What kind of errands....

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-27-2005
What kind of errands....
2007
Wed, 08-31-2005 - 1:41pm

Do you run on a daily basis? Weekly basis? Monthly basis?

I've often heard people say that they need a lot of time during the week to run errands and that those errands would otherwise take up their evenings and weekends if they had to WOH ft. It made me curious because I just don't seem to have many errands to run at all. Are we just lazy :-)?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-16-2005
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 8:23am
No, that isn't the reason. She doesn't do activities any more because she doesn't WANT to do them any more. She doesn't want to do them any more, perhaps, because she can't do them exactly the way she could have been pre-kids. But the kids' presence on the planet isn't the determining factor - as with virtually any grownup's decision, it's what she chooses to do about that fact of life that makes the difference. You'd think that would be good news, because it means she can change it any time she'd like, but no, apparently, it's preferable to think of herself as fettered against her wishes by a couple of kids.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-16-2005
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 8:41am
Thank you for saying so.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:03am
You put it so much better than I could.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:11am

Well, one response could be, "Yeah, we can see how it *might* be harder *for you* to remain as active as you were, or would like to have been, or would still like to be, now that you have kids, what with all the details, planning, PITA extraneous factors, etc., but in the long run, it's pretty much a neutral decision."

I get it that PNJ appears to be using her kids as a reason to be less active and not necessarily owning up to that. But I question whether that lack of upfrontness is any more to be frowned upon than the responses that uphold the active family as some sort of ideal that she might be falling short of.

I don't know about you, but it is harder for me to get drunk with kids for lots of reasons. Setting a bad example, not having adult parties as often as family-based parties any more, and so on. My therapist thinks I should imbibe a little more!

And, I don't know PNJ half as well as board veterans, but I'm sure you're right about her kayaking history or lack thereof.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:15am
I'm suggesting that some of these alternatives are less important than we might assume. That it makes about as much difference whether or not a family conforms to a popular ideal of "the active family" as whether parents on occasion imbibe to excess. These unwritten rules about the correct way to raise kids and be a family just slay me.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:21am

<>

I suppose for the sake of the rules by which the board operates, it's a "violation" for PNJ not to come right out and say that she doesn't do a lot of the other sporty things with her family that other families represented here might be doing just because she doesn't really want to or because it's too much of a pain.

But what I don't understand is why there seems to be as much interest in faulting her for not being a properly active family, for whatever reason, as in calling her on her lack of forthrightness about why she eschews these family activities. IMO, it reflects a certain bias about how families ought to live today. To the point where even her son's response to full day school gets involved with the argument, which as you point out is really separate.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-16-2005
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:21am

"But I question whether that lack of upfrontness is any more to be frowned upon than the responses that uphold the active family as some sort of ideal that she might be falling short of." For the umpteenth time, please point to a single such response.

Before or after DS, I was never remotely interested in getting drunk, so whether it is "harder" or not for me is something that has never come up in fact.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:22am
Her clear lack of candor about why she doesn't run a sporty family is being used as an excuse to bash her lifestyle choices. But she's being an awfully good kid about it, as usual!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-16-2005
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:23am
Again. Please point to one post which is "faulting" her for not being "properly active."
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-16-2005
Sat, 09-03-2005 - 9:34am
I guess you're just never going to point out anything supportive of your "Felicia (the 40 YO corporate lawyer) is a poor widdle kid getting picked on" fantasy, and are just going to ignore that it took Tex about 30 seconds to reverse her position on this post.


Edited 9/3/2005 12:05 pm ET by dogma_2

Pages