Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -><<<<What is in the drawer and who uses what is none of your damn >business. Just as it is none of my kids business, or anyone elses. Or do >you think only the kids deserve some privacy?>>>> > This is one of my own personal *pet peeves* (for lack of a better term) with > the Guru and certain of his followers. ONLY kids seem to deserve > privacy……respect…..honor of their individuality……or any damn thing > else, for that matter. Hell…..even the parent’s sexuality is not to be > respected or honored….while the child’s is. (as in……if you’re a child and > have a Playboy in your room….*that’s* cool, and to be respected……but if > you’re a parent and have a Playboy in your room, you have a *hint of > repression*) Go figure, huh? > Josie
No. If you have porn and won’t let your kid have their own porn, then you’re a repressive antisex bigot AND a hypocrite!! Steve
Response:
> Glenn wrote… > Why is it that some parents still feel that they have the corner on the > Morals Market ™?
You have usenet attribuitions totally backward and used wrongly. Fix them or everybody will think YOU said what GLEN said and vice versa. This is not a style issue, this is a matter for the archives to properly reflect who said what on usenet 1000 years from now, if anybody looks. Old things get >’s and older get >>’s and your words don’t get > this time, but only next time when someone responds to them. > <<<<<<<I do not think I have a corner on the market. I do think I know > what morals I want to try to instill in my children, and they are the > morals I live by. They are not carbon copies of what my parents tried to > teach me, just as I am sure my children will take what I teach them, > accept some of it and reject or modify some of them and teach their kids > what they want.>>>>
That’s bullshit. Ask your kids what THEY like. You are not moral arbiter, however the control freaks who raised you want to see themselves to be. > In answer to your question, perhaps it is because many parents actually > recognize that their children are separate, independent human beings who > deserve respect. > <<<<<This does not mean they are perfect and need no guidence in life. > This does not mean we cannot talk over issues that need to be discussed > and it does not mean that parents cannot have house/family rules.>>>>>>
Some rules which everyone is subject to are fine, such as not hitting, no loud music when I’m home, and not smoking in my air. Others are tyranny and you will find you lose your children that way as soon as punberty hits. You will be totally lost, lost, lost!! treat your kids as well as you would guests and you’ll be alright, otherwise you’ll get reamed big time when they’ve had it up to here with your crap. > Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and > productive human beings? > Given that kids are born that way, why would any informed and caring > parent want to mess with it? > <<<<<<Because life messes with it, and without guidence some people get > way off track.
The only thing that send people off the track is abuse from their parents. They can take abuse from anybody else BUT their parents just fine if they have your support. if you dishonor their desires you will suffer, they will make sure you do, and we will laugh at you. I believe it is the parents job to help steer children > along the right path. That does not mean choice their life course, it > means help them find it.>>>>>
You have a weird idea that nobody has ideas of what is right but you. if you try to put yours on other people who have theirs they will roast your ass for you. > If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own > homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The > government? The kids themselves? > BINGO! > <<<,Bingo what? >>>>>
The kids decide, they always do, they are the ONLY ones who EVER decide! You do NOT!! If you want to be heard by them before they leave you you would be well to learn how to listen and to heed them. if you try to enforce anything you’ll wind up crying and chewing your nails in the corner. > The illegality of the purchase seems like a pretty lame reason to be > concerned unless you actually think that them having it means that they > will turn into criminals becaue of it. > <<<<No I do not think it will turn them into criminals, but someone did > break the law. I would be just as upset if it were cigarettes, beers or > anything else a "minor" is not allowed to purchase.>>>>>>
Beer and cigarettes are harmful, sex is not, it is a natural need. There is no natural need for beer or tobacco. If you show them you are the kind of weenie lawyer bullshit merchant you are now you’ll have one pregnant just to spite you very soon now. if you disohonor their real needs in this regard you’ll get stepped on and hard, if they don’t ruin your marriage for you!! > 2) As a previous > poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why > does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? > Cripes! Now you are going to dictate to them which porn you don’t want > them to have in the first place? > <<<<<Yes, Victoria Secret is not porn. It is a sales catolog, which they > can legally obtain. Which they might find in our mailbox.>>>>>
YOU can legally obtain porn FOR them. It is NOT illegal for you to allow them to have it. Your word on what they require for sex-ed is final under the laws of virtually all states of the US. No other person has that legal right, except the minor has the right to make our life total HELL!! learn to abdicate bullshit authority and join the ranks of the real people now or you will be anathema to your kids forever. > 3) Not only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the > "stories," "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image > of women that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual > images. > Maybe very unrealistic. But then, so is virtually every single movie and > cartoon. > <<<<Yes, which is why we have a rating system, and why we have parental > guides for tv shows etc. >>>>>
Those are bullshit too and have done more to destroy your cause than anything else. They are widely disregarded or voluntary!! > Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and > Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, > HEY! If your sexual perceptions are so great, why would he need that > sort of stuff? > Might there be just a *hint* of sexual repression in your houe? > <<<<No, we are very comfortable with our sexuality. We also recognise > that some outside forms of stimulation can spice things up. That doesn’t > mean that a 13 yr old needs the same sorts of spice! Let ‘em be kids for > a while for goodness sake.>>>>
A 13 year old is NOT a kid!!! That’s what you don’t fucking grasp!! > along with our birth control and a > few other "adult" toys. > Like an Acu-Jack or a dildo? IOW, are the adult toys fulfilling your > repressed sexuality or his? > <<<<What is in the drawer and who uses what is none of your damn > business. Just as it is none of my kids business, or anyone elses. Or do > you think only the kids deserve some privacy?>>>>
I didn’t think YOU believed in privacy for them, so why bother with it now all of aa sudden!! > So if this is where my kids got the mags our discussion would be about > taking other people’s property, and then about the magazines themselves. > I would want to know if they were just curious, or if they thought that > was reality. > Asking the wrong questions. > <<<<<<<,That’s your opinion, and I am allowed to have mine.>>>>>
Allowed doesn’t mean your life won’t turn to shit overnight at your teen’s own hands. > However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and > intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, > especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? > Becaue they understood and honored their children’s individuality and > sexuality, perhaps? > <<<<<This does not answer the question. I do not see the connection > between honoring a child’s individuality and developing sexuality and > tolerating something you find > intolerable. >>>>>
If you can’t tolerate it then don’t read it. But don’t try to run other people’s minds or they’ll hate your fucking guts. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> For me (and many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I > be expected to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of > my teen? > Well, only if you honored them as individuals. > As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? > When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing > the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting > everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents > "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed > then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone > else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love > and doing "it." > (ObSteve) Did they let you watch? > <<<<No, and I would not have wanted to! Does the phrase "too much > information" mean anything to you. Knowing they still enjoyed having sex > together was enough, I didn’t need visual confermation.>>>>>> > And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a > pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on > your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the > house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or > agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. > That’s pretty tired. > Turn that around a bit and think of your old age when *they* pick your > nursing home. Do you *really* want them treating you this way? > <<<<Since I hope I will have as good and as close a relationship with my > children as I do with my parents I don’t really worry about this. I > can’t imagine putting my parents in a nursing home where they were > uncomfortable. My husband and I have discussed it and our parents will > live with us or in the facility of their choice if it ever comes to > that. Luckily, for now, they are healthy, independant people in their > early 50s. They take good care of themselves and are loved very much, as > well as honored and respected.>>>> > Liz
You THINK your kids like you. I’ll bet they don’t and you won’t know till you find out the hard way. Steve
Response:
OK, last time that I am gonna say this: When you "quote" someone in usenet, the convention is to preface each of their lines (more accurately, each line of the previous post which you elect to quote) is prefaced by a ">". If you follow this convention your posts will be much easier to follow. I’ll do it for ya this time. >Why is it that some parents still feel that they have the corner on the >Morals Market ™? >I do not think I have a corner on the market. I do think I know >what morals I want to try to instill in my children, and they are the >morals I live by.
OK. let me reword it, then. Why do some parents feel that their morals are better than the morals of their children? That you live by your’s causes me to say "*good* for ya!" However, why should anybody else have to live by those, too? >In answer to your question, perhaps it is because many parents actually >recognize that their children are separate, independent human beings who >deserve respect. >This does not mean they are perfect and need no guidence in life.
"Guidance"? Children are, in most meaninful respects, the best that they are gonna be, right outta the box. >This does not mean we cannot talk over issues that need to be discussed >and it does not mean that parents cannot have house/family rules.
Absolutely you can discuss things with kids. Heck, I learn some of the koolest stuff from kids. Now, if you have limitations on what you are comfortable with, by all means, you should let the kids know. Most of the time, kids will want to make you happy, so they will do whatever they can to comply. That is, unless the parent isn’t meeting their needs. Then the kids test and rebel. >>Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and >>productive human beings? >Given that kids are born that way, why would any informed and caring >parent want to mess with it? >Because life messes with it,
How? I have only seen parents and other authorities mess with it? In fact, the only way that I can think of that "messing kids up" can be done is by someone, with power over them, forcing them to do something that they are not ready for. > and without guidence some people get >way off track.
Who’s track? >I believe it is the parents job to help steer children >along the right path.
That partricular parent’s idea of "the right path", right? >That does not mean choice their life course, it >means help them find it.
That’s kool! … As long as they ask for the help. >If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own >homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The >government? The kids themselves? >BINGO! >Bingo what?
"The kids themselves". >The illegality of the purchase seems like a pretty lame reason to be >concerned unless you actually think that them having it means that they >will turn into criminals becaue of it. >No I do not think it will turn them into criminals, but someone did >break the law. I would be just as upset if it were cigarettes, beers or >anything else a "minor" is not allowed to purchase.
If the law says that a minor cannot *buy* that, and someone makes it available to them without selling it to them, it’s not illegal. >>2) As a previous >>poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why >>does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? >Cripes! Now you are going to dictate to them which porn you don’t want >them to have in the first place? >Yes, Victoria Secret is not porn.
Well, many horney little kids would disagree with you. >It is a sales catolog, which they >can legally obtain. Which they might find in our mailbox.
And if they did, would *this* be OK with you? >>3) Not only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the >>"stories," "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image >>of women that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual >>images. >Maybe very unrealistic. But then, so is virtually every single movie and >cartoon. >Yes, which is why we have a rating system, and why we have parental >guides for tv shows etc.
Not exactly. The reason that we have ratings is because some priss in DC decided that we need them. However, that doesn’t address the realism of cartoons. The realism of porn was your #3 reason for not wanting your kids to have porn. I assume, then, that you also don’t let them watch cartoons and other fictional media because it isn’t realistic. This, of course, leads one to wonder if this parent actually prefers that their kids watch realistic violence than unrealistic sex. >>Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and >>Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, >HEY! If your sexual perceptions are so great, why would he need that >sort of stuff? >Might there be just a *hint* of sexual repression in your houe? >No, we are very comfortable with our sexuality. We also recognise >that some outside forms of stimulation can spice things up. That doesn’t >mean that a 13 yr old needs the same sorts of spice! Let ‘em be kids for >a while for goodness sake.
Does being kids mean hidding the information from them that they have clearly expressed an interest in? At what age is it OK for them to be able to have porn and marital aids? >>along with our birth control and a >>few other "adult" toys. >Like an Acu-Jack or a dildo? IOW, are the adult toys fulfilling your >repressed sexuality or his? >What is in the drawer and who uses what is none of your damn >business. Just as it is none of my kids business, or anyone elses. Or do >you think only the kids deserve some privacy?
Sorry. If you look back, it was *you* who brought this up. If your kid came to you and told you that he got the latest issue of Hutler, would you allow him (or her) the same privacy that you are asking for, here? >>So if this is where my kids got the mags our discussion would be about >>taking other people’s property, and then about the magazines themselves. >>I would want to know if they were just curious, or if they thought that >>was reality. >Asking the wrong questions. >That’s your opinion, and I am allowed to have mine.
Yup. And when you expres them on usenet, others will comment on it. Didn’t Unka Bill tell you about that when you signed up for WebTV? >>However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and >>intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, >>especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? >Becaue they understood and honored their children’s individuality and >sexuality, perhaps? >This does not answer the question. I do not see the connection >between honoring a child’s individuality and developing sexuality and >tolerating something you find intolerable.
If you have a problem with something because of *your* hangups (perfectly valid), then it makes sense to tell them that you don’t want to see it or discuss it until you work out your issues. Kids, under normal circumstances, *want* to please their parents. >>For me (and many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I >>be expected to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of >>my teen? >Well, only if you honored them as individuals. >As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter?
It only matters if they want and you are willing to give autonomy and privacy. >When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing >the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting >everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents >"naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed >then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone >else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love >and doing "it."
I’ll bet that you didn’t confescate the nighty. So, why would a parent finding their porn be a problem? >>(ObSteve) Did they let you watch? >No, and I would not have wanted to! Does the phrase "too much >information" mean anything to you. Knowing they still enjoyed having sex >together was enough, I didn’t need visual confermation.
Your choice, of course. That is how information *should* come to kidss — at their request. >And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a >pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on >your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the >house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or >agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit.
"It didn’t hurt me" is different from "It was good for me". Can you see that? People often use that line on their kid when they are not communicatring properly and just don’t want to think about their silly-ass rules. >That’s pretty tired. >Turn that around a bit and think of your old age when *they* pick your >nursing home. Do you *really* want them treating you this way? >Since I hope I will have as good and as close a relationship with my >children as I do with my parents I don’t really worry about this. I >can’t imagine putting my parents in a nursing home where they were >uncomfortable. My husband and I have discussed it and our parents will >live with us or in the facility of their choice if it ever comes to >that. Luckily, for now, they are healthy, independant people in their >early 50s. They take good care of themselves and are loved very much, as >well as honored and respected.
OK … but you didn’t seem to get it and didn’t answer the question. Maybe next time? OK, now I went through and took the time to put in the proper attribution arrows (">"). I hope that you can see
… read more »
Response:
><<<<What is in the drawer and who uses what is none of your damn >business. Just as it is none of my kids business, or anyone elses. Or do >you think only the kids deserve some privacy?>>>>
This is one of my own personal *pet peeves* (for lack of a better term) with the Guru and certain of his followers. ONLY kids seem to deserve privacy……respect…..honor of their individuality……or any damn thing else, for that matter. Hell…..even the parent’s sexuality is not to be respected or honored….while the child’s is. (as in……if you’re a child and have a Playboy in your room….*that’s* cool, and to be respected……but if you’re a parent and have a Playboy in your room, you have a *hint of repression*) Go figure, huh? Josie
Response:
Glenn wrote…
Why is it that some parents still feel that they have the corner on the Morals Market ™? <<<<<<<I do not think I have a corner on the market. I do think I know what morals I want to try to instill in my children, and they are the morals I live by. They are not carbon copies of what my parents tried to teach me, just as I am sure my children will take what I teach them, accept some of it and reject or modify some of them and teach their kids what they want.>>>> In answer to your question, perhaps it is because many parents actually recognize that their children are separate, independent human beings who deserve respect. <<<<<This does not mean they are perfect and need no guidence in life. This does not mean we cannot talk over issues that need to be discussed and it does not mean that parents cannot have house/family rules.>>>>>> Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and productive human beings? Given that kids are born that way, why would any informed and caring parent want to mess with it? <<<<<<Because life messes with it, and without guidence some people get way off track. I believe it is the parents job to help steer children along the right path. That does not mean choice their life course, it means help them find it.>>>>> If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The government? The kids themselves? BINGO! <<<,Bingo what? >>>>> The illegality of the purchase seems like a pretty lame reason to be concerned unless you actually think that them having it means that they will turn into criminals becaue of it. <<<<No I do not think it will turn them into criminals, but someone did break the law. I would be just as upset if it were cigarettes, beers or anything else a "minor" is not allowed to purchase.>>>>>> 2) As a previous poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? Cripes! Now you are going to dictate to them which porn you don’t want them to have in the first place? <<<<<Yes, Victoria Secret is not porn. It is a sales catolog, which they can legally obtain. Which they might find in our mailbox.>>>>> 3) Not only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the "stories," "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. Maybe very unrealistic. But then, so is virtually every single movie and cartoon. <<<<Yes, which is why we have a rating system, and why we have parental guides for tv shows etc. >>>>> Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, HEY! If your sexual perceptions are so great, why would he need that sort of stuff? Might there be just a *hint* of sexual repression in your houe? <<<<No, we are very comfortable with our sexuality. We also recognise that some outside forms of stimulation can spice things up. That doesn’t mean that a 13 yr old needs the same sorts of spice! Let ‘em be kids for a while for goodness sake.>>>> along with our birth control and a few other "adult" toys. Like an Acu-Jack or a dildo? IOW, are the adult toys fulfilling your repressed sexuality or his? <<<<What is in the drawer and who uses what is none of your damn business. Just as it is none of my kids business, or anyone elses. Or do you think only the kids deserve some privacy?>>>> So if this is where my kids got the mags our discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just curious, or if they thought that was reality. Asking the wrong questions. <<<<<<<,That’s your opinion, and I am allowed to have mine.>>>>> However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? Becaue they understood and honored their children’s individuality and sexuality, perhaps? <<<<<This does not answer the question. I do not see the connection between honoring a child’s individuality and developing sexuality and tolerating something you find intolerable. >>>>> For me (and many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? Well, only if you honored them as individuals. As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love and doing "it." (ObSteve) Did they let you watch? <<<<No, and I would not have wanted to! Does the phrase "too much information" mean anything to you. Knowing they still enjoyed having sex together was enough, I didn’t need visual confermation.>>>>>> And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. That’s pretty tired. Turn that around a bit and think of your old age when *they* pick your nursing home. Do you *really* want them treating you this way? <<<<Since I hope I will have as good and as close a relationship with my children as I do with my parents I don’t really worry about this. I can’t imagine putting my parents in a nursing home where they were uncomfortable. My husband and I have discussed it and our parents will live with us or in the facility of their choice if it ever comes to that. Luckily, for now, they are healthy, independant people in their early 50s. They take good care of themselves and are loved very much, as well as honored and respected.>>>> Liz
Response:
>You can, however, have your home greatly disrupted and many of your >possessions destroyed in the course of a search and investigation. And, >should your minor child’s activities bring anyone to harm, you’ll be >liable.
True……and even if the child hurts no *one*……but destroys Josie
Response:
writes: >However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and >intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, >especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? >Becaue they understood and honored their children’s individuality >and sexuality, perhaps? >For me (and >many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected >to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? >Well, only if you honored them as individuals.
Again I ask……is the *individuality* of parents never to be honored? Whether *honoring* of individuality and *respect* is always and only to be extended to children. Josie
Response:
>Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are >supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or >immoral?
Why is it that some parents still feel that they have the corner on the Morals Market ™? In answer to your question, perhaps it is because many parents actually recognize that their children are separate, independent human beings who deserve respect. >Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and >productive human beings?
Given that kids are born that way, why would any informed and caring parent want to mess with it? >If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own >homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The >government? The kids themselves?
BINGO! >It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom >session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral >issues in the best manner.
Look, if some Kontrol Phreak Mom ™ comes in here trying to get ideas on how to beter control kids, the nature of usenet is that the mother will get a lot of alternative information. >I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. I >would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter >with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this >age, so just where did you get your hands on this?
The illegality of the purchase seems like a pretty lame reason to be concerned unless you actually think that them having it means that they will turn into criminals becaue of it. I’m guessing, though, that this is just rationalization and grasping at straws, at that. >2) As a previous >poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why >does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well?
Cripes! Now you are going to dictate to them which porn you don’t want them to have in the first place? Either this is more Kontrol Phreak Parenting ™ or you are again grasping at straws. >3) Not >only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the "stories," >"letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women >that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images.
Maybe very unrealistic. But then, so is virtually every single movie and cartoon. >Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and >Forum mags in his nightstand drawer,
HEY! If your sexual perceptions are so great, why would he need that sort of stuff? Might there be just a *hint* of sexual repression in your houe? >along with our birth control and a >few other "adult" toys.
Like an Acu-Jack or a dildo? IOW, are the adult toys fulfilling your repressed sexuality or his? >So if this is where my kids got the mags our >discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about >the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just >curious, or if they thought that was reality.
Asking the wrong questions. >However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and >intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, >especially in the hands of their child or even young teen?
Becaue they understood and honored their children’s individuality and sexuality, perhaps? >For me (and >many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected >to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen?
Well, only if you honored them as individuals. >As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? >When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing >the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting >everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents >"naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed >then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone >else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love >and doing "it."
(ObSteve) Did they let you watch? >And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a >pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on >your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the >house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or >agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit.
That’s pretty tired. Turn that around a bit and think of your old age when *they* pick your nursing home. Do you *really* want them treating you this way? — Do not underestimate your abilities. That is your boss’s job. It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> of communication a two way street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at > him, because if you just lay down the law, you’re going to have the > angry 60s in your house all over again when he is a little older – and > none of us need that because there is too much potential for real harm > in real rebellion. > I have to say I agree with 99% of what you said, but on some issues I do > believe there is no room for compromise. > Drugs, IMO, is one of these issues. My father had a friend whose son > started with "experimenting" and went on to dealing drugs out of his > parents home. When he was caught the parents home was seized, along > with their car. These people were not using or dealing drugs themselves > and stupidly believed he just had a lot of friends who visited (he was > 16, had his own door in and out for his "privacy." His room was > originally meant to be a "mother in law apartment.") > I believe as a parent I have the right to tell my children not to curse > in my house (as long as my husband and I don’t) I have the right to not > allow their boy/girl friends to spend the night (talking teens/ opposite > sex sleep overs) and set reasonable limits on styles of dress (sorry but > my daughters are not allowed to shop in the jr slut department. They > can pick their clothes out, but my hubby and I have veto power if we > think something is too tight, short or revealing.) > You are 100% correct when you say pick your battles wisely. I would not > feel right asking my children to do anything I am unwilling to do. I do > not think that battling over who their friends are, or what time to go > to bed is a good idea if a teen is living up to their responsibilities > (grades up, family commitments kept etc.) > However, I have no problem with saying "my house, my rules" if my child > wants to bring in a pet snake (major snake phobia here!) or smoke, or > blast music I find offensive (listen to it at a reasonable level in your > room, fine, try to force me to listen to it, big problem!) There are > just some times, IMO, when as the parent and the home owner (or renter) > you have to draw a line and say "this will not be crossed without > ——- happening." This does not mean that I won’t be willing to > discuss it with my children and compromise where I can. It means it is > my and my husbands house and we get the final say so. > Liz > Actually, I think we agree on quite a bit. I think my real point is that > parents should have absolute rules on things like drugs, overnight > opposite sex visitors, smoking, and habits that infringe on the health > and safety and sanity of others in the house. There is a time to be > inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what > he or she does or might endanger someone else. > However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these > categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound > like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to > say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like > junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really > think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, > smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just > embarrassing you?
I agree a lot with what Liz and Davidson have been saying. I think picking the things you want to make an issue of, is an important concept. Things like hair style are so unimportant. Not being shocked at dred locks for instance, I mean what does it matter. But health and safety issue, there should be limits. I think it is good if this is something that you make an overall house rule. For instance our house is No Smoking, and any smoker that comes here has to smoke outside. I believe it goes further than that though. Having communication open and honest and being able to talk about anything, taking age into consideration. The way that it goes further is limits bring security. If there are no limits, kids keep pushing and pushing to try to find them, no limits is almost non-caring, even if you communicate. It says ok I will talk to you, and be with you, but I will not protect you and show you right from wrong. Annemarie
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > There is a time to be > > inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what > > he or she does or might endanger someone else. > Trying to control people your size is a fool’s errand. > > However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these > > categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound > > like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to > > say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like > > junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really > > think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, > > smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just > > embarrassing you? > Gee, and your LAST post almost sounded sane! You’ve backslid. Rules > about things that are really harmful are the VERY STUPIDEST thing you > could possibly do!! It invalidates you immediately and you never get to > be heard ever again, they tune you out and do as they please. The ONLY > way to reach them is to retain your influence, and that means NO RULES, > JUST COMMUNICATIONS!! A rule against smoking indoors that applies to > everyone is a good idea, let them go outdoors, but if you can’t apply it > to a paying guest it won’t work trying to apply it to a young adult!! A > rule against noise is fine, as long as it is applied uniformly. > Steve > Steve, > At what age do you think a person has the right to make decisions that > may permanently harm them? At what point of maturity do they have the a > clear enough idea about the implications of their actions to make an > informed judgment about the risks?
When they are virtually your size trying to stop them is counter-productive to their own safety, because they will do what you don’t want them to do to free themselves, as an animal in a trap will chew off their leg. if you love them you will not ever try to catch them in such a trap. Instead you will communicate, not control. > Do you agree that it is reasonable to keep a toddler from running into > the street after a ball because a car is coming? Is this a parent’s > responsibility? Do you agree that there should be an absolute rule "no > running into the street" for toddlers?
No. They are not old enough to grasp the danger, thus they are too young to grasp the rule. This does NOT mean, however, that you have the right to disrespect and dishonor them with deprecation and emotional cruelty in order to control them. Instead you must passively restrain them without comment and wait till they are more advanced to talk to them about such things, at which point it won’t be very necessary. > At what age do these toddlers mature to the point where they can make an > informed judgment about the risk of running into the street?
When they can tell it to you. > At what age does a child become capable of making an informed judgment > about the risks of alcohol abuse, heroin abuse, unprotected sex?
Like other full-sized humans, when they are big enough that YOU cannot really stop them and when your very interference makes them MORE likely to harm themselves and not LESS!! > Is it a > parent’s responsibility to keep children away from these things until > they are able to make a mature judgment about them and understand the > potential risks and benefits?
Till they understand what they are at all, yes, till age of perhaps 8 or 9. After they DO understand and simply disagree with you? No. > I don’t think you can live you life for your kid. Who would want to, > anyway? Only those sorry souls who haven’t lived their own life for > themselves. But I do believe that there are times when children simply > don’t have the ability to understand the implications of their actions > (a toddler really doesn’t understand the finality of death, for > example). So yes, eventually I believe you have to let kids make their > own decisions, no matter how bad you think their decisions are. But that > is very different from totally hands-off, no rules parenting? So I’m > curious, do you believe in rules for children at any age? (the big > safety rules, not the stupid clean-your-room rules)
The toddler analogy is EXTREMELY flawed. You make no distinction between not even KNOWING a danger when a child is small enough to STOP versus trying to force them to agree with you when they are too BIG to stop!! When a being vociferously demands their autonomy they must be given it. No other way works because it makes them "chew off their own leg". Steve
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Drugs, IMO, is one of these issues. My father had a friend whose son > started with "experimenting" and went on to dealing drugs out of his > parents home. When he was caught the parents home was seized, along > with their car. These people were not using or dealing drugs themselves > and stupidly believed he just had a lot of friends who visited (he was > 16, had his own door in and out for his "privacy." His room was > originally meant to be a "mother in law apartment.") > The last newsgroup you tried this on 6 months ago had the same reaction > I’m gonna give you right now: BULLSHIT!! No parents have had their home > seized in that manner over some crime by their child that they were not > actively supporting!! This anecdote came off the fucking 700 Club on TV > a year ago and has been making the rounds as moron Xtians repeated it as > justification for archaic reactionary bastardliness!! I found it after a > web search!! There was an incident in Florida where a whole crime family > had their compound seized when their kid was busted for selling at > school in the course of a warrant search, but it was due to the parents’ > methedrine lab!!!
You can, however, have your home greatly disrupted and many of your possessions destroyed in the course of a search and investigation. And, should your minor child’s activities bring anyone to harm, you’ll be liable. Banty
Response:
No, not a nap – a shower :-D – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > awhile? > Josie >> Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are >> supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or >> immoral? >Because so many parents are morons who think all sorts of good things >are unacceptable, repugnant, or immoral. >> Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and >> productive human beings? >You use the word moral a lot. To me that usually means a lurking >antisexual nutcake. It’s a code word for SEXUAL REPRESSION. And that >gets you a pregnant daughter and nothing else. >> If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own >> homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The >> government? The kids themselves? >Somebody who knows what a good idea is and has had a good blowjob >recently, or given one. Certainly not sexually defective prigs like >you!! >> It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom >> session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral >> issues in the best manner. >You’re saying that shitfucking word again!! >> I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. >SURE you don’t! Why don’t I believe you? >>I >> would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter >> with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this >> age, so just where did you get your hands on this? >They usually paid good money for it, LEAVE THEM THE FUCK ALONE!!! >Who the fuck cares, it’s not illegal for them to have it!! Every state >recognizes your right to educate your child about sex using any material >you wish!! Look it up, lady!! >2) As a previous >> poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why >> does he need porn? >TO MASTURBATE BETTER and become EDUCATED about genitals, YOU SHIT!! >> Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? >NO PUSSIES THERE, PRIG!!! >3) Not >> only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, >I see hair, pussy, clit, labia, all the usual, so what’s the problem, >Mommy Dearest!!!?! >> but the "stories," >> "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women >> that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. >That’s because you’re a neurotic asinine prig with delusions of moral >superiority. They tell what adults talk about and think about so kids >will know. That’s a fucking good idea!! You can bet they won’t get TRUTH >ouit of YOUR kind!! >> Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and >> Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a >> few other "adult" toys. >So whoopeeee, and "some of your best friends are probably liberals"!! >So fucking what? >> So if this is where my kids got the mags our >> discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about >> the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just >> curious, or if they thought that was reality. >Nobody thinks its reality. Anybody with a brain can look around and see >what real women look like and imagine them without clothes, and in a >sane world people would show kids what they looked like and you could >ask the 40-something neighbor lady to fuck your brains out if you were >14, but in this asinine society you need porn!! The porn is to >stimulate. it’s take on things is an attempt at campy humor. Do you >worry that Saturday Night Live will give kids a "false version of >reality, or books or other TV will?? Then why the fuck would you bother >with porn!!!??!! At least it isn’t cartoon characters with 4 fingers!! >Geez! >> However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and >> intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, >> especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and >> many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected >> to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? >because it’s unrealistic for the real world!! >If you don’t change your views your kid will change your rules and your >views for you without telling you. They will just go right around you >and cut you out of the loop entirely. That’s the way it works. Asinine >prigs always get what they fear the most!! So stop fearing and educate >yourself and quit being a reactionary asshole. >> As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? >YES, a violation of privacy of ANYONE is DISHONORING and you can expect >to be disrespected for your behavior as soon as possible!! it doesn’t >fucking matter what your "rules" are, they make their own rules on you >too, and you’ll get yours. Trying to merely "control" other people your >own size is a fool’s errand. You’d better shut your mouth and make >friends if you want to really know what’s going on. That means treating >them as equals so that they’ll treat YOU as an equal, because otherwise >they won’t. You’ll be a disparaged asshole. >> When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing >> the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting >> everyone’s things away. >THAT’s stupid!! Give everybody their stuff and have THEM put them away!! >A family with no secrets is a family where everything REAL is a secret!! >> Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents >> "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed >> then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone >> else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love >> and doing "it." >For some people this masquerades as sex-ed. Pitiful. You kids probably >had NO idea what they even meant! Find any long rubber things while you >were at it?? >> And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a >> pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on >> your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the >> house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or >> agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. >Bullshit, I can tell that you’re STILL damaged!! >> These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while >> reading this thread. >> Liz >Dumb. "my girls mom",eh? Fuck you and that horseshit merchant "Dr." >Laura S. too! And tell her I’ve got all her nude pictures off the net!! >Steve >Path: >lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc03.blue.aol.com!portc01.blue.aol.com!por > tc.blue.aol.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!netnews.com!news > feed.berkeley.edu!cyclone.swbell.net!news.pacbell.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Actually, I think we agree on quite a bit. I think my real point is that >parents should have absolute rules on things like drugs, overnight >opposite sex visitors, smoking, and habits that infringe on the health >and safety and sanity of others in the house. There is a time to be >inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what >he or she does or might endanger someone else. >However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these >categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound >like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to >say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like >junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really >think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, >smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just >embarrassing you?
thought. (?) Josie
Response:
An extremely good post, Davidson…….and I agree with all of it. The only thing I take exception to is the either or attitude WRT believing in the *my house, my rules* stand. While I……like Liz…..grew up with the same…….the *my house, my rules* thing was never translated into *my way or the highway*. (in our home, anyway) Never. When we as children didn’t follow any such rules (and the rules were damn few) of the house……we certainly weren’t shown the door and highway. We *did* however……understand and accept, even as kids…..that *someone* had to be in charge and that *that* was as it should be. My parents also btw…..never…..instilled in us children that there was only one *right way* to anything. In fact, we were taught the opposite……that there are many different *ways* and beliefs……and that they were all to be respected, just as *their* way was to be respected…..and that we could choose our own *right way* when we were grown and making our lives. That doesn’t negate the fact though, IMO……that parents should be able to have some *house rules* . JMO. Josie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Let me add my thoughts to this. I’m older than many of the posters in >this group. I grew up at a time (I was born in 1952) when most parents >had Liz’s attitude – my way or the highway. There was one "right" way to >do things. Conformity was considered a kind of respect. This wasn’t just >in my family (which was actually quite flexible for the time) but for >society (at least "nice" white middle class society) as a whole. Look at >some of the old newsreel footage of the Senate or House when Kennedy was >President – what do you see? Identical older white men in dark suits >ties and white shirts. It is really pretty creepy. >Then the came the late 60s. Along with protesting the Vietnam war, what >young people wanted was to be judged for what they were on the inside, >not how they looked on the outside or how well they played the game of >conformity. A lot of parents couldn’t take this. I saw families >literally split apart and not talking to each other over the length of >the son’s hair. That seemed pretty damned stupid to me then, and it >seems pretty damned stupid now, but it really happened. Clothes, hair, >language all caused family upheavals. But so did risky behaviors – sex, >drugs, hitchhiking to sit-ins. The point is that for many families, >there seemed to be no difference in the horror of their son with a >ponytail and the horror of their son tripping out of his freaking mind >on acid. Both things violated the parents’ rules of "How Things Should >Be in My House Where I Am the Boss." And because of this inflexibility, >a lot of kids were so alienated from their parents that they did a lot >of things that had the potential to really cause them harm. The parents >were so rigid and condemning in their attitudes about small things that >the kids figured they might as well hang for a sheep as hang for a lamb >- in other words, they were going to catch hell from their parents no >matter what. >Now, it seems as in reaction parents may have moved too far in the other >direction, allowing too much flexibility and experimentation and not >giving today’s kids a firm platform of values to stand on. But I for one >don’t want to go back to the "My House, My Rules" way of life either. I >think it is necessary to convey values to your children, but I also >think it is necessary to pick your battles wisely and to decide which >values are really important in the long run and which are rules you are >enforcing for your convenience. (I think of this every time I read a >thread about how awful it is that some 4 year old won’t clean her room). >If you really object to pornography, tell your child why – help him see >how it degrades women. Help him understand your objections. But don’t >just say "Not in my house" Keep the channels of communication a two way >street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at him, because if you just lay >down the law, you’re going to have the angry 60s in your house all over >again when he is a little older – and none of us need that because there >is too much potential for real harm in real rebellion. > Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are > supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or > immoral? > Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and > productive human beings? > If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own > homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The > government? The kids themselves? > It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom > session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral > issues in the best manner. > I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. I > would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter > with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this > age, so just where did you get your hands on this? 2) As a previous > poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why > does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? 3) Not > only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the "stories," > "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women > that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. > Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and > Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a > few other "adult" toys. So if this is where my kids got the mags our > discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about > the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just > curious, or if they thought that was reality. > However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and > intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, > especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and > many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected > to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? > As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? > When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing > the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting > everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents > "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed > then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone > else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love > and doing "it." > And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a > pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on > your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the > house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or > agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. > These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while > reading this thread. > Liz >Path: >lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc03.blue.aol.com!portc.blue.aol.com!newsf
eed.cwix.com!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!135.173.83.19!wnmasters2!bgtnsc04-
Response:
>And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a >pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on >your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the >house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or >agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. >These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while >reading this thread.
Alot of the same thoughts popped into my head during this thread too. Thanks it’s true that great minds think alike. [G] Josie…… btw, I’ve sent ya about 6 e-mails since I got this new computer up……did *any* get through?
Response:
> Actually, I think we agree on quite a bit. I think my real point is that > parents should have absolute rules on things like drugs, overnight > opposite sex visitors, smoking, and habits that infringe on the health > and safety and sanity of others in the house.
That’s unreasonable. THAT’S the highway!! Or simply ignoring your fucking ass!! Ask yourself what a housemate would put up with and where they’d punch your face or ignore you and you’ll have a better idea. > There is a time to be > inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what > he or she does or might endanger someone else.
Trying to control people your size is a fool’s errand. > However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these > categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound > like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to > say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like > junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really > think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, > smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just > embarrassing you?
Gee, and your LAST post almost sounded sane! You’ve backslid. Rules about things that are really harmful are the VERY STUPIDEST thing you could possibly do!! It invalidates you immediately and you never get to be heard ever again, they tune you out and do as they please. The ONLY way to reach them is to retain your influence, and that means NO RULES, JUST COMMUNICATIONS!! A rule against smoking indoors that applies to everyone is a good idea, let them go outdoors, but if you can’t apply it to a paying guest it won’t work trying to apply it to a young adult!! A rule against noise is fine, as long as it is applied uniformly. Steve
Response:
Steve, I am not a prig, not by any stretch of the imagination, except by people like you. You seem to think every single thing in the world is connected to sex, and last time I checked it is not. As for whether I have or have not given a good blow job recently, that is none of your business. The only person who knows for sure is my husband. I simply do not feel the need to have sex with everyone I meet. I did my share of fooling around when I was single, but I did take a vow to "forsake all others" and I meant it. I don’t condemn you and your spouse for your open marriage, please give me the same respect for mine. As for the rest of what you had to say (insults included) all I can say is this —- Opinions are like assholes—everyone has one. Liz
Response:
awhile? Josie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are > supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or > immoral? >Because so many parents are morons who think all sorts of good things >are unacceptable, repugnant, or immoral. > Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and > productive human beings? >You use the word moral a lot. To me that usually means a lurking >antisexual nutcake. It’s a code word for SEXUAL REPRESSION. And that >gets you a pregnant daughter and nothing else. > If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own > homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The > government? The kids themselves? >Somebody who knows what a good idea is and has had a good blowjob >recently, or given one. Certainly not sexually defective prigs like >you!! > It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom > session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral > issues in the best manner. >You’re saying that shitfucking word again!! > I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. >SURE you don’t! Why don’t I believe you? >I > would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter > with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this > age, so just where did you get your hands on this? >They usually paid good money for it, LEAVE THEM THE FUCK ALONE!!! >Who the fuck cares, it’s not illegal for them to have it!! Every state >recognizes your right to educate your child about sex using any material >you wish!! Look it up, lady!! >2) As a previous > poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why > does he need porn? >TO MASTURBATE BETTER and become EDUCATED about genitals, YOU SHIT!! > Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? >NO PUSSIES THERE, PRIG!!! >3) Not > only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, >I see hair, pussy, clit, labia, all the usual, so what’s the problem, >Mommy Dearest!!!?! > but the "stories," > "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women > that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. >That’s because you’re a neurotic asinine prig with delusions of moral >superiority. They tell what adults talk about and think about so kids >will know. That’s a fucking good idea!! You can bet they won’t get TRUTH >ouit of YOUR kind!! > Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and > Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a > few other "adult" toys. >So whoopeeee, and "some of your best friends are probably liberals"!! >So fucking what? > So if this is where my kids got the mags our > discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about > the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just > curious, or if they thought that was reality. >Nobody thinks its reality. Anybody with a brain can look around and see >what real women look like and imagine them without clothes, and in a >sane world people would show kids what they looked like and you could >ask the 40-something neighbor lady to fuck your brains out if you were >14, but in this asinine society you need porn!! The porn is to >stimulate. it’s take on things is an attempt at campy humor. Do you >worry that Saturday Night Live will give kids a "false version of >reality, or books or other TV will?? Then why the fuck would you bother >with porn!!!??!! At least it isn’t cartoon characters with 4 fingers!! >Geez! > However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and > intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, > especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and > many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected > to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? >because it’s unrealistic for the real world!! >If you don’t change your views your kid will change your rules and your >views for you without telling you. They will just go right around you >and cut you out of the loop entirely. That’s the way it works. Asinine >prigs always get what they fear the most!! So stop fearing and educate >yourself and quit being a reactionary asshole. > As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? >YES, a violation of privacy of ANYONE is DISHONORING and you can expect >to be disrespected for your behavior as soon as possible!! it doesn’t >fucking matter what your "rules" are, they make their own rules on you >too, and you’ll get yours. Trying to merely "control" other people your >own size is a fool’s errand. You’d better shut your mouth and make >friends if you want to really know what’s going on. That means treating >them as equals so that they’ll treat YOU as an equal, because otherwise >they won’t. You’ll be a disparaged asshole. > When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing > the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting > everyone’s things away. >THAT’s stupid!! Give everybody their stuff and have THEM put them away!! >A family with no secrets is a family where everything REAL is a secret!! > Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents > "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed > then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone > else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love > and doing "it." >For some people this masquerades as sex-ed. Pitiful. You kids probably >had NO idea what they even meant! Find any long rubber things while you >were at it?? > And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a > pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on > your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the > house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or > agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. >Bullshit, I can tell that you’re STILL damaged!! > These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while > reading this thread. > Liz >Dumb. "my girls mom",eh? Fuck you and that horseshit merchant "Dr." >Laura S. too! And tell her I’ve got all her nude pictures off the net!! >Steve >Path: >lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc03.blue.aol.com!portc01.blue.aol.com!por
tc.blue.aol.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!netnews.com!news feed.berkeley.edu!cyclone.swbell.net!news.pacbell.net.POSTED!not-for-mail – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> There is a time to be > inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what > he or she does or might endanger someone else. > Trying to control people your size is a fool’s errand. > However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these > categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound > like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to > say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like > junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really > think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, > smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just > embarrassing you? > Gee, and your LAST post almost sounded sane! You’ve backslid. Rules > about things that are really harmful are the VERY STUPIDEST thing you > could possibly do!! It invalidates you immediately and you never get to > be heard ever again, they tune you out and do as they please. The ONLY > way to reach them is to retain your influence, and that means NO RULES, > JUST COMMUNICATIONS!! A rule against smoking indoors that applies to > everyone is a good idea, let them go outdoors, but if you can’t apply it > to a paying guest it won’t work trying to apply it to a young adult!! A > rule against noise is fine, as long as it is applied uniformly. > Steve
Steve, At what age do you think a person has the right to make decisions that may permanently harm them? At what point of maturity do they have the a clear enough idea about the implications of their actions to make an informed judgment about the risks? Do you agree that it is reasonable to keep a toddler from running into the street after a ball because a car is coming? Is this a parent’s responsibility? Do you agree that there should be an absolute rule "no running into the street" for toddlers? At what age do these toddlers mature to the point where they can make an informed judgment about the risk of running into the street? At what age does a child become capable of making an informed judgment about the risks of alcohol abuse, heroin abuse, unprotected sex? Is it a parent’s responsibility to keep children away from these things until they are able to make a mature judgment about them and understand the potential risks and benefits? I don’t think you can live you life for your kid. Who would want to, anyway? Only those sorry souls who haven’t lived their own life for themselves. But I do believe that there are times when children simply don’t have the ability to understand the implications of their actions (a toddler really doesn’t understand the finality of death, for example). So yes, eventually I believe you have to let kids make their own decisions, no matter how bad you think their decisions are. But that is very different from totally hands-off, no rules parenting? So I’m curious, do you believe in rules for children at any age? (the big safety rules, not the stupid clean-your-room rules)
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > of communication a two way street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at > him, because if you just lay down the law, you’re going to have the > angry 60s in your house all over again when he is a little older – and > none of us need that because there is too much potential for real harm > in real rebellion. > I have to say I agree with 99% of what you said, but on some issues I do > believe there is no room for compromise. > Drugs, IMO, is one of these issues. My father had a friend whose son > started with "experimenting" and went on to dealing drugs out of his > parents home. When he was caught the parents home was seized, along > with their car. These people were not using or dealing drugs themselves > and stupidly believed he just had a lot of friends who visited (he was > 16, had his own door in and out for his "privacy." His room was > originally meant to be a "mother in law apartment.")
The last newsgroup you tried this on 6 months ago had the same reaction I’m gonna give you right now: BULLSHIT!! No parents have had their home seized in that manner over some crime by their child that they were not actively supporting!! This anecdote came off the fucking 700 Club on TV a year ago and has been making the rounds as moron Xtians repeated it as justification for archaic reactionary bastardliness!! I found it after a web search!! There was an incident in Florida where a whole crime family had their compound seized when their kid was busted for selling at school in the course of a warrant search, but it was due to the parents’ methedrine lab!!! > I believe as a parent I have the right to tell my children not to curse > in my house (as long as my husband and I don’t) I have the right to not > allow their boy/girl friends to spend the night (talking teens/ opposite > sex sleep overs) and set reasonable limits on styles of dress (sorry but > my daughters are not allowed to shop in the jr slut department. They > can pick their clothes out, but my hubby and I have veto power if we > think something is too tight, short or revealing.)
And you’re a moronic prick who will get richly what you deserve for your fascism!! I hope they kill you in your sleep!! Deserved!! > You are 100% correct when you say pick your battles wisely. I would not > feel right asking my children to do anything I am unwilling to do. I do > not think that battling over who their friends are, or what time to go > to bed is a good idea if a teen is living up to their responsibilities > (grades up, family commitments kept etc.) > However, I have no problem with saying "my house, my rules" if my child > wants to bring in a pet snake (major snake phobia here!) or smoke, or > blast music I find offensive (listen to it at a reasonable level in your > room, fine, try to force me to listen to it, big problem!) There are > just some times, IMO, when as the parent and the home owner (or renter) > you have to draw a line and say "this will not be crossed without > ——- happening."
You have your concept of "sin" and otherwise reasonable relations between housemates all mixed up together and your boundaries are totally skewed all over the map!! > This does not mean that I won’t be willing to > discuss it with my children and compromise where I can. It means it is > my and my husbands house and we get the final say so. > Liz
Then you will never know your own children, not really, and they will never wish to actually come visit you, let alone live with you ever again. Your way IS the highway!! Steve
Response:
> Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are > supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or > immoral?
Because so many parents are morons who think all sorts of good things are unacceptable, repugnant, or immoral. > Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and > productive human beings?
You use the word moral a lot. To me that usually means a lurking antisexual nutcake. It’s a code word for SEXUAL REPRESSION. And that gets you a pregnant daughter and nothing else. > If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own > homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The > government? The kids themselves?
Somebody who knows what a good idea is and has had a good blowjob recently, or given one. Certainly not sexually defective prigs like you!! > It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom > session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral > issues in the best manner.
You’re saying that shitfucking word again!!
SURE you don’t! Why don’t I believe you? >I > would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter > with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this > age, so just where did you get your hands on this?
They usually paid good money for it, LEAVE THEM THE FUCK ALONE!!! Who the fuck cares, it’s not illegal for them to have it!! Every state recognizes your right to educate your child about sex using any material you wish!! Look it up, lady!! 2) As a previous > poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why > does he need porn?
TO MASTURBATE BETTER and become EDUCATED about genitals, YOU SHIT!! > Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well?
NO PUSSIES THERE, PRIG!!! 3) Not > only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic,
I see hair, pussy, clit, labia, all the usual, so what’s the problem, Mommy Dearest!!!?! > but the "stories," > "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women > that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images.
That’s because you’re a neurotic asinine prig with delusions of moral superiority. They tell what adults talk about and think about so kids will know. That’s a fucking good idea!! You can bet they won’t get TRUTH ouit of YOUR kind!! > Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and > Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a > few other "adult" toys.
So whoopeeee, and "some of your best friends are probably liberals"!! So fucking what? > So if this is where my kids got the mags our > discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about > the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just > curious, or if they thought that was reality.
Nobody thinks its reality. Anybody with a brain can look around and see what real women look like and imagine them without clothes, and in a sane world people would show kids what they looked like and you could ask the 40-something neighbor lady to fuck your brains out if you were 14, but in this asinine society you need porn!! The porn is to stimulate. it’s take on things is an attempt at campy humor. Do you worry that Saturday Night Live will give kids a "false version of reality, or books or other TV will?? Then why the fuck would you bother with porn!!!??!! At least it isn’t cartoon characters with 4 fingers!! Geez! > However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and > intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, > especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and > many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected > to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen?
because it’s unrealistic for the real world!! If you don’t change your views your kid will change your rules and your views for you without telling you. They will just go right around you and cut you out of the loop entirely. That’s the way it works. Asinine prigs always get what they fear the most!! So stop fearing and educate yourself and quit being a reactionary asshole. > As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter?
YES, a violation of privacy of ANYONE is DISHONORING and you can expect to be disrespected for your behavior as soon as possible!! it doesn’t fucking matter what your "rules" are, they make their own rules on you too, and you’ll get yours. Trying to merely "control" other people your own size is a fool’s errand. You’d better shut your mouth and make friends if you want to really know what’s going on. That means treating them as equals so that they’ll treat YOU as an equal, because otherwise they won’t. You’ll be a disparaged asshole. > When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing > the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting > everyone’s things away.
THAT’s stupid!! Give everybody their stuff and have THEM put them away!! A family with no secrets is a family where everything REAL is a secret!! > Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents > "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed > then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone > else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love > and doing "it."
For some people this masquerades as sex-ed. Pitiful. You kids probably had NO idea what they even meant! Find any long rubber things while you were at it?? > And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a > pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on > your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the > house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or > agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit.
Bullshit, I can tell that you’re STILL damaged!! > These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while > reading this thread. > Liz
Dumb. "my girls mom",eh? Fuck you and that horseshit merchant "Dr." Laura S. too! And tell her I’ve got all her nude pictures off the net!! Steve
Response:
of communication a two way street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at him, because if you just lay down the law, you’re going to have the angry 60s in your house all over again when he is a little older – and none of us need that because there is too much potential for real harm in real rebellion. I have to say I agree with 99% of what you said, but on some issues I do believe there is no room for compromise. Drugs, IMO, is one of these issues. My father had a friend whose son started with "experimenting" and went on to dealing drugs out of his parents home. When he was caught the parents home was seized, along with their car. These people were not using or dealing drugs themselves and stupidly believed he just had a lot of friends who visited (he was 16, had his own door in and out for his "privacy." His room was originally meant to be a "mother in law apartment.") I believe as a parent I have the right to tell my children not to curse in my house (as long as my husband and I don’t) I have the right to not allow their boy/girl friends to spend the night (talking teens/ opposite sex sleep overs) and set reasonable limits on styles of dress (sorry but my daughters are not allowed to shop in the jr slut department. They can pick their clothes out, but my hubby and I have veto power if we think something is too tight, short or revealing.) You are 100% correct when you say pick your battles wisely. I would not feel right asking my children to do anything I am unwilling to do. I do not think that battling over who their friends are, or what time to go to bed is a good idea if a teen is living up to their responsibilities (grades up, family commitments kept etc.) However, I have no problem with saying "my house, my rules" if my child wants to bring in a pet snake (major snake phobia here!) or smoke, or blast music I find offensive (listen to it at a reasonable level in your room, fine, try to force me to listen to it, big problem!) There are just some times, IMO, when as the parent and the home owner (or renter) you have to draw a line and say "this will not be crossed without ——- happening." This does not mean that I won’t be willing to discuss it with my children and compromise where I can. It means it is my and my husbands house and we get the final say so. Liz
Response:
Let me add my thoughts to this. I’m older than many of the posters in this group. I grew up at a time (I was born in 1952) when most parents had Liz’s attitude – my way or the highway. There was one "right" way to do things. Conformity was considered a kind of respect. This wasn’t just in my family (which was actually quite flexible for the time) but for society (at least "nice" white middle class society) as a whole. Look at some of the old newsreel footage of the Senate or House when Kennedy was President – what do you see? Identical older white men in dark suits ties and white shirts. It is really pretty creepy. Then the came the late 60s. Along with protesting the Vietnam war, what young people wanted was to be judged for what they were on the inside, not how they looked on the outside or how well they played the game of conformity. A lot of parents couldn’t take this. I saw families literally split apart and not talking to each other over the length of the son’s hair. That seemed pretty damned stupid to me then, and it seems pretty damned stupid now, but it really happened. Clothes, hair, language all caused family upheavals. But so did risky behaviors – sex, drugs, hitchhiking to sit-ins. The point is that for many families, there seemed to be no difference in the horror of their son with a ponytail and the horror of their son tripping out of his freaking mind on acid. Both things violated the parents’ rules of "How Things Should Be in My House Where I Am the Boss." And because of this inflexibility, a lot of kids were so alienated from their parents that they did a lot of things that had the potential to really cause them harm. The parents were so rigid and condemning in their attitudes about small things that the kids figured they might as well hang for a sheep as hang for a lamb – in other words, they were going to catch hell from their parents no matter what. Now, it seems as in reaction parents may have moved too far in the other direction, allowing too much flexibility and experimentation and not giving today’s kids a firm platform of values to stand on. But I for one don’t want to go back to the "My House, My Rules" way of life either. I think it is necessary to convey values to your children, but I also think it is necessary to pick your battles wisely and to decide which values are really important in the long run and which are rules you are enforcing for your convenience. (I think of this every time I read a thread about how awful it is that some 4 year old won’t clean her room). If you really object to pornography, tell your child why – help him see how it degrades women. Help him understand your objections. But don’t just say "Not in my house" Keep the channels of communication a two way street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at him, because if you just lay down the law, you’re going to have the angry 60s in your house all over again when he is a little older – and none of us need that because there is too much potential for real harm in real rebellion. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are > supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or > immoral? > Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and > productive human beings? > If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own > homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The > government? The kids themselves? > It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom > session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral > issues in the best manner. > I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. I > would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter > with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this > age, so just where did you get your hands on this? 2) As a previous > poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why > does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? 3) Not > only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the "stories," > "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women > that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. > Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and > Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a > few other "adult" toys. So if this is where my kids got the mags our > discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about > the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just > curious, or if they thought that was reality. > However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and > intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, > especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and > many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected > to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? > As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? > When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing > the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting > everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents > "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed > then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone > else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love > and doing "it." > And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a > pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on > your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the > house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or > agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. > These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while > reading this thread. > Liz
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > of communication a two way street. Listen to him, don’t just talk at > him, because if you just lay down the law, you’re going to have the > angry 60s in your house all over again when he is a little older – and > none of us need that because there is too much potential for real harm > in real rebellion. > I have to say I agree with 99% of what you said, but on some issues I do > believe there is no room for compromise. > Drugs, IMO, is one of these issues. My father had a friend whose son > started with "experimenting" and went on to dealing drugs out of his > parents home. When he was caught the parents home was seized, along > with their car. These people were not using or dealing drugs themselves > and stupidly believed he just had a lot of friends who visited (he was > 16, had his own door in and out for his "privacy." His room was > originally meant to be a "mother in law apartment.") > I believe as a parent I have the right to tell my children not to curse > in my house (as long as my husband and I don’t) I have the right to not > allow their boy/girl friends to spend the night (talking teens/ opposite > sex sleep overs) and set reasonable limits on styles of dress (sorry but > my daughters are not allowed to shop in the jr slut department. They > can pick their clothes out, but my hubby and I have veto power if we > think something is too tight, short or revealing.) > You are 100% correct when you say pick your battles wisely. I would not > feel right asking my children to do anything I am unwilling to do. I do > not think that battling over who their friends are, or what time to go > to bed is a good idea if a teen is living up to their responsibilities > (grades up, family commitments kept etc.) > However, I have no problem with saying "my house, my rules" if my child > wants to bring in a pet snake (major snake phobia here!) or smoke, or > blast music I find offensive (listen to it at a reasonable level in your > room, fine, try to force me to listen to it, big problem!) There are > just some times, IMO, when as the parent and the home owner (or renter) > you have to draw a line and say "this will not be crossed without > ——- happening." This does not mean that I won’t be willing to > discuss it with my children and compromise where I can. It means it is > my and my husbands house and we get the final say so. > Liz
Actually, I think we agree on quite a bit. I think my real point is that parents should have absolute rules on things like drugs, overnight opposite sex visitors, smoking, and habits that infringe on the health and safety and sanity of others in the house. There is a time to be inflexible, and that time is when your child might be endangered by what he or she does or might endanger someone else. However, things like dress and cursing just don’t fall into these categories. Sure, you should point out that cursing makes them sound like an idiot and that they will get more respect for what they have to say if they can say it without swear words, and that if they dress like junior slut they will be treated like junior slut, but do you really think that these issues are of the same magnitude as drugs, sex, smoking? Is their language or dress really hurting them or is it just embarrassing you?
Response:
Why is it, that to be considered a "good" parent these days we are supposed to tolerate things that we consider unacceptable, repugnant or immoral? Isn’t it the job of parenting to raise well adjusted, loving, moral and productive human beings? If we don’t want the parents choosing what moral to inforce in their own homes who decides? The neighbors? The church on the corner? The government? The kids themselves? It really bothers me that this thread turned into a bash the mom session, instead of a discussion on how to handle sexual and moral issues in the best manner. I do not have a problem with porn magazines or even videos for adults. I would have a problem with it if I found my 13 yr old son or daughter with one for several reasons. 1) They are illegal to purchase at this age, so just where did you get your hands on this? 2) As a previous poster stated, a stiff breeze can arouse a 13 yr old boy, so just why does he need porn? Wouldn’t a Victoria Secret do just as well? 3) Not only are the pictures in most porn mags unrealistic, but the "stories," "letters" and "articles" they often include portray an image of women that I do not want to be among my childrens first sexual images. Now, just to set the record totally straight: my husband has Playboy and Forum mags in his nightstand drawer, along with our birth control and a few other "adult" toys. So if this is where my kids got the mags our discussion would be about taking other people’s property, and then about the magazines themselves. I would want to know if they were just curious, or if they thought that was reality. However, if someone finds such magazines totally repugnant and intolerable why should they be expected to allow them in their home, especially in the hands of their child or even young teen? For me (and many parents) the absolute no way would be drugs. Should I be expected to change my views to accommodate the "experimentation" of my teen? As for the "why were you in his drawer" question, why does it matter? When I was growing up the house rule was that we each took a week doing the family laundry, which included folding, ironing, and putting everyone’s things away. Yes, it was awkward when I found my parents "naughty nighties" as they called them (I think Mom was more embarrassed then I was) but it was also kind of nice to learn that while everyone else’s parents were divorcing (or so it seemed) my were still in love and doing "it." And as my mom was fond of telling me after turning down a request for a pet, or making me clean "my" room to "her" standards: "Until you are on your own, paying your own way, in your own house you have to live by the house rules. My house, my rules." I might not have always liked it or agreed with it, but it didn’t hurt me one bit. These are just some thoughts that were popping through my head while reading this thread. Liz
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.