Scraping the title barrel these days 😆
Today has ended a generally pleasant “getting back to it” week. I feel much more upbeat about things now that i have Amelie properly back. I feel like i can start to get some sort of rhythm back into the day now, which is a massive relief. i will have to come up with a slightly better plan for her and Josie during the mornings, but i needed to do that anyway. For now, Teletubbies and the pc for Amelie are working okay.
Normals, as normal – nothing dramatic other than being impressed by Fran’s recall on times tables, then a fair bit of kicking about doing this and that. Earwigged on Maddy playing castles for a while and was enjoying her ironic take on fairytales till i realised she was playing at Shrek. My kids are never going to have romantic aspirations for Prince Charming, it seems 😆
Fran and i knitted for a while, she seems to have got the hang of it now and has managed a couple of inches worth, with the occasional bale out. She counts religiously, it sounds like a rosary or something! Maddy had a go but got bored, but she tried really hard. Even i did some, but my needles were too small for the HESFES wool i had bought. Besides which it had been “josiefied” and is in need of considerable untangling 🙄 I’d forgotten just how destructive baby-toddlers are – everything in the cupboards, on the shelves, in boxes, on tables is ruthlessly removed and scattered. I know Fran was like this but i don’t remember the middle two being, or maybe i just didn’t notice. No, i’m sure Maddy wasn’t anyway, she wasn’t interested in the world enough!
Josie is reminding me a LOT of baby Fran atm actually and it is really funny as neither of the others were like her at all. I’m looking forward to having another one of that sort about 🙂 Mind you, Josie was feeding a little while ago and from the angle she was at, she looked Amelie’s double. I do like interchangeable children; Amelie featured in the Ed Report a few times because the photos of her doing things were better!
Josie is weaning slowly, down to a feed every few days now. Hoping she’ll carry on till after Melrose as it will make that much easier if she does; i really do NOT want another “1st year there with Amelie” experience. She can now run, play very convincing games, has a good understanding of a variety of sentences and say hello, byebye and managed look today. Yesterday she was grumbling for a piece of Amelie’s paper and i said “shall i give you one of these then?” and she immediately stopped, whipped round and held out her hand to me. She melted everyones heart by running to the door calling “daddeeeee!” when she heard the door open the other night.
I left all the oil pastels out on the table and we’ve used them lots today, exploring and experimenting. Fran and i did the “colour over it in black and scratch” thing, which was fun. They’ve spent the evening running a pretend museum and making Max and i visit, pay and be directed to exhibits! Amelie and i also curled up for ages doing Dora on the Leapster; i was quiet impressed by her memory on the tile matching game. It was nice to snuggle up with her anyway and Josie brought her little piano and came and sat with us, so i felt very homeschoolmom.
I’m loving my nano and am listening to A Tale of Two Cities – the unabridged version on Audible is wonderful, really good to listen to. I’m going to have to get the book as well though, as i am sure i’ll want to really read it. I listen to that as i go to sleep and read Far from the Madding Crowd before i go to sleep. Maybe it is no wonder that i’ve had a whole set of deeply disturbing dreams the last couple of nights.
And i’ve just won these for Fran on ebay
VERTBAUDET – apparently… for £10.50. I can live with those, boots they may be, but at least they don’t look like she charges by the hour 🙄
They are lovely 🙂
Nice boots. 🙂
Lovely boots, Abi had some.
We buy from there occasionally and I praise them for being one of few retailers who want little girls to look like little girls and not hookers- expensive though!
love the boots! girls clothes are much cuter than boys clothes.
So do P And M’s long boots mean they look like prostitutes?
Mine both have long boots also.
I don’t think long boots automatically look that way – Big has long boots atm. But there are an increasing number that are a little older in look than our children. 😉
No – -not that i have any idea what they look like since i haven’t seen them – but the ones i got offered in Clarkes (Clarks?) last week did. I HATE black, knee length, cut away boots full of buckles, straps, fringes and hanging bits and 2 inch heels with a passion and even if older girls (or older looking) girls can get away with them, Fran can’t. More to the point, she doesn’t want to. She refused several of the pairs i did offer her. Hell, she brought me the body jewels she got in her stocking yesterday and asked me to keep them till she’s older as she doesn’t feel grown up enough for them yet.
I am perfectly entitled to think what i like about boots for MY daughter. Most of the ones we saw last week were completely horrid and i very much doubt they are currently being worn by ANY of the kids i know.
So there.
And no, as Jax says, it’s not “boots” that are the problem. I don’t mind boots. The problem with boots is that that wasn’t what SHE wanted, she wanted shoes that didn’t look like school shoes but the only ones on offer were school shoes. Everything else was a boot. And and all the boots we got offered were horrid and nasty, possibly because we were trying to buy in sales.
We just wanted shoes for that elusive “not a baby but not a big girl either” territory that seems woefully uncatered for if you happen to be a size 13 1/2 F. Or so it appeared in Milton Keynes and Pboro anyway.
Love the boots, we’re having probs with boots/shoes atm, Clarkes is convenient for us, but limited choice, going to back next when its quiet and try to find something!
Shoes are a bloody nightmare. Try finding size fives in a shoe for a nine year old. Can’t even get doodles, and as she is still a g fitting, nothing in the adult section is suitable either. Hannah has lived in trainers and walking boots for the last three years.
Joyce, i simply can’t bear to think about it. You have my sympathy!
But if boots like *that* are worn by people you know, you are saying, in effect, that it makes them looks like prostitutes. Of course you *are* entitled to think that 😉 If I thought that I probably wouldn’t say it. I suppose that is what I was trying to say.
You may think i am saying that, if you wish. But i’m not. i have no interest in how anyone else dresses their children at all, it isn’t for me to make judgement on and i don’t.
I am however allowed to rant, on my blog, about shoes I was offered for my child and how much i disliked the style of them and the image they projected. i am allowed to rant about how impossible it is to find reasonably priced shoes for a little girl who doesn’t want to wear black. I am allowed to make judgements on how clothes/shoes would make my child look, particularly if she tells me that they make her feel too grown up and nasty.
I deeply dislike the culture of dressing little girls like skimpily dressed women ready for a night out and i’m not partaking of it. My rant is directed at shoe and clothing companies, not at parents of people buying what is available. That is their choice, just as mine is mine.
I can, as you say, think what i like. But, like you, i wouldn’t say it somewhere like this, particularly if i thought people would assume i was criticising their choices. I have no idea of the footwear of any of my friends children, and i don’t care either. And i didn’t say it. You said i said it. Slightly different.
My two cents – I think there is an increasing encroachment on childhood by big businesses to sexualise and “adult-ise” from an younger age. The reason they seek to do this is obvious – to instill a consumeristic mind-set and inculcate a love of fashion so they can make MONEY from our kids. Innocence is seen as twee – even if the kids are, in effect innocent! Why should children be dressing like adults? They aren’t. They are children free from labido and sexuality. This desire to turn all aspects of society into one great big sexualised market really sickens me. You can’t find anything which does not in some way have naked women to promote it, or have suggestive advertising, or imply that by wearing or doing this that and the other makes you sexually attractive and available. Nothing is innocent anymore, so hurrah to the mothers who protect their children from that.
I remember a few years ago there was a trend for exceptionally short skirts coupled with exceptionally tight and short t-shirts with lurid and suggestive slogans on them. Where as these things are fine for adults it was the pre-teen market that was targetted and an entire generation of 11 and 12 year olds (my innocent sister included) walked round like sluts – they themselves unaware of the image, since they were just following fashion. Both society and their parents failed them by making them look like hooker and idiots when they should have said “no – not til you’re sixteen!”.
I really have issues with the pornographication of society. I demand the right for children to have childhoods!
Thats not to say any child could look obscene, because they are innocent and pure, but it does reflect badly on parents when they can let children dress provocatively.
End of two cents worth.
Of course, there are times you wish some people HAD worn boots, waders even…
Not sure I understand the question. Not one of MY pics. (Thankfully)
“innocent and pure”
groan! I too abhor the commercial sexualisation of children but I never agree with this sentiment. Not entering the fray here, just wanted to chuck in a wild tangent 😉
Boots are lovely 🙂
I guess the rest of us bought up the non-whore boots before you got there Merry 😉
Oh Tim, I’d love to see your version!
what camera do you use?
Well, in fairness… it did occur to me that i was seeing the ones which hadn’t sold. So i guess you must have 😉
Now… you’ll all have to go and try my boot survey which i shall publish in a moment!
“innocent and pure” – hmm…. jamie Bulger… but in essence, i agree Debbie. What annoys me most is that we’ve reached a point where choice is limited unless you want to pay designer prices, which i can’t. I don’t think i can even afford Next.
Children AREN’T innocent and pure???? I must be mixing with the wrong crowd…
I agree Debbie. The Jamie Bulger case, those boys responsible and their own upbringing, are in fact a perfect example of what happens what the innocence and purity of a child *isn’t* protected.
You know there is a theory that pedaphillia has increased due to the sexualisation of children in the media, particularly advertising. Not sure whether that’s true or not, you’d have to be a complete sicko in the first place, but it is food for thought when choosing our children’s attire.
I think my least favourite ever thing in a shop was a short, tight black leather dress in NEXT for 3 year olds. Blurgh.
I think Small might go for one of those. 🙂