It's as simple as this to me... Your mother gives you a shitload of stuff. A roof over your head, three square meals a day, etc. As a parent, I can tell you that even if she hasn't done much, she's still worked her ass off so you can have a decent life.
So let's say that her rule is crazy... you're still coming out way ahead. Suck it up and cut the lady a little slack. We're not all perfect. It's cliche, but as long as your going to reap the benefits of her household, your going to have to live with her rules - even the ones that you don't like. If things are really so bad - move out and pay your own bills. I suspect you'll be back home in a day or two.
It's okay to not get your way once. Trust me, you'll survive. I understand that in your mind this sucks, but you're much better off thinking about what you can do to avoid this type of situation in the future.
Those aren't consequences. Denying someone the right to travel because they got bad grades is no different than if I hit you because I don't like the way you look. A consequence of bad grades is fewer options in future education and career choices. What's the point of adding extra and artificial consequences on top of that?
To help drive the point home.
It is a parent's job to help their children become ready to deal with the real world. Some kids see this as mean but I believe in "tough love".
Here we have a case of a child getting bad grades and then telling his mother that he just didn't care enough to try hard enough to get good grades. That tells me (as a parent) that this kid is not living up to his potential and is in danger of becoming lazy.
What if you failed while working a project at work? You had a deadline and when the project was due the customer no longer wanted it because you failed to deliver. Is your boss going to say, "better luck next time" after you just told him that you could have done the job better but you were too busy playing video games to apply yourself to the project?
I have no sympathy here. Taking away Otakon is only the first thing I would do!
Denying someone the right to travel because they got bad grades is no different than if I hit you because I don't like the way you look.
IMHO they are very different. I have little control over how I look. I had vast control over the grades I made in school.
What if you failed while working a project at work? You had a deadline and when the project was due the customer no longer wanted it because you failed to deliver. Is your boss going to say, "better luck next time" after you just told him that you could have done the job better but you were too busy playing video games to apply yourself to the project?
I know it's probably not popular to insist on making good grades. I know it's cool to think grades don't matter. However, I totally agree with Steve's analogy. I maintain that a child's real, full-time job is going to school. Grades are a measure of how well the child works. Grades are like a letter of recommendation. They either say, "This kid will do the work you want him to do." or "This kid is a lazy punk kid." That's why it's important to make good grades.
Denying someone the right to travel because they got bad grades is no different than if I hit you because I don't like the way you look.
This misses the mark entirely. She's denying him the right to travel to protect him. Whether you like to admit it or not, good grades and a strong work ethic are going to get him much more in life than a weekend at Otakon ever will.
To use your analogy, I'm hitting you to prevent you from falling into the crevass - not because you look funny.
I'm with Hungry Joe. You live with your mom, she makes the rules. Fair or unfair, that's life. I can't believe so many people are backing this kid. You have expectations to live up to and you did not meet those expectations. I'll reiterate what Steve said: HungryJoe FTW.
Fine then. It's because I don't like your beard. You could have shaved.
Grades are objective while looks are subjective.
That's not the point. The point is that the parents are creating artificial consequences on top of the real consequences. I do not see any reason to do that. All it does is make things generally worse for everybody involved. If the real consequences of getting bad grades aren't enough to get the kid to change his ways, then he's not going to change. It's as simple as that. No amount of bribery or punishment is going to change someone who doesn't actively and consciously want to change.
What about, say, an essay? An essay grade is not necessarily objective.
Actually they can be quite objective. Do you have a well formed thesis? Do you have proper grammar? Do you support your thesis? Is your writing style well developed (No passive tense, mixed sentence length, ect)? In higher level English (AP classes), they grade your ability to argue, not what you are arguing.
Schools are far from perfect systems. There are times when teachers grade you on whether they like you or not. There is a teacher at my school who failed people just because she didn't like them. They had all "A's" on their work, but she gave them "D's".
I was gone all day, and I regret missing this one. All I can do now is throw my hat into Joe's camp. I have no personal quarrel with you, and I can remember feeling just as repressed at your age, Li, but that's too bad. You're underage; you live at home; your parents cover your expenses; the expectations have been clearly stated that you are to perform well in school. You stated that you chose not to do well in two classes, therefore your parent is doing what a parent SHOULD do -- giving you an incentive to change.
All the old men of our virtual village are together on this one. Do as your mother says.
I had this same problem. I was in the same boat with Junior yr. Pre-calculus (honors track). Then I showed my mother (an MA in math) the project and she worked on it for about 2 hours and couldn't get anywhere. After that I had the benefit of the doubt for the rest of the year and most likely next year since I have the same teacher for Calculus.
I simply don't believe your statement. I'm certain that most kids in your school take Algebra II when they're sophomores, maybe even when they're freshmen. If you can prove me wrong by showing me the course requirements, I'll apologize.
Just a quick comment on this on. In my school and other schools in the area its Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Pre-Calculus. This is so that students will have an understanding of Geometry for the 1000% useless PSATs and the 100% meaningless SATs if they want to take in March when they have not yet completed Algebra II. I content on this issue that you do worse if you have taken more advanced math on standardized test if you have taken advanced courses.
I'll say it again, "The parents cover your expenses" is not an excuse, as an adult you know that if you plan to have a child, you have to provide for him, it's YOUR OBLIGATION, but that kid has freedom of speach, and he's free to decide what he wants to do with his life, hes not an extension of the parents life, and shouldn't be treated as such, the kid passed algebra and english, that should be more than enough, granted, with those grades, he can graduate, It's like punishing a teenager for wanting to go to Music school instead of Med school, IT'S NOT FOR THE PARENT TO DECIDE as much as they want, "I know whats best for you" no you don't, you are just repeating the possible same mistakes that your really old fashioned parents made with you, even if you claim that you are not, yes, you are not hitting him but still trying to make him go a certain path that perhaps is not the best for him
but that kid has freedom of speach, and he's free to decide what he wants to do with his life
And in this case he can decide if he wants to abide by the household rules. If he doesn't, then he can exercise his "freedom" and move out. As long as he chooses to be dependent, he can stop whining.
Let's keep one thing in mind... it's his mother's house. She gets to run it the way she wants. Or does "freedom" only apply to kids?
Come one guys... take a minute and think outside of your own age bracket. I know it sounds romantic to think that kids ought to have unfettered "rights," but it's just absurd.
The old folks here have been kids and adults. Based on that experience, we're unanimous. You younger types have only seen one side of the coin.
One other rant... can we stop using "freedom of speech" where it doesn't apply? It is a right guaranteed in the constitution. It only deals with government's restriction of speech. That's it. There is no freedom of speech in a private setting such as this.
No, parents can't get off the hook that easy, that has to be the lamest parenting ever, it's a human being you are talking about, a human being that has an opinion on things, you just can't be so close minded, so, if I have a kid, who's underage, and I know for a fact that most places prohibit minors to work, I can just boss him around because he knows that there is no chance of survival out there? So I can decide where he goes, what he eats, when and where does he sleep, who to be friends with, when is the time to have a girlfriend, who should his girlfriend be, what mayor will he have in college, when to masturbate, what technique should he use, when to take a dump, when to go pee... And you may say, "it's not the same thing, you are exaggerating!" well, its like saying you have freedom of speech except when you talk about afro-americans.
I can accept "graduate" as a goal for your kid, but the terms are between him and the school.
I'm giving you the perspective of someone who had to work to pay for his own highschool, and is currently paying for his own college, worked since the age of 14 and helped economicaly the household since then, and still live at home because without such help, my mother would kinda go through rough times.
and that is the result of a mother giving her son the space to dedicate himself to what he believed to be important to him, and did not make him get straight A's, as long as I graduated, it was O.K., the same kind of liberty when I decided, I want to pay for my own stuff, and started working, thats what I wanted, and she let me, and believe me, MY work ethics are probably better tan all of my "straight A's" colleagues that had their asses wiped since they were kids.
MrRoboto, please kindly edit your posts for proper punctuation and grammar, preferably before Mr. Period or WaterIsPoison is forced to correct them for you.
Your current posts, regardless of the merits of their contents, have repeatedly caused me to gnash my teeth in utter frustration and hate.
MrRoboto, please kindly edit your posts for proper punctuation and grammar, preferably before Mr. Period or WaterIsPoison is forced to correct them for you.
Your current posts, regardless of the merits of their contents, have repeatedly caused me to gnash my teeth in utter frustration and hate.
No, Spanish is my native language, and studied French in highschool, so forgive me please, I know its not perfect, but I'd say its better than some native speakers out there.
What everyone is forgetting is that parents are looking out for their children's best interests. If that means limiting their behavior, then yes, that is appropriate.
An example... A teenage child decides to shoot up heroin. Are you folks arguing that this is his right, and that the parents must sit by idly and let him do it? This may be an extreme example, but the concept is no different than a parent expecting good grades in school. It is about nurturing the child. Whether you want to admit it or not, a 15 year old kid doesn't have the life experience to make all of their own decisions. It's a romantic thought, but it's not reality.
You are proving my point when you admit that the kid can't got out and support himself without his life being miserable. If 16 year old kids were so smart, and made good decisions, then they would sought by businesses. As yourself why they are not...
There is plenty of time in life to be an adult. Enjoy your childhood - even if it means that 5% of the time you have to abode by rules you don't like.
I've heard this one before. Listen, just because someone provides you with food, shelter, etc, does not mean that they are now in control of your entire life. Yes, it would be nice if you were thankful and grateful for these things. Yes, you should probably respect someone who has sacrificed so much for your well being. Yes, if you wish this person, or people, to continue providing more for you, it is best to be nice to them.
However, no matter what someone does for you, you should never be forced to give up your basic civil rights. Of course, you should be prepared for the real consequences of your actions. Parents are, and should be, obligated to provide food, clothing, shelter, etc. to the children they bring into the world. You had 'em, you feed 'em. However, everything else is optional. If your parents don't want you to go to Otakon, they don't have to help you. However, if you can get there on your own, with your own money and your own car, then I say they should have no right to detain you.
Supposedly there is a UN civil rights treaty which is among the many UN treaties not signed by the US. I have heard that one of the reasons that this treaty has not been signed by the US is because it contains an agreement to provide civil rights to children as well as adults. Of course, this is just something I heard a long time ago.
Hey Li, if it turns out that you can't go to Otakon at all, is there anything you would like us to get for you?
Thank you for the offer, but I prefer to walk around and look for things rather than search the internet before hand to find the things I want. If I do think of something, I will tell you. At the moment, I'm still hoping my mom will cave in and let me go.
I've heard this one before. Listen, just because someone provides you with food, shelter, etc, does not mean that they are now in control of your entire life.
If you are their kid, and you live in their house, they are in control of your life. Why don't people understand this? You may not think it's right, but it's reality.
Scott, you know as well as I do that the original poster can't move out and have as good a life. Therefore, his mother holds all of the cards. Again, you may not like the concept, by why can't you admit that this is the reality?
Remember, possession is 9/10ths of the law. Right now his mother has all of the possessions. So stop thinking theoretically and think about reality.
Honestly, Scott, your position is rather cruel. You know as well as I do that if they are left to their own devices, a shit ton of kids are going to make terribly poor decisions regarding their life. I choose the nurturing model that attempts to avoid harm, whereas you don't care if they step right in it.
Comments
Your mother gives you a shitload of stuff. A roof over your head, three square meals a day, etc. As a parent, I can tell you that even if she hasn't done much, she's still worked her ass off so you can have a decent life.
So let's say that her rule is crazy... you're still coming out way ahead. Suck it up and cut the lady a little slack. We're not all perfect. It's cliche, but as long as your going to reap the benefits of her household, your going to have to live with her rules - even the ones that you don't like. If things are really so bad - move out and pay your own bills. I suspect you'll be back home in a day or two.
It's okay to not get your way once. Trust me, you'll survive. I understand that in your mind this sucks, but you're much better off thinking about what you can do to avoid this type of situation in the future.
It is a parent's job to help their children become ready to deal with the real world. Some kids see this as mean but I believe in "tough love".
Here we have a case of a child getting bad grades and then telling his mother that he just didn't care enough to try hard enough to get good grades. That tells me (as a parent) that this kid is not living up to his potential and is in danger of becoming lazy.
What if you failed while working a project at work? You had a deadline and when the project was due the customer no longer wanted it because you failed to deliver. Is your boss going to say, "better luck next time" after you just told him that you could have done the job better but you were too busy playing video games to apply yourself to the project?
I have no sympathy here. Taking away Otakon is only the first thing I would do!
To use your analogy, I'm hitting you to prevent you from falling into the crevass - not because you look funny.
All the old men of our virtual village are together on this one. Do as your mother says.
Let's keep one thing in mind... it's his mother's house. She gets to run it the way she wants. Or does "freedom" only apply to kids?
Come one guys... take a minute and think outside of your own age bracket. I know it sounds romantic to think that kids ought to have unfettered "rights," but it's just absurd.
The old folks here have been kids and adults. Based on that experience, we're unanimous. You younger types have only seen one side of the coin.
One other rant... can we stop using "freedom of speech" where it doesn't apply? It is a right guaranteed in the constitution. It only deals with government's restriction of speech. That's it. There is no freedom of speech in a private setting such as this.
Nevertheless, if you were paying my room and board and asked me to shave, off it would go.
I can accept "graduate" as a goal for your kid, but the terms are between him and the school.
I'm giving you the perspective of someone who had to work to pay for his own highschool, and is currently paying for his own college, worked since the age of 14 and helped economicaly the household since then, and still live at home because without such help, my mother would kinda go through rough times.
and that is the result of a mother giving her son the space to dedicate himself to what he believed to be important to him, and did not make him get straight A's, as long as I graduated, it was O.K., the same kind of liberty when I decided, I want to pay for my own stuff, and started working, thats what I wanted, and she let me, and believe me, MY work ethics are probably better tan all of my "straight A's" colleagues that had their asses wiped since they were kids.
Your current posts, regardless of the merits of their contents, have repeatedly caused me to gnash my teeth in utter frustration and hate.
It looks like he made a "C" in English Grammar.
I'm so sorry.
An example... A teenage child decides to shoot up heroin. Are you folks arguing that this is his right, and that the parents must sit by idly and let him do it? This may be an extreme example, but the concept is no different than a parent expecting good grades in school. It is about nurturing the child. Whether you want to admit it or not, a 15 year old kid doesn't have the life experience to make all of their own decisions. It's a romantic thought, but it's not reality.
You are proving my point when you admit that the kid can't got out and support himself without his life being miserable. If 16 year old kids were so smart, and made good decisions, then they would sought by businesses. As yourself why they are not...
There is plenty of time in life to be an adult. Enjoy your childhood - even if it means that 5% of the time you have to abode by rules you don't like.
However, no matter what someone does for you, you should never be forced to give up your basic civil rights. Of course, you should be prepared for the real consequences of your actions. Parents are, and should be, obligated to provide food, clothing, shelter, etc. to the children they bring into the world. You had 'em, you feed 'em. However, everything else is optional. If your parents don't want you to go to Otakon, they don't have to help you. However, if you can get there on your own, with your own money and your own car, then I say they should have no right to detain you.
Supposedly there is a UN civil rights treaty which is among the many UN treaties not signed by the US. I have heard that one of the reasons that this treaty has not been signed by the US is because it contains an agreement to provide civil rights to children as well as adults. Of course, this is just something I heard a long time ago.
Scott, you know as well as I do that the original poster can't move out and have as good a life. Therefore, his mother holds all of the cards. Again, you may not like the concept, by why can't you admit that this is the reality?
Remember, possession is 9/10ths of the law. Right now his mother has all of the possessions. So stop thinking theoretically and think about reality.
Honestly, Scott, your position is rather cruel. You know as well as I do that if they are left to their own devices, a shit ton of kids are going to make terribly poor decisions regarding their life. I choose the nurturing model that attempts to avoid harm, whereas you don't care if they step right in it.