or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › The Granola Extreme
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Granola Extreme - Page 12

post #221 of 327
: i read to page 4 and wanted to sub :
post #222 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamsmama View Post


Well, the point I am trying to make is that we can't all be the same and I look at the differences in my friends as the people in my life that "smooth out the edges of *me*". I've learned things from them and they have learned things from me. That is why I like MDC. No, I don't label myself with any parenting label. We are who we are. I don't want everyone to be like me, because if they were, then there would be nothing more to learn from others.
A woman after my heart....Koom bay ah....
post #223 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
The thing is, this is not a purely educational/informational board and I really don't think most people perceive it as such. It is very much a community, that people start to identify with after a while. And it can be hurtful to have the support of that community withdrawn because one doesn't have this or that box checked off. It's conditional friendship and all it will do is cause people to be dishonest about their lives for fear of getting hurt. It will become a venue for displaying an online persona and crowing over one's own purity rather than discussing natural parenting. Which is already enough of a problem as it is IMO.
I guess I have never seen this. I have no idea if people are lying. None of us do. Of course, I am actually a 50 yo male with no children I have never seen anyone shooed off because they do not do something on some sort of checklist. I HAVE seen people chastised for declaring they love Hummers because of the way they look and would buy one if they had the cash. I do not think it is OK to attack or belittle someone for declaring that. But I do think it is perfectly acceptable to state you feel that opinion is irresposible. It IS a NFL board after all.

What I do see over and over is someone saying "I think toilet paper is wasteful and I cannot afford to buy it, give me suggestions". Then all sorts of people come on with suggestions that the OP shoots down one after another. Turns out the OP actually wants everyone to say "yeah it is wasteful but you gotta do what you gotta do, here are some pats on the back". If that is what we have to do to make everyone feel all happy inside, then forget it. It is a waste of my time to post suggestions in what turns out to be cleverly disguised just-give-me-pats threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
As for the child abuse Taco Bell example, "I think that..." is nowhere near a sufficiently strong disclaimer for deliberately inflammatory, exaggerated rhetoric. Yeah they may THINK that, but what are they trying to achieve in SAYING it?
Well, they might be trying to say they think it is child abuse. Obviously, this fictional example is getting a little silly. But depending on the context of the thread and the parameters around it, a statement like that might be useful to someone who feels strongly about it. If I were posting on that thread, I would think "gee that person has some strong views" and move on since I love TB way too much to worry what some unknown person thinks about me taking my kid there.
post #224 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
I look more mainstream than I am, which isn't saying much. But I hit a rough patch in life and for several years had much bigger things to worry about than whether my paisley skirts were REAL Indian block prints or industrial repros. I should have been clearer that I am not talking about people who merely look mainstream, but those who actually are mainstream in areas of life outside the strict technical definitions of AP. I don't know if the ladies I saw at WF are among them, but I know they exist, because they post to MDC about how no respectable woman would ever dream of leaving the house without "full face makeup."

I think the word I'm looking for is "co-opted." And I think the snarky crunchier-than-thou phenomenon is, in part, a confused and counterproductive attempt to deal with such.
I hear ya. I didn't have time before but let me tell you that I have my own hangups about judging people who have "co opted" as you put it. I have an issue with going to the health food store in my little beat up Geo amongst a sea of Lexuses and SUV's. I have an issue with organic style magazine and how organic or ecofriendly has now become an interior design issue. I have issue with how being green is now a trend and that instead of making real lifestyle changes people buy some "green" product and claim they are making a real difference.

So there you have it. That is awfully judgemental...but then I realized that people are probably judging me too. In fact, let me help you out. How can I bleach my hair with all those chemicals and buy organic? How can I wear a designer bag made of leather? How can I eat vegan one night and then taco bell the next? How can I drink organic juice but drink several glasses of wine or beer the next? I could go on and on.

I've just come to a point of realizing that we are all human and nobody is perfect. When I looked the part so to speak I really did attempt the granola extreme and found as you were saying about paisley skirts which was very funny btw, that no matter what something wouldn't be good enough or granola enough or crunchy enough. Then I looked at the way I judged others for their decisions the same way others were probably judging me. I decided to be human, to accept that if I really wanted to bleach my hair it was okay..that if I really want to wear designer clothing because I think it is prettier than hemp or organic, that is okay. I'm not always proud of those decisions. I tend to see them as vices even, but I think if we try too hard we will still never walk a straight line and if we take ourselves too seriously we will never enjoy life.
post #225 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
So I come back to the same question: What should happen here? Some people really are "extreme". Are they suppose to shut up?

...

I also never said that i think *anyone* should be allowed to talk down to people or purposely be rude/condescending/etc..... What I said is that "extreme" people should not have to be quiet and go away because someone feels guilty about thier very existense.
I don't see people being made to feel guilty or inferior by just a persons extremism, or just their crunchiness. It is the entire attitude these so-called extremists embody, and like someone else has already said, that attitude is not favored by many here when dealing with children, but somehow it is acceptable when dealing with adults?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
I also think that anyone that participates on a messgae coard needs to remember that written words and tone are interpretted differently by each person.
I think that is a two way street. Yes, people need to keep in mind that the "tone" they are reading may not be intentional, but at the same time, it would be nice if people would also take into concideration the "tone" they may be projecting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I'm not seeing people trying to censor what others say. I think this is all part of what you are talking about Yooper, organic discussion where people get challenged, express their beliefs, and comfort zones get prodded a little.

This time it is around extremism and judgment. What's wrong with that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazelnut View Post
I don't see it either. I see people just wanting the condescension checked at the door, with maybe a little understanding if someone isn't up to snuff in all departments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
But this isn't about our actual parenting practices. It's about behavior on a discussion forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I'm seeing objections to the judgment and rudeness, not to 'extreme' ways of living.
:
post #226 of 327
Hmm--Getting back to the idea that having to give your parenting a name is bourgeois. Actually, though, all segments of our society get names or identify themselves culturally by common behaviors and common lifestyles, common things they buy (and I do mean 'segments'--our culture is all about demographic fragmentation, mostly for marketing purposes). Like, you have the Nascar people, the Bergdorf Goodman people, the Stop-n-shop people, the Miller drinkers, the microbrew drinkers.

But maybe this is bourgeois, since all these people would probably call themselves middle class. Do the very wealthy call themselves anything? Do the very poor?

The thing is, though, that like it or not, people DO tend to connect with each other in the U.S. via shared brand names or shared lifestyles (that usually involve purchasing products). Things like buying piercings and tattoos are totally mainstream, even cliche, if you're in that group.

So the AP label serves a purpose. I think when people first start out 'doing' AP, they are often so swept away that they DO make it into a list of sorts. We're so used to being told what to do by experts--we're so used to NOT using our own instinct and judgement for anything--that switching to AP is sometimes just continuing to do that.

If you look at the history of consumption in the 20th century, you see that as time passes we become a more and more fragmented society. Identity politics played into this beautifully. Some people say it's why we are so far from achieving deep, lasting social reform that benefits everyone (like paid maternity leaves, nat'l health insurance). In the U.S., we just don't think of ourselves as a 'people.' We think of ourselves as belonging to some subcategory. The constant emphasis on individualism goes very well with this too. Both the left and the right pride themselves on their individualism--it's just being 'individualist' about different things. (The right is about economic individualism, the left is about cultural individualism.) Most of our cultural energy seems to go into finding ways we are different from everyone else rather than in finding ways to get together. A really good book on this is Lizabeth Cohen's A Consumer's Republic.

(Not that individualism is all bad. I am always fascinated by people here wishing they were in a 'tribe' to raise their children...but they forget that tribes can be pretty conformist places. And--Hmm. Wait a minute...)
post #227 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuller2 View Post
The constant emphasis on individualism goes very well with this too. Both the left and the right pride themselves on their individualism--it's just being 'individualist' about different things. (The right is about economic individualism, the left is about cultural individualism.)
excellent point. I think one area where women are especially hit hard by individualism is that having children is often portrayed as an individual choice by the family. I'd even go so far as saying that many parenting decisions are called "lifestyle choices".

The upside of this is that it allows for more diversity of styles and, well, choices. The downside is that if something is a choice, then it is your responsibility - you chose to have a child, you chose that lifestyle. Therefore, the community has NO OBLIGATION to support you in that choice. And if your choice suddenly does require support from the community because you cannot do it alone, then you lose your right to have free choice.

So we benefit and we get burned. I guess you cannot get the good without taking the bad too? Interesting situation to be in.

Siobhan
post #228 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzharmony View Post
On the "noone can make you feel guilty" sentiment, I have seen many people trashed after just mentioning gently the two words cloth diapers in another's disposable diaper thread. I haven't seen much trashing of the "mainstream" thinkers here but I have seen a lot of vicious bashing of the poor mother who comes here to express her sadness at the baby being left to cry upstairs alone at the dinner party she attended the night before. Or how dare someone suggest that a toddler shouldn't live on coke and muffins (remember the infamous pink muffin thread) I mean really.
I'm in a fix here; I'd like to give examples of posters being trashed for not willing to go to the extremes of AP/NFL, but I'm pretty sure that's considered a UA. Suffice to say that I've seen plenty of examples. (I don't remember anyone being "viciously bashed" for being sad about a baby left to CIO during a party, though - want to PM me a link?)

I will point this out, though: none of your examples involve crunchier/"extreme" posters being criticized for being crunchy or for posting about their extreme crunchiness. They're examples of crunchier/extreme posters being criticized for making harsh judgments of other people's parenting. There's a big difference.

I feel as though when people in this thread say "Extreme posters are being stifled! They shouldn't have to censor themselves!" what they really mean is that extreme posters should be able to criticize others, without in turn being criticized for being judgmental. No one has given an example of an MDC mama being told that she is too crunchy in her own practices (although people have given examples from their outside-the-net lives). Instead it all seems to be about the right to criticize mainstreamier mothers without having other posters disagree with your approach.

I guess I just don't get what's supposed to be positive and affirming about the dozens and dozens of threads that boil down to, "I saw someone parenting in a way that I wouldn't parent. Don't they suck?", followed by twenty follow-up agreements decorated with crying or vomiting smilies. I'm really glad that those kinds of posts are increasingly met with critical feedback amongst the agreeing comments.

Because as much as I don't support a steady diet of coke and muffins for a toddler, for example, I also recognize that sitting around with a bunch of like-minded mamas complaining about how awful it is that people feed their kids crap doesn't do one single thing to improve childhood nutrition. If it was something that upset me enough that I was losing sleep over it, I wouldn't go looking online for validation that I'm a better mother than the ones who feed their kids coke and muffins - I'd see what I could do about volunteering with a parenting education program.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I just took a pan of muffins out of the oven, and am planning to feed them to my toddler. They are whole-wheat banana-raisin-bran muffins, and decidedly not pink, so hopefully my posting privileges won't be revoked over this.)
post #229 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuller2 View Post
Hmm--Getting back to the idea that having to give your parenting a name is bourgeois. Actually, though, all segments of our society get names or identify themselves culturally by common behaviors and common lifestyles, common things they buy (and I do mean 'segments'--our culture is all about demographic fragmentation, mostly for marketing purposes). Like, you have the Nascar people, the Bergdorf Goodman people, the Stop-n-shop people, the Miller drinkers, the microbrew drinkers.
This is quite true. But, the fact that marketing people want to slot me neatly into a demographic pigeonhole doesn't mean that I have to hand them the label and crawl inside. Years ago, I worked with an advertising guy, who brought out his "bible" - a breakdown of demographic groups, according to socio-economic status, education, religious beliefs and a bunch of other categories. I fit into at least one category for each grouping. He told me I was making it up. The idea that I didn't fit mostly, or totally, into any of his slots threatened him. Tough. I refuse to be slotted into any label. I wore the label "metalhead" when I was a teenager, and I wore it with pride. But, that was 20 years ago, and the only labels I wear now are "wife" and "mother" - and I define what they mean - nobody else.

Quote:
But maybe this is bourgeois, since all these people would probably call themselves middle class. Do the very wealthy call themselves anything? Do the very poor?
I don't call myself anything, and I don't think I'm very poor these days...and I'm certainly not very wealthy.
post #230 of 327
Thread Starter 
"Hmm--Getting back to the idea that having to give your parenting a name is bourgeois. Actually, though, all segments of our society get names or identify themselves culturally by common behaviors and common lifestyles, common things they buy (and I do mean 'segments'--our culture is all about demographic fragmentation, mostly for marketing purposes). Like, you have the Nascar people, the Bergdorf Goodman people, the Stop-n-shop people, the Miller drinkers, the microbrew drinkers."

Isn't this the function of signature lines here? To identify segments?

Since we're communicating online, we can't look at one another and say "that's the alterna/punk mother" "that's the Whole Foods, Bergdorf Goodman mother" "that's the hippie mother" and signature lines fulfill that function (which is the reason why I don't have one).

I think some people use them as a short-hand for the particular ways they are crunchy or to provide insta-granola cred. I guess I wonder why people feel they need that.
post #231 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by bczmama View Post
Isn't this the function of signature lines here? To identify segments?
No. I don't see how identifying myself as a breastfeeder is putting me into a social segment.

Quote:
I think some people use them as a short-hand for the particular ways they are crunchy or to provide insta-granola cred. I guess I wonder why people feel they need that.
Because I can't walk around in real life spouting off about how my almost 1 year old likes to nurse standing up while I sit on the sofa, or about the new cute wool cover I just got in the mail, or how I woke up pinned next to the head board with her butt in my face. These things are not "normal" in society, sadly, and to flaunt them proudly and talk about them as if they are normal either makes me a pushy Nazi breastfeeder (which I've heard WAY too many people refer to LLLI as), a weirdo, a hippie.. all other sorts of names. Or labels for that matter.

THIS is the place I feel safe being a proud breastfeeding, co-sleeping, non vaxing, slinging, organic eating, cloth diapering mama, and THIS is the place where I want to show case those things without being judged for it.

Now it seems even a signature line is one more thing to judge a person's intentions by. Sad.
post #232 of 327
post #233 of 327
FWIW I think there is a distinction between "natural mommas" and "AP mommas".....

For example, I have a friend who had her first baby at the same time I had my second. She CD's, buys the expensive wooden/waldorf toys, eats only organic from the local co-op, makes her own baby food, etc But she said to me "I read about AP and it seems like too much work." Her DD sleeps in a crib down the hall, she only uses a stroller (despite buying an expensive, beautiful mei tai), gives her daughter formula to supplement because she doesn't want to be a "pacifier", and takes every opportunity to leave her 6 month old daughter with a sitter so she can go "be an adult". (I'm not saying this because I think it's bad - it's just not AP by her own definition!)

Whereas I'm definitely more AP - co-sleep, EBF, babywearing etc. But the natural stuff is something I only sort of strive for. I use Disposable diapers, mostly eat organic but don't want to drag my butt to the co-op so end up shopping at Safeway, sometimes make my own baby food, and don't really care if my kid is chewing a plastic toy....so I'm not so natural.

I'm wondering if that is some of the distinction you all are seeing?

peace
robyn
post #234 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivka5 View Post
I feel as though when people in this thread say "Extreme posters are being stifled! They shouldn't have to censor themselves!" what they really mean is that extreme posters should be able to criticize others, without in turn being criticized for being judgmental. No one has given an example of an MDC mama being told that she is too crunchy in her own practices (although people have given examples from their outside-the-net lives). Instead it all seems to be about the right to criticize mainstreamier mothers without having other posters disagree with your approach.
And I think I stated that isn't what I'm defending (I can't speak for others) a few times. IF a not-so-extreme poster asks for advice on a given topic, THEN is told a solution they deem too extreme, OFTEN they will turn it around and accuse the advice-giver of trying to make them feel guilty.

Please take what I write at face value. I don't mean anything more or less than what I write, and frankly it's a bit insulting to be assumed to have intentions that I don't have. Take a look at what I bolded in the quote above.

There are two problems on MDC in this respect:
1) Posters who write hurtful things with no thought to the people on the other end, and
2) People who are intent on inferring hurtful things (between the lines) where there truly are none

(please excuse the grammar in the post above, I'm distracted by listening to my dds play with a pieceocrap electronic plastic cash register dd1 got for her birthday, and no, I'm not happy that others persist in showering my children with ecologically irresponsible gifts, but yes, I'm gracious enough in receiving said gifts that the giver would never know it - but you can still bet come next Yule I'll be looking *here* for suggestions to guide the givers to more ecologically responsible gift alternatives)
post #235 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamsmama View Post
post #236 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivka5 View Post
I'm in a fix here; I'd like to give examples of posters being trashed for not willing to go to the extremes of AP/NFL, but I'm pretty sure that's considered a UA. Suffice to say that I've seen plenty of examples. (I don't remember anyone being "viciously bashed" for being sad about a baby left to CIO during a party, though - want to PM me a link?)

I will point this out, though: none of your examples involve crunchier/"extreme" posters being criticized for being crunchy or for posting about their extreme crunchiness. They're examples of crunchier/extreme posters being criticized for making harsh judgments of other people's parenting. There's a big difference.

I feel as though when people in this thread say "Extreme posters are being stifled! They shouldn't have to censor themselves!" what they really mean is that extreme posters should be able to criticize others, without in turn being criticized for being judgmental. No one has given an example of an MDC mama being told that she is too crunchy in her own practices (although people have given examples from their outside-the-net lives). Instead it all seems to be about the right to criticize mainstreamier mothers without having other posters disagree with your approach.

I guess I just don't get what's supposed to be positive and affirming about the dozens and dozens of threads that boil down to, "I saw someone parenting in a way that I wouldn't parent. Don't they suck?", followed by twenty follow-up agreements decorated with crying or vomiting smilies. I'm really glad that those kinds of posts are increasingly met with critical feedback amongst the agreeing comments.

Because as much as I don't support a steady diet of coke and muffins for a toddler, for example, I also recognize that sitting around with a bunch of like-minded mamas complaining about how awful it is that people feed their kids crap doesn't do one single thing to improve childhood nutrition. If it was something that upset me enough that I was losing sleep over it, I wouldn't go looking online for validation that I'm a better mother than the ones who feed their kids coke and muffins - I'd see what I could do about volunteering with a parenting education program.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I just took a pan of muffins out of the oven, and am planning to feed them to my toddler. They are whole-wheat banana-raisin-bran muffins, and decidedly not pink, so hopefully my posting privileges won't be revoked over this.)
Well, I am one that thinks extreme opinions/experiences/suggestions should not be squashed. But I also find the "I saw such and such at the park" threads to be pointless and mean-spirited. I think it borders on name-calling and is definatley judgemental for no purposeful reason. But it is not the very "extreme" posters I ever see doing this. Maybe our definition of extreme is different. I am talking about the posters that might take one (or more) specific area and fully embrace it. They are the people I look to to be able to answer any question in that topic. These are not the people I see judging anyone, just freely sharing info and answering questions. Sometime speople take the answers to their questions as personal attacks if they do not agree, but I think that is the risk in any discussion. I mean, I can tick off (or offend, or be "critical" of) my mom simply by saying I do not agree that George Bush is God. Maybe that is why I am confused about several points on this thread?

And I will say it again. Where I see what might be a called "judgement" and critism" that bugs me is the really-needs-validation-but-is-masking-it-with-asking-for-help threads. I see them often in the GD forum and it almost always ends in a trainwreck. I rarely bother to participate when people ask for suggestions for that very reason. For example "I would like to cloth diaper and know it is better for the environment but am having challenges.....I need suggestions". Everyone chimes in with suggestions only to get from the OP "well, my washer is in the basement and I do not like stairs", "My dh will not let me", "the mailman refuses to deliver soft and fluffy packages". Then the OP starts to get mad that people are still suggetsing things and starts calling them judgemental and critcal. Turns our OP wants everyone to say "You are right, CDing is impossible for you, please feel really warm and fuzzy with using disposables". I do not frequent to CD fourm so this is completely fictional....before anyone jumps on it. But I see it everywhere. I honestly thought that is what this thread was addressing. If we are in fact talking about needless bashing of completely innocent and defenseless people, then I agree, there is no need.
post #237 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
IF a not-so-extreme poster asks for advice on a given topic, THEN is told a solution they deem too extreme, OFTEN they will turn it around and accuse the advice-giver of trying to make them feel guilty.
I have heard it quoted "Guilt is a disconnect between your behavior and your values". But how do those values get set? They don't spring fully formed out of anyone's head - we read, we think, we talk to other people, we come to sites such as this one to learn from other people facing the same circumstance. And they are constantly evolving and changing.

Mothers come to MDC to learn how to be NFL/AP mothers. And the threads teach them about the expectations.

A dogpile thread ("SIL fed her baby cheetos! OMG!!" - with the long string of OMG responses) teaches newcomers what is considered unnacceptable behavior and the appropriate response to that behavior. So any mom who may have mistakenly fed her toddler cheetos thinks "Oh Sh!t, I had no idea how horrible that was!"

Sometimes this is good for something more obviously horrible, but most of the time I see threads freaking out over something that is usually pretty innocuous.

In the cases where someone makes a blanket statement that cannot be universally supported, we get a death spiral of "but what about people with this or that or the other circumstance" and a laundry list of ALL the horrible things that each mother went through in order to provide X for their kids, with the implication or the outright statement that anyone who did less is a selfish, lazy, dishonest mother. That teaches the lurker mother what she is expected to go through in order to consider herself a good mother.

Those threads scare the heck out of me. There was one that promoted seriously unsafe expectations for a mother - I was worried that any new mother would believe that she had to go to such extremes to be seen as "really trying" - when the extreme was VERY DANGEROUS to mother and child.

Don't get me wrong, I *want* to hear about how people were willing to move heaven and earth to do right by their kids and I love to see the passion people bring to living their values.

However, sometimes we set unrealistic expectations on ourselves and others - and this is a direct reflection of mainstream cultural values of mommy as martyr/perfection parenting. I find it ironic that when I questioned it, I have been accused of not supporting NFL/AP.

I really love the threads where out of unexpected quarters, a mama will say "yeah, I don't like to do Y, but I do sometimes because I am human and I cannot be supermom". I also like the threads where a mama will say "I value Z - and that takes all my attention and energy. So I have to give other things up, like X and Y."

And while they don't get a lot of attention, I love the fact that there are always mamas who will jump into a discussion that seems seriously amiss, and try to put some brakes on. There are some seriously smart and strong ladies on this group.

The thing for all of us to remember is that no where on MDC does it say that every member MUST adhere to all the core values - as PPs have said, someone might be pretty hard core about cloth diapering, but vax on schedule, or even (gasp) formula feed by choice.

The rules state that you must avoid promoting behaviors that are against those core values.

And I think this is valuable for MDC - otherwise, we'd have a darn small community. I wouldn't be there, definitely. Some members have at times peeled off to start their own communities, and more power to them. There is nothing stating that MDC has to be all things to all people.

I think that we do have to remember that we are speaking to more than ourselves, and that our actions will have an impact beyond ourselves.

Is a thread setting an unrealistic expectation for other mothers to follow? For ourselves to follow? Who am I really beating up when I jump on the bandwagon with an OMG? Do I even know this person? Why am I responding? What am I intending to share?

I go back and forth between hoping that the tone on MDC will be less negative and just accepting it for what it is. I come here with my skin nice and thick and I watch for the landmines. I am not alone in my experience. If that is how the community wants to run itself, that is great. If not, something will have to change.

Siobhan
post #238 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
I am talking about the posters that might take one (or more) specific area and fully embrace it.
I too find these folks the most interesting. Most of the time, they recognize they are extreme and don't seriously expect anyone else to follow what they are doing, unless they are seriously committed -because they KNOW what it takes to make that choice.

Quote:
Where I see what might be a called "judgement" and critism" that bugs me is the really-needs-validation-but-is-masking-it-with-asking-for-help threads.
I hear you. I usually stay away from those threads for the same reason.

In facilitation I have done, we have a "yeah but" ban. Basically, if you ask a question and participate in discussion, you are open to the suggestions and ideas of others. It doesn't mean 100% acceptance, of course, but "yeah, but" with a list of why the suggestion won't work is not conducive to conversation.

I don't know how to make that a rule - something like "don't post requests for suggestions if you are not open to change" or some such?

[quote] "the mailman refuses to deliver soft and fluffy packages". /QUOTE]

This cracked me up! Especially as our mailman always makes comments on our packages - and seems to prefer the soft and lightweight ones (wonder why? ;P)

Siobhan
post #239 of 327
I began to stay away from the gd forum a lot of the time, but I rarely see that. What I usually see (and have experienced, and have received pms of commiseration about it when I experience it) is asking for advice and people getting snotty responses like "you're making very dangerous assumptions" when no such assumptions were made, or someone clearly at their wits end asking for help and getting not-so-helpful responses that often seemd more designed to lecture than to help, so they're not exactly met with an open mind. Sometimes they don't seem to be listening to particular circumstances particular to the OP. But I don't recall seeing polite, understanding suggestions rebuffed. Maybe it happens. I don't see it unless the "suggestions" are patronizing and assuming the OP is coming from complete GD ignorance.
post #240 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Of_60 View Post
Actually had nothing to do with your post at all.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › The Granola Extreme