citizenED

But what kind of society do you want? If we keep going in this direction of over-supervising our children and other people's children we will end up with a horribly paranoid society. Do you want children to be in a stifling situation at all times, supervised and overseen by a responsible adult? The journey to school is a good place to start for extending freedom and liberty. It isn't directed time in class or at home, and it isn't free time. It hits that area of a semi-controlled environment, ie, known route, known destination, largely known hazards. No doubt thew children are known on the route by other parents and passers-by. How great it would be if we, as a community, support such a decision.

Much of the fuss over this is down to what people perceive to be the age at which it would be safe for children to travel to school unaccompanied. In this case it seems many think the kids are just too young. That is promising, for it suggests that in general there would be an age at which it would be deemed acceptable. I have a proposal. If a law was to made that said kids could not travel to school unaccompanied before they are, say 7, them so be it - but after this age they must travel unaccompanied. In this whole debate there is far too much pressure on parents from the thoughts of other parents. It's the "I told you so" principle at work. The fear in some parents that if you follow your heart and instincts and allow your little cherub to do something that another parent would not allow, then when something happens you will be lambasted as a bad parent.

Would they require video technology?

Trinity said, "Dulwich is one of the safest places I can think of for primary children to make their own way to school. If there was any incident or problem there would be hundreds of parents around to step in and help. Well done to the parents." Well said. I think this act should be celebrated and supported. The school should take a much more positive line. I think there is an issue regarding the cycling. If they were walking I would feel even more supportive.

I took my two little boys and they had a good time especially as the older one won a football in a penalty shoot-out game. Can hardly go wrong with the fair and an ice cream van. I'm not Irish, so don't quite have the perspective of what an Irish Festival should be - but, I can understand cmck83 being a little embarrassed. Lots of green clothing, dancing and music but the stalls seemed uninteresting.

Germany 4 - 1 England Germany 4 - 0 Argentina Hurrah! we are better than Argentina

This little guy was the victim. Don't know when this photo was taken but wow, I know boys like this. http://madnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/zac.jpg Zac Olumegbon

LittleEDfamily; secondary school in the UK goes from 11 to 17/18yr-old

Thanks for all the suggestions people - though Lemonia looks great, I'm leaning towards Guanabana, so thanks felt-tip. Citizen

But you say that as if it is a bad thing MM. Are you saying that official of a teaching union is not concerned with education?

But Academies don't have the right to select independently - isn't that done centrally?

"...smoking while pregnant and complaining about another's parenting skills..." see, it takes a woman to demonstrate such impressive multitasking.

No, but they serve a fair number of East Dulwich kids. East Dulwich doesn't have any secondary schools. The new Harris Boys will be the first in East Dulwich.

gosh, people, Mangoes are', naturally, the king of fruits. We in this northern climate have to put up with apples and pears and then we geat sent from exotic places the magnificent mango. And we bemoan stringiness, we bemoan lack of taste; we even bemoan difficulty in eating. Cast aside your doubts. Don't peel the thing. Cut off one side with a sharp knife. Cut off the other side. Slice them into cubes. Eat with a cocktail stick, skin ON. Delicious.

We are heading up to Camden to see a gig on Saturday. Anyone know of a decent, cheapish restaurant up that way?

Oh, snowboarder, conclusively the at-my-wits-end post of the day. Feel for you, it is all so dispiriting, all the effort we go to and the time you take for our little cherubs to throw it back in our faces, or floor, or wherever. The little sods just don't get it, and we don't either. Our agenda just does not match with their agenda. The phenomenom that it the "Phases" concept of childrearing means that you can be sure that in a couple of months he will be through this - or more likely, you will.

Whooops, sorry Narnia. Of course I meant evolved.

This thread is at 63 posts (64 after this) and the companion one is at 62. Over there everyone is earnestly discussing the issue and expanding it to incorporate wider social contexts. In here its descended into tit jokes.....hmmmmm

Moi23; "...breast is beast campaign..." Now there's a thing.

I'm sure that this is the case Molly - and sadly the pro-breastfeeding lobby do themselves no favours by promoting breastfeeding with images of real women from around the world engaged in feeding their babies. I'm no advertising exec. by I think they would do better by getting a sexy supermodel to head their campaigns.

The original article made me sad - and the response, particularly this refrain that it is the woman's choice makes me sadder. Not, of course that I wouldn't defend the right of women to make choices about what they do with their bodies, but simply that it has got to this stage; that a woman would choose not to taint what she sees as her sexualised self by doing the natural thing of breastfeeding their baby. Sure, if, for one reason or another, a mother cannot breastfeed, then there is always formula milk. But in the first instance, surely, it has to be breastfeeding. One reason that the pro-breast-feeding lobby get so vociferous as they argue their case is that they have pretty much lost the battle. Breast-feeding rates in this country are so low. The original article is less of a call to arms for women to assert their right to to with their bodies what they will and more a further kick in the teeth for the pro-breastfeeding fratenity. So it brings up the question of choice. Is it really an even choice between breast-feeding and formula-feeding? Formula is backed by big businesses with big advertising budgets. There is no money in breastfeeding. But more worrying is the underlying body-politics that dominate the press's coverage of women. The Sun, for example, promotes the Page 3 image of the female. When do they ever promote the beautiful image of a breastfeeding mother? The OA is just part of this; the editor of a mum and baby magazine supports the option to be a formula feeding mum because she doesn't want saggy breasts and wants glass of vino. Shame.

I agree that it is difficult to have a selective ban on some types of dogs. The solution is to ban private ownership of dogs. Put dogs in zoos along with other animals. All the dog owners can get a hamster, gerbil or meerkat instead.

The idea of a woman finding her baby feeding at her breast being "creepy" is odd. Thinking of someone else's baby feeding at your breat might be creepy, or your baby being fed by someone else, sure, but your own baby? I don't think it is an honest comment anyway. The word was chosen for maximum effect and it has worked.

Keef, I have not read the article or the thread that relates to it yet so I wouldn't actually want to comment on the issue that has caused you to post but, as someone who is a regular in both rooms, there is undoubtedly a diffference in the tone of the posts in general. On the whole I find the Lounge competitiive whereas the Family Room is empathetic. Post something looking for sympathy in the Lounge and you are likely to get a sarcastic/jokey comment in the first few responses. In the Family room, people are only too willing to provide support and advice.

Brendan, are you talking about the kind of people who think it is justified to buy ornamental floating duck houses on their expenses, or who think it is morally justified to have their moat cleaned at tax-payers expense, perchance?