General Dance Discussion > Definitive video of why children shouldn't be at dances

Discussion in 'General Dance Discussion' started by jon, Sep 26, 2004.

  1. Pacion

    Pacion New Member

    :applause: Dancing Mommy and may I refer back to Sakura's very mature (for a soon to be 16 year old :wink: ) post which effectively boils down to that in all things being equal (ie no health problems etc) it is a CHOICE whether to have children or not, it is a CHOICE whether to be in the vicinity of children or not. This sounds like so many other arguments where CHOICE is involved (to smoke or not to smoke, to take drugs or not to take drug, to work or take handouts) - each "interest group" arguing for their side.

    Last week, in big letters in one of the UK national newspapers was the following by one of the politicians:

    It is your duty to have children

    She, rightly or wrongly, was making out that with the aging population, there were insufficient youngsters to work, pay their taxes and therefore prop up/support the economy and state provided pensions. According to her, it is not a CHOICE, but a DUTY. (What about adopting/providing for orphans/children given up for adoption, is another matter, apparently.)

    What seems to have also been forgotten is that we in the West are very LUCKY to have the CHOICE. Remember that in China the adult population are limited to one natural child. If they want more, they have to adopt. Would this conversation be taking the twists and turns if we did not have that CHOICE? I know where I would place my bets........
  2. Pacion

    Pacion New Member

    Incidentally, with regard to the FRONT newspaper article, we had a good chuckle at work because we knew that we have a CHOICE. Without children ie. if everyone stopped having children, there would be no future left. Therefore, I believe some tolerance, understanding and patience is warranted from both sides.

    The childless adults who may not be millionaires/billionaires and able to support themselves later on in life, may find themselves looking at those same children they could not bear to be in the vicinity of, to subsidise their pensions/medical bills. :?
  3. foursquare

    foursquare New Member

    Moderator, I would posit that calling a person a curmudgeon that is acting like a curmudgeon is not name calling, an attack on character or profane. In fact, in defense of me and my debating friend Saludas, I would say we have kept this downright G-rated.

  4. Pacion

    Pacion New Member

    Foursquare, if I may be blunt.

    Things were getting a bit hot in here (even if you did keep it G-rated) and hence SD's subtle request to keep things civil. Whereas other languagues have variants of the word "you" to mean the personal or the general/generic, the english language does not have that. And as I said, some steam had to be let out because remember that one of the beautiful aspects of DF's environment is RESPECT.
  5. saludas

    saludas New Member

    Let's all remember that we are talking about the parent who is NOT sensitive to the way that their child affects others... the child is not really the issue here.

    Children are childlike. They are obtrusive to adult situations when their actions intrude on the situation; similar to that old 'yelling fire in a crowded theatre'.... and parents are the ones responsible for what the child does in a situation.

    And, BTW, I AM a parent....
  6. DanceAm

    DanceAm New Member


    Why does my car insurance go up because someone else hit me? Why does my medical insurance go up when I am never sick? Why is obesity now a disease and you can get paid disablity for it while I lost my weight and still have to go to work? Why do women pay more for haircuts and dry cleaning?

    Life is unfair, get used to it.
  7. jon

    jon Member

    (I realize this wasn't Pacion's main point, but this is a big deal to me...)

    The developed world is going through a demographic crunch, and the rest of the world is following as it industrializes and modernizes. The only way to provide the type of old-age benefits Europeans and Americans have become accustomed to in the last few decades would be to keep the population expanding rapidly forever, which will not (indeed cannot) happen. Somethings gotta give, and it's going to be the expectations of retirees.

    Bottom line: world population appears on track to stabilize around 8-9 billion people over the next half-century, no matter what random politicians editorialize. Some unforseen event could change this, but the smart money is that the age distribution of the population will continue to shift upwards. People had better plan for that shift in their retirement - e.g., they had better assume that they are not going to get 20-30 years of free pension and medical care - or they'll have an awfully unpleasant retirement.
  8. foursquare

    foursquare New Member

    It's a hot topic with strong opinions. What exactly is a narrowly constricted "open forum for debate?" "You," as used in the context of the sentence in my post, clearly meant "Everyone" as in "Everyone can be annoying."

    I have re-read every post in this discussion, and they all fall within the bounds of the forum's guidelines and the moderator's admonissions. I can have a heated discussion with a friend and not lose one ounce of respect for them. And I respect every opinion I've seen so far in this discussion, but I sure as heck disagree with some of them. Strongly.

    I guess what I am saying is that the knuckle-rapping was premature at best, condescending at worst. We are having a free-flow of ideas here on a topic that hits close to home for almost everyone in the discussion. Of course it gets heated. I don't think anyone's character has suffered, nor do I think, in this public forum, do people have an expectation of arguments being all fluffy bunny slippers.

  9. jon

    jon Member

    Probably the only really distinctive thing about DF is that it lacks the nastiness and sniping as is common on Usenet and other web boards. As someone who is naturally a somewhat argumentative type I have to restrain myself to fit in, but that's OK - it's private property and the mods can make whatever rules they like. If people don't like the DF rules then they can go elsewhere, there are lots of elsewheres to go to. Yay for the free market and all that.

    If nothing else though, the thread might profitably be moved to Dancers Anonymous and retitled something suitable, like "Childed vs. childfree debate, round 14!" :)

    In any event I'm so proud, my very first original post to go to 10 pages! Better than having a kid be on the honour roll :p
  10. foursquare

    foursquare New Member



  11. Pacion

    Pacion New Member

    I guess from what you have written above, you are taking this personally? (Bearing in mind that I have only your words and neither your body languauge, tone of voice or eye contact to aid my interpretation)

    I refer to my comment above.

    :lol: :lol: :lol: Jon
  12. foursquare

    foursquare New Member

    No, nothing meant or taken personally. I saw the flash of the rules as putting the brakes on a discussion that has left me more aware of my child's behavior and it's possible affect on people, and other people becoming (hopefully) more understanding and tolerant of the difficult job we parents are trying to muddle through as best we can. In other words, common ground was being reached, and the way it was being reached was through a discussion with deeply felt opinions strongly delivered posts.

    As the rules of the forum remain unbroken, I saw the post as unneccesary nannying and I thought it cast the discussion underway in a light of being trite and flipant. It was a post to tell us to be good when we were being, while argumentative, good.

    I found it frustrating that the discussion had it's momentum stalled just as it was getting to the making sense part. I think you'll agree that the longest relationships have gotten that way by hashing out the differences before they can be bottled up and fester.

    Our argument has led to better understanding on both sides, not worse. If we had all agreed to disagree at the beginning, I do not believe this would have happened.

  13. cocodrilo

    cocodrilo New Member

    Gee, that quote in bold print sounds exactly like what some arrogant Japanese politician (former Prime Minister Mori to be exact) said several years ago. He also said that women aren't doing society any good by being in the workforce as they aren't paying half the taxes men are(yet I pay twice as much! :evil: )...

    Regarding the childbirth issue in China, yes, they are limited to one child per family and this usually goes unchallenged in urban areas. In the countrysides, however, families need the "manpower" to work in the fields, thus often have more than one child. Social workers are sent out into the rurual areas to see if people are complying with the one-child law and families say of the extra child "Oh, it's a visiting cousin" and they can sometimes get away with it. Infanticide is not unheard of as male babies are preferred as they can help with the hard, manual labor. This has become so widespread that women are being abducted for marriage partners for these country folk, where girls are scarce nowadays. It is said that the male/female ratio is presently way out of proportion.
    Adoption in Asia is kind of looked down upon and is not common. (If a child does not resemble his or her parents, it may lead to bullying, a big problem in Asian societies wher "The nail that sticks up gets hammered down" reasoning applies.)The adoption agencies you've most likely read about, Pacion, are filled with girls, abandoned at birth, and cater to hopeful parents in the west. I know such a woman in America who adopted a little Chinese girl. A lot of these children are terribly malnutritioned and disease is rife in such situations, so it takes an extra loving would-be parent to take on an adoption like this(not to mention the time, money & paperwork involved!).
  14. tasche

    tasche New Member

    In public I control the things I can control. If I got to a family resturant and I dont want to be in a situation where I see a noisy family etc I will ask to sit somewhere else that way I dont have to endure you and you dont endure me. That way I can swear and say the f word 10 times in one minute and not corrupt your kids. Is that cool?

    But having to listen to a kid screaming or crying in a R rated movie bc you wanted to go see exorcist and couldn't find a babysitter. Not cool.

    Having my $100 a plate meal ruined bc you couldn't tell the difference between Spago's and Chucky Cheese. Not cool.

    Now if I go to see sharks tale this weekend and its got screaming kids in it will I care not really bc I'm their turf so to speak.

    There are some places that are more kid appropriate than others. Think of them as training grounds so to speak.

    As a child I was taken to many adult places and I was expected to act as adult like as possible. Even at 9 I was horrified at how some kids acted and other kids annoyed me more back then than they do now ( me all prim and proper in my velvet frock with the lace collar )

    I just feel that sometimes that parents feel that that they are MORE entilted to things than single folks. In workplaces its the WORST. The mothers always expected the favorable shifts and holidays off bc they had kids. etc. Not my fault but I had to suffer and if I didn't suffer quietly I was a B*


    On the dog thing. I have a thing with my cats in that I will never feed them only my husband. he doesn't understand this but bc I work at home if I feed them they'll nag me all day but if he does it they know food time is when daddy goes to work and when he comes home.
  15. Pacion

    Pacion New Member

    Cocodrilo, where I read about the adoption part was in connection with a guy found guilty of trafficing in children who was either recently put to death or sentenced to death in China. I will try and find the link. Along the lines of what you said, the article said that the babies he was found with (something like 30 :shock: in duffle bags, bound, gagged and drugged) were probably destined for childless couples, couples wanting more than one child and could get away with it if they could show "papers" (as in adoption) for the second child or as brides (at that age :shock: ).

    But, I take you point about the imbalance of the male/female population as I have vague recollections of reading about the one child limit when it was first brought in and then subsequently about the girl children being abandoned or even killed.

    This isn't the original article but it contains the paragraph that I was looking for, as quoted above:
  16. DanceMentor

    DanceMentor Administrator

    I'm sorry if anyone got bent out of shape. Sometimes we have to agree to disagree. We all try our best to make the Dance Forums a good place, and I hope at least we can all agree on that. I know sometimes the way we do it does not please everyone, but I do want you to know that the Moderator have a separate forum, and we discuss matters carefully. It's never just one person doing whatever they want, and that is the strength of the Dance Forums. We work together.

    If you question someone else's post, or question the action of a moderator, a would really appreciate it if we could deal with these things one on one through Private Messaging. We just can't talk about issues involving moderation or interpretation of the guidelines in the public forum, but I will guarantee that we will carefully address any problem that is brought to us (moderators).

    I believe we were talking about Children at Dances and the Video.
  17. mamboqueen

    mamboqueen Well-Known Member

    Wow! This thread really took off.

    I don't think it's selfish at all to NOT have children. I think it's a worse decision to have them because you feel that's what you're *supposed* to do. Actually, it's more selfish to say "I want children." That's great; and what about the kids? They're a zygote and thinking "I want this person for my mom!" Think about it. And I think about this more in the context of overindulged celebrities who have kids even though they don't have time (but plenty of money and hired help) to raise them.

    I have no problem with people who don't want kids. It's a personal decision, and a decision that has such enormous consequences if you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

    Having said that, parenting is, in a sense, like being a child. I think DM said it, you're not born a parent. It's a learning process and you make plenty of mistakes along the way. If I've ruined someone's dinner, I apologize and move on. I'll make worse mistakes, and the people will probably have worse things happen to them than dealing with a child who didn't behave well at dinner.

    Having said that, there are people who don't seem to learn from it. I took my son to a family restaurant when he was 2. It was after a long day trip up to Maine and I didn't want to have to cook when I got home. He was clearly tired and bringing him to a restaurant was a bad idea. He acted up and cried and fussed. I asked the waitress for our meals to go. I am sure I was as annoyed as anyone sitting around us, but I knew it was our own fault for expecting that he could last through the meal after having a long day. You really can't blame the children; it's the parents. Yes, there are parents who would go out and repeat that nightmare; how they can tolerate it is beyond me. But, one thing I have learned as my kids got older and could understand consequences for their actions, is that if they acted up in any particular place, they got pulled from that place. It is the only thing that really works to keep the behavior from happening again.

    As for dealing with other people's children....a sticky subject. If I'm at a playground and there's kids behaving in a way that is detrimental to kids around them (i.e., using foul language or picking on another child), I speak up to stop it - if the parents are there, I'll say something in case they didn't notice, but if they're not there, I'll say something to the child. And honestly, if it were my kids that were the offenders, I would have no problem if someone stepped in (if I wasn't there). I have a big pet peeve, and it's bullying. And it always seems like the kids that are the bullies are the ones whose parents are paying ZERO attention to what they're doing.

    Okay; off my soap box. Happy to take any and all jabs!
  18. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member

    No jabs coming from me! You sound like a great mom. :D

    The point you made about dealing with other people's kids is interesting. A couple weeks ago, I was out at a public swimming pool, sunning myself and reading a trashy novel (my fave!) while there was a group of young children about four to eight years old taking swimming lessons in the pool.

    In came a group of teenagers. I don't know, but I think they were about fourteen to sixteen I guess. You know how fourteen year old boys are, especially around girls. All swagger and bravado and LOTS of cursing. So I'm lying there, and all of a sudden, the avenging angel in my soul made me get up and go challenge those teenagers. I didn't say much -- just,"please watch your language around the babies," but SOMEBODY had to say something. So heck. It may not have been my business, but I spoke up anyway. (And, I bet if the teenagers' Moms had been present, there never would have been an issue. :lol: :lol: )

    Anyway, I guess my point is that you do have to be careful with other people's children, but I don't think that means you should let them run amok over your feelings and sensibilities. If the loud, misbehaving, cursing people had been adults, I'd have confronted them too. 8)
  19. mamboqueen

    mamboqueen Well-Known Member

    Now that I'd pay to see! LOL!

    Teenagers are tricky. As long as they don't know where I live, I would probably speak up, too :)
  20. Terpsichorean Clod

    Terpsichorean Clod Well-Known Member

Share This Page