason or evidence or something more than just stating it is so.
I think it's generally odd when people are giving what is supposed to be expert advice and it has no empirical basis and they don't actually mention that. If I am trying to find out how to prevent my child from, say, getting in a car accident, I would like information that actually is likely to really help.
I think everyone is taught that sometimes, they have to do physical things to please others. I think everyone is taught social norms around things like greetings. They aren't necessarily all the same things, but it is not easy to draw any kind of line around things that will make children sure of their boundaries or that suddenly will make them question them, without being arbitrary. I don't really think the difference in effect has much to do with that - it's more likely about other elements in their relationships.
I also think there is a real risk that not giving clear direction around social touching, greetings, etc, is that leaves a lot more room for confusion and just being unsure of what is ok and what isn't. It's difficult to feel secure in an interaction under those circumstances - the fact is everyone feels uncomfortable all the time.
You are absolutely correct. You've out-logic-ed me.
-
No, you don't have to "show" anything. However, this idea that not teaching those kinds of social norms is repeated very commonly in advice in parenting magazines and such as a way to proof children against abuse. People repeat it in conversations like this as if it's something that's well known. And yet there really is no evidence that it is effective, or that those kinds of social norms have that kind of effect when you look at different societies.
Does it not seem kind of weird that something that appears on every "top 5 ways to keep your kid from being abused" is just something that some people think might make a difference to how kids think about things? Making a strong statement that it's true, best this is the way kids think, seems to be over-stating the case.
The other element is that it seems to imply that parents who do teach their kids to do things like shake hands are somehow being bad parents, or naive, and I've heard moms comment on that sort of thing as evidence of ignorant parenting.
You are the one that said I had to "show" something as if I were in a court of law.
We can all have different opinions on whether or not any of it is true or if anyone is overstating.
No, I don't think it's at all weird that "something that appears on every "top 5 ways to keep your kid from being abused" is just something that some people think might make a difference to how kids think about things". I'm not even sure what that means but I can't figure out why any of it would be weird. I can say with certainty that forcing these kinds of social norms was a very effective tactic in teaching me that there were things that I had to physically take part in whether I liked it or not in order to make someone else happy. And that ended up hurting me.
-
1
-
-
Given this information, I don't think he wanted a polite handshake... he wanted the kind of handshake that meant demonstrate that he is in control of the situation between you (and/or to prove he is in the right of the situation between you). I think you were able to infer the power-move content of him initiating the handshake.
It sounds like he was seeming to say, "I'm going to force you to either shake my hand (demonstrate that you have no problem with me) or not shake my hand (prove you are rude and vindictive). Either way, I win."
Does that interpretation fit with your perception? If so, that's not exactly case 1 or case 2 -- he's neither dangerous nor merely annoying... but controlling and power hungry in kind of a sociological way?
I agree with this assessment.
I personally would not allow someone to have that kind of power over me. So If I couldn't shake his hand and walk away and act as though it didn't bother me, I would literally just walk away from him.
-
2
-
-
The suggestion is there is some kind of causative effect or propensity. And if you want to show they are inappropriate or unhealthy, you have to actually show how that's the case.
Handshakes are a social norm, or un bec in Quebec. In some places so is grabbing people's butts and pretend it didn't happen. Does anyone actually say that the latter is the same as the former, or doing the former will lead to people accepting the latter? Is butt grabbing more common in places where people shake hands, as opposed to ones where there is no social touching?
Yes, I do believe that social norms that normalize unpleasant or "forced" (from the child's perspectve) physical actions can make it easier for for abusive behavior to exist.
No, I don't have to "show" anything because I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm having a chat with my online friends, not defending a dissertation. I believe these things from personal experience and that of many of my IRL friends. Teaching kids that their bodies are their own and they get to decide who and how to show affection is a good thing and IMO much more important than any social norms.
-
1
-
-
If he is truly creepy, not someone you just don't like, I think talking to your priest about him might be appropriate.
His behavior certainly puts him in a category of people I would be wary of.
-
2
-
-
Kissing grandma is just a social greeting norm. The same as any other. Telling kids old enough to comprehend the language that it is rude not to do it isn't going to make them unsure of their personal boundaries.
Making kids think they have to do anything any adult says, or else, is likely to cause issues, whatever the focus of the situation happens to be. And that type of attitude isn't likely to be about just one thing.
Kissing grandma might be the norm, oftentimes so is grandpa pinching your butt or Uncle Joe having private hugs. So, also, is it the norm to pretend these things don't happen. Because they're norms doesn't mean they're appropriate or healthy.
-
2
-
-
I don't follow sports and don't really know who Tom Brady is. I don't have a problem with lip-kissing. It comes very naturally to some kids - some of my kids do & some don't. Neither loves me more, they just have different personalities.
I think it's icky to ask for "better" affection from your child. It can be done in a purely playful way where the kisser doesn't feel pressured and the kissee doesn't really "need" any affection from the kisser. But I am most familiar with the coercive kind and yeah - I believe it makes abuse more likely. I don't know which kind this was.
The response to the DJ who said something negative about his child seems appropriate.
-
I have heard great things about a line of hair products for AA hair at Target. Not sure if they have anything baby specific. No personal experience.
-
That does sound stressful - I'm hopeful something will work out.
-
Been thinking about you all day. So glad you went in, your symptoms sound potentially serious. I understand the billing issues - we are still financially suffering from a surgery I needed several years ago - and we have very good insurance.
Please keep us posted. Thinking of you.
-
I'm not sure that it's something I thing it's generally useful to talk about, unless it's the point of the conversation. (As in, what is it like to be in such and such a position?) And there are lots of times people have discussions like that.
I thought that WAS the point of this discussion.
I would happily be more concrete, but charges of being lacking in empathy would result.
This sounds really passive-aggressive to me. I'm not sure how this conversation got here.
Oh, I hope you recover soon.
When you get a chance, I'd be interested if you could give a concrete example of how it would help with that kind of determination - how could empathy suggest a way forward for land division, for example.
No, I don't think this is a productive conversation. I've been asking questions that remain unanswered and now there are passive-aggressive comments and apparently a thread about people who "think empathy is everything" isn't actually about empathy. I'm clearly lost.
-
Yes.
I have more than adequate cold weather gear as I'm used to winter daytime highs being below 0. But the name of the game is to stay warm and be comfortable. That can also be "cute" but in a decidedly different way. Leggings with big shirts and even bigger sweaters and chunky socks are my staples.
-
There was a British show that I used to watch where a decorator & handyman went to someone's house and updated their decor with stuff they already had - like they made new shelves with scrap wood they found in the shed or painted an accent wall with leftover paint mixed into a new color.
I loved that show.
ETA: This one. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0419338/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl
-
5
-
-
I don't see it doing much to come up with solutions or even really understand the real sources of conflict, or come to some conclusions about what is just.
Forgive me, I've become quite ill today so this will probably be my last post but I'm not ignoring you.
For me, personally, and I would guess for some other people - maybe even the person who your OP was about - empathy plays a large role in understanding the real sources of conflict and in coming to conclusions about what is just. I think it is virtually impossible for me to approach those topics devoid of empathy.
-
1
-
-
The most thorough take on forgiveness in this situation that I have seen so far: (Christian content)
Given your concerns that Christians can use God’s call to forgive as a weapon against survivors, did you feel at all apprehensive telling Nassar that you forgive him?
I did to an extent, because forgiveness can really be misapplied. Taken within the context of my statement, with the call for justice and with what I have done to couple forgiveness and justice, it should not be misunderstood. But I have found it very interesting, to be honest, that every single Christian publication or speaker that has mentioned my statement has only ever focused on the aspect of forgiveness. Very few, if any of them, have recognized what else came with that statement, which was a swift and intentional pursuit of God’s justice. Both of those are biblical concepts. Both of those represent Christ. We do not do well when we focus on only one of them.
-
5
-
-
That's funny, most people I know have zero empathy for Israel [ the state of Israel, not the Jewish people ].
I don't think empathy is a factor in that conversation because it's kind of a zero sum game. In a Blue Group and Red Group conversation.
In Pam in CT's example, US slavery, the appeals to empathy made by the abolitionists are only one side of the conversation. There were also appeals to empathy on behalf of the other side. Imagine all the slaves, including so many children, who who would starve if not taken care of by their owners. They would own no land, have no assets! Imagine all the white women who would be put in harm's way if black men were free to do as they pleased. And so on. This all sounds absolutely disgusting from our modern POV. Because ....it is. But these were sincerely held beliefs and common arguments. Remember there were millions of enslaved people at the time, about 1/3 of the population of several states. My point is empathy on both "sides" existed, didn't really matter, it took a war, and the war could have gone either way.
I think that empathy is a factor because I think the lack of empathy makes one ignore objective truth to only believe facts that serve your own empathy. So this would obviously be a negative caused by empathy, but I don't believe that it is possible to completely get rid of empathy so it needs to be used to serve the objective truth.
Gotta run to the bus stop. I probably didn't explain well.
-
1
-
-
I would say people very often bring empathy into discussions of that conflict, though, much the same way they do in other types of discussions. So I'm curious to know what you see as the real distinction between that and any of the other examples like immigration etc?
Can you explain what you mean by "bringing empathy into discussions"? I'm trying to understand what your expectations are of empathy but I'm honestly confused. You started out talking about people who think empathy is everything and now it sounds like you don't think empathy has any place in these discussions.
Since we have a concrete example of the Israel/Palestine conflict, I don't know how to have a discussion about it that is devoid of empathy. Most people I know personally are very pro-Israel, anti-Palestine. They have absolutely zero empathy for Palestine, to the point of rejecting all facts about their plight. I present them with factual information but I don't think appeals to their empathy are somehow inappropriate or worthless or less effective. Honestly, both factual and empathy appeals have had zero effect so at least IME they are equally effective for this example.
-
1
-
Superbowl ads
in The Chat Board
Posted
I saw very few ads - the Dodge ad is the only one I really remember. Horrible. As soon as I saw it I was interested to see what it was about & when I saw what it was for I thought yuck, how inappropriate.