Another ScaryParenting rant, sorry. I know that I have a problem, I just can't seem to stay away.
Anyway, lately I've been reading a lot of (exceedingly annoying) debates about various child-rearing choices - breast feeding, formula feeding, cloth nappies, early weaning, purees, baby-led weaning, Gina Ford, attached parenting, baby-wearing, co-sleeping, controlled crying, cry-it-out blah blah blah blah blah. (People with no children or who aren't obsessesed with baby websites are probably going "wtf?!" right now. Yeah, I had no idea these things had these names either.) The debates always get very heated, with everyone rushing to defend their own positions while subtly implying that everyone else is wrong.
But how much difference does it make, really? In 20 years time, or even 10 or fewer, are you going to be able to tell who was on a strict routine from birth, and who was demand-fed until they were two? Do we look at Ashley Cole and think "I bet he wasn't breastfed."? Do we assume that Barack Obama was given a wide variety of finger foods instead of being force-fed pureed carrot? (No idea where those examples came from, or what I'm trying to say with them, if anything. Oh, forget the names, it doesn't matter). No, we don't. So why does everyone get so het up about it? Buggered if I know. I personally am a fan of the "make it up as you go along and hope I'm not emotionally (or physically) scarring my child for life" method. It might not be perfect, but hopefully it will work.
What's the point of all of this? I can only conclude, once again, that I spend too much time on the internet.
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment