Jorsay
-
Posts
161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by Jorsay
-
-
What do you want to know?
There is lots of gluten free here.
Whole Foods is a grocery store with just about everything.
Many chain restaurants have gluten free menus - I don't eat at chains too much but I know for sure that "Outback Steakhouse", "Z Pizza", and "PF Changs" have them.
I was in Medford WI a month ago (Pop. about 10,000) and even their only grocery store (as far as I know) had an entire Isle (I mean aisle - I just learned form the post below how to spell that word correctly. thank you.) devoted to gluten free.
Here in CA there are small shops that specialize in just gluten free.
-
There is a huge difference between the various styles of Karate, Judo, Jiu Jitsu, wrestling, and boxing.
I think you should choose a style based upon what you are looking to get out of it.
I know I am going to make some people upset here, but IMO karate is not an effective form of self defense. It is fun, good for self disipline and, perhaps, self confidence. It is mostly sport, and not much practical self defense. (I taught karate for four years, and was reasonably accomplished in competition.)
Judo is also more of a sport than a self defense, but it does work a little in the street. (My son and I have done some Judo over the past few years and I studied when I was younger.)
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is an effective form of self defense and has all the positive qualities of karate. (My son won a 'world champion'. [This really doesn't mean too much since the competition isn't up to par with wrestling. Basically wrestlers win those tournaments.] His coach was third at the world submission grappling championships in Switzerland last Christmas and we have studied with him for about 5 years.)
Wrestling is arguably the most effective form of self defense and has the benefit of being the best form of exercise of the group. (My son is a state champ and has won one of the toughest national championships. I am his coach.)
Boxing works as self defense and is the second best form of exercise after wrestling, but I was always concerned about letting my kids get hit in the head many times. (My son studied boxing for two years, but I finally took him out because I didn't want him hit in the head.)
-
If it's not illegal, the police won't get involved anyway...
You are incorrect. I once went to dinner (1/4 mile down the road) with my wife and left my 9 and a half year old at home with the phone and my number. Five minutes after sitting down she called me to tell me the police were at the door. The policeman said it wasn't illegal and that he did it himself, but, since he was called, he was required to report it to child services. After a court appearance to get into my house, Child Services sent a young 20 something girl who inspected my home, interviewed my children without my presence and against my will. Without provocation, asked "where does daddy touch you?" "Does daddy hit you?" Then searched my body for drug tracks. This was completely without cause. Kind of retribution for me not giving them permission to search my house without a warrant.
When you call the police on someone, you are taking a serious step.
-
I would call the police.
This is dispicable.
If this is your answer, I thinnk you should mind your own business!
A child in a parked car with the motor running is in less danger than if he is removed from the car and walked through the parking lot.
How about if I visit your house and check on what activities you allow your kids to engage in? Do you allow them candy, McDonalds, TV, to walk to school alone, to swim in YOUR pool unsupervised, to stay up past 8pm? What books do you allow them to read? What movies can they see? What religion are they? If you are going to decide what is good and safe for my kids, then you will be allowing others to decide what's good and safe for your kids.
Mind your own business.
-
Sounds to me like you need to stop looking, then... most women who breastfeed in public are discreet enough that only those who are particularly watching them would see nipple. If it is a problem for you sexually, then you should protect your eyes and stop watching women with babies... flee from the temptation. I don't think that it is the responsibility of the mother who is nursing her child to shelter you from it. That's just my 2cents.
"you need to stop looking" is naive or a disingenuous argument. If there is a nipple exposed in public and a man or woman's eye comes across it, they will not be able to not notice. It's like short skirts, burns, or a white gorilla; you can't help but notice.
I once had a secretary who wore low cut shirts and had a tattoo on her breast. Everytime I spoke to her I had to stare hard at her forehead so as not to look. She worked for me for over a year and I still don't know what the tattoo was.
I know that people will read this post and think I am talking about a cute little baby suckling. I am not. I am talking about an adult woman blatantly showing her breasts in public. I am not even saying that blatantly showing your nipples and breasts in public should be illegal. I am saying that it makes me uncomfortable.
Breast feeding in public = OK with me, just don't do it in my face if you are a stranger to me. That's the meaning of "discreet" as was originally posted. If you look at the poll, the majority agrees with me.
Now I am going to invite the guys over for beers this Saturday and to watch the fights, but before the fights start I think we will discuss how beautiful breast feeding is and how it stirs my maternal instincts to see a woman nursing her cute little baby. Oh, how beautiful. *sigh* Well, were I to do that, I got news for you ladies: the men that I like to have over won't invite me for poker anymore and it's not because they are afraid to show their feminine side. It's because they are men. The guys that spoke up for breast feeding are probably not the guys that I would invite to the fights. Using common sense and not wishful thinking, do you think most men are like them or like me. So speaking for men like me, we don't care if you breast feed your babies in public. We aren't turned on by it, but we don't find it some beautiful act that melts our hearts either. Most of us (including me) really don't care much one way or another. But the OP did ask my opinion. So please, be considerate and breast feed your babies discreetly.
-
I get where you're coming from. I don't agree, but I get it ;)
As long as there are laws concerning it, it's going to be political for someone.
As for the woman who flashed you on the train, or any of the other flashers out there, just put them with the girls with short skirts or jeans that show their panties, or those wonders that let it all hang out whenever they can get away with. They're exhibitionists (shrug) not much you can do there.
Most women who breast feed don't want you to see they're goodies, they just want to feed their lil' one and (at least for me) natural and healthy aside, it's work and it's hard to see it as anything else. For that time, the goodies are the tools to get the job done and sometimes moms can forget that others may see them differently.
I agree.
-
It sounds like that was uncomfortable, but she never needed to ask your permission.
No, she didn't. It was just rude for her not to ask and rude for her to expose herself in my face.
-
I just heard they offered her an anchor position at Fox News!
No. It was CNN.
-
I don't get this. I breast fed four babies, in public, in church, at the mall, in restaurants, often without a blanket (sometimes with), and I venture to say not a single man saw my nipple. It isn't that hard. In addition, not a single person ever complained or seemed uncomfortable and my oldest is 24! There were also circumstances in which I did leave the area because there was no discreet way to nurse, too close quarters. But most the time, you can just tuck yourself in a corner, turn away from the crown and go ahead.
I have no problem with this.
What is the argument? I can't imagine that breastfeeding women are on here demanding the right to bare it all in public so long as they are breast feeding....are they? Did I miss that post. ( Sorry, I didn't read them all.) It's just that unless I missed something, I don't see the disagreament.Perhaps I misread, but I think there are some who have posted that are 'in your face' activists. I did see one poster that apparently even saw it as a political issue.
As a young adult, I was on a train once with an attractive woman with a baby. We spoke at length about many things. All of the sudden, she bore her breast to me, fudged around a bit, and then attached her baby. As I recall, we were so close that her bare breast was touching my arm. Being quite young, I didn't immediately realize that she was preparing her breast to the baby. It seemed like she was offerring it to me. I was, thank goodness, too dumbfounded to move. I would call this indiscreet breast feeding. However, I was not offended in any way. It happened too fast for me to become arroused. However, I was extremely uncomfortable for the remainder of the trip. Had she simply said "Do you mind if I breast feed my baby?", I would have said "no problem", and turned to look out the window.
-
Discreet does not mean having to smother an infant with a blanket. Nursing without a blanket does not mean one is exposing herself and "putting it in people's faces".
I agree.
-
I believe you when you say that you feel something when you see a woman nursing. I see a woman feeding her baby. If I feel anything, it's the joy of witnessing love and life in action, not much different than seeing a father holding his newborn baby, or even a mare nuzzling her newborn foal.
I can only speak for this man, but I do not feel anything remotely sexual. I'm troubled that you would extrapolate your experience and suggest that I (and every other man) would do the same.
I didn't say that every man feels something sexual. I said that every man feels something that they don't usually feel in public. Again, if you have testosterone, that's what testosterone does. It doesn't necessarily arouse you, but it certainly makes you feel something different. I guess I don't believe that powerful drugs like testosterone have no effect on some people.
-
I would completely ignore your ignorant and unbelievable position that breastfeeding is on par with public elimination - except that I would abhor to think that you would assume my failure to disagree was like unto agreement.
WOW:confused:
and NO ONE in this post is advocating "in your face"
This attitude being verbalized gives some light onto the argument that babies should have to take their nourishment in the restroom. Ridiculous at best.
Discreet means "not in your face".
Not being discreet means "in your face".
If not, you don't disagree.
-
While each of these situations are unique and made you feel uncomfortable, it seems like the uniqueness of each situation is what caused the uncomfortable feeling...not the action. Do you feel awkward seeing another man urinate? This happens in most public restrooms and in public situations like camping, etc.
I would feel akward seeing another man urinate in front of a strange woman. Like, perhaps all other men, I prefer bathrooms with private stalls and little walls between urinals. So yes, there is a bit of discomfort anywhere when two men are near each other with their pants down.
How about having a naked man walking around in a locker room instead of sitting beside you on a bus? Does that make you feel like no one should use a locker room?If another man stood in front of me naked to have a conversation in a locker room, I would feel akward, yes. The truth is I don't think many men feel fully comfortable around other naked men anywhere, even in a locker room.
Everyone should go into little rooms and change their clothes or wait until they get home?No they should be discreet when they dress.
Should men not be able to go bare chested...they have nipples too?Not in restaurants or movie theatres or the like. I have pool in my backyard. When I have guests in my home, I feel a bit uncomfortable in my own home when I put on my suit in my bedroom and walk barechested out to the pool. I have seen that they feel a bit different as well.
In addition, men's nipples are not typically considered sexual by most people in our culture whereas all males consider women's nipples as sexual.
What about a small child, boy or girl. Are all breasts whether on a 112lb 20yo or a 300lb 80yo titillating to you?See. You want to make me out to be a pervert. Most breasts are not the least bit arousing to me, as most male's privates would not be arousing to you. (assuming you are a women here) I don't think you would be aroused if I came to your house for dinner naked or even with my shirt off, but I don't think you would be comfortable. How would you feel if my 300 pound aunt sat down to your dinner table with her shirt off? Comfortable?
You make it sound like you have no self control, you see a nipple and you are aroused, I know a lot of men too, and almost all of my friends growing up were men, I have been privy to many a mans conversation on sexual topics; I don't think that every man has soo little self control to feel arousal in these situations.Again, not about arousal. By the way, if you are a woman, it is naive to think that you understand exactly when a man is aroused or that many men would be truthful about it to you.
But if you saw naked women every day all day, your oversensitivity would wane. This is more the point, that these unique situations mentioned here. If more women openly breastfed, you would get more desensitised to it, and it would be less unique to you.This is absurd. I don't want to be desensitised to strange nipples. Do you want to be desentised to arousal? Besides, it's not about arousal, it's about privacy. You don't want to see me running around the mall with my shirt off or naked, do you? Is that because you have no self control? Should we all run around naked to become desensitised.
I simply don't want to see your nipples. Why is that so bad. If you have to breast feed in public, be discreet. Don't show me your nipples. Please.
-
As a male, with many male friends from all walks of life, I don't believe that there is a normal adult male (between 16 and 45) who can look at the nipple of a female stranger and feel nothing. I don't think it really makes much difference if the exposed nipple is about to feed a baby or anything else. The only exception might be some doctors who see them in the course of their work in a sterile environment day in and day out. Testosterone is a powerful drug that makes a male feel something when he sees certain parts of a woman, and all men have testosterone in their blood at all times.
I am not saying that all men are turned on or turned off by a woman breast feeding her baby, although I know that many are. I am saying that they feel something, and that something is not what they normally feel when they are in public.
Besides the effects of testosterone, I personally am uncomfortable seeing anyone perform almost any of their natural bodily functions in public, and I bet most of you who are in favor of public, 'in your face' breast feeding feel the way I do about these other bodily functions. Perhaps they are all beautiful processes, but I prefer that they are done discreetly. For instance, I wouldn't be turned on or off by a naked man seated next to me on the subway reading a newspaper. However, I would change my seat. When I was in South America, I stepped between two parked cars to cross the street in the middle of the day and stumbled over a woman squatting to go to the bathroom in the street. I wasn't repulsed nor was I turned on, however, I wasn't exactly comfortable either. I prefer not to see two men kissing each other passionately full on the mouth. It does not turn me on nor does it repulse me, and I am certain they believe it is a 'beautiful natural thing', but I just prefer not to share that part of their lives. For that matter, I prefer not to see anyone kissing passionately. It is a private thing that I feel uncomfortable watching others. Don't you? Sure, I can look the other way, but that's like having to look the other way when people urinate in public. It's disruptive and uncomfortable. Is anyone in favor of public urination?
-
Speaking as a male, I feel more comfortable if they cover up.
-
So he pays for your kids to go to an expensive private school this year. Who is to say that he will pay next year? or the year following? What then? Charity isn't always free.
I think the answer is to rely on yourself and do a good job. If you are uncertain about the job you are doing, then give your kids a standardized test. That's how the school would measure their success.
-
It seems that the current philosophy is that children are not capable of understanding basic science concepts before they are in junior high or high school. Thus, they are given 'nature' activities or 'labs'. I disagree with this philosophy and believe that teaching labs before concepts is backwards.
Typically, lab is a small portion of a college science grade. Theoretical science is more important for college grades and necessary for a reasonable understanding of labs anyway. I started 'high school or junior high level' physics with my son when he was eight. What I mean by 'high school' physics is a systematic approach to the basic concepts and formulae in science. I started with physics because physics is a foundation for chemistry, biology, and earth science. He is ten now and we are working on chemistry.
I use Hewitt and Suchocki. It is more concept based than most texts. Of course we do mini labs (or demonstrations) along the way, but it is mostly concept and formula oriented. I would say that 7 year olds are entirely capable of learning real science.
[sorry. After reading my own post, I see that it may be offensive. To clarify, I am referring to my perception of how science is taught in public schools. I don't mean to offend anyone or to criticize how they teach science. I am, however, criticizing public school.]
-
Jorsay, have you been through the experience of parenting an 11-14 year old boy who gets distracted easily? If so, could you tell me about it? I'm trying to find out what others' experiences have been and how they handled it - thus my question of "is it common." I guess I'm assuming parents who have BTDT will respond.
My son turned ten in March. (perhaps that not close enough to 11-14, I don't know) He failed kindergarten because, according to the teacher, he couldn't pay attention in class. He is now entirely focused. I believe it is because I don't allow him to be otherwise. He knows that, as I have in the past, I will force him to do extra work during his free time if he "wastes my time" by not staying focused and not working diligently. He works 32.5 hours of academics each week and 16 hours of very tough physical work. His academic assignments are no more than one hour at a time on any one subject otherwise he, like any other human, will become distracted. I try to make any back to back activities as different as possible in order to keep things interesting. If I am not supervising an activity, he always reports to me at the end of each activity so I can monitor how much he accomplished.
He also knows that his free time is his own (barring any punishments). This helps motivate him.
-
I'm afraid that just wouldn't work. He would know it was "busy work" and see it as punishment, and I'd have a battle on my hands that I am not willing to fight, esp. when the distractedness is not coming from defiance. I can see letting him finish his "real work" in free time, but I'm not willing to give him extra work to teach him to manage his time.
It seems to me that giving him extra work to manage his time is the appropriate consequence for mismanagement of time or for allowing oneself to be distracted. Call it punishment or not, it is nothing more than real world consequences for working slowly. Whether he is being defiant or he just moves slowly, if you believe it is important for him to work faster, why wouldn't you allow him to experience the real world consequences of not working faster?
-
I know that everyone here knows this but it's worth restating. Rephrased from somewhere on the net (I don't remember where):
The Seven Liberal Arts are divided into the Quadrivium (“The four roadsâ€, Arithmetic, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy) and the Trivium (“The three roadsâ€, Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric) of Sciences.
The trivium and quadrivium are from the middle ages. I would update them as follows: Arithmetic and geometry should include algebra, trig, and especially calculus (all developed after the trivium and quadrivium). Astronomy (basically the middle ages version of science) should be updated to include biology, physics, and chemistry. Art should be added to music. During the middle ages art was not yet appreciated the way it is today. (I am not saying it wasn't appreciated at all.) Instead, artists were thought of as artisans. This may be why it wasn't included in the quadrivium.
I personally would include chronological history as important to a complete understanding appreciation of any subject above.
Finally, a foreign language or two is far more important than it would have been in the middle ages. I would add a foreign language to any classical education.
Therefore, I think a classical education is Reading, Writing, (these include grammar, logic, and rhetoric), History, Math (through calculus), Arts (including Music), and Science. I would add one living foreign language.
I agree that Latin and Greek are unnecessary. But they are fun to know.
-
Honestly then, I would just assign him an hour of work (perhaps 45 minutes to be safe). Tell him that if he doesn't finish in one hour, he must do a similar assignment again (instead of his play time) until it only takes him one hour.
-
How many hours each day does your son currently spend doing academics (including reading)? It sounds like a lot.
My 10 and 1/2 year old does 32.5 per week plus 16+ hours of physical. I never give him more than one hour of work at a time. I mix it up with reading, math, logic, video lecture, live lecture, and writing. We start at 7am and finish at 8pm with only 1 hour and 45 minutes of break during this time. I consider this a heavy load. He will be done with high school before he is in 9th grade. I couldn't imagine asking more of him. I think he handles it because I change it up every hour and I keep close track of how much work he gets done when he is alone.
-
You'll notice that the article states, tongue-in-cheek, about full immersion (of yourself). It's very common to weave by soaking the reeds first (often a necessity).
Didn't read it that closely. I get it now. Thanks.
-
I would imagine yes. Immersing willow (for example) and allowing it to soak before attempting to work with it is essential to avoid the stems breaking as you try to force it into unnatural positions. Even if you don't work with it underwater, you'd need to keep going back to soak it to keep it supple as you worked.
Underwater basketweaving sounds ridiculous to me.
Gluten Free food in the USA
in General Education Discussion Board
Posted
Here's a guide to gluten free restaurants in the US for $23.
http://www.triumphdining.com/products/gluten-free-restaurant-guide