Now, granted, your consideration of others about your kids is awesome, as is your consideration of your kids about others (kids don't always want to be in adult spaces anymore than all adults welcome kids in all adult spaces), and I appreciate and welcome that. You are awesome, and if you are awesome, I'm sorry that some people are such assholes to you about the fact that hey, having kids was the best choice for you.
I'm gluten-free, because gluten causes me harm. Other people's reasonably behaved (in a kid-like way that, yes, is sometimes loud or crying) kids, unless they randomly, literally bite my ankles or have a meltdown on a plane (and what can you do about that, sometimes I feel like I'm going to have a meltdown on a plane too; kids melting down on planes, I stand with you in solidarity!) don't cause me harm. I don't need to deal with them like they're an allergen, and in most cases, neither does anyone else.
As a person without kids, who thinks kids are pretty okay but will say something to a parent if they don't tell their kid to stop smacking me on the subway (hello, Monday), I'd really like if people like me, you know, existed, as opposed to these caricatures that people fall into of "Parent who will beat you over the head with their child's car seat" and "child-free person whose freedom is destroyed every time they see a child from anything less than 500ft."
no subject
Date: 2010-07-28 05:13 pm (UTC)I have an incredibly weird and ambivalent reaction to that. On the one hand, I can definitely see where this shift comes from. When someone carved a swastika into my driveway a few years ago, my initial reaction was, "Did somebody mistake my pentagram for a Star of David again?" (Followed by a slightly freaked out and ultimately pointless call to the police, who did absolutely nothing except possibly log the call. They didn't even seem to want do that, despite my insistence that there should be a record in case anything else happened in our neighborhood.) It was pointed out to me then that most likely whatever bored and destructive kids did it probably have no idea what it means and just associate it with "badness."
That, of course, leads to the opposite side of the ambivalence. Because it is a symbol used to mean everything from "holy" to "good luck" in other parts of the world. There are a couple of pieces of Eastern jewelry that I own but will never wear because it's part of the symbolism, and even knowing the history and origins in that context, it just completely makes my skin crawl. (I should really find someone to pass them on to who wouldn't have that issue.) So there's part of me that would like to see it lose those horrible associations ... but expanding it to just general badness and hate isn't exactly a step in that direction either.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-29 12:41 am (UTC)It's disturbing that the reason the swastika is being downgraded as a specifically anti-Semitic symbol is because people seem to be forgetting how it was actually used or at least using it in harassing others who aren't Jewish. If it were some other reason, such as a widening awareness of other uses for it, that would be one thing. But this suggests that younger generations aren't as keenly aware of what that symbol was made to mean in what is still fairly recent history, just have some vague idea of it being associated with "badness" and hatred generally. And yet as the article goes on to say, there's been an increase in violent crimes against Jews. There's some connection there that the article never quite makes and that I'm not quite able to put a finger on other than to say that it's troubling.