On Apr 17, 2007, at 1:46 PM, authfriend wrote:
My point was that *even as a single incident* it could
be traumatic for the kids, not just at that moment but
long term, *especially* if the mother were normally
highly responsible and rational. Depends a lot on the
kids' age, though.
Right, so this incident, far from showing that the mother was being
irresponsible or even neglectful, actually proves what a *great* mother
she was, since presumably, if her kids were even the least bit taken
aback by her behavior, it could only be because it was such a huge
change from the way she normally acted. It couldn't at all be because
they'd seen examples of how other mothers react to their kids' needs
and kept hoping against hope that one day, their mother might also.
<snip>
If the story can be taken at face value, we have kids
trained to not disturb mommy during meditation so powerfully
that they overcame their own hunger for hours.
You're exaggerating again. Unless these kids were
teeny-weeny, they were perfectly capable of grabbing
something from the kitchen to tide them over.
Of course they could have--then why didn't they?
And if they'd been really terrorized about disturbing their
mother, they wouldn't have approached her at all.
That is simply not correct. You've obviously not spent much time
around either kids or neglected kids.
More likely, they weren't hungry so much as they were
impatient for the promised treat.
And you know this because...?
For that matter, for
all we know, they were so absorbed in their play they
weren't even thinking about pancakes until they'd gotten
tired of whatever game they were playing.
And what game would that be, Judy? Please let me know so I can get my
hands on a copy of it, because when my kids are hungry, it's all they
can do to concentrate for more than a few minutes, and many if not most
kids are the same way, which is why proper nutrition during childhood
years is stressed so much.
And to most people, pancakes is not some kind of special "treat"--it's
a normal meal.
Sal
