I'm really bored, can someone start a heated debate please

[WorkingMummy]

Chillaxed Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OK maybe I'm just trying to ramp up the 'heated

> debate' factor on a slow Friday, and I hate people

> commenting in ignorance on others parenting, but

> 'you've been so good, don't spoil it now' doesn't

> rank up there with the worst comments I've heard

> or heard of. I doubt very much that these ladies

> were conscious of your interpretation of their use

> of the word 'good'. Who hasn't described a baby

> as a 'good boy/girl'?

>

I disagree, and identify with Zedd's annoyance. It's not that they said her baby was good. It was the idea that a good baby is a silent baby, and a baby who makes noise is the opposite of good. It's not true, and an unkind thing to say. Sure, it's not the worst thing they could have said. But had they -say- started calling the baby nasty names, then Zedd would have been entitled to feel more than unwelcome and then annoyed. She would on that scenario have been entitled to call the management over and ask the two women to leave...

[Saffron]

The comment could also be attributed to a generational gap in values and attitudes on the part of the ladies at the other table. Wasn't it mentioned that they were in their 70s? Perhaps they deserve to be cut a little slack for their age/generational differences? Or perhaps they were just a couple of idiots. I can't say, because I wasn't there. It's just a thought.

[bishop]

Throwing my hat into the Ruckus Ring:

All nannies want to overcharge you and steal your husband. Discuss*

*Tongue is firmly lodged in my cheek.

[bishop]

ALSO. Me and Mr Bishop have been invited to loads of weddings over the past two years or so that have stated No Children. Fine for our toddler who we were able (for the most part...) to leave with grandparents for the day, but not so easy with our breastfed baby. And yes, the no children rule did often extend to her. Poor baby. Therefore, I have a special kind of hate directed to couples who state no babes in arms at weddings...or expect breastfed babies and Mothers to go into a special room/cuboard to feed so as not to offend guests ( I may be projecting...)

[Otta]

No babiew at all is just ridiculous! My mate was upaet when he was best man for his okdest friend, and was tokd he couldn't bring his son, who the groom is God father to!

[Otta]

Which reminds me. People who don't attend church reasonably regularly (once a month maybe) have got absolutely no business getting married in church or having their child christened.

Christening s for people who don't really bother with church are just another excuse to make them centre of attention and get more presents out of people!

[Jah Lush]

But if your kids aren't christened they'll be the sons and daughters of Satan and the little devils will go straight to hell. FACT!

[Pickle]

Otta wrote:

> Christening s for people who don't really bother

> with church are just another excuse to make them

> centre of attention and get more presents out of

> people!

COMPLETELY agree. We were invited to a christening for a friends kids (then aged 3 and 1) at a church in Redhill. They are not religious, never go to church, and that was obvious throughout the whole cringeworthy service. She had dressed the girls in matching outfits to rival My Big Fat Gypsy Weddings. Other than an excuse to have a party I don't understand at all why they did it.

The fact that our kids aren't christened is a contentious issue with my in-laws (one of many issues if I'm honest). I would feel like a complete fraud.

[Pickle]

And while I'm on the topic...

Dressing your kids the same, especially in the situation where they are not twins. Don't do it. Not only do the poor kids look stupid, but those people saying "aaaah look, how cute, you've dressed them the same" are actually laughing at you behind your back.

[gillandjoe]

I just don't understand why you would WANT to have your child christened if you weren't religious. To me, not being religious means I get to AVOID things like christenings!

With regards to everything posted about weddings etc. I have found it very hard to explain to my non-parent friends (basically everyone) that I can't leave my BF son for nights of debauched partying even if I deeply want to! I have missed weddings and 30th weekends etc. because of this. Non-parents just don't understand and I am definitely losing friends because of this. I think they all feel that I don't really want to party anymore and use my baby as an excuse. Poor mummy-no-mates!

[KalamityKel]

Dunno what you're complaining about - surely it's one of those things you give up when you have kids... ya life...

or u could just leave tru ED old skool stylee and leave ya kids wiv a neighbour ya don't really know while ya go out partying each weekend :-D

[bishop]

Gill&Joe, I am the first out of my group of friends to have children and they just didn't/don't get it. I think they thought childcare was free because when I said I couldn't afford to go back to work (initially) I got loads of 'huh?!' faces. Also they thought child benefit was about 8x as much as it is. Some of them are now pregnant, and have lofty ideas such as 'Well, of course, me and Partner are quite adaptable so I reckon we'll be fine on only six or seven hours of sleep...' (Someone actually said this to me...I asked if they meant six or seven hours over the course of three days. Reality, they are about to get a dose of it.)

[Helen GV]

Now you're just going to have to think of 101 ways to say 'I told you so'

;0)

[Belle]

on the christening thing, married in church - I have to declare an interest as I did both but don't regularly attend. But I think I'd probably say I am lapsed something (a mix of catholic/episcopal which is the Scottish version of the Anglican church). I have certain beliefs, and it felt important to me to be married in a church. It was also specifically the church where we had my dad's funeral (I guess some would say morbid - for me it was important). I can't exactly explain why I chose the church, and why we went for christenings for both kids in any articulate way, because I'm not sure what I believe. But I can categorically state it wasn't for a picture perfect wedding (there are many, many venues which would have been far more picturesque than the place we got married) or to get presents for the kids (we only asked godparents and close family to attend, and even then only if they were around, and I'm pretty confident they all knew gifts were not expected). The person who christened both my sons is close to us (not through his church role), and also did the sermon at our wedding. Aside from my personal experience, I'm of the view that if it's ok with whoever is doing the ceremony, it doesn't really matter how discernibly religious the people involved are. A good wedding is a good wedding... particularly if it finishes with a ceilidh ;)

[Saffron]

Church / no church wedding, kids/no kids at ceremony, christening / no christenting, meh. Lapsed. Whatever. We're not a religious household, but I'm fine with other people celebrating in whatever way suits, even if I don't personally 'get' it. It's their day, not mine. However, I have a harder time getting my head round this: People who don't believe in church/christening/etc, but still attend others' ceremonies and fawn over the bride/children/etc while secretly thinking the whole thing is stupid. Why go at all? I find that confusing. Who is the bigger hypocrite, the lapsed Christian, or the fake guest? (I think this is why Mr Saff hates weddings and will try everything to get out of going like a dog avoiding his bath!) Hmm, I guess that's something I have to work on accepting too.

[Sanne Panne]

Another topic. The anglophone (well, UK/US for sure, not sure about elsewhere) world's obsession with parenting methods. Do we really need books? Have all these theories taken our instincts and/or confidence away? If we think they "get" it in Spain and Italy one of the big differences is that they don't obsess over it so much. Stronger cultural consistence and availability of family maybe. But here it's really gone too far and I don't see the kids (or parents) benefit at all. Thoughts?

[WorkingMummy]

Lot of truth in that, S P.

Perhaps it's loss of extended family units and loss of community child rearing that's knocked our confidence and books are marketed to fill that void.

Also we have more time to worry about the minutiae. My grandmother, who never did a paid day's work after her first child, was a million times more busy with her three children than I am with mine. Don't think she had time to read a patenting manual. Just accepted what help was on offer from families around her and gave freely in return.

[????]

There's money to be made in crap advice, it's an industry that started in The US and our shared language and the fact that thre.s plenty of people looking to make a buck means that it's spread over here. See also self help, how to make a million, how to make friends and influence people, diet fads, all a fooking con. The money wasted on them parenting books......don't get me wrong we fell for it too but all in the bin for number 2

[Bouncy]

"People who don't believe in church/christening/etc, but still attend others' ceremonies and fawn over the bride/children/etc while secretly thinking the whole thing is stupid. Why go at all?" - Because they are your friend, and that's how they chose to celebrate an important event that they've invited you to be part of, and you respect their choice and celebrate with them! Or that's my take on it, anyway. (Funny, while writing that, occurs to me that it could equally be applied to the no-kids weddings - which I also attend now mine is old enough to be left - on a similar basis really, I guess!)

[Saffron]

Although, if you* respect someone, you don't generally rubbish them behind their backs! That was my point. If you really don't respect what they're doing, maybe you should consider why you're friends with them? It just seems weird to me, like back-biting. Not the kind of people I want to have around my daughter. This has been a difficult one for me personally because I've had to distance myself from people I thought were my friends. But everyone copes differently, I guess.

*(Not you personally Bouncy, just general 'you' ;-) )

[Belle]

It's a tricky one that. I have friends who are atheist and I know they generally aren't keen on church events. But they came to my wedding, and I suppose I would have been hurt if they chosen not to on principle, if I'm being honest. I'd hope they could just ignore the liturgy, enjoy the vows/music and celebrate their friends' happiness. But I've just remembered that one person who was Jewish refused to come because of the church element. It wasn't anyone particularly close to us but I think I was a bit suprised more than anything. I would happily go to a ceremony of any or no faith, if the couple mattered to me. Went to a humanist ceremony in Scotland once and it was lovely.

But, I think christenings are different. Technically, you are asking godparents and the wider congregation to take vows with you that relate completely to the Christian faith (whereas you could say that the congregation's contribution in a marriage ceremony is more about supporting the couple). There were definitely people who I'd have considered as godparents for both my children, but I knew it would make them uncomfortable to ask them to stand up in church and make those commitments in a Christian context, so I wouldn't dream of asking that of them. Even though there will be no other 'churchy' element of the role.

[Saffron]

Just to clarify, I don't mean I've distanced my myself (and my daughter) from people who have different beliefs. I mean that I've distanced us from people who have said one thing to my face (or a mutual friend's face) and another behind our backs. I was just using religion (or lack thereof) as an example, as it's a common point of reference. What I really struggle with are hypocrites. Imagine what they might say to your child behind your back?!

[WorkingMummy]

Saffron, I think I know where you are coming from.

It's even trickier to get your head around this kind of thing if one parent has a faith (or at least, a cultural habit of involving the church in key life events) and the other really doesn't.

We have this issue. My husband is not religious but would no more fail to christen a child than he would fail to celebrate Christmas.

I have never hidden my atheism from the vicars who married us or christened our children. I would probably have been silent about it unless directly asked, but each time I was directly asked. So I said, I don't really get this, or even particularly like it, but I love my husband and as he's giving up/has given up his country to live with me in London and raise our children here, and he wants it, and I kind of feel I owe it to him to be honest.

I have been amazed by the openness of the vicars to adapting the service so that I could participate whole heartedly. The baptism pledges for example were in each case adapted to a promise to raise the child to live in communion with all people of good will. We had totally secular marriage vows and a friend of mine was allowed to say a wish for us, instead of a prayer.

This was the Swiss church however. Not sure how far you'd get with the CofE.

[Chillaxed]

Ouch. Not mates anymore I take it?!

Pickle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta wrote:

> > Christening s for people who don't really

> bother

> > with church are just another excuse to make

> them

> > centre of attention and get more presents out

> of

> > people!

>

> COMPLETELY agree. We were invited to a

> christening for a friends kids (then aged 3 and 1)

> at a church in Redhill. They are not religious,

> never go to church, and that was obvious

> throughout the whole cringeworthy service. She

> had dressed the girls in matching outfits to rival

> My Big Fat Gypsy Weddings. Other than an excuse

> to have a party I don't understand at all why they

> did it.

>

> The fact that our kids aren't christened is a

> contentious issue with my in-laws (one of many

> issues if I'm honest). I would feel like a

> complete fraud.

[Otta]

I think if one partner has faith, it's cool for the other to accept it and go along with it. What I think is stupid is when people just do the church thing because they think it's the done thing.

As for the people who attend, I'd argue that they are just there for their friends.

I did feel a bit of a hypocrite being a god father in a Catholic christening though!