# Pixie Sticks for breakfast? Why or why not?



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

If you had Pixie Sticks in the house, would you let your child eat them for breakfast? I would and here's why:

I would not want Pixie Sticks to be the sole thing they eat, but I would figure that as soon as they eat them, the sooner they will be gone and the child can forget about them (as in Halloween or something. I don't like to drag out the candy. I would rather they eat it all in a couple of days than have candy every day for a couple of months).

I would want them to eat an egg or other protein so their blood sugar would not tank. A Pixie Stick won't fill them up, so they will soon be eating the rest of breakfast. (My kids would, anyway).

That is why I wouldn't pick that hill to die on. I would try not to have a lot of sugar like that in the house. (Halloween notwithstanding).

Tot wants to watch Night of the Living Dead. I would tell them exactly what the movies is about. I am lucky in that none of my kids would have wanted to watch that movie at that age. (At least I dont ever recall anyone asking). If you have a child who would, you have my sympathies, but i still feel like the long disucssion about what you think about that movie and small children would matter to the child. I believe a child who has grown up without a lot of rules would trust the parent's judgement on it, or maybe compromise with a less scary movie.

Clothing with sexual writing on the bum for a 9 yr old-- Most 9 yr olds would get why you wouldn't want them to buy this, I think. But if they insisted, I would think that there is something peer-wise going on with the child and would sympathize. Sometimes 'fitting in' matters...you would talk about peer-dependancy and vulnerability etc. I htink a 9 yr old is old enough to ake statements about what sort of clothing they feel they need to wear. Maybe a compromise can be had. Perhaps the same style shorts, fromt he same teeny bopper store, even if we think the Limited is a trash store, without the writing. I think we can all recall times where just blending in was less painful than wearing the mary janes and white tights our mothers loved.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

I'm with you.

I believe that giving loving guidance, without demanding control, allows children to learn self-discipline.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

My daughter needs protein for breakfast, but she and I have worked that out together. She has had sweet stuff for breakfast, and has learned that it doesn't work for her, and now has protein for breakfast.

I'd personally rather give my daughter other options that she might like more than to deny any given option. Unless the risk was really severe. And even then, I'd try to find a way to accept the general wish if not the specific one. If my daughter wanted to see the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and I knew it would give her nightmares, I might deny that specific movie but still recognize that she's ready for movies that are a little scarier than she's seen so far and together maybe we'd find a few that were a step up in scaryness for her that we could agree on.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Well, since this is a direct spin-off of a post of mine, I assume you think you know my views on the matter.

But, just to clarify, actually:

First and most importantly, I would not ever classify a parent who forbade these things as "disrespectful," unless he/she was disrespectful in the WAY they were forbidden. That's key. I just would not think twice about it. Perfectly justifiable parental choices, IMO. Well within the realm.

But, if it were actually ME:

#1: Well, there's no way in heck we'd have Pixie Stix in the house unless they were leftover Halloween candy. In that case, I'd tell DD she could have one after breakfast when she had some "growing food" in her belly. In fact, this Halloween, DD was allowed two pieces of candy a day, and she did choose to have some of them after breakfast.

#2. No, she couldn't watch it, but I'd explain why compassionately.

#3. No, I wouldn't permit her to buy it, but I'd explain why and offer an alternative choice.

Honestly, what we're talking about here is a fairly classic MDC/GD debate--do you believe yourself, as the parent, to be in a position of final authority, or not? Do you believe young children are always fully capable of making healthy, positive choices, or not? My position is that I'm the adult and the one with more life experience and knowledge, and I get more say. This is especially true when we are talking about purchases, as we are are very money- and environment-conscious about what we buy, and I fail to believe that denying my generally very privileged child this or that candy or gewgaw is going to scar her for life. I know not everyone agrees. Ah well.

FWIW, in my experience, I give my kid waaaay more leeway on most choices than the vast majority of mainstream parents. But I have a line.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

No candy for breakfast. Oatmeal, an egg, a ham steak, peanut butter toast, yogurt..... the list goes on. The pixie stick would not enter into choices at all.

Gentle discipline does not mean letting your kid sabotage a healthy diet.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Yep, except I'd hope they were artificial color and artificial flavor-free.









Pat


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Actually, I just realized, that ds ate jelly beans first thing this morning. And they are artificial color and artificial flavor-free.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Loraxc-- I just didn't want you to think I didn't respect your questions. I wrote a very nice post, but then the whole thread was no more.

I think my children absolutely look to me for guidance. I respect my role in their lives too much to not care about that! I respect they need parents they can count on. I also know they have some ideas of their own and I totally respect that, even if I might not agree with all of them.

I have hardly said Heck, no. Even still, I find my children have very good judgement. There are so many things that have never even come up for us. The words on the butt is one thing. Total non- issue, and I don't know why. If my dds brought something like that home, I'd want to talk about it. Knowing my girls, they would have some darn good reason, and I would need to listen. I don't see how I could say no.

As for sugar, even my 8 yr old knows that if she doesn't eat healthy food, her body, her head, her energy level will be at issue. I can't imagine in a million years that she would want to have only Pixie Sticks in her stomach. She'd absolutely want soemthing to go with them. lol

So many things, when we think about them, become non issues. The kid ate a min candy bar on an empty stomach...now he's cranky. Here's some soup from last night, or a grilled cheese. End of story, kwim? 9Of course if your child is deathly allegic to something, it's not even around...so I am not talking about epi pen situations).


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *philomom* 
No candy for breakfast. Oatmeal, an egg, a ham steak, peanut butter toast, yogurt..... the list goes on. The pixie stick would not enter into choices at all.

Gentle discipline does not mean letting your kid sabotage a healthy diet.

Would many children feel full on a Pixie Stick? Wouldn't they want some yogurt to go with it? An egg (and my first posts talks about an egg...) would negate the Pixie Sticks.









Of course, I know most people at MDC don't have Pixie Sticks in the house...but what if you did...that one time in a zillion years? I mean, how serious is the candy for breakfast situation, and how often would it even come up?


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

oops hit send twice! Sorry!


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

What about if the kid wants another candy bar, then another, then another, then another?( In my example, I was more thinking about a whole bag of Pixie Stix, not one.) Or the kid who WILL watch TV 10 hours a day if permitted?

This actually isn't something my kid would do, but I know some who would. In my experience, some people have much better luck limiting themselves and understanding themselves, grown-ups included. For instance, I drink and enjoy wine and beer qute often (when not pregnant) but I know that anything more than two is too many. Many people have trouble stopping at two, though...


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I agree UU Mom. How often would this come up? The day after Halloween? If she's got candy, she can eat it. She generally knows better than to have something like that first thing in the morning, but if she had it one day I'd have to think she'd still be hungry for an egg or something.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
Actually, I just realized, that ds ate jelly beans first thing this morning. And they are artificial color and artificial flavor-free.









Well, my children ate eggs they gathered from their own hens this morning (That's true, I am not being sarcastic lol). We don't have any jelly beans.







Not today, anyway. Those eggs, however? They were followed up by chocolate chip (Hershy chocolate, not Nestle's!) cookies my dds made yesterday. (Which I recorded in our hsing calendar as "Science". )


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
What about if the kid wants another candy bar, then another, then another, then another?( In my example, I was more thinking about a whole bag of Pixie Stix, not one.) Or the kid who WILL watch TV 10 hours a day if permitted?

This actually isn't something my kid would do, but I know some who would. In my experience, some people have much better luck limiting themselves and understanding themselves, grown-ups included. For instance, I drink and enjoy wine and beer qute often (when not pregnant) but I know that anything more than two is too many. Many people have trouble stopping at two, though...

Yeah, but that begs the question of how do people learn to limit themselves? I'd argue that maybe it's by experimenting and learning.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

I have let my kids have candy for breakfast, especially when it was leftover Halloween candy and I wanted to get it out of the house. But every day? I don't think I would. My dd wouldn't come back for protein, she'd just bop off and feel yucky and then take it out on us.

My argument against scary movies and sexual messages and all of that stuff is this:

You say you trust your child and think that they have good judgment. So, if you happened to have a swimming pool, would you explain to them all about drowning, how quickly it could happen, how easy it is to slip into the pool, how when they're dead, they're dead, etc.? And then, since you knew that they knew how you feel, and you knew that they had good judgment, would you turn them loose in the backyard unsupervised?

Of course not. I think it's the same with "mature content". Kids might THINK they're ready for it or know what it's about, but I just don't think they really can. Or, if they do, (like in the example of sexually explicit materials), it's because something went terribly wrong. My brother always complains because his daughter wants to wear super-low jeans (she's 10). I say, it's nice that she doesn't understand why parents are opposed to that.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
Yeah, but that begs the question of how do people learn to limit themselves? I'd argue that maybe it's by experimenting and learning.

I don't think that's neccesarily true. Especially not when it concerns biologically addictive substances. Like nicotine, high fructose corn syrup, and alcohol.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
What about if the kid wants another candy bar, then another, then another, then another?( In my example, I was more thinking about a whole bag of Pixie Stix, not one.) Or the kid who WILL watch TV 10 hours a day if permitted?

This actually isn't something my kid would do, but I know some who would. In my experience, some people have much better luck limiting themselves and understanding themselves, grown-ups included. For instance, I drink and enjoy wine and beer qute often (when not pregnant) but I know that anything more than two is too many. Many people have trouble stopping at two, though...

Honestly, most MDC parents who don't have a lot or rules and such, would probably plop themselves down next to the child watching TV (and long before 10 hours into it) and say "hey, kid, got any other ideas about how to use this day?" I know I would. Unless the kids was sick or something. Then I'd leave the TV, but I would stop in with some checkers or a book and ask him if he wanted to be read to. I might also suggest an audio book. If the child were not feeling ill, I would ask if he'd want to make some pizza or something with me.

Not having a rule that says you can't watch TV 10 hours a day doesn't mean a parent would not try to suggest other activities for a child who ghadn't moved for several hours.

A pregnant woman who doesn't drink isn't doing so because of a law against drinking...we know it's not healthy, some of us don't have an emotional or biological glitch that has us abusing wine; or perhaps we've already gone down that road and fought our demons. But it's still not a law that motivates us.

Knowledge, guidance (without law), information, discussion, compassion, experience, respect for zany behavior sometimes (epecially in children) is what helps us make ''good' choices.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
I don't think that's neccesarily true. Especially not when it concerns biologically addictive substances. Like nicotine, high fructose corn syrup, and alcohol.

Information and education is power. When a child is tiny, we control their world. Most parents here dont put Coke in a bottle. We don't give them jelly beans when they we have organic oatios.

But not having strict rules about things does not mean we do not give critical information to our growing children. That 8 yr old who ate chocolate chip cookies after her eggs







leaned a loooooong time ago that she feels like crap if she reverses it.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

This is the twist on "would you let your 15 month old run into the street"! LOL And no parent in their right mind give a toddler a choice as to whether she can drown in a pool or or not, or walk in front of a truck. "Here sweetie, , I've left some crushed up glass on the floor of your room, right near your blocks. Make sure you crawl around it, not over it.









That's not even remotely the same as an older child choosing her own clothing.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
I have let my kids have candy for breakfast, especially when it was leftover Halloween candy and I wanted to get it out of the house. But every day? I don't think I would. My dd wouldn't come back for protein, she'd just bop off and feel yucky and then take it out on us.

My argument against scary movies and sexual messages and all of that stuff is this:

You say you trust your child and think that they have good judgment. So, if you happened to have a swimming pool, would you explain to them all about drowning, how quickly it could happen, how easy it is to slip into the pool, how when they're dead, they're dead, etc.? And then, since you knew that they knew how you feel, and you knew that they had good judgment, would you turn them loose in the backyard unsupervised?

Of course not. I think it's the same with "mature content". Kids might THINK they're ready for it or know what it's about, but I just don't think they really can. Or, if they do, (like in the example of sexually explicit materials), it's because something went terribly wrong. My brother always complains because his daughter wants to wear super-low jeans (she's 10). I say, it's nice that she doesn't understand why parents are opposed to that.


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

:


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

I wouldn't allow pixie sticks for breakfast because my kids react badly to the synthetic colors and flavors. We do keep plenty of "natural" sweets in the house- Yummy Earth lollypops and/or sucking candies, sugar cubes, etc.

Since we always have those in the house, I don't allow them for breakfast. My kids tend to NOT want healthier foods after eating sugar- they just crave more sugar and get cranky and miserable. So the rule is they can only have candy AFTER meals, not before. On school days they can only have candy after school, but on days off they can have candy after breakfast.

And I limit what things they're allowed to watch on TV. Anything on Disney channel or Noggin I'm comfortable just letting them watch and tuning out. New shows, that we haven't seen before, I'll watch WITH them and discuss afterwards whether I think it's appropriate to continue watching or not. If my answer is no, we talk about why. I'll turn something off in the middle if it's truly innappropriate- but far more likely (say with TV shows) we'll watch the whole thing and then discuss it together.

We also have rules about the TV being on at night when DS has homework to finish, and keeping it off when I'm tired and likely to tune out for hours and not get the kids to bed on time.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

Yeah, but that begs the question of how do people learn to limit themselves? I'd argue that maybe it's by experimenting and learning.
I'm honestly not sure about this. Maybe yes, maybe no. In my case, I grew up with a brother who had type 1 diabetes, so we almost never had sugary food in the house. You might say I had no chance to experiment and learn--but as an adult, I have no issues with sugar consumption. Maybe I just didn't develop much of a taste for it? I don't know. But I have plenty of friends who grew up eating lots of sugar and STILL eat lots of sugar--way more than me.

Similarly, I have friends who grew up with no TV who never had to go through a "learning to limit" gorging phase with it once they had access, and who still don't really watch it.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Well, right now DS has chocolate first thing every morning because he's doing a chocolate advent calendar and is so excited about it every morning that I don't see a reason not to have that be the first thing we do.

But on a typical day, if DS asks for candy right away and for some reason we have some around, I tell him he can have some with lunch. Since, so far, he's accepted that with no further discussion, I leave it at that. If he let me know that it was extraordinarily important to him that he have candy in the morning that day, I'd reconsider my position, but I don't see a reason to not even try to guide him toward something that will make him feel better for his morning meal.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Yeah, I'm ok with pixie-stix or sugar for breakfast--mine had smarties this morning. And then a banana and some organic, nitrate-free bacon.

We'd talk about the movie and discuss it and I might recommend against it, but if the child was adamant then I'd figure out a way to watch it in a less scary way.

Same with the clothes, I guess. I might talk about what those things mean and what other folks might think if they had it on (or not--depending on the situation--no 9 yr. old girls in my future!). And I might talk about my comfort level, but I just can't get that worked up over clothing choices (barring some super-offensive racial slur or somethign).

I like the, "this is not the hill I'm going to die on," quote!! So true!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *philomom* 
Gentle discipline does not mean letting your kid sabotage a healthy diet

No, but MDC is about: "Non-adversarial Cooperative Family Living" so, for me, even if the parent isn't comfortable with those choices there's bound to be more than just flat-out "no."


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
First and most importantly, I would not ever classify a parent who forebade these things as "disrespectful," unless he/she was disrespectful in the WAY they were forbidden. That's key. I just would not think twice about it. Perfectly justifiable parental choices, IMO. Well within the realm.
.











It is entirely possible to respectfully say "no" to your child. Sometimes, ime and imo, it is the more respectful thing to do.


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

Sure.









It wouldn't be in the house too often so why not? We don't eat "meals" anyway so likely in a few min. they'd be wanting something more substantial anyhow.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I'd say no to #1 and 3, but I would explain why. The kid could have Pixie sticks after lunch, in the backyard.
DD loves films like _Night of the Living Dead_ I wouldn't let her watch _Evil [/I]Dead or Shaun of the Dead, though._


----------



## kikidee (Apr 15, 2007)

No pixie sticks for breakfast. That is not a breakfast food. And absolutely not on the writing on the bum. If my daughter ever wants to dress like that (oy!), we would have a discussion about how fitting in isn't everything, and it's okay to be yourself. And also, we would discuss how the way you dress projects a certain image. And it's fun to play w/ fashion, but you have to be careful about what you are projecting.

Yeah I'm not excited about that part of the teenage years! I hope that turtlenecks and long pants are in by then! I kid... but seriously, it's tough sometimes to be a parent and lay down the law, so to speak.

But, as others have said, as long as you set up guidelines with love and respect, I think that is exactly what we are supposed to do as parents.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

I needed the light touch UUMom brought to the topic. I'm having an exhausting and frustrating week, so I'm very grateful for the inspiration.

Thanks.


----------



## Joyster (Oct 26, 2007)

If my two year old had his way he'd eat nothing but cookies. If we're talking about children a bit older, I would allow them pixie sticks AFTER they ate something healthy. Their father would be fit to be tied though. We don't keep things like pixie sticks though, and I've never seen them at Halloween, they just don't see too popular here anymore.

Scary movies. I didn't have a lot of restrictions on movies or TV when I was a kid. I don't feel scarred by it, but I can't really see my tot asking to see something like that. If he did, I think we'd find an alternative. I for one don't have much problem saying no to TV time and will pick up a book or play a game instead. We don't watch a lot of TV. We did show him some non-violent scenes from Jurassic Park and he was completely blown away. He then managed to get the TV on while I was in the kitchen just as the T-Rex was eating everyone.







:

As for the clothing. God willing my daughters will get the ideal firmly imprinted that wearing that sort of thing does not do much good in the long run. I understand peer pressure, and have no problems settling on a compromise, but it is my job to raise a young woman who doesn't feel the need to have something sexy printed across her rear at the age of nine. I just pray that I can make that clear in a way that has her agreeing with me, and I don't have to lay that arbitrary line down, but I am prepared to do so if need be. That and I need to preserve the lifespan of my husband, because something like that would make his head explode. lol


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
Yep, except I'd hope they were artificial color and artificial flavor-free.









Pat

LOL And no nitrates in the ham steak, right?

Thanks for keeping this friendly, everyone. I heart you all.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chfriend* 
I needed the light touch UUMom brought to the topic. I'm having an exhausting and frustrating week, so I'm very grateful for the inspiration.

Thanks.

Most welcome, and thank you for getting it.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 

No, but MDC is about: "Non-adversarial Cooperative Family Living" so, for me, even if the parent isn't comfortable with those choices there's bound to be more than just flat-out "no."


I searched and found it in the MDC Mission Statement. And "Discipline without punishment" is also listed. http://www.mothering.com/mdc/oldrule...vertising.html
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=164797

Pat


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Pixie Stix. No problem. I ate a brownie for breakfast yesterday. And then some protein, when I wanted that. After the jelly beans, ds had organic millet and flax bread with organic creamy peanut butter, then pasta with meat sauce for lunch.









Quote:

Night of the Living Dead?
"I believe this could be a scary movie to you. I don't think you'd like it." I've said this to ds on multiple occasions. He trusts my input, when he wants it. He follows his own judgment, when he doesn't. Both of us have learned from some of his preferences. He is very sensitive and doesn't *want* to watch scary movies.

Quote:

Sexual shirt?
Well, we have a boy.







. I owned a midriff top, myself at 11 or 12. I surely am not going to restrict clothing. When I was not allowed to wear what I wanted to school, I just carried it to school in the bottom of a bag of books and changed at school. I was very adept at getting around parent imposed obstacles to do what I wanted anyway. I do believe it has helped me to be creative at finding solutions which meet both of our needs.









Pat


----------



## macca (Jan 6, 2006)

Pixie Stix have the same "nutritional content" (or lack thereof!) at 7am or 7pm. If my child was going to eat candy that day, the time of consumption wouldn't really be a concern. Of course, I'd try to ensure they ate something healthy as well.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

I posted but didn't answer the questions









Pixie sticks for breakfast, if we had them in the house for some odd reason.....yes, after protein. no before (because she would have a meltdown before the protein got to ger mouth). At 6 she is aware of her protein needs, but sometimes thinks it won't happen "just this once". She often eats holiday candy for breakfast, after protein.

Scary movie--all I have to say is "it is scary" or "it has kissing and stuff" (if too much sexuality) and dd wants none of it. If she pressed, I would say "no" if I deemed it too much. You can't unring a bell for violence, kwim? So I feel it is more respectful of her childhood to shelter in this regard.

Sexy printing on 9 yo? Hells no. There would be discussion--lots of it, but the answer would be no. This is one area where I feel it is more respectful to say no. I can't imagine how I would feel now if I saw a pic of me wearing something like that when I was 9....I would wonder "why didn't my parent's care enough to stop me?" Post puberty I might have a different answer....but 9? No.


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

Well, there is probably less sugar in a Pixie Stick than there is in my cup of coffee, and I have waaaay more than a cup for breakfast.....so I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I denied her a pixie stick. I'd let her have it, and at the first opportunity thereafter, I'd throw them out. It's not fair for me to have the candy in plain sight and then deny her, yk? Of course she's only 2.5, so she doesn't know we hide the 'goods' in the higher shelves!














:Seriously though, dd has had ice cream for breakfast a TON over the past few weeks. She's also asked for chicken and rice, vegetable soup, and spaghetti and meatballs. And she will frequently have scrambled eggs for lunch or like tonight, cereal (organic shredded wheat) for dinner. We don't have 'set' breakfast foods, lunch foods or dinner foods. If she chose to have a sugary breakfast, I would just make sure to provide a higher protein snack and lunch option for her. She's sick right now, so today isn't typical, but she's had-scrambled eggs with ketchup, organic graham bunny crackers, a candy cane and some chamomile tea with Agave nectar. She'll have some cookies next because I was craving them and she helped me bake them.







Eh, so what? Tomorrow we'll have a lower sugar day.
As for movies, right now, because she seems to be going through a very scared stage, I wouldn't let her watch it. However, she would trust me when I told her it was too scary for her and wouldn't want to watch it anyway.
WIth the clothing, I would try to get to the heart of why she wanted it. If it was to fit it, we'd have a talk about trends, peer pressure, and all that. I understand the need to fit in, it was something I felt I never quite did in school, and I hated school for it. She's going to be home/unschooled, so hopefully it wont be quite such a big issue for her. I would give my opinion and hope that she would be receptive. I would also offer similar choices for styles of clothing. Ultimately though, I have no problem saying no to a 9 year old wanting to wear fishnet tights, a 6 inch mini-skirt, spike heels and a low cut halter top with "Booby Baby" written on the front.














think it's highly unlikely that she will want that though!


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
This is the twist on "would you let your 15 month old run into the street"! LOL And no parent in their right mind give a toddler a choice as to whether she can drown in a pool or or not, or walk in front of a truck. "Here sweetie, , I've left some crushed up glass on the floor of your room, right near your blocks. Make sure you crawl around it, not over it.









That's not even remotely the same as an older child choosing her own clothing.

But is it even remotely the same as saying, "This movie might have lots of people killing each other and stabbing each other. It's just pretend, so you don't need to worry. Okay? Wanna see it?" and then your child has disturbing nightmares.


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 





















I'm with you.

I believe that giving loving guidance, without demanding control, allows children to learn self-discipline.

I do agree with this...but we also don't have sugar treats aside from ice cream or actual sugar







, so it's easy for me to say.


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

Just to add...I am only addressing the pixie stix, not the movies and clothing. I am not ready to go there yet.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
But is it even remotely the same as saying, "This movie might have lots of people killing each other and stabbing each other. It's just pretend, so you don't need to worry. Okay? Wanna see it?" and then your child has disturbing nightmares.









I know some peeps think some of us crazies are saying that: "I don't care if you have nightmares and are scarred for life. Okay! Let me go ahead and hit play"-- but most of us are not saying any such thing.

I would love to chat specifically about this situation, but you need to not want want to polarize various parenting styles.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 







I know some peeps think some of us crazies are saying that: "I don't care if you have nightmares and are scarred for life. Okay! Let me go ahead and hit play"-- but most of us are not saying any such thing.

I would love to chat specifically about this situation, but you need to not want want to polarize various parenting styles.

Whoa! I don't think that's fair. I'm not trying to do anything of the sort. I HAVE had this same discussion before on MDC, though, and there was a large contingency or moms who thought that toddlers/preschoolers could handle scary/violent movies as long as they were prepped and it was "discussed". And by scary/violent, I mean Spiderman, X-Men, Batman, etc. So I apologize if I've offended you by lumping in with those moms. Maybe that's not what you're trying to say.

What I was trying to say with my swimming pool argument is that information is not enough. So if your dc wants to go to a scary movie, and you tell them, "I think this will scare you. It will be gory and gross and it'll be very hard to remember that it's just pretend," and they still want to go, I wouldn't let them.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that children are still children, whether you live consensually or you're authoritarian.







*De*Polarizing, if you will.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

That's just not how I'd handle the scary movie. My daughter wanted to see Lord of the Rings. I'm quite sure she'd get terrible nightmares. So she and I talked about it - she said the movie sounded good (she loves sci fi) but that she didn't want nightmares. I remembered something about animated LOTR movies from some time way ago, and we ordered those for her. She was quite happy with that. We found a solution that gave her absolutely everything she wanted and none of what she didn't want.

It's about being open minded and finding solutions. We set up these false dichotomies sometimes - he wants to see Texas Chainsaw Massacre and I don't want him to see it - when maybe the answer is to find a movie that's a little scary but not *that* scary. Kids often want to see something that's a bit scary, and there are plenty of movies that are scary enough to be fun but not terribly scary. You don't want your kid to watch that particular movie? Say why, give some alternatives that you'd be more comfortable with, see if he has alternatives that might be good. You might be able to reach an agreement rather than imposing your will or letting him do something you know he'd regret. (General you here - I don't think this was anyone's real life circumstance.)

With the candy - my daughter has learned that she needs protein for breakfast. But if she has an interest in something sweet, we do try to find a way to meet that and still get protein in her. Sometimes she has ricotta cheese with a little sugar and vanilla in it for breakfast. I can't imagine her actually asking for candy for breakfast but if it came right down to it, it's her body and she gets to make those decisions. Has anyone here actually had a child want to eat candy for breakfast? She seems to only want candy on Christmas morning and Easter morning, and I just let it slide those two days, but I'm sure that's never come up any time other than Christmas and Easter. Of course she knows that if she says she wants something sweet, I have an option that's sweet available (the ricotta cheese thing).


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 

What I was trying to say with my swimming pool argument is that information is not enough. So if your dc wants to go to a scary movie, and you tell them, "I think this will scare you. It will be gory and gross and it'll be very hard to remember that it's just pretend," and they still want to go, I wouldn't let them. .

I think most small children will trust a parent who is trying to work with them. I also do not know any small child of 4 or 5 yrs old who has engaged in these sorts of chats who doesn't trust their parent when they say, "I think this will give you terrible nightmares".

ETA-- I was in a rush so could not finish.

The above is not the same thing as thinking a walking baby can understand what you tell her about pools, drowning etc. Babies and pools need fences, alrams and/ or constant adult superviosn. I don't think anyone with a real brain thinks that leaving it at telling a tot "Don't go near the water' is a viable strategy.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
I searched and found it in the MDC Mission Statement. And "Discipline without punishment" is also listed. http://www.mothering.com/mdc/oldrule...vertising.html
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=164797

Yep! Funny that.









I'm naking so bear w/..........

when monkey was 4 he LOVED to watch Scooby Doo....and all manner of other "scary" movies like Spiderman, The Hulk, etc. It was like the *thing* w/ his dad--sit on the couch together and watch this stuff. And I would mosey into the room and see this frightful stuff on!! And be like, OMG! This is too scary! I don't think it's a good idea for him to watch this! Monkey, aren't you scared?!

And the short answer was, no. He wasn't scared and he'd be telling ME, "Mommy, it's *pretend!* I'm not scared!!" And he wasn't.







I was! I hate scary stuff!

But then he started telling me that Scooby Doo was giving him nightmares and wasn't going to watch it at nighttime. And that was his rule for himself for a good while. Now he's six and he no longer has that rule--in fact, I just asked him about it and he doesn't even remember it.







I asked him what he would think if I had made that rule for him and he said, "That would be mean," and looked all confused.









He kind of doesn't trust me re. scary--he thinks I think EVERYTHING is "too scary."







But if his daddy said it was too scary, he says he'd definitely wait 'til he was older.

But there's so much in btw. OK and No Way. There's waiting for it to come out on DVD and not having the theater intensity, there's FFing thru the scary parts, there's talking about the special effects, there's offering up Goosebumps or Scooby instead of Texas Chainsaw, etc.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But there's so much in btw. OK and No Way. There's waiting for it to come out on DVD and not having the theater intensity, there's FFing thru the scary parts, there's talking about the special effects, there's offering up Goosebumps or Scooby instead of Texas Chainsaw, etc.









: So dang true!


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
I searched and found it in the MDC Mission Statement. And "Discipline without punishment" is also listed. http://www.mothering.com/mdc/oldrule...vertising.html
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=164797

I had never read that Mission Statement! Cool!

To be fair, while those are all topics advocated in the magazine and on the website, they are not all advocated as the only or best approach. For instance, homeschooling is on there, and I don't believe the website or magazine is specifically taking a stand on the superiority of homeschooling.

I do think that the magazine takes a stand against punishment and adversarial parenting, but there is a huge gray area in what is considered punitive and adversarial. When my dd was having an extremely difficult time in past months, I read an "ask the experts" article from the homepage that specifically suggested a system of rewards and consequences for older children with explosive rage (for the behavior of raging).


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
To be fair, while those are all topics advocated in the magazine and on the website, they are not all advocated as the only or best approach.

Nope, but they're not as "extreme" and inappropriate as some might think.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Oh, I totally agree!


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

I know you do, mama!







:


----------



## Breeder (May 28, 2006)

This discussion is so interesting!

For us, it's about setting boundaries. We have had rules about things we knew we would have issue with since our DS was teeny tiny.

#1 - we don't watch tv at our house (when DS is awake - he will be able to join in on the wkends when he is older)
#2 - you can have as many pieces of candy as you are old for Halloween and you get to pick them .... (BTW DS still has THREE of his five pieces over a month later.... all suckers. He was well aware that he could eat them at anytime) all other sugary sweets are rarely in the house and when they are you are free to have some at snack time or as a dessert.
#3 - whining never gets you what you want....ever
#4 - we approve all toys, clothes etc because we BUY them with the money we work for. When our kids are old enough to get a job, they can purchase something we don't necessarily approve of (this doesn't mean we don't give choices, it's just a choice between this or that: also the school he goes to doesn't allow images on clothing, since this will likely be the school our second attends too the words on the rump would be a non-issue.)

These are simple rules, they have not been tested (thus far: except the whining of course) because they are facts of life to my child.

Boundaries can be respectful, you don't have to be harsh to give your child healthy boundaries.


----------



## 93085 (Oct 11, 2007)

Everything in me was horrified with the idea of pixie sticks for breakfast until I realized that DD1 has been starting off each morning with a piece of chocolate from her Advent calendar lately.









So change pixie sticks to chocolate, and I'm guilty. But I confess I give her a real breakfast (with no complaints) after that.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
Everything in me was horrified with the idea of pixie sticks for breakfast until I realized that DD1 has been starting off each morning with a piece of chocolate from her Advent calendar lately.









So change pixie sticks to chocolate, and I'm guilty. But I confess I give her a real breakfast (with no complaints) after that.









You are such a terrible parent!


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

If you are asking whether I would give a patent "No way"...that isn't my style. There would be lots of discussion. It is extremely important to me that ds understand the values behind my reasoning, and I would put a lot of effort into helping him share/connect with those values. That would be my focus.

If you are asking whether, at the end of the day, I would accept a decision by ds to watch a movie I felt strongly was not acceptable, or wear clothing that I felt was totally inappropriate, or consume a highly toxic diet...no I would not accept that decision. So there is a level of authority I feel okay returning to as a basis for setting some boundaries until the issue is resolved. What I have found is that _sometimes_ the agreeable solution is not obvious, and in the meantime, someone has to decide what happens. In those instances, I am willing to set a boundary until resolution is found.

However I am picturing this perhaps differently than intended?

FOOD: As long as ds has a mainly healthy diet he chooses what and when he eats. Typically, there is almost never any need for any kind of "pulling rank" as the parent. Ds has been raised in near constant conversation and it is just second nature for us to talk out an issue and reach a solution easily.

MEDIA: ds found a tv show that initially I let him watch because it was a cartoon. He was talking about the show after seeing a few episodes, and some of what I heard him say was really upsetting to me. I watched the show and was pretty horrified. I think in general ds has a lot of freedom with what he can see. However, he is 11, and right now the information *is* the reality, because right now there is no concrete reality for him on adult topics. And this show was ALL about taking serious topics, like abortion, gays, racism, sex, women etc. and going all out to get a laugh on those topics. The information was being given in a way that skewed the topic so as to mock it and make it a joke--and some of the information (not the topics themselves, but the stereotypes and graphic details) were entirely new to ds. It just is not okay with me for ds to be presented with such important information, for the first time, in a way that twists and humiliates the subject matter. Because while he has a sense that this is meant to be a joke--he doesn't have any way to know which part is the joke! And so he was drawing his own conclusions. He was guessing. And he was identifying mainly with the funny shock value, and relating that to the topic. Not okay with me.

Anyway, I explained all of this to him, and said that this show was not something he could watch right then, I needed time to think about it. I talked to dh and we agreed that ds could only watch this show if one of us watched with him so we could talk about what he was seeing. Once, the show advertised another, even more "shock value" show, and we simply said 'When you are older we can watch that with you. Right now, this show (the one I've been describing) is our limit'. He seemed fine with that.

Now, right there in that first moment, ds was swept up in the show, and really did want me to say 'Sure you can watch it all you want". He was disappointed that I didn't say that. However this is where I go my own way based on my own experiences--I think the "other" voice here, the one presented by the tv show, does not have equal validity to real, truthful information. That show is not the truth, and on some level ds intuitively sensed it. But he didn't have any way to know it. The information was new and the jokes were funny, and I think he had a gut feeling it was somehow 'off', but he wasn't sure why. I think his disappointment was actually very healthy. I think it was okay that ds had to wait until I had time to give the topic some thought. I think it was healthy for him to see that I cared enough about him to give the subject that much attention. I think it was healthy for him to be given some limits on how he would absorb the information in that show. I think whatever disappointment he felt was okay for him to experience in the greater context of being given lots of feedback and support on the issue.

CLOTHING: hasn't been an issue. I am very relaxed compared to some, I don't care if ds matches or if he wears the same shirt two or three times. But without any doubt, I would not be okay with an 8 year old girl wearing sexuality explicit language on her clothes. Honestly, nothing makes me feel more old fashioned than my shock at what is marketed now for girls. Who decided to market and sell some of this stuff to children? I would find a compromise if she really loved the clothing--she could wear it around the house instead, or we could put a funny word of her choosing on a plain pair of pants. I am sure a compromise could be reached. I would be very open about my concerns--but honestly I do not believe a 7 year old child would really get the issue in total. I would set limits and find a way to make them tolerable for her, in the same way mentioned above with the tv show.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

It's about being open minded and finding solutions. We set up these false dichotomies sometimes - he wants to see Texas Chainsaw Massacre and I don't want him to see it - when maybe the answer is to find a movie that's a little scary but not *that* scary. Kids often want to see something that's a bit scary, and there are plenty of movies that are scary enough to be fun but not terribly scary. You don't want your kid to watch that particular movie? Say why, give some alternatives that you'd be more comfortable with, see if he has alternatives that might be good. You might be able to reach an agreement rather than imposing your will or letting him do something you know he'd regret.
I am totally in agreement with this, and this is in fact what I would do (and what I DO do, albeit not with TV or movies as DD doesn't watch yet). With my persistent, strong-willed kid, I would be completely sunk by now if I weren't well-versed in the art of offering alternatives.







(Wanna hear about how hard she is lobbying to name the new baby? In this case, the compromise is "You can absolutely choose a special name that you call him/her, but dada and mama will use the name we choose." Just in case anyone is thinking we should let her, her most recent naming of a stuffed animal was "Flunda January May."







)

However, IF, after all the discussion, she still said she wanted to watch the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the answer would still be no.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I've found some TV programming to be an excellent way of discussing current events and certain topics wth my kids (And ok, no, we do not 'need' TV to have good discussions. lol) . Will and Grace, fi, humanizes gays...and is a great antidote to certain insantiy of certain other media. Same with Simpsons. People think the message is Bart telling his mother to kiss off, and it isn't.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
I am totally in agreement with this, and this is in fact what I would do (and what I DO do, albeit not with TV or movies as DD doesn't watch yet). With my persistent, strong-willed kid, I would be completely sunk by now if I weren't well-versed in the art of offering alternatives.







(Wanna hear about how hard she is lobbying to name the new baby? In this case, the compromise is "You can absolutely choose a special name that you call him/her, but dada and mama will use the name we choose." Just in case anyone is thinking we should let her, her most recent naming of a stuffed animal was "Flunda January May."







)

However, IF, after all the discussion, she still said she wanted to watch the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the answer would still be no.

But it's such a provocative and assumptive stretch...why would your small child 'insist' upon watching Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Folks give these examples, but they are so rarely (ever?) based on actual experiences.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Hmm. I know three different families who tried to get their kids to eat healthful diets with radically opposing methods. One family forbade sugar and junk food, but had to lift the ban because the child wouldn't really eat anything else. One family stuck with the ban, and the child learned to eat healthful food, but when I saw them recently, he was sneaking forbidden treats. A third family decided to permit everything, in the hopes that their children would eventually pick healthful food--and they really haven't!

So I haven't a lot of successful strategies for dealing with this, either restrictive or permissive. I think I lean toward permissive, because so far my kid has shown really good judgment about what to eat, how much to eat, and when. He's not a sweets fiend, and when he does eat sweets, it doesn't seem to affect his behavior or digestion badly.

If it were only my show, I'd probably say yes to Pixie Stix, knowing full well that he would never ask for them! But my dh is in this parenting biz too, and he has strong ideas about breakfast, so we go with that.

The movies on the other hand--I totally can't predict what is going to disturb him. Really almost everything he sees and reads can be converted to scariness.

So I don't know. I like respect and cooperation, and I love it that I can trust my kid to know his own body about food. That is so great. But I think there might be variation on these issues with individual kids. I'll never be able to take an absolute position on giving my kid freedom or telling him what to do on every issue. Plus there is his dad to take into account.


----------



## babygrace (Aug 23, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
If you had Pixie Sticks in the house, would you let your child eat them for breakfast?

no.

Quote:

Tot wants to watch Night of the Living Dead.
compromise by choosing on a mildly scary movie first.

Quote:

Clothing with sexual writing on the bum for a 9 yr old
no.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
But it's such a provocative and assumptive stretch...why would your small child 'insist' upon watching Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Folks give these examples, but they are so rarely (ever?) based on actual experiences.

But aren't these threads sort of theoretical/hypothetical? To me, I always see these threads as a sort of push to me to really consider my responses to hypothetical situations. And those of us with toddlers and preschoolers will one day possibly be faced with tougher situations with our teenagers. I guess I don't see it as a bad exercise to question what one might do in xyz situation.

My child has no idea what pixie sticks are so this would not come up for us. So hypothetically, no we wouldn't have them for breakfast. For my particular darling, he doesn't want to take anymore time than absolutely necessary to eat...he has way better things to do. So if his belly gets full on junk or healthy food he's off. In this case, he'll either be off with a good start of healthy food or off with a soon-to-be sugar crash which will not be pretty. We always talk about healthy food choices and why our bodies want what they do...he totally gets that. So this would honestly never come up for us. He chooses the health food over the junk every time...he'll still eat the junk but after the good stuff. And then he'll be very moderate about the junk....I try to follow his example. This kiddo is amazing to me as far as moderation goes.

As far as scary movies, he is extremely sensitive to scary stuff (he thought an episode of Reading Rainbow was scary). He actually had us preview a Charlie Brown show while he slept because it was called "He's a bully, Charlie Brown". Knowing him, we knew that it might be upsetting to him and that was all he needed to take a pass on it for now. If, hypothetically, he was a child who wanted to see a horror movie, at the age of 4 or 5 I'd say no. I don't want those images in the mind of my young child. When he's a teenager, he can make that call on his own.

We talk about everything (both myself and ds are total verbal processors)...but if I had to, I would absolutely pull my parental card of having the final say. I have rarely had to do that because we strive to work it out together, but I certainly see the value in parents holding limits for their kids.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Pixie Stiks:

I confess, I'd be a total hypocrite and ask my kids to eat something with complex carbs and/or protein first. (But I've been known to sneak candy before breakfast, especially when I'm PMSing














. But then my kids are pretty sensitive to swings in blood sugar (so am I, but I've got enough brains to follow up pixie stiks with yogurt and kashi), so it's a really bad idea.

Scary movies:
I appear to be in a minority here in that my opinion is that kids ought not to be exposed to violent media until they are much older than most people think is OK. (I'm talking 6-7 for Disney movies minimum, and 10-12 for PG movies.)

I'm as controlling in this regard as some parents on MDC are about food that's in the house. (I do view limiting what's in the house as a control issue; since you buy the food, you control what's available, even if you don't control it once it's in the house. I'm much more lax about food that comes in.) We simply don't have videos or watch shows that are violent. Ever. My 3 1/2 year old has never seen a movie. My 6 1/2 year old has seen one movie: Cars.

I do this because I believe the research that says that exposure to violent media is bad, and because my kids are highly visual learners (ds especially), and scary images stay with them for a long time. We were at Penney's the other night getting pictures taken for the holidays and they had a waiting area with a movie. They were playing some stupid Disney movie that was rated PG ("The Pacifier"). Dd watched 2 minutes and literally ran away in terror.

So, this would be a case where I could say "I think this is too scary for you" and my kids would agree it's a bad idea. But even if they wanted to, if they're not old enough to meet the rating, i.e. it's PG (parental guidance) and my parental guidance says "NO", then "no" it will be. Ds had nightmares from some book they were reading in 1st grade!!

Clothing with writing on the butt:
Not with my money. If they want to earn/save their own money and buy it, then they can look stupid.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
Whoa! I don't think that's fair. I'm not trying to do anything of the sort. I HAVE had this same discussion before on MDC, though, and there was a large contingency or moms who thought that toddlers/preschoolers could handle scary/violent movies as long as they were prepped and it was "discussed". And by scary/violent, I mean Spiderman, X-Men, Batman, etc. So I apologize if I've offended you by lumping in with those moms. Maybe that's not what you're trying to say.

What I was trying to say with my swimming pool argument is that information is not enough. So if your dc wants to go to a scary movie, and you tell them, "I think this will scare you. It will be gory and gross and it'll be very hard to remember that it's just pretend," and they still want to go, I wouldn't let them.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that children are still children, whether you live consensually or you're authoritarian.







*De*Polarizing, if you will.









:

one of my issues with some of the approaches parents take to GD is that I'm a firm believer in developmental readiness. And sometimes a child just isn't developmentally ready for some experiences, or to be able to negotiate some things.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

ITA with Lynn. It's my job to take into account my ds's developmental readiness for many things. A friend of mine has a nearly 5yo that just can't do playdates right now...for a number of reasons. It's just not helpful or positive for him or anyone else. I try to really tune into my kid as well as take overarching guidelines into account. ITA that media should generally be limited. Lots of kids are allowed to play video games, but research shows that it stimulates the same part of the brain as cocaine...not what I want for my child's precious brain. Just because something is out there and others are doing it doesn't mean it's a good idea for my kid. I see my role as protecting him from this stuff until he is ready to make his own decisions based on sound information.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

I don't know if this has been brought up yet or not, but age really factors into this for me. I can see by age 8 allowing my child to choose whether to have sugar first thing in the morning, because he will have had several years of experience in knowing how it makes him feel. But a 3yo? No. My 6yo? Maybe. There are some mornings I allow him to have crap first thing, and sometimes I don't - if we're fighting off a bug I explain to him about sugar lowering his immune system and that we're working on keeping our bodies really healthy right now. It affects the whole house when someone gets sick. Heck, it even affects the whole house if one person is acting like a brat because they are flipped out from only eating sugar that morning. (I've been that person, even as an adult, btw.) If we have to leave early because he has soccer or something, then we may not have time to get around to eating the egg once the initial sugar excitement is over.

Movies? Again, depends on the age. My 6yo has terrible nightmares and gets scared very easily, so I would not allow him to watch something I knew would scare him. But then I doubt he'd want to, since his first question is usually "Is it scary?"

Clothing? If I'm buying it, I get to draw a line. If he's buying it with his own money, there still might be limits, and there would be a lot of discussion.

In GD circles I'm probably considered a little controlling, but in mainstream circles I am most definitely considered wayyyyy too lenient. I constantly have other parents/teachers/adults shocked that I let my children make so many of their own decisions, or make decisions based on their input. But in this forum, I would most definitely be considered one of the more conservative parents.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Hmm, just because I don't allow pixie sticks for breakfast does not mean I beat my kids.

No scary movies until age 12 or so.

No skimpy clothing unless at the beach!

Philomom is not a tyrant. Her kids love her and find her mostly reasonable but they know there are some things that are "out of bounds" for our family. They can make different choices for their families when they are grown.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Pixie Stix for breakfast?

Sure, but the only time we have candy in the house is right after Halloween. My rule is "eat whatever you want for 5 days and then we take it to my parents' house and grandpa will eat the rest"








5 days out of 365 isn't going to hurt anything.
The other day, we had cake and hot cocoa for breakfast.... and we won't have cake in the house for another 10 months, so it's not really a big deal, in my book.

Scary movies?

No, because the boys wouldn't want to watch them anyway. If I say "It's gonna be scary", that ends the conversation. If they *really* wanted to watch one, I'd probably let them. IMO, if a kid likes to be scared (my niece is like that), then it's easy for them to remember that it's fake. If a kid doesn't like to be scared (like my DS), then it's not an issue. They just won't ask (and will tell you you've got the TV too loud if you're watching one in the other room







)

Clothing with stuff on the butt.... I have boys, so they don't ask for it. DS does like the t-shirts at Target with snotty sayings on them and we discuss each one individually. As long as it's my money we're spending, then I get the final say. If he has $12 of his own money, then the conversation is different. He's had several gift cards over the years and has yet to buy anything I disapprove of, though. Usually, he asks my opinion & I give it & he ends up buying candy or a video game.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
But it's such a provocative and assumptive stretch...why would your small child 'insist' upon watching Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Folks give these examples, but they are so rarely (ever?) based on actual experiences.

Well, no, not Chainsaw Massacre....that is pretty extreme. But there have been times when I've simply had to say "no" to a dvd. In our case it was when I was borrowing Queer as Folk from our library. We would go to the video room after choosing our books, and dd and I would each choose our dvds. They have the full QaF collection







, so I eventually borrowed them all! Dd got used to seeing these, and was curious about them. She wanted to watch "my movie". Every week the same thing (and she was 4-5 at the time...), "can I watch your movie with you, mommy? Why not?" (I watched after she was in bed, asleep). Now, QaF certainly would bring up some great conversations if watched with a 15 yo.....but it is simply Not Appropriate for a small child. And she was completely unable to understand that at the time. So the answer, in the end, was No.


----------



## alicia622 (May 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 









It is entirely possible to respectfully say "no" to your child. Sometimes, ime and imo, it is the more respectful thing to do.

I agree. If asked, DS will request ice cream when ever it's time to eat. Does he get it? No, not for meals but sometimes as a snack. When asked what he wants Santa to bring for Christmas, he says ice cream, so I'm thinking of letting him have ice cream for breakfast that day! DH was flabbergasted when I told him my plan


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

ITA about developmental readiness. As I thought about the "writing on the butt" example, FI, I realized that while it would be an absolute no for my 9yo, who is unquestionably not old enough to be choosing to sexualize herself, I probably wouldn't forbid it for my 16yo (although she would definitely hear my opinion on it), because I understand that 16yos are, appropriately, by their developmental nature, emerging sexual beings.

Quote:

I appear to be in a minority here in that my opinion is that kids ought not to be exposed to violent media until they are much older than most people think is OK. (I'm talking 6-7 for Disney movies minimum, and 10-12 for PG movies.)
ITA, Lynn. Actually, one of my own early memories involves being completely terrified by a Disney movie. I think I was 6.

Quote:

If a kid doesn't like to be scared (like my DS), then it's not an issue. They just won't ask
I dunno about this. My parents let me watch The Exorcist on TV when I was...11ish--because I insisted I could handle it. I didn't sleep that night. I remember crying in the bathroom, I was so scared.


----------



## cfiddlinmama (May 9, 2006)

Good conversation and very interesting!

I'm laughing right now. My kids are eating ice cream for breakfast. It's the feast of St. Nicholas. I totally dropped the ball and wasn't prepared (the kids put out their shoes the night before and get treats from St. Nicholas). We live in the middle of nowhere so there was no place to run and pick something up. Dh went to our little mom and pop store (only one in town) and got the kids ice cream, jerky and cookies. The boys ate their jerky before the ice cream which is good. Ds2 has blood sugar issues. They requested mac and cheese for breakfast which is cooking now. So yeah, once in a while we have treats for breakfast, but it's not in the house very often. Their pretty reasonable about eating something good first. They get a ton of say in their food choices. My mother would be horrified.







Of course, I have healthy choices for them to choose from....

Movies: we have lots of discussions about how some movies aren't appropriate for kids. They know dad and I watch movies after they go to bed. We don't have scary or inappropriate movies that we own. The only two are the Lord of the Rings and the Passion of the Christ. Both way too intense for my kids 7 and under. We compromised on the LOTRs and they got to watch the "making of" documentary. They are definitely trusting of us when it comes to scary movies. They get a lot of leeway in choosing what they want to watch from what's available. (Right now they are obsessed with MacGyver)

Clothing: Well, this one's a sticky one. We try and hold a certain standard of modesty. Right now Dd1 is stricter than I am.







DH is way more authoritarian than I am, he wouldn't want our girls wearing anything "indecent." We have and will continue to have lots discussions about clothing. There is a lot of compromise and very little control about clothes though. Basically, once it's in the house, I don't control when or how they wear it. Sometimes I'll give DD pointers about matching if we're going out. I just don't buy (or keep that's given to us) clothes that aren't modest. I am soooooo much more lenient than my parents were. We were forced to wear clothes that we didn't like and basically had no say. Weren't allowed to wear pants etc. DD gets that we give her a lot of leeway so if some pants are really tight and low cut, she trusts us that it's in her best interest to not wear them.

I have found that I don't have or want to lay down the law with my kids. We have an awesome working relationship. They make requests that for the most part are granted and I make requests that are for the most part granted. If there's an issue, we compromise. DH is coming around, it's just taking a while! I'm ok with kids having boundaries, and so are they. It's just not a dictatorship IYKWIM!


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
I think most small children will trust a parent who is trying to work with them. I also do not know any small child of 4 or 5 yrs old who has engaged in these sorts of chats who doesn't trust their parent when they say, "I think this will give you terrible nightmares".

Maybe my kid was just slower with the cause and effect, or maybe he's more vulnerable to peer pressure than all of your kids....

But no, my older child started arguing back about certain media around 5-6. "Why can't I see Revenge of the Sith?" "Because it was made for older people. You didn't like Aladdin because it was scary, right? Well Sith is way scarier than Aladdin."
"But Sam has seen it! Sam says its so cool!"

Now, based on previous experience, I knew that Sith was way, way, WAY too much for my kid. Nightmares and weeping way too much. But he was just responding to hsi friend boasting about having seen it and "my mom lets me watch lots of stuff."

The pressure on boys, especially, to "toughen up" starts really, really early. I know lots of parents who have shown little boys stuff that they clearly were not ready for, and there's often a subtle "Don't be overprotective! He's a boy! HE needs violent scary media!" vibe when you say that you're not ready for Sith, or Spiderman, or Transformers... I'm sure there are kids who are more than ready for it, who are unaffected by it -- but I'd rather err on the side of caution in this regard. Because its not like you can take it back and erase it if it turns out to be harmful.


----------



## mamabear&babybear (Dec 20, 2004)

Interesting thread!

Candy: We don't generally have a lot of candy in the house, but if we did I would certainly let my dc eat it before breakfast. Sometimes my brain needs a sugary jump start, so I imagine their brains do too.

Movies: It would depend on the movie, I guess. Right now, dd1 knows that there are movies for her and movies that are for Mom and Dad only.

Clothes: I like the idea of buying them but only wearing them around the house. Eventually I will talk to the girls about clothing choices. If we lived in a perfect world they could wear whatever they wanted. However, we don't live in a perfect world, and I don't want them advertising something that they are not ready for.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
Maybe my kid was just slower with the cause and effect, or maybe he's more vulnerable to peer pressure than all of your kids....

But no, my older child started arguing back about certain media around 5-6. "Why can't I see Revenge of the Sith?" "Because it was made for older people. You didn't like Aladdin because it was scary, right? Well Sith is way scarier than Aladdin."
"But Sam has seen it! Sam says its so cool!"

Now, based on previous experience, I knew that Sith was way, way, WAY too much for my kid. Nightmares and weeping way too much. But he was just responding to hsi friend boasting about having seen it and "my mom lets me watch lots of stuff."

The pressure on boys, especially, to "toughen up" starts really, really early. I know lots of parents who have shown little boys stuff that they clearly were not ready for, and there's often a subtle "Don't be overprotective! He's a boy! HE needs violent scary media!" vibe when you say that you're not ready for Sith, or Spiderman, or Transformers... I'm sure there are kids who are more than ready for it, who are unaffected by it -- but I'd rather err on the side of caution in this regard. Because its not like you can take it back and erase it if it turns out to be harmful.

This is an interesting perspective. I'll have to watch out for that as my boys get older. I agree with erring on the side of caution. We have some friends who are Star Wars junkies and their dd was quoting Star Wars by the time she was three. I honestly think that at age three it was probably too hard to tell what was happening to be scary, but now she's five and she must be somewhat de-sensitized. That's kind of icky to me.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
I've found some TV programming to be an excellent way of discussing current events and certain topics wth my kids (And ok, no, we do not 'need' TV to have good discussions. lol) . Will and Grace, fi, humanizes gays...and is a great antidote to certain insantiy of certain other media. Same with Simpsons. People think the message is Bart telling his mother to kiss off, and it isn't.

Thank you for mentioning Simpsons. I generally feel pretty awful when ds watches it. lol. If I'm flipping channels, and he sees it, I leave it there. Ah well. lol

Candy- maybe. I guess it would depend on my mood. Ds would be pretty amenable to a deal like "you can have candy now, but then something relatively healthy." But some days, I start (mindlessly) off with "no" then don't want to change my mind because of ds's fit...
I'm sure dp would allow candy for breakfast, and do the talking and discussion, etc etc.

Scary movies- at 3, I can say that I wouldn't allow scary movies, but also that I'd pretty much guarantee that if I told ds it was too scary, that he'd choose not to watch it. I can see myself saying "no" to scary movies in the future, even if ds thinks he's ready. He's really sensitive, especially to scary music. I don't even watch CSI around him (but I do have some g-rated csi substitutes to tide me over. lol)

sexy clothes- no. very much no. It wouldn't happen, at least as far as I could control it(I only have a boy, but...).
I dressed sexy when I was a young teen. I am so frickin' icked out by it. Teens (and especially younger) just don't get how sick minded some men can be (is that sexist? I guess women could be sick minded too.) I was doing it to impress the boys my age, which is fine. But there were adult men fantasizing about me, because of my clothes. (eww...I want to be sick). Yuck.
I'd be hard pressed to allow a girl to wear a bathing suit at the beach. I might be convinced into that, though.

Though...pants with words on the butt...I don't know. I guess it might depend on how tight the pants were, and what word it was. Words like "slut" would get a "heck no."

Now, all black goth type clothes? I'm cool with that. Strong fashion statements, sure. Most clothes, with the exception of hateful words (even dp would forbid anything even remotely racist), would be ok.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
That's just not how I'd handle the scary movie. My daughter wanted to see Lord of the Rings. I'm quite sure she'd get terrible nightmares. So she and I talked about it - she said the movie sounded good (she loves sci fi) but that she didn't want nightmares. I remembered something about animated LOTR movies from some time way ago, and we ordered those for her. She was quite happy with that. We found a solution that gave her absolutely everything she wanted and none of what she didn't want.

It's about being open minded and finding solutions. We set up these false dichotomies sometimes - he wants to see Texas Chainsaw Massacre and I don't want him to see it - when maybe the answer is to find a movie that's a little scary but not *that* scary. Kids often want to see something that's a bit scary, and there are plenty of movies that are scary enough to be fun but not terribly scary. You don't want your kid to watch that particular movie? Say why, give some alternatives that you'd be more comfortable with, see if he has alternatives that might be good. You might be able to reach an agreement rather than imposing your will or letting him do something you know he'd regret. (General you here - I don't think this was anyone's real life circumstance.)

With the candy - my daughter has learned that she needs protein for breakfast. But if she has an interest in something sweet, we do try to find a way to meet that and still get protein in her.









:

A couple of years ago my answer to these things would've been "no way!" But I'm learning now that not only do my kids usually accept my guidance when I listen and explain, but also that there's this big, wonderful, creative, satisfying middle ground. There's this middle ground where my kid gets to say "I want candy for breakfast, it looks good and I feel like having something sweet" and I get to say "I'm concerned that you'll be cranky if you eat candy before having some healthy food, I wonder if we can find a way for you to have something sweet _and_ get the protein/healthy food you need to have a good morning," and we find a solution that addresses _both_ my concern _and_ hers. It's a middle ground where it isn't just _either you do what I want you to do_ or _you get your own way even if I don't agree/like it_. This is a place where my kid can want to watch that movie, and I can find out what interests him about it and talk about how scary it might be and how that might affect him, and we can look into solutions that address both his concern/interest and mine-like finding movies that aren't as scary but still satisfy his interests.

Wrt the sexy clothing, a friend of mine had a preteen dd who went out wearing a thong sticking out of her jeans. This mom was not happy about it but did not forbid it. Instead she talked very frankly about how people tend to/might perceive people who wear things like that, and how her dd wanted to be perceived, and her own concerns as a mother, and so on. And this girl decided not to wear that anymore (and no, I don't know how/why she got the thong in the first place). I liked this approach, because it didn't set up this big power struggle. It was giving information and guidance in a way that encouraged trust and openness between mom and daughter, which allowed the daughter to welcome and value mom's guidance.


----------



## Qestia (Sep 26, 2005)

Joining this thread late... but DS had chocolate for breakfast this morning. Specifically it was a homemade mixture of raisins, peanuts, and about 6 chocolate chips... which with the peanuts and raisins I feel is probably actually better than the trader joe's waffle he often has. pixie sticks I'd probably try to talk him out of. Even at this age he seems receptive to "first we eat dinner, then we can have chocolate".


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Absolutely not. To ANY of it.

















Har har, it's me folks. Yes, I would allow all three if it came down to either allowing it, or setting up a huge power struggle and me communicating the message to dd that I don't trust her to make choices regarding her body and herself.

Now, as another poster pointed out (UUmom I think) there is a world of choices and options between NO WAY or "here, my two year old... I brought home Texas Chainsaw massacre...let me lock you in a dark room and force you to watch it!"

The sexy messages written on clothing is the one I would be the most peeved at to tell you the truth -- I'd probably go a little hard @ss on that one and tell her she has to pay for them herself (out of birthday/Christmas/allowance money or whatever, which she would have access to) because I don't feel comfortable spending my money on such things, but in the end I wouldn't forbid it.


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

These all really boil down to one issue: When would you intervene to prevent your children from suffering the natural consequences of their choices?

So many factors come into that! Age, development, personality, relationship to the parent, ability to understand the potential consequences, how severe the consequences are, etc. Pretty much everyone agrees that you would at SOME point- like letting your kid run into the street or play in the pool alone. But beyond that the line is sometimes difficult to pin down.

For me:

Pixie sticks FOR breakfast? No. (at least not until you're old enough to make your own breakfast, then maybe I'll butt out). Pixie sticks WITH breakfast? Sure.

Scary movie? Maybe. My son's too young for me to deal with this yet, but I'd be willing to let him watch something like that to 1. See if he can deal with it 2. Allow him to experience the consquences so I can better explain why he can't do it again if he asks.

Nine year old girl with "Bootylicious" written on the butt of her jeans? No way. A nine year old probably isn't capable of understanding the ramifications of the sexualization and objectification of women in general and young girls in particular. Of the three, this is the hill I would choose to die on.

And yes, I would try other things before stomping my foot down and saying THIS IS HOW IT IS, but after explaining and offering alternatives and brainstorming, those are things that I *would* put my foot down on. Theoritically. Years from now, when my kids are old enough for these situations to happen







:


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

With my 7 year old, if I say "I'm really not comfortable with that" it provokes a good conversation about whatever it is. Ultimately, this stuff ends up being her decision, but she really listens to me regarding my concerns. So far, I either end up agreeing with her or she ends up agreeing with me, or simply not doing something because I'm not comfortable. I also sometimes don't do things because she's not comfortable.

When she's 9 it might be different, but at least I'm getting my good thinking about stuff available to her now. And she doesn't like clothes with writing on it. Honestly, the kid has pretty good sense.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

I am completely comfortable with my choice to tell dd she could not watch Queer as Folk with me when she as 4 and 5 (after vague conversations about why it is not appropriate for children). But out of curiosity....how *would* you explain that to a 4 yo? (the content is a lot of graphic sexuality, often in back rooms of gay clubs....great stuff







, but not gentle and not loving).

I mean, I don't really want to explain *why* she can't watch, because even the *why* is inappropriate imo.







And since I was borrowing these during our weekly library visits, it came up a lot! So she just had to accept that it was "not for children".


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I don't know what Pixie Sticks are, but I have a sugar addict (and I formerly was one) so I know whereof I speak. IMO, anyway.









My kid gets too many sweets. But we have a rule that you have to eat 'real food' first and no sweets in the morning. I have also started buying mostly health food store sweets for at home, in small quantities.

I do believe, actually I would say I *know* that sugar is biologically addictive and children cannot be expected to regulate their intake without adult assistance. Eating sugar leads to a blood sugar high, then collapse, and a biological imperative to eat more sugar to re-stabilize the system. The less sugar (and other high glycemic sweeteners) they eat, and the more protein and other good foods they get, the more stable their system will be.

Lately I have managed to convince my kid that french toast is a sweet. MAJOR







for that one. She helps make it, we make a mixture of milk, cinnamon and one egg per slice of bread (using low glycemic ezekiel bread), and then she eats it with maple syrup. Tastes fabulous, maple syrup is high glycemic but has food value, and she is getting actual food, fibre and protein to balance some of the sugar overload. Major step up for us.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
Absolutely not. To ANY of it.

:
Now, as another poster pointed out (UUmom I think) there is a world of choices and options between NO WAY or "here, my two year old... I brought home Texas Chainsaw massacre...let me lock you in a dark room and force you to watch it!"

.

I think a lot of people here think that's what we're doing if we let our younger kids watch LotR or Star Wars. I really think they envision us propping their eyelids open, making them watch gory movies while we play "Ode to Joy" in the background, out of an intentional desire to desensitize our kids.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
I am completely comfortable with my choice to tell dd she could not watch Queer as Folk with me when she as 4 and 5 (after vague conversations about why it is not appropriate for children). But out of curiosity....how *would* you explain that to a 4 yo? (the content is a lot of graphic sexuality, often in back rooms of gay clubs....great stuff







, but not gentle and not loving).

I mean, I don't really want to explain *why* she can't watch, because even the *why* is inappropriate imo.







And since I was borrowing these during our weekly library visits, it came up a lot! So she just had to accept that it was "not for children".

sunmama....Q as F is too scary for me because I hate watching gay bashing in media and I got really tense watching a few episodes 'cause it seemed like someone was going to get bashed.

Now the L Word....honestly, I only watch that stuff when the kids are sleeping.

And I think that's something that gets overlooked a bit. I'm willing not to have things around that I don't want my kids exposed to. I have a tremendous amount of control over what gets introduced. When it does come up, I voice my opinions about it and often we come to a compromise.

For example, I don't like characters for a bunch of reasons. My kids sometimes get Pooh and Hello Kitty stuff, which for some reason bug me less than the Disney Princesses and Cars and such.

One of the reasons I told my kids I don't like them is that they are designed by the marketers to "go out of style" forcing kids to buy more stuff.

Then, when a kid teased my kid about some Care Bear thing 'cause they were "out" she just kind of nodded at me about it.

I can see that having good long interesting conversations about my thoughts and feelings on any number of topic and limiting my own exposure to marketing and scary stuff has had a powerful positive influence on my kids.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:

I think a lot of people here think that's what we're doing if we let our younger kids watch LotR or Star Wars. I really think they envision us propping their eyelids open, making them watch gory movies while we play "Ode to Joy" in the background, out of an intentional desire to desensitize our kids.
Oh, that's wrong?









I think I did tell Monkey, "No way, dude. It's NOT for kids." about some cartoon that came on on "Adult Swim" (nighttime programming in Cartoon Network or something). Simpsons are OK, but Futurama (I think) about had my eyes pop out of my head!! But b/c he knows most kids don't watch stuff like Desperate Housewives and other stuff he does, when I tell him something isn't cool like that he's OK w/ it.

And he doesn't like blood. So we try to avoid anything bloody for his sake.

I have throw my hand over his eyes or FFed when some scary movie preview comes on MTV at night if he's in the room. But appreciates that b/c even though he likes some scary........THAT is TOO scary! Even the previews make me quake!


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chfriend* 
sunmama....Q as F is too scary for me because I hate watching gay bashing in media and I got really tense watching a few episodes 'cause it seemed like someone was going to get bashed.

Now the L Word....honestly, I only watch that stuff when the kids are sleeping.

And I think that's something that gets overlooked a bit. I'm willing not to have things around that I don't want my kids exposed to.

Yes, I only watched when she was sleeping, too. But I borrowed the dvd's from the library during our weekly library trips (they don't have the L word, but I love that series too!














. Our habit was to spend a bunch of time reading and choosing books, then walk over to the dvds. I would pick mine, and dd would pick hers. She was always at my side because, well, dd never left my side at that age (her choice). It got to the point that she could lead the way to the QaF shelf









Since she was so used to seeing me check them out, she was curious. I never actually watched them when she was awake, but she was asking to watch them anyway.

I dunno. I'm not willing to only check things out of the library that are appropriate for her to watch....that wouldn't work for me. But I do agree that it is good to save the actual *watching* until she is in bed.


----------



## gsd1amommy (Apr 6, 2007)

Pixie Stix for breakfast? I wish. My son has a rare inborn error of metabolism called Glycogen Storage Disease type 1a (glucose-6-phosphatase deficiency). He is unable to convert glucose 6 phosphatase to glucose so he is dependent on a continuous supply of glucose. In our case that is raw, uncooked cornstarch via bolus feeding every three hours around the clock. His diet is very strict-ABSOLUTELY no sugar, no fruit, no dairy. His body cannot convert any of the sugars in these things so he doesn't ever get them. He is in constant danger of profound, life threatening hypoglycemia, lactic acidosis, seizures due to hypoglycemia, and death if intervention is not available for him. So, if his disease is ever cured and he can have any of these things-yep, pixie stix for breakfast. You can be sure of it. In fact, my promise to him is that if he is ever cured, we are going to put a table cloth in the middle of the living room floor and eat whatever he wants. He has requested Hershey bars, apples, grapes, regular syrup, and a bag of sugar just so he can dip the spoon in it and eat it of the spoon.
Scary movies-if he is so inclined, I guess he could if he asked and I sat with him. I let him watch family guy with me so I can explain it when he has a question. He is really fascinated more with Baby Stewie's thoughts about world domination.
Writing on the butt-no. He's not asked for that but does want me to make a shirt for him that says "gross". He doesn't know why though.
Sorry for the novel. But yeah, I would SO let him have a pixie stix for breakfast and can't wait for the day I can serve him one a silver platter.


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom* 
Would many children feel full on a Pixie Stick? Wouldn't they want some yogurt to go with it? An egg (and my first posts talks about an egg...) would negate the Pixie Sticks.









Of course, I know most people at MDC don't have Pixie Sticks in the house...but what if you did...that one time in a zillion years? I mean, how serious is the candy for breakfast situation, and how often would it even come up?

My children wouldn't get full of pixie sticks, but they'd instantly be totally insane with sugar and wouldn't want to eat anything else. So, ala Barbara Colorosa..."You may have a pixie stick as soon as you've eaten something healthy."


----------

