HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stuart@shuksan.boeing.com (Gary Stuart)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Sugarbabies
Summary: Not in favor of this idea!!
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:45:00 GMT
Organization: The Boeing Co., MMST, Seattle, Wa.


Hi there again.  Yea its me again, the guy with the non-mainstream views.

I'm not saying that sugarwater should NEVER be used, but I 
would only use it as a last resort!!!!

Ever wonder why no matter where one grows up, they like the local 
food?  Well its because when you are very young, the human body is
very open to being impressed with various tastes, sort of in the
form of addictions, but not necessarily that strong of an
attachment.  I personally am in favor of sugar no and then, but
not on any kind of regular basis.  By giving an infant sugarwater
you are increasing the likelyhood of a pseudo-sugar-addiction, that
will then have to be supported the rest of your childs life.  I.e.,
you will increase the likelyhood that the child will demand sweets
as part of every meal/snack etc.

Maybe we were just lucky, but we found that affection and nursing
could solve most any crying period that our child got into.

As far as the negatives of sugar in general, I believe there are
many, but as you all have already made up your mind on this one,
I will save my fingers. (Soothing!! Harmless!! What a concept.)

As for Paula's comment:

> Wait a minute--honey is practically devoid of nutritional value, it's 
> really nothing but sugar! Oh, but it's "natural." So is poison ivy, so 
> that's not much of a selling point--and wait a minute, wasn't the sugar 
> cane used to make the sugar a product of nature?

Yes, cane sugar is natural!!  And is much better for the body and teeth
than refined sugar is.  The refining of sugar, from a health point of view,
removes all the good aspects of sugar and leaves all the rest.  I would
much rather give my child a piece of cane sugar than refined sugar!
-- 
      Gary Stuart                      The quality of life is far, far 
      Boeing Aerospace Co.             better than the quantity of life.
      uunet!bcstec!shuksan!stuart
Xref: sparky misc.kids:25706 soc.singles:27418
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,soc.singles
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Date: 9 Oct 1992 22:05:11 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <14891@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>In article <1992Oct06.012015.23329@CS.ORST.EDU> keeneye@CS.ORST.EDU (Eileen F. Keeney) writes:
>|There are over 200 phrases (I don't recall the exact number)
>|"Math class is Hard" is one of those phrases, a few others are
>|more career oriented such as "I want to be a doctor".
>
>Could be worse. She could say "I want to be a lawyer".

Could be more interesting.  She could say "Math class is hard, (*pant*) sooo
hard.  (*pant* *pant*) I want more.  Give me more math!  OH BABY!!  Gimme some
more LONG AND HARD math problems to work on!!!  Oh my God!  It's the Calculus!!
Not the Calculus!!  OOOOOOOOO!!!"
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: bellas@soldev.TTI.COM (Pete Bellas)
Subject: Re: Remembering Dreams/Cute Things (2 yrs)
Reply-To: bellas@soldev.TTI.COM (Pete Bellas)
Organization: Transaction Technology, Inc.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 14:50:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.190826.24365@linus.mitre.org>, kvt@willow.mitre.org
writes:
> Has anyone else had a very sleepy 2 year old
> wake up and express what you know had to be
> a dream?

Jeff was about three the first time he remembered a dream very well.  He
woke up about 4am with a shout and I ran in to see what the matter was.
He said to me "Dad, I had a movie in my head", I almost died laughing.
I told him it was a dream and he replied "We were riding on alligators with
saddles, that's pretty silly... and one of them bit my but, but it didn't 
hurt... I guess that's because it was a dream".

			-Pete-

* Pete Bellas                   "Cogito ergo spud"                         *
* Citicorp/TTI                       I think therefore I yam.              *
* Santa Monica, CA                                                         *
* bellas@gamma.tti.com                                                     *
From: ivy@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Ivy Griffiths)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:23:55 GMT
Subject: Re: Pregnancy and Wine sauce
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: misc.kids

I think you're more at risk from heavy metals in seafood than
alcohol in wine sauce.  I know, just what you needed, another
issue to concern yourself with.  Take a look at back issues of
Consumer Reports, they had an issue on seafood.  I don't eat the
stuff anymore.  I'd rather take my chances on hormones in chicken, 
trichenosis (sp) from pork, or the cholesteral from beef.  
Oh, well there's always peanut butter....which you'll be eating
alot of once they're 2+yrs old.

Please take this and all advice you get when you're pregnant with
a tremendous grain of salt.  You can only do what's best for you.

Ivy Griffiths
From: evelyn@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Evelyn James)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Social Skills
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:59:05 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA

In misc.kids, fs@cs.tulane.edu (Frank Silbermann) writes:


      >I have a niece soon to enter her teen years
 >   who has problems getting along with other children.
 >   For many years her did not live among other families
 >   with children, so she has spent most of her childhood
 >   either with adults or playing with her baby sister.

Too bad this child didn't have two working parents (outside the home) and
spend time in daycare.
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: colinm@alfred.carleton.ca (Colin McFadyen)
Subject: Birth Announcement!!
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 04:20:06 GMT


  Saturday Oct. 10 at 07:09, Ian Myles McFadyen made his debut at the
Grace Hospital (Ottawa, Canada) weighing in at 6 pounds 9 ounces.

  Mother and child are doing just fine.
From: judyd@rosebud.CNA.TEK.COM (Judy E. Drake)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:36:49 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Redmond,  OR.

In article <Bvv1no.FpM@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>lowry@watson.ibm.com (Andy Lowry) inquires:
>
>>When has anybody in this entire thread ever claimed that violence is
>>not justified as self-defense against violence?  When has anybody ever
>>claimed that one should not prepare one's children to defend themselves?
>
>Why Andy, I'm glad you asked.  Diane claimed it.  In fact, she's
>trying to implement it.  That kid is not going to be prepared to
>defend himself (at least, not prepared by his parents.  Maybe he could
>watch some Bugs Bunny cartoons.)
>
>To wit: "we're raising Dylan to be non-violent and non-aggressive."

I hate it when this happens!  Why do people post misleading and 
out-of-context quotes, twisting the words and original meaning into 
something totally opposite to what the original poster intended??
Are we supposed to be fooled by this?

What Diane _actually_ said was

+... I did not say anything
+about not allowing my son to fight back if it's truly a question of
+self-defense (which in too many cases, it just isn't).  But, there
+are different ways of fighting back, and not all involve violence.

and

+Acting aggressively and acting in self-defense are two different
+things.  Nowhere did I imply that Dylan would not be able to defend
+himself if necessary.  BUT,
+
+[...]
+>I'll promise you one thing, though, and that's that if
+>your kid hits my kid, he's going to get hit back.[...]
+
+hopefully, Dylan will not be one of those kids who hits your kid
+first.  This is the whole point I'm trying to make:  we're raising
+Dylan to be non-violent and non-aggressive.  We will not tolerate
+unprovoked aggression from him, and I do not see the value in
+parents tolerating or encouraging that sort of behavior from
+children. 

and

+Again, I don't know anyone who would argue that being able to defend
+oneself is a bad idea.  But there's a world of difference between
+acting in self-defense and acting aggressively or violently.  

She has said over and over (how many times does it have to be 
repeated, anyway?) that she isn't talking about defending oneself
against violence, that she is condemning _unprovoked_ violence.

Being non-violent and non-aggressive does NOT mean that a person is
unprepared to defend him or herself.  I know some pretty peaceful,
unaggressive black belts who could really do some damage if seriously
threatened.  But that's not the issue here.  The issue is uncalled-for
aggression and unprovoked violence.  I'm with Diane--I don't see any
value in encouraging it, in children or anyone else.

Judy Drake
From: lcheap@cac.washington.edu (Laurel Cheap )
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Juggling Work and Family -- long term effects?
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:26:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct16.212612.26424
Organization: UW Computing

In article <3411@isgtec.isgtec.com> mike@isgtec.com (Mike Sellers) writes:
>I *know* this is highly non-PC, and will probably get me roundly flamed
>(especially given that it is so painful to many people), but I think it
>needs to be pointed out that the few hours in the evening (say, the 2-3 
>between 6 when you pick your child up and 8 or 9 when they go to bed) do 
>not outweigh the many (8-10?) hours that they spend with another person 
>during the day.  Consider the cumulative waking time spent with you vs. the 
>caregiver between birth and 5 years -- at 240 working days per year, figure 
>approximately 3025 for you and 12100 for the caregiver, or 4x as much as you.
>Your child is spending 80% of their waking life with one or more non-parent 
>adults...

I don't want to flame anyone but the math here needs some work,
especially to take into account weekends:

240 working days @ 5 yrs = 1200 working days
125 weekend/holiday/etc days @ 5 yrs = 625 non-working days

1200 working days X 10 hrs at daycare (worst case?) = 12000 dc hrs
1200 working days X 3 hrs at home (worst case?) = 3600 home hrs
625 non-work days X 13 hrs at home = 8125 home hrs 

12000 dc hrs / 23725 total hrs = 50.6 % spent at daycare
11725 home hrs / 23725 total hrs = 49.4 % spent at home

So the 80% mentioned above is really out of proportion.  The 50-50
split here doesn't even count nap time (more at day care than at
home) and assumes only 20 days per year of holiday and vacation (I
get 10 days holiday and 14 days vacation per year).  Also, the 10 hrs
per day in daycare is (I hope) an extreme.  The above numbers also
don't include any time off when the child is born (if you want to go
for a 5 year span rather than a weekly total).

Personally, my son is only in day care for 7.5 hrs 4 days a week for
a 32% daycare/68% home (not counting holidays and vacations) split.
I know I should be greatful that it's not the other way around but I
still feel like I don't spend enough time with him.  We working parents
feel guilty enough about the time away from our kids without someone
trying to convice us that our "child is spending 80% of their waking
life" away from us. 

-Laurel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laurel Cheap           University of Washington   lcheap@u.washington.edu
Information Systems    Seattle, Washington  USA   a.k.a. Brendan's mommy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: EMN002@email.mot.com (Mary Beth Northrup)
Subject: ear thermometer 1-800 #
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Plantation, FL
Distribution: USA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 14:23:56 GMT

I've seen several postings lately about the new "ear" thermometer. I know
when I bought mine, I had trouble finding who carried it in my area.

Anyway, this month's issue of Working Mother Magazine has an ad for
the Thermoscan thermometer which gives a phone number to call to find
out where to get one:

1-800-EAR-TEMP

Hope this helps!

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Mary Beth Northrup                    "In the house and on the street .. |
| (mommy to Sean, 15 mo.)																	how many, many feet you meet!"   |
| EMN002@email.mot.com                                   ---  Dr. Seuss    |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: bets@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Beth Schwindt)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Help avert a tragedy(smoke detectors)
Date: 12 Oct 1992 19:15:33 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

In <1992Oct12.234951.7765@u.washington.edu> wolffie@u.washington.edu writes:

>In article <1ba9hfINN2ju@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> dxf12@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas  
>Fowler) writes:

>>      Officials also said that faulty smoke detectors have prevented at  
>least
>> a few people from awakening in time.  Please, *please*, check the  
>batteries
>> in your detectors a couple times a year.  

>How about getting them hard-wired so that they don't require batteries?
>I can think of worse ways to spend money.

>John Wolff

This biggest problem with this is that (especially in an apartment 
building) the electricity is usually shut off as soon as the firemen
reach the scene.  At that point, someone who might be in mild danger
as their smoke detector has not gone off and is still asleep is put
in serious danger because there is now no way that the detector will
go off.

I lived in an apartment last spring where the smoke detector was
hard wired.  It's a much bigger nuisance to deal with if you happen
to burn something on the stove/in the oven than if they use batteries.

Beth


-- 
The brighest day in America will be when education has enough funding and
the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber....My history
teacher (from the Wireless catalog) bets@matt.ksu.ksu.edu, bets@ksuvm.ksu.edu
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Aggression in boys (Was: Re: BARBIE
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:14:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Oct14.221426.4440
Organization: Western Washington University

rc@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Richard Carlson) writes:

>On the contrary, your story is as typical as a story can get.  The
>factor of being more intelligent and _showing_ it, being "new" and
>lacking established friends that predate the school environment,
>and probably even the belief that you had to fight back.  Even the
>rock -- most bullied kids recall one incident where they picked up
>some kind of a weapon, and if they didn't actually do it they
>recall their father telling them to "pick up a stick or pick up a
>stone!"

	In grade school there was a bully who was several years
older than me.  He was in junior high school and had been on a 
mission to terrorize me that had only become more consuming since 
he chased me into my yard and I soaked him down with the hose 
(he got a nice cold walk home).
 
	He had threatened many times to really hurt me when he got 
a chance.   One day he got on _my_ bus, I was terrified because
he didn't even go to my school, and he said today was the day.

	I got out first and I filled my lunchbox up with rocks.
He got out, and when the bus left I brained him.   I kept hitting
him until the lunchbox fell apart.  He was bloody and lying on 
the street when I left.   He obviously didn't die because my parents
were never contacted, but I worried that a call would come.

I never saw him again.   The problem was solved as far as I was
concerned.

	I never for a moment felt that I made the wrong decision.
The only times I have ever regretted are when I was too afraid to 
fight.  A child may get in some temporary trouble defending himself  
from bullies, but it is not as bad as learning to be afraid.
Even a weak child can act humble then pick something up when
the bully turns around.

Years later, my young brother related that he was having bully 
problems.  I recomended the preemptive brutal strike.  My mother
suggested he ignore the bully and he will go away.  He followed
her advice and it worked because he changed schools in a few
months, but I wouldn't have bet any money on it.

Jim Del Vecchio
From: xxaj547@chpc.utexas.edu (Carmen Rusu)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: How to get daughter more career-minded?
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:05:02 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas System - CHPC

>>
>>>In article <1992Sep28.160918.12999@engage.pko.dec.com> pub@riscee.pko.dec.com (Publius) writes:
>>>>We have a 4 years old daughter who is really bright.  ...
>>>>
>
I would be cautious in asserting the connection between the "brightness" of a  
such a young kid and her future career performance, regardless of what her
teachers tell about her NOW, at age 4.

As we all know there are more things needed for a successful life and career.
Unfortunately there are a lot of bright kids who drop out of their educational
path because they lack qualities as motivation and will power.

And vice-versa, there are average kids who by sheer willpower achieve more
than the gifted ones...

Carmen Rusu

-- 
********************************************************************************
    Carmen Rusu				     Internet: xxaj547@chpc.utexas.edu

    University of Texas System		     Phone: (512) 471-2474
Newsgroups: misc.kids,soc.culture.asian.american
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 01:23:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.175954.8650@nynexst.com> clare@nynexst.com (Clare Chu) writes:
>In article <3717@master.CNA.TEK.COM> judyd@rosebud.CNA.TEK.COM (Judy E. Drake) writes:
>>In excellent article <LOWRY.92Oct4152902@rotor.watson.ibm.com> 
>>lowry@watson.ibm.com (Andy Lowry) writes:
>>
>>>The problem I have with what the doll says is not that it's
>>>unrealistic or unreasonable, but that it reinforces some existing
>>>stereotypes that are damaging to women (and to society in general).

>>Andy brings up some excellent points, and I'd like to add an 
>>observation of my own.  In school, I was a girl who was good at
>>math, and I didn't find it hard.  However, being good at math was 
>>not perceived as a very "feminine" trait by most of my peers, and I 
>>got into the habit of hiding and downplaying my math skills in order 
>>to conform to a more "desirable" feminine model.  I'm sure lots of 
>>women in this forum remember doing this as well.  The fact that 
>>Barbie, a supposedly attractive character, says she finds math 
>>hard reinforces for those girls who _are_ good in math that they'd 
>>better pretend they're not if they want to be popular or liked,
>>or even normal.

>  These stereotypes really do affect people.  In my case I had
>  two stereotypes being applied to me and they sort of canceled
>  out.  I was good in math and science, as well as English, and social
>  studies, etc.  Since I am female, a lot of people would just as
>  well apply the "feminine" stereotype of being bad in Math
>  and good in English.  However I am also Asian American and
>  the stereotype for Asian Americans is to be bad in English
>  and good in math.  

Too true. I am Native American, and although my IQ scores as a child
were well into the top percentile, I was consistently assigned to
slow learner groups in school. Teachers consistently related my
intelligence as 'dull normal' unless they were shown the test scores!

Native children in many tribes have discipline problems in school that
are related to cultural behaviors. If a book is damaged or an object
stolen, a white teacher will talk about the offense, and peg the child
who looks guiltiest as the offender. Native children will look guilty
if they are accused of something they did not do; the shame is that they 
could have done something that would give you the impression that they
could steal or damage things. On the other hand, if a native child did
do the evil deed (TM), they will not look guilty since they know that
they committed the offense! I spent most of kindergarten sitting in a 
corner since I always looked guilty when the teacher was trying to find
out who did what!
 


-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: Sugarbabies
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:02:16 GMT

In article <1b4qmgINNona@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> pburch@bcm.tmc.edu (Paula Burch) writes:
>
>A friend of mine went to a meeting of her La Leche League group a couple 
>of days ago. Evidently, hers is among the loonier groups, although I 
>understand that this is not true of all La Leche League groups. Her 
>homemade banana nut muffins were poison, because they contained sugar. 
>"It's so important," they said, "to use honey instead of sugar."

And what was that finding a couple of years ago about honey?  That it
contains a certain bacteria that children under one years old don't
have antibodies for?  I am not certain of the particulars (maybe someone
else remembers and can post it).

Honey is great in homebaked bread, however ...  :-)

-Nance
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Xref: sparky misc.kids:26209 soc.culture.asian.american:9642
From: launce@apollo.med.utah.edu (Tri-Ungulate)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:22:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: apollo.LAUNCE.92Oct16112245
	<1992Oct7.175954.8650@nynexst.com>
	<1992Oct8.012353.8327@jetsun.weitek.COM> <67389@cup.portal.com>
Organization: Trifurcate-Hooved Ruminant Surveyors, Inc.

In article <67389@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
>   I wonder what they'd do with an Asian-American Barbie doll?

"I like CM's"... "Math is easy, though not so easy as it is for my
brother"..."I like to shop"... <gag>

>   Hey cool, we got a Native American to post here.

Righteous. Keep it up, Nadja. 

>   Only... ONLY 760 out of 800 on math? That's one smart cookie. I want
>   to remind everybody that Asian women get Math SATs just as high as
>   white males, and maybe this is a good occasion to ask why this is so.

Why Arthur, it's genetic, of course... 

>   Amy Tan was another Asian American woman who got 99th percentile Math
>   SAT's, but she was able to buck her parent's wishes and become a writer
>   so that she could do her best-seller.

More power to her.

>   It's too bad more Asians don't go into Law. I think this whole bit that
>   Asians aren't any good at it because of English is a load of crap.

Very true.  My sister is a lawyer. (god help her) 

>   I would have made a great lawyer, but now I'm just a very good software
>   engineer. 

Gee, I dunno Arthur.  Overbearing conservatism does not necessarily a
"great lawyer" make.  Citing factoids and twisting their
interpretations does come in handy though. So does the propensity to
expostulate at great length, especially when its mostly hot air.

>   My verbal SAT was "only" 650 vs. my 720 math, and I did't even
>   go to a particularly good high school where they use big vocabularies.

Well *MY* SAT was XXX verbal, and XXX math.  As if it matters or "proves"
anything.  I'm worried about boards, tho'.

| _, launce gouw * internet: launce@apollo.med.utah.edu * ooniversity of ootah 
|(_) medical center * department of human genetics *   palace of the brine
___) we apologise for the previous opinions. those responsible have been sacked
Newsgroups: misc.kids