next »

[ms_turtle]

Having children is not a requirement, last time I checked.  If you can't adjust to the responsibility or choose not to, don't.

I cannot understand why anyone would think that bringing up children in social isolation is in any way acceptable.  I don't care if you know a couple of kids that endured it and turned out okay.  There are kids who grew up in Romanian and Chinese orphanages and turned out just fine, that doesn't mean that's an acceptable model for bringing up children.

I accept that I will draw fire for my opinions on this matter.

So, how did your social immersion during childhood work out for you? Did you learn anything from it? Are you learning from your current social immersion?

I don't need to wait for the answers because you've already shown everyone through your posts.

Now, this is just silly on an academic forum.  Sorry if I've hit a nerve, which clearly I have, but your personal inferences are just childish and somewhat ridiculous.  Resorting to name calling belies the weakness of your position and makes you appear a little foolish.

No. Presuming that you know what is right for a family that you've never met and a lifestyle that you've never experienced is childish, ridiculous, and foolish.

[post_functional]

Ah, so this is what all the one-offing is about.  To think I almost missed out.

I don't think stereotyping home-schoolers is very helpful.  Show me a stereotypical right-wing religious home-schooling family and I'll show you a stereotypical left-wing crunchy granola hippie commune home-schooling family.  The very left-leaning anti-vaxing Mothering-Dot-Commune is full of pro-homeschoolers and, more than that, unschoolers.

Not that this will ever happen, but in my opinion the guy who has it right is Leon Botstein.  High school is useless.  All the fundamentals of education can take place between K-8.  Kids graduate from high school now with an eighth grade education; re-calibrate the curriculum so an eighth-grade education is exactly that, what it was around 1960 or so.  Save the real higher order educational pursuits for college so that college is college and not remedial high school.  Then for those four years that used to be high school, put kids to work in community service.  Have them rub elbows with the elderly, intern in city halls, work in fire stations; in other words, give them exposure to generations of people and social circles that have nothing to do with youth popular culture and teenage tribalism.

I think it's a wonderful idea, but there is no political will for such a radical reordering of society.

[lolar2]

P_f, I take it you missed this New York Times article the other day. Take heart.

[tinyzombie]

Having children is not a requirement, last time I checked.  If you can't adjust to the responsibility or choose not to, don't.

I cannot understand why anyone would think that bringing up children in social isolation is in any way acceptable.  I don't care if you know a couple of kids that endured it and turned out okay.  There are kids who grew up in Romanian and Chinese orphanages and turned out just fine, that doesn't mean that's an acceptable model for bringing up children.

I accept that I will draw fire for my opinions on this matter.

So, how did your social immersion during childhood work out for you? Did you learn anything from it? Are you learning from your current social immersion?

I don't need to wait for the answers because you've already shown everyone through your posts.

Now, this is just silly on an academic forum.  Sorry if I've hit a nerve, which clearly I have, but your personal inferences are just childish and somewhat ridiculous.  Resorting to name calling belies the weakness of your position and makes you appear a little foolish.

No. Presuming that you know what is right for a family that you've never met and a lifestyle that you've never experienced is childish, ridiculous, and foolish.

Well put.

TZ, who actually would not choose to homeschool her children

[post_functional]

P_f, I take it you missed this New York Times article the other day. Take heart.

Thanks, lolar2.  I've been too busy prepping classes and writing home to my wife to read much.

[kiana]

Having children is not a requirement, last time I checked.  If you can't adjust to the responsibility or choose not to, don't.

I cannot understand why anyone would think that bringing up children in social isolation is in any way acceptable.  I don't care if you know a couple of kids that endured it and turned out okay.  There are kids who grew up in Romanian and Chinese orphanages and turned out just fine, that doesn't mean that's an acceptable model for bringing up children.

I accept that I will draw fire for my opinions on this matter.

So, how did your social immersion during childhood work out for you? Did you learn anything from it? Are you learning from your current social immersion?

I don't need to wait for the answers because you've already shown everyone through your posts.

Now, this is just silly on an academic forum.  Sorry if I've hit a nerve, which clearly I have, but your personal inferences are just childish and somewhat ridiculous.  Resorting to name calling belies the weakness of your position and makes you appear a little foolish.

No. Presuming that you know what is right for a family that you've never met and a lifestyle that you've never experienced is childish, ridiculous, and foolish.

I agree.

[marigolds]

Having children is not a requirement, last time I checked.  If you can't adjust to the responsibility or choose not to, don't.

I cannot understand why anyone would think that bringing up children in social isolation is in any way acceptable.  I don't care if you know a couple of kids that endured it and turned out okay.  There are kids who grew up in Romanian and Chinese orphanages and turned out just fine, that doesn't mean that's an acceptable model for bringing up children.

I accept that I will draw fire for my opinions on this matter.

So, how did your social immersion during childhood work out for you? Did you learn anything from it? Are you learning from your current social immersion?

I don't need to wait for the answers because you've already shown everyone through your posts.

Now, this is just silly on an academic forum.  Sorry if I've hit a nerve, which clearly I have, but your personal inferences are just childish and somewhat ridiculous.  Resorting to name calling belies the weakness of your position and makes you appear a little foolish.

No. Presuming that you know what is right for a family that you've never met and a lifestyle that you've never experienced is childish, ridiculous, and foolish.

I agree.

Froggy, the problem I'm seeing with your position is that our notions of sociality and childrearing are so totally culturally and historically shaped.  Did you ever read the Little House on the Prairie books?  Before the current centrifugal movement towards the cities and suburbs, lots and lots of families lived far out (on the prairie, on isolated farms, etc) and their children did just fine with only themselves and their siblings for company. Humans are remarkably resilient, you know; we're designed to thrive in a relatively wide variety of social and emotional conditions. 

Also, you're presenting your ideas in a very amnirov-esque manner, which may explain some of the responses you've gotten.  If you want to discuss childrearing practices, then open a discussion rather than dropping a "if you don't want to do it the way I would do it, don't do it at all, or I will call you irresponsible!" bomb on people. 

[frogfactory]

I wasn't going to post here again, but I wanted to thank marigolds for a measured and well-written rebuttal.  I appreciate that my tone was inappropriate, and that childrearing is a hotbutton topic for a lot of people, especially parents who perceive differences of opinion about the decision to have kids in the first place as well as how to bring them up as personal criticism.  I am guilty of participating in an escalation, which was unfortunate.

I'm sure Polly's going to step here and remind me that apologising is not the same as 'getting away with it', and I'm cool with that.

[t_r_b]

Froggy, the problem I'm seeing with your position is that our notions of sociality and childrearing are so totally culturally and historically shaped.  Did you ever read the Little House on the Prairie books?  Before the current centrifugal movement towards the cities and suburbs, lots and lots of families lived far out (on the prairie, on isolated farms, etc) and their children did just fine with only themselves and their siblings for company.

I agree with your larger point, but I have to jump in here and point out that the popularity of the LHotP books and the like have much more to do with how Americans like to think of themselves living than with how Americans have actually lived (at least within living memory). The majority of the US population has been urban/suburban for about a century now. A very large majority of Americans who grew up during or since World War II (i.e., the vast majority of the current population) have never lived in a rural area. Also, the parts of the country that are often considered the most rural (i.e. the Plains and intermountain West) are actually the most urban, as measured by the proportion of the population that lives in cities. Not very many people actually live (or have ever lived) on actual ranches. Most people in the Dakotas and Wyoming, etc. live in the cities that sell stuff to farms and ranches and process their products.

That said, your point still holds, because:

1. Americans love the IDEA of themselves being a rural/small town people, even if they are not. They love their western/pioneer heritage, even if they are removed from that life by a good 100+ years and have only Hollywoodized ideas of what it was like. And they really love the idea of themselves as independent and self-reliant (even though they never were, and have become much less so with time) which is why LHotP and the entire western genre continue to be so popular.

2. The social geography of suburbia, which is 60+ years old now, very much reflects that American self-image. The standalone single-family home with attached garage and no front porch and only a decorative front yard encourage American families to isolate themselves from their neighbors every bit as much as the LHotP family did, even though they live right next door to each other. In fact, in terms of social connectedness, suburban families of the last few generations are probably even more isolated than most nineteenth-century residents of rural areas ever were. Back in the day, people relied on one another quite a bit, and certainly knew each other's business, even when they lived fairly far apart. Not so much in the modern suburbs.

So even though the idea of Americans as a rural people is largely a myth (at least for the last century or so), that idea has in itself created a culture that encourages us to think of ourselves in independent and even self-isolating terms. Now, whether or not that is good for child development I have no idea and will venture no opinion. But the ethos of self-reliance is very much a part of American culture, and homeschooling is very consistent with that.

[collegekidsmom]

Still, the OP really just wanted to know what kind of therapist might be best for a school phobic child. I don't think they are considering leaving school.

[mdwlark]

Still, the OP really just wanted to know what kind of therapist might be best for a school phobic child. I don't think they are considering leaving school.

Yes, the train jumped the tracks here.  I hope the OP will find a therapist who works well with her daughter. 

[msparticularity]

Still, the OP really just wanted to know what kind of therapist might be best for a school phobic child. I don't think they are considering leaving school.

Yes, the train jumped the tracks here.  I hope the OP will find a therapist who works well with her daughter. 

Well, too, the original discussion was just that the OP might consider homeschooling very brieflywhile getting the issues sorted out, and perhaps finding a new school. The whole "homeschooling as a lifestyle" thing was a serious diversion from that.

[frogfactory]

And my response of identifying a good online school was an honest attempt to be helpful, although I did make other, less useful, comments in my first post.

[post_functional]

I agree with your larger point, but I have to jump in here and point out that the popularity of the LHotP books and the like have much more to do with how Americans like to think of themselves living than with how Americans have actually lived (at least within living memory). The majority of the US population has been urban/suburban for about a century now. A very large majority of Americans who grew up during or since World War II (i.e., the vast majority of the current population) have never lived in a rural area. Also, the parts of the country that are often considered the most rural (i.e. the Plains and intermountain West) are actually the most urban, as measured by the proportion of the population that lives in cities. Not very many people actually live (or have ever lived) on actual ranches. Most people in the Dakotas and Wyoming, etc. live in the cities that sell stuff to farms and ranches and process their products.

That said, your point still holds, because:

1. Americans love the IDEA of themselves being a rural/small town people, even if they are not. They love their western/pioneer heritage, even if they are removed from that life by a good 100+ years and have only Hollywoodized ideas of what it was like. And they really love the idea of themselves as independent and self-reliant (even though they never were, and have become much less so with time) which is why LHotP and the entire western genre continue to be so popular.

Yes.  There is a road that begins in the Hollywood version of Dodge City and leads directly into the outer reaches of Libertarian Land.

[msparticularity]

I agree with your larger point, but I have to jump in here and point out that the popularity of the LHotP books and the like have much more to do with how Americans like to think of themselves living than with how Americans have actually lived (at least within living memory). The majority of the US population has been urban/suburban for about a century now. A very large majority of Americans who grew up during or since World War II (i.e., the vast majority of the current population) have never lived in a rural area. Also, the parts of the country that are often considered the most rural (i.e. the Plains and intermountain West) are actually the most urban, as measured by the proportion of the population that lives in cities. Not very many people actually live (or have ever lived) on actual ranches. Most people in the Dakotas and Wyoming, etc. live in the cities that sell stuff to farms and ranches and process their products.

That said, your point still holds, because:

1. Americans love the IDEA of themselves being a rural/small town people, even if they are not. They love their western/pioneer heritage, even if they are removed from that life by a good 100+ years and have only Hollywoodized ideas of what it was like. And they really love the idea of themselves as independent and self-reliant (even though they never were, and have become much less so with time) which is why LHotP and the entire western genre continue to be so popular.

Yes.  There is a road that begins in the Hollywood version of Dodge City and leads directly into the outer reaches of Libertarian Land.

I have only recently escaped the Land of the Sagebrush Rebellion, after two decades of captivity. My relief is indescribable. Even as we speak, the governor of said state is preparing to completely dismantle (what remains of) the system of public education. He is aided and abetted by many, many people who don't see any good reason why they should pay taxes or a higher minimum wage to support all those touchy-feely New Age hippy things like education, and building inspections, and care for the mentally ill and disabled. However, you can bet that when they call for the police or the fire department to come to their own walled compounds, they expect service! Also, they apparently just figure they can build more and bigger prisons to deal with all of those kids who are failing/dropping out of school.