I have no idea where this came from. I am non-clinically depressed and anxious at the moment. That is, I have reasons for both!
When you’re depressed every act of will requires an extra push, like a low impact excersie routine done in water because the water provides resistance. With depression everything requires more effort, only you’re not wading through water, your universe has taken on the viscosity of a gel toothpaste. Everything you do is pushed through that medium, taking orders of magnitude more effort than the same actions when you’re not in a depressed state. But how to explain this to the happily unaffected?
It is very hard for those who are unaffected to related to the experience of having a brain that is not under their control. But I’m nothing if not tenacious so here is my attempt to explain…
Almost every one has had a crush on another person, right? It seems that everything they do is perfect, you are besotted, and most importantly, you can’t seem to stop thinking about them. Everything you see or do seems to relate back to them somehow, they are the last thing on your mind before you go to sleep, they may provoke stalking behaviour (especially since it is so easy to do these days!), their presence may equate with dizzying happiness accompanied by bouts of invincibility, they may also cause crushing anxiety and the misery associated with unrequited love. During this experience, you probably could not stop thinking about them even if you wanted to, the thought of the person interferes with your work and play. If you are lucky, this interference is painlessly seamless, if you are unlucky, you are unable to concentrate at all. This person, whoever they are, seems to have hijacked your thoughts, taken some of your mental liberty away.
The same could be said for worries, ever lost sleep because you could not switch of your brain for worry? That is an example of your mind being out of your control, you want to sleep, but you can't for worry. Surely if you had control over your emotional state this would not be a problem?
The main message is: Normal folk do suffer from periods when their mind/brain does things that they cannot control. That is a no brainer really, but I claim that it is these experiences that may help them relate to people with mental illness. So, assuming you believe me that normal people can suffer periods where their mind seems to be out of their control for some reason, try to imagine what that would be like without an object, that is without a crush on someone, without a worry to occupy your mind, without a reason to be sad.
Try to imagine a perpetual state of worry without an object of worry (this can be called anxiety).
Try to imagine a perpetual state of sadness without a reason to be sad (this is called depression).
Try to imagine extraordinary happiness, so happy that you believe nothing could ever hurt you, but without a reason to be happy (this is a symptom of bipolar disorder).
Try to imagine that switching off this worry, sadness or happiness is not an option, try to imagine that these feelings do not shift according to what is happening in your life. This is quite like the times when switching off for you is not an option.
What makes you different from the anxious or depressed person is that you have the comfort of a reason. We think you are so, so lucky. But please try to understand how unlucky we are. We have by accident, injury or design brains that will plunge us into the depths of despair, engage a dire apprehension that will gnaw at our guts or provoke swooping episodes of happiness where we become a danger to ourselves and others. Our brains do this for no reason at all and it can be terrifying.
Please also believe that we do not want to be like this, that we would not wish this state of being upon anyone. But we are tired of the labels of self-absorbed, or lazy, or paranoid, as though we were doing it on purpose. We are tired of the lack of understanding.
So next time you hear about or meet someone with a mental illness, when you read about suicides in the paper or are unfortunate enough to know someone who has attempted it. Try, try, try to remember the last time your mind was out of your control, and try to imagine what kind of hell it might be to be stuck there without a reason. Please.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Monday, May 23, 2011
The new age(d) me?
Those of you who are following my Twitter feed will know that I've been helping out in 13yo's high school play. Those that aren't following me know now!
On the second night we had a bit of an incident involving a middle aged woman, unhappy about the sound quality of the production, stalking up to the bio-box at interval and venting her anger on a fourteen year old boy. Classy eh? Said 14yo (lets call him little Johnny) and I were the only people in the room at the time.
It was a fairly odd thing to have happen but that wasn't the odd bit, the odd bit was my reaction. I think as little as two years ago I would have cowered over my script until it was over, offered the kid sugar and sympathy and wallowed in anger about it for weeks. What I did, however, was walk right up, stand between her and little Johnny and tell her that I was sorry, I knew she was upset, but I couldn't let her take out her anger on a child. I'm quite sure my heart was pounding much harder than either of theirs, I could feel my hands sweating and was worried that my knees were going to begin to shake because Ms Yell-a-lot was not looking like she wanted to stop her tirade. However, after a little bit of too-ing and fro-ing she finally believed me when I said her message would get to the right person and that she really wasn't allowed to be in this room, and she consented to leave. (Or maybe I really did start to shake and she took pity on me. Who knows?)
I've been wondering what on earth happened there? What galvanised me into action? am I just more grown up? are other grown ups simply not as scary any more? (though I was plenty scared!). Did I see my mother taking out her frustrations on her own teenage daughter? Or maybe what I was seeing was simply SO unjust I couldn't sit still - little Johnny wasn't entirely responsible for the sound quality after all.
Whatever it was, I like the new me. She kicks butt. :)
.
On the second night we had a bit of an incident involving a middle aged woman, unhappy about the sound quality of the production, stalking up to the bio-box at interval and venting her anger on a fourteen year old boy. Classy eh? Said 14yo (lets call him little Johnny) and I were the only people in the room at the time.
It was a fairly odd thing to have happen but that wasn't the odd bit, the odd bit was my reaction. I think as little as two years ago I would have cowered over my script until it was over, offered the kid sugar and sympathy and wallowed in anger about it for weeks. What I did, however, was walk right up, stand between her and little Johnny and tell her that I was sorry, I knew she was upset, but I couldn't let her take out her anger on a child. I'm quite sure my heart was pounding much harder than either of theirs, I could feel my hands sweating and was worried that my knees were going to begin to shake because Ms Yell-a-lot was not looking like she wanted to stop her tirade. However, after a little bit of too-ing and fro-ing she finally believed me when I said her message would get to the right person and that she really wasn't allowed to be in this room, and she consented to leave. (Or maybe I really did start to shake and she took pity on me. Who knows?)
I've been wondering what on earth happened there? What galvanised me into action? am I just more grown up? are other grown ups simply not as scary any more? (though I was plenty scared!). Did I see my mother taking out her frustrations on her own teenage daughter? Or maybe what I was seeing was simply SO unjust I couldn't sit still - little Johnny wasn't entirely responsible for the sound quality after all.
Whatever it was, I like the new me. She kicks butt. :)
.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Standing corrected.
My husband is indeed interested in giving the book a read, especially since I'm going to use it as the basis of the equivalent of heroin depravation. I guess asking him to start it last night was too much to ask as his brand new kindle arrived.
It was smaller than I expected.
I'm only allowed to be online at the moment because I had to order son's school books. Bye from me for now before the WILFing begins...
It was smaller than I expected.
I'm only allowed to be online at the moment because I had to order son's school books. Bye from me for now before the WILFing begins...
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Dare I turn the internet off at home? The Great Unscreening.
I've been reading The Winter of Our Disconnect and it is both inspiring and scary. As we also live in a household full of flickering screens, blank eyes and ever shortening attention spans I've decided we should do something similar. Surprisingly, 13yo seems to be on board with it, he almost sounded relieved on the phone. Was he aware that he was having trouble controlling his xbox consumption? Or did he just want his parents back? Who knows, but he's definitely on board (hurrah!).
My husband was a whole other matter. When I first mentioned a disconnect ("How about we turn the wireless off?") he reacted as though I'd just asked him to swallow a whole live frog. I decided to quickly give in (after all he does need it for work) and mentioned that we could cordon off internet access to just the study. He's slightly more interested now, not in reading the book (I think he's waiting for it to come out on the Kindle) but in following orders with respect to the Great Unscreening. As usual, I'm the director of operations, hauling along the unwilling for their own good. We've already evicted the television from the living room and survived without for a whole month.
I'll keep everyone posted when internet is allowed. :)
My husband was a whole other matter. When I first mentioned a disconnect ("How about we turn the wireless off?") he reacted as though I'd just asked him to swallow a whole live frog. I decided to quickly give in (after all he does need it for work) and mentioned that we could cordon off internet access to just the study. He's slightly more interested now, not in reading the book (I think he's waiting for it to come out on the Kindle) but in following orders with respect to the Great Unscreening. As usual, I'm the director of operations, hauling along the unwilling for their own good. We've already evicted the television from the living room and survived without for a whole month.
I'll keep everyone posted when internet is allowed. :)
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Loser.
I'm having an argument with 4yo about something at the shops. This is normal. The argument continues all the way out to the car. This is normal. I tell her that if she does not cooperate and sit in her car seat straight away I will lose my temper. Also normal. I give her reports about my escalating temper so that when I really do lose it she's had plenty of warning. Normal, normal, normal.
"I'm going to lose my temper if you don't stop asking about this."
"I can't get you want straight away so if you keep shouting at me I will lose my temper do you want that?"
"You're really on thin ice now mate, you will regret it if I lose my temper."
4yo sighs, shoves her bottom into the seat, complies with the seat belt procedure and as I'm clipping her in mutters, "Loser."
She might as well have made the 'L' shape with her thumb and forefinger her tone was so derogatory. This is so funny coming from an angry four year old that I nearly fell backwards out of the car laughing. But because she'd been so rude that wasn't aloud and I had to buckle myself up and wait until my voice was steady before I could give her the lecture. The one where this isn't a nice thing to say to someone and what do if someone says that to her... bla... bla... I'm pretty sure she listened to the first few words of it.
To her credit, she got into the car without a fuss in the end. After all, this loser Mummy is quite scary when her temper is the thing she loses!
"I'm going to lose my temper if you don't stop asking about this."
"I can't get you want straight away so if you keep shouting at me I will lose my temper do you want that?"
"You're really on thin ice now mate, you will regret it if I lose my temper."
4yo sighs, shoves her bottom into the seat, complies with the seat belt procedure and as I'm clipping her in mutters, "Loser."
She might as well have made the 'L' shape with her thumb and forefinger her tone was so derogatory. This is so funny coming from an angry four year old that I nearly fell backwards out of the car laughing. But because she'd been so rude that wasn't aloud and I had to buckle myself up and wait until my voice was steady before I could give her the lecture. The one where this isn't a nice thing to say to someone and what do if someone says that to her... bla... bla... I'm pretty sure she listened to the first few words of it.
To her credit, she got into the car without a fuss in the end. After all, this loser Mummy is quite scary when her temper is the thing she loses!
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
3yo sees the light, then gives it a mash.
We have a new saying at house: "My mother makes me match my Mini-M&Ms on a Monday morning Ooooh Ahhh." Add melody, repetition and a few key changes and you have the warm up song for the actors in my 12yo's school musical. 3yo's version, which she likes to sing at the top of her lungs in the supermarket, is: "My mother makes me mash my idioms on a Monday morning Ooooh Ahhhh." Close, but no cigar.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
3yo weirdness.
I asked 3yo how she got a scratch on her cheek and she replied: "I was riding my tricycle in the park with Mummy and Daddy and I fell off and there was lots of blood and I died." I immediately saw the problem with that story: "But 3yo, you don't have a tricycle." It was intriguing how genuinely confused she looked, as though she were SURE she had one, and where had it got to? Or maybe she was just bewildered that I hadn't pointed out the fact that she wasn't dead. I guess I'll never know about the scratch...
Friday, February 19, 2010
Poem for my daughter on a hot sunny day.
Ode to my little daughter, who never seems to be able to stay dressed when at home. We made this one up tryin' to stay cool in the paddlin' pool.
My toddler is lovely when she’s naked and cuddly,
but things can get freaky when she’s naked and cheeky.
Times can be bad when she’s naked and sad,
and she don’t give a toss when she’s naked and cross.
Things can get hairy when she’s naked and scary,
but she needs loads of care when she’s naked and scared.
And when the day’s hot and the clothes all come off,
what is the bet, she’ll be naked and wet?
My toddler is lovely when she’s naked and cuddly,
but things can get freaky when she’s naked and cheeky.
Times can be bad when she’s naked and sad,
and she don’t give a toss when she’s naked and cross.
Things can get hairy when she’s naked and scary,
but she needs loads of care when she’s naked and scared.
And when the day’s hot and the clothes all come off,
what is the bet, she’ll be naked and wet?
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Women's Health in the North is looking for friends.
Reposted from Kathleen Maltzahn (via facebook): "Women's Health In the North is looking for friends. If we find 25 fans on Facebook, we can have a username. Once we've got a username, we can let people know how to talk to us. Can you become a fan and help us out? Search 'Women's Health In the North' on Facebook and you'll find us."
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
For Claire...
This needed more than a 140 char tweet!
I found this on the Science Based Medicine blog, one commenter references breast feeding outdoors being illegal in some states. Maybe she would know?
Link to article: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3096#more-3096
Quote from comments:
"Restaurants eject nursing women; most states won’t allow you to breastfeed outdoors, so mothers have to find bathrooms or at least pray for a mother’s room or women’s lounge; breasts are seen as sexual objects and thus not suitable for view by children; women even get asked to stop nursing on airplanes when they’re covered. It’s not good. The real problem isn’t that there’s too much formula feeding. The real problem is that we have a social taboo about it. Our society supports it as long as it isn’t seen, which is a bit like supporting equal education for blacks 50 years ago as long as they don’t actually show up at your school. Which is to say, not helpful at all."
The rest of her comment is quite good too. I'm saddened by the fact that breastfeeding is so heavily encouraged for new mothers antenatally and neonatally, yet when they reemerge as new breastfeeding mothers society provides more lip-service than acceptance.
I'm also saddened by the fact that women who don't breastfeed can find themselves either ostracised or wracked with guilt. Women need accurate information about breastfeeding, sure, but all the information in the world won't help them if they live in a society that implicitly frowns upon it.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Just sayin'
Having a bit of a chat with someone about Islam on facebook. Isn't facebook a wonderful thing? Here's a snippet:
It is my personal belief that supposedly liberated western women who will not leave the house without make-up or hairless legs/underarms or who will not stand up for their right to make their own choices regarding their healthcare (don't even get me started on that one...) or who accept the status quo when it comes to childcare and maternity provisions, are just as much prisoners of their culture as women who won't leave the house without a burka or hijab.There are very few truly free women in the world.Just sayin'
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Every parent's reward...
My 12yo came home with two outstanding pieces of paper on Monday. The first was his Student of the Week award for: "his honesty and for his selflessness which he regularly demonstrates" Good grief, could I ask for anything more? The second was a note from the office: "Dear Student, Thank you for handing in the money you found in to the office. I am now returning it to you and thank you for your honesty." Wow. I did something right there. Or maybe not, maybe it's just him. Either way, happy Mummy!
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Checking the 3yo's comprehension...
12yo to 3yo: "What colour is a yellow bus?" 3yo: "Blue!" 12yo: "What colour is a blue dress?" 3yo: "Pink!" (Should have seen that one coming...) 12yo: "What colour is a purple turtle?" 3yo: "Green!" 12yo: "What colour is a black bear?" 3yo: "Scary!!" (Runs for cuddles with 12yo..) How cute is she? Interesting to note that she knows a colour response is required, but hasn't made the link between the bus being called a 'yellow bus' and it being a yellow colour. Maybe it'll come in a few months.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
From the mouths of babes, a fitting description of the Eye and Ear Hospital
12yo and I were rehashing the events following the unfortunate insertion of an agapanthus stalk into his cornea, including the atrocious treatment we got at the local eye and ear hospital, when he says, "They're like, the opposite of O'brien." Huh? Apparently, O'brien are really, really good at car windscreens and that's all they do. Whereas the Eye and Ear hospital only does eyes and ears, but they're really really BAD at it.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Dear Fearless Freddie Freestyle
To the inconsiderate old fart who ruined the tranquility of my tai chi breast stroke moment in the slow lane at the pool today. Here's a clue. If you are bearing down on someone over and over and over again you are in the wrong lane. You need to move over and swim with the faster fishies. Here's another clue. I can smoothly sidestroke much, much faster than your splashy freestyle, and I can quietly bear down on you again, and again, and again...like a shark...without even getting out of breath. Spooky huh? And really, really, REALLY annoying (I hope). Sent from my iPhone. Any typos or errors of grammar, anything really, is the iphone's fault.
Growing up.
"It takes courage to grow up and turn out to
be who you really are." - e.e. cummings
be who you really are." - e.e. cummings
As usual, just when I don't think I have any courage left, people appear out of the blue to remind me that I just might be worth having faith in. Never ceases to amaze me, and it's quite, quite humbling.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Dialogue with a bloke against smacking.
With his permission, I am posting here a conversation I've been having on facebook with a distant relative about smacking. His contributions are in block quotes:
Eddie mentions not being at adult intellect, but fails to follow through on what this implies for children and forms of discipline. That's not insight, it's flinging analogies about with a blindfold on. The guy is still a twit. Sorry :(
Mon at 11:55 · Delete
Argh, I don't have time to address all of your points though I do address some of them on my BadMummy blog.
I didn't know it was illegal to smack dogs! Must have missed the memo. When our dog was biting 12yo (then 5) the vet recommended hitting him and gave us instructions on how to do it effectively and when to stop. We now have a gorgeous dog who will let children take food from his mouth. I do not regret this course of action. And having personally been picked up and shaken by a horse, both bitten and chased by a dog, and my father nearly having died from a deep cat bite I do not agree with you that animals are helpless. Though I agree that deliberate cruelty to them goes under-punished.
Adults do hit each other when frustrated, all the time, and most don't press charges. Advocates of the well timed smacking of children (like me) will always stress that you must NEVER touch your children when you are tired or frustrated and that is always the wrong reason to deliver a smack.
I've also seen anti-smackers I know shake their children, pinch them, or grab them by the arm and drag them. But that's ok apparently because you're not hitting them. And the same parents are reluctant to admit that their child was beyond reason as though that's some kind of failure. There's a pooload of hypocrisy in this debate.
I don't agree that it is always wrong to hit another adult. I can think of plenty of scenarios where hitting another adult would be morally obligatory.
I have never heard of "the child should know better" arguments against smacking? This sounds a little confused.
3yo understands that a smack means she has gone too far, so as a child who deliberately pushes the limits she tends to get more than average. She gets reminders that she needs to listen to us, then she gets warnings, with counting so that she has plenty of time to make up her mind (danger smacks are an exception, but oddly she's never had any of those!). She does not get smacked out of the blue when we are tired or angry.
She has had it explained to her that we only ever smack her when she is badly behaved and not listening, and that ONLY we can do that because we made her and it's our job to teach her how to be a good girl. She knows that no other grown ups are allowed to do this.
One day I'll have the presence of mind to video the course of events so that the anti-smackers can watch my 3yo weigh up whether or not a smack is worth the thrill of being naughty. Sometimes, despite all warnings, she goes ahead anyway and the last resort protocol kicks in. In these cases she KNOWS she is going to get smacked and chooses a course of action that will ensure it (because Mummy does not make threats she won't carry out). She's a total mystery to me.
Thank you for noting that you're a non-parent at the beginning. It sets you apart from a lot of tossers I know :)
Mon at 13:20 · Delete
Um, I don't have time to respond now... but I elaborate on the difference between children and adults here http://badmummysyndrome.blogspot.com/2009/10/great-smacking-debateagain.html
Mon at 20:43 · Delete
"McGuire's original article was a response to a debate sparked by a woman who was warned by police after her daughter told someone at school that her mother had hit her with a wooden spoon.
I mean seriously, that just sounds lazy to me, parent can't even hit the child with their own open palms, they have to extent their reach/increase impact speed with some kitchen utensil."
Actually, having spoken to other mothers about this, it's not about the extension of reach, or increased impact. I hear that it's because they don't want to use their hands to discipline their children. I get that sentiment. Also, a lot of the time parents are just doing what they perceive to have worked for them. The wooden spoon didn't work for us (my mother broke one on my brother, didn't seem to help her out much), but then again, nothing my mother did worked for us because she was totally inconsistent in her disciplining. She could have used a cattle prod, it wouldn't have made any difference because things that were fine one day were crimes the next. There is much more to discipline than the implement.
"I wasn't thinking in the context of an animal that is being violent because I don't spend any time around violent animals."
Sorry, I only said what I did because you claimed that animals were helpless.
"I was thinking of an animal that won't go where it is told, or toilets where it shouldn't, or destroys objects for fun."
All things a person should be prepared for when they buy a puppy. Unfortunately, as you are already stating, people are not always aware that puppies (or other animals) have special behaviours and requirements and if they are ignorant or just cruel they abuse the animal for it. Parents who are ignorant or cruel abuse their children too.
"And yes, you trained your dog, but there are plenty of adults out there who train their spouses too."
That's an odd analogy. I don't see how you can really compare the two situations. Ever tried to sit down and reason with a dog? In the spouse situation, there is a viable alternative and this makes the "training by hitting" morally wrong. I've only ever met one "train them with love" dog owner and her dogs were completely out of control, they didn't respect her at all :( And as you've just seen on the news I guess, an out of control dog is a very bad thing indeed.
"I wasn't making a "child should know better" argument, I was making a "its wrong to hit adults yet they should know better" bullshit suggestion, to demonstrate how relativistic it sounds."
*cringe* sorry I still don't get it.
"I'm willing to bet that for every "anti-smacker" that then engages in some sick behaviour like pinching or shaking, there are ten "I should have the right to discipline my children PRO smackers" who go far too far, and DO smack when they are frustrated, tired, headache, hormones, inpatient, personality disorder, etc, and DO exceed the level of physical force that is appropriate - like the one i saw on the tram who full swing full speed smacked her 1yo (in the pram) right across the face. I won't say any more about that at this point."
That woman should have been reported to the police. Did you? Did anyone? Because all the people who did nothing to protect the child are accessories in my humble opinion.
Nothing I have said condones any of the above behaviour. I pointed out the hypocrisy of some anti-smacker types. I have not, at any point, condoned behaviour where parents go too far. That is not discipline, that is venting your frustration on someone who is relatively helpless and completely dependant on you. I'm not sure what you are arguing for here. Are you arguing for discipline by smacking to be outlawed?
"In what circumstances should adults tolerate being hit or think its ok to hit another adult?"
My daughter has a habit of running ahead at the shopping centre. (We do not use a harness out of consideration for other people who want to retain their hearing.) If a bloke picked her up without my permission and I didn't know who they were I wouldn't just hit them I'd probably rugby tackle them and try to break their fucking neck. I think violence would be ok in that circumstance.
To take a milder example. My husband has less nerves than me, occasionally doesn't know his own strength, and tickles me in a painful way. I thump him to make him stop, because it's quicker than explaining (I'm in pain, remember). It was this kind of hitting I had in mind when I said adults do hit each other, and it's not reported. For that matter, siblings hit each other too, particularly if they are not old enough to be articulate about their issues, this can carry on in a milder form into their adulthood.
When I steal food from the chopping board when my step-mother is cooking she slaps my hand away when she thinks I've had enough.
A bloke at CPA had his fingers saved by a guy who pushed him (hard) away from the table saw.
I think that's enough...
"And if they don't complain within say, a week, to the police, do they still retain the right to complain years later when they drag the person through court and want to smear their character because the relationship "didn't work out"?"
In the above scenarios, I don't think the complaints would be taken at all seriously.
"I'm not a parent, but as for bad behaviour/not listening/being naughty, would it not be easy for say, some man to adapt what you have said to an analogies about his girlfriend/wife? It is the cultural norm for men to do so in a considerable percentage of the world's communities."
No, it would not. Because the girlfriend/wife is an reasoning adult.
"Seriously, give a young fool like me an example of what a 3yo can do, and I can think of an equivalent many grown adults would do."
This was the real clincher for me. I'm sure you could. But you would probably deal with their behaviour by removing yourself from the situation and leaving them to their own devices (unless you were their carer which is a different story). Parents hardly ever have that option, it is their responsibility to STOP the behaviour. The situation is utterly different. But if it helps, their are people in our society whose job it is to stop adults behaving dangerously or unsociably, they are policemen, and they are allowed to use force when the adults concerned are not listening to reason.
"It seems that people can draw the line for smacking someone somewhere where it suits them best, and in this case, it seems to be "no violence, no abuse, (nevermind the slippery slope), only a JUSTIFIED smack, and only to CHILDREN, WHEN they really need it".
That's because not all children respond to gentler forms of discipline. That is just a weird genetic personality trait type fact. Call me when you know why or have a cure.
"I'm sure most of the female "smacking defenders" would draw the line well before it reached a "justified smack" for THEM, unless they consensually enjoy that sort of thing, which is completely separate issue."
Most coherent smacking defenders would not indulge in the kind of behaviour that attracted a smack in the first place. Again, we are talking about the behaviour of children, not adults.
I would love to post this exchange on my BadMummy blog with your permission. It's fascinating.
Mon at 21:58 · Delete
That's a shame. I don't get to lock horns on this issue very often. Most people I know personally agree with me. The one person I'm in vague contact with (internet met) who doesn't hasn't spoken to me about it.
5 minutes ago · Delete
He stated: I have a newfound respect for Eddie McGuire, who has demonstrated impressive insight!
"If an adult was seen to hit a mentally disabled person there would be
uproar, but is it okay to whack a mentally growing human who is not yet
near adult intellect?"
Belting kids is not discipline | Herald Sun
Source: www.heraldsun.com.au
IF EVER there is a topic that will lead to polarising views, it is child rearing.
18 October at 11:12 · Comment · Like · Share
Eddie mentions not being at adult intellect, but fails to follow through on what this implies for children and forms of discipline. That's not insight, it's flinging analogies about with a blindfold on. The guy is still a twit. Sorry :(
Mon at 11:55 · Delete
If Eddie has said or done something else (besides being friends with Sam Newman) that makes you think he's a twit that I'm not aware of, please share. :-)
I've heard some arguments that in some circumstances an opened handed smack on the bottom to a child too young to be reasoned with is in their interests as it helps them to learn to avoid dangerous behaviours. Frighten them away from the stove, running on the road, sticking things in the socket.
And yet it is wrong and illegal to hit a dog. Although they do have leashes on collars when they go for a walk so they can't do anything dangerous. I saw a family in a shopping centre once, with a toddler (age 2-3) wearing a harness that was on a leash the mother was holding - I digress.
A point Eddie McGuire makes is that adults get frustrated - frustrated at each other, and want to hit each other, but can't because its against the law.
It is wrong and illegal for an adult to hit another adult who is disobedient, frustrates them, causes them to lose their patience, etc, and yet adults are capable of being reasoned with (or claim to be), so they shouldn't make mistakes that require punishment with violence should they?
Oh that's right, adults aren't perfect either.
I can't help but wonder, as someone who has never had a child of his own, what percentage of "smacks" (and that is just smacking, not including using an implement or going too far) are actually in the child's best developmental/discipline/safety interest, and what percentage result from a parent (or teacher, back when they were allowed to) who is frustrated, out of patience, cranky, running late, hormonal, headache, tired, etc.
Being able to smack children certainly must save a lot of parents a great deal of time and effort. It used to save teachers time and effort too - Eddie writes that
"Yes, it takes a lot longer to reason with a kid and explain a situation.
In my school days my mates and I would rather cop the cuts than suffer a Saturday detention. Same for the teachers.
But we all knew which had the bigger effect."
As someone who agrees is it wrong to hit another man or woman, and also wrong to hit a dog, it seems to me like some suspiciously convenient morally relative position whereby it is still ok to hit a child.
Arguments that the child should know better could also apply to other adults, right?
And arguments that the child is incapable of understanding could also apply to pets?
And yet, the maximum penalty for animal cruelty or neglect is still dismally short - 12 months in prison.
We should take the time to use words with adults, and animals are defenceless.
If the exception with children is that they are growing and capable of learning, developing brains that will be capable of understanding, what are they learning?
Mon at 12:51
Argh, I don't have time to address all of your points though I do address some of them on my BadMummy blog.
I didn't know it was illegal to smack dogs! Must have missed the memo. When our dog was biting 12yo (then 5) the vet recommended hitting him and gave us instructions on how to do it effectively and when to stop. We now have a gorgeous dog who will let children take food from his mouth. I do not regret this course of action. And having personally been picked up and shaken by a horse, both bitten and chased by a dog, and my father nearly having died from a deep cat bite I do not agree with you that animals are helpless. Though I agree that deliberate cruelty to them goes under-punished.
Adults do hit each other when frustrated, all the time, and most don't press charges. Advocates of the well timed smacking of children (like me) will always stress that you must NEVER touch your children when you are tired or frustrated and that is always the wrong reason to deliver a smack.
I've also seen anti-smackers I know shake their children, pinch them, or grab them by the arm and drag them. But that's ok apparently because you're not hitting them. And the same parents are reluctant to admit that their child was beyond reason as though that's some kind of failure. There's a pooload of hypocrisy in this debate.
I don't agree that it is always wrong to hit another adult. I can think of plenty of scenarios where hitting another adult would be morally obligatory.
I have never heard of "the child should know better" arguments against smacking? This sounds a little confused.
3yo understands that a smack means she has gone too far, so as a child who deliberately pushes the limits she tends to get more than average. She gets reminders that she needs to listen to us, then she gets warnings, with counting so that she has plenty of time to make up her mind (danger smacks are an exception, but oddly she's never had any of those!). She does not get smacked out of the blue when we are tired or angry.
She has had it explained to her that we only ever smack her when she is badly behaved and not listening, and that ONLY we can do that because we made her and it's our job to teach her how to be a good girl. She knows that no other grown ups are allowed to do this.
One day I'll have the presence of mind to video the course of events so that the anti-smackers can watch my 3yo weigh up whether or not a smack is worth the thrill of being naughty. Sometimes, despite all warnings, she goes ahead anyway and the last resort protocol kicks in. In these cases she KNOWS she is going to get smacked and chooses a course of action that will ensure it (because Mummy does not make threats she won't carry out). She's a total mystery to me.
Thank you for noting that you're a non-parent at the beginning. It sets you apart from a lot of tossers I know :)
Mon at 13:20 · Delete
McGuire's original article was a response to a debate sparked by a woman who was warned by police after her daughter told someone at school that her mother had hit her with a wooden spoon.
I mean seriously, that just sounds lazy to me, parent can't even hit the child with their own open palms, they have to extent their reach/increase impact speed with some kitchen utensil.
I wasn't thinking in the context of an animal that is being violent because I don't spend any time around violent animals.
I was thinking of an animal that won't go where it is told, or toilets where it shouldn't, or destroys objects for fun.
And yes, you trained your dog, but there are plenty of adults out there who train their spouses too.
I wasn't making a "child should know better" argument, I was making a "its wrong to hit adults yet they should know better" bullshit suggestion, to demonstrate how relativistic it sounds.
I'm willing to bet that for every "anti-smacker" that then engages in some sick behaviour like pinching or shaking, there are ten "I should have the right to discipline my children PRO smackers" who go far too far, and DO smack when they are frustrated, tired, headache, hormones, inpatient, personality disorder, etc, and DO exceed the level of physical force that is appropriate - like the one i saw on the tram who full swing full speed smacked her 1yo (in the pram) right across the face. I won't say any more about that at this point.
In what circumstances should adults tolerate being hit or think its ok to hit another adult?
And if they don't complain within say, a week, to the police, do they still retain the right to complain years later when they drag the person through court and want to smear their character because the relationship "didn't work out"?
I'm not a parent, but as for bad behaviour/not listening/being naughty, would it not be easy for say, some man to adapt what you have said to an analogies about his girlfriend/wife? It is the cultural norm for men to do so in a considerable percentage of the world's communities.
Seriously, give a young fool like me an example of what a 3yo can do, and I can think of an equivalent many grown adults would do.
It seems that people can draw the line for smacking someone somewhere where it suits them best, and in this case, it seems to be "no violence, no abuse, (nevermind the slippery slope), only a JUSTIFIED smack, and only to CHILDREN, WHEN they really need it".
I'm sure most of the female "smacking defenders" would draw the line well before it reached a "justified smack" for THEM, unless they consensually enjoy that sort of thing, which is completely separate issue.
Mon at 19:12
Um, I don't have time to respond now... but I elaborate on the difference between children and adults here http://badmummysyndrome.blogspot.com/2009/10/great-smacking-debateagain.html
Mon at 20:43 · Delete
"McGuire's original article was a response to a debate sparked by a woman who was warned by police after her daughter told someone at school that her mother had hit her with a wooden spoon.
I mean seriously, that just sounds lazy to me, parent can't even hit the child with their own open palms, they have to extent their reach/increase impact speed with some kitchen utensil."
Actually, having spoken to other mothers about this, it's not about the extension of reach, or increased impact. I hear that it's because they don't want to use their hands to discipline their children. I get that sentiment. Also, a lot of the time parents are just doing what they perceive to have worked for them. The wooden spoon didn't work for us (my mother broke one on my brother, didn't seem to help her out much), but then again, nothing my mother did worked for us because she was totally inconsistent in her disciplining. She could have used a cattle prod, it wouldn't have made any difference because things that were fine one day were crimes the next. There is much more to discipline than the implement.
"I wasn't thinking in the context of an animal that is being violent because I don't spend any time around violent animals."
Sorry, I only said what I did because you claimed that animals were helpless.
"I was thinking of an animal that won't go where it is told, or toilets where it shouldn't, or destroys objects for fun."
All things a person should be prepared for when they buy a puppy. Unfortunately, as you are already stating, people are not always aware that puppies (or other animals) have special behaviours and requirements and if they are ignorant or just cruel they abuse the animal for it. Parents who are ignorant or cruel abuse their children too.
"And yes, you trained your dog, but there are plenty of adults out there who train their spouses too."
That's an odd analogy. I don't see how you can really compare the two situations. Ever tried to sit down and reason with a dog? In the spouse situation, there is a viable alternative and this makes the "training by hitting" morally wrong. I've only ever met one "train them with love" dog owner and her dogs were completely out of control, they didn't respect her at all :( And as you've just seen on the news I guess, an out of control dog is a very bad thing indeed.
"I wasn't making a "child should know better" argument, I was making a "its wrong to hit adults yet they should know better" bullshit suggestion, to demonstrate how relativistic it sounds."
*cringe* sorry I still don't get it.
"I'm willing to bet that for every "anti-smacker" that then engages in some sick behaviour like pinching or shaking, there are ten "I should have the right to discipline my children PRO smackers" who go far too far, and DO smack when they are frustrated, tired, headache, hormones, inpatient, personality disorder, etc, and DO exceed the level of physical force that is appropriate - like the one i saw on the tram who full swing full speed smacked her 1yo (in the pram) right across the face. I won't say any more about that at this point."
That woman should have been reported to the police. Did you? Did anyone? Because all the people who did nothing to protect the child are accessories in my humble opinion.
Nothing I have said condones any of the above behaviour. I pointed out the hypocrisy of some anti-smacker types. I have not, at any point, condoned behaviour where parents go too far. That is not discipline, that is venting your frustration on someone who is relatively helpless and completely dependant on you. I'm not sure what you are arguing for here. Are you arguing for discipline by smacking to be outlawed?
"In what circumstances should adults tolerate being hit or think its ok to hit another adult?"
My daughter has a habit of running ahead at the shopping centre. (We do not use a harness out of consideration for other people who want to retain their hearing.) If a bloke picked her up without my permission and I didn't know who they were I wouldn't just hit them I'd probably rugby tackle them and try to break their fucking neck. I think violence would be ok in that circumstance.
To take a milder example. My husband has less nerves than me, occasionally doesn't know his own strength, and tickles me in a painful way. I thump him to make him stop, because it's quicker than explaining (I'm in pain, remember). It was this kind of hitting I had in mind when I said adults do hit each other, and it's not reported. For that matter, siblings hit each other too, particularly if they are not old enough to be articulate about their issues, this can carry on in a milder form into their adulthood.
When I steal food from the chopping board when my step-mother is cooking she slaps my hand away when she thinks I've had enough.
A bloke at CPA had his fingers saved by a guy who pushed him (hard) away from the table saw.
I think that's enough...
"And if they don't complain within say, a week, to the police, do they still retain the right to complain years later when they drag the person through court and want to smear their character because the relationship "didn't work out"?"
In the above scenarios, I don't think the complaints would be taken at all seriously.
"I'm not a parent, but as for bad behaviour/not listening/being naughty, would it not be easy for say, some man to adapt what you have said to an analogies about his girlfriend/wife? It is the cultural norm for men to do so in a considerable percentage of the world's communities."
No, it would not. Because the girlfriend/wife is an reasoning adult.
"Seriously, give a young fool like me an example of what a 3yo can do, and I can think of an equivalent many grown adults would do."
This was the real clincher for me. I'm sure you could. But you would probably deal with their behaviour by removing yourself from the situation and leaving them to their own devices (unless you were their carer which is a different story). Parents hardly ever have that option, it is their responsibility to STOP the behaviour. The situation is utterly different. But if it helps, their are people in our society whose job it is to stop adults behaving dangerously or unsociably, they are policemen, and they are allowed to use force when the adults concerned are not listening to reason.
"It seems that people can draw the line for smacking someone somewhere where it suits them best, and in this case, it seems to be "no violence, no abuse, (nevermind the slippery slope), only a JUSTIFIED smack, and only to CHILDREN, WHEN they really need it".
That's because not all children respond to gentler forms of discipline. That is just a weird genetic personality trait type fact. Call me when you know why or have a cure.
"I'm sure most of the female "smacking defenders" would draw the line well before it reached a "justified smack" for THEM, unless they consensually enjoy that sort of thing, which is completely separate issue."
Most coherent smacking defenders would not indulge in the kind of behaviour that attracted a smack in the first place. Again, we are talking about the behaviour of children, not adults.
I would love to post this exchange on my BadMummy blog with your permission. It's fascinating.
Mon at 21:58 · Delete
thanks for your responses.
please post the conversation on your blog if you like,
I won't clog up our facebooks with any more on it.
Tues at 12:22
That's a shame. I don't get to lock horns on this issue very often. Most people I know personally agree with me. The one person I'm in vague contact with (internet met) who doesn't hasn't spoken to me about it.
5 minutes ago · Delete
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Ask a silly question...
12yo got a questionnaire from his future high school today. One of the questions was: What do you want to get out of Year 7?
His off-the-cuff answer?
"More than I put into it."
His off-the-cuff answer?
"More than I put into it."
Monday, October 19, 2009
An honest account of motherly anger? About time.
Well this is slightly topical given my last post...
Film-maker Julia Black, a BAFTA and Grierson nominated independent documentary maker, is making a film about motherly anger. As a mother of two, she is interested in shifting the taboo that surrounds a mother's anger towards her child or children and wishes to research into how many mothers, like her, have been shocked by the level of anger they experience.
Please take a few minutes to fill in this online questionnaire. All answers are entirely anonymous and cannot be traced to your e-mail address.
www.survey.ingenious2.co.uk
I did it, and it can be done in ten minutes or so. There's also room for the more loquacious of us to comment at the end which was nice (for me anyway!).
Film-maker Julia Black, a BAFTA and Grierson nominated independent documentary maker, is making a film about motherly anger. As a mother of two, she is interested in shifting the taboo that surrounds a mother's anger towards her child or children and wishes to research into how many mothers, like her, have been shocked by the level of anger they experience.
Please take a few minutes to fill in this online questionnaire. All answers are entirely anonymous and cannot be traced to your e-mail address.
www.survey.ingenious2.co.uk
I did it, and it can be done in ten minutes or so. There's also room for the more loquacious of us to comment at the end which was nice (for me anyway!).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
