lucky day
Katy
manipulative SD who takes pleasure in trying to make my life as miserable in
cahoots with her bi0-witch mom pulled a total rant guilt trip on her Dad
my SO) and won... eventhough he got in one shot about how the bio-witch
screwed him over in court with lies to get money when he was unemployed
this is rare as we never slam her in front of kids).. and she piped back
with I hate it when you do that he said what? Mom always says stuff about
you and I hate it when you guys do it.. (proof the witch is constantly
undermining their relationship boys, and the dad)... This rant was about a
"needed" dress for a dance.. ( I had heard her tell her mom on the phone,
"dad doensn't know it yet but he is buying me that dress tomorrow I will
threaten to hate him etc. if he doesn't)... Well against my judgement that
since the mom was getting cks each week, plus 900.00 a month for the the 3
months whe did'nt get regular checks... and he just paid for ski club the
mom should buy it... she doesn't spend money on kids.. just her partying and
car payment.. then crys poor me.. and I thought the RANT should seal the no
dress.. but....he caved with the compromise that this would be counted as an
xmas gift and the bio-witch had to kick in for all the accessories... Well
after she maniupulated him all weekend, had friends over, made sure they ate
most of the stuff in the freezer, complained about her laundry etc.. etc...
made sure we had no time alone... told her mom to drop Steven (9yr old that
she keeps from me and his Dad except when she parties and Patti is not
availbale to babysit) off at 10pm on Sat nite since she was at our house and
couldn't babysit.. the Dad was already asleep.. Well off they went to go
shoppin Sun afternoon when she knew I wanted to go xmas tree looking with
the dad and the boys.. this was her DAd daughter trip.. but duh she took one
of her friends.. So I stayed home with my daughter, grandaughter and son...
the boys went to their mom's.. oh darn did we ruin her plans to sleep in and
spend the day with her boy toy fiance? thinking that.... I am not her
babysitter.. and since I rarely have time alone with my kids... we put up
the xmas lites, and decorated the house.. ( without tree yet).. and had a
peaceful not rant, non roughhouse day... BUT here is the good part.. I had
to go to the Step daughters room to retrieve the remote for the living room
TV and I tripped on her backpack.. and out came a package of Cigarettes...
ooooh baby she is busted... she has been smoking for a year and lying...
Sorry but I busted her.. I called the DAd... said dilemma do I tell you
know or later.. he said now.. he called bio-witch ( the boys have told on
her but witch won't do anything because she said she has to catch her doing
it..bio chainsmokes in the house.. and the SD sneaks moms cigs.., plus she
doesn't want to lose her babysitter and "best friend" anything to keep Dad
out of picture)..and she said oh... well buy her the dress and I will talk
to the boys.... Well end result she got dress and she is GROUNDED... should
have seen her face when she could not find the cigs.. we said nothing.. but
apparnetly bio-witch grounded her as soon as she got to the mom's
house....Thanks for listening... I just get sick of her lies and her doing
mean things to me and my kids but is "miss innocent and has no consequences
for her rants and misbehavior ( boys, smoking) and conspiring with her mom
all the time to treat me and my SO like crap!!!
Nikki Murphy
here and moaning at Katy for what she has said? Maybe some of it isn't 100%
politically correct but I think this newsgroup needs to be the one place in the
world where us step parents can just regurgitate this sort of stuff so we can
stay healthy people!
Phew even I feel better after reading that one Katy!
N
Vicki Robinson
>Well i hope that made you feel better! Please can no-one start offering advice
>here and moaning at Katy for what she has said? Maybe some of it isn't 100%
>politically correct but I think this newsgroup needs to be the one place in the
>world where us step parents can just regurgitate this sort of stuff so we can
>stay healthy people!
>
I'm not sure what you mean by "moaning at Katy." No here ever objects
to people venting about their own experiences, although alternate ways
of looking at things might be suggested. The resistance starts when
posts appear complaining about whole classes of people without
limiting it to the poster's personal experience. Complaints about "my
step-kids' biomom" are rarely met with disapproval; it's the posts
that start with "What is wrong with biomoms anyway? THEY do this and
that and the other thing, and THEY are terrible people." The same is
true of posts complaining about NCPs or CPs, about deadbeat dads and
deadbeat moms. Feel free to write whatever you want about *your
situation*, as Katy does. Also be aware that this group encompasses
custodial parents, non-custodial parents, step-parents, bioparents,
child-support payers and child-support receivers and all combinations
of the above. If you post blanket statements, you're going to offend
somone, it's nearly guaranteed. Katy doesn't do that, she limits her
vents to her own situation. When other posters offer advice and
alternate points of view, she is gracious about them. That's all it
takes.
Vicki
--
Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution Resources:
http://www.rit.edu/~vjrnts/mediation/mediation.html
The alt.folklore.urban FAQ and archive can be found at
http://www.urbanlegends.com/
Nikki Murphy
n
Vicki Robinson wrote:
Nikki Murphy
to below was a simple sentence written to sympathise with the situation of the lady
to whose post I was responding to. The 'in my experience' part which you took such
offence to was in particular to point out that I experience the same as did the
original poster. I didn't really think that a 'oh not every bio-mom is like the
bio-mom in your situation' approach was sympathetic at that point.
N
janelaw
>
> and that response was exactly the type of response i wanted to avoid.
>
> n
>
Why?
Nikki Murphy
Vicki Robinson
>Oh and just in case you're interested my last post which you are clearly referring
>to below was a simple sentence written to sympathise with the situation of the lady
>to whose post I was responding to. The 'in my experience' part which you took such
>offence to was in particular to point out that I experience the same as did the
>original poster. I didn't really think that a 'oh not every bio-mom is like the
>bio-mom in your situation' approach was sympathetic at that point.
>
???
Nikki, calm down! I'm not flaming you! How in the world did you draw
the conclusion that I "took such offense" to anything? Your
post sounded so defensive about not "moaning" at Katy, I thought that
maybe you misunderstood what does draw flames on this group and what
doesn't. You're a relative newcomer. I agree that pointing out to
Katy that not all biomoms are like hers would be counterproductive; I
didn't do that, and I *don't* do that, because Katy confines her posts
to her own situation. My whole point was that you needn't worry that
anyone would respond defensively to her post because she talks about
her own experiences. That's all. She doesn't need defending because
no one is out to flame her.
And where do I take offense at anyone saying "In my experience"? Hell
no, I *encourage* that. Write about your own experiences. Don't be
surprised or offended if you get advice or a different point of view,
though; that's what a support group is for. If all you want to do is
vent, then say so; everyone here understands that and will forbear to
comment if all you want is to blow off steam, and you have made that
clear.
You posted in defense of Katy, I responded that she didn't need
defending, and you say "That's exactly what I was worried about."
Sorry, I don't follow the logic.
Gp lenexa
>posts appear complaining about whole classes of people without
>limiting it to the poster's personal experience.
>Complaints about "my
>step-kids' biomom" are rarely met with disapproval; it's the posts
>that start with "What is wrong with biomoms anyway? THEY do this and
>that and the other thing, and THEY are terrible people." The same is
>true of posts complaining about NCPs or CPs, about deadbeat dads and
>deadbeat moms. Feel free to write whatever you want about *your
>situation*, as Katy does. Also be aware that this group encompasses
>custodial parents, non-custodial parents, step-parents, bioparents,
>child-support payers and child-support receivers and all combinations
>of the above. If you post blanket statements, you're going to offend
>somone, it's nearly guaranteed.
I think that includes blanket statements like "all children love their
mothers"..
Geri
Nikki Murphy
posted in response to something i wrote to someone last week criticising me for saying
'in my experience bio moms don't listen to anything that you say' which you may
remember.
That's what i meant.
N
ps i've been in and out of this newsgroup for two years
Nikki Murphy
N
SoccerStepMom
Probably includes any blanket statement that rationalizes one's own
hopes and desires... such as "children are better off without their
mothers if the mothers do not fit my definition of good." ;-)
SSM
(Who still can't figure out if you are really as dense about this
stepparenting/custody stuff as you appear, or if you are just engaging
in a massive troll of this group)
Vicki Robinson
>
>I think that includes blanket statements like "all children love their
>mothers"..
Show me peer-reviewed journals that have published valid research showing
that all biomoms are monsters. I can show you peer-reviewed journals
showing that young children are deeply attached to their mothers, even
mothers who are abusive, drug-addicted, mentally ill, or otherwise unfit.
Your comparison is invalid.
Nikki Murphy
good idea:
"What is wrong with biomoms anyway? THEY do this and > >that and the other
thing, and THEY are terrible people." The same is > >true of posts
complaining about NCPs or CPs, about deadbeat dads and > >deadbeat moms. "
about blanket statements is okay then surely it's okay for Gina to say that
blanket generalisations such as
"> I think that includes blanket statements like "all children love their
mothers"..
are also okay? I don't think she meant that there is no biological pull/need
for approval/love etc from the bio parent but just that both statements are
possible situations.
n
SoccerStepMom wrote:
> Gp lenexa wrote:
> >
> > >The resistance starts when
> > >posts appear complaining about whole classes of people without
> > >limiting it to the poster's personal experience.
> >
> > >Complaints about "my
> > >step-kids' biomom" are rarely met with disapproval; it's the posts
> > >that start with "What is wrong with biomoms anyway? THEY do this and
> > >that and the other thing, and THEY are terrible people." The same is
> > >true of posts complaining about NCPs or CPs, about deadbeat dads and
> > >deadbeat moms. Feel free to write whatever you want about *your
> > >situation*, as Katy does. Also be aware that this group encompasses
> > >custodial parents, non-custodial parents, step-parents, bioparents,
> > >child-support payers and child-support receivers and all combinations
> > >of the above. If you post blanket statements, you're going to offend
> > >somone, it's nearly guaranteed.
> >
> > I think that includes blanket statements like "all children love their
> > mothers"..
> >
Gp lenexa
>hopes and desires... such as "children are better off without their
>mothers if the mothers do not fit my definition of good." ;-)
I expect it does. :-)
Geri
Gp lenexa
>stepparenting/custody stuff as you appear, or if you are just engaging
>in a massive troll of this group)
>
I am sure you have better things to do than that!
Geri
Gp lenexa
>that all biomoms are monsters. I can show you peer-reviewed journals
>showing that young children are deeply attached to their mothers, even
>mothers who are abusive, drug-addicted, mentally ill, or otherwise unfit.
>
>Your comparison is invalid.
I am talking about blanket statements, no matter what their content. That
includes those we don't agree with. :-)
My comparison is very valid.
Geri
Gp lenexa
>showing that young children are deeply attached to their mothers, even
>mothers who are abusive, drug-addicted, mentally ill, or otherwise unfit.
Do tell me what they are, though. I am always interested in reading things
like this. (I have seen the usual nebulous sources quoted in sociology texts,
but admittedly this is subject is not my forte, not having ever thought I would
remotely be dealing with it in a personal way.)
Geri
SoccerStepMom
AHA, so I am right; you are just having fun with the people here. Well,
silly me! I was trying to help what I thought was a person in shoes
very similar to my own. Never mind.
SSM
Gp lenexa
>silly me! I was trying to help what I thought was a person in shoes
>very similar to my own. Never mind.
Actually I am too busy to troll around. But I don't think my experiences are
similar to yours and since I am not in the shoes of anyone else, nor are they
in mine, it is not any of our jobs to judge each other's opinions - which are
usually a product of our experiences.
I am sure you believe deeply in what you say, as do others, and I don't think I
have ever gotten hateful about anything anyone has had to say, even if it was
rude. I just don't agree all the time. I don't think that makes a troll.
Interestingly, I have gotten a lot of very helpful and useful info from this
ng, and a lot of it has come from private e-mails - perhaps from people who
don't wish to be flamed for agreeing with what doesn't seem to be the PC
opinions of the more vocal posters.
Geri
TYounger
> Interestingly, I have gotten a lot of very helpful and useful info from this
> ng, and a lot of it has come from private e-mails - perhaps from people who
> don't wish to be flamed for agreeing with what doesn't seem to be the PC
> opinions of the more vocal posters.
Not to invalidate your point, that's not what I'm doing, but I would
think that if someone was going to post, they'd be aware that some people
are not going to agree with them, and some vehemently so..
Sometimes we have to realise that we shouldn't worry about what other
people think about what we have to say, because there is always going to
be opposition in one way or another. It's better to just post, and let
your thoughts/opinions be used productively by those who *can and will*
use what you say, than to not post at all for fear of being shot down by
someone.*
TYounger
* - With the exception of trolls - ugh!
janelaw
>
> I think if the statement from Vicky saying that generalisations are not a
> good idea:
>
> "What is wrong with biomoms anyway? THEY do this and > >that and the other
> thing, and THEY are terrible people." The same is > >true of posts
> complaining about NCPs or CPs, about deadbeat dads and > >deadbeat moms. "
>
> about blanket statements is okay then surely it's okay for Gina to say that
> blanket generalisations such as
>
> "> I think that includes blanket statements like "all children love their
> mothers"..
>
> are also okay? I don't think she meant that there is no biological pull/need
> for approval/love etc from the bio parent but just that both statements are
> possible situations.
>
> n
>
guidelines very helpful.
One of the problems with step-parenting is dealing with kids at
ages you're not used to. I find it helpful to hear more
experienced posters talk about what is normal for teens. It
helps me understand my teen SKs. I know I would never have been
able to deal with my kid at 4 yo if I hadn't known her since her
birth. It helps to know what is common to kids in general when
you're trying to evaluate your kids' behavior.
Then there are all those subtle things that are common to kids
in step situations that adults might not understand. The
example that comes most readily to mind is the fantasy of BM and
BF remarrying and living happily ever after. IMO, it's really
important not to take that kind of thing personally. If you
understand that it really has nothing to do with you, it's
easier to work through the hostility that that fantasy can lead
to. For me, anything that can help me understand what is going
on in the kids' minds is helpful, even if it may not be true of
every single child.
The other thing, the bitching about BMs, SMs, CPs, NCPs, etc. in
general is just a pain in the butt. Every time someone
criticizes a group, it's unjust and pisses off the posters who
are members of that group. Then we have to have another
argument about it. I'm sick of it. You can vent all you want
about "your" BM/SM/NCP, etc. I'm fine with the "some"
BM/SM/NCPs observations. But criticism of any one segment of us
is unjust and unproductive. It is nothing like discussing
principles of child development.
jane
Vicki Robinson
Look for work by Bowlby in attachment theory in particular, and I
think Marian Millner (sp?) as well. I'll do a PsychLit search when I can
find some time at work; I can't access those particular databases from
home.
Gp lenexa
>think Marian Millner (sp?) as well. I'll do a PsychLit search when I can
>find some time at work; I can't access those particular databases from
>home.
Thanks! (The only thing I offhand remember reading in school was something
about babies failing to thrive if they weren't held.)
Geri
Katy
did not expect to cause discomfort or in anyway generalize bio- moms.. I
know that there are truly wonderful women who know how to be human, loving
and kind unfortunately this woman thing is not one of them, nor does she
even try... I guess I just needed to vent and get some feedback on this
situtation and whether I had "grounds" to behave or react the way I did.. I
realized when I posted it I would get support, advice, corrective insight,
critisism.. etc.. thats all good and needed in order to maintain my sanity
in my topsy turvy world of the " bio- witch and her partial clones".. Thanks
katy again sorry for the debate I caused..
Katy wrote in message <74gh0p$iut$1...@camel25.mindspring.com>...
CIT
janelaw wrote:
>
>
> I know I would never have been
> able to deal with my kid at 4 yo if I hadn't known her since her
> birth.
>
> jane
Thanks for pointing this out. Sometimes, when you haven't had kids of your own
and you find yourself in a difficult situation with your 3 year old Stepchild, you
question your abilities as a potential parent and wonder if you should have your
own child or not. I found your comment encouraging. It reminds me that I haven't
raised my SS and I haven't known him since birth either and that it's ok to not
know how to handle him all the time.
CIT
Sian Lee Reid
(Gp lenexa) wrote:
> >I can show you peer-reviewed journals
> >showing that young children are deeply attached to their mothers, even
> >mothers who are abusive, drug-addicted, mentally ill, or otherwise unfit.
>
> Do tell me what they are, though. I am always interested in reading things
> like this. (I have seen the usual nebulous sources quoted in sociology texts,
> but admittedly this is subject is not my forte, not having ever thought
I would
> remotely be dealing with it in a personal way.)
>
> Geri
It's not my area either, but I am at least a sociologist (my area is new
religious movement). These kinds of studies are likely to appear in such
publications as the Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, the Journal of
Marriage and the Family, Family Process, Family Relations, Child Abuse and
Neglect, Marriage and Family Living, and Families in Society. There are
probably others, but those are the peer reviewed ones I could come up with
without digging around. I don't think that Sociological Abstracts (paper,
available in university libraries) is produced anymore. It is probably
available as a CD-ROM in those same sources, and articles appearing in
those journals would be indexed on sociofile.
Sian