"The Ranger" > wrote in message

> BOB > wrote in message
> .. .
> [snip]
> > I notice that you, Ed, have/had CHILDREN,
> > whereas the "Ranger" has, as he calls them,
> > "UNITS".
>
> There's your reading comprehension shooting another hole in your
> foot. No wonder ADFP kicked your sorry ass out with such
> unmitigated joy.
>
> > Nuff said.
>
> Indeed.
>
> The Ranger

HUH?

"UNITS" instead of children? No, I think that it's you that has a problem
with comprehension.
Also, where did you get any information on *MY* life? Do you actually know
anything about me *OR* my family? I think not, because I don't post private
information for the world to read on on usenet, and then cry when someone
has an opinion that differs from mine. Yeah, you comprehend real well.
*NOT*

BOB

jmcquown wrote:
> margaret suran wrote:
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> I once worked for a company (this was in the 1980's) where a woman
>>> was reportedly still breast feeding a SEVEN YEAR OLD. She alledged
>>> she had been bitten by him and was filing a medical claim and it was
>>> denied by the insurance company. Well, hello? 7 year olds have
>>> teeth and when did you think you were going to stop this ridiculous
>>> behavior?!
>>>
>>>
>> Remember "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn" and how the mother who had a child
>> who would not be weaned from the breast, solved her problem?
>
> I'm sorry, but I don't remember that book/movie.
>
>
If I can find a copy, I will mail it to you. It is worth while reading.
Betty Smith is the author and I loved the book when I read it as a
teenager in the mid 1940's.

On 2007-05-27, Michael "Dog3" Lonergan > wrote:

> it again. OTOH, I've been reading Ranger's posts for a long time. I'm of
> the opinion that the term, as he uses it, is one of endearment.

I've also enjoyed Ranger's posts, but also think "unit" is just about
as impersonal as one can get short of actually using the term "thing".
In fact, I've specifically mentioned my thoughts on it to him. But, I
know he's a good family man and that's just his style of writing and I
just pray he really doesn't address his child as Spawn.

nb

Dave Smith > scripsit in
:

> You don't believe that women have more of a tendency to be the
> mothering, nurturing parent of new-borns?

No. I believe men relegate that function to women when they are
present. Men are just as nurturing as women are. And if you don't
think that, that's ok for you.

The old chestnut about women being the only sex to be hardwired to
buture is a load of ******** and you are just perpetuating an anti-male
stereotype whose time is passed.

--

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's
oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the
search for a superior moral justification for
selfishness." -- John Kenneth Galbraith

On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> >> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with
> >> chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring
> >> a bottle for the kid.
>
> >> Jill
>
> > Are you stupid or just ignorant?
> > First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
> > people peeing and/or crapping?
>
> > You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
> > eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
> > expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to use
> > a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.
>
> > Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
> > their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they are
> > discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless they are
> > getting paid to show them).
>
> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The Assholes
> let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3 kids and don't
> know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some guy with 3 more.
> IDIOT.

Oh, did I hit a nerve? You know I'm right. Your cat has more sense
than you do. I have no kids by choice, I'm happily married to the same
wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread and
I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.

I can't believe they haven't run you off yet. Still the same bitch you
were 6-7 years ago.

wrote:
> On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> I'm happily married to the same
> wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread and
> I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.
>

My mom used to have a great recipe for zucchini bread; I made it lots of
times when I was a wee child back in high school. I've asked her for it
since, and she claims she doesn't have it anymore. I've been looking for a
good recipe since, as well. Let me know if you find one and please share!

kili

Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
>
> Pambo forced Giusi > to post this at:
> rec.food.cooking:
>
> >
> > It strikes me that many here have never even looked at the great
> > classical portraits of Madonna and child, in many of which she is
> > nursing the child in public. Classless, eh?
>
> I don't much have an opinion on public breast feeding. I'm thinking that if
> I were female, and a mother, I would most likely go into the restroom to
> breast feed. Not because I would worry about other people's opinions but
> out of modesty, and respect, for myself and other people.

Bingo! Like I said, class (a.k.a. modesty, taste, respect for others,
decorum, etc.).

>
> >
> > It's generally hopeless for people so deeply buried in their cultural
> > notions to alter their POV, which in this case pretty much puts babies
> > alongside farm animals who also aren't very welcomed into restaurants.
>
> I do not know where you are from. I am in the US located in the state of
> Missouri. I do not welcome children in restaurants. Well, let me
> rephrase. I do not welcome children in restaurants when said brats and
> little hoodlums are allowed to roam and be destructive. If that is
> equating them to farm animals in your eyes, so be it. In my eyes the fault
> lies with the parent. I don't equate the child with farm animals but I
> have serious thoughts about equating the parents with farm animals.

Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not welcome.

Breast feeding of course doesn't equate to that level of intrusive /
disruptive behavior and if it's happening somewhere out of my sight line
it's not going to effect my dining experience. It is still however, low
class behavior that is disrespectful to other patrons.

>
> > I shouldn't think many young mums get to eat with or without baby at
> > Keller's restaurant, but then when did Keller's restaurant become a
> > shrine?
>
> I've never been to Keller's. People are allowed their opinions and
> restaurant owners should be allowed to enforce a certain decorum that is
> enjoyed by, and respected by other patrons.

"No shoes, no shirt, no service" as the sign on the door says.

>
> >
> > Some place nursing next to elimation processes, others find it sexual
> > behavior. My head is spinning around.
>
> To me it just looks like the baby is hungry and it's feeding time.

Indeed, and I've never said otherwise. What I have said is that breast
feeding in public, in particular in a higher end restaurant is low class
behavior.

Pete C.

Giusi wrote:
>
> Serene wrote:
> > Pete C. wrote:
> >
> >> This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
> >> available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
> >> formula.
> >
> > It's not about class. It's about nutrition and parenting. Breast milk
> > is healthiest straight from the breast, and breastfeeding is better for
> > the child than bottlefeeding. That's well established, and your Ick
> > reaction doesn't change that.
> >
> >>
> >> Don't give me any "it's natural" nonsense, nudity is "natural" too, as
> >> is relieving yourself whenever and wherever necessary like most animals,
> >> but none are generally acceptable in public.
> >
> > We've already been over this. Breast milk is not about elimination. It's
> > about the feeding of a child. That's an appropriate thing to do in public.
> >
> > Serene
>
> Go, Serene.
>
> It strikes me that many here have never even looked at the great
> classical portraits of Madonna and child, in many of which she is
> nursing the child in public. Classless, eh?

Yes, classless, as is the entire superstitious mythology.

Pete C.

(devout atheist)

On May 27, 10:07 am, "kilikini" > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> > I'm happily married to the same
> > wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread and
> > I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.
>
> My mom used to have a great recipe for zucchini bread; I made it lots of
> times when I was a wee child back in high school. I've asked her for it
> since, and she claims she doesn't have it anymore. I've been looking for a
> good recipe since, as well. Let me know if you find one and please share!
>
> kili

DH had a memory flash a couple weeks ago that his dearly departed mom
made zucchini bread (back in the 1970's) when he was a kid after their
garden overflowed with them. MIL passed 3 years ago, so forget getting
her recipe. I found one in a cookbook I've had for a million years
(the red plaid cover) but we weren't thrilled with it. Recipe is in
the zucchini bread thread i started last night.
What do you think about it?

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
> > My kid turned out okay. He is bright, university graduate, living on his
> > own and working, calls regularly, comes and visits, books time off to
> > spend
> > with us when we go to visit. He once sent us a copy of a paper he wrote
> > about his upbringing and praising me. We bonded pretty well. Like most
> > men, I just don't find babies irresistible. That is a girl thing. It is
> > hard wired.
>
> Sounds like he is a winner. My "kids" are now 39 and 37. They both are
> trying to bring up their kids in a manner similar to how they were raised
> and teach them the same values they were taught. Not once did they ask why
> I did not give them the 3 AM bottle.
>
> My wife is to blame though. She insisted on getting up since I was the one
> that had to go to work the next morning and she wanted to be sure I slept
> well. I know some of the woman libbers out there may get upset, but 41
> years later, she still makes my breakfast in the morning and packs me a nice
> lunch, all while I'm getting dressed.
>
> Getting back to the kids, I used to take them out for a walk after dinner
> while my wife did the dishes. Talk about chauvinist pigs! ! !

Responsibilities should be divided evenly and what you indicate seems to
be a perfectly even division of responsibilities for the situation where
one partner does not work outside of the home i.e. stay at home Mom /
Mr. Mom. If both partners work outside the home then division of the in
home responsibilities would be warranted.

Pete C.

Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
>
> Pambo forced "The Fat Man®" <Sauk Pimp @ The Corner.org> to post this
> at: rec.food.cooking:
>
> >
> > Indeed! I'd walk a mile with the childrens afore I'd do some dirty
> > dishes.
> >
> > Ahem! I'm lyin'. I wouldn't procreate.
> >
> > TFM®
>
> I've read this thread with interest. I've never raised a child from birth
> to adulthood and never will. I never wanted to either, being the selfish,
> self centered ******* that I am. However, I think many people just do the
> best they can with kids and hope for the best.

Hopefully "doing the best they can" includes searching out some advice
and information rather than just "winging it".

> Then there are the people
> with kids that should never have had them in the first place.

As the song goes "look around and see that only stupid people are
breeding..."

>
> I wouldn't even know where to begin on equal parenting. Maybe it's a trial
> and error thing. Children are cool (if they stay out of my garden) as long
> as I can give them back to their owners after a couple of hours

Equal parenting is a good thing, if it's truly an equal division of
responsibilities. Unfortunately some of the more radical types seem to
ignore the whole working outside the home to provide the income to
support the household. If only one partner works outside the home, that
partner should not be expected to do half of the in home
responsibilities as they are already doing a large share outside the
home. If both partners work outside the home then the in home
responsibilities should also be equally divided.

Pete C.

jmcquown wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
> > jmcquown wrote:
> >>> That's a nutso thing to say. Hard wired?! I don't find babies
> >> irresistable, in fact I resist them every chance I get. I'm very
> >> much a woman.
> >
> >
> > Look around the animal world Jill. In most species it is the mother
> > who deal with the new-borns, especially in the primates. There are
> > always variations from the norm, and I am sure that you acknowledge
> > that you hold a minority attitude when it comes to the attitude
> > toward children. Most women will gladly go through nine months of
> > pregnancy and passing something the size a of a roast of beef through
> > their loins and risk having their luscious young bodies permanently
> > misshapen to have babies... more than one. Perhaps the Ranger got
> > your share of estrogen.
>
> What a disgusting image! Misshapen. Yeah, I decided to pass on that. Age
> has misshapen me enough already, thanks!
>
> I study birds. It is the male Cardinal that tends to the young birds, not
> the female. They do tend to mate for life but it's always the 'father' that
> teaches them how to fly, teaches them how to find food, teaches them to
> build the nest. This is true of many birds.

In the typical human household until recently it was also the "father"
that taught the kis how to fly (a kite, ride a bike, etc.), brought home
the food (or the funds to buy the food), and how to build a nest
(clubhouse, fort, etc.).

Pete C.

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
> et...
> > "The Ranger" > wrote in message
> >>
> >> How would you know? You never did any "middle-of-the-night
> >> feedings" so you couldn't possibly know which opportunities
> >> slipped by unnoticed.
> >>
> > Thank you for your offer of internet parenting. Since you don't
> > know me, [..]
>
> I must've hit pretty close to the mark for you to go into this
> unsubstantiated, spit-flecked, response. I'm glad. If more men
> challenge the Old School and told them they were full of shite,
> there'd be less young men "afraid" of taking on equal parenting
> responsibilities.
>
> **** the Old School and their dark robes and smoke-filled parlors.
>


> Long Live The New Philosophy and its equally shared
> responsibilities!

Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to support the
household is included in the shared responsibilities pool. Sending one
partner out to work outside the home to earn income, and then expecting
them to do half the in home work is *not* equal. If both partners work
outside the home, then equal division of the in home work is warranted.
If only one partner works outside the home, then that partner should not
be expected to do half the in home work. Makes no difference which
partner is which, just that the total household support workload, which
includes the outside work, is shared equally.

Pete C.

wrote:
> On May 27, 10:07 am, "kilikini" > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>>
>>> I'm happily married to the same
>>> wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread
>>> and I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.
>>
>> My mom used to have a great recipe for zucchini bread; I made it
>> lots of times when I was a wee child back in high school. I've
>> asked her for it since, and she claims she doesn't have it anymore.
>> I've been looking for a good recipe since, as well. Let me know if
>> you find one and please share!
>>
>> kili
>
> DH had a memory flash a couple weeks ago that his dearly departed mom
> made zucchini bread (back in the 1970's) when he was a kid after their
> garden overflowed with them. MIL passed 3 years ago, so forget getting
> her recipe. I found one in a cookbook I've had for a million years
> (the red plaid cover) but we weren't thrilled with it. Recipe is in
> the zucchini bread thread i started last night.
> What do you think about it?

Honestly, the recipe seemed close. I know my mom's bread had cinnamon and
nutmeg in it - it was kind of spicey, but sweet, and you could see the green
of the zucchini like you see the dark flecks of banana in banana bread.
Gosh, I'm going back 25 years, here, but I remember we pureed the zucchini,
squeezed out as much moisture as we could and blended it in with the wet
ingredients. Then we folded it into the wet ingredients. How much to how
much, is anyone's guess. Again, though, I KNOW hers had cinnamon and nutmeg
in it. It was like a zucchini-type carrot cake (no carrot though). I
copied the recipe you posted in the hopes that it would be kind of like my
mom's.

kili

jmcquown wrote:
> wrote:
>> On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>>
>>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with
>>> chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring
>>> a bottle for the kid.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>> Are you stupid or just ignorant?
>> First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
>> people peeing and/or crapping?
>>
>> You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
>> eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
>> expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to use
>> a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.
>>
>> Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
>> their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they are
>> discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless they are
>> getting paid to show them).
>
> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The
> Assholes let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3
> kids and don't know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some
> guy with 3 more. IDIOT.

Why in the world would you say that. What that poster was saying was more
than feasible.

Do I take you have no children or at least have never breast fed??

Your response does seem dreadfully over the top

On Sun, 27 May 2007 13:09:36 GMT, margaret suran
> wrote:

>>>> Remember "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn" and how the mother who had a child
>>> who would not be weaned from the breast, solved her problem?
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I don't remember that book/movie.
>>
>>
>If I can find a copy, I will mail it to you. It is worth while reading.
> Betty Smith is the author and I loved the book when I read it as a
>teenager in the mid 1940's.

I love that book as well. It contains some very evocative food
descriptions -- all the different meals that Francie's mother made out
of stale bread, the large sour pickle that Francie would carry around
and make last a day. I remember a beautiful sentence about how
Francie liked coffee for the heat and warmth of it, even though she
didn't like the flavor.

Tara

jmcquown wrote:
>
>
>
> I study birds. It is the male Cardinal that tends to the young birds, not
> the female. They do tend to mate for life but it's always the 'father' that
> teaches them how to fly, teaches them how to find food, teaches them to
> build the nest. This is true of many birds.

That is true Jill, and it is the male seahorse that tends the eggs in a
special sac in its belly while they incubate. Then there are fish like the
three spined stickleback who go through intricate courtship rituals that
include building a nest and dancing at certain angles to attract a female.
The behaviour is so innately based that if you destroy the nest part way
through they cannot just rebuild it but instead have to go back and start
all over again. However, I guess that you didn't pay much attention to my
comment about most species, and specifically apes. We have a closer
evolutionary tie to apes than to cardinals. If you spent any time around a
farm with livestock you would know that young animals are usually
segregated from the older males because the males are not loving and
nurturing. They are more likely to kill a youngster than to try to feed it.

Before anyone flies off the handle and misinterprets that comment, I am
only reporting that it is what happens with animals, not that I am
advocating infanticide.

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Dave Smith > wrote in message
> ...
> [snip]
> > I believe the expression is Wuss.
>
> Since you've already admitted you are terrified of parenting and

Are you borderline retarded?? I made no such admission. I said that I am
uncomfortable with new born babies.

"Pete C." wrote:
>
> >
> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not welcome.


That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast feeds in
a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast feeding in the same
restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?

:-)

"Pete C." wrote:
>
>
> Responsibilities should be divided evenly and what you indicate seems to
> be a perfectly even division of responsibilities for the situation where
> one partner does not work outside of the home i.e. stay at home Mom /
> Mr. Mom. If both partners work outside the home then division of the in
> home responsibilities would be warranted.


Try as I may have, I could never breast feed my son. I don't have the
hardware for it.

On May 27, 11:12 am, "kilikini" > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On May 27, 10:07 am, "kilikini" > wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >>> On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> >>> I'm happily married to the same
> >>> wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread
> >>> and I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.
>
> >> My mom used to have a great recipe for zucchini bread; I made it
> >> lots of times when I was a wee child back in high school. I've
> >> asked her for it since, and she claims she doesn't have it anymore.
> >> I've been looking for a good recipe since, as well. Let me know if
> >> you find one and please share!
>
> >> kili
>
> > DH had a memory flash a couple weeks ago that his dearly departed mom
> > made zucchini bread (back in the 1970's) when he was a kid after their
> > garden overflowed with them. MIL passed 3 years ago, so forget getting
> > her recipe. I found one in a cookbook I've had for a million years
> > (the red plaid cover) but we weren't thrilled with it. Recipe is in
> > the zucchini bread thread i started last night.
> > What do you think about it?
>
> Honestly, the recipe seemed close. I know my mom's bread had cinnamon and
> nutmeg in it - it was kind of spicey, but sweet, and you could see the green
> of the zucchini like you see the dark flecks of banana in banana bread.
> Gosh, I'm going back 25 years, here, but I remember we pureed the zucchini,
> squeezed out as much moisture as we could and blended it in with the wet
> ingredients. Then we folded it into the wet ingredients. How much to how
> much, is anyone's guess. Again, though, I KNOW hers had cinnamon and nutmeg
> in it. It was like a zucchini-type carrot cake (no carrot though). I
> copied the recipe you posted in the hopes that it would be kind of like my
> mom's.
>
> kili

Well you know how food memories are. He's been talking about his mom
lately, more than usual, so maybe he's just missing her and even if I
made her exact recipe, it wouldn't be as good as his memory of her
zucchini bread. Know what I mean? I would have thought butter or even
sour cream would have made for a richer tasting bread, but the only
rcipes I saw for zb called for oil. I did squeeze out the water from
the zuch--maybe too much and that's why it wasn't lush and moist? I
dunno.

"Pete C." wrote:
>
>
> Equal parenting is a good thing, if it's truly an equal division of
> responsibilities. Unfortunately some of the more radical types seem to
> ignore the whole working outside the home to provide the income to
> support the household. If only one partner works outside the home, that
> partner should not be expected to do half of the in home
> responsibilities as they are already doing a large share outside the
> home. If both partners work outside the home then the in home
> responsibilities should also be equally divided.

The division of labour often seems to be a hot issue for couples. For some
reason, the only labour a lot of wives want shared is the housework like
cooking, cleaning and laundry. For some reason, two hours of lawn mowing
doesn't seem to come into the equation with the vacuuming.

Disclaimer.... I do most of the cooking in our house. I do my own laundry
and anything of hers that is in the hamper and will fit with the load I am
doing. I do the dishes once or twice a day.

BOB > spewed and spat in message
.. .
> [..] I don't post [..] and then cry when someone has an opinion
> that differs from mine.
[snip]

Right...


The Ranger

notbob > wrote in message
. ..
> On 2007-05-27, Michael "Dog3" Lonergan >
> wrote:
>
>> it again. OTOH, I've been reading Ranger's posts for
>> a long time. I'm of the opinion that the term, as he uses
>> it, is one of endearment.
>>
> I've also enjoyed Ranger's posts, but also think "unit" is
> just about as impersonal as one can get short of actually
> using the term "thing".

Which we've debated for years it seems.

> In fact, I've specifically mentioned my thoughts on it to
> him.

Without a doubt...

> But, I know he's a good family man and that's
> just his style of writing and I just pray he really
> doesn't address his child as Spawn.

If you ever meet her, ask. She's very social and unafraid of
talking to anyone.

The Ranger

"The Ranger" > wrote in message

> BOB > spewed and spat in message
> .. .
> > [..] I don't post [..] and then cry when someone has an opinion
> > that differs from mine.
> [snip]
>
> Right...
>
>
> The Ranger

You're quite good at creative editing, aren't you?

Snip what you disagree with.
Hmmm???
Can you say "Head-in-the-sand"?

I knew you could.

BOB

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan > wrote in message
.121...
>" BOB" > posted this at: rec.food.cooking:
>
>> "UNITS" instead of children?
>
> I apologize for intruding upon your discourse with
> Ranger and I'll not do it again.

No need to apologize for adding grist to the mill; it's nice to
see another opinion.

> OTOH, I've been reading Ranger's posts for a long time.

Of which I appreciate.

> I'm of the opinion that the term, as he uses it, is one of
> endearment.

It is but BOB's mentally challenged so he often misinterprets
things he reads or foists his insecurities upon them.

His loss.

The Ranger

Pete C. > wrote in message
...

>> Long Live The New Philosophy and its equally shared
>> responsibilities!
>>
> Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to
> support the household is included in the shared responsibilities
> pool. Sending one partner out to work outside the home
> to earn income, and then expecting them to do half the in
> home work is *not* equal. If both partners work outside
> the home, then equal division of the in home work is
> warranted. If only one partner works outside the home,
> then that partner should not be expected to do half the
> in home work. Makes no difference which partner is
> which, just that the total household support workload,
> which includes the outside work, is shared equally.

Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways of
doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
might work in/outside the home.)

The Ranger

BOB > stamped his feet in a true pout through message
.. .
> "The Ranger" > wrote in message
>
>> BOB > spewed and spat in message
>> .. .
>> > [..] I don't post [..] and then cry when someone
>> > has an opinion that differs from mine.
>> [snip]
>>
>> Right...
>>
> You're quite good at creative editing, aren't you?

Whereas you suck at any editing whatsoever. But again, use the
excuse that your limited mental ability is to blame.

> Snip what you disagree with.
> Hmmm???
> Can you say "Head-in-the-sand"?
>
> I knew you could.

BOB, BOB, BOB, BOB... You're making a total ass of yourself. Not
that this is unusual.

The Ranger

Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
>
> Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
> rec.food.cooking:
>
> > "Pete C." wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
> >> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
> >> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
> >> welcome.
> >
> >
> > That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
> > feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
> > feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
> >
> >:-)
>
> My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone

I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
next to them.

Pete C.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> "Pete C." wrote:
> >
> >
> > Responsibilities should be divided evenly and what you indicate seems to
> > be a perfectly even division of responsibilities for the situation where
> > one partner does not work outside of the home i.e. stay at home Mom /
> > Mr. Mom. If both partners work outside the home then division of the in
> > home responsibilities would be warranted.
>
> Try as I may have, I could never breast feed my son. I don't have the
> hardware for it.

Actually, they make add on hardware for that...

Pete C.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> "Pete C." wrote:
> >
> >
> > Equal parenting is a good thing, if it's truly an equal division of
> > responsibilities. Unfortunately some of the more radical types seem to
> > ignore the whole working outside the home to provide the income to
> > support the household. If only one partner works outside the home, that
> > partner should not be expected to do half of the in home
> > responsibilities as they are already doing a large share outside the
> > home. If both partners work outside the home then the in home
> > responsibilities should also be equally divided.
>
> The division of labour often seems to be a hot issue for couples. For some
> reason, the only labour a lot of wives want shared is the housework like
> cooking, cleaning and laundry. For some reason, two hours of lawn mowing
> doesn't seem to come into the equation with the vacuuming.
>
> Disclaimer.... I do most of the cooking in our house. I do my own laundry
> and anything of hers that is in the hamper and will fit with the load I am
> doing. I do the dishes once or twice a day.

To truly be fair, all the various household support tasks, including the
presumed 8 or 16 hrs a day of external work to fund the household needs
to be considered. Make a big list of all tasks, have each person select
the tasks they prefer to do and then divide up what's left to balance
the whole list.

Pete C.

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Pete C. > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Long Live The New Philosophy and its equally shared
> >> responsibilities!
> >>
> > Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to
> > support the household is included in the shared responsibilities
> > pool. Sending one partner out to work outside the home
> > to earn income, and then expecting them to do half the in
> > home work is *not* equal. If both partners work outside
> > the home, then equal division of the in home work is
> > warranted. If only one partner works outside the home,
> > then that partner should not be expected to do half the
> > in home work. Makes no difference which partner is
> > which, just that the total household support workload,
> > which includes the outside work, is shared equally.
>
> Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
> should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways of
> doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
> might work in/outside the home.)
>
> The Ranger

What you propose is *not* equal. When someone spends 8 hrs a day +
commuting time in support of the household, expecting them to do half
the in home work is not even remotely close to equal. List all household
tasks and the typical time to complete required, adjusted for difficulty
level and then divide the result equally.

Pete C.

"Pete C." wrote:
>
>
> > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone
>
> I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
> behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
> vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
> to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
> next to them.


The problem is that they don't. They usually have some loud, idiotic ring
tone and then they shout into the phone.

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
> Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
> rec.food.cooking:
>
>> "Pete C." wrote:
>>> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
>>> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
>>> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
>>> welcome.
>>
>> That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
>> feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
>> feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
>>
>> :-)
>
> My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone
>
> Michael
>
What "high end" restaurant would admit a baby? It would not be
considered "high end" if it did.

Pete C. > wrote in message
...
> The Ranger wrote:
>> Pete C. > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> >> Long Live The New Philosophy and its equally shared
>> >> responsibilities!
>> >>
>> > Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to
>> > support the household is included in the shared
>> > responsibilities
>> > pool. Sending one partner out to work outside the home
>> > to earn income, and then expecting them to do half the in
>> > home work is *not* equal. If both partners work outside
>> > the home, then equal division of the in home work is
>> > warranted. If only one partner works outside the home,
>> > then that partner should not be expected to do half the
>> > in home work. Makes no difference which partner is
>> > which, just that the total household support workload,
>> > which includes the outside work, is shared equally.
>>
>> Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
>> should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways
>> of
>> doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
>> might work in/outside the home.)
>>
> What you propose is *not* equal. When someone spends 8 hrs a day
> +
> commuting time in support of the household, expecting them to do
> half
> the in home work is not even remotely close to equal. List all
> household
> tasks and the typical time to complete required, adjusted for
> difficulty
> level and then divide the result equally.

It sure is equal and equitable to divide home duties equally. I've
been doing it for the last 20 years and see no problems continuing
to do so.

When someone spends 8+ hours a day working in the field or at some
physically taxing that is no less draining than the person working
inside the home doing the manual labor/chores required for
standard household upkeep. The difference is that the household
chores don't end at the end of a shift.

The Ranger

Tara wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 13:09:36 GMT, margaret suran
> > wrote:
>
>>>>> Remember "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn" and how the mother who had a child
>>>> who would not be weaned from the breast, solved her problem?
>>> I'm sorry, but I don't remember that book/movie.
>>>
>>>
>> If I can find a copy, I will mail it to you. It is worth while reading.
>> Betty Smith is the author and I loved the book when I read it as a
>> teenager in the mid 1940's.
>
> I love that book as well. It contains some very evocative food
> descriptions -- all the different meals that Francie's mother made out
> of stale bread, the large sour pickle that Francie would carry around
> and make last a day. I remember a beautiful sentence about how
> Francie liked coffee for the heat and warmth of it, even though she
> didn't like the flavor.
>
> Tara

I don't remember the descriptions of food, but I remember Francie's
encounter with the butcher, when her mother sends her to buy chopped meat.

Pete C. wrote:

> I still don't get this idiotic fuss over breast feeding. While it
> doesn't faze me in the least unless the mother in question is
> particularly obnoxious about it, it *is* low class.
>
> This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
> available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
> formula.

Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.

Insisting that a baby take a bottle, when they're breastfed is ignorant
of the mechanics of breastfeeding. The two are not necessarily
interchangable. That would be like expecting you to to suddenly know how
to drive a manual transmission car when prior to that you've only used
an automatic. They're both cars but they certainly do not work the same
way.

"Pete C." wrote:

> What you propose is *not* equal. When someone spends 8 hrs a day +
> commuting time in support of the household, expecting them to do half
> the in home work is not even remotely close to equal. List all household
> tasks and the typical time to complete required, adjusted for difficulty
> level and then divide the result equally.


That is a tough one to do. Some of the chores are daily, some are weekly,
and some are seasonal. Then you have to consider the amount of actual work
involved in a chore. For instance, laundry takes a lot of time, but not a
lot of work. Sort, the laundry, put it in the machine, add detergent and
start the machine. The cycle might take 30-40 minutes, but there is only
a few minutes of actual work. It is not like the old days where it is all
time one piece at a time by hand. When it is done, you take it out of the
washer and put it in the dryer. The dryer cycle might take 45 minutes, but
it only takes a minute or two to load it and unload it. I realize it has
to be sorted, folded, hung or maybe ironed..... but I am talking just the
actual washing and drying time. A person can multitask while the machines
are doing their thing. Similarly, cooking is generally more time being
cooked than it is being prepared. Two minutes to prepare a roast and two
hours for it to cook. It is two minutes work, not two hours.

Yard work, OTOH, can't usually be multi-tasked. You have to mow, then edge,
then rake. You can't just start the machine and work on something else.

You can get a lot more work done if you learn how to multi-task. For
instance, this morning I got back from my riding lesson. I had a quick
shower, came downstairs, turned on the oven to pre-heat and made up a batch
of pie pastry. Then I went outside and cut some rhubarb, came inside and
cut it up, rolled out the pastry and put half in the pan and the other half
rolled out for the top, put the rhubarb in the pie stuck it in the oven
with a timer set for 15 minutes. While it was cooking I grabbed the vacuum
and ran through the upstairs, the stairs, spare bedroom and kitchen. When
the timer went I turned down the temperature and started preparing muffins
and put some bacon and sausage on to fry slowly. When my wife got home all
I had to do was take out the pie and pop in the muffins and had 10 minutes
to make coffee and scramble eggs.


If I had done each of those tasks one at a time it would have taken hours.
When I have to do the lawn, I am looking at close to two hours to mow with
the tractor mower. Then I have to get the trimmer out, and that is good for
another 30-35 minutes. Then I have to get out the broom and sweep off the
walks. I may not get as much accomplished outside, but it is a lot more
work and a lot more time.

Goomba38 wrote:
>
>
> > This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
> > available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
> > formula.
>
> Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
> off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.

That shows how times change. In the good old days if you were a person of
position you would hire a wet nurse to breast feed your child for you.

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
> " BOB" > posted this at: rec.food.cooking:
>
>> "UNITS" instead of children?
>
> I apologize for intruding upon your discourse with Ranger and I'll not do
> it again. OTOH, I've been reading Ranger's posts for a long time. I'm of
> the opinion that the term, as he uses it, is one of endearment.
>
> Michael
>
I find it annoying. Cute the first time, perhaps twice. After that it
just seems as if someone who got a laugh once didn't learn that the same
joke told over and over again just doesn't work well.