Brats these days

unholyangel

poet123 wrote: »

Again, fair point, but we do not always realise how revealing a post is until it is commented on by others. Sometimes it is a tone, or a nuance that is picked up on and it reveals something other/more than the writer initially intended to convey.

Anyway, as you say, only you know the truth of the matter, and whether my observations were really so wide of the mark. No offence intended, I just found it a fascinating piece of social commentary and decided to jump in.:D

I actually said i was not a biological parent, not that i wasnt a parent. However the question remains, am i an actual biological parent who purposely mislead you as i made an educated guess (obviously i could not know) as to why you were asking if i were a parent or not to find out exactly what some of your own viewpoints are? You seem to regard step/adoptive/foster parents as lesser parents than those who have given birth to children of their own.

I am merely emphasising the point that giving birth does not make you a parent. Nuturing that child makes you a parent. And yes, IMO and from personal experience, it is entirely true that you can love a child that is not related to you by blood just as much as a child that is. Nor does giving birth give you a viewpoint different from a parent who has raised a child not related to them - which is what your previous posts implied.

I could take a leaf out of your book and make wild speculations as to why you react so badly to kids who misbehave being described as brats and why this word holds so much meaning for you personally, why you feel the need to try and repeatedly assume that because i have a certain viewpoint i must have some underlying issues and why you feel the need to imply that ONLY people who have no children of their own can share my views to name but a few.........but quite frankly i have no desire to turn this into a !!!!ing contest.

I started the thread to vent about the actions of a small group of children in my area, not to attack another forum member - which seems to be your own goal.

I will not disclose very personal facts no matter how many times you try to needle me or bait me into answering as i know all too well how easy it is for someone to collect information to use it against someone (like robbers watching facebook to see when people are on holiday or !!!!!philes using it to target children etc), what i will say is that yes, your speculations have been very wide indeed and that the truth may come as an unexpected suprise.

poet123

unholyangel wrote: »

I actually said i was not a biological parent, not that i wasnt a parent. However the question remains, am i an actual biological parent who purposely mislead you as i made an educated guess (obviously i could not know) as to why you were asking if i were a parent or not to find out exactly what some of your own viewpoints are? You seem to regard step/adoptive/foster parents as lesser parents than those who have given birth to children of their own.

I am merely emphasising the point that giving birth does not make you a parent. Nuturing that child makes you a parent. And yes, IMO and from personal experience, it is entirely true that you can love a child that is not related to you by blood just as much as a child that is. Nor does giving birth give you a viewpoint different from a parent who has raised a child not related to them - which is what your previous posts implied.


No, they did not imply lesser viewpoint, they implied different.

No, you did not mislead me, you are trying to do so now though.


I could take a leaf out of your book and make wild speculations as to why you react so badly to kids who misbehave being described as brats and why this word holds so much meaning for you personally, why you feel the need to try and repeatedly assume that because i have a certain viewpoint i must have some underlying issues and why you feel the need to imply that ONLY people who have no children of their own can share my views to name but a few.........but quite frankly i have no desire to turn this into a !!!!ing contest.

Please feel free to do so, I will answer honestly, and if you are correct I will tell you so.

I started the thread to vent about the actions of a small group of children in my area, not to attack another forum member - which seems to be your own goal.

Not an attack, a set of observations, I am sorry if you saw them as an attack, that was not my intent. However, if you post on a forum you will get responses which are not what you maybe expected, or particularly welcome, such is the nature of the beast.


I will not disclose very personal facts no matter how many times you try to needle me or bait me into answering as i know all too well how easy it is for someone to collect information to use it against someone (like robbers watching facebook to see when people are on holiday or !!!!!philes using it to target children etc), what i will say is that yes, your speculations have been very wide indeed and that the truth may come as an unexpected suprise.

I am not asking you to disclose personal facts, despite your quite bizarre reason for not doing so on an anonymous forum. I am happy for you to state that my assertions were wide of the mark on this occasion, I have to say when I get such a feeling though, I am rarely wrong.:D

unholyangel

And as such you have just proven my point that you cannot possibly know the intentions behind what i said, only how you observed them.

Your posts DID give have those implications from my viewpoint. Just as my posts had certain implications for you. Again.......it is speculation and not fact......only i know in what regard my posts were intended as you do with your posts.

And i am quite aware i posted on a open forum and expect that at least a minority (in some cases a majority) will disagree with me. However, you didnt disagree. You set about trying to blame my viewpoints on some issue/cause that doesnt exist rather than just accepting them for what they are - personal opinion based on what i have witnessed and know.

Even now, your posts are still implying there are underlying issues that i am not admitting to. Otherwise you wouldnt have felt the need to add "i am rarely wrong". And no, sorry.....i wont follow in your footsteps and make educated guesses as to why you have posted as you have. Attacking someone elses viewpoints in such a manner is a telltale sign of unhappiness and insecurity with aspects of your own life and i'm perfectly happy and secure in mine. I have no need to go on the offensive.

I am also fully aware that i am posting anonymously. However, the more personal details you disclose, the more that anonymity is threatened. To say otherwise is quite foolish and ignorant of any potential risks. Maybe different for big cities but i dont live in a big city. If i were to disclose personal aspects of my life, it would be all too easy for someone to find me. Rather needlessly safe than sorry!

I think its pretty clear (judging by the past 2 pages ) that we're not going to agree and will continue round in circles - which may offer little entertain but is ultimately futile when our efforts could be better used helping other members.......eh?

POPPYOSCAR

unholyangel wrote: »

And as such you have just proven my point that you cannot possibly know the intentions behind what i said, only how you observed them.

Your posts DID give have those implications from my viewpoint. Just as my posts had certain implications for you. Again.......it is speculation and not fact......only i know in what regard my posts were intended as you do with your posts.

And i am quite aware i posted on a open forum and expect that at least a minority (in some cases a majority) will disagree with me. However, you didnt disagree. You set about trying to blame my viewpoints on some issue/cause that doesnt exist rather than just accepting them for what they are - personal opinion based on what i have witnessed and know.

Even now, your posts are still implying there are underlying issues that i am not admitting to. Otherwise you wouldnt have felt the need to add "i am rarely wrong". And no, sorry.....i wont follow in your footsteps and make educated guesses as to why you have posted as you have. Attacking someone elses viewpoints in such a manner is a telltale sign of unhappiness and insecurity with aspects of your own life and i'm perfectly happy and secure in mine. I have no need to go on the offensive.

I am also fully aware that i am posting anonymously. However, the more personal details you disclose, the more that anonymity is threatened. To say otherwise is quite foolish and ignorant of any potential risks. Maybe different for big cities but i dont live in a big city. If i were to disclose personal aspects of my life, it would be all too easy for someone to find me. Rather needlessly safe than sorry!

I think its pretty clear (judging by the past 2 pages ) that we're not going to agree and will continue round in circles - which may offer little entertain but is ultimately futile when our efforts could be better used helping other members.......eh?

I think you are quite right here.

I sometimes have to take a step back and think carefully what I say
you never know who is reading these posts.

poet123

unholyangel wrote: »

And as such you have just proven my point that you cannot possibly know the intentions behind what i said, only how you observed them.

I have said that I was writing from my personal observations, obviously I cannot definitively know your intent I can only speculate.

Your posts DID give have those implications from my viewpoint. Just as my posts had certain implications for you. Again.......it is speculation and not fact......only i know in what regard my posts were intended as you do with your posts.

Fair enough, I am quite happy to discuss what you deduced from my posts and why you made that deduction. I am interested in that kind of thing from an academic pov.

And i am quite aware i posted on a open forum and expect that at least a minority (in some cases a majority) will disagree with me. However, you didnt disagree. You set about trying to blame my viewpoints on some issue/cause that doesnt exist rather than just accepting them for what they are - personal opinion based on what i have witnessed and know.

You mistake my intent, it was not about apportioning "blame" (unlike your own OP) it was about my reading of perspective and the circumstances in your life which made you view issues from that particular perspective.

Even now, your posts are still implying there are underlying issues that i am not admitting to. Otherwise you wouldnt have felt the need to add "i am rarely wrong". And no, sorry.....i wont follow in your footsteps and make educated guesses as to why you have posted as you have. Attacking someone elses viewpoints in such a manner is a telltale sign of unhappiness and insecurity with aspects of your own life and i'm perfectly happy and secure in mine. I have no need to go on the offensive.

If I had indeed been attacking you maybe you may have a point re insecurity etc, but I was not actually doing that. However, if that were the criteria for the manifestation of unhappiness I suspect that if I reviewed your old posts I may find some which fit that mould. Few, if any of us of us post universally begnign commentary.

I am also fully aware that i am posting anonymously. However, the more personal details you disclose, the more that anonymity is threatened. To say otherwise is quite foolish and ignorant of any potential risks. Maybe different for big cities but i dont live in a big city. If i were to disclose personal aspects of my life, it would be all too easy for someone to find me. Rather needlessly safe than sorry!

Again, fair enough:D

I think its pretty clear (judging by the past 2 pages ) that we're not going to agree and will continue round in circles - which may offer little entertain but is ultimately futile when our efforts could be better used helping other members.......eh?

As this board is not for any useful purpose only to explore issues and vent, I think perhaps we have fulfilled the brief. Again I reiterate I foud it (the OP) a thought provoking piece of social commentary which was my reason for responding. Childhood issues (perceptions and actuality) and their repercussions going forward. are of an academic/professional interest to me.:)

POPPYOSCAR

poet123 wrote: »

As this board is not for any useful purpose only to explore issues and vent, I think perhaps we have fulfilled the brief. Again I reiterate I foud it (the OP) a thought provoking piece of social commentary which was my reason for responding. Childhood issues (perceptions and actuality) and their repercussions going forward. are of an academic/professional interest to me.:)

I think sometimes we read to much into things.

poet123

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I think sometimes we read to much into things.

You may well be correct, or it may be that on any given subject others see things we don't!:D

POPPYOSCAR

poet123 wrote: »

You may well be correct, or it may be that on any given subject others see things we don't!:D

Very true.

poet123

Taken from the weekly gripe, an online facility for those of a certain age to air their grievances. It follows the same mould as the OP!!

Now before I start lets just say that I know I am going to get accused of being a miserable old sod, but I think that this just needs to be said.

I get sick to the back teeth of people saying "He/She's only a kid you know" (normally accompanied by a scornful look). Yes you are right, they are, and as such they should learn consideration for others and respect for those who know better.

Most weekly visits to the supermarket are now just as much about avoiding the sliding child that whizzes past the end of an aisle just as you emerge. Or even the whinging brat hanging of the side of the trolley until they have blocked the whole aisle, as it is about buying provisions for the family.

On a recent visit to a well known supermarket "pats back pocket" I was treated to the unenviable pleasure of synchronising my route with the children of Satan. I suggested to their dim looking mother that she leave them at the other end of the supermarket near the swings and roundabout. "Oh, I didn't know they had them" was the response. "They don’t" I said "that's because it's a supermarket and not a bleeding playground".

I felt bad for being rude but enough is sometimes far more than enough! A visit to a museum recently was equally difficult. Whilst reading a very interesting exhibit text a loud and brash child decided that the post upon which it was placed resembled a set of monkey bars. I asked the child to move as I was reading (politely I should add) to which the father said, "He’s only playing".

The simmering started and was shortly followed by, " I understand that but I've paid good money to get in here as well and I would like to be able to enjoy my visit too, so please keep him under control". A reasonable statement you might think. Apparently not! I was reported to the staff who asked me to leave as I was upsetting other visitors.

Now, I'm not against children enjoying themselves. I love to see them having fun. I just think that they should be controlled more by their parent/s so as not to upset or annoy others. Am I a miserable old sod or do others of you feel the same?

By: Old Git

janninew

Just picking up on what you said about supermarkets Poet, do you remember when them bloody shoes with wheels were popular?! You couldn't go to my local supermarket without tripping over kids wheeling everywhere! It got so bad that my local Asda actually banned them! Why would any parent in their right mind allow there children to whizz round a very busy supermarket, causing nuisence and annoying people who just want to do their shopping. It wasn't the odd child either, I saw countless doing it!

What are their parents thinking? :mad: