Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Merry Christmas!
I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas and I pray that the new year will be blessed for all.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
The Christmas Shoes
This is one of the most touching Christmas songs I've ever heard. It's by the group NewSong, and if it doesn't make you cry you're not human.
I wanted to post a video to the song on one of my blogs and went to YouTube to find it. There were several different videos for the song, including the official one. I chose this version, which was made as a Film School project, because of the way it ends. That clinched it for me. When you see the ending you'll know why.
None of us has a guarantee that we or our families will be here next Christmas or even next week. I hope this video makes all of us hug our loved ones a little tighter now and always.
Merry Christmas and a Blessed New Year!
Friday, December 7, 2007
The Simplest Game Of All
Whew! I can't believe it's time for Fun'n'Games Friday again. This time I'm actually in a gaming mood, but only a little bit. So I'm going to tell you about a game my family learned from one of my Mom's co-workers over 30 years ago. It's a very simple game. It requires no equipment, has no real rules, and can be played anywhere. It's called the tv game.
What's the tv game, you ask? Simple. It's a game where you have to guess the name of tv shows from the opposite of the words in the title. Did you get that? Let's see if I can clarify. In this game two or more people pick a tv show, tell the other person(s) the words that are the opposite of the words in the show's title and that person(s) has to guess the show. If the words in the title don't have exact opposites you can use words that are similar. Here's a simple example: Cottage. Can you guess which tv show that is? Right, House!
As you can see, "cottage" is similar to "house" rather than opposite to it. Here's another example: Spirit Shouter. Can you guess this one? Think hard. That's right! Ghost Whisperer. I could use both a similar and an opposite word for that show's title. And that's the gist of the tv game. Like I said, simple.
You can make "rules" to the tv game if you want. You might decide to do only dramas or comedies. You could also include the title of cd's or the names of bands in the game. It's strictly up to you how serious and involved you want this game to be. And because there's no equipment for this game except your brain it's great for road trips. My family and I have had tons of fun with the tv game. I'm sure you will, too.
What's the tv game, you ask? Simple. It's a game where you have to guess the name of tv shows from the opposite of the words in the title. Did you get that? Let's see if I can clarify. In this game two or more people pick a tv show, tell the other person(s) the words that are the opposite of the words in the show's title and that person(s) has to guess the show. If the words in the title don't have exact opposites you can use words that are similar. Here's a simple example: Cottage. Can you guess which tv show that is? Right, House!
As you can see, "cottage" is similar to "house" rather than opposite to it. Here's another example: Spirit Shouter. Can you guess this one? Think hard. That's right! Ghost Whisperer. I could use both a similar and an opposite word for that show's title. And that's the gist of the tv game. Like I said, simple.
You can make "rules" to the tv game if you want. You might decide to do only dramas or comedies. You could also include the title of cd's or the names of bands in the game. It's strictly up to you how serious and involved you want this game to be. And because there's no equipment for this game except your brain it's great for road trips. My family and I have had tons of fun with the tv game. I'm sure you will, too.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
To Tell Or Not To Tell
Well, it's that time again. Christmas is just around the corner and a lot of parents are facing the Santa question. Do they tell their children the truth about jolly St. Nick or not? 
I have mixed feelings about Santa Claus. Like most folks I believed in Santa as a child. I was never told the truth; I figured it out on my own. Slowly, over time, I realized that the Santa story didn't add up. By the time I was nine or ten I'd put two and two together and made peace with the fact that Santa was a pleasant fiction. I suffered no psychological damage from having been "lied" to by my parents and other adults for years. But I do understand how the dishonesty can be uncomfortable for a lot of people.
Many adults remember their belief in Santa as harmless fun and they want the same for their children. A happy fantasy, they reason, can be soothing and reassuring for children in an often dark and dangerous world. That's true, but today's children are often more wordly than those of the past and more likely to spot a hoax. Consequently it might be a good idea for parents to level with them from the beginning. But won't that take away the magic of Christmas? Not necessarily.
If you're religious, Christmas was never supposed to be about Santa Claus and his presents anyway. It's supposed to be about the birth of Christ. Teaching children the true reason for the season, sharing precious time with family and friends, and giving to those less fortunate are ways to experience the joy of Christmas without involving the Santa myth.
If you just can't get through the holiday without Santa, but don't want to tell your kids a fib, try telling them the story of the real St. Nicholas, on whom the Santa legend is based. The life of this man can serve as an inspiration for everyone, regardless of religion or lack thereof. You can make telling his story a family tradition, as telling the story of the first Christmas already is for many. Following St. Nicholas' example of loving children and the poor can motivate us to help others, bringing joy to them and to ourselves. And keeping us in the spirit of Christmas.
I don't want to sound like a moral relativist, but there's no right or wrong answer to the Santa question. Children aren't going to be harmed by believing in a pleasant myth for a few years. On the other hand, if you don't want to fib to your kids rest assured that not believing in Santa won't ruin the spirit of the season for them. Be careful, though, that your kids don't spill the beans to kids whose parents DO want them to believe in the man in the red suit.
Whatever decision you make about Santa be sure it jibes with your values as a family. Santa Claus IS Christmas to many people, but he doesn't have to be. Worshipping Christ, being with family, giving gifts and helping others are all ways of bringing Christmas joy to your children with or without Santa Claus. So go ahead. Tell your kids Santa's real, or tell them he's not. The magic of the season will be there either way.
I have mixed feelings about Santa Claus. Like most folks I believed in Santa as a child. I was never told the truth; I figured it out on my own. Slowly, over time, I realized that the Santa story didn't add up. By the time I was nine or ten I'd put two and two together and made peace with the fact that Santa was a pleasant fiction. I suffered no psychological damage from having been "lied" to by my parents and other adults for years. But I do understand how the dishonesty can be uncomfortable for a lot of people.
Many adults remember their belief in Santa as harmless fun and they want the same for their children. A happy fantasy, they reason, can be soothing and reassuring for children in an often dark and dangerous world. That's true, but today's children are often more wordly than those of the past and more likely to spot a hoax. Consequently it might be a good idea for parents to level with them from the beginning. But won't that take away the magic of Christmas? Not necessarily.
If you're religious, Christmas was never supposed to be about Santa Claus and his presents anyway. It's supposed to be about the birth of Christ. Teaching children the true reason for the season, sharing precious time with family and friends, and giving to those less fortunate are ways to experience the joy of Christmas without involving the Santa myth.
If you just can't get through the holiday without Santa, but don't want to tell your kids a fib, try telling them the story of the real St. Nicholas, on whom the Santa legend is based. The life of this man can serve as an inspiration for everyone, regardless of religion or lack thereof. You can make telling his story a family tradition, as telling the story of the first Christmas already is for many. Following St. Nicholas' example of loving children and the poor can motivate us to help others, bringing joy to them and to ourselves. And keeping us in the spirit of Christmas.
I don't want to sound like a moral relativist, but there's no right or wrong answer to the Santa question. Children aren't going to be harmed by believing in a pleasant myth for a few years. On the other hand, if you don't want to fib to your kids rest assured that not believing in Santa won't ruin the spirit of the season for them. Be careful, though, that your kids don't spill the beans to kids whose parents DO want them to believe in the man in the red suit.
Whatever decision you make about Santa be sure it jibes with your values as a family. Santa Claus IS Christmas to many people, but he doesn't have to be. Worshipping Christ, being with family, giving gifts and helping others are all ways of bringing Christmas joy to your children with or without Santa Claus. So go ahead. Tell your kids Santa's real, or tell them he's not. The magic of the season will be there either way.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Not In A Gaming Mood
Hi all. I know this is Fun'n'Games Friday but, for some reason, I'm just not in a fun'n'games mood. I know what game I want to post but I just can't bring myself to do it. I've been thinking alot about what's going on in my life and the world and my mood is so serious right now. Writing about a game seems so...trivial, a waste of time. I know I said that Fun'n'Games Friday would be a weekly thing and I still plan on it being that, but this Friday fun just isn't where I'm at. Sorry.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Boundaries
Families can be heavenly...or they can be hell. I think one of the things that makes living and dealing with our families difficult is the absence of boundaries. All relationships need boundaries. They help us to respect each other, which is vital in healthy relationships. Many of us seem to forget that, though, when it comes to our families.
Bosses, co-workers, neighbors, friends, even strangers are often treated better by us than our families are. But why? Because we know and respect the boundaries of non-family members. If our neighbor's son mows our lawn we pay him that day, not weeks later. If our friend babysits our child we pick up the baby on time, not hours later. Very often we don't show the same curtesy to family.
There's an old saying, familiarity breeds contempt. I don't think most of us hold our families in contempt, but I do think we take them for granted and have an attitude of entitlement toward them. We often view our family members as people who exist to provide free services for us. This usually isn't done maliciously but the consequences can be ugly nonetheless.
Our families are not here just to serve us. They have their own needs, lives, and responsibilities. Treating our family members with respect can go a long way to creating family harmony. We respect our family members by respecting their boundaries. If our sister-in-law doesn't approve of smoking we won't do it in her house. If Uncle Frank isn't religious we won't pester him to come to church. If we leave the kids with Mom we'll get them at 6 as we promised. And we won't presume that Mom will always be there to babysit.
Our families should mean more to us than anyone else. Our relationship with them should be paramount. Love alone, though, doesn't make relationships successful. Respect is the vital ingredient for family happiness that is so often missing. Giving our family members even a little of it can go a long way. And that's what boundaries are really all about: respect, love, and happiness.
Bosses, co-workers, neighbors, friends, even strangers are often treated better by us than our families are. But why? Because we know and respect the boundaries of non-family members. If our neighbor's son mows our lawn we pay him that day, not weeks later. If our friend babysits our child we pick up the baby on time, not hours later. Very often we don't show the same curtesy to family.
There's an old saying, familiarity breeds contempt. I don't think most of us hold our families in contempt, but I do think we take them for granted and have an attitude of entitlement toward them. We often view our family members as people who exist to provide free services for us. This usually isn't done maliciously but the consequences can be ugly nonetheless.
Our families are not here just to serve us. They have their own needs, lives, and responsibilities. Treating our family members with respect can go a long way to creating family harmony. We respect our family members by respecting their boundaries. If our sister-in-law doesn't approve of smoking we won't do it in her house. If Uncle Frank isn't religious we won't pester him to come to church. If we leave the kids with Mom we'll get them at 6 as we promised. And we won't presume that Mom will always be there to babysit.
Our families should mean more to us than anyone else. Our relationship with them should be paramount. Love alone, though, doesn't make relationships successful. Respect is the vital ingredient for family happiness that is so often missing. Giving our family members even a little of it can go a long way. And that's what boundaries are really all about: respect, love, and happiness.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Cat and Mouse
I can't believe it's Friday again! Here's installment #2 of Fun'n'Games Friday. Hope you enjoy it!
Cat and Mouse
Like Jump the Creek, this game was a big hit with the kids at day care. It's basically another version of tag that evolved out of a regular game of tag we were playing one day. It's great outside or in. On rainy days we played it in the gym. Have fun!
As always, supervise children while they're playing this or any other game.
Type of Activity: Running Game
Objective: Catch all the "mice"
Equipment: Kids!
Location: Inside or outside
Number of Players: Works best with from 5-10, although more can play
Age Group: 5 and up
The kids and I actually came up with two versions of Cat and Mouse, the short version and the long version. I'll give you the short version first.
Short Version
In this version of CaM the game is over when the "cat" catches all the "mice". What makes it go so fast is that every "mouse" caught turns into a "cat" and helps the original "cat" catch the other "mice". The last "mouse" caught becomes the new "cat".
Before you begin find some place to be the mouse house. This is where the "mice" will run to to be safe. The mouse house can be anything: a tree, the side of a house, a square drawn on the ground, the circle beneath a basketball net, anything. Just make sure all the players know the mouse house's boundaries. Next, pick someone to be the "cat". Now you're ready to play!
All the "mice" start in the mouse house. At the count of three off they go! The "cat" tries to catch them. The "mice" run in and out of the mouse house, teasing the "cat" as they run. Catching them isn't as easy as the "cat" thought! The "mice" run very fast, but as they get captured some will forget who's a " cat" and who's still a "mouse". This will make them vulnerable. Soon, the "cat" and his helpers will catch the last "mouse" and the game will be over. Start over again with the new "cat"! That's the short version of Cat and Mouse.
Long Version
The objective of the long version of CaM is for the "cat" to imprison all the "mice" in the mouse house. This version can be endless, like Monopoly. You may want to put a time limit on it and let the last "mouse" caught within that limit be the new "cat". Here's how you get started.
First, choose a mouse house like in the short version, only this time it'll be the "mices'" jail, as stated above. Next, chose a "cat". Now, gather the kids in a crowd, count to three, and let 'em rip!
The "cat" has to catch the "mice" and put them in the mouse house. This sounds simple; however, there's a wrinkle. The "mice" who're free can tag their imprisonned friends and get them out. This forces the "cat" to do two jobs: catch the "mice" AND guard the mouse house. Of course, the "cat" can't be two places at once. He has to decide when to chase and when to guard. No matter what choice he makes there's always a chance "mice" will be freed from the jail. So, the goal of capturing all the "mice" gets complicated. That's what makes the long version of Cat and Mouse well...long. As I said above, you can put a time limit on the game, or just let the kids play until they're tired. Either way, you'll have a lot of fun.
Play Cat and Mouse the next time the gang's over . It'll give everyone some fun filled exercise. And it might become a favorite of yours like it did for me and my kids. Have fun!
Cat and Mouse
Like Jump the Creek, this game was a big hit with the kids at day care. It's basically another version of tag that evolved out of a regular game of tag we were playing one day. It's great outside or in. On rainy days we played it in the gym. Have fun!
As always, supervise children while they're playing this or any other game.
Type of Activity: Running Game
Objective: Catch all the "mice"
Equipment: Kids!
Location: Inside or outside
Number of Players: Works best with from 5-10, although more can play
Age Group: 5 and up
The kids and I actually came up with two versions of Cat and Mouse, the short version and the long version. I'll give you the short version first.
Short Version
In this version of CaM the game is over when the "cat" catches all the "mice". What makes it go so fast is that every "mouse" caught turns into a "cat" and helps the original "cat" catch the other "mice". The last "mouse" caught becomes the new "cat".
Before you begin find some place to be the mouse house. This is where the "mice" will run to to be safe. The mouse house can be anything: a tree, the side of a house, a square drawn on the ground, the circle beneath a basketball net, anything. Just make sure all the players know the mouse house's boundaries. Next, pick someone to be the "cat". Now you're ready to play!
All the "mice" start in the mouse house. At the count of three off they go! The "cat" tries to catch them. The "mice" run in and out of the mouse house, teasing the "cat" as they run. Catching them isn't as easy as the "cat" thought! The "mice" run very fast, but as they get captured some will forget who's a " cat" and who's still a "mouse". This will make them vulnerable. Soon, the "cat" and his helpers will catch the last "mouse" and the game will be over. Start over again with the new "cat"! That's the short version of Cat and Mouse.
Long Version
The objective of the long version of CaM is for the "cat" to imprison all the "mice" in the mouse house. This version can be endless, like Monopoly. You may want to put a time limit on it and let the last "mouse" caught within that limit be the new "cat". Here's how you get started.
First, choose a mouse house like in the short version, only this time it'll be the "mices'" jail, as stated above. Next, chose a "cat". Now, gather the kids in a crowd, count to three, and let 'em rip!
The "cat" has to catch the "mice" and put them in the mouse house. This sounds simple; however, there's a wrinkle. The "mice" who're free can tag their imprisonned friends and get them out. This forces the "cat" to do two jobs: catch the "mice" AND guard the mouse house. Of course, the "cat" can't be two places at once. He has to decide when to chase and when to guard. No matter what choice he makes there's always a chance "mice" will be freed from the jail. So, the goal of capturing all the "mice" gets complicated. That's what makes the long version of Cat and Mouse well...long. As I said above, you can put a time limit on the game, or just let the kids play until they're tired. Either way, you'll have a lot of fun.
Play Cat and Mouse the next time the gang's over . It'll give everyone some fun filled exercise. And it might become a favorite of yours like it did for me and my kids. Have fun!
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Bottles and Binkies and Boobs! Oh My!
We live in a society that doesn't seem to know what to do with children. The stage of life called "childhood" is shifting. The lines between infant and child and child and adult are blurring. I touched on this phenomenon in my previous post "Prosti-tots". The wearing of provocative Halloween costumes by preteen girls, however, is only one facet of this disturbing trend.
We adults can't make up our minds about when we want children to be children, babies, or adults. We want to both infantilize and adultify children whenever it suits us. Young children, for instance, are allowed to continue doing things like sucking bottles or wearing diapers long after they're past the age for it. As recently as five years ago I worked for a day care where kids couldn't move up to the 3-year-old class unless they were potty trained. Now, 3-year-old teachers are expected to change diapers. It's like adults want to keep children babies for as long as possible. Working parent guilt may be partly to blame.
Infancy does pass quickly. Some working parents, feeling they've missed out on it, may try to recapture it by letting their kids suck pacifiers or wear diapers when they're too old for it. Other working parents may be too tired to fight with rebellious toddlers and let them have their way just to keep the peace. Either way, toddlers and even preschoolers are being infantilized for the satisfaction of adults. And it gets worse.
Once we adults decide that infancy is finally over, we want an immediate transition to maturity. We want kids to stay in diapers until they're five but show their cleavage at ten. We switch them from bottles to bustiers with ease. We dress our girls in sexy Halloween costumes and think it's cute. Even everyday clothes for kids, especially girls, are getting more "sophisticated". Several years ago the show 20/20 did a story on this trend. The children's fashion industry even had a name for it: KGOY or kids getting older younger. I find that really, really sad.
We grown ups need to get our proverbial act together. We need to understand that we are here to train children, guide them through the various stages of growing up, and finally send them into the world as responsible adults. We have no right to either retard or accelerate that process for our convenience. Three-year-olds shouldn't be wearing diapers and sucking binkies just so parents can cope with their guilt. And ten-year-olds shouldn't be looking like Britney Spears because Moms want to relive their carefree, pre-motherhood days through their daughters.
Stunting or accelerating children's development can be detrimental, even dangerous. Provocatively dressed young girls could give the wrong idea to the wrong people. And children who are infantilized may never become autonomous individuals but remain forever dependent on Mom and Dad. We can and should do better by our kids. They don't deserve to be stunted or pimped out because we've got issues. Let us deal with our problems, not mess up our kids with them.
We adults can't make up our minds about when we want children to be children, babies, or adults. We want to both infantilize and adultify children whenever it suits us. Young children, for instance, are allowed to continue doing things like sucking bottles or wearing diapers long after they're past the age for it. As recently as five years ago I worked for a day care where kids couldn't move up to the 3-year-old class unless they were potty trained. Now, 3-year-old teachers are expected to change diapers. It's like adults want to keep children babies for as long as possible. Working parent guilt may be partly to blame.
Infancy does pass quickly. Some working parents, feeling they've missed out on it, may try to recapture it by letting their kids suck pacifiers or wear diapers when they're too old for it. Other working parents may be too tired to fight with rebellious toddlers and let them have their way just to keep the peace. Either way, toddlers and even preschoolers are being infantilized for the satisfaction of adults. And it gets worse.
Once we adults decide that infancy is finally over, we want an immediate transition to maturity. We want kids to stay in diapers until they're five but show their cleavage at ten. We switch them from bottles to bustiers with ease. We dress our girls in sexy Halloween costumes and think it's cute. Even everyday clothes for kids, especially girls, are getting more "sophisticated". Several years ago the show 20/20 did a story on this trend. The children's fashion industry even had a name for it: KGOY or kids getting older younger. I find that really, really sad.
We grown ups need to get our proverbial act together. We need to understand that we are here to train children, guide them through the various stages of growing up, and finally send them into the world as responsible adults. We have no right to either retard or accelerate that process for our convenience. Three-year-olds shouldn't be wearing diapers and sucking binkies just so parents can cope with their guilt. And ten-year-olds shouldn't be looking like Britney Spears because Moms want to relive their carefree, pre-motherhood days through their daughters.
Stunting or accelerating children's development can be detrimental, even dangerous. Provocatively dressed young girls could give the wrong idea to the wrong people. And children who are infantilized may never become autonomous individuals but remain forever dependent on Mom and Dad. We can and should do better by our kids. They don't deserve to be stunted or pimped out because we've got issues. Let us deal with our problems, not mess up our kids with them.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Prosti-tots
Halloween is just around the corner and little children all over the land are eager to jump into their costumes and "extort" candy from willing "victims". Unfortunately, a large number of those children will be little girls looking more like hookers than Disney princesses. Welcome to the age of the prosti-tots.*
When I was a child I was lucky to get a mask to wear for Halloween. Now, teen and preteen girls are clamoring for sexed up costumes and parents are buying them. How sad! We live in a time when child predators are everywhere yet some parents happily offer up their daughters as pedophile eye candy.
Some will say that I'm overreacting. Halloween is just one night out of the year. Surely girls won't be harmed by looking sexy just one night. Maybe not. But why should 11, 12, or 13-year-old girls look sexy at all? What purpose does that serve except to make them enticing to the wrong men?
Of course, the little Lolitas couldn't wear those costumes if parents didn't buy them. But they do buy them. Some parents do so because they're wimps too weak, lazy, or even scared of their kids to say no. Other parents buy the outfits because they don't find them inappropriate and/or don't have a sense of boundaries. These parents want to be the "cool" parents. They want to be their girls' friends, not the people who make and enforce standards. Also, some of the Moms who buy these sexy costumes maybe trying to recapture their pre-motherhood figures through their daughters. Whatever the reason, this needs to stop.
If provocative costumes are worn on Halloween they should be worn by adults. Kids, including teens, have NO business looking sexy at ANY time. It is child abuse to push young girls into a psuedo-adult sexiness. When they grow up they'll have the rest of their lives to look trashy, if they so choose. While minors, let children be children. Don't turn your tots into prosti-tots*.
*I didn't coin this term; I heard it on the Glenn Beck Show, which inspired this post.
When I was a child I was lucky to get a mask to wear for Halloween. Now, teen and preteen girls are clamoring for sexed up costumes and parents are buying them. How sad! We live in a time when child predators are everywhere yet some parents happily offer up their daughters as pedophile eye candy.
Some will say that I'm overreacting. Halloween is just one night out of the year. Surely girls won't be harmed by looking sexy just one night. Maybe not. But why should 11, 12, or 13-year-old girls look sexy at all? What purpose does that serve except to make them enticing to the wrong men?
Of course, the little Lolitas couldn't wear those costumes if parents didn't buy them. But they do buy them. Some parents do so because they're wimps too weak, lazy, or even scared of their kids to say no. Other parents buy the outfits because they don't find them inappropriate and/or don't have a sense of boundaries. These parents want to be the "cool" parents. They want to be their girls' friends, not the people who make and enforce standards. Also, some of the Moms who buy these sexy costumes maybe trying to recapture their pre-motherhood figures through their daughters. Whatever the reason, this needs to stop.
If provocative costumes are worn on Halloween they should be worn by adults. Kids, including teens, have NO business looking sexy at ANY time. It is child abuse to push young girls into a psuedo-adult sexiness. When they grow up they'll have the rest of their lives to look trashy, if they so choose. While minors, let children be children. Don't turn your tots into prosti-tots*.
*I didn't coin this term; I heard it on the Glenn Beck Show, which inspired this post.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Jump the Creek!
Home Fires is my newest blog and I've decided to try to make it more "organized" than my other blogs. I don't want to structure it too much and box myself into rules that might get in the way of meaningful writing. However, I think--and hope!--that if I give my readers "columns" to look forward to on a regular basis it will encourage them to keep returning to HF. So today I'm introducing my first column, Fun'n'Games Friday.
Fun'n'Games Friday will be featured--you guessed it!-- every Friday (because fun and Friday both start with "f", hehe). As the title implies this column will be about games and other ways to have family fun. A lot of my ideas will come from my childhood and my years as a day care teacher. Other ideas will come from books, magazines, friends, and any other sources I can find. Some posts in this column will have just one game or activity, other posts will have more. It'll just depend on what I can come up with each week. Well, that's it with the introduction. Let's get into the first issue of Fun'n'Games Friday. Hope you enjoy!
Jump the Creek
Type of Activity: Game
Objective: Last child to jump the creek wins
Location: Outside
Equipment: Two jump ropes, sticks, lengths of yarn, or anything else to make the "shores" of the creek
Number of Players: Works best with about 10, not counting the "constuction workers"
Age Group: 6 and up
As always, supervise children when playing this or any other game.
Jump the Creek was one of the most popular games in one of the day care centers I used to work at. It's a very easy game to play, with minimal equipment and only one real rule: don't land in the creek. I hope you find it as fun as my kids and I did.
The object of this game is simple: be the last person to jump the creek and win. To make the creek place two jump ropes on the ground a few inches apart. Appoint two kids to be the "construction workers" on the creek. They will each hold an end of ONE of the jump ropes and move it away from the other rope as the game progresses. To begin play line up the jumpers and have them start jumping the creek (the space between the jump ropes). This will be easy and go fast, at first, because the creek will be very narrow. But it will quickly get harder.
After the last jumper has jumped, the construction workers yell, "Construction on the creek!", and move their rope a few inches from the other one. The jumpers line up and go again; when the last one has jumped the workers yell and move the rope. This continues so the creek gets wider and wider. Soon, the jumpers have to get a running start to make it across the creek. Any jumper who lands in the creek, i.e. between the ropes, is out. Finally, it'll come down to two jumpers. They will keep on jumping until one just can't make it across and "falls" into the creek. When this happens the last jumper wins and the game is over.
As stated above, this was one of the most popular games at day care. Sometimes half the center--about 50+ kids--would gather on the playground for a Jump the Creek "tournament". Most of them were spectators cheering on their friends as the creek got wider, the jumping got harder, and the suspense got more and more intense. Shouts of "Go Patrick!", "Go Erik!", or "Go Ryan!" filled the air along with squeals of delight when the favored one won. And then the game was immediately started again.
Try Jump the Creek at your next birthday party or family reunion (adults can play it as well as kids). Create teams, start your own tournament, give out ribbons or medals. You can make it as simple or elaborate as you want. It might even become a family tradition. Most of all, just have fun with it like me and my day care kids did. Get out your ropes and jump that creek!
Fun'n'Games Friday will be featured--you guessed it!-- every Friday (because fun and Friday both start with "f", hehe). As the title implies this column will be about games and other ways to have family fun. A lot of my ideas will come from my childhood and my years as a day care teacher. Other ideas will come from books, magazines, friends, and any other sources I can find. Some posts in this column will have just one game or activity, other posts will have more. It'll just depend on what I can come up with each week. Well, that's it with the introduction. Let's get into the first issue of Fun'n'Games Friday. Hope you enjoy!
Jump the Creek
Type of Activity: Game
Objective: Last child to jump the creek wins
Location: Outside
Equipment: Two jump ropes, sticks, lengths of yarn, or anything else to make the "shores" of the creek
Number of Players: Works best with about 10, not counting the "constuction workers"
Age Group: 6 and up
As always, supervise children when playing this or any other game.
Jump the Creek was one of the most popular games in one of the day care centers I used to work at. It's a very easy game to play, with minimal equipment and only one real rule: don't land in the creek. I hope you find it as fun as my kids and I did.
The object of this game is simple: be the last person to jump the creek and win. To make the creek place two jump ropes on the ground a few inches apart. Appoint two kids to be the "construction workers" on the creek. They will each hold an end of ONE of the jump ropes and move it away from the other rope as the game progresses. To begin play line up the jumpers and have them start jumping the creek (the space between the jump ropes). This will be easy and go fast, at first, because the creek will be very narrow. But it will quickly get harder.
After the last jumper has jumped, the construction workers yell, "Construction on the creek!", and move their rope a few inches from the other one. The jumpers line up and go again; when the last one has jumped the workers yell and move the rope. This continues so the creek gets wider and wider. Soon, the jumpers have to get a running start to make it across the creek. Any jumper who lands in the creek, i.e. between the ropes, is out. Finally, it'll come down to two jumpers. They will keep on jumping until one just can't make it across and "falls" into the creek. When this happens the last jumper wins and the game is over.
As stated above, this was one of the most popular games at day care. Sometimes half the center--about 50+ kids--would gather on the playground for a Jump the Creek "tournament". Most of them were spectators cheering on their friends as the creek got wider, the jumping got harder, and the suspense got more and more intense. Shouts of "Go Patrick!", "Go Erik!", or "Go Ryan!" filled the air along with squeals of delight when the favored one won. And then the game was immediately started again.
Try Jump the Creek at your next birthday party or family reunion (adults can play it as well as kids). Create teams, start your own tournament, give out ribbons or medals. You can make it as simple or elaborate as you want. It might even become a family tradition. Most of all, just have fun with it like me and my day care kids did. Get out your ropes and jump that creek!
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
They Are YOUR Children!
I'm sure everyone has heard about the decision of the Portland, ME school board to give birth control pills to middle school girls without their parents knowledge, let alone consent. This makes my blood boil! And what's even worse is that there are parents who agree with this policy! Is there no sanity left in our culture?
Remember, public schools are government schools. So when they give children anything without their parents' knowledge it's really the government telling parents what they can and can't know about their own children. It is government intrusion of the worst kind. I don't see how any parent could submit to that, but some do. It's as if they don't understand who they are or what their job is. I'll tell them.
Parents, you job is to raise your children!!! They're your responsibility and yours alone. You have no right to expect anyone or anything--grandparents, government, day care centers, even the church--to take on any part of the job for you. And you should never let anyone or anything take away any part of the job from you. Parents, you are to provide for your children not only financially but also morally and spiritually. You are to consciously teach them values not just let them create their own. And you are to teach them faith. The Bible clearly gives parents, not clergy or religious institutions, the primary responsibility to teach God's law to the next generation. This is a BIG job!
Many frazzled modern parents apparently feel it's too much. They work 8 or more hours a day and think that that is their main parenting function. Exhausted, they begin to believe that things like potty training or teaching values are, or should be, someone else's job. Indeed, many modern parents feel that's what they're paying day care centers to do. By the time their children start school these parents are already comfortable with giving up huge chunks of their authority in exchange for less responsibility. This sad state of affairs reveals itself most starkly in situations like the one in Maine, where some parents happily embrace the government's take over of a very important part of their job. It's like they're saying, "Yes! Less work for me!".
I implore all parents to take back their role and rights as parents. You are the authority over your children. You, not the government, decide what values they will have. I understand that parenting can be hard and exhausting, especially when it's combined with working outside the home. But when you brought that little bundle home from the hospital you were committing yourself to that awesome task. Your children are a sacred trust. You, not grandparents, day care centers, or schools will be held responsible by God for how they turn out. They are YOUR children. Act like it!
Remember, public schools are government schools. So when they give children anything without their parents' knowledge it's really the government telling parents what they can and can't know about their own children. It is government intrusion of the worst kind. I don't see how any parent could submit to that, but some do. It's as if they don't understand who they are or what their job is. I'll tell them.
Parents, you job is to raise your children!!! They're your responsibility and yours alone. You have no right to expect anyone or anything--grandparents, government, day care centers, even the church--to take on any part of the job for you. And you should never let anyone or anything take away any part of the job from you. Parents, you are to provide for your children not only financially but also morally and spiritually. You are to consciously teach them values not just let them create their own. And you are to teach them faith. The Bible clearly gives parents, not clergy or religious institutions, the primary responsibility to teach God's law to the next generation. This is a BIG job!
Many frazzled modern parents apparently feel it's too much. They work 8 or more hours a day and think that that is their main parenting function. Exhausted, they begin to believe that things like potty training or teaching values are, or should be, someone else's job. Indeed, many modern parents feel that's what they're paying day care centers to do. By the time their children start school these parents are already comfortable with giving up huge chunks of their authority in exchange for less responsibility. This sad state of affairs reveals itself most starkly in situations like the one in Maine, where some parents happily embrace the government's take over of a very important part of their job. It's like they're saying, "Yes! Less work for me!".
I implore all parents to take back their role and rights as parents. You are the authority over your children. You, not the government, decide what values they will have. I understand that parenting can be hard and exhausting, especially when it's combined with working outside the home. But when you brought that little bundle home from the hospital you were committing yourself to that awesome task. Your children are a sacred trust. You, not grandparents, day care centers, or schools will be held responsible by God for how they turn out. They are YOUR children. Act like it!
Monday, October 15, 2007
Just What Do You Mean "Family"?
Unless you've been living under a rock for the last 30 years, you know that the American family has undergone a lot of change, much of it painful. In many ways our society has become weaker due to this familial transformation. The family has become a heated topic, difficult to discuss because we no longer have a cultural consensus on what "family" even means. Therefore, I want my readers to know what I mean when I say family.
By "family" I mean the traditional family: mom, dad, and kids. I mean that because I have a conservative, Judeo-Christian worldview, even though I'm unchurched. I'm sure I've just turned off a lot of people, but try to be open minded. Yes, I believe in the traditional family, but that doesn't mean you can predict where I stand on every familial issue. Some of my views will probably surprise and/or anger conservatives as well as liberals. But I didn't start Home Fires to anger or offend anyone. I started it because I wanted to discuss my views on the family and express some of my concerns about the state of the family in modern America. If I offend anyone I apologize in advance.
To reiterate, I support the traditional family structure of mom, dad, and kids. I believe this structure is the best. Why? Because it's the family form outlined in the book of Genesis where it says, "For this cause[the cause of God making Man male and female], a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and the two shall become one flesh." This verse has been the foundation of Western civilization's understanding of marriage and the family for over a millenium. I believe that the farther we get from Genesis' familial plan the worse off our culture will become.
The above verse establishes what we call the nuclear family as the foundation of society. A man is to leave his parents, cleave to his wife, and begin the creation of a new family unit. I don't think this means that newly married couples must always live apart from their parents. Sometimes that just isn't feasible. It does mean, I think, that the new marriage must be respected by society as a nascent family unit independent of and equal to the family units bride and groom came from. From the new marriage a new family--mother, father, and children--emerges.
I believe that the verse in Genesis establishes marriage and the family as heterosexual institutions. A MAN is to cleave to his WIFE, not to his wife or male lover. Homosexual unions do not have the blessings of God and for centuries didn't have the blessings of the civil authoritites, either. Does this mean that gay people should be treated like dirt? Of course not. It just means that homosexual unions are outside the definition of family, just as incestuous and adulterous heterosexual unions are outside the definition of family. Having a societal consensus on what constitues a family is not a license to abuse anyone. Personally, I'd rather live next door to a nice gay couple than a straight adulterer or incest practitioner.
If you notice, I used the phrase "marriage and the family" in the paragraphs above. I did that on purpose. Just as I believe that the nuclear family is the foundation of society, so I believe that marriage is the foundation of the family, BUT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FAMILY BY ITSELF. A married couple is a married couple, not a family. The birth of children is what turns a marriage into a family. As I said, family means mother, father, AND children. Again, I know I've offended many people and again, I apologize. I just believe there IS an objective familial norm, given to us by God, that all people should acknowledge and strive to achieve. And what do I think of "alternative" families? Where do they fit into my view of life? Those are subjects for other posts. For now you know just what I mean when I say "family".
By "family" I mean the traditional family: mom, dad, and kids. I mean that because I have a conservative, Judeo-Christian worldview, even though I'm unchurched. I'm sure I've just turned off a lot of people, but try to be open minded. Yes, I believe in the traditional family, but that doesn't mean you can predict where I stand on every familial issue. Some of my views will probably surprise and/or anger conservatives as well as liberals. But I didn't start Home Fires to anger or offend anyone. I started it because I wanted to discuss my views on the family and express some of my concerns about the state of the family in modern America. If I offend anyone I apologize in advance.
To reiterate, I support the traditional family structure of mom, dad, and kids. I believe this structure is the best. Why? Because it's the family form outlined in the book of Genesis where it says, "For this cause[the cause of God making Man male and female], a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and the two shall become one flesh." This verse has been the foundation of Western civilization's understanding of marriage and the family for over a millenium. I believe that the farther we get from Genesis' familial plan the worse off our culture will become.
The above verse establishes what we call the nuclear family as the foundation of society. A man is to leave his parents, cleave to his wife, and begin the creation of a new family unit. I don't think this means that newly married couples must always live apart from their parents. Sometimes that just isn't feasible. It does mean, I think, that the new marriage must be respected by society as a nascent family unit independent of and equal to the family units bride and groom came from. From the new marriage a new family--mother, father, and children--emerges.
I believe that the verse in Genesis establishes marriage and the family as heterosexual institutions. A MAN is to cleave to his WIFE, not to his wife or male lover. Homosexual unions do not have the blessings of God and for centuries didn't have the blessings of the civil authoritites, either. Does this mean that gay people should be treated like dirt? Of course not. It just means that homosexual unions are outside the definition of family, just as incestuous and adulterous heterosexual unions are outside the definition of family. Having a societal consensus on what constitues a family is not a license to abuse anyone. Personally, I'd rather live next door to a nice gay couple than a straight adulterer or incest practitioner.
If you notice, I used the phrase "marriage and the family" in the paragraphs above. I did that on purpose. Just as I believe that the nuclear family is the foundation of society, so I believe that marriage is the foundation of the family, BUT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FAMILY BY ITSELF. A married couple is a married couple, not a family. The birth of children is what turns a marriage into a family. As I said, family means mother, father, AND children. Again, I know I've offended many people and again, I apologize. I just believe there IS an objective familial norm, given to us by God, that all people should acknowledge and strive to achieve. And what do I think of "alternative" families? Where do they fit into my view of life? Those are subjects for other posts. For now you know just what I mean when I say "family".
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
The Qualifications of a Childless Parenting Advisor
This blog is about family and anything related to and/or impacting the family. It's impossible to talk about family without talking about parenting, and I intend to do that. But for the sake of honesty I must admit that I'm childless. I'm not a parent; I don't have kids. Of course, a lot of people will immediately say that that disqualifies me from saying anything about raising children, but I disagree. I feel I'm highly qualified to talk about childrearing and even to give parents advice. Here's why.
First off, I was a child. That's not a trick answer. Having been a child, like everyone else on this planet, I know a lot about parenting from the back end, so to speak. I remember much about my childhood that show me now a lot about how moms and dads should, and shouldn't, parent. I remember words, spoken in anger or carelessness, that still cause pain to this day. I remember the burden of trying to live up to contradictory expectations. I remember the oppression of controlling, smothering adults. I remember the fear engendered by parental wars.
But I also remember never eating breakfast at school because my mom rose before dawn every day to fix a hot breakfast for her kids. I remember having long, beautiful hair because Mama took the time to take care of it. I remember always being clean and well-groomed, even on the weekend. I remember never going without any necessity. I remember always getting everything I wanted for Christmas and then some.
All of these childhood experiences were lesssons in parenting for me. The responsibility of parenting. The power of parenting. And the love of parenting that makes you do more for another human being, at your own expense, than any other love there is. These lessons qualify me to talk about raising kids.
I'm also qualified because, even though I have no biological children, I've been intimately involved in the rearing of other people's children. I have a niece, a nephew, and a great-niece whom I absolutely adore and helped cared for for much of their childhood. Plus, I have a batch of godchildren whom I spend lots of time with. Too, I worked in day care for 13 years teaching, training and, above all, loving, dozens of kids who spent more time with me than with their parents. I readily concede that no amount of "aunting" or godmothering can equal the real thing. Still, my adulthood has been so defined by hands-on caring for children that I feel entitled to call myself an honorary mom.
As an honorary mom I can give out parenting advice. In fact, several first time parents at the day care centers I worked for asked me for help with various childrearing issues. They understood that as a longtime day care teacher my experience with kids far outweighed theirs, even if the baby went home with them every night.
So being childless doesn't mean you don't or can't know anything about raising kids. Childless, strictly speaking, means only that you have no biological children; it doesn't mean you have no "child sense". I have tons of child sense, regardless of never having children, and I'd like to share it with you. May it help you on the scary, funny, sad, maddening, and superhumanly loving adventure called parenthood.
First off, I was a child. That's not a trick answer. Having been a child, like everyone else on this planet, I know a lot about parenting from the back end, so to speak. I remember much about my childhood that show me now a lot about how moms and dads should, and shouldn't, parent. I remember words, spoken in anger or carelessness, that still cause pain to this day. I remember the burden of trying to live up to contradictory expectations. I remember the oppression of controlling, smothering adults. I remember the fear engendered by parental wars.
But I also remember never eating breakfast at school because my mom rose before dawn every day to fix a hot breakfast for her kids. I remember having long, beautiful hair because Mama took the time to take care of it. I remember always being clean and well-groomed, even on the weekend. I remember never going without any necessity. I remember always getting everything I wanted for Christmas and then some.
All of these childhood experiences were lesssons in parenting for me. The responsibility of parenting. The power of parenting. And the love of parenting that makes you do more for another human being, at your own expense, than any other love there is. These lessons qualify me to talk about raising kids.
I'm also qualified because, even though I have no biological children, I've been intimately involved in the rearing of other people's children. I have a niece, a nephew, and a great-niece whom I absolutely adore and helped cared for for much of their childhood. Plus, I have a batch of godchildren whom I spend lots of time with. Too, I worked in day care for 13 years teaching, training and, above all, loving, dozens of kids who spent more time with me than with their parents. I readily concede that no amount of "aunting" or godmothering can equal the real thing. Still, my adulthood has been so defined by hands-on caring for children that I feel entitled to call myself an honorary mom.
As an honorary mom I can give out parenting advice. In fact, several first time parents at the day care centers I worked for asked me for help with various childrearing issues. They understood that as a longtime day care teacher my experience with kids far outweighed theirs, even if the baby went home with them every night.
So being childless doesn't mean you don't or can't know anything about raising kids. Childless, strictly speaking, means only that you have no biological children; it doesn't mean you have no "child sense". I have tons of child sense, regardless of never having children, and I'd like to share it with you. May it help you on the scary, funny, sad, maddening, and superhumanly loving adventure called parenthood.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Welcome to Home Fires!
Welcome to Home Fires! On this blog I'll be opining about all things family. I may say some things that challenge you, or even upset you. But I'm just talking about children, parents, and family as I see them. So come along for the ride. Hope you enjoy what you read, and maybe we can learn more about what makes this thing called family tick. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
